moonslav59

How many blue chippers (or even purple), who are eligible for Rule 5, are still in single A? (Can you name any from the past that were there for the taking but were not?)

CiCi's is all you can eat- but you can't eat more than a bite. Worst crust. Worst sauce. Same cheese.

The Houck differential is not that great. (He's at .510 with Vaz- career!) These sample sizes are much larger (most large with 2 or more catchers) and just as stunning: EOvaldi: CERA/OPS 4.60/.781 Vaz (155 IP) 4.85/.748 Salty (124) 2.95/640 Plawecki (110) Sale: 4.12/.759 Vaz 127 IP 2.79/.578 Leon 436 IP (granted- pre- TJS) 2.51/.622 AJ P 226 IP (pre TJS) ERod 4.18/.725 Vaz 614IP 4.05/.700 Leon 118 IP 3.78/.778 Hanigan 50 Price 4.27/.738 Vaz 360 IP 2.96/.647 Leon 204 IP Porcello 4.96/794 Vaz 211 IP 4.19/.728 Leon 576 IP Those are the 5 biggest IP guys on the Sox since Vaz was our catcher. I think the fact that RP'ers are more even has to do with little chance to build lasting comfort levels.

CiCi's is the worst of any. Trust me.

So, you do value these numbers? WOW! I'm not alone, even though I do NOT value 9.2 IP sample sizes.

I've accepted that. Does anyone know for certain that it has nothing to do with anything related to CERA? MVP seems to know, for sure. How about you?

I doubt they will, too, but that 26th man slot could create a situation where someone grabs a single-A guy. (That guy will NOT be Jimenez, if anyone is taken.)

Yes. Some were not sure Whitlock would pitch anything more than mop-up duty, when we selected him. That quickly changed, but it might not have.

I know all about the unbalanced sample sizes and other factors, but that does not mean many pitchers do about the same, no matter who is catching. I've never claimed to know the reason why, but some pitchers- mostly starters- do way better with one catcher over another, year-after-year, with very little variance. It could just be a psychological comfort factor, but even that does not make it any less real. It may or may not have to do much with pitch calling, but when years and years of sample sizes all point to the same thing, I tend to think there is something driving the numbers. Just because that something is hard to quantify, does not make it valueless.

Maldanado has a playoff OPS of .244. That's his OPS and NOT his BA. I'm not sure another Astros catcher even has played one inning. Since catchers need more breaks than other positions, over the season the Astros had these numbers from their catchers: .573 Maldanado (426 PAs) 1011 innings .799 Castro (179 PAs) 355 innings .458 Stubbs (38 PAs) 79 innings If Maldanado has such horrific defensive stats and hit .573, why else could he be chosen to start every playoff game? I'll save MVP the trouble in looking up the useless team CERA numbers: 3.72 Maldanado 3.89 Castro It's about pitcher by pitcher- something MVP can't seem to grasp. Castro did seem to do well with the younger pitchers. and Maldando with older ones, all year, but it does seem strange he is the 100% catcher, now, despite sucking on D, according to traditional defensive numbers.

That very well may be true. We don't have access to all the information managers have. I never claim to know why they start one catcher over another. (There may very well be some pitchers that will or already have done better with Castro or others.) You, on the other hand, totally shut off any chance that how a catcher handles a pitcher or staff has anything to do with the choices made. You act like anything related to CERA has zero value. You act like I am claiming I know more or that managers use this type of information. I have repeatedly said I don't know, but you seem to act like you know they do not. Correct me, if I am wrong in this observation on this debate.

And of course, none of that info could possibly have to do with the chance pitchers just do way better with Maldanado, despite his obvious defensive weaknesses shown by stats, right?.

They must like Vaz's "other numbers" enough to outweigh the numbers I provided. I never claimed all GMs were onboard with my beliefs or that I am sure I am right. I give my opinion, and I provide facts to support it. I do think Bloom/Cora started Plawecki with Eovaldi, in part because his numbers blow away others. I think they like Vaz's bat more, his framing and blocking more, and that's enough for them to choose Vaz. I trust they know how to quantify values better than i do, but the fact that vaz starts more does not mean they don't think other catchers are better at getting better numbers from the staff. It just means they don't think it's by enough to make a change, or as harmony might say, or not. I think it is obvious many managers think some pitchers do better with a single catcher than the other. Do you dispute this? They don't platoon catchers by batting splits or every 4 or 5 day plans. They almost all pick a pitcher to match with their back-up, because, IMO, they believe in "comfort factors."

Like with Maldanado, right?

I just read it. I just responded. (BTW, I think Vaz is a better hitter than Plawecki, but not this year.)

I never claimed managers and GM all follow my beliefs. Plawecki caught Eovaldi, who had a very clear differential in CERA. The other pitchers not so much. Also, I am not a big Plawecki fan. I've never said he was great or even good at "handling the staff." My point has always been about Vaz not matching his back-up numbers with most starters and some having massive differentials.

Why else would Maldanado be playing, if he is so horrible at traditional defensive stats and is hitting like .100? You tell me. These numbers support my position.

Probably not many non-pitchers, but the 26 man roster is rather new, so maybe that may change.

We traded for him. The list was for all the "greats" brought up through the Sox system since Buchholz.

That helps me understand your mentality.

I think it is pretty clear why Maldanado is the starting catcher for the Astros, despite his .300 OPS.

As long as the guy is good at handling the staff and decent at other defensive aspects, I'm on board. I know very little about other teams' catchers and staff-handling.

Is that your goal?

There is a difference between what I want to happen and what I think will happen, but in this case, both point to no mega deals, this winter. $30-40M to spend: 4-5 slots open. That does not leave much room for a $30M deal, unless we sign Scherzer and 3 Iggy types.

It's not about Plawecki being great with the staff, except maybe Eovaldi. It's about Vaz being worse or much worse than whoever else is our back-up.