A Realistic View at 2017 Part I

[moonslav59]

Jason Castro was among baseball's best pitch framers this year:

 

http://www.statcorner.com/CatcherReport.php

 

... and has been valued at $32.7 million over the past three seasons (after being valued at $32.2 million in 2013 alone):

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=8722&position=C#value

 

Castro would likely be the Opening Day catcher for the Red Sox in 2017.

 

I doubt it. Maybe on a platoon, but not FT. He's got horrible splits.

 

My point is that weak hitting catchers can still have high value. I'm not saying he has low value.

 

Castro barely got over half the catcher PAs on the Stros this year. He had about 60% of the catching PAs in 2015.

 

[harmony]

I doubt it. Maybe on a platoon, but not FT. He's got horrible splits.

 

My point is that weak hitting catchers can still have high value. I'm not saying he has low value.

 

Castro barely got over half the catcher PAs on the Stros this year. He had about 60% of the catching PAs in 2015.

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/jason-castro-is-a-step-in-the-right-direction-for-the-twins/#more-237637

[moonslav59]

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/jason-castro-is-a-step-in-the-right-direction-for-the-twins/#more-237637

 

Pitch framing is a very valuable asset. My argument is not about Castro not being worth $24.5M. It's about the value of catchers today, and how there are very few high value catchers out there.

 

According to StatCorner, Vazquez had the 3rd best framing numbers in 2014 (1.80 calls per game); Castro was 22nd (+0.61). (All catchers with 1000+ calls)

 

Castro placed 15th in 2015 at +1.04. (Swihart was -0.17.)

 

2016? Castro placed 11th (+0.92) while Vaz placed 17th at +0.56

Swihart -0.29

Holaday -0.80

S Leon -0.89

 

I guess pitch framing is the new CERA. It is not the only factor used to rate/rank catcher defense. Pitch blocking, CS%, staff handling and other areas are all of value.

 

Again, I'm not disrespecting Castro. I'm actually using his example to prove that teams value catchers, even if they can't hit.

[Spudboy]

Castro is an average catcher.

 

Let some else value his framing at $8. mil a year.

 

I'd rather have the cheap and better options of the three that we have.

[moonslav59]

Castro is an average catcher.

 

Let some else value his framing at $8. mil a year.

 

I'd rather have the cheap and better options of the three that we have.

 

The reason I brought up Castor is that many seem to feel guys like Swihart, Leon and Vaz have little trade value until "they prove themselves".

 

The state of MLB catching these days is very poor. If a team will pay Castro $8M a year for 3 years after having three straight bad offensive seasons just because he is a top 10 pitch-framer proves that GMs are starving for average to decent catchers.

 

I'm not even sure being the 10th ranked pitch-framer makes up for Castro's below average offense. I admit I don't know much about his other defensive skills, but fangraphs has his as 12th out of 35 catchers with 1500+ innings since 2014. His CS% has been 36% over three years. He's near the league lead in PB+WP allowed in those three years (30+124=154). I guess we can probably call him about the 10th best defenive catcher out of the top 30 (one per MLB team). That's pretty good, but when you count the fact that not a single catcher in MLB had more PAs and a lower OPS than Castro since 2014, I'm thinking even slightly below average is a high value these days at the catcher position.

 

Out of 30 catchers with over 810 PAs since 2014, Castro placed 28th at 660.

[Spudboy]

Castro is a back up catcher on the Sox.

[moonslav59]

Castro is a back up catcher on the Sox.

 

Technically, a platoon.

 

Career

 

vs RHPs: .753

vs LHPs: .536

 

$8M for a platoon catcher!

[Bellhorn04]

Technically, a platoon.

 

Career

 

vs RHPs: .753

vs LHPs: .536

 

$8M for a platoon catcher!

 

That's not totally out of whack since it's righties he hits best. (By today's ungodly pricing.)

[moonslav59]

That's not totally out of whack since it's righties he hits best. (By today's ungodly pricing.)

 

Since most "full time catchers" take a day off every 5 or 6 games, and we faced a lefty starter only 37 times last year, asking Castro to sit 1 out of four days isn't far from being considered full time.

 

With a .753 OPS and about number 10 out of 30 overall defense, he's certainly a plus. BTW, Leon hit .764 vs righties this year. Swihart is a career .724 vs RHPs, but his .673 vs LHPs blows Castro away.

[Spudboy]

So. Would any of you be willing to replace one of our current (3) catchers straight up for Castro?

 

Not me.

[harmony]

Castro is a back up catcher on the Sox.

The prorated 2017 Steamer projections for Jason Castro, Sandy Leon, Blake Swihart and Christian Vazquez are similar:

 

JC 95 G, 1.1 WAR

SL 90 G, 1.1 WAR

BS 10 G, 0.1 WAR

CV 44 G, 0.6 WAR

 

According to many, WAR does not capture pitch-framing, which would give Castro the edge.

 

I might choose to spread my risk across the three Red Sox catchers, but head-to-head I would likely choose Castro.

[moonslav59]

The prorated 2017 Steamer projections for Jason Castro, Sandy Leon, Blake Swihart and Christian Vazquez are similar:

 

JC 95 G, 1.1 WAR

SL 90 G, 1.1 WAR

BS 10 G, 0.1 WAR

CV 44 G, 0.6 WAR

 

According to many, WAR does not capture pitch-framing, which would give Castro the edge.

 

 

I might choose to spread my risk across the three Red Sox catchers, but head-to-head I would likely choose Castro.

 

Vazquez was ahead of Castro in pitch framing during his full season of 2014. Since then, JC has improved. Christian's small sample size this year showed regression, but I'm not sure he's any worse than JC at this point.

 

[Dojji]

If I have my choice between meh, meh, meh, and meh+1, but have to give up $9M a year for meh+1, then I go with meh.

 

Nothing against Castro, but you'd be hard pressed to argue he's a significant enough upgrade to spend money on until other more serious problems (bullpen f'rex) are dealt with.

[notin]

If Castro takes the most games to achieve his 1.1fWAR, not sure how anyone makes him player the Sox need this test.

[Dojji]

If Castro takes the most games to achieve his 1.1fWAR, not sure how anyone makes him player the Sox need this test.

 

Translation: "If it takes more projected games for Castro to reach the same 1.1 fWAR than Leon or Vazquez, then he's probably not even as good as the guys we have and I don't know why people want him so bad."

 

It's an interesting point -- if one player has 2 WAR over 150 games, but another has 1.5 WAR over 80 games, the second player is probably actually more useful.

 

I wonder what kind of barometer fWAR/G would actually be, and whether it might be useful to track that as a stat. Hey Moonslav, you like to crunch numbers, feel like exploring this for us? What's the fWAR/G of each of our starters last year?

Edited November 24, 2016 by Dojji

[Bellhorn04]

Translation: "If it takes more projected games for Castro to reach the same 1.1 fWAR than Leon or Vazquez, then he's probably not even as good as the guys we have and I don't know why people want him so bad."

 

It's an interesting point -- if one player has 2 WAR over 150 games, but another has 1.5 WAR over 80 games, the second player is probably actually more useful.

 

I wonder what kind of barometer fWAR/G would actually be, and whether it might be useful to track that as a stat. Hey Moonslav, you like to crunch numbers, feel like exploring this for us? What's the fWAR/G of each of our starters last year?

 

Quite right - WAR/G is the best measure of how well a guy played.

Pure WAR is a combo of how well the guy played and how much he played.

[moonslav59]

WAR/G is more useful, but if the guy who plays the other games has a zero or negative WAR, then the player with the high WAR/G numbers is not as valuable, if he could not play because of injury or horrible splits (like Castro).

[S5Dewey]

WAR/G is more useful, but if the guy who plays the other games has a zero or negative WAR, then the player with the high WAR/G numbers is not as valuable, if he could not play because of injury or horrible splits (like Castro).

 

At last. An admission that WAR is flawed.

 

I hear what you're saying about the injuries or the splits. WAR/G is calculated on the basis of a player being put into his best position to be successful, unlike non-platoon players who are out there every day.

 

However, to look at WAR/G from the back side, a platoon player is actually helping the team when he doesn't play in favor of someone with better splits. That doesn't entirely compensate for only playing in situations where he's expected to be successful but it does temper it some.

[Kimmi]

If I have my choice between meh, meh, meh, and meh+1, but have to give up $9M a year for meh+1, then I go with meh.

 

Nothing against Castro, but you'd be hard pressed to argue he's a significant enough upgrade to spend money on until other more serious problems (bullpen f'rex) are dealt with.

 

I agree. All of the catchers project to be worth about the same in terms of WAR/game. I don't see the point of paying $9 million dollars for virtually no upgrade. That money can be better spent elsewhere.

[Bellhorn04]

At last. An admission that WAR is flawed.

 

I hear what you're saying about the injuries or the splits. WAR/G is calculated on the basis of a player being put into his best position to be successful, unlike non-platoon players who are out there every day.

 

However, to look at WAR/G from the back side, a platoon player is actually helping the team when he doesn't play in favor of someone with better splits. That doesn't entirely compensate for only playing in situations where he's expected to be successful but it does temper it some.

 

I don't think this indicates that WAR is flawed. To me it indicates that if the player only played part of the season, you have to analyze it a little further. All part of the fun!

[Kimmi]

At last. An admission that WAR is flawed.

 

I hear what you're saying about the injuries or the splits. WAR/G is calculated on the basis of a player being put into his best position to be successful, unlike non-platoon players who are out there every day.

 

However, to look at WAR/G from the back side, a platoon player is actually helping the team when he doesn't play in favor of someone with better splits. That doesn't entirely compensate for only playing in situations where he's expected to be successful but it does temper it some.

 

WAR is not without its flaws, but the point that you are trying to make is not a flaw in WAR. Most people understand that WAR is partly based on the number of games played. This point is true of ANY counting stat, as opposed to a rate stat.

 

In terms of WAR though, a player who plays 160 games and provides 5 WAR is worth more overall than a player who plays 40 games and provides 1.25 WAR, though they both have the same WAR/game.

[S5Dewey]

I don't think this indicates that WAR is flawed. To me it indicates that if the player only played part of the season, you have to analyze it a little further. All part of the fun!

 

Flawed in that it doesn't represent a player's worth, at least at first glance. WAR/G is a better representation of a player's contribution. Just as the number of hits a player gets during a season has value, it has even more value when that number of hits is divided by the number of AB's. Adding the /G is a qualifier, bringing a player's WAR into perspective.

 

Please don't interpret this as my now being on board with WAR. I'm not. But if we're going to use it let's at least make it relevant.

[Kimmi]

Flawed in that it doesn't represent a player's worth, at least at first glance. WAR/G is a better representation of a player's contribution. Just as the number of hits a player gets during a season has value, it has even more value when that number of hits is divided by the number of AB's. Adding the /G is a qualifier, bringing a player's WAR into perspective.

 

Please don't interpret this as my now being on board with WAR. I'm not. But if we're going to use it let's at least make it relevant.

 

WAR is relevant. It is very relevant to know how much a player is worth over the course of a full season.

 

I would have no problem if sites started posting the stat both ways, as WAR and as WAR/Game, but it's easy enough to figure that out.

 

Seriously, WAR may have its problems, but this is not one of them.

[S5Dewey]

WAR is not without its flaws, but the point that you are trying to make is not a flaw in WAR. Most people understand that WAR is partly based on the number of games played. This point is true of ANY counting stat, as opposed to a rate stat.

 

In terms of WAR though, a player who plays 160 games and provides 5 WAR is worth more overall than a player who plays 40 games and provides 1.25 WAR, though they both have the same WAR/game.

 

True enough. But at the same time, as fans when we see someone whom we know is only getting 40 games a year having the same WAR as a full-time player we know that there's something amiss in WAR.

 

I'm not advocating substituting WAR/G for WAR and eliminating WAR completely. I'm just saying that WAR/G is more valuable (to me) than having to look up the two players to determine the # Games Played and then interpolate it on my own.

[S5Dewey]

WAR is relevant. It is very relevant to know how much a player is worth over the course of a full season.

 

I would have no problem if sites started posting the stat both ways, as WAR and as WAR/Game, but it's easy enough to figure that out.

 

Seriously, WAR may have its problems, but this is not one of them.

 

What?? Did you just admit that WAR has problems????? :D

[Kimmi]

What?? Did you just admit that WAR has problems????? :D

 

Haha. Key word in my sentence being 'may'.

 

Every stat has its problems. As does every pair of eyes.

 

That doesn't mean they aren't useful.

[Bellhorn04]

Every stat has its problems. As does every pair of eyes.

 

That doesn't mean they aren't useful.

 

Now that's a quotable quote. Very nice.

[moonslav59]

At last. An admission that WAR is flawed.

 

I hear what you're saying about the injuries or the splits. WAR/G is calculated on the basis of a player being put into his best position to be successful, unlike non-platoon players who are out there every day.

 

However, to look at WAR/G from the back side, a platoon player is actually helping the team when he doesn't play in favor of someone with better splits. That doesn't entirely compensate for only playing in situations where he's expected to be successful but it does temper it some.

 

I've always said WAR is flawed as are all stats, but at least WAR makes a strong attempt to capture the whole of a player's value- not just offense.

[moonslav59]

Sean O'Sullivan signs with Korean team.

 

Why can't we ever get guys like him?

[Spudboy]

Sean O'Sullivan signs with Korean team.

 

Why can't we ever get guys like him?

 

Good for him. He knows he's never going to be a big time MLB star so might as well take what he can get while he can.

 

Has anyone here ever thought about what it would be like to just pick up and go live in such a different environment as South Korea?

 

I have a friend who spent about 6 months working in S. Korea this year. She said it was very interesting and exciting. Just imagine living there and working there. Not knowing the language.

 

It's got to be strange.