Catchers' ERA

[Rog]

I still don't know how starting catchers' ERA overall compares with that of their backups, but I do know that they seemed impressed with the nearly half run Brian McCann's ERA was below his replacements last season.  Still nothing definitive, but it is looking more like Mike Piazza's slightly better than half a run advantage over his backups is significant.

Like fielding, it's a little tougher to measure accurately, but I'm wondering if when looking at a catcher's overall defense, we shouldn't be looking more closely at how his catchers' ERA compares with his replacements.  The measurement is accurate, but doesn't provide complete correlation IMO.  There are some difficulties with it.  But overall, I think it may be a much better contributing measurement to evaluating a catcher's overall defense than we have realized.

Remember, as bad a catcher otherwise Piazza was, it is unlikely that he was bad enough to cost his team even CLOSE to the half run plus he "saved" his team with his handling of pitchers.  I still see some difficulties, but it seems hard to argue that Mike DIDN'T help his pitchers a significant amount given the very large same of both him and his backups.

I'm curious as to the opinions of others (and Boly in particular).  I think we may be on to something here -- and that we're not giving enough credit or discredit to how many runs a catcher "saves" his team.  In some cases, it's almost GOT to be a significant part of the catcher's overall defense.  Despite the difficulties I see.

As an aside, Buster Posey's catchers' ERA advantage over his backups is almost precisely the same as the advantage enjoyed by Brian McCann last season.  And I should add that one of the commentators who was impressed by McCann's "advantage" is Dave Valle, himself a decent former catcher who may know a thing or two about defense.

[islandboagie]

Mike Pizza could also have been in the same situation that Posey is in now. Since Sanchez has joined the team, Posey has benefitted from catching our 3 more successful pitchers while Sanchez has had to endure the roller coaster ride that Lincecum and Zito careers have been on lately.

Over the last few years you could have hung a tire behind home plate for Cain, Bumgarner and Vogelsong to pitch to, and hung another tire for Lincecum and Zito. I'm fairly certain tire #1 will have the better catchers era, thus making the stat geeks all claim tire #1 is better at calling games.

Obviously catchers ERA does have some merit, but unfortunately, like you tend to do, you've presented that stat as unarguable proof.

[donk33]

Feb 27, 2014 15:57:50 GMT -5 islandboagie said:

Mike Pizza could also have been in the same situation that Posey is in now. Since Sanchez has joined the team, Posey has benefitted from catching our 3 more successful pitchers while Sanchez has had to endure the roller coaster ride that Lincecum and Zito careers have been on lately.

Over the last few years you could have hung a tire behind home plate for Cain, Bumgarner and Vogelsong to pitch to, and hung another tire for Lincecum and Zito. I'm fairly certain tire #1 will have the better catchers era, thus making the stat geeks all claim tire #1 is better at calling games.

Obviously catchers ERA does have some merit, but unfortunately, like you tend to do, you've presented that stat as unarguable proof.

dk..seems like the same things I have been saying all along...there are many stats that people put out that really don't tell the whole story...some teams line up their #2 catcher to catch a certain pitcher or 2 in order to give the #1 catcher some off days...teams have a different approach ...some use their #2 catcher to catch the easiest pitcher to handle...others, throw the #2 to the wolves and have them catch the toughest....when Gus Mancuso was the 1 catcher on the Giants, Harry Danny would usually catch Hubbell...they switched roles when Danning became #1....

[Rog]

Boagie -- Mike Pizza could also have been in the same situation that Posey is in now. Since Sanchez has joined the team, Posey has benefitted from catching our 3 more successful pitchers while Sanchez has had to endure the roller coaster ride that Lincecum and Zito careers have been on lately.

Rog -- The thing about Mike is that he caught 1600 games and his backups caught 800. It is possible what you say is true over that big a sample, but the odds would seem to be against it. I could go back and check whether Mike caught a disproportionate percentage of the time with the better pitchers. It is possible he did. I had already thought of that, but the research would be quite extensive. Maybe I can get to it somewhere along the line.

Your point about Buster is a good one, although we might want to take a closer look.

Hector did have the better ERA with Tim in 2012 -- 4.87 to 5.46. But Tim had the better one in 2013 -- 4.20 to 4.83. Overall, Tim was a quarter of a run better pitching to Buster than to Hector.

One can argue on behalf of Hector by pointing out that Tim threw a greater percentage to him in Tim's very down season of 2012, while Tim threw a lesser percentage to Hector in 2013.

On Buster's behalf, it can be pointed out that while Tim's ERA pitching to Hector stayed about the same in 2013 as it had been in 2012, his ERA pitching to Buster improved by a run and a quarter from 2012 to 2013.

Here the sample isn't so big, with Tim throwing 229.1 innings to Tim and 142.2 to Hector. But I'm not seeing anything here that would back up your premise.

We can't be as sure here with Buster as we can be with Bench. Buster's sample of catching Tim is much smaller than Johnny's. But I don't think you have suggested anything that would point out Buster's having a great advantage compared to Hector.

So how about with Barry Zito? Here the numbers come closer to indicating your point. Barry's ERA pitching to Buster has been 4.56 the past two seasons. Pitching to Hector, it has been 4.09. Looks pretty clear, right?

Well, not quite so fast. Barry did almost all his pitching in his down year of 2013 to Buster. In 2012, when he had much more success, he actually pitched more to Hector.

So maybe it was TIM who contributed heavily to Barry's down year in 2013, since he did almost all the catching of Barry. But if that were true, why would his ERA (4.39) catching Barry in 2012 be fairly close to Hector's 4.08?

Buster's catching of Tim would seem on balance to go against your argument. His catching of Barry supports your point more.

But let's not forget that Buster's catcher's ERA is compared with ALL the guys who have caught for the Giants,including a broad field from Bengie Molina to Chris Stewart.

I think your point is a good one. I also think it is questionable. Maybe we'll know more after the sample grows this season.

And it is Mike's much larger sample that makes it statistically pretty unlikely that your point is true for him. At some point I'll try to look it up (or you could do so yourself). But I think we need hard evidence of your point regarding one possible source of Mike's advantage.

Your point is a good one, and you might be right. But without further research, the odds would appear fairly strongly to be against it.



Boagie -- Over the last few years you could have hung a tire behind home plate for Cain, Bumgarner and Vogelsong to pitch to, and hung another tire for Lincecum and Zito. I'm fairly certain tire #1 will have the better catchers era, thus making the stat geeks all claim tire #1 is better at calling games.

Rog -- While there is no question that the first three have much better control than the lst two, none of those pitchers has good enough control to throw the ball through a tire. I think Matt Cain has very good control -- yet I've seen him miss the target by a LOT.

As I have said, you could be right here -- more likely so with Buster than with Pizza. Catching Tim and Barry combined, Buster had the lower
ERA -- 4.63 to 4.77. With the sample still being small, it's hard to draw a strong conclusion with regard to Buster and Hector. I'm nt going to take the time to do the comparison, but I suspect Buster enjoys a pretty significant advantage over Hector with regard to catching Cain, Bumgarner, Vogelsong and the relievers.

Boagie -- Obviously catchers ERA does have some merit, but unfortunately, like you tend to do, you've presented that stat as unarguable proof.

Rog -- That kind of conclusion on your part seems highly unfair. I have spoken several times about wishing I had far more data with regard to how other starting catchers fared compared to their backups. How can I make such an important statement an yet be makng an argument with "unarguable proof?" I have mentioned the following information I DO have:

. Piazza's advantage compares favorably with Buster's -- by a little bit.

. Neither of them come close to Yadier Molina's advantage, but based on the research I did on Mike Matheny when he joined the Giants, their advantage was well ahead of Mike's.

. Brian McCann's advantage last season -- virtually the same as Buster's over Buster's career and a bit less than Piazza's -- was given strong consideration on the MLB Network, including that of Dave Valle, who caught 7000 innings over 13 seasons.

I believe that if you look back at all I have written, Boagie, I've attempted to be fair. Piazza's advantage and especially sample size are just too big for it to be at all likely that pitchers didn't pitch better to him than to his backups.

I haven't said it is certain that is the case. Only that it is highly likely.

I think you built a possible case against Buster. See if you can build one against Piazza. I realize that is my asking far too much research, but all you have come back with is "what if's".

This Piazza thing isn't something I came up with myself. It is something I read by someone who likely spends a lot more time on research than both of us put together.

Again, you could be right. But two things:

First, I have never said I am absolutely sure Mike's advantage is unassailable.

Second, raising "what if's" without any backup doesn't seem like a fair way to argue on your part.

As a parting comment here, I have found that all too many argue with the facts of analytics simply by calling those who use them "stats geeks," as if their arguments are invalidated by a status you seem to think very little of. In reality, those who use analytics use more objective information to make their judgments than do most who don't.

You and others here have yet to point out what it is that I don't understand about the game which causes me to overlook all that is holy and instead substituting analytics.

15 or 20 years ago, my knowledge of the game was pretty much the equal of others here -- with the exception of Boly's much better knowledge of mechanics and Don's far superior knowledge of the history of the game prior to 1960. In the 15 or 20 years since, I have learned a lot more about the game, in great part because I have also studied analytics.

Teams themselves are doing so more and more. And mostly the argument against doing so is that it gets "stats geeks" involved. Most teams have now undertood for quite a while that the combination of scouting and analytics gives more insight than either of them alone.

I have a respect for both disciplines. You and others here seem to have little respect for anything but scouting. In actuality, the teams that have done the most with the least have combined the two.

I will ask you again: Why is it that those fans who utilize analytics chose to use those analytics on baseball -- when there are so many other areas to which it can be applied? Might it not be because of their love of the game?

Scouting and analytics are NOT mutually exclusive -- even within one individual. Those who understand that are well ahead of the game.

Let me give you an example regarding myself. First of all, let me say that I know a WHOLE lot more about baseball than about hockey. But I did make Sharks comment here that has turned out to be quite true.

I mentioned that new backup goalie Alex Stalock (who coincidentally was the winning goaltender for the Sharks tonight -- now last night) was very good at handling the puck. There is no public statistic of which I am aware that illustrates that. Assists by a goalie could be an indication, but they are so rare as not to be very meaningful for analysis.

So how did I know this? Well, in fairness I had read a little about it, although there isn't a ton of information available about a somewhat obscure goalie.

But the real reason I know was that I had "scouted" him. I'm going to venture that not too many Sharks fans have seen him doing extra practice at actually flipping the puck over the back of the net and out to the blue line. I have -- and was quite impressed.

That's why it was obvious to me to point out Stalock's prowess in moving the puck.

If you look back at my scouting reports on the players I have seen at San Jose Giants games, you will see that they have been rather accurate. My sources including the radar guy at the stadium and also the father of a Giants prospect who has gone on to pitch for them but now pitches across the bay.

The pitcher has a career 2.45 ERA and posted a marvelous 1.38 last season. I can assure you the pitcher isn't nearly as good as those numbers, even though his career minor league numbers are also impressive. And that is for the very reason his dad -- in all candor -- expressed to me.

The pitcher is far better than he was for the Giants, and I wouldn't mind having him for depth this season. But I don't believe he will be close to a 2.45 ERA pitcher. I have described him as a poor man's Sergio Romo, and he does have a high of 34 saves in a minor league season.

I thought he was better than he showed as a Giant, and I don't think he's as good as he showed last season after leaving them. He does have two excellent strengths though.

He has excellent control, and he has thrown nearly 60% ground balls as a big leaguer, which is almost obscene. In fact, the more I look at his peripherals, the more I'm impressed with him.

But I don't think he's a 2.45 guy -- and especially not the 1.38 guy he was last season. But I do think he's a lot better than he showed with the Giants. I think he's done better than his dad expected. His dad thought his most likely role would be as a long reliever, and it appears he's more than that.

Anyway, Boagie, just because I use analytics, don't think I know nothing about the game. If there are important things I don't know, you'll need to explain them to me.

Very little I present here is absolute proof. But if it doesn't make you think more, you should think more about it.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2195/catchers-era#ixzz2ubOcpsA8

[islandboagie]

I'm not trying to build a case against Buster, I think Buster is a good catcher. I was just showing how I believe you misrepresent the value of certain stats. I know Buster is a good catcher because I watch him. I watched him and Romo battle Jay Bruce in game 5 against the Reds in the NLDS. I saw him catch Matt Cain's perfect game and Lincecum's no-hitter, so I know he is good. I think he does his homework, and makes adjustments and it's shown up in two World Championships.

Mike Piazza I dont know about. I watched him when the Giants played the Mets and Dodgers but I didn't see him enough to have an educated opinion on what kind of game caller he was. That's where we differ. I admit I don't know, while you claim based on a few stats, that you can give an educated opinion.

While we're on this topic, I'd like to address another catchers stat you are misrepresenting, and that's caught stealing %. While I understand the value of the stat, I think you (and certainly others) overvalue the stat. The most important part of having a catcher with a good arm is not so much catching runners stealing but more so establishing a reputation that makes the opposing managers put up a red light. Which I think Posey has established that to an extent. Mike Pizza was terrible in that regard.

To sum it up...comparing the two in any aspect of the game being hitting is an outrage.

[klaiggeb]

-Boagie-I'd like to address another catchers stat you are misrepresenting, and that's caught stealing %. While I understand the value of the stat, I think you (and certainly others) overvalue the stat. The most important part of having a catcher with a good arm is not so much catching runners stealing but more so establishing a reputation that makes the opposing managers put up a red light. Which I think Posey has established that to an extent. Mike Pizza was terrible in that regard.

---boly says---

I totally agree, Boagie. % caught IS the most misleading stat I can think of.

In reality, it has as much to do, if not more to do, with how quick a pitcher is to the plate than anything else.

Even an arm like a young Benito Santiago is helpless if the guy on the mound can't hold a guy close.

I don't care how good a catcher's arm is, if the pitcher is as slow as Nenn or Lincecum to the plate, he simply is not going to catch that many runners.

boly

[Rog]

Boagie -- Mike Piazza I dont know about. I watched him when the Giants played the Mets and Dodgers but I didn't see him enough to have an educated opinion on what kind of game caller he was. That's where we differ. I admit I don't know, while you claim based on a few stats, that you can give an educated opinion.

Rog -- There are a lot of things I don't know about either. So in this case, let's revert to logic.

We know from a reliable source that pitchers pitching to Piazza had an overall ERA a little better pitching to him than to his backups.

We know that the sample is large on both sides -- 1600 games from Mike and 800 from his backups.

We know that with a large sample size, differences are meaningful a very high percentage of the time and that the larger the sample, the higher the meaningfulness.

Logic tells us that pitchers pitched better to Piazza than to his backups. To a very high degree of certainty.

So likely the only variables are two:

Did Johnny have lousy backups?

Is it normal for a starting catcher to have a lower ERA than his backups (perhaps because of better familiarity with the pitchers) and how much is it?

As for the backups, I know one of them was Pat Corales, and I think Pat was pretty good. Overall, they might have been lousy, but again statistical analysis tells us is it likely with such a large sample of backups, Johnny's backups were likely fairly close to average.

As for the advantage in catchers' ERA the average starter enjoys over his backup, I don't know. I suspect it exists, but I don't know to what degree. My sense is that it's lower than the half run plus enjoyed by Piazza. I know that former catcher Dave Valle seemed to be impressed by the 0.44 run advantage Brian McCann enjoyed last season. Valle seems pretty sharp, but I don't know how much he truly knows or has even thought about the advantage enjoyed by the average starting catcher.

I don't know anyone who has even talked about whether a starting catcher should enjoy an advantage over his backups. One would think if it were believed that was the case, it would have come up. I personally believe that it does. But not to the extent of the advantage enjoyed by Piazza.

On balance, the evidence seems to point toward Piazza's being an above-average in helping his pitchers to pitch well. Do I know that for certain? No, I don't. Does logic and statistical probability make it likely? I would have to say yes to that one.

IMO the difference between us here is that I have thought about it and done at least a tiny bit of research. In addition to Matheny, Posey and Molina, I just took a quicky look at Johnny Bench. Not surprisingly it appears he enjoys an advantage. That advantage might even be as high as Piazza or higher. My sense thus far is that it's in the same ballpark.

So, yeah, I think my conclusion is more logical than yours. I don't know the answer for sure, but at least I have an idea. I don't believe you have much of an idea at all. Your arguments seems to center around "You don't know everything, so how can you know anything?"

It has been said that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. That is why I consistently strive to increase and improve my knowledge.

I'm certainly not right all the time. But it usually isn't because I haven't done my homework. If I'm just taking a guess, I say so. If I put something out there without saying I'm merely guessing, it's probably been pretty well thought out.


Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2195/catchers-era#ixzz2ujWHoUvY

[Rog]

Boagie -- While we're on this topic, I'd like to address another catchers stat you are misrepresenting, and that's caught stealing %.

Rog -- I'm not misrepresenting it at all. It's a proven fact.

Boagie -- While I understand the value of the stat, I think you (and certainly others) overvalue the stat. The most important part of having a catcher with a good arm is not so much catching runners stealing but more so establishing a reputation that makes the opposing managers put up a red light.

Rog -- What you say here about the red light is so "duh" I'm surprised it doesn't have its own district. Oh, wait. I guess it does.

When we look at Yadier Molina, for instance, we see how LITTLE teams try to steal against him. His pitchers might have something to do with that, but I think he plays by far the major part.

You might notice too that Yadier has an excellent percentage. It's not as if his caught stealing percentage disagrees with how seldom runners try to steal on him. In fact, wouldn't it be the most determining factor?

Think about it. If the few runners who attempt to steal on Yadier begin to drive down his percentage, guess what? They will incrementally begin to try to steal more.

Boagie -- Which I think Posey has established that to an extent. Mike Pizza was terrible in that regard.

Rog -- I think we could learn a lot by seeing how much runners try to steal against catchers compared to how often they try to steal against their backups. We could do such an analysis on Buster and on Mike. I think we know what we would find.

Runners were probably more likely to steal against Piazza, since the risk/reward ratio was better. Wouldn't they be fools NOT to?

Mike caught 23% of runners compared to a 31% league average. Buster has caught 32% of runners compared to a league average of 28%. How is that misleading? Incidentally, runners stole about 50% more often against Mike than against Buster. Isn't that more or less what we would have guessed?

Let's suppose we know nothing about two catchers except that one throws out runners 50% more often than the other. We can guess which catcher the runners try to steal on more, can't we? With a pretty high degree of accuracy?

Or let's suppose we know that one catcher was stolen against quite a bit more than another. Could we guess with a high probability of success which catcher had the higher caught stealing rate?

Does caught stealing percentage tell the whole story? It doesn't. Does it tell quite a bit -- especially when one takes the time to compare it to league average and to the record of a catcher's backups? I would have to say it does.

To say -- other than in specific instances -- that caught stealing percentage is misleading is, well, misleading.


Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2195/catchers-era?page=1&scrollTo=19040#ixzz2ujgtqmvC

[Rog]

Boagie -- To sum it up...comparing the two in any aspect of the game being hitting is an outrage.

Rog -- If one wants to make a total evaluation of how two players compare, he should compare them in all aspects of the game. Which means that comparing Buster and Mike in areas beyond hitting is far from outrageous; it's actually requisite to a full comparison.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2195/catchers-era?page=1&scrollTo=19041#ixzz2ujlqfoWE

[Rog]

Boly -- I totally agree, Boagie. % caught IS the most misleading stat I can think of.

In reality, it has as much to do, if not more to do, with how quick a pitcher is to the plate than anything else.

Even an arm like a young Benito Santiago is helpless if the guy on the mound can't hold a guy close.

I don't care how good a catcher's arm is, if the pitcher is as slow as Nenn or Lincecum to the plate, he simply is not going to catch that many runners.

Rog -- Might you two guys share with us the many catchers whose throwing ability is grossly over- or understated by their caught stealing percentage? In a small sample, you bet. In a larger sample, rarely.

Batting average is actually far more likely to deceive. OPS is far more revealing.

But really, guys. Who are the catchers whose throwing we clearly mis-evaluate by looking at their caught stealing percentage?

As for the Nen and Lincecum examples, if we judged a catcher ONLY by his percentage with those guys on the mound, yes, we would stand a high chance of mis-evaluating them. But we judge them by their overall percentage with ALL the pitchers they catch. If we're a little wiser than most, we then compare that percentage to league average. And if we're really on top of it, we then compared that percentage to that of the catcher's backups.

But coming back to the root of the question: How many catchers with a good-sized sample do we mis-evaluate by looking at their caught stealing percentages? If the stat were truly misleading, it would be a fairly high percentage of catchers. Please point them out to us.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2195/catchers-era?page=1&scrollTo=19042#ixzz2ujmTengL

[klaiggeb]

Rob--But really, guys. Who are the catchers whose throwing we clearly mis-evaluate by looking at their caught stealing percentage?

As for the Nen and Lincecum examples, if we judged a catcher ONLY by his percentage with those guys on the mound, yes, we would stand a high chance of mis-evaluating them. But we judge them by their overall percentage with ALL the pitchers they catch. If we're a little wiser than most, we then compare that percentage to league average. And if we're really on top of it, we then compared that percentage to that of the catcher's backups.

But coming back to the root of the question: How many catchers with a good-sized sample do we mis-evaluate by looking at their caught stealing percentages? If the stat were truly misleading, it would be a fairly high percentage of catchers. Please point them out to us.

---boly says----

Rog, I did that in my answer to Boagie, but I'll summerize it again.

1-I believe it's an misleading stat
2-I believe it's an over misleading because it doesn't take into account "who" is on the mound
Thus, even a great arm looks average or below average when the guy on the mound is incredibly slow to the plate like Nenn or Lincecum
3-I didn't say it was a USELESS stat, I agreed with Boagie that it was MISLEADING. Nothing more.
4-A catcher with a good to great arm has a lower 'caught stealing' percentage when his staff has 1 or more guys whose delivery to the plate moves at the speed of fudge.

Rog, you're totally taking Boagies statement, and my response out of the context in which it was made.

You're talking about "overall performance" by a catcher and that is NOT the point either of was making.

I contend it's misleading because of my summary above.

Now, to answer your question. Posey's % caught looks down because he catches Bumgarner and Lincecum.

boly

[Rog]

We don't really disagree here. Looking back, I see that Boagie DIDN'T say the caught stealing stat was useless. What he said was that I was misrepresenting the stat. I think when he said that, his focus was too narrow.

I have mentioned the aspect of preventing base stealers, especially with regard to Yadier Molina. The same thing can happen to some extent if a pitcher is particularly good at holding runs on and picking them off.

I have spoken of comparing catchers' caught stealing percentages to league average and also to comparing a catcher's percentage with his backups'. So we should look at these things to get as much of the true picture as we can:

. How a catcher's caught stealing percentage compares to league average.

. How it compares to the catchers' backups.

. The same things using steal attempts per inning, which helps show us the deterence of a catcher's throwing.


I would guess though that there is an inverse correlation between caught stealing percentage and attempts against. Why do I think that?

If you've got Yadier Molina behind the plate, you WANT most runners to try to steal against him. They're successful only 55% of the time, which means on average they're HURTING their team by attempting to steal.

If you've got Mike Piazza behind the plate, you HATE having runners try to steal, since he was only half as likely to throw them out as Yadier is.

I have asked a direct question here. No one has yet answered it. The question I have asked is which catchers play today or have played previously whose caught stealing percentages are misleading of their ability to throw out runners?

We don't need to know, for instance, how many times runners attempted to steal against Piazza, Posey and Yadier to know how good their arms were. It's obvious that Piazza's was poor, that Molina's is excellent and that Buster is in between the two and very likely above average.

So again, who are the catchers out there with whom we are mislead by their caught stealing percentage?

I'm going to draw Matt Wieters out of the hat. Wieters is considered to be excellent at throwing runners out, perhaps the best in the American League. Want to bet his career caught stealing percentage is somewhere around 40%, plus or minus a little bit? I'm going to make a guess of 38% or 39%. I could be wrong here -- but I doubt it's by a lot. Let's take a look.

Actually, I'm off by more than I thought. He's at only 33%. He was at 39% in 2012, but that was for only one season. I guess he doesn't throw quite as well as I thought.

Still, when we see his actual 33% compared to a league average 26%, it's clear he's prety good. I doubt very much that we're deceived by the percentage.

His sample is small, but I'm going to take a look at the percentage for the Kansas City catcher. In the little I have seen of him, he looks like one HECK of a thrower, maybe not all that far off Molina, at least as far as potential goes.

Well, Salvador Perez's percentage last season was 35%. That compares with a 26% league average and a similar percentage by his teammates. Maybe Perez isn't quite as good yet as I think he is, maybe the small sample (one season) doesn't properly represent, or maybe the very small sample I have seen of his work shows one of the weaknesses of scouting.

But I doubt very much that his 35% caught stealing percentage compared to a league average of 26% is misleading. You are right that runners don't atttempt to steal against him much, and that is one of several things we should consider. But I think the 35% caught stealing percentage compared to league average doesn't mislead us by much.

How about the catcher for the Reds? Ryan Hannigan is considered to be quite good at throwing. And his career 40% and his league-leading 45% in last season (he also led in 2012) show he is indeed pretty darn good. And runners don't try to steal against him much.

Would you agree that caught stealing percentage and how often a catcher is run against are to a great extent flip sides of the same coin? I think for catchers with a good sample size, EITHER tells us a lot about a catcher's arm.

Again, which catcher's stealing percentage misleads us by a lot? I think we are really all on pretty close pages here. I am looking at the cup as being half full, while you guys are looking at the cup as being half empty. You're worried about the little caught stealing percentage DOESNT'T show us, while I'm impressed by how MUCH it shows us. We all realize it's not perfect and that we need to have numbers to compare it to.

I believe that caught stealing percentage in an appropriately large sample isn't often misleading, at least not by much. If you guys disagree, just let us know the many examples in which it is.

I don't think that is the case with any of Piazza, Posey, Molina (probably none of the three), Perez, Wieters or Hanigan. I'm open though to those in whose case it is. I think Perez's is pretty informative even though his sample is very small.


Remember -- flip sides of the same coin. Aren't they?

[islandboagie]

We've already mentioned how the Giants pitchers lack of holding runners on has effected Posey's caught stealing %. Why do we have to give other examples to prove the stat can be somewhat misleading? It's already been proven.

On to your other point. I agree, there is a correlation between how often runners run and how good the catcher is at throwing.

Buster is in a different situation though. I dont think the decision to send the runner is based on Posey's %. It's more based on the pitcher on the mound who isnt holding the runner close.

I think if you ask the managers around baseball what they feel about Posey's ability to throw runners out when given a chance to do so, I think you'd find that Buster is likely near the top of throwers. Much more so than his % would indicate.

[klaiggeb]

--boagie---Buster is in a different situation though. I dont think the decision to send the runner is based on Posey's %. It's more based on the pitcher on the mound who isnt holding the runner close.

I think if you ask the managers around baseball what they feel about Posey's ability to throw runners out when given a chance to do so, I think you'd find that Buster is likely near the top of throwers. Much more so than his % would indicate.

---boly says----

Bingo! Your last two sentences sum it up perfectly, Boagie!

It's what I've been saying all along; it doesn't matter how good your catcher's arm is IF... IF the guys on the mound make little to no effort, or simply can't hold a runner on first to at least an average level.

boly

[donk33]

Mar 3, 2014 13:33:14 GMT -5 klaiggeb said:

--boagie---Buster is in a different situation though. I dont think the decision to send the runner is based on Posey's %. It's more based on the pitcher on the mound who isnt holding the runner close.

I think if you ask the managers around baseball what they feel about Posey's ability to throw runners out when given a chance to do so, I think you'd find that Buster is likely near the top of throwers. Much more so than his % would indicate.

---boly says----

Bingo! Your last two sentences sum it up perfectly, Boagie!

It's what I've been saying all along; it doesn't matter how good your catcher's arm is IF... IF the guys on the mound make little to no effort, or simply can't hold a runner on first to at least an average level.

boly

dk...there is one problem with your analysis, Giants' pitchers picked off 14 runners last year and they count towards Posey's CS%...at least that is what I read....I'm sure that Rog can verify or correct my memory....Posey has a strong arm, but he gets into ruts where his throws veer off towards right field...

[klaiggeb]

dk...there is one problem with your analysis, Giants' pitchers picked off 14 runners last year and they count towards Posey's CS%...at least that is what I read....I'm sure that Rog can verify or correct my memory....Posey has a strong arm, but he gets into ruts where his throws veer off towards right field...

---boly says--

Right on all points, Don.

And many (most?) of the runners picked off were picked off, I believe, by Bumgarner.

boly

[Rog]

Boagie -- We've already mentioned how the Giants pitchers lack of holding runners on has effected Posey's caught stealing %. Why do we have to give other examples to prove the stat can be somewhat misleading? It's already been proven.

Rog -- How has it been proven? Don makes just the opposite point, showing how many of the caught stealings Buster has been credited with have resulted from pickoffs.

I don't understand how you think you have proven that Buster is a better thrower than his percentage indicates. How did you prove this?

Boagie -- On to your other point. I agree, there is a correlation between how often runners run and how good the catcher is at throwing.

Rog -- Which tends to show us that judging a catcher on his caught stealing percentage without considering how he limits the opponents' running attempts isn't all that big a deal. It's nice to know both things, as well as how they compare to league average and how they compare to the catcher's own backups (which helps us factor in the effects of how effective the pitchers are in holding runners). The more information we have, the better.

But I haven't yet seen anyone point out the catchers whose caught stealing percentages give us an opinion of a catcher's throwing that is way off base. If caught stealing isn't that valid a measure, it should be easy to come up with example after example.

Boagie -- Buster is in a different situation though. I dont think the decision to send the runner is based on Posey's %. It's more based on the pitcher on the mound who isnt holding the runner close.

Rog -- Don't disagree at all with that analysis. Which is why I like to compare how often runners go against Buster with how often they go against his backups. Pretty much every factor I have been able to find shows that Buster is better than his backup group in just about every way.

Boagie -- I think if you ask the managers around baseball what they feel about Posey's ability to throw runners out when given a chance to do so, I think you'd find that Buster is likely near the top of throwers. Much more so than his % would indicate.

Rog -- I'm not so sure about that. Buster's caught stealing percentage is well above average and even higher compared to his backups. My guess is that Buster would be rated around the bottom of the first quartile in throwing. Just a guess on my part.

Here is what I can tell you: Fan Graphs does a poll of the fans. (Which I have participated in and you are able to, as well. I'll guide as to how if you would like.) On a scale of 1-100, they have Buster at 79 for release, 78 for arm strength and 75 for accuracy.

Yadier Molina scores 97, 92 and 96. Matt Wieters scores 88, 87 and 86. Ryan Hanigan scores 80, 70 and 72. (I'm surprised he didn't score higher, although he's pretty close to Buster's scores.)

Jonathan Lucroy scores 60, 51 and 56, so Buster is clearly rated higher. Salvador Perez scores 88, 87 and 86. Russell Martin scores 65, 62 and 58. Again, Buster is ranked clearly better.

The fans who watch the players think highly of Buster, but I don't think they rank him much if any above the bottom of the top quartile.

Believe me, I think highly of Buster's catching. I have pointed out that he gets the job done pretty well. I think he ranks well above average. But I don't think he has yet reached his potential.

I know some here don't like Buster's blocking technique, but he gets results, and that might even be his best skill. Think how great Buster might become at ball blocking if he ever gets his technique down.


Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2195/catchers-era#ixzz2uyEOgZTq

[Rog]

Boagie -- I think if you ask the managers around baseball what they feel about Posey's ability to throw runners out when given a chance to do so, I think you'd find that Buster is likely near the top of throwers. Much more so than his % would indicate.

---boly says----

Bingo! Your last two sentences sum it up perfectly, Boagie!

It's what I've been saying all along; it doesn't matter how good your catcher's arm is IF... IF the guys on the mound make little to no effort, or simply can't hold a runner on first to at least an average level.

Rog -- I wish I had access to what I'll call Buster's PURE caught stealing percentage. That is his percentage not including pickoffs where the runner tries to advance to the next base and yet despite the pickoff, the catcher gets credit for the caught stealing (just as he gets "credit" for the stolen base if the runner is fast enough to make it safely). Madison Bumgarner in particular had a lot of pickoffs IIRC.

I think we might be overestimating how high Buster's throwing is evaluated by managers (who may not be right anyway, since they see Buster play only occasionally).

Let's take a look at the statistics. Buster's caught stealing percentage is clearly above average, although there are quite a few ahead of it. Perhaps it is because of the balancing effect of the pickoffs, but I don't think Buster's throwing is too much better than his caught stealing percentage would indicate. Don is right that Buster gets into periods when his throw sail toward the right field side of the bag. If one looks, one can even see Buster's disappointment when he gets into that situation. I'm sure he works hard to break the trend, and eventually he does so.

Now, I think some here take the OPPOSITE stance with regard to Buster's ball blocking. They seem so overwhelmed by his lack of technique that they seem to ignore that he just doesn't allow many balls to get to the backstop. Oft times his worst technique shows up with no one on base, when it doesn't really matter anyway.

Are we to believe that Buster's numbers lie against him in throwing and yet argue too much on his behalf when it comes to passed balls and wild pitches? Are we being guilty here of seeing what we want to see?

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2195/catchers-era#ixzz2uySHnZuO

[Rog]

dk...there is one problem with your analysis, Giants' pitchers picked off 14 runners last year and they count towards Posey's CS%...at least that is what I read....I'm sure that Rog can verify or correct my memory....Posey has a strong arm, but he gets into ruts where his throws veer off towards right field...

---boly says--

Right on all points, Don.

And many (most?) of the runners picked off were picked off, I believe, by Bumgarner.

Rog -- I'm getting more and more confused here as we go on. Buster gets extra credit for many of the Giants' pickoffs, yet his percentage -- somewhat inflated by the pickoffs -- isn't high enough to show how his throwing really is?

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2195/catchers-era?page=1&scrollTo=19057#ixzz2uyUmXpbC

[klaiggeb]

dk...there is one problem with your analysis, Giants' pitchers picked off 14 runners last year and they count towards Posey's CS%...at least that is what I read....I'm sure that Rog can verify or correct my memory....Posey has a strong arm, but he gets into ruts where his throws veer off towards right field...

---boly says--

Right on all points, Don.

And many (most?) of the runners picked off were picked off, I believe, by Bumgarner.

Rog -- I'm getting more and more confused here as we go on. Buster gets extra credit for many of the Giants' pickoffs, yet his percentage -- somewhat inflated by the pickoffs -- isn't high enough to show how his throwing really is?

---boly says----

That's not what we're saying, Rog. No one is giving Buster credit for that.

The point is this complicated and this simple; "Caught stealing % is a misleading stat."

Nothing more, nothing less.

boly

[Rog]

Boly -- That's not what we're saying, Rog. No one is giving Buster credit for that.

The point is this complicated and this simple; "Caught stealing % is a misleading stat."

Nothing more, nothing less.

Rog -- No one has answered the key question here: Who are the many catchers whose caught stealing percentage is very misleading?

As for HOW it can be misleading, there are at least a couple such factors:

. I thought Don brought up the best one in that the catcher's caught stealing percentage misleadingly is affected by his pitchers' pickoffs. I have found in the past what I'll call "pure" caught stealing percentage -- not including the pickoffs -- but right off the top of my head, I'm not quite sure where.

. The pitchers he's catching clearly have an effect. Catching runners stealing is a team effort.

That said, I haven't seen any catchers whose caught stealing percentage appears to give us a distorted look at his throwing. Especially in a large sample, things seem to even out somewhat.

You have said, Boly, that "Caught stealing % is a misleading stat. Nothing more, nothing less." Who are the catchers with whom we are signinicantly mislead?

I guess you would use Buster as an example. But his caught stealing compared to league average shows him to be clearly above average, and his caught stealing percentage compared to his backups shows an even more impressive picture. Isn't that kind of where Buster is right now -- clearly above average but not among the very best?

I'm guessing a scout would give Buster something like a 60-65 score on the 20-80 scouting range. Yadier Molina would likely receive something in the 70-80 range. Is that how you see it?

If we are fairly close to agreeing here, isn't that kind of what Yadier's 45% caught stealing and Buster's 32% caught stealing compared to 28% league average indicate? It indicates Buster is clearly above average, while Yadier is a Super Star thrower.

Runners have attempted to steal once every 18.8 innings against Molina. They have attempted to steal once every 9.5 innings against Buster. They have attempted to steal once every 7.8 innings against Hector Sanchez and his 24% caught stealing percentage.

I'm not sure any of those numbers contribute to misjudging the throwing of each catcher.

I'm open to an opposing point of view. I simply need to see a bunch of catchers whose throwing skills we truly misjudge by looking at their caught stealing percentages. Who are those catchers, and what convinces us we are misjudging them?

I think caught stealing percentage helps us a lot more than it hurts us in evaluating a catcher's throwing on steal attempts. I'm open to evidence to the contrary, but where is it?



Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2195/catchers-era#ixzz2v0qXUctO

[islandboagie]

Rog -- No one has answered the key question here: Who are the many catchers whose caught stealing percentage is very misleading?

As for HOW it can be misleading, there are at least a couple such factors:

Boagie- I only watch Posey and Sanchez enough to give an opinion that might differ from the stats. I have given you a very solid reason why Posey's % is lower than what I believe it could be.

I can also give you a few hypothetical situations.

Let's say there's a young catcher who is decent at throwing out runners, he makes it to the big league level and cuts down the first runner trying to steal. His % would be 100%. Does that mean he's instantly the best in the game? No. But his % would certainly indicate that he is.

Now let's pretend there's a catcher for a rotation full of soft throwers. Do you think his % of throwing out runners would be accurate to his ability? Obviously not.

CLEARLY there are many situations where the % would not be accurate. And CLEARLY you will keep asking the same question over and over until people get sick of it and stop reposting.

We've answered the question, you just dont like the answer even though its perfectly reasonable, because it proves the stats you spew on an everyday basis are flawed.

[Rog]

Boagie- I only watch Posey and Sanchez enough to give an opinion that might differ from the stats. I have given you a very solid reason why Posey's % is lower than what I believe it could be.

I can also give you a few hypothetical situations.

Let's say there's a young catcher who is decent at throwing out runners, he makes it to the big league level and cuts down the first runner trying to steal. His % would be 100%. Does that mean he's instantly the best in the game? No. But his % would certainly indicate that he is.

Rog -- I'm shocked that you would say that, Boagie. You're using the smallest possible sample to make a point? That's more what Don does. (Sorry, Don.) Really, I'm shocked. That outdoes your comments on Carlos Beltran.

Stop and think about your statement here and see if you wouldn't like to pretend you never posted it. It's almost as bad as saying a baby lived through its first day, therefore it will live forever. The logic is similar IMO.

Or how about, a pitcher throws a strike on his first pitch. He has the greatest control ever.


Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2195/catchers-era#ixzz2v4cj4LBm

[Rog]

Boagie -- Now let's pretend there's a catcher for a rotation full of soft throwers. Do you think his % of throwing out runners would be accurate to his ability? Obviously not.

Rog -- Let's cut through the diatribe. Who are the catchers with a good sample size whose caught stealing percentage makes us badly misjudge their throwing?

Just answer that question and back it up with good reasons for the many we would misjudge. Please.


Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2195/catchers-era?page=1#scrollTo=19083#ixzz2v4e9V5Yu

[Rog]

To clarify a point Don made and I commented on, I believe a catcher receives credit for a caught stealing on a pickoff by the pitcher only when the runner tries to advance after being picked off. If he is simply caught going back to the bag, I don't believe that is applied to the catcher's record.

[Rog]

No question Buster's caught stealing percentage is hurt by catching Tim Lincecum, but just for fun, let's look at how Buster has fared with the other Giants' pitchers.

Madison Bumgarner -- Buster has allowed 43 steals in 60 attempts. That's 28% caught stealing. His backups have allowed 12 steals in 25 attempts. That's 52% caught stealing.

Barry Zito -- Buster has allowed 16 steals in 25 attempts (36% CS). Other Giants catchers have allowed 46 in 80 attempts (45% CS).

Matt Cain -- Buster has allowed 42 steals in 62 attempts (32% CS). Other Giants catchers have allowed 78 in 114 attempts (32% CS).

Ryan Vogelsong -- Buster has allowed 12 steals in 28 attempts (43% CS). Other Giants catchers have allowed 11 steals in 15 attempts (27% CS).

If we add the four primary starters not named Tim Lincecum during Buster's career, Buster has thrown out 36% of the attempted steal attempts. The other Giants catchers have thrown out 37%.

If we look at the Giants' catchers with the other four starters besides Lincecum, they actually fare slightly BETTER than Buster. I'm wondering if I've got something slightly wrong with these stats, but the point is that Buster actually fares BETTER without Lincecum in the mix compared to the other Giants' catchers than he does when Tim is included. Tim makes it tough to throw out a high percentage of runners, but it appears the other Giant' starters actually help him.

Some staffs are easier to throw out runners with than others, but the larger the sample, the more things even out.

Looking at how Buster fares when catching Lincecum, he has thrown out 15% compared to 22% for the Giants' other catchers. As we look more closely at Buster's caught stealing stats by pitcher, it tends to make him look WORSE, not better.

This isn't exactly what I was hoping to learn, but I once again thank you guys for challenging my opinions. In this case, I learned that Don has been closer to the truth than I have given him credit for when it comes to Buster's throwing and that I have been closer than others.

I would like to do even more study here, but based on what I'm seeing, I'm going to have to lower my evaluation of Buster's throwing from the bottom of the first quartile to somewhere in the 2nd. Now I feel that Buster's throwing has been even FURTHER from his potential.

It is revealing that as one does a better and better job of analyzing stats, he very likely gets a clearer and clearer picture of what is really happening.

[Rog]

Boagie -- We've answered the question, you just dont like the answer even though its perfectly reasonable, because it proves the stats you spew on an everyday basis are flawed.



Rog -- I like your logic here, Boagie. You have proven my stats wrong because they disagree with your point of view, which you view as reasonable. Makes a lot of sense to me.



The more deeply I look in to this -- and correct me if you can find something wrong with the stats I used -- the FURTHER off base you appear to be.



Let's not forget that stats are FACTS. They can be misstated or misinterpreted, but they are FACTS. In order to refute them, you need to show that they are indeed misstated or have indeed been misinterpreted. When you make a statement that your point of view is reasonable, you aren't refuting the facts.



Often, statements are reasonable -- but wrong.



Once again I will ask you: About which sizable group of catchers are we fooled by their caught stealing percentage? If you are unable to answer that -- and the how and why of the ways in which we are being misled -- you're speaking only hypothetically.



You have said that you have proven the stats wrong, but you haven't stated HOW you have proven them wrong or identified the significant group for which they mislead us.



The proof is in the pudding. Go for it!



Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2195/catchers-era##ixzz2v4vw7J00

[islandboagie]

I never said CS% was completely inaccurate. I just said it wasn't totally accurate. I think the pitcher's ability or inability to hold runners on plays a large part in the catcher's CS%.

I loved Bengie Molina, but during his last season with us teams (most notably the Padres) were running all over us because our pitchers weren't holding runners on and Bengie was slow out of the croutch. When Buster came teams stopped feeling free to run all the time.

Which led me to believe that the amount of times teams run on a catcher should be also be an indication of how good a catcher is at throwing out runners.

We compared Posey and Piazza, their % was different, but not drastically different. However, the amount of attempts against Posey vs. Piazza was drastic.

Considering this comparison, I believe the better measure is in fact the amount of attempts, rather than the CS%, because I believe the difference defensively between Posey and Piazza is drastic.

That was the point I was trying to make from the beginning. Take it or leave it.

[Rog]

Boagie -- I never said CS% was completely inaccurate. I just said it wasn't totally accurate. I think the pitcher's ability or inability to hold runners on plays a large part in the catcher's CS%.

Rog -- As with most factors in the game, I think it is important to understand the things that could affect a stat such as catcher's CS%. Comparing to league average is pretty easy, as both the individual catcher's percentage and the league average are available at Baseball-Reference. Comparing to the other catchers on the team takes more effort, but it does add an extra dimension.

I learned from the comments of you and Boly that Buster's CS% understated his throwing ability to look further into how the catcher performs with the individual pitchers compared to his backstops. Much to my chagrin as well as your's and Boly's, I am finding that much of Buster's advantage over his teammates in CS% is because he has caught a lower percentage of his games with Tim Lincecum on the mound.

Don has overdone it in his constant criticism of Buster IMO, but I agree with him that Buster does enter periods when his throws sail to the first base side of second. When commenting about how it hurts a catcher's percentage to catch someone like Lincecum, you guys are right on the money. That said, other catchers also have to catch guys who don't hold runners on. Over time things tend to even out a bit.

I'm still waiting for the long list of catchers whose throwing we grossly misjudge by looking at caught stealing percentage (especially when it is analyzed as I have suggested).

Buster threw a 94 mph fastball as a closer in college. He's got plenty of arm. His release too seems pretty good. He just needs to keep from sometimes flying out his front side, causing his throws to sail.

I believe Buster is a pretty good catcher. I think he's excellent at pitch calling. I think despite his technique flaws, he's very good at blocking pitches. I think his infielding experience helps him on some other situations, although I think it also occasionally increases his chance of making a risky play. The fact that he hasn't been catching all his life and may not have some factors yet coming as naturally as they might to other catchers probably doesn't help him.

It's funny though that overall I hold his throwing in less esteem than many others here and yet like his ball blocking better than some of the same observers. Funny too that Buster has the strong throwing arm but sometimes technique gets in the way, while he seems to overcome his poor technique in ball-blocking.

Buster isn't Yadier Molina. Not all that close yet. But he has the tools, he has the smarts, and he seems to have the work ethic. I don't know that his catching will ever quite match his hitting, but I do believe he can become an excellent catcher. I would say he's already good to very good.


Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2195/catchers-era#ixzz2v8Y0pX51

[Rog]

Boagie -- We compared Posey and Piazza, their % was different, but not drastically different. However, the amount of attempts against Posey vs. Piazza was drastic.

Rog -- I'm not so sure about that. When a runner attempted to steal, Buster has been 39% more likely to throw him out than Mike was. Meanwhile, runners have been 28% more likely to steal against Mike than against Buster. There is actually more difference in their CS% than in their attempts against, but the two are reasonably close.

Remember, CS% and SB rate are pretty much flip sides of the same coin.

Still waiting for that long list of catchers we badly misjudge by using their CS%.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/2195/catchers-era?page=1#scrollTo=19110#ixzz2v8cifVTa