Time to Bench Salty

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

    Re: Time to Bench Salty

    In Response to Re: Time to Bench Salty:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Time to Bench Salty : Thats what a lot of people do when they are losing the debate. So be it. BTW: I would include Moon as someone who HAS used statistics to back up his opinion. I makes the opinion more believable; otherwise, its just "opinion". There is a place for that as long as you don' pass it off as facts.  Case closed.
    Posted by pumpsie-green[/QUOTE]

    21 HR, 49 RBI....pretty good for a catcher.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Time to Bench Salty

    Yes, and as I said about "Moneyball" since you like to use it so often--the reason the A's were good had little to do about Hatteberg, Justice, and more to do about
    the Big 3 of Zito, Mulder, Hudson....which never seemed to come up in the movie, just that offense dictated the A's change to winning. Also Art Howe should sue for complete inaccurate portrayal of a manager by a very good actor in a poorly cast role. Moneyball was a nice film, a nice book, and partial fantasy. 
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Time to Bench Salty

    In Response to Re: Time to Bench Salty:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Time to Bench Salty : 21 HR, 49 RBI....pretty good for a catcher.
    Posted by dannycater[/QUOTE]

    So if a catcher did that but struck out the rest of the time, is that still "pretty good"? There are other stats that are much better than HRs and RBIs: BA, K's, OPS etc. You know that.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Time to Bench Salty

    Stats have changed the way we look at things, but catching is not one area where you can pinpoint "he sucks" "he's great" through graphs/numbers.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Time to Bench Salty

    if i had a catcher hit 3 HR, and drive in 20, and he had an OBP of .313 and he made contact a lot, he'd probably also hit into a lot more double plays. I'll take the freeswinging guy with the 21 HR, 49 RBI.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Time to Bench Salty

    In Response to Re: Time to Bench Salty:
    [QUOTE]Stats have changed the way we look at things, but catching is not one area where you can pinpoint "he sucks" "he's great" through graphs/numbers.
    Posted by dannycater[/QUOTE]

    You can certainly assess his offensive contribution that way. Defensively, thats true. But there are some clues. Personally, I like to use the CS% (unless the pitchers are obviously not doing their job). Number of passed balls is also useful.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: Time to Bench Salty

    In Response to Re: Time to Bench Salty:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Time to Bench Salty : You can certainly assess his offensive contribution that way. Defensively, thats true. But there are some clues. Personally, I like to use the CS% (unless the pitchers are obviously not doing their job). Number of passed balls is also useful.
    Posted by pumpsie-green[/QUOTE]
    Have you ever thought an error/non-error call should have gone the other way?
    These are subjective calls made by ( we hope ) educated observers.
    Same with passed balls.
    So much for objectivity. These "facts" are numbers created by judgment calls. 
    We know what you like to use. Does everyone?  Does Billy Beane? Many baseball people do not assign a high priority to CS% because of all the variables. Theo is a numbers guy. During his tenure, Sox pitchers did not use the slide step or work hard at holding runners on. That's an important variable.
    Theo apparently did not lose sleep about opponent's stealing. 
    How did Tek rate on one of your king stats?


     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Time to Bench Salty

    great point about the slide step. That was the thing that Kerrigan forced upon his pitchers and it made a few suffer by the result. And I believe you are also right that in turn the steal numbers ballooned from that point on. It totally changes the dynamic of caught stealing percentage. I think it's a good gauge for college baseball because the best catchers will have high CS percentages as they can compensate for different pitchers and opponents and virtually little scouting reports/statistics used. But in MLB, the playing field is so even that the slower delivery pitchers are burned and everyone knows who is a good pitcher to steal on and who is a tough pitcher to steal on because a good one might have a wicked pickoff move or varies his stretch and pace with each pitch.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Time to Bench Salty

    In Response to Re: Time to Bench Salty:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Time to Bench Salty : Have you ever thought an error/non-error call should have gone the other way? These are subjective calls made by ( we hope ) educated observers. Same with passed balls. So much for objectivity. These "facts" are numbers created by judgment calls.  We know what you like to use. Does everyone?  Does Billy Beane? Many baseball people do not assign a high priority to CS% because of all the variables. Theo is a numbers guy. During his tenure, Sox pitchers did not use the slide step or work hard at holding runners on. That's an important variable. Theo apparently did not lose sleep about opponent's stealing.  How did Tek rate on one of your king stats?
    Posted by expitch[/QUOTE]

    I understand the difficulty in evaluating defense, especially that of the catcher. Errors, IMO, even out, roughly, over the season. I would not use that as a the sole method of evaluating any fielder. CS% also has issues, but if the pitchers are on the ball, as the Sox pitchers are this year (as opposed to years past where using the slide step and keeping runners close was really not a priority-as well as the fact that a knuckleball pitcher is easier to steal on), then that is part of the equation. I am not a big believer in CERA because catchers do not pitch the ball; some here like that stat. Also, part of the equation is watching the game; thats subjective. What I read from the "experts" is that Salty is improving, but is not yet considered a good defensive catcher. I admit that I do not have enough baseball knowledge to make that judgement myself, so I rely on others. I do not think that anyone here has claimed that he is an excellent defensive catcher yet, and no one has claimed that he is top third offensively. Now Southpaw made a good point: maybe he simply hasn't been taught properly. That could be. Right now I would place him middle third of catchers. For my championship team, ideally, I want as many top third players as possible-ie, improve where you can.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Time to Bench Salty

    In Response to Re: Time to Bench Salty:
    [QUOTE]I'm trying to figure this thread out. We got Boom, Crazed and Pumpsie citing statistics, moon, southie, ex and me trying to explain it's more than statistics, but then show statistics that show Salty is unique power-wise and young catcher-wise. The conclusion is that this is a tic-tac-toe that ends every time in a stalement. The best move is not to play with boom,crazed,pumpsie anymore.
    Posted by dannycater[/QUOTE]

    Kind of like the movie "War Games"?

    I don't mind arguing about this issue with any of these guys, but it does seem like we've come full circle a few times.

    I understand the logic behind trying to improve our offense, and I actually
    did an in depth study on positional v alue of players during the whole Mauer craze. Basically, it came down to this: since so few teams have even a good offensive catcher, if we can improve our catcher position to the mid .800's or better, we'd have such a great differential advantage over most of our opponents at that position, that it would be hard for them to make that advantage up at other traditionally good offensive positions.

    I brought up the flip-side of this argument when we traded for and extended AGon. While I was for the trade and signing, I cautioned that we were spending a huge percentage of our available player budget number on a position that had very little OPS differential from the #2-5 best 1Bmen and the #14-16 best 1Bmen, who usually were paid much less than what AGon is getting. In a sense, we paid $10-15M more to get AGon for4 just a minimal increase in OPS over the average 1Bman, when in contrast, had we spent $15M more to get a top catcher, his OPS would be light years higher than the average catcher.

    Here's an example. Let's assume Pujols signed for $20M for 1 year. His .877 OPS is 6th in MLB among 1Bmen this year. The team who signed him paid maybe $10-15M more than an average 1Bman gets paid to add what?
    The average 1Bman (#15) has about an .806 OPS, so the team signing Pujols got a plus .070 OPS at one position (1B) for $10-15M.
    Now look at the catching position. The 5th best catcher's OPS is .878 (Molina), but the 15th best catcher OPS is .744 (Hanigan). The differential is about .145 or twice as much as the differential between the #5-6 1Bman and the #15 1Bman and the same ranking catchers.
    It makes more sense to overpay for a great hitting catcher than a great hitting 1Bman.

    That being said, I understand the argument to want to greatly improve the catcher's position's offense, and Lava represents the potential to do that. However, it is speculative, and what we have right now is higher than #15 anyways, so the increase would not be as great for us to, say, sign a McCann than for a team with an extremely low catcher OPS to sign him.

    Sorry for going off on a tangent there.



     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: Time to Bench Salty

    In Response to Re: Time to Bench Salty:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Time to Bench Salty : I understand the difficulty in evaluating defense, especially that of the catcher. Errors, IMO, even out, roughly, over the season. I would not use that as a the sole method of evaluating any fielder. CS% also has issues, but if the pitchers are on the ball, as the Sox pitchers are this year (as opposed to years past where using the slide step and keeping runners close was really not a priority-as well as the fact that a knuckleball pitcher is easier to steal on), then that is part of the equation. I am not a big believer in CERA because catchers do not pitch the ball; some here like that stat. Also, part of the equation is watching the game; thats subjective. What I read from the "experts" is that Salty is improving, but is not yet considered a good defensive catcher. I admit that I do not have enough baseball knowledge to make that judgement myself, so I rely on others. I do not think that anyone here has claimed that he is an excellent defensive catcher yet, and no one has claimed that he is top third offensively. Now Southpaw made a good point: maybe he simply hasn't been taught properly. That could be. Right now I would place him middle third of catchers. For my championship team, ideally, I want as many top third players as possible-ie, improve where you can.
    Posted by pumpsie-green[/QUOTE]
    Errors do not always "even out," whatever YOU intend that to mean. If a guy is given an error on one play, he'll be given a break on another? How do you know this? Even if they did, my point is that an error call is subjective. Every single one. Yet you use error totals and passed balls as examples of your "objective" evidence. 
    I've already spoken to player rankings. They should be taken with a grain of salt. Top or bottom of middle third? Middle of top third?  Sort of middle but tending downwards?  Bottom third but tending upwards? A mug's game.
    There are plenty of "issues" with CS%. You didn't answer my questions about Billy Beane and Tek? Was Tek in your top third of defensive catchers? 

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

    Re: Time to Bench Salty

    Errors do not always "even out," whatever YOU intend that to mean. If a guy is given an error on one play, he'll be given a break on another? How do you know this? Even if they did, my point is that an error call is subjective. Every single one.

    It doesn't "even out" at positions like SS when you have guys making 10-35 errors, but to look at errors for catchers, who range from about 2-8 errors, just 2-3 bad scorer calls make a huge comparative differential.

    Yet you use error totals and passed balls as examples of your "objective" evidence. 

    Since Salty has caught way more innings than many "FT MLB catchers", wouldn't it be logical to look at PBs per inning caught to get a more realistic view of how good Salty is in catching catchable pitches, and to look at WPs per inning caught to see how well he does at blocking bad pitches?

    Well, I did that a few weeks ago, and Salty was in the top 3rd of the top 30 catchers by innings caught in MLB.

    I've already spoken to player rankings. They should be taken with a grain of salt. Top or bottom of middle third? Middle of top third?  Sort of middle but tending downwards?  Bottom third but tending upwards? A mug's game.
    There are plenty of "issues" with CS%.

    A few things are clear about CS%. No team has had more issues with CS% than the Sox for several years. They had a team philosophy to not hokld runners for years. Those tendancies are not easily overcome shortly after the philosophy was supposedly changed 2 years ago. Secondly, as I have pointed out before, if Salty had the league average CS%, he'd have thrown out maybe 8-10 more runners this year. Are we really calling hima bad defensive catcher over 9 extra SBs? Apparently, several people are.

    I can't find my data on PBs and WPs, but consider this:

    There are 17 MLB catchers who have the same or more PBs than Salty in less innings caught! (Salty has 5 in about 700 innings)

    Looking at the 12 catchers with more innings caught, I see these with higher PB/inn rates than Salty:
    Ellis 10 in 870
    AJP    7 in 828
    Buck  7 in 799
    Martin 6/785
    Avila    7/716

    My guess is that Salty is about 7th in MLB in PB/inn.

    (BTW, Shoppach has the same amount of PBs in about 300 innings less.)

    There are 19 MLB catchers with the same or more WPs than Salty (21), and many many more with slightly less WPs in way way less innings caught, so my guess is about the same there: Salty is top 3rd in allowing less WPs per innings caught.

    So, to recap:

    Salty is...
    Poor on CS%? Yes
    (but with qualifications and only by maybe extra 9 SBs.)
    Poor on PBs? False
    Poor on WPs? False
    Poor on assists (not counting CSs)? False
    Poor on CERA? Not after April 25th.
    Poor on some catcher defense metrics? True
    Poor if taking into consideration his whole career's body of work? Probably, yes.
    Poor if looking at his trends? False

    That's how I see it in terms of thye numbers, but catching goes way beyond numbers, and coming from a numbers guy, that's saying a lot. Salty is not nearly the same catcher he was last year. It's not even close. he is way better, and he is only 27 and completing only his 2nd FT season in MLB. Giving up on him might be the biggest mistake we can ever make, even if Lava is everything we hope he will become.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: Time to Bench Salty

    In Response to Re: Time to Bench Salty:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Time to Bench Salty : Have you ever thought an error/non-error call should have gone the other way? These are subjective calls made by ( we hope ) educated observers. Same with passed balls. So much for objectivity. These "facts" are numbers created by judgment calls.  Posted by expitch[/QUOTE]

    And when you are watching a game, and say that Salty did a good job, is that not also a judgment call?

    Stats are never going to tell the whole story.  Neither is evaluating a player based on just what you see.  People tend to see what they want to see.

    I have recently read a post from someone who has also been watching Salty very carefully, and he came to a very different conclusion than yours.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: Time to Bench Salty

    I understand what the limitations of defensive stats are.  I know that no matter how advanced they get, it will be impossible to fully quantify the human aspects of the game and to account for all of the variables.

    That said, defensive stats have really become quite extensive, as have the recent catcher studies in pitch framing, blocking pitches, and game calling. 

    Stats like UZR make adjustments for things like ballpark, handedness of pitcher, positioning of defenders, etc etc.  Fangraphs rSB, for instance, does factor in the pitcher's contribution in controlling the running game.  Thousands of scouts watch videos of every play of every game. They try to deal with subjectivity and bias by having several scouts view and evaluate the same play, and they rotate which games and which players the scouts watch. 

    They are by no means perfect.  But they also are not useless.    
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: Time to Bench Salty

    In Response to Re: Time to Bench Salty:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Time to Bench Salty : And when you are watching a game, and say that Salty did a good job, is that not also a judgment call? Stats are never going to tell the whole story.  Neither is evaluating a player based on just what you see.  People tend to see what they want to see. I have recently read a post from someone who has also been watching Salty very carefully, and he came to a very different conclusion than yours.
    Posted by RedSoxKimmi[/QUOTE]
    I have never made a claim to anything other than a judgment call. Do not imply that I make or hint at claims that have never been part of my posts. Nor have I said that my judgment is based only on what I see.  If you speak to me about my methodology, please base it on what I write. Sounds like nah-nah-nah-nah to me.   That's one down. I do question appeals to objectivity. See above. 
    It depends upon who is looking and what the observer knows.
    All observers are not equal. 
    Who is this mystery person?
    You reached hard to score points here, and fell hard. 
    I know what your conclusion is about Salty. You know mine. Let's hear from this third party. That would put you ahead, 2 to 1. Unless we count Moon and Danny and Southpaw in. Then you could appeal to Boom and Harv and Craze and ....
    Try again. Or, wisely, give it a rest.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: Time to Bench Salty

    In Response to Re: Time to Bench Salty:
    [QUOTE]I understand what the limitations of defensive stats are.  I know that no matter how advanced they get, it will be impossible to fully quantify the human aspects of the game and to account for all of the variables. That said, defensive stats have really become quite extensive, as have the recent catcher studies in pitch framing, blocking pitches, and game calling.  Stats like UZR make adjustments for things like ballpark, handedness of pitcher, positioning of defenders, etc etc.  Fangraphs rSB, for instance, does factor in the pitcher's contribution in controlling the running game.  Thousands of scouts watch videos of every play of every game. They try to deal with subjectivity and bias by having several scouts view and evaluate the same play, and they rotate which games and which players the scouts watch.  They are by no means perfect.  But they also are not useless.    
    Posted by RedSoxKimmi[/QUOTE]
    Who are you arguing with? To my knowledge, no one on this board has said that stats are useless. So, you imply a straw dummy. 


     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Time to Bench Salty

    In Response to Re: Time to Bench Salty:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Time to Bench Salty : Errors do not always "even out," whatever YOU intend that to mean. If a guy is given an error on one play, he'll be given a break on another? How do you know this? Even if they did, my point is that an error call is subjective. Every single one. Yet you use error totals and passed balls as examples of your "objective" evidence.  I've already spoken to player rankings. They should be taken with a grain of salt. Top or bottom of middle third? Middle of top third?  Sort of middle but tending downwards?  Bottom third but tending upwards? A mug's game. There are plenty of "issues" with CS%. You didn't answer my questions about Billy Beane and Tek? Was Tek in your top third of defensive catchers? 
    Posted by expitch[/QUOTE]

    I think that plays that are called errors and those that should have been called errors but were called hits DO even out during the season. Generally the official scorers go do a pretty good job and see it the way I see it. Sure, its subjective. So is a called ball and strike; so what? Do you have evidence that this is not the case? Thats a matter of opinion that cannot be proven either way. As far as Beane goes, I have no idea what he thinks of CS%, nor do I care much. And as for Varitek, I would not rate him as a top defensive player, no. At least not late in his career. His strength was in game preparation.
    It appears to me that you are attempting to discount ANY defensive statistic as being meaningful. I believe that fielding percentage and CS% DO have value, along with other factors.
    You are not really classifying Salty as a top third defensive catcher are you? That would be a mistake.
    And if you do not like the defensive metrics I prefer to measure a catcher's performance, which ones would you recommend? I am open to anything but "thats my opinion, so its fact".
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Time to Bench Salty

    In Response to Re: Time to Bench Salty:
    [QUOTE]I understand what the limitations of defensive stats are.  I know that no matter how advanced they get, it will be impossible to fully quantify the human aspects of the game and to account for all of the variables. That said, defensive stats have really become quite extensive, as have the recent catcher studies in pitch framing, blocking pitches, and game calling.  Stats like UZR make adjustments for things like ballpark, handedness of pitcher, positioning of defenders, etc etc.  Fangraphs rSB, for instance, does factor in the pitcher's contribution in controlling the running game.  Thousands of scouts watch videos of every play of every game. They try to deal with subjectivity and bias by having several scouts view and evaluate the same play, and they rotate which games and which players the scouts watch.  They are by no means perfect.  But they also are not useless.    
    Posted by RedSoxKimmi[/QUOTE]

    How does Salty rank using rSB? Seems to me that you have to use SOMETHING to measure a player's defense, even though there are no perfect measures.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: Time to Bench Salty

    In Response to Re: Time to Bench Salty:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Time to Bench Salty : I think that plays that are called errors and those that should have been called errors but were called hits DO even out during the season. Generally the official scorers go do a pretty good job and see it the way I see it. Sure, its subjective. So is a called ball and strike; so what? Do you have evidence that this is not the case? Thats a matter of opinion that cannot be proven either way. As far as Beane goes, I have no idea what he thinks of CS%, nor do I care much. And as for Varitek, I would not rate him as a top defensive player, no. At least not late in his career. His strength was in game preparation. It appears to me that you are attempting to discount ANY defensive statistic as being meaningful. I believe that fielding percentage and CS% DO have value, along with other factors. You are not really classifying Salty as a top third defensive catcher are you? That would be a mistake. And if you do not like the defensive metrics I prefer to measure a catcher's performance, which ones would you recommend? I am open to anything but "thats my opinion, so its fact".
    Posted by pumpsie-green[/QUOTE]
    Once again, listen carefully, what you call "objective" has a subjective foundation. It's the "objective" part that I call into question -- no matter how many people agree on the call. A judgment has been made. You keep saying that errors even out. In individual cases? That's what we are talking about. Since you're a numbers guy, prove it. Make it ( ahem ) a "fact," to go with all your others.
    How many times must you be told that I don't classify according to thirds? That's your game.  But Moon's numbers make a pretty good case for Salty in the top third in many areas. OK, since you asked, I'll take Moon's numbers. There's the stats you asked for.
    "That's my opinion, so it's a fact." Who says this? Who even implies it? It's nutty, unless intended as comedy.
    I state opinions except when a statement is explicitly identified as a fact. 



     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: Time to Bench Salty

    You don't think that game preparation is a defensive strength? Tek was good at it, but he wasn't a good defensive catcher, say you.  Some people would put it on the top rung. I am one of them. If it's not a defensive strength, what role does this kind of preparation play in defense. None? Some? Maybe the middle third amongst useful skills for a catcher. Top of bottom third? Bottom of top third?
    You have cited Billy Beane. But you don't know and don't care what he thinks of CS%. Or, as far as I can tell, what any GM, manager, scout, coach, pitcher, or catcher thinks about it. YOU rank it high. Remember what I said about selective quantification. Do you think you know more about evaluating catchers than the people who play and manage it? I thought you relied upon "experts." Good. Now go find some experts who rank CS% at the top, where you place it, when judging the defensive value of catchers -- in relation, say, to calling the game ( with preparation as the foundation ), managing pitchers, and handling errant pitches.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Time to Bench Salty

    In Response to Re: Time to Bench Salty:
    [QUOTE]You don't think that game preparation is a defensive strength? Tek was good at it, but he wasn't a good defensive catcher, say you.  Some people would put it on the top rung. I am one of them. If it's not a defensive strength, what role does this kind of preparation play in defense. None? Some? Maybe the middle third amongst useful skills for a catcher. Top of bottom third? Bottom of top third? You have cited Billy Beane. But you don't know and don't care what he thinks of CS%. Or, as far as I can tell, what any GM, manager, scout, coach, pitcher, or catcher thinks about it. YOU rank it high. Remember what I said about selective quantification. Do you think you know more about evaluating catchers than the people who play and manage it? I thought you relied upon "experts." Good. Now go find some experts who rank CS% at the top, where you place it, when judging the defensive value of catchers -- in relation, say, to calling the game ( with preparation as the foundation ), managing pitchers, and handling errant pitches.
    Posted by expitch[/QUOTE]

    I would like to see where the statistics are for "game preparation by a catcher". I asked you which defensive metrics you prefer to use. You gave me none. Apparently, for you, none matter. IMO that makes your arguement weaker. Although defensive metrics are not perfect, they are also not useless. Its better than "I think he is a good defensive catcher". I also asked you if you rank Salty in the top third of catchers defensively. Again, no answer. You are good at saying that my approach is wrong, but you have no objective approach at all-its all fluffy opinion. Thats fine; its just weaker....IMO.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Time to Bench Salty

    I like some stats more than others. personally, CS% is on the bottom of my list. Especially with it involving the pitcher and the pitch thrown. way too many variables. Moon is the stats guy i refer to and I believe ex said that he does too. I never said Salty was an AS calibur catcher as of right now. I aslo dont consider him as a "bad" defensive catcher either, like some do...But I truly do believe he could be an AS and I also believe it would be a mistake to give up on him right now. Hes got one more year of arb to prove himself. That would be 3 years with the Sox, and after 2013 we should have a clearer picture. The numbers Moon provided says Salty has improved defensively as a whole. Although I dont consider myself an "expert", I do know what Im talking about and know what to look for as far as the pitcher catcher dynamic goes...Salty has improved on that as well. Now, he might plateau and this might be it for him. I just think as long as he shows improvement he should be given a fair shake.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Time to Bench Salty

    In Response to Re: Time to Bench Salty:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Time to Bench Salty : You can certainly assess his offensive contribution that way. Defensively, thats true. But there are some clues. Personally, I like to use the CS% (unless the pitchers are obviously not doing their job). Number of passed balls is also useful.
    Posted by pumpsie-green[/QUOTE]

    Wouldn't passed balls per innings caught be a more realistic stat than the number of PBs, since there is such a wide disparity between the top 37 catchers in MLB with over 450 innings.

    Here's the top 37 by Innings and PBs/WPs:
                    PB/WP inn  PB+WP/inn
    Wieters    4/17  898  .0234
    Montero   3/29  897  .0357
    Y Molina   4/21  887  .0282
    Ellis         10/28  870  .0437  
    AJ Prz       7/45  828  .0628
    McCann    5/25  800  .0375
    J Buck       7/16  799  .0288
    Martin       6/33  785  .0497
    Posey        1/20  767  .0274
    Susuki       5/22  763  .0354
    Ruiz           4/12  721  .0222
    Avila         7/27  716  .0474
    Salty         5/21  699  .0372
    Hannigan 2/12  679  .0206
    Santana   7/37  660  .0667
    Barajas    7/18  656  .0381
    Arencibia 9/23  642  .0498
    Thole      15/12  642  .0420
    J Flores    4/25  614  .0472
    Rosario  14/41  610  .0902
    G Soto      2/17  570  .0333
    Napoli      8/14  552  .0399
    J Molina  5/22  551  .0490
    Hundley 3/17  492  .0406
    Olivo       7/21  489  .0573
    Mauer     1/18  487  .0390
    Snyder   2/25  486  .0556
    Castro    7/24  481  .0644
    Lucroy   1/18   466  .0408

    Then, there's 17 more with worse PB rates out of catchers with 100+ innings: 
    Shoppach with 5 PBs in 406, Mathis 5/403, Baker 7/395, 
    J Montero 6 in 371, Pena 5/357, Iannetta 5/345, Clevenger 3/332, Stewart 6/316, Norris 3/298, Nickeas 7/284, Cruz 3/224, Ramos 2/217, Grandal 4/211, Castillo 3/180, Blanco 2/161, Johnson 2/135, and Corporan 2/125.

    Salty places 9th out of 30 in PB+WP per inning caught.

    Then, there are 17 other catchers with worse rates between 100 innings and 449.





     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Time to Bench Salty

    In Response to Re: Time to Bench Salty:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Time to Bench Salty : Wouldn't passed balls per innings caught be a more realistic stat than the number of PBs, since there is such a wide disparity between the top 37 catchers in MLB with over 450 innings. Here's the top 37 by Innings and PBs/WPs:                 PB/WP inn  PB+WP/inn Wieters    4/17  898  .0234 Montero   3/29  897  .0357 Y Molina   4/21  887  .0282 Ellis         10/28  870  .0437   AJ Prz       7/45  828  .0628 McCann    5/25  800  .0375 J Buck       7/16  799  .0288 Martin       6/33  785  .0497 Posey        1/20  767  .0274 Susuki       5/22  763  .0354 Ruiz           4/12  721  .0222 Avila          7/27  716  .0474 Salty         5/21  699  .0372 Hannigan 2/12  679  .0206 Santana   7/37  660  .0667 Barajas    7/18  656  .0381 Arencibia 9/23  642  .0498 Thole      15/12  642  .0420 J Flores    4/25  614  .0472 Rosario  14/41  610  .0902 G Soto      2/17  570  .0333 Napoli      8/14  552  .0399 J Molina  5/22  551  .0490 Hundley 3/17  492  .0406 Olivo       7/21  489  .0573 Mauer     1/18  487  .0390 Snyder   2/25  486  .0556 Castro    7/24  481  .0644 Lucroy   1/18   466  .0408 Then, there's 17 more with worse PB rates out of catchers with 100+ innings:  Shoppach with 5 PBs in 406, Mathis 5/403, Baker 7/395,  J Montero 6 in 371, Pena 5/357, Iannetta 5/345, Clevenger 3/332, Stewart 6/316, Norris 3/298, Nickeas 7/284, Cruz 3/224, Ramos 2/217, Grandal 4/211, Castillo 3/180, Blanco 2/161, Johnson 2/135, and Corporan 2/125. Salty places 9th out of 30 in PB+WP per inning caught. Then, there are 17 other catchers with worse rates between 100 innings and 449.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Yes. PB/inning or PB per 100 pitches is better still.
    In any event I don't think Salty is going anywhere. He will get his one more year to prove himself. We will need to upgrade elsewhere, especially at pitching. They scored 13 runs tonite and lost the game.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Time to Bench Salty

    I am nearly certain of this, one of 2 things will happen:

    1) Papi stays and Salty or Lava is traded (my bet would be Salty).

    2) Papi walks and Lava is given the DH job to lose and catches vs LHPs.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share