Salty/Russell Martin Debate

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate

    2010 Dodgers' pitchers opponents OPS with their different catchers:
       (Warning: many small sample sizes)

    If 3 or more catchers had sample sizes: red=best/orange 2nd best

    Pitcher (IP)  Martin      Ellis          Barajas         Ausmus
    Kershaw(577) .628   (88)   .481  (128)  .602   (55)  .715
    Kuroda  (494) .678   (129) .738  (135)  .479   (52)  .488
    Billings. (420) .731  (154) .665   (168) .524    (75) .635
    Padilla  (256) .682   (22)   .332      (n/a)        (111) .706
    J. Ely    (272) .600   (158) 1.177     (n/a)            (n/a)
    Montas (184) .798   (103)  .669  (12)  1.483   (100) .842
    Broxton (145) .661  (57)   .820  (33)   .926    (36)  .543
    Belisario(126) .617  (42)   .675  (32)   .683     (33)  1.075
    Weaver (118) .798  (43) 1.022   (15)  1.156    (21)  .390
    R. Ortiz (116) .891   (19)   .676       (n/a)          (n/a)
    H-K Kuo (113) .421  (57)  .332   (24)  .292     (35)  .504
    Haeger  (59)   .978  (92) .869         (n/a)         (n/a)   

    It appears that Martin did OK at "getting the most out of the pitchers" in LA last season. Not many catchers had close to equal sample sizes with any pitcher, so these numbers should be taken with a grain of salt.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate

    Martin has done well with the Yankees staff, however. However, his physical condition is deteriorating, and he's starting to seem more and more to resemble Varitek from the complete package POV; which is why I'm surprised you don't see more catcher "rotations", or even the term used.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from jimdavis. Show jimdavis's posts

    Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate

    In Response to Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate:
    [QUOTE]Let's try this. The Sox are out to win a championship this year. So are the Yankees. Would the Yankees want Martin behind the plate right now or Salty? Same for the Sox. Would they want Martin behind the plate or Salty? Obviously Theo believes in Salty as a project. No argument there. Martin is not a project and I'd have to believe he's a large part of the success--starters and bullpen--the Yanks are enjoying. Homerism is fine but a little intellectual honesty is good too.
    Posted by mfymfy[/QUOTE]

    Martin might have an overall edge in the discussion but it is debatable.  The overall point of the thread is that in April, Martin was Johnny Bench and Salty was Johnny Wockenfuss.  That just ain't the case.  Red Sox fans were losing their minds projecting Martin to be a 40 HR guy.  I'm not sure but I don't think he is going to get there.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate

    In Response to Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate : Martin might have an overall edge in the discussion but it is debatable.  The overall point of the thread is that in April, Martin was Johnny Bench and Salty was Johnny Wockenfuss.  That just ain't the case.  Red Sox fans were losing their minds projecting Martin to be a 40 HR guy.  I'm not sure but I don't think he is going to get there.
    Posted by jimdavis[/QUOTE]

    I'm not sure Gardner will get there either.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate

    I think getting Martin was a smart move by Cashman, but getting Saltalamacchia was a brilliant move by Theo.  Of course, Theo had Tek available to reduce the risk, and Tek has more than delivered.  This two-catcher approach just might be establishing a new paradigm because it keeps both of them fresh. 
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate

    First, CERA is not meant to be used on a team CERA level, but rather a one tool to compare catchers on the same team on how the do with individual pitchers that they both catch a significant amount of time (sample sizes).

    That being said, here are the overall numbers and some individual pitcher's numbers:

    Overall:
    Molina (19 Inn)  2.37  (.614 OPS against)
    Cervelli (192)    3.09   (.637)
    Martin   (643)    3.60   (.703)

    2011 Yankee starting pitchers with each catcher:
                Martin                   Cervelli           Molina
    Sab   (393) 3.57/.626   (218)3.47/.540   (n/a)
    Burn  (475) 4.40/.729   (57)  5.40/.671  (n/a)
    Garc  (361) 3.55/.790   (58)  2.57/.658  (21) 0.00/.243
    Colon (297) 4.37/.795  (104) 0.93/.435  (n/a)
    Nova  (246) 4.13/.689  (135)4.74/ .874  (25) 1.42/.497
    Huges (102) 8.44/.892     (n/a)          (n/a)

    Only Sabathia, Nova, and Colon have significant sample sizes worthy of definitive comparison.

    Cervelli has been slightly better than Martin with Sabathia.
    Cervelli has done way better with Colon than Martin.
    Martin has done better than Cervelli with Nova.

    The others have unbalanced sample sizes, but if you combine Cervelli and Molina, the results are:

    Burnett has a better ERA with Martin, but a better OPS against with Cervelli.
    Garcia has a much better ERA & OPS against with Cervelli/Molina than Martin.
    Hughes has no comparison sample sizes as Martin is the only one who caught him.

    Overall, Martin has done clearly better with only Nova.
    Burnett is about even.
    Sabathia, Garcia, and Colon have done better with Cervelli/Molina than Martin.

    The sample sizes are small, but there is no evidence that the Yankee starters are doing overall better with Martin than othe Yankee catchers.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate

    In Response to Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate:
    [QUOTE]First, CERA is not meant to be used on a team CERA level, but rather a one tool to compare catchers on the same team on how the do with individual pitchers that they both catch a significant amount of time (sample sizes). That being said, here are the overall numbers and some individual pitcher's numbers: Overall: Molina (19 Inn)  2.37  (.614 OPS against) Cervelli (192)    3.09   (.637) Martin   (643)    3.60   (.703) 2011 Yankee starting pitchers with each catcher:             Martin                   Cervelli           Molina Sab   (393) 3.57/.626   (218) 3.47/.540    (n/a) Burn  (475) 4.40 /.729   (57)  5.40/ .671   (n/a) Garc  (361) 3.55/.790   (58)  2.57/.658   (21) 0.00/.243 Colon (297) 4.37/.795  (104) 0.93/.435   (n/a) Nova  (246) 4.13/.689   (135)4.74/ .874  (25) 1.42/.497 Huges (102) 8.44/.892     (n/a)          (n/a) Only Sabathia, Nova, and Colon have significant sample sizes worthy of definitive comparison. Cervelli has been slightly better than Martin with Sabathia. Cervelli has done way better with Colon than Martin. Martin has done better than Cervelli with Nova. The others have unbalanced sample sizes, but if you combine Cervelli and Molina, the results are: Burnett has a better ERA with Martin, but a better OPS against with Cervelli. Garcia has a much better ERA & OPS against with Cervelli/Molina than Martin. Hughes has no comparison sample sizes as Martin is the only one who caught him. Overall, Martin has done clearly better with only Nova. Burnett is about even. Sabathia, Garcia, and Colon have done better with Cervelli/Molina than Martin. The sample sizes are small, but there is no evidence that the Yankee starters are doing overall better with Martin than othe Yankee catchers.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Moon,

    Good breakdown; you are THE Stat guy on this board; however, you're overreliant on these #s, ala rotisserie baseball, and what the pitchers say about him (less spin, that is) IMO should be considered as well; especially without large and consistent sample sizes; speaking of, the Salty Tek comparision is more useful than usual this yr; due to Varitek catching about 30% of the time (as opposed to, let's say, 10%). Harness is right about tandems with a given yr and team as indicative as the most reliable, at least as far as these CERA STATS are concerned verbatim.

    CERA (and/or C_Opposing_OPS), when the sample size is sufficient, is one of my favorite New Age Measures, others less so. Those who diss it (we know who that is) is IMO either misinformed or opinionated to a fault.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sheriff-Rojas. Show Sheriff-Rojas's posts

    Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate

    Cervelli has been slightly better than Martin with Sabathia.
    Cervelli has done way better with Colon than Martin.
    Martin has done better than Cervelli with Nova.

    The others have unbalanced sample sizes, but if you combine Cervelli and Molina, the results are:

    Burnett has a better ERA with Martin, but a better OPS against with Cervelli.
    Garcia has a much better ERA & OPS against with Cervelli/Molina than Martin.
    Hughes has no comparison sample sizes as Martin is the only one who caught him.


    This sounds like one of those logic puzzles teachers or corporate facilitators assign for group problem-solving. 
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate

    In Response to Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate : This is based on what I've read regarding pitcher & Mgr  feedback and seen. As far as other catchers are concerned with respect to defense, I thought Mauer before the injuries was great, I-Rod when he was younger, and I like Wieters, Ruiz & Y. Molina now. Historically, I would go with Cochrane, Hartnett, J. Gibson, Dickey, Ferrell & Bench, and Fisk was an animal. I guess you have to throw Berra in there too. Ray Schalk is in the HOF despite a 250-ish BA because of his skills behind the plate. Other notable defensive guys with lesser stature were E. Howard (short prime), Freehan & Sundberg.
    Posted by nhsteven[/QUOTE]
    Fair enough, if Girardi and the pitchers like how Martin calls pitches.
    Ted Williams once said that Berra was the difference between the Sox and Yanks in those days. Advantage Yanks.
    Wasn't .250 a pretty good average for catchers when Schalk played?

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate

    In Response to Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate : Fair enough, if Girardi and the pitchers like how Martin calls pitches. Ted Williams once said that Berra was the difference between the Sox and Yanks in those days. Advantage Yanks. Wasn't .250 a pretty good average for catchers when Schalk played?
    Posted by expitch[/QUOTE]

    Better than now, but nothing to crow about.

    TW said that about Rizzuto too.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate

    In Response to Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate : Better than now, but nothing to crow about. TW said that about Rizzuto too.
    Posted by nhsteven[/QUOTE]
    Are you saying that Williams went on record as preferring Rizzuto to Stephens and Pesky, a close pal?  Never heard it.  Why would Williams need to have gone beyond citing one player as the difference.
    Do you have BA's of catchers in Schalks time?

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from pinstripezac32. Show pinstripezac32's posts

    Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate

    In Response to Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate : Are you saying that Williams went on record as preferring Rizzuto to Stephens and Pesky, a close pal?  Never heard it.  Why would Williams need to have gone beyond citing one player as the difference. Do you have BA's of catchers in Schalks time?
    Posted by expitch[/QUOTE]

    you should be laughing expitch






    Following the 1949 season, Ted Williams made some statements that were highly respected at the time, but which would be ridiculed today.

    In 1949, the
    New York Yankees won the first of what would turn into five consecutive World Championships. Their shortstop was Phil Rizzuto.

    Trailing the
    Boston Red Sox by one game with two left to play, the Yankees beat the Red Sox twice to win the pennant, and went on to beat the Brooklyn Dodgers
    in the World Series.

    Ted Williams was upset. Winners are always upset when they or their team loses.

    Ted Williams was on first base in the first inning of the first of the two game. He was held close to the bag by Tommy Henrich.

    Williams pointed toward shortstop. "If we had that little squirt we'd be out in front by 10 games right now."


    The shortstop Williams was referring to was Phil Rizzuto. The Boston shortstop was Vern "Junior" Stephens. The statistics were not even close.

    In 1949, Stephens hit .290. Rizzuto hit .275,

    Stephens hit 39 home runs and batted in 159. Rizzuto hit five home runs and batted in 64.

    Those were the primary statistics used at the time to compare players. Modern statistics favor Stephens even more.

    Vern had a .391 on base average and slugged .539 with an .872 OPS.

    Rizzuto had a .352 on base average and slugged all of .358 with a a .711 OPS.

    Today, anyone who compares the 1949 Phil Rizzuto to the 1949 Vern Stephens and concludes that Rizzuto was more valuable would be a laughing stock, but that graphically illustrates the fact that statistics must be interpreted within a specific context.

    During their record streak of five consecutive World Championships, the Yankees never had the best player in the league and they never had the best pitcher, but they had 25 good to excellent players who played together as a team. What statistic measures that?


    I never heard about the yogi comment

    but it makes more sense

    you can read the rest

    Ted Williams Would Be Laughed at If He Said That About Phil Rizzuto Today


    http://bleacherreport.com/articles/695490-ted-williams-would-be-laughed-at-if-he-said-that-today


     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate

    In Response to Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate : Are you saying that Williams went on record as preferring Rizzuto to Stephens and Pesky, a close pal?  Never heard it.  Why would Williams need to have gone beyond citing one player as the difference. Do you have BA's of catchers in Schalks time?
    Posted by expitch[/QUOTE]

    Hard to fathom, since I've heard this several times; here's an excerpt from Wikipedia, then the link

    ------------------------------------------------------


    Ted Williams once claimed that his Red Sox would have won most of the Yankees' 1940s and 1950s pennants if they had had Rizzuto at shortstop,[1] but Rizzuto himself was more modest: "My stats don't shout. They kind of whisper."[2]

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




    As far as BAs way back when are concerned, check baseball-reference.com. However, a contemporary of Schalk was Bresnahan, who hit better than him.

    Here's a couple before 1920: Chief Meyers hit .358 and .334; Steve O'Neill hit .331 , a few others hit this high as well (Min 300 ABs)

    The last decade of the 19th century was a hitters era, so you don't want to look at those.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate

    Schalk got into the HOF due to his defensive prowess. Even that long ago, all phases of his catching skill (Including having the right temperament in dealing with Pitchers, a-la Varitek) was revered. However, I recall back in the 70s there was a campaign to throw him out because "He was the worst player in the HOF". Those that didn't see him didn't appreciate him, and pointed to his lifetime BA as unworthy of the honor. Regardless, no one's confusing him with Honus Wagner as a ballplayer.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate

    In Response to Salty/Russell Martin Debate:
    [QUOTE]For all of April and May, I read how foolish the Sox were to have signed Salty and not Martin.  Martin started out on fire which only rhachetted up the rhetoric.  Now that Salty is playing well and Martin has come back to earth, I wonder where all the Salty doubters have gone.  To me it was a typical Red Sox Nation over reaction in the early part of the season.  What do you all think?
    Posted by jimdavis[/QUOTE]

    Simple answer, Martin is a better catcher and game caller.  Salty is a slightly better hitter but neither are top tier players.  Salty still has time to progress, I'm not so sure about Martin.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate

    In Response to Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate:
    [QUOTE]This sounds like one of those logic puzzles teachers or corporate facilitators assign for group problem-solving. 
    Posted by Sheriff-Rojas[/QUOTE]

    LOL Sheriff.

    Being a high school math teacher, I love those logic puzzles.

    To all, some very good and informative posts on this thread!
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate

    In Response to Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate : you should be laughing expitch Following the 1949 season, Ted Williams made some statements that were highly respected at the time, but which would be ridiculed today. In 1949, the New York Yankees won the first of what would turn into five consecutive World Championships. Their shortstop was Phil Rizzuto. Trailing the Boston Red Sox by one game with two left to play, the Yankees beat the Red Sox twice to win the pennant, and went on to beat the Brooklyn Dodgers in the World Series. Ted Williams was upset. Winners are always upset when they or their team loses. T ed Williams was on first base in the first inning of the first of the two game. He was held close to the bag by Tommy Henrich. Williams pointed toward shortstop. "If we had that little squirt we'd be out in front by 10 games right now." The shortstop Williams was referring to was Phil Rizzuto . The Boston shortstop was Vern "Junior" Stephens. The statistics were not even close. In 1949, Stephens hit .290. Rizzuto hit .275, Stephens hit 39 home runs and batted in 159. Rizzuto hit five home runs and batted in 64. Those were the primary statistics used at the time to compare players. Modern statistics favor Stephens even more. Vern had a .391 on base average and slugged .539 with an .872 OPS. Rizzuto had a .352 on base average and slugged all of .358 with a a .711 OPS. Today, anyone who compares the 1949 Phil Rizzuto to the 1949 Vern Stephens and concludes that Rizzuto was more valuable would be a laughing stock, but that graphically illustrates the fact that statistics must be interpreted within a specific context. During their record streak of five consecutive World Championships, the Yankees never had the best player in the league and they never had the best pitcher, but they had 25 good to excellent players who played together as a team. What statistic measures that? I never heard about the yogi comment but it makes more sense you can read the rest Ted Williams Would Be Laughed at If He Said That About Phil Rizzuto Today http://bleacherreport.com/articles/695490-ted-williams-would-be-laughed-at-if-he-said-that-today
    Posted by pinstripezac32[/QUOTE]
    Williams was a great hitter, a good teammate, and he was often right. But he was also something of a pop-off.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate

    In Response to Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate : Moon, Good breakdown; you are THE Stat guy on this board; however, you're overreliant on these #s, ala rotisserie baseball, and what the pitchers say about him (less spin, that is) IMO should be considered as well; especially without large and consistent sample sizes; speaking of, the Salty Tek comparision is more useful than usual this yr; due to Varitek catching about 30% of the time (as opposed to, let's say, 10%). Harness is right about tandems with a given yr and team as indicative as the most reliable, at least as far as these CERA STATS are concerned verbatim. CERA (and/or C_Opposing_OPS), when the sample size is sufficient, is one of my favorite New Age Measures, others less so. Those who diss it (we know who that is) is IMO either misinformed or opinionated to a fault.
    Posted by nhsteven[/QUOTE]

    Although VTek has caught about 40%, there are very few balanced sampel sizes per starting pitchers due to tito's philosphy of the "personal caddy".

    CERA is not supposed to be used as an overall number. It is misleading to show that VTek is way ahead of Salty in team ERA, since both have caught different pitchers for the most part.

    Salty: 4.46 in 494.2 IP
    VTek: 3.18 in 368.0 IP

    Looking at individual pitchers and how they do with each catcher is the correct way to use CERA and OPS vs Opponent-type stats. Looking at the Sox starters this year, there aren't many balanced sample sizes:

     Opps against  w Salty        w VTek
    Beckett:   (24 PAs)  .796   (431) .493 (CERA 5.40 to 1.97)
    Lester:    (382 PAs) .738     (92) .496  (CERA 3.69 to 1.88)
    Buch:      (265 PAs) .662     (88) .841  (CERA 3.52 to 3.38)
    Wake:     (332 PAs) .785     (38) .741  (CERA 4.66 to 6.00)
    Lackey:  (315 PAs) .870     (77) .743  (CERA  6.68 to 6.75)
    Dice-K:    (16 PAs) 1.768   (151) .545 (CERA 31,50 to 3.82
    Miller:     (94 PAs)   .810      (50) .726  (CERA 5.95 to 2.38)
    Weiland: (26 PAs)  .651    (22) 1.323 (CERA 4.50 to 13.50)

    As you can see, no starter has pitched close to equally with both catchers, except Weiland, but his sample sizes both 6 IP or less.

    I think harness may have the relief pitchers numbers which are more balanced, but still small sample sizes as of now.

    As you can see, no starter has 100 PAs with each catcher. Miller and Weiland are closely balanced, but neither has larger than 100 PAs with either catcher. The Sox starting pitchers this year are not suited for proper CERA use.


     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate

    In Response to Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate : Although VTek has caught about 40%, there are very few balanced sampel sizes per starting pitchers due to tito's philosphy of the "personal caddy". CERA is not supposed to be used as an overall number. It is misleading to show that VTek is way ahead of Salty in team ERA, since both have caught different pitchers for the most part. Salty: 4.46 in 494.2 IP VTek: 3.18 in 368.0 IP Looking at individual pitchers and how they do with each catcher is the correct way to use CERA and OPS vs Opponent-type stats. Looking at the Sox starters this year, there aren't many balanced sample sizes:  Opps against  w Salty        w VTek Beckett:   (24 PAs)  .796   (431) .493 (CERA 5.40 to 1.97) Lester:    (382 PAs) .738     (92) .496  (CERA 3.69 to 1.88) Buch:      (265 PAs) .662     (88) .841  (CERA 3.52 to 3.38) Wake:     (332 PAs) .785     (38) .741  (CERA 4.66 to 6.00) Lackey:  (315 PAs) .870     (77) .743  (CERA  6.68 to 6.75) Dice-K:    (16 PAs) 1.768   (151) .545 (CERA 31,50 to 3.82 Miller:     (94 PAs)   .810      (50) .726  (CERA 5.95 to 2.38) Weiland: (26 PAs)  .651    (22) 1.323 (CERA 4.50 to 13.50) As you can see, no starter has pitched close to equally with both catchers, except Weiland, but his sample sizes both 6 IP or less. I think harness may have the relief pitchers numbers which are more balanced, but still small sample sizes as of now. As you can see, no starter has 100 PAs with each catcher. Miller and Weiland are closely balanced, but neither has larger than 100 PAs with either catcher. The Sox starting pitchers this year are not suited for proper CERA use.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    A valid point, but somewhat of a gray area as well; and something that would be difficult to simulate to boot.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate

    True enough nh. It is still interesting to note that even with unbalanced sampel sizes on all starters (or short sample sizes in Weiland's case), VTek still has done better with 6 of 8 starters.

    Opps against  w Salty        w VTek
    Beckett:   (24 PAs)  .796   (431) .493 (CERA 5.40 to 1.97)
    Lester:    (382 PAs) .738     (92) .496  (CERA 3.69 to 1.88)
    Buch:      (265 PAs) .662     (88) .841  (CERA 3.52 to 3.38)
    Wake:     (332 PAs) .785     (38) .741  (CERA 4.66 to 6.00)
    Lackey:  (315 PAs) .870     (77) .743  (CERA  6.68 to 6.75)
    Dice-K:    (16 PAs) 1.768   (151) .545 (CERA 31,50 to 3.82
    Miller:     (94 PAs)   .810      (50) .726  (CERA 5.95 to 2.38)
    Weiland: (26 PAs)  .651    (22) 1.323 (CERA 4.50 to 13.50)

    The differentials are huge in Vtek's favor with 4 starters:
    Beckett, Lester, Dice-K and Miller

    VTek is slightly better with Lackey.

    Buch is about even with both.

    Salty is better with Wake, but VTek does have a better OPS.

    Salty is only clearly better than Vtek with Weiland, but the sample sizes are 6 IP vs 4 IP.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate

    In Response to Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate:
    [QUOTE]I think getting Martin was a smart move by Cashman, but getting Saltalamacchia was a brilliant move by Theo.  Of course, Theo had Tek available to reduce the risk, and Tek has more than delivered.  This two-catcher approach just might be establishing a new paradigm because it keeps both of them fresh. 
    Posted by maxbialystock[/QUOTE]


    Max: This is overstated, to say the least. Salty hasn't panned out to the point of being defined in this manner. He was influential in almost derailing April.
    In his Boston tenure, the team plays exactly .500 ball when he starts.

    That doesn't validate "brilliant". Nor do his physical skills.
    I think the better way to phrase it is: He was a huge gamble that so far hasn't back-fired. But he's a work in progress - and he has a loooooooooong way to go.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate

    In Response to Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate:
    [QUOTE]True enough nh. It is still interesting to note that even with unbalanced sampel sizes on all starters (or short sample sizes in Weiland's case), VTek still has done better with 6 of 8 starters. Opps against  w Salty        w VTek Beckett:   (24 PAs)  .796   (431) .493 (CERA 5.40 to 1.97 ) Lester:    (382 PAs) .738     (92) .496   (CERA 3.69 to 1.88 ) Buch:      (265 PAs) .662      (88) .841  (CERA 3.52 to 3.38 ) Wake:     (332 PAs) .785     (38) .741   (CERA 4.66 to 6.00) Lackey:  (315 PAs) .870     (77) .743   (CERA  6.68 to 6.75) Dice-K:    (16 PAs) 1.768   (151) .545 (CERA 31,50 to 3.82 Miller:     (94 PAs)   .810      (50) .726   (CERA 5.95 to 2.38 ) Weiland: (26 PAs)  .651     (22) 1.323 (CERA 4.50 to 13.50) The differentials are huge in Vtek's favor with 4 starters: Beckett, Lester, Dice-K and Miller VTek is slightly better with Lackey. Buch is about even with both. Salty is better with Wake, but VTek does have a better OPS. Salty is only clearly better than Vtek with Weiland, but the sample sizes are 6 IP vs 4 IP.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Good work Moon, as always. Tek is not a great physical catcher, which is why he tries to get Wake to fuse his dancer with alternatives Wake rarely uses unless his bread & butter falls off the table.

    Tek caught Weiland's debut - nuff said. Weiland to me doesn't look like a keeper, in the SR anyway. His pitches look susceptible to hang time. But he could end up an Aceves type - or a trade chip.

    Boom mentioned [paraphrasing] that Salty isn't giving us anything behind the plate
    (CERA incl.) that VMART wasn't giving them. And so far, I think that's accurate.

    As for Martin, I did some CERA, etc. work on him dating back years. SS sizes deter any definitive conclusion, but the trend did not favor him. I'm not saying he's a liability. But I don't think he enhances his staffs to any degree, if at all.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate

    From what I had heard before this year, Salty was not very good at "handling pitchers". I think he has done much better than I expected. I even think he has improved as the year has progressed. I think VTek has been a big help. His hitting has helped offset the slow start both offensively and with the staff.

    The sample size is still small and W-Ls are hard to blame on catchers in just 96 games. It's also hard to compare anyone to VTek in "handling pitchers". Not many can improve quickly enough to even get close to his performance level in that area. I hope he continues to learn and improve in this area.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate

    Well, as far as W/L records, since 2010:
    Team is 46-21 with Tek.
    Team is 31-31 with Salty.

    We thought VMART was "improving", but the numbers didn't go there. I do think personal observation is more meaningful, albeit deceptive in this area.
    FWIW, I do believe both VMART and Salty showed considerable improvement.
    The difference is, VMART has a really poor track record. Salty started out that way, but the numbers go both ways in TX, so that tells me he has a higher ceiling in this slippery area.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Salty/Russell Martin Debate

    Salty is about Vtek's age when VTek began his FT career. It took VTek a while to get this good. I know patience is a tough thing to give time to on this team or any team going for a ring. I know it's a gamble.
     

Share