In response to Drewski5's comment:
In response to moonslav59's comment:
Now if you have a masher at 3B, LF, RF, you can get away w/ a high OBP, athletic, defensive 1b. However, the Red Sox, as currently constructed, do not have sufficient team power to get away with a 15 HR first baseman.
You really need 2 30 HR guys, and 3 other 20 HR guys (or elite pitching)
I agree, but if Cecchini can hit 15-18 HRs, it's not like he has zero HRs. (AGon had only 18 last year.)
Cecchini has 55 2B+3B in about 650 PAs on the farm (.446 Slg%). That can drive in a lot of runs as well, but he will not likely be batting 3-6th.
Its about the rest of our team. If in 2014 David Ortiz is still playing at a high level, Middlebrooks is hitting 25+, we find a couple of corner outfielders (internally or externally) hitting 25+, then I would be open to the idea of a non power hitting first baseman.
However, as Ive said. You need to have either mashers in teh middle, or 20 HR hitts 2-7 in your lineup. Power is so important. I think its the second most important element to team construction (behind only starting pitching).
Out of the 5 teams with the most highest slg % last year (NYY, Tex, Mil, Col, LAA) , 4 were also top 5 of runs scored. The only team that wasnt in the top 5 (Col) was sixth.
The Yankees were 8th in BA last year, but were first in HR, 2nd in runs scored. San Fran was fifth in average, but 12th in runs scored.
HR > Average.
The problem with average is many things need to go right to create one run. You need a hit. Then a steal. Then another hit. Or a hit with 0 outs. A sacrifice. Another hit.
HR's are instant runs (and often more than one at a time).
The top 5 scoring teams last year were also among the top five in OBP. The argument might be made that OBP has a better relevance to scoring that slugging, and than home runs.
For example, the 2007 White Sox were second in the AL in home runs, yet were last in scoring. Why? Lowest OBP in MLB that year...