A Realistic View of 2023: Part II

[Hugh2]

It may well be. I would really like to see Wong catch Sale though, to see if there are better results. Kluber did have his only good game out of 3 pitching to Wong.

 

Even if I saw that, that would still be a 1 game sample size.

 

Let’s say Sale just needed two starts to shake eye cobwebs off and is poised for a great start. You’re going to get that with McGuire or Wong.

 

I think CERA is way overrated, maybe I’m wrong, but I know that even if I am wrong we need a massive sample size to show us. Because there’s so much that can affects pitcher that has nothing to do with his catcher. When it’s the other way around we don’t charge the pitcher with an earned run. There’s nothing like that for a catcher.

[moonslav59]

Even if I saw that, that would still be a 1 game sample size.

 

Let’s say Sale just needed two starts to shake eye cobwebs off and is poised for a great start. You’re going to get that with McGuire or Wong.

 

I think CERA is way overrated, maybe I’m wrong, but I know that even if I am wrong we need a massive sample size to show us. Because there’s so much that can affects pitcher that has nothing to do with his catcher. When it’s the other way around we don’t charge the pitcher with an earned run. There’s nothing like that for a catcher.

 

Many pitchers will go to their grave thinking their battery mate matters. Some, it doesn't seem to matter much.

 

It takes time for relationships to grow closer or farther apart. With so many new pitchers, including some that were injured, last year or while McQuire or Wong were on the big club, I think time will shake things out.

 

I do think the catcher matters on many teams. There must be times and places where both catchers are pretty close to the same, and maybe it's just some intangible confort level thing with some pitchers.

 

It's way too early to know anything about who might or might not be better placed with each pitcher, and maybe in this case, it doesn't or won't matter, at least for 2023.

 

Many managers choose to match up certain catchers with certain pitchers and shy away from any sort of choice based on which catcher hits the pitcher they face that night better. That makes me think, managers think it matters.

[Bellhorn04]

Many managers choose to match up certain catchers with certain pitchers and shy away from any sort of choice based on which catcher hits the pitcher they face that night better. That makes me think, managers think it matters.

 

Exactly.

[Bellhorn04]

I also can't help wondering, if McGuire is a good hitter and a good defensive catcher, and his price tag is low, why would the Jays and White Sox dump him for next to nothing? Maybe the guy has some personal issues, as his infamous incident would suggest. I'm as puzzled about all this as anyone. But it does disturb me that we give up an average of 6.5 runs a game when he's catching.

[jad]

I also can't help wondering, if McGuire is a good hitter and a good defensive catcher, and his price tag is low, why would the Jays and White Sox dump him for next to nothing? Maybe the guy has some personal issues, as his infamous incident would suggest. I'm as puzzled about all this as anyone. But it does disturb me that we give up an average of 6.5 runs a game when he's catching.

 

As Nadal famously said when asked if Kyrgios could be a top-ten player, if he could just do X and not do Y and ...: " Eef eef eef ... "

He is an average at best hitter and has defensively deficiencies that have been exploited already.

But like Pham, no other team wanted him. THus, a 'bargain' for the Boy-Genius and another step toward getting rid of Bogey, JD, and any others that aren't 'his guys'.

[moonslav59]

I also can't help wondering, if McGuire is a good hitter and a good defensive catcher, and his price tag is low, why would the Jays and White Sox dump him for next to nothing? Maybe the guy has some personal issues, as his infamous incident would suggest. I'm as puzzled about all this as anyone. But it does disturb me that we give up an average of 6.5 runs a game when he's catching.

 

But, he had a better CERA with the CWS while not catching Cease, at all, so I doubt they traded him away out of fears over CERA related issues.

 

BTW, he did not hit well with them (.546 and was under .700 w TOR, before), so maybe that was it, or they just liked the other two catchers better. God knows why, but maybe they saw something in Diekman.

[moonslav59]

As Nadal famously said when asked if Kyrgios could be a top-ten player, if he could just do X and not do Y and ...: " Eef eef eef ... "

He is an average at best hitter and has defensively deficiencies that have been exploited already.

But like Pham, no other team wanted him. THus, a 'bargain' for the Boy-Genius and another step toward getting rid of Bogey, JD, and any others that aren't 'his guys'.

 

You should and an "e" to your names- as in "jaded."

 

[Bellhorn04]

BTW, he did not hit well with them (.546 and was under .700 w TOR, before), so maybe that was it, or they just liked the other two catchers better. God knows why, but maybe they saw something in Diekman.

 

The WS even tossed in a pitcher, Taylor Broadway, and took on more salary, of course. So they essentially saw Diekman as MORE valuable than McGuire.

[moonslav59]

The Sox are 4th in MLB is runs scored with 76 in 14 games (5.4 per game.)

 

We have been aided by Reach on Errors as we have aided our opps, too. We have also got on base 9 times via HBP (T3 in MLB.)

 

Other offensive rankings:

 

T8th in lowest K% at 21.3%

9th in HRs w 18

16th in OPS at .724

T28th in BAbip at .265

 

Pitching

12th in K-BB% at 14.7%

16th xFIP at 4.54

25th in ERA- at 111

25th WHIP at 1.47

26th .320 BAbip (thanks to our D)

26th fWAR at +0.2

26th runs allowed at 76 (5 are unearned, but we all know the bad D caused many more than 5.)

.

[Hugh2]

Many pitchers will go to their grave thinking their battery mate matters. Some, it doesn't seem to matter much.

 

It takes time for relationships to grow closer or farther apart. With so many new pitchers, including some that were injured, last year or while McQuire or Wong were on the big club, I think time will shake things out.

 

I do think the catcher matters on many teams. There must be times and places where both catchers are pretty close to the same, and maybe it's just some intangible confort level thing with some pitchers.

 

It's way too early to know anything about who might or might not be better placed with each pitcher, and maybe in this case, it doesn't or won't matter, at least for 2023.

 

Many managers choose to match up certain catchers with certain pitchers and shy away from any sort of choice based on which catcher hits the pitcher they face that night better. That makes me think, managers think it matters.

 

I get that, but if there are pitchers who it doesn’t matter and batters who can shift their spot in the lineup without bother those guys add more value to your team. Then you can employ splits and platoons much more effectively.

 

People can be creatures of habit, they like throwing to a certain catcher not because that guy is a better catcher….but because he’s less comfortable with a change. I don’t think it matters as much as people think in the long run.

 

Managers appease players often. Doesn’t mean they’re not putting emotions over reality. They’re also managing people with emotions, superstitions, fears, and egos too. That could go a long way into their decision making other than it actually impacting the game.

 

If a guy is a good catcher and a pitcher doesn’t like pitching to him. The guy either screwed his girlfriend or he’s just. It comfortable with change. Odds are, he’ll be fine after a start or two. Pitchers cant control who is on the roster.

[moonslav59]

The WS even tossed in a pitcher, Taylor Broadway, and took on more salary, of course. So they essentially saw Diekman as MORE valuable than McGuire.

 

Indeed, a head scratcher. I was willing to hand Diekman away or even pay a little of his contract for a bag of balls, so I'm getting your point, and then some.

 

Certainly, some sort of cloud hangs over McGuire's head.

[moonslav59]

I get that, but if there are pitchers who it doesn’t matter and batters who can shift their spot in the lineup without bother those guys add more value to your team. Then you can employ splits and platoons much more effectively.

 

People can be creatures of habit, they like throwing to a certain catcher not because that guy is a better catcher….but because he’s less comfortable with a change. I don’t think it matters as much as people think in the long run.

 

Managers appease players often. Doesn’t mean they’re not putting emotions over reality. They’re also managing people with emotions, superstitions, fears, and egos too. That could go a long way into their decision making other than it actually impacting the game.

 

If a guy is a good catcher and a pitcher doesn’t like pitching to him. The guy either screwed his girlfriend or he’s just. It comfortable with change. Odds are, he’ll be fine after a start or two. Pitchers cant control who is on the roster.

 

Agreed, and I have often said maybe the variances have little to do with any skillset, and is just about some sort of comfort level thing based on who knows what, but I do think some pitchers, and perhaps many pitchers, for whatever reason, just do significantly better with one guy over another.

[jad]

You should and an "e" to your names- as in "jaded."

 

 

Ha! You're right that I'm having a little more trouble finding the positives in this team than all my Polly-anna-ish brethren on this board!

[Hugh2]

That’s fine, but guys need to accept change sometimes. A team shouldn’t be forced to accept a full time catcher who has a declining set of skills and hitting the market.

 

I’m not saying that’s the case in this scenario with Vas, I think that’s true for any team.

 

These guys are pros, they get that. You work with what you got. You have 2-3 guys, you find who you like better.

 

Perhaps having Tim Wakefield in your rotation might complicate things.

[Maxbialystock]

I get that, but if there are pitchers who it doesn’t matter and batters who can shift their spot in the lineup without bother those guys add more value to your team. Then you can employ splits and platoons much more effectively.

 

People can be creatures of habit, they like throwing to a certain catcher not because that guy is a better catcher….but because he’s less comfortable with a change. I don’t think it matters as much as people think in the long run.

 

Managers appease players often. Doesn’t mean they’re not putting emotions over reality. They’re also managing people with emotions, superstitions, fears, and egos too. That could go a long way into their decision making other than it actually impacting the game.

 

If a guy is a good catcher and a pitcher doesn’t like pitching to him. The guy either screwed his girlfriend or he’s just. It comfortable with change. Odds are, he’ll be fine after a start or two. Pitchers cant control who is on the roster.

 

Is English your second language? Forget grammar. Your posts border on unintelligible.

[jad]

That’s fine, but guys need to accept change sometimes. A team shouldn’t be forced to accept a full time catcher who has a declining set of skills and hitting the market.

 

I’m not saying that’s the case in this scenario with Vas, I think that’s true for any team.

 

These guys are pros, they get that. You work with what you got. You have 2-3 guys, you find who you like better.

 

Perhaps having Tim Wakefield in your rotation might complicate things.

 

Agreed. But then, no one would have looked at last year's pathetic team and concluded: "The problem is Vasquez." And sure, RS could use a better catcher; teams could use better players at ALL positions. But again, no one looking to upgrade the catching spot would have thought: you know what the answer is? R. McQuire.

[Hugh2]

Agreed. But then, no one would have looked at last year's pathetic team and concluded: "The problem is Vasquez." And sure, RS could use a better catcher; teams could use better players at ALL positions. But again, no one looking to upgrade the catching spot would have thought: you know what the answer is? R. McQuire.

 

Ok but Vazquez wasn’t traded for McGuire, so it’s not 100% fair to compare even though they play the same position.

 

It’s also worth noting Vazquez was traded because he was a free agent. The Sox traded free agents to be they thought they could get something for.

 

Not defending or attacking that strategy, just pointing it out. But for what it’s worth, McGuire was much better than Christian down the stretch so the risk paid off.

 

If Vazque is much better than McGuire going forward he should still ultimately be compared to what he was traded for. Also, the criticism should come of the Sox not resigning, or upgrading the position

[moonslav59]

Ok but Vazquez wasn’t traded for McGuire, so it’s not 100% fair to compare even though they play the same position.

 

It’s also worth noting Vazquez was traded because he was a free agent. The Sox traded free agents to be they thought they could get something for.

 

Not defending or attacking that strategy, just pointing it out. But for what it’s worth, McGuire was much better than Christian down the stretch so the risk paid off.

 

If Vazque is much better than McGuire going forward he should still ultimately be compared to what he was traded for. Also, the criticism should come of the Sox not resigning, or upgrading the position

 

...and like it or not, there was no way we were going to pay Vaz even close to what he got via free agency, so we basically traded away 2 months from a lost and broken season for Abreu and EValdez.

 

If you want to combine the two trades to match up positions, we traded:

 

2 months of Vaz & 1 yr and 2 months of Diekman (and about $5M in contract cost)

 

for

 

McGuire, EValdez & Abreu

 

Nothing Vaz does going forward changes the results of the trade, IMO. It is a separate issue.

 

I doubt Diekman shines, this year and makes us wish we still had him.

 

The guys we got back are all potential (or "suspect" as Red might call them,) but between the three, I'm thinking at least one should be helpful.

[moonslav59]

Agreed. But then, no one would have looked at last year's pathetic team and concluded: "The problem is Vasquez." And sure, RS could use a better catcher; teams could use better players at ALL positions. But again, no one looking to upgrade the catching spot would have thought: you know what the answer is? R. McQuire.

 

I think the hope was that the very inexpensive catching tandem of McGuire and Wong could come close to what Vaz and Plawecki gave us and were projected to do going forward, and with the money saved, we could direct more resources at upgrading other positions that, in theory, might far outweigh any loss we might see at the catching position.

 

Also, the longer term hopes of McGuire, Wong and maybe even Hickey and Brannon came into play in the decision made.

 

Vaz would have taken a longer term commitment that we wanted to give him.

[Bellhorn04]

But for what it’s worth, McGuire was much better than Christian down the stretch so the risk paid off.

 

Based strictly on offensive numbers, sure.

 

But it's the mostly intangible aspects of catching that we're really debating.

[Bellhorn04]

I think the hope was that the very inexpensive catching tandem of McGuire and Wong could come close to what Vaz and Plawecki gave us and were projected to do going forward, and with the money saved, we could direct more resources at upgrading other positions that, in theory, might far outweigh any loss we might see at the catching position.

 

Also, the longer term hopes of McGuire, Wong and maybe even Hickey and Brannon came into play in the decision made.

 

Vaz would have taken a longer term commitment that we wanted to give him.

 

And if I had confidence in Bloom's judgment I would buy all that. Right now I have very little confidence in him.

[moonslav59]

And if I had confidence in Bloom's judgment I would buy all that. Right now I have very little confidence in him.

 

Fully understandable.

 

The sample size is small. Let's see how we feel in a few months.

[Hugh2]

...and like it or not, there was no way we were going to pay Vaz even close to what he got via free agency, so we basically traded away 2 months from a lost and broken season for Abreu and EValdez.

 

If you want to combine the two trades to match up positions, we traded:

 

2 months of Vaz & 1 yr and 2 months of Diekman (and about $5M in contract cost)

 

for

 

McGuire, EValdez & Abreu

 

Nothing Vaz does going forward changes the results of the trade, IMO. It is a separate issue.

 

I doubt Diekman shines, this year and makes us wish we still had him.

 

The guys we got back are all potential (or "suspect" as Red might call them,) but between the three, I'm thinking at least one should be helpful.

 

I think it’s wildly inappropriate to evaluate a trade by using a free agent to be free agent years.

 

It’s never and apples to apples comparison. Also, years of control effects return. Two years of Betts rather than one would have resulted in a completely different return.

 

When teams trade a guy like that away with one year of control it’s because they know they either don’t have the money to resign them or they do not want to resign. This has been wildly speculated with Mookie Betts, as it had been reported he was uninterested in staying with Boston.

 

With Vazquez, I’m not sure that’s the point but if not then the Sox just wanted to move on from him. Regardless, we can’t compare McGuire to Vaz. Because not only were they not traded for each other, not only was Vazquez a free agent to be, but the Sox could have upgraded elsewhere in free agency such as signing Contreras.

 

I’m ok with less offenses for good defense if the offensive is made up elsewhere. Not sure if the Sox did enough to strengthen the lineup this year but that’s certainly not Reese’s fault

[Hugh2]

Based strictly on offensive numbers, sure.

 

But it's the mostly intangible aspects of catching that we're really debating.

 

Everything I’ve ever read about Reese from his time In Toronto to his scouting reports sings praises about his defense. This year will be telling. He has t looked bad at the plate too, consider catchers are late bloomers at the plate, I find that highly encouraging

.

[moonslav59]

Not many hot hitters on our team, right now:

 

Last 14 days:

1.666 Duvall

1.014 Devers

.933 McGuire (1.000 last 7 days)

.917 Tapia (just 12 PAs)

 

.775 Verdugo

 

.637 Turner

.628 Yoshida

.625 Kike

 

.586 Dalbec (11)

.542 Refsnyder

.524 Casas

 

.458 Wong

.394 Arroyo

.111 Chang

(These last 3 guys have 86 PAs in the last 13 games- YUCK!)

.

[moonslav59]

I think it’s wildly inappropriate to evaluate a trade by using a free agent to be free agent years.

 

It’s never and apples to apples comparison. Also, years of control effects return. Two years of Betts rather than one would have resulted in a completely different return.

 

When teams trade a guy like that away with one year of control it’s because they know they either don’t have the money to resign them or they do not want to resign. This has been wildly speculated with Mookie Betts, as it had been reported he was uninterested in staying with Boston.

 

With Vazquez, I’m not sure that’s the point but if not then the Sox just wanted to move on from him. Regardless, we can’t compare McGuire to Vaz. Because not only were they not traded for each other, not only was Vazquez a free agent to be, but the Sox could have upgraded elsewhere in free agency such as signing Contreras.

 

I’m ok with less offenses for good defense if the offensive is made up elsewhere. Not sure if the Sox did enough to strengthen the lineup this year but that’s certainly not Reese’s fault

 

Agreed.

 

The end result was, we moved on from Vaz and Plawecki and ended up with McGuire and Wong (Alfaro).

 

One can look how that worked out, but with so many moving parts and a wide financial disparity, it's like comparing apples to watermelons.

[Maxbialystock]

I don't remember which pitcher said it, but someone claimed that a pitcher, especially a starter, rarely has all his pitches working for him in any given game. It's not just a matter of a fastball that's fast enough or a curve that breaks sharply enough, command is an even bigger issue. To make matters worse, the command/velocity/break can vary from inning to inning or even within an inning.

 

When Chris Sale was the stud starter (a century or so ago), he usually had good stuff and good command and therefore never shook off the catcher. At the time he said, "I just focus on execution and let the catcher do the thinking/strategizing." But that Chris Sale was a rarity.

 

With the 20 second clock, there is now less time to shake off pitches and thus an even greater need for trust between pitcher and catcher--especially given the reality that most pitchers don't always have their best stuff on any given day.

[Hugh2]

The more and more we think a catcher influences a pitchers outcome the worse and worse Vaz looks from 2022. Of course that’s not saying much about this battery this year then either.

 

But we’re barely 2 weeks into the season. We will know more in a few months.

 

While these things may matter to degrees we can argue about I’m fairly confident no amount of play calling can fix a pitcher who is just laying eggs.

[Bellhorn04]

As far as the value of the catcher thing goes, one story I always remember is when Schilling had a no-hitter broken up in the 9th by Oakland. After the game he said he only shook Varitek off a handful of times in the game, and the big one was on the pitch that resulted in the A's only hit. And Schilling said he knew afterward that Varitek had called the right pitch.

 

If a pitcher has a lot of confidence in the pitches his catcher is calling, it must make his job a little easier. He can focus on executing the pitch and not have to wonder if it's the right pitch.

 

Another thing I also liked about Varitek was the way he set the target with his glove. He seemed to have perfect technique for doing that. And sometimes of course he would try to fool the hitter by setting it and then moving it. There can be a lot of stuff going on there.

[Hugh2]

Another concept we need to realize is if the pitcher is calling off the catcher a LOT, it could also be on the pitcher sometimes too.

 

A catcher does a lot of homework in when and where to pitch a guy and goes over it with coaching and trainers before every game. It’s almost predetermined what they’re pitching.

 

In the future, the near future batteries will wear headsets and can talk to each other. Or with the dugout and pitches will be called from there. Which at times they are now.