Is Grayson Rodriguez our no. 1 prospect now?

[Sports Guy]

6 hours ago, interloper said:

I was all Adley all the way, but I honestly can't fault this take now. The only thing I'll say is it might be a little easier to find an impact SS than an impact C. 

Well as someone who believes C are overrated, this doesn’t matter that much to me.

But I understand I’m in the minority on that.

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, Sports Guy said:

Well as someone who believes C are overrated, this doesn’t matter that much to me.

But I understand I’m in the minority on that.

I don’t even know what it means to say, “catchers are overrated.”   

I have the following observations:

1.  Catcher is generally the weakest offensive position.  An .800 OPS C has more offensive value than an .800 OPS hitter at any other spot on the field, because of the differential between that player and the average player at his position.  

2.  Catcher is the hardest position to evaluate defensively.   There are so many aspects to it — pitch calling, framing, blocking, throwing out runners, tag plays, fielding bunts, ranging for foul pops, knowing when it’s time to visit the mound, etc.  A few of those things are easy to measure, some aren’t.   But certainly a catcher has more opportunities to influence the game on defense than any player other than the pitcher.   So I’d venture a guess that the run impact of the best defensive catcher versus the worst (all of the above being considered) is the biggest of any non-pitcher position.   It’s hard to prove that, though.   

3.   Catchers generally have the shortest careers where they are good offensive players.  

4.   Point 3 is an important consideration if you are considering which player will have the most offensive impact over his career.   But it is not very important if you are considering which player will have the most offensive impact during the years he is under team control.   

5.  In most instances a healthy catcher is still only going to play 70-80% of the time, whereas at other positions a healthy player will play 90%+.

So, there’s a lot that goes into a decision about drafting a stud catcher vs. a stud at some other position.   
 

[Sports Guy]

6 hours ago, Frobby said:

I don’t even know what it means to say, “catchers are overrated.”   

I have the following observations:

1.  Catcher is generally the weakest offensive position.  An .800 OPS C has more offensive value than an .800 OPS hitter at any other spot on the field, because of the differential between that player and the average player at his position.  

2.  Catcher is the hardest position to evaluate defensively.   There are so many aspects to it — pitch calling, framing, blocking, throwing out runners, tag plays, fielding bunts, ranging for foul pops, knowing when it’s time to visit the mound, etc.  A few of those things are easy to measure, some aren’t.   But certainly a catcher has more opportunities to influence the game on defense than any player other than the pitcher.   So I’d venture a guess that the run impact of the best defensive catcher versus the worst (all of the above being considered) is the biggest of any non-pitcher position.   It’s hard to prove that, though.   

3.   Catchers generally have the shortest careers where they are good offensive players.  

4.   Point 3 is an important consideration if you are considering which player will have the most offensive impact over his career.   But it is not very important if you are considering which player will have the most offensive impact during the years he is under team control.   

5.  In most instances a healthy catcher is still only going to play 70-80% of the time, whereas at other positions a healthy player will play 90%+.

So, there’s a lot that goes into a decision about drafting a stud catcher vs. a stud at some other position.   
 

I think the defense at C is overrated.  People talk about the impact they have on the game.  
 

People don’t steal bases anymore.  Many teams call pitches from the dugout.  The info we have on pitch framing stats is inconclusive and we don’t know how valuable it really is.  
 

Blocking balls in the dirt is important. 
 

I’m not saying the position isn’t important but I would take a stud CFer, SS and 3rd baseman over a C any day.  Second baseman possibly as well.  A high OPs, good fielding COer is also possible.  

[Can_of_corn]

4 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

I think the defense at C is overrated.  People talk about the impact they have on the game.  
 

People don’t steal bases anymore.  Many teams call pitches from the dugout.  The info we have on pitch framing stats is inconclusive and we don’t know how valuable it really is.  
 

Blocking balls in the dirt is important. 
 

I’m not saying the position isn’t important but I would take a stud CFer, SS and 3rd baseman over a C any day.  Second baseman possibly as well.  A high OPs, good fielding COer is also possible.  

I think you're wrong here.

I get what you are saying but.

1. I think catcher is, at worst, third most important.  I think it is clearly over third and second.
2. It is just so hard to find a good bat at the position, so when you do, its more valuable.

[Sports Guy]

2 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

I think you're wrong here.

I get what you are saying but.

1. I think catcher is, at worst, third most important.  I think it is clearly over third and second.
2. It is just so hard to find a good bat at the position, so when you do, its more valuable.

I do agree that it’s harder to find a good bat at C, no doubt.  
 

I also don’t think that matters the way people make it out to be.

Production is production.  I don’t care where it’s coming from.  IIRC, if you are out scoring your opponents by about 100 runs, that puts you in position where you should be competing for a playoff spot.  
 

However that is accomplished is all that matters.  Sure, having the top offensive C (or close to it) puts you ahead of other teams but your first baseman and COers are subpar, you lose your advantage immediately.  
 

I care about building the best all around team possible.  I don’t want to spend “real money” on a large majority of the pen or on the bench.  I also don’t really believe in spending big money on your 4th or 5th starter.

The one contribution I felt RShack ever made was the idea that you need 15 players…9 position players/DH, 3 starters and 3 BP arms.  I agree with that.  
 

The other 10 guys are largely interchangeable and should cost you very little money.

However those 15 guys are ordered in terms of importance doesn’t mean a whole lot to me.  What matters is putting together the best team possible.  
 

 

[Can_of_corn]

4 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

I do agree that it’s harder to find a good bat at C, no doubt.  
 

I also don’t think that matters the way people make it out to be.

Production is production.  I don’t care where it’s coming from.  IIRC, if you are out scoring your opponents by about 100 runs, that puts you in position where you should be competing for a playoff spot.  
 

However that is accomplished is all that matters.  Sure, having the top offensive C (or close to it) puts you ahead of other teams but your first baseman and COers are subpar, you lose your advantage immediately.  
 

I care about building the best all around team possible.  I don’t want to spend “real money” on a large majority of the pen or on the bench.  I also don’t really believe in spending big money on your 4th or 5th starter.

The one contribution I felt RShack ever made was the idea that you need 15 players…9 position players/DH, 3 starters and 3 BP arms.  I agree with that.  
 

The other 10 guys on largely interchangeable and should cost you very little money.

However those 15 guys are ordered in terms of importance doesn’t mean a whole lot to me.  What matters is putting together the best team possible.  
 

 

But it's easier to get it at other positions.  Having a premium bat at catcher makes the whole process of building an offense easier.

[Sports Guy]

4 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

But it's easier to get it at other positions.  Having a premium bat at catcher makes the whole process of building an offense easier.

Maybe, it depends on the position and the availability of players at that position at any point in time.  But again, that doesn’t really matter imo.  If you are good at developing, talent evaluation, etc…you can find players and put together a winning team.  
 

I do agree it’s harder to find the good bat C…of course, how often that good bat even plays is important too.

[Frobby]

4 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

But it's easier to get it at other positions.  Having a premium bat at catcher makes the whole process of building an offense easier.

You are both right.   There are many ways to skin a cat and there is no one best way to structure a winning team.   Having a very good offensive catcher who also plays excellent defense is a nice head start, but it is neither necessary nor sufficient.   

[Just Regular]

1 hour ago, Sports Guy said:

The one contribution I felt RShack ever made was the idea that you need 15 players…9 position players/DH, 3 starters and 3 BP arms.  I agree with that.  
 

The other 10 guys on largely interchangeable and should cost you very little money.

I'd be tempted to even push it to 10-12, especially if the tournament becomes easier to get into.

The thing is, the skill level of the Bottom 50% of the MLB roster can bear on how hard you have to work your key assets to earn a playoff berth.   I think it is pretty likely at 10 or 12 playoff teams that John Means' and/or Grayson Rodriguez's first postseason game will be near 200 IP deep into their seasons whatever year, whereas if they were Dodgers they might be Julio Urias, who will keep Kenley Jansen nailed to bullpen bench and smoke you to clinch a World Series, but absent a Padres or Gausman level challenge probably wouldn't start 33 games.   It's a treat Urias and Buehler have had to hustle 19 straight starts with no break in sight for the time being.