Hill to replace Soto

[Guest]

Yikes, Lou has lost his freaking mind?

 

Edit: Also, if Hendry and Lou are still around in the off-season, Soto is traded for peanuts.

[Guest]

I refuse to get into a slapping duel with the Soto homers on here, but this move didn't come soon enough. Hill's outplayed Soto all year. Spare me the OPS+, please.

 

Get Soto's head on straight, make him play winter ball, etc etc, and we'll see him behind the plate on opening day '10. There's just..ugh...there's no purpose in his plump self being out there right now .

 

So you don't want us to use stats that prove you wrong?

[Fred Hornkohl]

i can definitely buy that a catcher, by virtue of understanding opponents' tendencies and pitching strategy in general, could have an effect on a pitchers' ERA. I don't think that requires much of a leap.

 

I don't think that you can just take two catches in a one-year span (or in this case, 3/4 season span) and make a judgement that one is a better-game caller than another. Seems like it would be impossible to separate the noise in this case.

 

I might agree with that if the difference wasn't nearly a whole R/G after 120 games. Perhaps there's something more at work here, like the confidence level of the pitchers ??

 

You still can't draw anything of note from the R/G totals by themselves. You could guess, and you might be right, but there's no way of knowing.

 

For instance, look at this stat

 

CUBS' Runs scored per game when Soto starts 3.93.... when K Hill starts 5.15

 

Why are the Cubs scoring over a R/G more when Hill hits even though he's been worse statistically than Soto? Because there are lots of other variables involved.

 

Try to focus now, IMB. You're all over the place. We started out talking about the effect of a catcher on the teams' ability to prevent runs; basically CERA. The only conclusion that I came to was that I don't think the difference can be completely explained away as white noise because it's too large. I didn't, as you said, "draw anything" from the R/G totals by themselves. I was speaking of the difference in the pitchers' ERA with the two catchers, and for the record, I wasn't basing my remarks on just 3/4 of a season; although I didn't reveal it, K Hill smoked Soto in this department last year by an even bigger margin...... 2.46 to 3.88.

 

Now you want throw in the offensive R/G stats into a discussion of the defensive effect of a catcher ??? How is that relevant ?? Sure, I know I posted it, but it's really unrelated to our discussion. It's nothing more than an interesting anomaly. I drew no conclusions from it, and probably shouldn't have posted it.

[Guest]

i can definitely buy that a catcher, by virtue of understanding opponents' tendencies and pitching strategy in general, could have an effect on a pitchers' ERA. I don't think that requires much of a leap.

 

I don't think that you can just take two catches in a one-year span (or in this case, 3/4 season span) and make a judgement that one is a better-game caller than another. Seems like it would be impossible to separate the noise in this case.

 

I might agree with that if the difference wasn't nearly a whole R/G after 120 games. Perhaps there's something more at work here, like the confidence level of the pitchers ??

 

You still can't draw anything of note from the R/G totals by themselves. You could guess, and you might be right, but there's no way of knowing.

 

For instance, look at this stat

 

CUBS' Runs scored per game when Soto starts 3.93.... when K Hill starts 5.15

 

Why are the Cubs scoring over a R/G more when Hill hits even though he's been worse statistically than Soto? Because there are lots of other variables involved.

 

Try to focus now, IMB. You're all over the place. We started out talking about the effect of a catcher on the teams' ability to prevent runs; basically CERA. The only conclusion that I came to was that I don't think the difference can be completely explained away as white noise because it's too large. I didn't, as you said, "draw anything" from the R/G totals by themselves. I was speaking of the difference in the pitchers' ERA with the two catchers, and for the record, I wasn't basing my remarks on just 3/4 of a season; although I didn't reveal it, K Hill smoked Soto in this department last year by an even bigger margin...... 2.46 to 3.88.

 

Now you want throw in the offensive R/G stats into a discussion of the defensive effect of a catcher ??? How is that relevant ?? Sure, I know I posted it, but it's really unrelated to our discussion. It's nothing more than an interesting anomaly. I drew no conclusions from it, and probably shouldn't have posted it.

Fred, all I'm going to say to you is that correlation is not causality. There could be a number of reasons for the numbers.

[Fred Hornkohl]

i can definitely buy that a catcher, by virtue of understanding opponents' tendencies and pitching strategy in general, could have an effect on a pitchers' ERA. I don't think that requires much of a leap.

 

I don't think that you can just take two catches in a one-year span (or in this case, 3/4 season span) and make a judgement that one is a better-game caller than another. Seems like it would be impossible to separate the noise in this case.

 

I might agree with that if the difference wasn't nearly a whole R/G after 120 games. Perhaps there's something more at work here, like the confidence level of the pitchers ??

 

what are the individual pitchers' stats with each catcher? is it a matter of koyie hill being behind the plate more often when a better pitcher is on the mound?

 

starter    starts   ERA   starts   ERA

Zambrano      11   4.88      11   2.91
Dempster      18   4.39       6   3.41
Lilly         14   2.82       8   4.35
Harden        13   5.53       9   2.17
Marshall       6   6.59       3   3.32
Wells         10   2.39      10   3.73
Hart                          4   2.86
Gorzelanny     2   9.95       2   2.19
Samardzija                    1  18.90

totals        74   4.24      54   3.38

[Rob]

What about peripherals?

[Sammy Sofa]

I refuse to get into a slapping duel with the Soto homers on here, but this move didn't come soon enough. Hill's outplayed Soto all year. Spare me the OPS+, please.

 

Get Soto's head on straight, make him play winter ball, etc etc, and we'll see him behind the plate on opening day '10. There's just..ugh...there's no purpose in his plump self being out there right now .

 

If I was 110% convinced of this being a stupid move before, I'm now 1000% sure that it is.

[Fred Hornkohl]

The only stupid argument that hasn't been used in support of Hill is team record while he's catching.

 

Inevitably, that did get mentioned in the Tribune article link that was posted.

 

It's also been mentioned in this thread..... but what the hell.......

 

CUBS are 32-42 when Soto starts..... 33-21 when K Hill starts
CUBS pitchers' ERA in games that Soto starts 4.24..... in games that K Hill starts 3.38
CUBS' Runs scored per game when Soto starts 3.93.... when K Hill starts 5.15
Opponents runs scored per game when Soto starts 4.49.... when K Hill starts 4.00
CUBS run differential when Soto starts -43.... when K Hill starts +62

 

What's the overlap for when Soto and Ramirez were out at the same time?

 

When neither Ramirez nor Soto started.........

 

CUBS are 12-8
CUBS starters' ERA is 3.46
CUBS score 5.20 R/G
CUBS opponents score 3.85 R/G
CUBS run differential is +27

[Outshined_One]

74 to 54 starts is a substantial enough margin that having Koyie Hill catch another 20 games should help close that number between the two of them.

[imb]

i can definitely buy that a catcher, by virtue of understanding opponents' tendencies and pitching strategy in general, could have an effect on a pitchers' ERA. I don't think that requires much of a leap.

 

I don't think that you can just take two catches in a one-year span (or in this case, 3/4 season span) and make a judgement that one is a better-game caller than another. Seems like it would be impossible to separate the noise in this case.

 

I might agree with that if the difference wasn't nearly a whole R/G after 120 games. Perhaps there's something more at work here, like the confidence level of the pitchers ??

 

You still can't draw anything of note from the R/G totals by themselves. You could guess, and you might be right, but there's no way of knowing.

 

For instance, look at this stat

 

CUBS' Runs scored per game when Soto starts 3.93.... when K Hill starts 5.15

 

Why are the Cubs scoring over a R/G more when Hill hits even though he's been worse statistically than Soto? Because there are lots of other variables involved.

 

Try to focus now, IMB. You're all over the place. We started out talking about the effect of a catcher on the teams' ability to prevent runs; basically CERA. The only conclusion that I came to was that I don't think the difference can be completely explained away as white noise because it's too large. I didn't, as you said, "draw anything" from the R/G totals by themselves. I was speaking of the difference in the pitchers' ERA with the two catchers, and for the record, I wasn't basing my remarks on just 3/4 of a season; although I didn't reveal it, K Hill smoked Soto in this department last year by an even bigger margin...... 2.46 to 3.88.

 

Now you want throw in the offensive R/G stats into a discussion of the defensive effect of a catcher ??? How is that relevant ?? Sure, I know I posted it, but it's really unrelated to our discussion. It's nothing more than an interesting anomaly. I drew no conclusions from it, and probably shouldn't have posted it.

 

I didn't mean that you specifically had drawn a conclusion from it, just that it wasn't a good idea. The offensive stats I postsed were just an example of how useless something like this is on its own. The offense has performed much better with Hill in the lineup rather than Soto even though Hill has been statistically worse. Does that mean that we should start Hill because of his effect on the Cubs offense? Of course not, so we throw that out.

 

Maybe Hill is a better game caller and understands pitching better than Soto, it's definitely possible, but you just can't tell from a sample of 200-300 games. Maybe he's caught games against worse opponents, or maybe he's caught better pitchers or maybe he's caught more games when the wind was blowing in, I mean, who knows? That's the point, you can't see that from just looking at straight numbers, and unless you feel like doing extra research, the stats are nothing more than something interesting to theorize about.

[Fred Hornkohl]

Fred, all I'm going to say to you is that correlation is not causality. There could be a number of reasons for the numbers.

 

Good grief. Seems like we have to go through this every damned year. I never attempted to draw any statistical inference from this data. It's an interesting anomaly, and that's all it is. If you ever catch me trying draw such an inference from a data set like this one, then by all means, please feel free to slap me up side the head.

 

In the mean time....... and this is all I'm going to say to you....... the CUBS win when they bunt, and they bunt when they win.

 

So there !!!

[Geech]

Try to focus now, IMB. You're all over the place. We started out talking about the effect of a catcher on the teams' ability to prevent runs; basically CERA. The only conclusion that I came to was that I don't think the difference can be completely explained away as white noise because it's too large. I didn't, as you said, "draw anything" from the R/G totals by themselves. I was speaking of the difference in the pitchers' ERA with the two catchers, and for the record, I wasn't basing my remarks on just 3/4 of a season; although I didn't reveal it, K Hill smoked Soto in this department last year by an even bigger margin...... 2.46 to 3.88.

 

Now you want throw in the offensive R/G stats into a discussion of the defensive effect of a catcher ??? How is that relevant ?? Sure, I know I posted it, but it's really unrelated to our discussion. It's nothing more than an interesting anomaly. I drew no conclusions from it, and probably shouldn't have posted it.

 

Get a grip here, Fred. IMB wasn't saying that R/G had anything to do with CERA, he was pointing out that the R/G stats were clearly very heavily influenced by outside factors and suggesting that the same was true for CERA.

 

It is, by the way.

[Fred Hornkohl]

What about peripherals?

 

Good question, but unfortunately, I don't have that data as readily accessible. Might well be worth looking into.

[Fred Hornkohl]

74 to 54 starts is a substantial enough margin that having Koyie Hill catch another 20 games should help close that number between the two of them.

 

All of that, plus $1.39, will buy you coffee down at the truck stop.

[Geech]

I never attempted to draw any statistical inference from this data.

 

Then I guess we don't have a disagreement.

[Fred Hornkohl]

 

I didn't mean that you specifically had drawn a conclusion from it, just that it wasn't a good idea. The offensive stats I postsed were just an example of how useless something like this is on its own. The offense has performed much better with Hill in the lineup rather than Soto even though Hill has been statistically worse. Does that mean that we should start Hill because of his effect on the Cubs offense? Of course not, so we throw that out.

 

Maybe Hill is a better game caller and understands pitching better than Soto, it's definitely possible, but you just can't tell from a sample of 200-300 games. Maybe he's caught games against worse opponents, or maybe he's caught better pitchers or maybe he's caught more games when the wind was blowing in, I mean, who knows? That's the point, you can't see that from just looking at straight numbers, and unless you feel like doing extra research, the stats are nothing more than something interesting to theorize about.

 

If the difference between the two weren't so large, I wouldn't give it a second thought, but this difference is huge. Soto is sitting there at 4.24 which is dead on league ERA, while K Hill is at 3.38 which lower than the best team in the league; in fact, it's almost 2 standard deviations off the mean. I'm just not ready to write off a difference like that to white noise. After all, most of the factors that limit CERA have been ameliorated to some extent. Both catchers are working with the same small number of pitchers, against the same small number of teams, and appear to draw their assignments in a pseudo-random manner (i.e. no pitcher had either man as his "personal catcher") With a couple of hundred games played, I don't think factors such as weather, injuries, and drawing a better or worse opponent are going to matter. Certainly not to the extent of this difference. That's more than just an interesting anomaly, and it certainly does bear more detailed analysis. Unfortunately, I likely won't have the time to devote to it until the weather turns cold and there are no more CUBS games to watch.

[Rob]

The problem here is that ERA on its own isn't even a good stat.

[Geech]

If the difference between the two weren't so large, I wouldn't give it a second thought, but this difference is huge. Soto is sitting there at 4.24 which is dead on league ERA, while K Hill is at 3.38 which lower than the best team in the league; in fact, it's almost 2 standard deviations off the mean. I'm just not ready to write off a difference like that to white noise. After all, most of the factors that limit CERA have been ameliorated to some extent. Both catchers are working with the same small number of pitchers, against the same small number of teams, and appear to draw their assignments in a pseudo-random manner (i.e. no pitcher had either man as his "personal catcher") With a couple of hundred games played, I don't think factors such as weather, injuries, and drawing a better or worse opponent are going to matter. Certainly not to the extent of this difference. That's more than just an interesting anomaly, and it certainly does bear more detailed analysis. Unfortunately, I likely won't have the time to devote to it until the weather turns cold and there are no more CUBS games to watch.

 

 

That's just not true. We're dealing with a couple of catchers who split part of a season between them. If Hill starts the rest of the season then they may have about half a season worth of data each. That's not enough to negate the factors that people have talked about, or the effect of pure, random chance for that matter.

 

Check out Keith Woolner's CERA study here: http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=432

[Geech]

FYI, Hill's career CERA is 4.36, while Soto's is 3.98.

 

Those numbers don't actually mean anything, but that appears to be the style at NSBB these days, so there you go.

[Cubbie Swagger]

There was a stretch this year where Geo got hot and it looked like he was back. Then he got hurt again. I don't see why they'd bench him... I'd let him hit out of it. Mostly because we're out of the race, but also because I know he WILL hit out of it.

[Grit amp Heart]

There are way too many things out of a catcher's control in order to use cERA, especially when it's because a guy gets hurt. Some factors include:

 

- Unfair representation among innings pitched per pitcher

- Disproportionate representation among offensives faced

- a few bad innings ruining it from a crappy pitcher

- luck

- defense

- pitchers going through hot (and cold)

 

if we had thousands of games to go on, it'd be useful, but over the course of 50-60 games there's way too much noise to use it. I believe every study that has looked at cERA has come to the conclusion that a catcher's contributions on pitching and defense is almost entirely dominated by his ability to throw out runners and control the running game.

[CUBZ99]

Maybe Steve Stone was right last year, and Soto needs to get back on the juice over the off season.

[Keener98]

Maybe Steve Stone was right last year, and Soto needs to get back on the juice over the off season.

 

Still like for you to expand on Soto being a prick

[CUBZ99]

Maybe Steve Stone was right last year, and Soto needs to get back on the juice over the off season.

 

Still like for you to expand on Soto being a prick

 

No point, I shouldn't have made the comment.

[CUBZ99]

Looks like Lou plans to have Soto starting in 2010. Appears he is just riding the hotter bat in attempt to salvage a playoff birth.

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-01-cubs-brite-chicago-sep01,0,1663983.story