|
Post by Rog on Dec 9, 2016 14:18:06 GMT -5
But regardless of his style, goofy as it often looks, he IS effective, and the bottom line is that, THAT is what is most important. Rog -- Nicely put, Boly. I think you described the whole situation well. Because he isn't a natural catcher, he isn't always orthodox. But his quick reflexes and soft hands usually bail him out. If we compare Buster to other catchers around the league, he allows fewer balls to get by him. If we compare him to other Giants catchers, he lets fewer balls get behind him. I think there can be a tendency to overrate his catching because he's an excellent hitter for a catcher and something of the All-American boy (man?). But particularly last season he built up a defensive resume that is hard to argue with. Thank goodness we have Don to do just that! Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3615/compare-buster-posey-hunter-brandon#ixzz4SMzmAjkQ
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Dec 9, 2016 14:37:53 GMT -5
Most of my life I pitched to smooth, fluid catchers.
Often they "looked" better than they really were BECAUSE they were so smooth.
But there are so many other aspects of the game that "looks" can't always, or solely, be used as the determining factor.
boly
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 9, 2016 19:52:49 GMT -5
I think it's ironic that fielders can appear better than they are either because they're smooth or because they're awkward but not in an awkward-looking way.
An example of the former might be the later-year Omar Vizquel. In terms of grace, Omar may have been unequaled in history. He just LOOKED like a great fielder. And for most of his career, he was. But in his late career I think the grace masked his weak arm and declining range, making him appear better than he was at that point of his career. Of course his reputation didn't hurt either.
On the other side may be Eduardo Nunez, who has made a huge improvement in his third base play since joining the Giants, but whose play may look even better than it actually is because he makes some unorthodox plays that his athleticism makes look smooth instead of awkward, making some of his play appear tougher than they truly are.
If a player looks awkward, we don't usually see him as a good defender -- and he rarely is one. But if he looks smooth, he can make plays look tougher than they really are without suffering from the stigma of awkwardness.
Willie Mays was of course a great defender, but it was said of him that he made the easy plays look hard and the hard plays look easy. More metaphorically than literally, Willie embodied both of the attributes I'm describing here.
Speaking of Willie, I've posted this before, but IMO it could be repeated every single day. Branch Rickey said of a barehanded catch Willie made on the warning track (and not from a misjudgment as Kevin Mitchell's was) "That was the greatest catch I've ever seen, and the greatest catch I ever hope to see!"
And of course there was the triple that Willie hit that Giants beat writer Bob Stevens described thus: "The only guy who could have caught it, hit it." And then there was Willie's center field, "where balls (went) to die."
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Dec 9, 2016 20:44:04 GMT -5
Thing about Nunez, Rog is that WHEN he settled in at 3B, he BECAME a great defender.
HE thought he was a SS.
He had the ARM for SS
He had the RANGE of a SS
But he wasn't and ISN'T a SS because of the quantities of errors he makes when he plays there.
As I've said before: Too much time to think before throwing the ball to 1B.
boly
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 9, 2016 23:34:56 GMT -5
Thing about Nunez, Rog is that WHEN he settled in at 3B, he BECAME a great defender. HE thought he was a SS. He had the ARM for SS He had the RANGE of a SS But he wasn't and ISN'T a SS because of the quantities of errors he makes when he plays there. As I've said before: Too much time to think before throwing the ball to 1B. Rog -- That makes a lot of intuitive sense. But last season Eduardo had two throwing errors in 140 chances at third base, and the same two errors in 136 chances at short. His chance of making a throwing error was almost the same regardless of which position he played. Over his career, he has made 16 throwing errors at third in 578 chances compared to seven throwing errors in 266 chances at shortstop. In short (hah, hah!) he has made just about the same percentage of throwing errors whether he has been playing third base or shortstop. Likewise his fielding errors have been about the same at each position. At third, he has made 14 fielding errors on 120 chances. At short, he's booted 22 balls in 292 chances. He's been a higher percentage of fielding plays at short than at third. Last season it was fairly close between the two, with three boots at third in 51 chances compared to four boots at third in 62 fielding chances. Now, fielding percentage isn't anywhere near all of fielding. But the facts say that Eduardo has made about the same percentage of throwing errors regardless of whether he has played third or short. Having the extra time to think doesn't seem to have all that much to do with it. I think the concept makes a lot of sense. But the reality may not quite fit with the concept. I think Eduardo has become a good third baseman after a career of not being one. But I don't think he is quite as good as he looks, either. Both of Eduardo's errors with the Giants at third base were throwing errors, but he made them in his first four games with the team. After that, he didn't make a single error -- and indeed looked very good in doing so. The theory makes sense. So far the results may not support it. I guess we'll learn more this season. I'd like to see Eduardo leading off -- at least against southpaws. Remember, there is little doubt Denard Span should hit eighth against southpaws. He simply doesn't appear to be able to hit them at this time in his career. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3615/compare-buster-posey-hunter-brandon?page=2#ixzz4SP8ib4T6
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Dec 10, 2016 11:04:21 GMT -5
From what I've read, Rog, Nunez has ALWAYS had an inordinate amount of errors for a SS.
You're focusing on throwing errors, and that was my focus, too.
But my statement remains the same; at SS the fielder has a lot of time to 'think' as compared to playing 3B.
Also, I am NOT a fan of Nunez' goofy, side arm, almost 3/4 under 'sling-throws' to 1B.
There is a reason 'over the top,' or '3/4' is more accurate.
But like so many professionals... he seems unwilling to change.
Still, he made a ton of INCREDIBLE stops at 3B this year.
He's far better there with the glove, and with his range than either Duffy or the Pillsbury doughboy.
boly
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 10, 2016 23:37:37 GMT -5
Ater playing four games for the Giants, Nunez made no more errors -- on throws or fielding. He's on a pretty good streak entering next season.
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 21, 2016 6:35:42 GMT -5
Awkward, not fluid, whatever, as you say, the bottom line is being effective, and Buster is considered the top defensive catcher in the game. The two stats that really ring the bell for me are his having fewer passed balls and wild pitches than any catcher catching 70 games or more, even when Buster himself started 122, and his recording outs on 32 of the 33 batted balls he fielded. Throw in his top pitch framing and what I felt was his best season throwing, and one can see why Buster is considered the best and has been considered so both the past two seasons.
Very below par season for Buster at the plate (although his .796 OPS was STILL easily above the career mark of Gary Carter), but it was his fielding that was at a Hall of Fame level.
As I stated, I agree with you that Buster is overrated as a hitter. But he's an outstanding hitter for a CATCHER. And as Don has pointed out many times, his .928 OPS as a first baseman is excellent. It would rank #13 among first baseman all-time. But Buster is mostly a catcher, and I think he is given too much credit for his hitting when he plays that position.
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Dec 21, 2016 11:56:59 GMT -5
All good points, Rog, and I agree.
boly
|
|
|
Post by donk33 on Dec 21, 2016 14:23:26 GMT -5
Awkward, not fluid, whatever, as you say, the bottom line is being effective, and Buster is considered the top defensive catcher in the game. The two stats that really ring the bell for me are his having fewer passed balls and wild pitches than any catcher catching 70 games or more, even when Buster himself started 122, and his recording outs on 32 of the 33 batted balls he fielded. Throw in his top pitch framing and what I felt was his best season throwing, and one can see why Buster is considered the best and has been considered so both the past two seasons. Very below par season for Buster at the plate (although his .796 OPS was STILL easily above the career mark of Gary Carter), but it was his fielding that was at a Hall of Fame level. As I stated, I agree with you that Buster is overrated as a hitter. But he's an outstanding hitter for a CATCHER. And as Don has pointed out many times, his .928 OPS as a first baseman is excellent. It would rank #13 among first baseman all-time. But Buster is mostly a catcher, and I think he is given too much credit for his hitting when he plays that position. dk...once more I dispute the stats....as Johnny Bench once said...a catcher can have good stats if he stays away from signing for low breaking balls.... it is almost automatic for Posey to sign for a high fastball when he is ahead on the count....and I still think his framing is highly over rated....in my observance, he really gets a strike call on close pitches and I still think he sets his target too far off the strike zone.....
|
|
|
Post by klaiggeb on Dec 21, 2016 14:53:34 GMT -5
Don, I'm not a big believer in framing at all.
If... and I say...IF an umpire is decent to good, he sees the ball as it CROSSES the plate, NOT after the catcher catches it, and thus ISN'T influenced by what the catcher does next.
Thus, as a long time former pitcher, I simply can't comprehend how a capable umpire would be fooled by 'framing.'
Then again, I think almost as little of umpires as I do of lawyers, so in all honestly, my opinion is tainted.
boly
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 21, 2016 15:07:07 GMT -5
once more I dispute the stats....as Johnny Bench once said...a catcher can have good stats if he stays away from signing for low breaking balls.. Rog -- But think of all the times Tim Lincecum bounced the ball in to him. That said, I'm going to backtrack on this one. Buster is rated as having allowed two ball blocking runs more than average the past two seasons, which supports what you say here, Don. The two years before that he was rated at minus one run, and in his MVP season of 2012, he was rated at three runs negative in this category. I thank you for helping me learn on this one. Stats don't lie, but they can be misinterpreted, which I believe is just what I did when I came across Buster's seemingly outstanding accomplishment of having fewer passed balls plus wild pitches than any other catcher who caught at least 70 games. I do think he's pretty good on passed balls though. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3615/compare-buster-posey-hunter-brandon?page=2#ixzz4TVKiqJV0
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Dec 21, 2016 15:25:48 GMT -5
Don, I'm not a big believer in framing at all. If... and I say...IF an umpire is decent to good, he sees the ball as it CROSSES the plate, NOT after the catcher catches it, and thus ISN'T influenced by what the catcher does next. Rog -- I understand what you're saying here, Boly, and I have to admit that by using proper mechanics, I didn't think I was often fooled by this. But I didn't umpire pitchers whose balls moved as much and as quickly as major leaguer's do, and I probably didn't catch behind many catchers with hands that were as quick and subtle as the good framers. I've explained this before, but let's go back and understand how framing is measured. Pitches in various areas are called strikes a certain percentage of the time. As the ball gets further away from the center of the strike zone, the percentage loweres. Where balls cross the plate is measured, adding up to the number of pitches that would usually be called a strike. If the percentage says 10,000 strikes would normally be called and the catcher gets 10,500 of the pitches called strikes, he's "framed" or "stolen" or "retained" 500 strikes. Given the difference in say a 2-1 count and a 1-2 count, those extra strikes have value, a value that can be calculated. Buster led the majors with 27 framing runs saved last season. Over the years, he has consistently graded out as being above average. I don't think pitch framing evaluations are perfect, but they're kind of like saying that in 1000 at bats, the average hitter gets 260 hits, a .260 average. If a batter hits for a .300 average, that's an extra 20 hits per 500 at bats, and there is considerable value in that. Is batting average a perfect measure of a guy's ability to get a hit? No. But the larger the sample, the better measurement it is, and so we generally accept it. It's not all that much different than measuring pitch framing. Perhaps knowing the methodology will help us to accept it more. One thing to remember too is that general managers usually accept it. If we ourselves don't accept it, we may be taking the dangerous position of saying we know more than they do. Catchers are actually being traded for these days for their ability to frame pitches. Its beginning to be considered a valuable skill. If a catcher can get his pitcher into enough 1-2 counts rather than 2-1 counts, there IS value in that. Read more: sfgiantsmessageboard.proboards.com/thread/3615/compare-buster-posey-hunter-brandon?page=2#ixzz4TVNdjOG2
|
|