How Rutschman steals strikes

[wildcard]

 

[scOtt]

That's some deep level stuff right there! From a College Junior(?). Or was he a Sophomore?

[MDK02]

That's an awesome breakdown! Very interesting and well done by our future catcher.

There is a lot of deception and technique in the catching position.

[Legend_Of_Joey]

So...College umpires are worse than MLB umpires, unless Laz Diaz or Angel Hernandez is behind the plate.

 

Also won’t matter if MLB goes to an Electronic Zone.

[Can_of_corn]

14 minutes ago, Legend_Of_Joey said:

So...College umpires are worse than MLB umpires, unless Laz Diaz or Angel Hernandez is behind the plate.

 

Also won’t matter if MLB goes to an Electronic Zone.

#RoboUmps

[DrungoHazewood]

10 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

#RoboUmps

Wild, somewhat related tangent: I wonder if baseball's deep-seated conservatism when it comes to rules changes and technological advances like RoboUmps comes from the very long development path? 

In football if they change something fundamental you just go out and draft guys the next year to account for that, and that year they're in the NFL.  In MLB if they go to RoboUmps and immediately eliminate framing, every system has like six or eight catchers down to rookie ball who were (at least in part) drafted and in development because they frame well.  All that future value has now been zeroed out, and you have to go find differently-skilled catchers not only for now, but for the next half-decade.

[Sports Guy]

10 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

#RoboUmps

I wish they would.

[Can_of_corn]

1 hour ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Wild, somewhat related tangent: I wonder if baseball's deep-seated conservatism when it comes to rules changes and technological advances like RoboUmps comes from the very long development path? 

In football if they change something fundamental you just go out and draft guys the next year to account for that, and that year they're in the NFL.  In MLB if they go to RoboUmps and immediately eliminate framing, every system has like six or eight catchers down to rookie ball who were (at least in part) drafted and in development because they frame well.  All that future value has now been zeroed out, and you have to go find differently-skilled catchers not only for now, but for the next half-decade.

I've been over this before but I don't buy that framing is near as important a skill as some folks make it out to be.  I'm sure what you are suggesting would happen to a degree but I don't think that many guys have jobs simply because of their ability to frame or that guys get moved off the position due to poor framing.

I'm still waiting for a team to bring in a framing specialist to catch during save situations.

[Legend_Of_Joey]

18 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

#RoboUmps

Make them all look like Arnie from Terminator 2 and you’ll eliminate arguments too.

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, Legend_Of_Joey said:

Make them all look like Arnie from Terminator 2 and you’ll eliminate arguments too.

Make it look like a Roomba, who's going to argue with a Roomba?

[CompuCoach]

4 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

Make it look like a Roomba, who's going to argue with a Roomba?

Nah, they would suck. Literally. 

[DrungoHazewood]

22 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

I'm still waiting for a team to bring in a framing specialist to catch during save situations.

And we've been over this before.  A top closer pitches 60-70 innings a year, out of a team's 1450-odd innings.  So if a catcher was worth an outlandish +50 framing runs per 150 games, he'd be worth two runs/year as a save-framer.  Maybe as much as four if you include leverage.  Your specialist catcher would be worth a fraction of a LOOGY, a role that's already so specialized that it's arguable they're not worth carving out a roster spot for.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, DrungoHazewood said:

And we've been over this before.  A top closer pitches 60-70 innings a year, out of a team's 1450-odd innings.  So if a catcher was worth an outlandish +50 framing runs per 150 games, he'd be worth two runs/year as a save-framer.  Maybe as much as four if you include leverage.  Your specialist catcher would be worth a fraction of a LOOGY, a role that's already so specialized that it's arguable they're not worth carving out a roster spot for.

He wouldn't be on the roster solely as the closing catcher.  He'd also be the backup catcher.  So he'd catch twice a week and come in during high leverage situations.  If he's worth +50 framing runs per 150 he'd be fine catching twice a week.

 

[DrungoHazewood]

22 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

He wouldn't be on the roster solely as the closing catcher.  He'd also be the backup catcher.  So he'd catch twice a week and come in during high leverage situations.  If he's worth +50 framing runs per 150 he'd be fine catching twice a week.

Oh, so he's not really a save situation specialist. Which means you're assuming that he can hit, at least minimally.  Really what you're talking about is a standard issue backup catcher with emphasis on framing.  Which likely means that, on average, he'll be worse than a normal backup catcher in hitting and other fielding aspects. 

Also, +50 is the framing equivalent of 73 homers.  Far more likely your framing specialist is going to be +15 per season, meaning his 40 or 50 games a year are going to be worth +5 runs.

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Oh, so he's not really a save situation specialist. Which means you're assuming that he can hit, at least minimally.  Really what you're talking about is a standard issue backup catcher with emphasis on framing.  Which likely means that, on average, he'll be worse than a normal backup catcher in hitting and other fielding aspects. 

Also, +50 is the framing equivalent of 73 homers.  Far more likely your framing specialist is going to be +15 per season, meaning his 40 or 50 games a year are going to be worth +5 runs.

No, I'm talking about taking the framing specialist backup catcher and putting him into games in save situations. 

If framing is as impactful as some groups would like us to think it would make sense to bring in the superior framer in high leverage situations.