John Dewan: Wieters is the favorite for the Fielding Bible/Gold Glove awards

[Frobby]

One of the interesting things about the pitch framing studies is that catchers can learn from them. A lot of stats are interesting for measurement purposes, but don't really impact how the game is played. But I can easily imagine a hard-working catcher reading these studies, looking at film of the catchers who always get the calls (now that we know who they are), and copying their techniques. I sure hope Matt Wieters and his backups will see this.

I disagree with the sentiment that the fact that some catchers are better than others in getting calls is a reason to have an electronic strike zone. To me, what the catchers do to get calls is a skill, just as much as the pitcher's command is a skill, and I kind of enjoy the fact that some catchers are better than others at this. Also, this adds a lot of insight as to why managers place so much emphasis on having a good defensive catcher. If a catcher can steal you 30 runs a year, that's huge.

[SrMeowMeow]

I think the next revolution in baseball statistics will be a shift in framework from trying to come up with a "new stat" to asking meaningful questions of the data and providing rigorous estimates.

On the defensive metric side, I'm not concerned about scale. I'm not sure what an expected counterfactual value between Jake Fox and Craig Tatum has to do with Albert Pujols. In addition, the value of one run saved on defense can (and should) be allocated to more than one player. Thus I don't see any expectation that they linearly add up to runs scored in a year for example.

I suggest that the question: What is the difference in value between Albert Pujols' bat and Cesar Izturis glove is not sufficient posed. And making the leap to a question about two catchers is similarly undefined.

No offense, but I have no idea what you're talking about here. I feel like you're just name dropping long words. And the few things that do make sense (e.g. not expecting that runs saved/runs added should add up to total runs scored) seem wrong.

[CA-ORIOLE]

I think the next revolution in baseball statistics will be a shift in framework from trying to come up with a "new stat" to asking meaningful questions of the data and providing rigorous estimates.

On the defensive metric side, I'm not concerned about scale. I'm not sure what an expected counterfactual value between Jake Fox and Craig Tatum has to do with Albert Pujols. In addition, the value of one run saved on defense can (and should) be allocated to more than one player. Thus I don't see any expectation that they linearly add up to runs scored in a year for example.

I suggest that the question: What is the difference in value between Albert Pujols' bat and Cesar Izturis glove is not sufficient posed. And making the leap to a question about two catchers is similarly undefined.

I actually agree with this. But I think you're already seeing it. The offensive side is relatively more precise. The defense is not. The advance defensive metrics have been making constant adjustments and improvements in methodology and incorporation of new technology for years. It's a source of continual debate, not just here, but amongst the guys that provide this and on the other sites. There are a multitude of issues that could be considered here. Lenearity/contributory effects certainly among them. Park Factor issues, objective versus subjective inputs, measurement tools/accuracy, component enhancements, undefined enhancements, synergetic effects, diminishing returns etc., etc.

Bill James is a high paid consultant for the Boston Red Sox. Do you think he'd get more money giving out this information for 3 dollars a month on his website or providing it to the Boston Red Sox? Ditto a lot of other companies and analysts. That being said, maybe you can make yourself nice niche by developing your own blog and providing this stuff...assuming you have the time and energy. You seam to have a nack for it. You'd have to figure out how to get good data. Good luck with that. That being said, I'm always interested in more information (relevant information anyways).

I suggest that the question: What is the difference in value between Albert Pujols' bat and Cesar Izturis glove is not sufficient posed. And making the leap to a question about two catchers is similarly undefined

It seamed sufficiently posed to me. The Pujols/Izturis anlaysis related market price to value. Assuming the Pujols/Izturis skill to pay disparities are correct, he's saying that catchers could be masssivley unerpaid in relation to their value (assuming some of these new statistical implications for catchers were true).

[Lucky Jim]

They may be massively underpaid relative to their value, but if that value is difficult-to-impossible to predict, is prone to wide-swings in valuation, and catchers are prone to only short-terms of peak value, then perhaps that underpayment is mitigated some?

[CA-ORIOLE]

They may be massively underpaid relative to their value, but if that value is difficult-to-impossible to predict, is prone to wide-swings in valuation, and catchers are prone to only short-terms of peak value, then perhaps that underpayment is mitigated some?

That's a relevant point. I'd have to go and look back at Frobby's article, but wasn't Molina (at least) pretty consistent with the pitch framing. The skill wouldn't seam to be something that would diminish, but it's possible umps could have varying outlooks.

[Lucky Jim]

That's a relevant point. I'd have to go and look back at Frobby's article, but wasn't Molina (at least) pretty consistent with the pitch framing. The skill wouldn't seam to be something that would diminish, but it's possible umps could have varying outlooks.

The spread from year-to-year is 19 run but it's unclear how it's distributed.

[DrungoHazewood]

They may be massively underpaid relative to their value, but if that value is difficult-to-impossible to predict, is prone to wide-swings in valuation, and catchers are prone to only short-terms of peak value, then perhaps that underpayment is mitigated some?

If it's almost impossible to predict and prone to wild swings, is it really a skill? Seems more like high amplitude noise.

[CA-ORIOLE]

If it's almost impossible to predict and prone to wild swings, is it really a skill? Seems more like high amplitude noise.

The BP article seams to separate guys out pretty well over a 4 year period. It quite frankly looks better than what you might see with UZR.

[Hallas]

If it's almost impossible to predict and prone to wild swings, is it really a skill? Seems more like high amplitude noise.

A catcher's durability issues might come into play here as well.

[Can_of_corn]

Linking to the Hardball Times article I posted on the MLB board since it is relevant to the discussion and some folks do not visit the MLB board with regularity. Basically it provides additional evidence that Wieters was very good behind the plate last season.

http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php/115554-Hardball-Times-article-on-pitch-blocking

[Frobby]

Linking to the Hardball Times article I posted on the MLB board since it is relevant to the discussion and some folks do not visit the MLB board with regularity. Basically it provides additional evidence that Wieters was very good behind the plate last season.

http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php/115554-Hardball-Times-article-on-pitch-blocking

But, it concludes that Russell Martin added the most value behind the plate of any catcher in the AL, due to his superior pitch-framing abilities.

[Can_of_corn]

But, it concludes that Russell Martin added the most value behind the plate of any catcher in the AL, due to his superior pitch-framing abilities.

I still think it was worth bringing attention to and it does paint Wieters in a favorable light.

[LookinUp]

But, it concludes that Russell Martin added the most value behind the plate of any catcher in the AL, due to his superior pitch-framing abilities.

I just can't get over this idea that Russell Martin actually had better Yankee uniform wearing abilities.

Catchers are even more difficult to understand defensively than any other position, IMO. The CS and SB statistics are certainly indicators, but even they are highly dependent on your pitchers and opposition.

Contrast with just about any other position in the field where, in theory, you could pinpoint the player's position at the time the ball was struck, where the ball ended up, the time that took and the player's success rate at fielding the ball and it's not even close.

[Frobby]

I still think it was worth bringing attention to and it does paint Wieters in a favorable light.

Oh, absolutely. This is cutting-edge stuff. Of course, the fact that Wieters allowed so few passed balls and wild pitches already told us he was a good pitch-blocker, but this study takes a good stab at judging just how good he was.

I think the earlier pitch-calling study is also fascinating and, as I posted in another thread, I hope that the Orioles will use it to try to teach their catchers the techniques that lead to getting the close calls. Wieters is doing decently in that category, but it appears he could still improve there.

[KAZ97]

I just posted a long, statistically oriented post over in the MLB Section. I didn't want to derail this thread, but it may be of interest to those of you who care about statistically estimating a catcher's defensive influence.