Too Long, Didn't Read: My theory is that weaker players with great hitting may be superior to all star hitters because their lack of power result in more gap hits which are better for RBIs than driven pop flies.
When I started the game, I had a meh team like everyone else. Later on, I played the market and now I have a very solid team. Despite this, I'm not seeing a dramatic increase in performance in these 30k+ cards compared to under 10k cards.
I've been lucky enough to try out most non-legend players and I'm finding that the elite players pop up alot (Trout, Cano, Troy, Stanton, etc.) This isn't surprising though, their power stats are elite. So even on normal hits, you probably are going to hit it deep.
But in theory, strategy wise, doesn't that hurt your chances of winning? Lemme explain what I'm noticing.
I've looked at the stats of players I've used who have the highest hitting percentages, high on base, highest RBI and HRs. Those are generally the most important stats to winning games.
When it comes to hitting percentages, it's pretty much equal. Basically any player who has high contact and high vision gets the job done, it just depends on personal preference.
But when it came to on base percentage and RBIs, my players with weak power outperformed any other player 2 to 1. Players like Altuve, Marte, Rizzo...basically any weaker contact hitter with decent speed (to beat out deep infield throws)
Despite how badly we want to hit home runs, it's RBIs and pitching that wins games. My theory is that players with weaker power, even when they get great contact, hit balls in the gaps more (due to them not having enough power to hit warning track shots), which result in more scoring opportunities.
Compared to elite players, who often hit powerful pop flies on good contact (which just results in warning track pop flies more than home runs). I find myself losing to good players who have average teams more than I do against players with full legend/all star teams.
The only thing I can't explain is how my weaker players also seem to hit more home runs for me as well. Batting stance may be more important than most people think.
I'm not claiming all star players suck. I'm just saying that a balanced team may perform better competetively than a team just stacked with all stars or legends. Something like this:
1 speedy contact hitter, highest OBP
2 best hitter (to get home the number 1 guy who should be on second after a steal)
3 power
4 power
5 speedy contact hitter (assuming it was a 123 inning, this guy will often be starting an inning)
6 personal preference, I prefer speed
7 power (to drive previous 2 hitters home)
8 personal preference
9 pitcher
I'd love to hear your thoughts on this.
When I started the game, I had a meh team like everyone else. Later on, I played the market and now I have a very solid team. Despite this, I'm not seeing a dramatic increase in performance in these 30k+ cards compared to under 10k cards.
I've been lucky enough to try out most non-legend players and I'm finding that the elite players pop up alot (Trout, Cano, Troy, Stanton, etc.) This isn't surprising though, their power stats are elite. So even on normal hits, you probably are going to hit it deep.
But in theory, strategy wise, doesn't that hurt your chances of winning? Lemme explain what I'm noticing.
I've looked at the stats of players I've used who have the highest hitting percentages, high on base, highest RBI and HRs. Those are generally the most important stats to winning games.
When it comes to hitting percentages, it's pretty much equal. Basically any player who has high contact and high vision gets the job done, it just depends on personal preference.
But when it came to on base percentage and RBIs, my players with weak power outperformed any other player 2 to 1. Players like Altuve, Marte, Rizzo...basically any weaker contact hitter with decent speed (to beat out deep infield throws)
Despite how badly we want to hit home runs, it's RBIs and pitching that wins games. My theory is that players with weaker power, even when they get great contact, hit balls in the gaps more (due to them not having enough power to hit warning track shots), which result in more scoring opportunities.
Compared to elite players, who often hit powerful pop flies on good contact (which just results in warning track pop flies more than home runs). I find myself losing to good players who have average teams more than I do against players with full legend/all star teams.
The only thing I can't explain is how my weaker players also seem to hit more home runs for me as well. Batting stance may be more important than most people think.
I'm not claiming all star players suck. I'm just saying that a balanced team may perform better competetively than a team just stacked with all stars or legends. Something like this:
1 speedy contact hitter, highest OBP
2 best hitter (to get home the number 1 guy who should be on second after a steal)
3 power
4 power
5 speedy contact hitter (assuming it was a 123 inning, this guy will often be starting an inning)
6 personal preference, I prefer speed
7 power (to drive previous 2 hitters home)
8 personal preference
9 pitcher
I'd love to hear your thoughts on this.
Comment