The Catching Situation

[Sports Guy]

19 minutes ago, LTO's said:

So despite decades of not only conventional wisdom but also sabermetrics, your contention is that catcher defense has to be overrated because a few (not even all) of our pitchers saw some improvements over a 10-20ish game sample size lol? That's just exceptionally irrational. As I said before, thank god you have no input on the decision making of this ball club.

I don't think anyone is saying that good defensive catchers can completely transform a pitcher's production. You are arguing against a strawman. However, catchers literally handle every single pitch of a ball game. They are tasked with making sure every baserunner in a ball game doesn't advance. Framing very much IS valued by the best teams in the game despite the inaccuracies others have posted in here. Strikeouts are continually rising. Balls are being put in play less and less. Take a guess who is making those put outs. 

Wow, someone must have taken a dump in your Cheerios this morning.  

Lets go over some of the bs in your post here:

 

1) As I said SEVERAL TIMES, catcher defense has always been important and used to be very important..but the game is different.  I don't care about C defense importance over the last several decades because the game is different.  This is like if you were having an argument about the NBA and acting like the mid range game is important because it has been for decades.  Its a new game.  

2) The argument on here from some (not my argument) is that these 2 are detriments to the team.  Someone said catchers are needed to develop pitchers.  So, I am simply asking if these guys are a detriment and they can't develop pitchers, why are pitchers being developed?  All of those things can't be true.  We know pitching is developing.  We see it.  Our eyes see it, the stats say it.  So, if that is the case, how can it happen with players who are so bad at it?  Could it be that coaching and talent of the pitchers is the true way they develop and that having 2 subpar defensive catchers doesn't actually matter?

3) They aren't tasked with making sure players don't advance on the bases.  First of all, the analytics say don't run into outs.  That alone is a big reason.  Pitchers are also quick to the plate.  That is another factor.  Sure, having a crappy C with no arm hurts you but how bad?  How many games have the O's lost with Sisco behind the plate because teams are running wild?  I'll wait on this answer and I am sure you will never give it.

4) Framing is valued but its also greatly questioned.  I am not saying its not valued.  I am saying it has a lot of noise in the data and many don't feel its as important as some do.

If you do a google search, you will see opinions everywhere.  Here is an article from a Dodgers fan site (also in there links to another good article) with quotes from Greinke and Kershaw about it.  

https://thinkbluela.com/2016/01/pitch-framing-myth-or-passing-fad/

 

5) Strikeouts are rising because pitchers are throwing harder and because teams realize strikeouts aren't a big deal.  That has ZERO TO DO WITH THE CATCHER.  

6) Are you really giving catchers credit for put outs when a batter strikes out?  Is that really part of your argument?

Again, every position has a certain level of importance defensively...it varies from position to position but defense is always important.   That being said, give me great defense at second, SS, CF and 3rd over catching anyday....and with the advent of more and more flyball hitters trying to hit it as far as they can, an argument could be made for the whole OF being more important.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, LTO's said:

So despite the entire league acknowledging that a player drafted in 2019 needs to play more than half a season of minor league ball before being called up to the majors, the Orioles cannot possibly also believe that. Must be service time manipulation. 

I think pretty much the entire league participates in some degree of service time manipulation. 

I've spoken a tiresome amount on the topic already and would rather not subject the rest of the board so DM me if you want me to pontificate further.  (I'm not sure why you would but the offer stands).

[LTO's]

37 minutes ago, Philip said:

Not putting Mountcastle in left field would’ve been a great first move.

Mountcastle needs reps in the outfield. He needed reps last year despite everyone freaking out about his service time being manipulated. That's painfully obvious. EVERYONE overreacted to an exceptionally small sample last year. Elias and Hyde have said all along that he's a work in progress out there. 

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, LTO's said:

Mountcastle needs reps in the outfield. He needed reps last year despite everyone freaking out about his service time being manipulated. That's painfully obvious. EVERYONE overreacted to an exceptionally small sample last year. Elias and Hyde have said all along that he's a work in progress out there. 

It struck me as curious that they played him at first late last season.

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

My complaint?  About the catching?

I want either Sisco or Severino replaced with AR.

That's my complaint.

You may start complaining on April 16, which is the first day Rutschman is guaranteed not to earn a full year of service time.  

[Philip]

19 minutes ago, LTO's said:

Mountcastle needs reps in the outfield. He needed reps last year despite everyone freaking out about his service time being manipulated. That's painfully obvious. EVERYONE overreacted to an exceptionally small sample last year. Elias and Hyde have said all along that he's a work in progress out there. 

If he has potential as a leftfielder, then yes he needs practice time in left field. However I contend that he has already demonstrated that he will never be an adequate leftfielder. There is no argument that his arm is weak and innaccurate, and the other things I mentioned in other comments as needing work, are not necessarily things that would respond to coaching. I’m not sure about that and I specifically asked about it, But if he can improve his routes and his reaction time, His confidence will go up and he will not be as tentative. But I do not know whether those things are coachable, and even if they are, he’ll Still have a very weak arm. And he doesn’t seem very sure handed either. Markakis didn’t have a very good throwing arm either, and I don’t think he had a lot of range, but he was splendid in every other way.

[LTO's]

8 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

They aren't tasked with making sure players don't advance on the bases.

This is like arguing with a brick wall as others have mentioned. It's like you haven't ever watched a baseball game. They don't keep them on the bases by throwing out base stealers, they keep them on base by catching pitches. EVERY pitch in a baseball game. I'm not going to argue with you any further if you genuinely think second basemen and corner outfielders provide more defensive value than catchers. It's really not worth it. What you're arguing is just not supported by literally any statistical valuation. You are somehow arguing that the steep decrease in balls being put in play makes fielders MORE valuable than catchers. Think about that for a second. Without even knowing a single thing about defensive metrics you could know that doesn't make any sense.  Just please read the conclusions here. It will show you why catchers are actually undervalued. 

https://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/article/41948/baseball-therapy-reimagining-the-defensive-spectrum/

https://tht.fangraphs.com/re-examining-wars-defensive-spectrum/

http://www.espn.com/espn/feature/story/_/id/11127248/how-catcher-framing-becoming-great-skill-smart-teams-new-york-yankees-espn-magazine

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/catcher-is-baseballs-most-endangered-position/#:~:text=Catchers still perform other important,number of stolen bases drops.&text=Catchers with at least 1%2C000 pitches caught in a season.

Last link is particularly interesting because it highlights exactly what I've been arguing with Mejdal and Rutschman as the focus. IF electronic strike zones become a thing you could make your argument. As of now, there's no point. Relevant quote from Mejdal below. Interestingly, he also believes that pitch calling is a very important part of a catcher's duties despite what others have posited. 

“I think how we evaluated catchers a decade ago or two decades ago, when we really didn’t appreciate pitch framing, I think we would return to those times” if the value of framing diminishes, Mejdal said. “Of course, there are less stolen bases in the game now, but I still think there is going to be significant appreciation of their defensive skills.”

[MurphDogg]

49 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

It struck me as curious that they played him at first late last season.

They had know way of knowing whether Mancini would be back this year. Mountcastle could very easily have been the everyday first baseman this season. Thankfully, we are having this discussion instead.

[LTO's]

56 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I think pretty much the entire league participates in some degree of service time manipulation. 

I've spoken a tiresome amount on the topic already and would rather not subject the rest of the board so DM me if you want me to pontificate further.  (I'm not sure why you would but the offer stands).

I understand your view. You believe that there is no difference between development at AA and development in the majors. I'm not sure how many scouts would agree with that. Would imagine very little would. The truth about service time manipulation is somewhere in the middle between what you think vs. what is happening in baseball.  

[Sports Guy]

31 minutes ago, LTO's said:

This is like arguing with a brick wall as others have mentioned. It's like you haven't ever watched a baseball game. They don't keep them on the bases by throwing out base stealers, they keep them on base by catching pitches. EVERY pitch in a baseball game. I'm not going to argue with you any further if you genuinely think second basemen and corner outfielders provide more defensive value than catchers. It's really not worth it. What you're arguing is just not supported by literally any statistical valuation. You are somehow arguing that the steep decrease in balls being put in play makes fielders MORE valuable than catchers. Think about that for a second. Without even knowing a single thing about defensive metrics you could know that doesn't make any sense.  Just please read the conclusions here. It will show you why catchers are actually undervalued. 

https://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/article/41948/baseball-therapy-reimagining-the-defensive-spectrum/

https://tht.fangraphs.com/re-examining-wars-defensive-spectrum/

http://www.espn.com/espn/feature/story/_/id/11127248/how-catcher-framing-becoming-great-skill-smart-teams-new-york-yankees-espn-magazine

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/catcher-is-baseballs-most-endangered-position/#:~:text=Catchers still perform other important,number of stolen bases drops.&text=Catchers with at least 1%2C000 pitches caught in a season.

Last link is particularly interesting because it highlights exactly what I've been arguing with Mejdal and Rutschman as the focus. IF electronic strike zones become a thing you could make your argument. As of now, there's no point. Relevant quote from Mejdal below. Interestingly, he also believes that pitch calling is a very important part of a catcher's duties despite what others have posited. 

“I think how we evaluated catchers a decade ago or two decades ago, when we really didn’t appreciate pitch framing, I think we would return to those times” if the value of framing diminishes, Mejdal said. “Of course, there are less stolen bases in the game now, but I still think there is going to be significant appreciation of their defensive skills.”

I am aware of what the stats say about positional rankings and things like that.

I just don't agree with them for the reasons I have stated. And again, remember I am not saying the defense isn't important, I am saying I think the value of that position is overestimated in an environment of players not running, analytics, teams calling pitches from the dugout and technology.   Now, your argument that less balls are in play is the best argument against my point.  To me, that doesn't illustrate how valuable catchers are, I think it illustrates that defense as a whole isn't as important as it was in the game before.  Shifts are also part of this.  

Again, that isn't to say defense isn't important because it is.  But you can argue that its not as important as it used to be because of the argument you are making.

 

And I am going to back to my true point....How much are these 2 actually hurting the team?  How much are they hurting development?  How are they losing us games with their defense and game calling?  How are you measuring that?

 

Even the best articles I have read on this, article that believe they are the most important players on the field, question how we can truly measure it.  If we don't know how to truly measure it, how can we be so certain about it?

[LTO's]

18 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

stats

 

18 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

I just don't agree with them

Understood.

[Can_of_corn]

30 minutes ago, LTO's said:

I understand your view. You believe that there is no difference between development at AA and development in the majors. I'm not sure how many scouts would agree with that. Would imagine very little would. The truth about service time manipulation is somewhere in the middle between what you think vs. what is happening in baseball.  

I'm not advocating the elimination of AA.  I'm not suggesting that some or even most players wouldn't get value out of AA that they couldn't get out of playing at the same age in the majors.

I'm guessing that if you got scouts off the record and asked if certain elite prospects  would be OK skipping AA some would agree.

[Philip]

1 hour ago, Sports Guy said:

 

1) As I said SEVERAL TIMES, catcher defense has always been important and used to be very important..but the game is different.  I don't care about C defense importance over the last several decades because the game is different.  This is like if you were having an argument about the NBA and acting like the mid range game is important because it has been for decades.  Its a new game.  

2) The argument on here from some (not my argument) is that these 2 are detriments to the team.  Someone said catchers are needed to develop pitchers.  So, I am simply asking if these guys are a detriment and they can't develop pitchers, why are pitchers being developed?  All of those things can't be true.  We know pitching is developing. 

3) They aren't tasked with making sure players don't advance on the bases.  First of all, the analytics say don't run into outs.  That alone is a big reason.  Pitchers are also quick to the plate.  That is another factor.  Sure, having a crappy C with no arm hurts you but how bad?  How many games have the O's lost with Sisco behind the plate because teams are running wild? 

4) Framing is valued but its also greatly questioned.  I am not saying its not valued.  I am saying it has a lot of noise in the data and many don't feel its as important as some do.

5) Strikeouts are rising because pitchers are throwing harder and because teams realize strikeouts aren't a big deal.  That has ZERO TO DO WITH THE CATCHER.  

6) Are you really giving catchers credit for put outs when a batter strikes out?  Is that really part of your argument?

Again, every position has a certain level of importance defensively...it varies from position to position but defense is always important.   That being said, give me great defense at second, SS, CF and 3rd over catching anyday....and with the advent of more and more flyball hitters trying to hit it as far as they can, an argument could be made for the whole OF being more important.

Hi, SG, how ya doin today?
1) Catcher defense has not diminished in importance despite the changing game. Regardless, the defense of OUR catchers is laughable. Even if C Defense HAS changed, our guys are bad.

2-3)They ARE detriments, but they have nothing to do with developing pitchers. Poor framing results in longer pitch counts, walks, passed balls. Holding runners on, and so on, make the job easier. How often does one of our catchers make a quick throw to first to try to catch a runner sleeping? Rarely. And the runners know it, so they take a larger lead, and only worry about throws from the pitcher. Runners may not run as much, but they CAN and they know it, because our catchers are lousy, and we’ve already had runs scored on a combination of a stolen base and a terrible throw from left. Runners are more willing to round third, knowing the catcher doesn’t tag well, and won’t even necessarily catch the ball. I’ve never said that our catchers develop pitchers, but a good catcher does help a pitcher, however slightly, and however much that “slightly” is, we need it, and they aren’t giving it.
Sisco loses games all round. The question isn’t how many games has he lost us as a lousy catcher, or even how many games has he lost us as a lousy overall player. It’s how many games would we have won with a good defender instead of him, or Severino, who actually seems to be worse.

4) Jason Castro can’t hit a lick, but the Twins gave him 24 million dollars because of his elite framing ability. There may be some noise in the data, but the Twins didn’t hand out 24 mill, to a guy who can’t hit, on a whim.

5-6) not sure I understand this. Catchers create Ks for their pitcher with good framing. Not sure what else need be said with these two.

Commenting on defense at SS, 3B, or where ever,  is irrelevant because we’re not talking about those positions, we are talking about catching defense, and ours is terrible. There is no reason to have Severino or Sisco when better defenders are available.

[LA2]

5 hours ago, BRobinsonfan said:

Sisco and Severino are the Lew Ford of catchers.  

I disagree. Lew Ford took us to the playoffs!

[LTO's]

10 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I'm not advocating the elimination of AA.  I'm not suggesting that some or even most players wouldn't get value out of AA that they couldn't get out of playing at the same age in the majors.

I'm guessing that if you got scouts off the record and asked if certain elite prospects  would be OK skipping AA some would agree.

It's a very interesting debate and I suppose we'll just have to agree to disagree. Vaughn will be an interesting case to follow. He was said to have a bat as, if not more, advanced than Adley. So far the scouting report has been pretty poor. Keith Law wrote the other day that he does not look ready. It's still early though.