"Once and For All, Why Not the Best?"

The above title comes from a song from the Jimmy Carter campaign in 1976. Why the title? More below.

Let's suppose you're drafting players for your BM/OOTP team. Normally, you can build yourself into an unbeatable dynasty in BM in two years, anyway, but let's say you're mired at .500 or below. Your problem, my friend, is pitching. You have no starting pitching to speak up, just a bunch of has-beens and never-weres thrown in the rotation to soak up runs for their ballooning ERAs.

The draft has come up and you're drafting in a fairly good position. It's finally your turn to pick, and it's time for your franchise to invest in the future.

The best remaining starting pitcher is Player A. He's okay, a sort of mid-range first round draft pick overall. Other better starting pitchers have gone before him, but Player A is still available and is ready for you to pick up the phone and call him and say, "Welcome to the Lugnuts."

However, there is an outfielder -- Player B -- who hasn't been picked yet. Player B is a top-range draft pick. In terms of pure ability, he's better than your starting pitcher, better enough for it to be noticed -- the reason he hasn't been drafted yet is that there's been a run on pitchers.

Your problem as Lugnuts GM/owner is that hitting isn't your problem. You've already got a core of outfielders that are good hitters and good fielders, and maybe a guy or two to back them up. Currently, Player B's about as useful as t*ts on a duck.

On the other hand -- Player B could be trade bait for a veteran starting pitcher somewhere. Furthermore, if lighting strikes and your outfielders pull their hamstrings or die rescuing kittens from flaming bourbon factories, in a few years Pkayer B will be ready to take their places.

So what do you do? Do you pass Player B up and take Player A, because pitching fills your needs, or do you take the best player available in the draft, regardless of redundancies?