|
Post by Rog on Jan 22, 2014 11:21:36 GMT -5
We know Buster Posey has some mechanical flaws behind the plate. Heck, even Johnny Bench had problems his first couple of seasons. Buster also has athletic abiity and soft hands. So how does the rubber meet the road? Buster has now caught over 3000 innings, so the sample size seems plenty big enough to compare him with the other Giants catchers.
Passed balls -- Buster has allowed just one passed ball every 341 innings. His teammates have allowed one every 150. Buster has been more than twice as good.
Wild pitches -- Buster has allowed a wild pitch every 34 innings. His fellow catchers have allowed one every 20 frames. Buster has been nearly twice as good.
Combined passed balls and wild pitches -- Buster has allowed a passed ball or wild pitch once every 31 innings. His fellow catchers have allowed one every 17 innings.
Base stealers caught -- Buster has caught 32.4% of base stealers. His fellow catchers have caught 27.8%. Not a huge difference, but Buster is clearly above league average while his teammates are right at league average.
Errors -- This is the area in which we might most expect Buster to excel, but in reality, he has made an error every 133 innings compared to his teammates' 120 frames per boot. Slight advantage to Buster.
Overall, Buster has clearly fielded his position better than his teammates. They have caught just about the same number of innings (Buster 3067, his teammates 2760), and the sample is large. Buster has done a pretty nice job behind the plate -- particularly in preventing the ball from reaching the backstop.
|
|
|
Post by donk33 on Jan 22, 2014 13:43:13 GMT -5
you are forgetting the "luck" aspect...also, the fact that the other catchers were primary Tim's catcher for many of their games....the thing that bothers me most is that there is a mdefinite leadership m
|
|
|
Post by donk33 on Jan 22, 2014 13:45:12 GMT -5
you are forgetting the "luck" aspect...also, the fact that the other catchers were primary Tim's catcher for many of their games....the thing that bothers me most is that there is a definite leadership
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Jan 22, 2014 14:18:13 GMT -5
Rog says---We know Buster Posey has some mechanical flaws behind the plate. Heck, even Johnny Bench had problems his first couple of seasons.
---boly says---
Rog, that's only surface-true. Everyone has an adjustment period when they get to the show, but defensivley? As much as I lover Buster, defensively, in his first 3 seasons, he's not even in Bench's ballpark or zip code.
As to the passed ball stats; those can be thrown out the window because the scoring today ain't even close to the way they scored things in '68-'69-'70; Bench's first 3 seasons.
Buster makes so many mechanical mistakes it drives me crazy.
yeah, he has soft hands.
Yeah, he's a really good athelete, but that's where things end.
Bench began catching at a young age and developed instincts that Buster has had to learn on the fly.
Don't get me wrong; Buster's not a bad catcher, but he can't be discussed in the same sentence anymore than Angel Pagan can be disccused in the same sentence as Willie Mays.
boly
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Jan 22, 2014 16:02:59 GMT -5
Strongly disagree boly. There's a difference between Posey and Bench, but it's nowhere near the difference between Mays and Pagan. Frankly, I think Posey is much underrated as a defensive catcher. He catches a staff that throws about twice as many pitches in the dirt as most other teams. They do that because they trust Posey to block them. He doesn't have Bench's arm, who does? But I think he blocks balls better than Bench did. Certainly more of them.
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Jan 22, 2014 17:11:01 GMT -5
Boly -- Rog, that's only surface-true. Everyone has an adjustment period when they get to the show, but defensivley? As much as I lover Buster, defensively, in his first 3 seasons, he's not even in Bench's ballpark or zip code. As to the passed ball stats; those can be thrown out the window because the scoring today ain't even close to the way they scored things in '68-'69-'70; Bench's first 3 seasons. Rog -- Let's look at the raw stats, Boly. Buster has caught 3067 innings. In his first 2+ seasons, Johnny caught 2783. Buster has committed 9 passed balls and given up 90 wild pitches. That's 99 balls that got past him in 3067 innings, or one every 31 frames. Johnny allowed 34 passed balls and 130 wild pitches. That's 164 balls that got beyond Johnny, or one every 17 games. Buster has allowed only a little over half as many balls per inning to get by him than Bench did in Johnny's first 2+ seasons. You say that scoring has changed, so perhaps Johnny's having given up four times as many passed balls as Buster has isn't quite fair. But whether it is called a passed ball or a wild pitch, the stat is counted only when a runner advances because a pitch isn't caught. Do you see that Buster has caught the ball better than Johnny? Here is what I think: Because Johnny caught one-handed, a novelty at that time, and because he did have one HECK of an arm, Johnny's defense was actually overrated through 1969. After that, he grew into the rep. Let's not forget that when Johnny entered his third full season in 1970, he was just 22 years old. As for errors and caught stealings, Johnny had the edge -- although it wasn't by quite as much as it might appear. Johnny made an error once every 164 innings to Buster's one per 133. Johnny threw out a marvelous 51% of attempting base stealers to Buster's 32%. But Buster's 32% compared to a league average of 28%, while Johnny's 51% compared a league mark of 40%. Base stealers just weren't as good back then. Their volume may have been higher, but they weren't nearly as efficient. All in all, the stats don't give Johnny a big edge thus far. But in 1970, Johnny stopped allowing pitches to get by him. He never again had more than 9 passed balls or 40 wild pitches in a single season. It appears Johnny improved significantly behind the plate after his first two full seasons. Let's hope Buster can do the same. As you imply, I don't expect Buster to be as good behind the plate the rest of his career as Johnny was in the rest of his. But it seems pretty clear that if Bench had a defensive advantage over Buster early in their careers, it's wasn't by a huge amount. I realize stats don't always tell the whole story, Boly, but the fact is that the early Bench allowed pitches to get by him nearly twice as often as Buster has. I'll bet you didn't know that (unless you have read it here before). I have mentioned that things aren't always as we remember them. I think this is such a case. Beginning in 1970, Bench as NAILS behind the plate. Before that though, his throwing was spectacular but his ball-blocking wasn't so great. You could look it up. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2177/bluster-buster#ixzz2rAMrtVoH
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Jan 22, 2014 17:14:35 GMT -5
Don -- you are forgetting the "luck" aspect... Rog -- The sample is big enough (about 3000 innings for both Buster and his backups) to signifcantly reduce the luck factor. Don -- also, the fact that the other catchers were primary Tim's catcher for many of their games Rog -- This is a good point, although I believe that my previous research indicated Tim also allowed fewer passed balls and wild pitches than the other catchers did when Tim was pitching. You could re-research this one in case my memory has failed me, but I don't believe that is the case. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2177/bluster-buster?page=1#scrollTo=18517#ixzz2rATYycZX
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Jan 22, 2014 17:23:20 GMT -5
Boly -- Don't get me wrong; Buster's not a bad catcher, but he can't be discussed in the same sentence anymore than Angel Pagan can be disccused in the same sentence as Willie Mays. Rog -- I believe comparing the early-career Buster to the early-career Johnny is more like comparing the prime-of-his-career (which wasn't bad, by the way, even though Angel has since regressed) to the late-career Willie. To simplify the Buster/Bench comparison to this point in the their careers, Johnny was clearly the better thrower, while Buster somehow has been WELL ahead of Johnny in preventing pitches from getting behind him. I haven't done the research, Boly, but I'll bet that the pitchers Johnny caught in 1967, 1968 and 1969 had clearly better wild pitch and passed ball records over the rest of their careers -- especially if Johnny caught them most of that career. Over his first two full seasons, Johnny allowed an average of 75 balls per season to get by him. He never again allowed more than 43 to get by him in a single season. It is possible Johnny himself made some mechanical changes. I realize the numbers I have cited here don't jibe with the way we remember Johnny. But the numbers indicate he improved a LOT in his ball-blocking skills. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2177/bluster-buster?page=1#scrollTo=18518#ixzz2rAUStUxH
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Jan 22, 2014 17:28:10 GMT -5
Allen -- I think he blocks balls better than Bench did. Certainly more of them. Rog -- I don't think there is a huge difference here between Buster thus far and Johnny over most of Johnny's career. My point here has been that Johnny got off to a rough start -- and then improved considerably. It seems hard to believe, but Buster probably IS a better ball blocker than even the seasoned Johnny was. But I think ball blocking is a skill that has developed over the years to cope with the nasty, frequently-in-the-dirt pitching used by many major league pitchers these days. As you point out, Allen, the Giants pitchers -- by design or otherwise -- seem to throw more balls in the dirt than do most pitching staffs. Buster does have flaws -- and he isn't Yadier Molina, who just might be the best defensive catcher ever -- but he has worked very hard at his ball-blocking skills. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2177/bluster-buster?page=1#scrollTo=18519#ixzz2rAWc9jEv
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Jan 23, 2014 13:01:31 GMT -5
Allen says--- Strongly disagree boly. There's a difference between Posey and Bench, but it's nowhere near the difference between Mays and Pagan. Frankly, I think Posey is much underrated as a defensive catcher. He catches a staff that throws about twice as many pitches in the dirt as most other teams. They do that because they trust Posey to block them. He doesn't have Bench's arm, who does? But I think he blocks balls better than Bench did. Certainly more of them.
---boly says---
Wow! Allen! Do we see things differently.
From my experience and observation, Buster's blocking technique though it 'can' be good, often isn't. Too much for me to be pleased with his technique on an over all basis.
I think last year I made a comparison to Lazy Bennie.
boly
|
|
|
Post by allenreed on Jan 23, 2014 16:06:34 GMT -5
A fallacious comparison IMO. I don't see anything lazy about Buster's catching. Bench had a great arm and a great bat, I don't recall anything all that special about his glove.
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Jan 23, 2014 22:49:20 GMT -5
Boly -- From my experience and observation, Buster's blocking technique though it 'can' be good, often isn't. Too much for me to be pleased with his technique on an over all basis. I think last year I made a comparison to Lazy Bennie. Rog -- I have made the point that Buster's athleticism and soft hands have helped him overcome whatever technique issues he has. His results tend to bear that out. Whatever his issues, Boly, it is fact that thus far in his career Buster has allowed a lot fewer pitches to get by him than the young Johnny Bench did. I realize how incredible that seems, but it is a fact. I respect the opinion of a lot of people, but I tend to respect facts at least as much. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2177/bluster-buster#ixzz2rHg6e6Eb
|
|
|
Post by donk33 on Jan 24, 2014 0:44:11 GMT -5
as Johnny Bench said...the good catchers call for the ball in the dirt, others call for the higher pitches....Posey almost always goes up high when the pitcher is ahead of the batter...another thing I have pointed out and you failed to acknowledge...but Bochy did...the pitchers and Posey never appear to be on the same page...pitchers shake off Posey way too much...in my opinion...another factor, Posey very seldom goes out to the mound unless the pitcher asks him to come out...I can't understand how jumping up in the air for a pitch in the dirt is good mechanics, but I will say that Posey cut down on the times he ducked and turned his head on inside sliders...when he catches these balls, lots of luck....
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Jan 24, 2014 11:45:07 GMT -5
Rog -- Let's look at the raw stats, Boly. Buster has caught 3067 innings. In his first 2+ seasons, Johnny caught 2783.
---boly says---
Rog, you continue to use 'raw stats,' and I claim that the way scoring has changed since then, you can throw the raw stats out the window.
What used to be errors by infielders, now go as hits, would be my example.
Sorry. I'm going to use me eyes and instincts here.
boly
|
|
|
Post by islandboagie on Jan 24, 2014 15:37:51 GMT -5
Even if that were true, Boly, which cannot be proven, there are arguments that oppose your position. For instance, regarding catchers, there are far more harder throwers in today's game. Pitchers also change teams far more than they did, which also makes it more difficult for catchers to become familiar with certain pitchers.
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Jan 26, 2014 13:43:08 GMT -5
Even if that were true, Boly, which cannot be proven, there are arguments that oppose your position. For instance, regarding catchers, there are far more harder throwers in today's game. Pitchers also change teams far more than they did, which also makes it more difficult for catchers to become familiar with certain pitchers. ---boly says----
Rog, your last statement simply is not true.
A pitcher learns to throw to a LOT of catchers, and it takes about 5 times through to figure out if you're 'mentally' in tune or not.
And that's just the mental ability to be on the same page when they decide what pitches to throw.
From a catcher's perspective, after five rounds with a starter, he KNOWS what the guy throws, how the ball moves, and what quirky habits he has.
He knows how the ball reacts in the dirt, which way his breaking stuff is likely to squirt or skip.
Thus, how often a guy changes teams is moot ESPECIALLY when Posey, and Bench, caught essentially the same guys (starters at least), over a 3 year period, is moot.
boly
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Jan 27, 2014 11:02:41 GMT -5
Boagie -- Even if that were true, Boly, which cannot be proven, there are arguments that oppose your position. For instance, regarding catchers, there are far more harder throwers in today's game. Pitchers also change teams far more than they did, which also makes it more difficult for catchers to become familiar with certain pitchers. ---boly says----
Rog, your last statement simply is not true.
Rog -- That wasn't my statement, Boly. What Boagie said was true though. I believe you too agree; you simply don't believe it is as hard to adjust to pitchers as Boagie seems to think. I'm probably closer to your position there than Boagie is.
Still, there is little question today's pitchers throw harder, and they change teams more often.
But here is where I think you owe us an explanation, Boly. You say catcher's stats are different now, that there aren't as many passed balls or errors charged. I don't disagree with you (other perhaps than on the degree), but you have never addressed how it is that whether passed ball or wild pitch, the early Bench let more pitches get away than Buster has.
Say the Reds' pitchers were harder to catch (which I doubt, but which is possible), but don't simply say the stats aren't what they used to be. It is FACT that Bench let more balls get away. Many more pitches, not just a few.
In this discussion, there have been opinions. But the one indisputable fact is that Bench allowed more pitches to get away. Regardless of passed ball or wild pitch, that fact is indisputable. Yet you continue to walk around it.
I'm not quite sure why.
|
|
|
Post by donk33 on Jan 27, 2014 11:52:55 GMT -5
Before comparing catchers, you should compare pitching staffs. One thing I would like to see is a comparison of ground balls versus fly balls..as well as K's versus walks...and quoting Bench, some catchers keep their stats up by calling for high pitches...another factor was the larger strike zone allowed pitchers to move the ball around and up and down...now pitchers concentrate on pitching to a smaller area making it easier to catch..I would think...
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Jan 27, 2014 17:21:56 GMT -5
Rob says---But here is where I think you owe us an explanation, Boly. You say catcher's stats are different now, that there aren't as many passed balls or errors charged. I don't disagree with you (other perhaps than on the degree), but you have never addressed how it is that whether passed ball or wild pitch, the early Bench let more pitches get away than Buster has.
----boly says----
sorry, rog, I thought I addressed that.
Scoring has changed. in the field, things that used to be called errors are now called hits.
Similar thing behind the plate.
Scorers are quicker to flash "wild pitch," then to say, "passed ball."
Years ago, even if a ball bounced, IF the catcher could have gotten his body in front of it, but didn't, it was a passed ball.
Now-a-days, if the ball bounces, almost invariably, they call it a wild pitch irregardless of whether or no the catcher should have been able to block the darned thing.
Consider how many years now you've heard me whinning about a catcher being lazy.
Since Lazy Benny was here.
I know what proper technique is. I've taught it beginning in 1983, and then refined what I taught after attending a clinc held by former Angel catcher, Bob Rogers.
To teach it, I had to learn how to do it.
I'll never be a catcher, wouldn't want to be, but the teacher doesn't have to have the skills to do it, just know how to teach it and recognize when the techniques are being done correctly or incorrectly.
Same as with my comment on catchers.
A pitcher gets used to a catcher, and vice-versa really quickly.
It's almost an unseen, unspoken chemistry that's there.
Balls bounce and move in a certain way, generally, but even more so for different pitchers.
Hard throwers can be a problem, but how many major leaguers (percent wise), throw in the upper 90's. A few, therefore, speed wise, handling them isn't the issue.
boly
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Jan 28, 2014 1:00:39 GMT -5
Rog says---But here is where I think you owe us an explanation, Boly. You say catcher's stats are different now, that there aren't as many passed balls or errors charged. I don't disagree with you (other perhaps than on the degree), but you have never addressed how it is that whether passed ball or wild pitch, the early Bench let more pitches get away than Buster has. ----boly says---- sorry, rog, I thought I addressed that. Scoring has changed. in the field, things that used to be called errors are now called hits. Similar thing behind the plate. Scorers are quicker to flash "wild pitch," then to say, "passed ball." Rog -- You didn't and haven't addressed the point I continue to make. Let's stipulate that more balls past the catcher are called wild pitches now, with fewer passed balls. The point I continue to make isn't that Buster has allowed fewer passed balls. I do think it is worth noting, since Buster has so FEW passed balls compared to the early Bench. But that isn't my point. My point is that Buster has allowed fewer pitches to get by him -- whether we call them passed balls OR wild pitches. For EITHER a passed ball or a wild pitch to be called, a base runner has to advance a base on a pitch that gets by the catcher. It doesn't matter whether the scorer called them passed balls or wild pitches. The fact is that Buster has allowed FAR fewer pitches to get past him than the early Bench. THAT fact is what you haven't yet addressed, Boly. Nor has anyone else I have seen here or in the considerable reading I do about baseball. I'm not saying that Buster is a better catcher than Bench was over Johnny's career. I don't believe he was, and I don't think the difference is yet small. What I AM saying is that Bench allowed a LOT of passed balls and wild pitches until 1969 and that after his first roughly 3000 innings, he let more get by him than Buster has in Buster's first roughly 3000 innings. This last statement isn't my opinion. It is a FACT. And one which no one has yet addressed. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2177/bluster-buster#ixzz2rfZQpsMw
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Jan 28, 2014 2:07:18 GMT -5
Boly -- Years ago, even if a ball bounced, IF the catcher could have gotten his body in front of it, but didn't, it was a passed ball. Rog -- I agree with you that more passed balls were called, Boly, but it seemed to me that if the ball bounced, it was usually called a wild pitch. It is on pitches that DON'T hit the dirt on which I believe the scorers are less critical of the catcher than they used to be. I have pretty much always felt that a scorer would call a ball in the dirt a wild pitch, but feel fewer pitches that DON'T hit the dirt are now called wild pitches. Part of that could stem from pitches being slightly faster now, giving catchers less time to react to errant pitches that aren't errant enough in a low fashion to hit the dirt. I do think catchers are better today at blocking balls. I believe it is far more the fashion to bounce the very good sinking off-speed pitches in the dirt when the pitcher gets two strikes on the batter, which in itself happens more now than it did when hitters didn't swing for as much power and thus made more contact early in the count. Thus, catchers get more PRACTICE in blocking balls. In addition, catchers today are likely more athletic as a group, which should aid them in ball-blocking. You mention that more pitches that got away used to be called passed balls. The average number of wild pitches per game the past 10 years has been virtually identical to that average number of wild pitches in the decade of the '60's. Since passed balls were more likely to be called back then, we can see that slightly fewer pitches overall get away from catchers than was the case then. There were fewer pitches thrown in the '60's than in today's game. Thus, today's catchers are allowing slightly fewer balls to get by them despite catching more pitches. Today's catchers likely have tougher balls to catch, as well. It appears likely that today's catchers are indeed better ball blockers. Slightly fewer pitches getting away on more pitches. As pointed out here many times, Buster allowed passed balls much less frequently and wild pitches much less frequently than his fellow Giants catchers. In Bench's case, he caught almost all the Reds' games in 1968 and 1969, so it is difficult to compare him with his teammates. In 1967 though, he caught 26 games and his fellow catchers caught 136. Bench and his teammates were virtually even on passed balls, although Johnny allowed wild pitches more often that his teammates. I pointed out earlier how I view Johnny's fielding. Overall, I think he was excellent. But threw his first 3000 or so innings, I don't think he was particularly good. I say that knowing that he won Gold Gloves in his first two full seasons. Here is what I think happened: I think Johnny's great arm and his inventing one-handed catching made him seem better than he was early on, when he allowed a lot of pitches to get by him. I think he developed into the great catcher his reputation indicated. At least, that's what the numbers show. Numbers can be misinterpreted, but they don't lie. In 1970, Bench suddenly allowed fewer pitches to get by him. His numbers became good, as Posey's are. But early on, the numbers seem to indicate Johnny wasn't that stellar at preventing passed balls and wild pitches. Based on innings caught, Bench in his first two full seasons allowed about .40 wild pitches per game compared to a league average of .32. Compare that with Buster so far, who has allowed .25 wild pitches per game compared to the same league average of .32. Buster was 22% better than average, while Johnny was, surprisingly, 25% worse than average. I'm not saying that Buster is as good as Johnny was over his career. I'm not saying he'll EVER be that good. What I am saying is that when it came to allowing pitches to get by, Buster thus far has been far better than the Johnny Bench of 1967, 1958 and 1969. The numbers back that up completely. Perhaps someone here can show how the numbers don't show the right picture. The adjustments are going to have to be both very solid and very substantial to put Johnny ahead of Buster. I hate to say it, but the early Johnny Bench appears to have been overrated behind the plate. Later on, he deserved his rep. But not those first two-plus seasons, it appears. Let's start with the facts and go from there. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2177/bluster-buster?page=1#scrollTo=18595#ixzz2rfcK52Vb
|
|
|
Post by donk33 on Jan 28, 2014 2:37:03 GMT -5
as usual, Rog has slanted the stats to make his case for Posey....Bench's first 4 seasons he was 19 -22 years old....in his 2nd season, he caught in 154 games...3rd season..147- and 139 in his 4th year....Posey's years 2-4, he was 23-26 years old and he caught 76, 41, 114 and 121 innings.....big difference...when Posey first played winter ball in Hawaii, he was pulled from the team and sent back to the states to get some instruction on how to catch the ball.....Bench learned in the majors...and in his first full season he caught 154 games, including 10 double headers....Posey has to be rested if he catches 4 games in a row...especially when Tim is due to pitch...
|
|
|
Post by islandboagie on Jan 28, 2014 3:47:29 GMT -5
Actually Bench caught in more games in the minors than Buster. But what does any of that matter? You and Boly comment on Buster's mechanics, which I agree are not typical mechanics a catcher should have. But yet, they seem to work for Posey, the numbers don't lie. We can keep returning to this topic over and over but yet the stats still don't support this idiotic idea you've conjured up in your head that Buster is a bad catcher.
|
|
sfgdood
Long time member
stats geeks never played the game...that's why they don't get it and never will
Posts: 90
|
Post by sfgdood on Jan 28, 2014 12:17:57 GMT -5
Also, DK does not know what the instruction Posey received was after his winter ball in Hawaii. Was it on how to block the ball or was it more on the calling pitches end? Remember that Bench was a catcher all his life while Posey became a catcher in college for the first time.
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Jan 28, 2014 13:40:19 GMT -5
Don -- as usual, Rog has slanted the stats to make his case for Posey....Bench's first 4 seasons he was 19 -22 years old....in his 2nd season, he caught in 154 games...3rd season..147- and 139 in his 4th year....Posey's years 2-4, he was 23-26 years old and he caught 76, 41, 114 and 121 innings.....big difference Rog -- I believe you mean games, not innings, but your point is very well taken. I myself brought it up the first time we discussed this subject. The stats I presented here are facts. I didn' slant them; I merely presented them. Rather than say I slanted the facts, it might be more productive to refute them or at least bring them into question. No one has yet attempted to do so. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2177/bluster-buster#ixzz2rigF2BdX
|
|
|
Post by donk33 on Jan 28, 2014 13:59:17 GMT -5
Don -- as usual, Rog has slanted the stats to make his case for Posey....Bench's first 4 seasons he was 19 -22 years old....in his 2nd season, he caught in 154 games...3rd season..147- and 139 in his 4th year....Posey's years 2-4, he was 23-26 years old and he caught 76, 41, 114 and 121 innings.....big difference Rog -- I believe you mean games, not innings, but your point is very well taken. I myself brought it up the first time we discussed this subject. The stats I presented here are facts. I didn' slant them; I merely presented them. Rather than say I slanted the facts, it might be more productive to refute them or at least bring them into question. No one has yet attempted to do so. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2177/bluster-buster#ixzz2rigF2BdXdk..you failed to comment on the fact that Bench received very few days off compared to Posey and that Bench was younger as a rookie than Posey. You can not refute the facts, but you can add the things that affect the facts....Posey has a big advantage in the special treatment he receives....so you are right, Posey had fewer passed balls than Bench in the first 4 years of their careers, but Bench caught in many more games..including catching double headers..
|
|
|
Post by donk33 on Jan 28, 2014 14:05:52 GMT -5
Also, DK does not know what the instruction Posey received was after his winter ball in Hawaii. Was it on how to block the ball or was it more on the calling pitches end? Remember that Bench was a catcher all his life while Posey became a catcher in college for the first time. dk..since Posey was having trouble with passed balls and it was reported that was the reason he was sent back to the States. I would guess that calling pitches was not a big concern with lack of "book" on pitchers and batters in the league...
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Jan 28, 2014 16:00:08 GMT -5
--Rog Says--- I do think catchers are better today at blocking balls.
--boly says---
Interesting question/thought. Not sure I agree. Gear back "then" was not as good as it is now, and thus, catchers HAD to have better technique NOT to get hit where it hurt and could do damage.
I'm not all that sure technique has changed that much, other than what Bob Rogers taught us with the Drop and Pop, technique.
I need to think on this one.
boly
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Jan 28, 2014 17:39:12 GMT -5
Don -- you failed to comment on the fact that Bench received very few days off compared to Posey and that Bench was younger as a rookie than Posey. You can not refute the facts, but you can add the things that affect the facts....Posey has a big advantage in the special treatment he receives....so you are right, Posey had fewer passed balls than Bench in the first 4 years of their careers, but Bench caught in many more games..including catching double headers.. Rog -- I agree with what you say and have mentioned most of those things myself. Whatever the reasons, Buster has allowed fewer pitches to get by him than Bench did in the same number of games at the beginning of his career. Isn't that what we were discussing? Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2177/bluster-buster#ixzz2rjf18o1O
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Jan 28, 2014 18:05:06 GMT -5
--Rog Says--- I do think catchers are better today at blocking balls. --boly says--- Interesting question/thought. Not sure I agree. Gear back "then" was not as good as it is now, and thus, catchers HAD to have better technique NOT to get hit where it hurt and could do damage. I'm not all that sure technique has changed that much, other than what Bob Rogers taught us with the Drop and Pop, technique. Rog -- As far as I know, there have been no big changes in pitch-blocking technique. I think the technique has long been to square up as much as possible and make your body your glove. I do think catchers today have to do more blocking of balls in the dirt. That likely has increased the importance of learning the technique properly and given the catchers more opportunity to practice it. I realize there were fork balls already, but the advent of the split finger meant far more pitches wound up in the dirt. Today the pitch in the dirt is used as a specific weapon by many if not most pitchers. Back in the old days we heard a lot about fastballs and curve balls, with sliders also on the rise. Now it is change ups and split fingers that are on the rise. I realize there isn't complete concurrence that today's game is better than in the old days, but can you think of any other major sport that ISN'T better? Baseball does take a different skill set, but why would it be different? Perhaps it hasn't improved as MUCH as the other sports, but with all the athletic improvements, it's hard to imagine it hasn't improved at all -- and particularly that it has declined. Anyway, you're thinking about how ball-blocking has improved, stayed the same or declined, and it's almost always good to think about things -- whether we change our minds as a result of it or not. I do want to ask anyone here to show how the early Johnny Bench (1967-1969) was better at preventing pitches from getting behind him than Buster Posey has been thus far. Buster not only has better numbers than Bench, but he also has better numbers than his teammates. Bench's numbers during that period weren't any better than his teammates, even though the primary catchers -- Johnny Edwards and Don Pavletich -- weren't know as being particularly good catcher. In Palevich's case, I think he was considered to be pretty poor. Hey, I too was surprised when I saw the numbers. But they are facts. Buster has been better than league average at avoiding advancements through missed pitches. The early Bench was below average. Later in Johnny's career, it was a much different story, more in line with how we view Johnny's defense. But look at Johnny's numbers before 1970 and from 1970 on. They are starkly different. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2177/bluster-buster?page=1#scrollTo=18613#ixzz2rjftQViY
|
|