Annual Post

[sfgdood]

You are going to see me reprise this same post every offseason until either:

A) Belt finally lives up to his considerable talent; or

B) The Giants finally do what I've been asking...trade Belt and move Buster to 1st base full time.

Look you all know I was FIRMLY on Belt's side when he first came up. I defended him profusely. But really, how long do we need to wait to see him dominate? I mean in terms of his production, he's not a BAD first baseman...I'm not saying that. He's actually been pretty good. But with the boneheaded plays, the concussion problems and the long slumps, he's just a guy who happens to play first base...nothing really that special.

Buster is our meal ticket. He needs to be protected. I'm sick of seeing his power disappear late in the year. I'm sick of seeing him take all sorts of punishment behind the plate and worrying to death that another Scott Cousins is going to lay him out. I'm not saying Susac will hit as good as Belt has...I'm saying that when you factor in Buster being healthy and strong all year, the lineup will overall be better.

And we might just be able to get something great in return for Belt.

[Rog]

It will be intriguing to see if Buster's long run at first base after Brandon Belt's last injury has meaning. My guess is that it doesn't.

That might also have had something to do with seeing if the Giants had enough to back up Buster that they could trade Susac. Or maybe Buster was a little banged up.

Buster's innings behind the plate in 2015 were slightly down from 2014, but the big change -- as far as it went -- was his 100-inning drop from 2013 to 2014.

I'm not worried about a big collision with a runner at home plate, but I am worried about the collision of a ball at the plate. You likely remember, Randy, when Buster was hit by a pitch for San Jose and missed a week. So we know he's had at least one concussion.

We also know that Buster's wife would prefer he not play behind the plate but that Buster and the Giants do. (That should make the debate about even!)

As for Brandon Belt, he may make some gaffes, but he's a very good player. His problem has been injuries. It's a shame that Marco Scutaro's throw hit him in the head when he was fielding a different throw in pre-game warmups. I thought Brandon would have a breakout season in 2015, but he didn't. Would he if not for injury? I guess we'll never know.

But he still had a very nice season. His .834 OPS was second on the team, just behind Buster Posey's .849. In essence, Belt hit just about as well as the best catcher in baseball. That's not great for a first baseman, but as Randy said, it's pretty darn good.

Brandon is also a very good fielder at first base and stole 9 bases in 12 attempts. He grounded into only three double plays. I'm guessing on this one, but I'll bet he had more bases per out than anyone on the team. And that's what hitting is all about. Accumulating bases while not making outs.

Could Brandon play left field? Pretty sure he could, but pretty sure he shouldn't. He's an excellent first baseman, whereas he would likely be below average in left field. He has plenty of arm for the outfield (he was originally a pitcher in college), but his speed is average and his gait is awkward.

So how well did Brandon play despite the injury? He was worth about four games, which likely put him in the top 10 or 15 first basemen. If he had remained healthy, he might have gotten up around five wins, which is very, very good.

I realize Brandon hasn't been as good as I in particular had hoped. I realize he makes mistakes. I also realize he's a darn good player.

Now, the Giants could trade him. He's got another two seasons before he's eligible for free agency, so he's very tradeable. But unless it's for a specific reason, it's usually not good to trade less expensive players. Brandon was worth more than a win per million dollars of salary last season. The average win from free agents costs close to 10 times more.

Whether we trade Belt or keep him, let's get off his figurative back. The guy has been a very good player, and he's done it despite being called up too soon and then suffering a rash of injuries. If every Giant were as good as Brandon, they would have made the playoffs. In fact, they would likely be as good as any team around.

[Rog]

Both Buster Posey and Brandon Belt are among the best at their positions. Moving Buster to first base and Belt to left field would hurt three positions defensively. Probably not a good idea.

[klaiggeb]

I think Buster's shown he can be quite good at 1B.

And from what I've seen of Belt in the OF? He ain't no Pat Burrell; resident stegasauris outfielder.

he may not be Gregor Blanco either, but he can be better than average, and we could sub for him late if needed.

I've said the same thing before. I'll say it again. Move Belt to LF, and Posey to 1B.


Randy's right; I'm sick and tired of watching Posey's power vanish down the stretch.

boly

boly

[Islandboagie]

Boly- And from what I've seen of Belt in the OF? He ain't no Pat Burrell; resident stegasauris outfielder.

Boagie- Burrell didn't have much range as he got older, but he still played the position well. Belt COULD learn to be good, but right now he doesn't get a good jump, he doesn't read the ball well, he's not good.

[Rog]

I'm sick and tired of watching Posey's power vanish down the stretch.


Rog -- Would it shock you to know that September is the month in which Buster has hit the most home runs? And that May is the month in which he has hit the least?

Here is something that might surprise you as much. Buster has hit a homer once every 28 at bats as a catcher. He's homered once every 27 at bats as a first baseman. And he's homered once every 25 at bats as a designated hitter. Darn near identical in each situation. (He's never homered in 21 pinch hitting at bats.)

Buster has hit for a much higher average and OPS as a first baseman, although those figures are lower when he is the DH. Would I play him at first base?

Pros:

. He hits better as a first baseman. Some of this may because he bats more often against southpaws when he fills in for Belt at the position, and he crushes southpaws.

. To me the most important reason is to take him out of harm's way. Concussions are huge these days.


Cons:

. He's a clearly better catcher than first baseman, although he's improving at the initial hassock.

. The Giants like his leadership behind the plate.

. The Giants' pitchers like pitching to him.

. Buster likes catching.

. The Giants are a better team with Posey and Belt than they are with Posey and Susac.


To a degree, it might make sense to platoon Belt with Susac, allowing Buster to move back and forth between positions. Brandon has a healthy .783 OPS against southpaws, but Andrew crushes them to a .898 clip. Andrew hasn't learned to hit major league right-handers yet, carrying only a .202 average against them.





Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3108/annual-post#ixzz3pk3o6Cvx

[rxmeister]

We've had this argument too many times. Nothing will ever change my mind. Good hitting catchers are a rarity. Good hitting first basemen are a dime a dozen. We have the best hitting catcher in the game and you want to make him into what would be probably the tenth best hitting first baseman. Meanwhile we have a more than competent first baseman and you prefer to bench him in favor of an unproven kid who hit .202 this past season. When Susac looked like a decent hitter coming off 2014 this argument had a drop of water. Now it's the Sahara desert with no oasis in sight. How many teams have good hitting catchers or shortstops? The Giants are blessed to have both, and not only that, they're both Gold Glove candidates as well. It makes no sense to create question marks when you don't have any. I'll take a .300 hitting Buster at catcher in September and not worry about the power loss. There's other HR hitters in the lineup, one of them being Belt

[Rog]

Nicely summed up, Mark.

The only real reason to switch Buster's position at this point would be health. He's the Giants' best player, and he's playing the most dangerous position on the field.

Over the past decade, two Giants' catchers in particular have been badly injured with concussions. Mike Matheny had to retire from them. Hector Sanchez seems barely able to stay on the field. Buster himself has suffered at least one concussion, although it came as a batter at San Jose.

Why have concussions become such a much bigger issue of late? Much of it, of course, is recognition. A lot of it too is likely because pitchers throw harder and batters swing harder, meaning foul tips hit the catcher harder.

Coming back to the Giants' catcher/first base situation: Barring a trade of Susac, which seems a true possiblity this winter, the solution seems pretty obvious. As long as he avoids head hits, Buster is going to play primarily behind the plate the next several seasons. The guy who finally takes his place behind the plate is as likely to be Aramis Garcia as Susac.

Garcia played at Low A Augusta this past season and is a 2nd-round draft pick (as was Susac) in 2014 I believe it was.

So this season the Giants should play Susac some against southpaws, where even in his poor 2015 season he hit for an .824 OPS. Belt then either sits or plays left field, although the Giants already have two left-handed hitters we'd rather see there. The Giants have tremendous depth.

You know what though? Despite their rotation woes, they were a better pitching team than hitting team. The Giants scored a tenth of a run more than the major league average. That's decent. They allowed four-tenths of a run less. That's easily at a postseason level.

This strongly supports the position that it was the Giants' injuries, not their rotation, that was the primary cause of their missing the postseason. If the Giants hadn't had all the injuries, they likely would have hit at the level of a postseason team, and their pitching would have been even more so. Despite their issues, both in terms of strength and injuries, the rotation wasn't all that bad.

[Rog]

We have pretty conclusive evidence that the Giants' rotation wasn't their biggest problem. Their rotation finished 11th in the majors in ERA. Their offense finished 13th in the majors in runs scored.

As it turns out, the offense -- which has received kudos here -- was a bigger problem than the rotation. And it seems likely that neither would have been a big issue if the Giants had stayed healthy.

Putting the rotation over injuries as the Giants' biggest problem in 2015 overlooks the facts.

[Rog]

Saying that the rotation WASN'T the Giants' biggest problem doesn't mean not to go all out to improve it. Lincecum, Hudson and Vogelsong may be gone, Heston may have pitched over his head, and aside from Bumgarner, the Giants didn't have a single good, healthy starter last season.

I'll bet ten or so free agent starting pitchers will have good seasons next year. Part of the problem though is that not one in a hundred might be able to pick every one of the ten, which makes it a little tough on the GM's. Some of the top teams, including the Giants, have the most money to spend on starting pitching, which gives them the best chance to succeed.

I'm sure we'd all love a rotation of Price, Bumgarner, Leake, Peavy and Cain. That's two Cy Young winners and a combined 14 All-Star teams. I'm guessing the winner will be Dallas Keuchel, but it's possible Price will win another Cy Young this year. Or the Giants could "settle" for the likely NL winner, Zack Greinke.

We've talked about how strong the starting pitching free agency crop is this season. Four of the top seven ERA leaders in the AL are free agents, including the leader himself (Price). The NL leader (Greinke) is also available.

Incidentally, Leake finished #21 in the NL in ERA. Madison Bumgarner was 9th. Jake Peavy would have ranked 18th if he had reached the required number of innings. Even Tim Lincecum would have tied for 32nd. The Giants' team ERA would have tied for 26th.

The Giants' rotation just wasn't that bad. Who knows? If the hitters had hit as well as the rotation had pitched, the Giants might have made the postseason. Seems really strange to say that, doesn't it? And given that the Giants played in a pitchers' park, it's probably not very accurate either.

And also shows that the rotation wasn't quite as good as the pure numbers indicated. So I take back several of my statements here. I do feel strongly though that injuries were the Giants' biggest problem, not the rotation.

We can easily see that the Giants' chances of making the playoffs would have been greater if they had remained healthy than if they had signed say Jon Lester. The Giants missed 2/3rds of a season from Hunter Pence and a third of a season from Joe Panik. That alone likely have a similar impact to not having Lester at all. And we haven't even considered here the time missed by Peavy, Lincecum, Hudson, Susac, Belt, Aoki and Blanco.

It's possible that simply having the full rotation healthy for the entire season could have had as much positive impact as having Lester, although it seems unlikely that either occurrence would have been enough.

The two factors that hurt the Giants the most were injuries and not sequencing their runs better. Remember, the Giants won five fewer games than they should have based on their +69 run differential.

Maybe that's because their team chemistry leader, Pence, was out so much. More likely though, it was just the vagaries of baseball.

[sfgdood]

It doesn't do you much good to have a great hitting catcher if he gets taken out by a dirty slide or has his career interrupted or ended by chronic concussions like Mike Matheny did. And as I have pointed out constantly, with the severe power drought we have seen late in recent years, Buster has been pretty ordinary after 4 months of getting beaten up behind the plate.

[Rog]

as I have pointed out constantly, with the severe power drought we have seen late in recent years, Buster has been pretty ordinary after 4 months of getting beaten up behind the plate.

Rog -- Buster Posey Career Stats:

1st Half .304/.370/.478/.849

2nd Half .318/.380/.490/.871

April .281/.360/.472/.832

May .295/.367/.421/.788

June .324/.376/.511/.887

July .343/.396/.526/.923

August .317/.377/.480/.857

September .300/.373/.492/.865


Bases per hit:

1st Half 1.57

2nd Half 1.54

April 1.68

May 1.43

June 1.58

July 1.53

August 1.52

September 1.64


It appears that Buster tires out in April and May. Must be the tough winter spent with his wife and kids.



Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3108/annual-post#ixzz3q0bdduWW

[sfgdood]

2014 postseason...# of extra base hits - 0

2015...Pre AS Break - 14 HRs, Post AS Break - 5 HRs

[Rog]

2014 postseason...# of extra base hits - 0

2015...Pre AS Break - 14 HRs, Post AS Break - 5 HRs


Rog -- I just love the way foolish people try to use small samples to overcome career numbers.

As I have often said, numbers don't lie -- but they can be poorly interpreted. You have fallen guilty to just such a trap, Randy. A year ago you were citing Pablo's career stats, while overlooking that they were declining year by year since 2011. There were three years of consistent decline, something you shouldn't have overlooked.

In the Buster Posey instance, you are using one postseason (automatically a small sample) and one season out of six to justify your point. This past season you used only home runs while ignoring that Buster hit .400 in July, .312 in August and .304 in September.

You did use recent seasons, but you didn't mention, for instance, that July, August, and September of 2014 were three of his top four months of the season. You didn't mention that he hit better in the second half than the first (as has been his career pattern). You didn't mention that he hit 13 of his 22 homers in July, August and September. Essentially, you used only the small sample that benefited your argument.

By the way, over the past two seasons, Buster has hit 21 homers in April, May and June while hitting 20 homers in July, August and September. That's pretty darn even.

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3108/annual-post#ixzz3q26n0wIV

[sfgdood]

I use small samples when I'm only commenting on a specific set of facts...in this case, that in recent years, Posey has indeed seen a severe power drought. If you have facts that refute my claim within its stated context, bring them on.

[sfgdood]

"Seen a severe power drought late in the year," that should have been. To me 0 postseason extra base hits is a power drought and so is 5 post ASB homers. Do you disagree with that?

[Rog]

To me 0 postseason extra base hits is a power drought and so is 5 post ASB homers. Do you disagree with that?


Rog -- I don't disagree with either of those. But the broader one looks, the less obvious the drought becomes. We looked at his career numbers, and they don't show a late-season drought.

So let's just look at the past two seasons if you wish. No question Buster hasn't fared well in his postseasons. Let's hope he gets a much larger sample size, and it is likely that will balance out a bit.

But let's just focus on the past two regular seasons, the seasons you mentioned.

In the second halves of those two seasons, he's hit .338 with a .504 SLG. In the two Augusts, he's hit .324 with a .500 SLG. In the two Septembers, he's hit .355 with a .526 SLG.

Those numbers are all over his .310 career batting average and his career .484 slugging percentage. What they say is that you don't know what you're talking about.

Hey, let's see how bad we can make it if we simply take the two Septembers and add in his very poor 2014 postseason. Well, we can't get his batting average below his career average. It's still .325, even when we take the most unfavorable combination we can find. We do, however, get his SLG clearly below his career mark at .439.

We've really got to stretch to take the worst possible combination. And even then Buster still hits pretty darn well. By comparison, for instance, Ivan Rodriguez will soon enter the Hall of Fame with a .296 average and a .464 SLG. In fact, you know that .439 SLG we got Buster down to? That's precisely the career SLG of Hall of Fame catcher Gary Carter.

You've got this idea in your head, Randy, and it's just not very accurate.

If you like the smaller samples, we might look at Buster's late-season games after he became pretty much a full-time first baseman on September 19th after Brandon Belt was lost for the season. In the 10 games Buster played at first base the rest of the season, he hit just .205 with a .364 SLG. Doesn't sound like the "rest" he got by playing first base helped much, did it?

In contrast, before that elongated stint as mostly a first baseman, Buster had caught seven games since he had made an appearance at first. In those seven games, he hit .304 with a .478 SLG.

There are a lot of different ways to look at it. But few of them support your theory, Randy, and the larger the sample, the less likely it is to support your point of view.

Who do you think you ARE when it comes to Buster -- Don?

There are two strong arguments one can make for Buster to become a full-time catcher:

First, he is at considerably more risk of injury.

Second, he has hit better as a first baseman than as a catcher. Part of that likely is explained by his batting against lefties more when he plays first base, but perhaps not all. One can also argue that the sample isn't large, but it's certainly not small -- and it's growing.

Those are points we can easily support. The point you made though appears to be a bit flawed. One has to really split the sample down pretty small to make your point.

Let's put it this way: Buster's "decline" late in the season isn't nearly as discernible as the decline of Pablo Sandoval over the years. You could look it up.

And perhaps a year ago should have.




Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3108/annual-post#ixzz3q84xZMyM

[klaiggeb]

Randy-To me 0 postseason extra base hits is a power drought and so is 5 post ASB homers. Do you disagree with that?


Rog -- I don't disagree with either of those. But the broader one looks, the less obvious the drought becomes. We looked at his career numbers, and they don't show a late-season drought.


***Bolys says****

But Rog, Randy's point is still the same, and looking at 'career numbers' ISN'T what he was talking about.

In the last post season, Buster had "0" extra base hits.

He said he didn't want to see anymore of Posey's late season power outages.


You want to argue "career" here and are NOT taking age into account. And when one doesn't, the 'career' numbers become moot.



The fact is this: the older Buster gets the more tired his legs WILL BECOME late in the season.

And that is an historical fact for catchers. Their legs get tired.


IF Buster is our most potent weapon, we cannot have him so weak he's not driving the ball as well as he did earlier in the season as we enter the post season, and thus, what he did when he was younger and stronger are no longer important.

We're talking a guy with MILAGE on him, so his most recent history is what counts the most.

boly

[Islandboagie]

Boly- IF Buster is our most potent weapon, we cannot have him so weak he's not driving the ball as well as he did earlier in the season as we enter the post season, and thus, what he did when he was younger and stronger are no longer important.

We're talking a guy with MILAGE on him, so his most recent history is what counts the most.

Boly

Boagie- There's no arguing that catchers have the most grueling work load during an entire season.

But at the same time, you can't ignore that Posey as the catcher has been a big factor in the Giants winning 3 World Championships, whether it's at the plate or behind it.

Remember when the Royals were going to run all over our pitchers and Posey during the World Series last year? Funny, I remember people predicting it, but oddly enough I don't remember it happening. As good as Posey is AT the plate, what he does to the opposing manager being BEHIND the plate is often overlooked by those who don't understand.

As far as just his offense goes toward the end of the season, his power did in fact dip this season, and last, but in 2012 he hit the two most important homeruns during the post-season.

[Rog]

But Rog, Randy's point is still the same, and looking at 'career numbers' ISN'T what he was talking about.


Rog -- Come on now. Let's get to the heart of the matter.

Randy asked if 0 postseason homers in 2014 and 5 homers after the All-Star game in 2015 counted as a power outage. I said they both did.

Randy originated this by saying that he was sick and tired of seeing Buster's power die out in the stretch. I showed how both over Buster's career and over the past two seasons, that just hasn't been the case. I agree with him on the postseason, although the postseason is too small a sample to mean all that much. If we disagree, see how well Pablo Sandoval's 2014 postseason predicted his 2015 season.

I have made so many points here, both career-wise and over the past two seasons. One small sample point I made was that after Buster began playing almost exclusively first base down the stretch, he didn't hit well. I showed how over his career he has generally hit better late than early. I showed how over the past two seasons that hasn't really been the case.

I should also mention that Randy's criterion is too narrow. Shouldn't we look at Buster's overall performance at the plate rather than simply his power numbers? Looking at the overall emphasizes my points even further.

Randy is looking at only what he wants to look at. And he isn't interpreting even that narrow focus all that well.

Personally I would think very carefully about moving Buster from behind the plate, primarily because of safety issues. It's my opinion that if repetitive concussions become an issue, the Giants will indeed move Buster.

Would Buster hit even better if he played only first base? We can make an argument either way on that one.

He certainly HAS hit better when playing first base, but that is likely in part because he hits against more left-handed hitters when playing first base, and he kills southpaws. Something I have long found intriguing is that Buster's numbers against southpaws have been similar. At this point in his career he has hit .329/.387/.564/.951. While playing first base, he has hit .346/.400/.540/.940.

He may be hitting better as a first baseman in part because it is a relief from catching. Would he enjoy the same impetus if he played there all the time?

I don't know the answer to these questions, and I don't think we can really know them until he plays two or three seasons exclusively as a first baseman. For now, the Giants have a better team when he catches, he wants to play catcher, the Giants want him to catch, the pitchers seem to like things the way they are, and the Giants feel he can best assert his leadership from behind the plate.

As I stated, one can make arguments either way. There is no clear cut right answer on this one.

My thought is that he'll continue to catch most of the time until health or age issues take over.

Does everyone agree that against right-handed pitchers, the Giants' best lineup has Buster behind the plate and Belt at first base? That against southpaws it makes some sense to catch Susac, since he hits southpaws very well, while struggling against right-handers? Even that isn't a certainty, but based on what has happened over the careers of the three players involved, it seems to make good sense.

The Giants seem well-served with Belt and Buster in the lineup against right-handed pitchers, which Susac hasn't hit a lick against in the major leagues. Against southpaws, they're probably still best with Buster and Belt, but that would be the time to give Belt days off, since Susac may be an even better hitter against southpaws than Brandon is.

Here is something else that might factor into the equation. Last season the Giants' pitching staff posted a 3.55 ERA with Buster behind the plate. With the other catchers, it was a combined 4.00. With Andrew catching, it was 4.04.

I believe this is another situation in which anyone who thinks the decision is clear-cut (either way) probably isn't looking at all the factors.




Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3108/annual-post#ixzz3qJLQm2fh

[donk33]

Oct 31, 2015 3:28:50 GMT -5 Rog said:

To me 0 postseason extra base hits is a power drought and so is 5 post ASB homers. Do you disagree with that?


Rog -- I don't disagree with either of those. But the broader one looks, the less obvious the drought becomes. We looked at his career numbers, and they don't show a late-season drought.

So let's just look at the past two seasons if you wish. No question Buster hasn't fared well in his postseasons. Let's hope he gets a much larger sample size, and it is likely that will balance out a bit.

But let's just focus on the past two regular seasons, the seasons you mentioned.

In the second halves of those two seasons, he's hit .338 with a .504 SLG. In the two Augusts, he's hit .324 with a .500 SLG. In the two Septembers, he's hit .355 with a .526 SLG.

Those numbers are all over his .310 career batting average and his career .484 slugging percentage. What they say is that you don't know what you're talking about.

Hey, let's see how bad we can make it if we simply take the two Septembers and add in his very poor 2014 postseason. Well, we can't get his batting average below his career average. It's still .325, even when we take the most unfavorable combination we can find. We do, however, get his SLG clearly below his career mark at .439.

We've really got to stretch to take the worst possible combination. And even then Buster still hits pretty darn well. By comparison, for instance, Ivan Rodriguez will soon enter the Hall of Fame with a .296 average and a .464 SLG. In fact, you know that .439 SLG we got Buster down to? That's precisely the career SLG of Hall of Fame catcher Gary Carter.

You've got this idea in your head, Randy, and it's just not very accurate.

If you like the smaller samples, we might look at Buster's late-season games after he became pretty much a full-time first baseman on September 19th after Brandon Belt was lost for the season. In the 10 games Buster played at first base the rest of the season, he hit just .205 with a .364 SLG. Doesn't sound like the "rest" he got by playing first base helped much, did it?

In contrast, before that elongated stint as mostly a first baseman, Buster had caught seven games since he had made an appearance at first. In those seven games, he hit .304 with a .478 SLG.

There are a lot of different ways to look at it. But few of them support your theory, Randy, and the larger the sample, the less likely it is to support your point of view.

Who do you think you ARE when it comes to Buster -- Don?

There are two strong arguments one can make for Buster to become a full-time catcher:

First, he is at considerably more risk of injury.

Second, he has hit better as a first baseman than as a catcher. Part of that likely is explained by his batting against lefties more when he plays first base, but perhaps not all. One can also argue that the sample isn't large, but it's certainly not small -- and it's growing.

Those are points we can easily support. The point you made though appears to be a bit flawed. One has to really split the sample down pretty small to make your point.

Let's put it this way: Buster's "decline" late in the season isn't nearly as discernible as the decline of Pablo Sandoval over the years. You could look it up.

And perhaps a year ago should have.

dk...I don't have the stats, but didn't Posey play 1B during much of the end of the season???


Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3108/annual-post#ixzz3q84xZMyM

[Rog]

dk...I don't have the stats, but didn't Posey play 1B during much of the end of the season???


Rog -- Yes, he did. That has all been covered here -- I believe in this very thread.

Pretty much everything regarding Buster at catcher vs. Buster at first base has been covered and covered well on this board.

Maybe we should simply distill this down to one factor.

We have complained here that the Giants are cheap. They have a huge investment in Buster, one which have to be replaced if something happened to end or badly curtail his career. They are willing to take that risk at this time, so clearly when they consider all the information at their disposal -- which is more extensive than the information available to us -- they feel it is worth that risk. As circumstances change, no doubt they will continue to analyze the available information.

I think decent arguments have been either way regarding Buster to first base. The Giants have made their decision, no doubt based on their own risk/reward analysis. Shall we recognize that they are the ones with the investment and the more extensive information with which to make the decision and let it go at that?

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3108/annual-post#ixzz3rrxzgpW3

[donk33]

Nov 18, 2015 13:45:34 GMT -5 Rog said:

dk...I don't have the stats, but didn't Posey play 1B during much of the end of the season???


Rog -- Yes, he did. That has all been covered here -- I believe in this very thread.

Pretty much everything regarding Buster at catcher vs. Buster at first base has been covered and covered well on this board.

Maybe we should simply distill this down to one factor.

We have complained here that the Giants are cheap. They have a huge investment in Buster, one which have to be replaced if something happened to end or badly curtail his career. They are willing to take that risk at this time, so clearly when they consider all the information at their disposal -- which is more extensive than the information available to us -- they feel it is worth that risk. As circumstances change, no doubt they will continue to analyze the available information.

I think decent arguments have been either way regarding Buster to first base. The Giants have made their decision, no doubt based on their own risk/reward analysis. Shall we recognize that they are the ones with the investment and the more extensive information with which to make the decision and let it go at that?

Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3108/annual-post#ixzz3rrxzgpW3

dk...it is  a good thing that John McGraw didn't have the same mind-set as the guys on this board....Mel Ott came to the Giants as a catcher and McGraw switched him to the outfield as he realized his legs wouldn't stand the strain and he wanted his bat in the lineup...Posey continues to catch enough to slow his foot speed down a little more each year....I still don't think Posey is a 4 hitter as his power dwindles down to a preaches few....

[Islandboagie]

Did they win three Championships while Mel Ott was catching?

[Rog]

I use small samples when I'm only commenting on a specific set of facts...in this case, that in recent years, Posey has indeed seen a severe power drought. If you have facts that refute my claim within its stated context, bring them on.


Rog -- That raises the question of how much next year's and the following years' performance is predicted by the recent past compared to the player's career to date. The advantage of the recent numbers is that they are just that -- more recent. The advantage of the numbers overall are that they represent a bigger sample.

Another question is should we be looking at Buster's power, or his hitting overall? I would think his overall hitting is more indicative of his contribution.

Let's look at the various time frames the past two seasons for home runs and OPS.


2014:

April 6, .833
May 1, .626
June 2, .912
July 3, .726
August 6, .951
September 4, 1.043

1st Half 10, .757
2nd Half 12, .978

Notes: First, the 1st "half" is longer than the 2nd "half," meaning we would expect more homers in the first half than the second. Then second, Buster had a lousy postseason. He might have been tired (especially since the Giants were in a tough stretch fight), or he might simply have been due for a slump after hitting .336 in August and .393 (!) in September.


2015:

April 3, .721
May 5, .919
June 4, .931
July 2, .921
August 2, .769
Sept. 3, .839

1st Half 14,.880
2nd Half 5, .813


If we look at the two years together, Buster's best months for homers were April and August. For OPS, his best months were June and September. In 2014, Buster had his best months in August and September, but slumped in the postseason. Last season he slumped in August before recovering in September.

As was noted in another post, once Buster began playing primarily first base after Brandon Belt's concussion issues in September, he did some of his worst hitting on the season.

Overall, it would seem that as far as the regular season goes over the two years, Buster's best month was probably September. He then slumped in the 2014 postseason.

No clear pattern emerges over the past two seasons. Nor does it emerge over Buster's entire career.

If we wish to look only at 2015, he did drop off in August and a bit in September. Perhaps surprisingly (or perhaps simply indicative that players have hot and cold streaks), Buster didn't hit all that well once he began playing first base almost exclusively.

If one wants to take a small sample, he can usually find one that says what he wants it to say. But the larger the sample, the more likely it is to represent the true picture.




Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3108/annual-post#ixzz3s3yhSoWQ

[Rog]

it is a good thing that John McGraw didn't have the same mind-set as the guys on this board....Mel Ott came to the Giants as a catcher and McGraw switched him to the outfield as he realized his legs wouldn't stand the strain and he wanted his bat in the lineup...Posey continues to catch enough to slow his foot speed down a little more each year....I still don't think Posey is a 4 hitter as his power dwindles down to a preaches few..


Rog -- Players should play the position where they can most help the team. Let's not forget that just two years before Buster was drafted by the Giants, he was playing shortstop. Even right before they drafted him, his duties included closing.

The year that Ott began playing full time, Giants catcher Shanty Hogan hit .333 with an .883 OPS. Hogan actually played in more games that season than Mel.




Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3108/annual-post?page=1#ixzz3s45N1G9N

[Rog]

Ott is a Hall of Famer and perhaps an underrated one at that. Buster will likely make the Hall too, but I think it would have been an iffy proposition is he had played the outfield. At first base it would depend on whether he continued his trend of hitting better when he plays first base.

Buster is the best catcher in the game. At first base, he likely would be behind Paul Goldschmidt and Miguel Cabrera. He might also be behind Joey Votto, Jose Abreu and Anthony Rizzo.

All those guys had a higher OPS last season than Buster. So did Edwin Encarnacion and Chris Davis. Adrian Gonzalez. Joe Mauer, Prince Fielder and Albert Pujols have arguably been better hitters over their careers than Buster.

By contrast, only Yadier Molina has had a career at catcher that is close to Buster's. Buster might go down as one of the best catchers ever. At first base, he might have gone down as a guy who was a very good hitter but lacked power for the position.

As for whether Buster should bat cleanup for the Giants or not, they don't really have a better candidate, do they? Buster was 9th in the NL in RBI's last season, and every player who finished ahead of him played in more games. After Buster, there was a drop of five RBI's to Adrian Gonzalez at #10. Only 19 NL hitters had as many as 80 RBI's.

A team's best hitter should likely bat 3rd or 4th, and Buster's lack of speed perhaps makes him better suited to hit cleanup.

Then again, I agree that Buster shouldn't be a catcher. After all, he framed only two pitches for strikes after the All-Star game, and that's horrible. Since he wound up as the best pitch framer in the majors last season, apparently he had an amazing first half.

Don, you understand the game a LOT better than to remember only two pitches Buster framed for strikes. That comment may have been the one that most showed your prejudice against Buster.

You're better than that, Don. Much better.

[donk33]

Nov 19, 2015 13:53:38 GMT -5 Islandboagie said:

Did they win three Championships while Mel Ott was catching?

dk...I was talking about the chance for a 20 year career.....not many catchers last any where near that......

[Islandboagie]

Not many catchers have three World Series rings either.

I know you have little respect for Posey and his catching abilities, but Posey didn't just happen to be the catcher for three Championship teams, those teams were Championship teams because Posey was catching.

Look at all modern era dynasties and most if not all had all-star caliber catchers. Look at the 3 most successful Championship teams in today's game (Giants, Cardinals and Royals) and all of them have perennial All-Star catchers.

I can respect the point of view that moving Posey to first would extend his career, I get that. That would almost surely lengthen Posey's career. And there certainly could be a time for that a few years down the road. But what if they do that now and the Giants never win another World Series? That would leave a lasting cloud of "what if?" hovering over the Giants organization for a long time.

Posey isn't old, he's a good defensive catcher, he wants to catch and Bochy wants him to catch. Posey as the catcher is the only logical situation at this time.

[Rog]

dk...I was talking about the chance for a 20 year career.....not many catchers last any where near that....


Rog -- Buster likely won't have a 20-year-career. Johnny Bench played 17, but he was 19 when he entered the bigs. Buster was 23.

Johnny played primarily catcher until he was injured at age 33. Then he became primarily a 3rd baseman and 1st baseman. In his last three seasons (the first of which was only about a third of a season), he played only 13 games behind the plate.

Buster has the advantage of not playing catcher until his sophomore year in college, meaning less being beaten up behind the plate. He has probably taken a bigger beating back there than Johnny at the same time in his career, since pitchers throw harder now, and there seem to be more pitches in the dirt.

On the other hand, Buster isn't catching as many games as Johnny did. All in all, I would think Buster is a little ahead of the curve Johnny was on. And Johnny played 17 years -- 14 of them very heavily catcher-oriented. After 17 seasons, Buster will be 39. He's probably unlikely to play longer than that, except possibly as a Designated Hitter. Probably if he makes it to age 39 though, he -- and we -- will consider that he has had a marvelous career.

Bench was out of the game at age 35.

Buster is already playing a little less behind the plate. That mini-trend will likely continue. If Buster becomes anything approaching a significant concussion risk, I suspect the Giants will quickly move him from behind the plate. Buster has had at least one known concussion, suffered as a batter while he played for San Jose. He missed a week, as the Giants were understandably very cautious.

Remember, the Giants shouldn't be hurt much at all if Brandon Belt platoons with Andrew Susac, which would give Buster quite a few games at first base and Susac a chance to develop. Thus far, Andrew has hit southpaws far better than Brandon. It's not that Brandon is horrible against lefties, but I believe Andrew's career OPS against southpaws is over .900.






Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3108/annual-post#ixzz3sNARgPMw