JBJ's Spring

[Dojji]

So now we have two catcher threads. OK

[cp176]

So now we have two catcher threads. OK

 

and Coco Crisp - boxing - your promotion (hopefully) etc. etc. etc. Look like a catchall to me.

[sk7326]

Rag arm was unfortunate with Crisp, but it's also one trait that is minor for CFs - you don't usually have cannons there anyway. With him it's interesting - it's one of those cases where because he was a mild disappointment compared to the hype in Boston, he is reflected on poorly. But really you look at what he is now - that is a pretty good player. Good base stealer, has some pop, great range in CF.

[Dojji]

Yeah, that's one of the reasons I tend to have a strange perspective on things. I don't have a TV, and don't watch cable sports. At all. So I have to learn this stuff for myself with independent research and that leads to odd things like me forming my own opinions based on research rather than basing my opinions on whether I do or do not agree with what the pundits are saying.

[mvp 78]

And whether or not you've actually see someone play for that matter.

[sk7326]

Yeah, that's one of the reasons I tend to have a strange perspective on things. I don't have a TV, and don't watch cable sports. At all. So I have to learn this stuff for myself with independent research and that leads to odd things like me forming my own opinions based on research rather than basing my opinions on whether I do or do not agree with what the pundits are saying.

 

It's admirable - and certainly simply appealing to pundit's authority is not good. I do caution though that considering minor league stat lines is tricky without considering age and what the developmental goals were.

[User Name]

Yeah, that's one of the reasons I tend to have a strange perspective on things. I don't have a TV, and don't watch cable sports. At all. So I have to learn this stuff for myself with independent research and that leads to odd things like me forming my own opinions based on research rather than basing my opinions on whether I do or do not agree with what the pundits are saying.

 

That's a cop-out. All of this stuff (both the pundits' opinions and televised games) are available on the internet. You're just trying to justify your backwards stance on everything.

[a700hitter]

It's admirable - and certainly simply appealing to pundit's authority is not good. I do caution though that considering minor league stat lines is tricky without considering age and what the developmental goals were.

I know a guy that for a good part of his life was a professional horse player. He filed his tax return noting that his occupation was "Gambler". Horse betting is very much about stats. You have all of the horse's times, the condition of the track, length of the race, class of the competition etc. It is all there to be boiled down distilled and number crunched. This guy went to the track all the time, because you learned things at the track that you couldn't possibly know from the racing form stats. He got to know the trainers. Sometimes a horse ran a race just for a workout. The jockey was told not to ride him too hard. Sometimes the trainer had another horse in the race and the trainer decided which horse would go for the win. Stats are great, but stats with observation is better.

[cp176]

I know a guy that for a good part of his life was a professional horse player. He filed his tax return noting that his occupation was "Gambler". Horse betting is very much about stats. You have all of the horse's times, the condition of the track, length of the race, class of the competition etc. It is all there to be boiled down distilled and number crunched. This guy went to the track all the time, because you learned things at the track that you couldn't possibly know from the racing form stats. He got to know the trainers. Sometimes a horse ran a race just for a workout. The jockey was told not to ride him too hard. Sometimes the trainer had another horse in the race and the trainer decided which horse would go for the win. Stats are great, but stats with observation is better.

 

 

Most people realize I hope that stats do help to tell a complete story but they don't tell the whole story. They also certainly can tell the story that you want to hear as well. The catching subject once again has been beaten to death I realize but maybe having a great and accurate arm isn't as important as framing the plate and being able to work a pitching staff but the effects of a great arm often times will not show up in any stat. You can't measure what is going on in a baserunner's mind when he knows that he has to deal with a guy that can throw him out. Personally, I think that ability was (is) one of Vasquez's best assets.

[Spudboy]

Most people realize I hope that stats do help to tell a complete story but they don't tell the whole story. They also certainly can tell the story that you want to hear as well. The catching subject once again has been beaten to death I realize but maybe having a great and accurate arm isn't as important as framing the plate and being able to work a pitching staff but the effects of a great arm often times will not show up in any stat. You can't measure what is going on in a baserunner's mind when he knows that he has to deal with a guy that can throw him out. Personally, I think that ability was (is) one of Vasquez's best assets.

 

This is what I see as the biggest loss with Vasquez out this year. Looks like we lost a strength that we were not accustomed to only to go back to what we have seen for so long. Unremarkable catching in a Sox uniform.

[cp176]

This is what I see as the biggest loss with Vasquez out this year. Looks like we lost a strength that we were not accustomed to only to go back to what we have seen for so long. Unremarkable catching in a Sox uniform.

 

Thnx - agreed

[User Name]

Isn't that why they got Hanigan and Leon, because they are remarkable defensive catchers?

[Spudboy]

Isn't that why they got Hanigan and Leon, because they are remarkable defensive catchers?

 

No. I don't think so. Hanigan will be okay. I know almost nothing about Leon. I still think Quintero makes some starts.

[sk7326]

This is what I see as the biggest loss with Vasquez out this year. Looks like we lost a strength that we were not accustomed to only to go back to what we have seen for so long. Unremarkable catching in a Sox uniform.

 

That said, baserunner caught stealing has quite a bit to do with the overall baserunner holding concept. The Red Sox for years had been indifferent - the basic idea, get the guy at the plate guy first and foremost.

[cp176]

I think that I agree with you. Minus the hitting, Vasquez was (is ) the real package. Framing, fielding the ball, and working with the p-staff. For me, what made him particularly special was his ability to keep baserunners from advancing. On a team filled with pitchers who really didn't do much of a job at keeping b - runners stationary, he was a bright light. his arm makes him tougher to replace than any of his other abilities.

[Kimmi]

Most people realize I hope that stats do help to tell a complete story but they don't tell the whole story. They also certainly can tell the story that you want to hear as well. The catching subject once again has been beaten to death I realize but maybe having a great and accurate arm isn't as important as framing the plate and being able to work a pitching staff but the effects of a great arm often times will not show up in any stat. You can't measure what is going on in a baserunner's mind when he knows that he has to deal with a guy that can throw him out. Personally, I think that ability was (is) one of Vasquez's best assets.

 

 

Just to give you some perspective on the relative unimportance of CS% as compared to pitch framing ability, the difference between the best pitch framer and the worst pitch framer in MLB in 2013 was 40 runs, or 4 wins. In 2012, it was 54 runs, or 5.4 wins. In 2011, it was 39 runs. In 2010, it was 50 runs. In 2009, it was 52 runs, and in 2008 it was a whopping 84 runs.

 

The difference between the best and worst in stolen base runs in 2013 was 15 runs. In 2012, it was 18 runs. In 2011, it was 10 runs. In 2010, it was 15 runs. In 2009, it was 15 runs. In 2008, it was 15 runs.

 

To summarize, on average, a great arm can give his team an additional 1.5 wins over a weak arm, which is not nothing, but a great pitch framer can give his team an additional 5 wins (or more) over a poor pitch framer.

[Kimmi]

Isn't that why they got Hanigan and Leon, because they are remarkable defensive catchers?

 

 

Yes, it is.

[Kimmi]

No. I don't think so. Hanigan will be okay. I know almost nothing about Leon. I still think Quintero makes some starts.

 

 

Quintero is a good defensive catcher in his own right.

[Kimmi]

For the record, while some of you may not buy into the pitch framing hype, I can tell you that most MLB front offices do. All of the geeks who have been "pioneers" of the pitch framing studies are now employed by major league teams as consultants.

[Kimmi]

To Dojii, I apologize for my catcher posts in the JBJ thread.

 

To a700, I apologize for my "binge" posting.

[cp176]

Just to give you some perspective on the relative unimportance of CS% as compared to pitch framing ability, the difference between the best pitch framer and the worst pitch framer in MLB in 2013 was 40 runs, or 4 wins. In 2012, it was 54 runs, or 5.4 wins. In 2011, it was 39 runs. In 2010, it was 50 runs. In 2009, it was 52 runs, and in 2008 it was a whopping 84 runs.

 

The difference between the best and worst in stolen base runs in 2013 was 15 runs. In 2012, it was 18 runs. In 2011, it was 10 runs. In 2010, it was 15 runs. In 2009, it was 15 runs. In 2008, it was 15 runs.

 

To summarize, on average, a great arm can give his team an additional 1.5 wins over a weak arm, which is not nothing, but a great pitch framer can give his team an additional 5 wins (or more) over a poor pitch framer.

 

I do not dispute the fact that you have done a good job compiling this data. I just don't think that it could possibly be that black and white. What criteria was used to determine a catcher's ability to frame the plate? I think that there is great room for subjectivity here and it really boils down to what you like in a player as opposed to what these statistics show. I want that average pitch framer with a great arm who can hit. How many wins does that amount to when compared to a great pitch framer with a great arm who can't hit a lick? In a ideal setting, a catcher could do it all but they don't come along all that often.

[User Name]

To Dojii, I apologize for my catcher posts in the JBJ thread.

 

To a700, I apologize for my "binge" posting.

 

You don't need to apologize for derailing the discussion a bit. That's kind of a douchey thing for Dojji to do, since he's been guilty of derailing topics plenty of times, as has everyone else.

[User Name]

I do not dispute the fact that you have done a good job compiling this data. I just don't think that it could possibly be that black and white. What criteria was used to determine a catcher's ability to frame the plate? I think that there is great room for subjectivity here and it really boils down to what you like in a player as opposed to what these statistics show. I want that average pitch framer with a great arm who can hit. How many wins does that amount to when compared to a great pitch framer with a great arm who can't hit a lick? In a ideal setting, a catcher could do it all but they don't come along all that often.

 

This is like 12 types of wrong. They have detailed frame-by-frame capture of every AB during an MLB baseball season. The criteria is about as good as it can get, because they use an objective, nearly flawless methodology that does not involve the naked eye. There's a hell of a lot more room for subjectivity on your end if you don't take the time to get even a general idea of what the process to compile the data is. And it takes 30 seconds to look up on the internet, to boot.

[Spitball]

Just to give you some perspective on the relative unimportance of CS% as compared to pitch framing ability, the difference between the best pitch framer and the worst pitch framer in MLB in 2013 was 40 runs, or 4 wins. In 2012, it was 54 runs, or 5.4 wins. In 2011, it was 39 runs. In 2010, it was 50 runs. In 2009, it was 52 runs, and in 2008 it was a whopping 84 runs.

 

The difference between the best and worst in stolen base runs in 2013 was 15 runs. In 2012, it was 18 runs. In 2011, it was 10 runs. In 2010, it was 15 runs. In 2009, it was 15 runs. In 2008, it was 15 runs.

 

To summarize, on average, a great arm can give his team an additional 1.5 wins over a weak arm, which is not nothing, but a great pitch framer can give his team an additional 5 wins (or more) over a poor pitch framer.

 

I wish we had a like button. Nice post, Kimmi.

[cp176]

This is like 12 types of wrong. They have detailed frame-by-frame capture of every AB during an MLB baseball season. The criteria is about as good as it can get, because they use an objective, nearly flawless methodology that does not involve the naked eye. There's a hell of a lot more room for subjectivity on your end if you don't take the time to get even a general idea of what the process to compile the data is. And it takes 30 seconds to look up on the internet, to boot.

 

12 types of wrong - really - 12 types?

 

30 seconds? It takes me longer than that to find my wallet and keys.

 

I realize how important it is to gather and use as much information as you can get before making decisions but at some point in time you have to sift through it all to come up with a best case scenario. I'm glad people do this type of work. I would certainly use this the information but I would pay to have it done.

 

I like a little subjectivity also. That's how I see the world. Not much is either or for me. I try to understand people and their opinions. 30 seconds - really! I just read an article about the current Sox pitching staff and the predictions based solely on metrics for them. I was actually pleased to see that 2 different sites could vary in their predictions as much as they did. They even even have a way to include the luck factor using metrics.

[cp176]

I wish we had a like button. Nice post, Kimmi.

 

 

Oh I like it to. I appreciate the detail and the work that goes into compiling this data. I don't disagree with using it at all. It is another tool to use to help paint a picture. Doesn't paint the whole picture but it is certainly useful info.

[Behindenemylines]

I would not sell low on JBJ if I were the FO. His defense is worth his weight in gold, and by all accounts, he looks a lot better at the plate. He's never going to be known as an offensive CFer, but if he can hit decently, he will be a valuable player. If the Sox are not given an offer that they are happy with, then I'd be fine stashing him in AAA for another season. In other words, don't trade him just for the sake of trading him because he is "expendable".

 

I could see where Betts, Bradley, and Castillo could end up starting in the outfield for the Sox at some point during the 2015 season. Ramirez and Victorino will be on the DL at some point, or Papi could finally start showing his age and Ramirez would become the DH opening up LF. Unless Bradley is used to get a true #1 starter I would not sell low with him. His stroke has looked better this spring and his glove is priceless.

[Kimmi]

I do not dispute the fact that you have done a good job compiling this data. I just don't think that it could possibly be that black and white. What criteria was used to determine a catcher's ability to frame the plate? I think that there is great room for subjectivity here and it really boils down to what you like in a player as opposed to what these statistics show. I want that average pitch framer with a great arm who can hit. How many wins does that amount to when compared to a great pitch framer with a great arm who can't hit a lick? In a ideal setting, a catcher could do it all but they don't come along all that often.

 

 

The technology that they have these days is incredible. The introduction of PITCHf/x in 2008 (I believe) has really helped revolutionalize some of the advanced studies that are being done. One of the things I hear often from the critics of advanced metrics, UZR in particular, is the amount of subjectivity that is involved in them. Yes, there is some subjectivity, but IMO, they are far less subjective than the fans who say they prefer to trust their eyes.

 

When it comes to any player, you want to choose the one who is the best overall player. If that means that you sacrifice some defense, then that's what you do. So, I agree that a catcher that can hit well, has a great arm, and is an average pitch framer might be better than a great pitch framer who can't hit or throw. That was not my point. My point was that out of all of a catcher's defensive attributes, the ability to throw out base stealers is the least important.

[Kimmi]

I wish we had a like button. Nice post, Kimmi.

 

 

Thank you. You and I are very much on the same page.

[Kimmi]

I could see where Betts, Bradley, and Castillo could end up starting in the outfield for the Sox at some point during the 2015 season. Ramirez and Victorino will be on the DL at some point, or Papi could finally start showing his age and Ramirez would become the DH opening up LF. Unless Bradley is used to get a true #1 starter I would not sell low with him. His stroke has looked better this spring and his glove is priceless.

 

 

I could see that too, if not in 2015, then possibly in 2016 and beyond.

 

I realize that we may have to give up some of our players for a greater need, like SP. I just don't want the Sox to sell low on players like JBJ or Craig, just because we have too many OFs. Depth is a good problem to have.