Gigantic Willy Style - The Willson Contreras Thread

[Sammy Sofa]

"Kicking out" makes moving him to another position sound a tad dramatic.

If Contreras finishes with a career year like he's on pace to, and then in the offseason you go sign the catcher that was like, one of two or three people to be move valuable than him (and is four years older), and tell Contreras, undisputed starter at catcher for the last 3 years, to go join the revolving cast of outfielders, it's pretty close to kicking him out.

 

Why wouldn't he be a regular starter in the OF? No platoon player he.

 

He'd get more playing time, and arguably end up being even more valuable...this doesn't seem like it would be a very hard sell.

[Sammy Sofa]

Like, Willson is awesome, almost totally due to his bat at this point

 

I'm not going using it to justify his continued catching...but he's also great at keeping runners from advancing, particularly when Lester is pitching. While you may want more from the catcher position than that, he's so good at it that it's a factor that shouldn't be ignored.

 

Well, yeah; that's basically the only thing he's good at as a catcher.

 

But, big picture, I'm not worried about the Cubs working around the needs of Old Man Lester; dude's likely gonna be nigh useless sooner rather than later.

[squally1313]

I am far from an expert on catcher defensive stats, and really don't even know how much of it goes into the catcher WAR on FG. But this site (hopefully reputable) makes it seem like the difference between Contreras and Grandal for framing has been 5 runs so far, with Contreras being pretty much exactly average. He had that weird thing with catcher's interference early on, which seems like it's gone away, and he's got a really strong arm. I think this is more eye test than reality.

 

http://www.statcorner.com/CatcherReport.php

[JudasIscariotTheBird]

 

For me, the time to move Contreras to the outfield (or to another team) is if/when Amaya starts looking like the real deal, which is hopefully in about 12 months. Right now he's getting BABIPed in A+, but he improved his walk rate, K rate, and ISO, and from what I've read he's solid behind the plate. If he keeps developing, the timing works out with Contreras getting more expensive and the grind of every day catching taking its toll.

Well, in that scenario you don't have to sign a catcher at all. You move Conteras to the OF, spend the money on a pitcher, call up Amaya and call it a day.

[Banedon]

I am far from an expert on catcher defensive stats, and really don't even know how much of it goes into the catcher WAR on FG. But this site (hopefully reputable) makes it seem like the difference between Contreras and Grandal for framing has been 5 runs so far, with Contreras being pretty much exactly average. He had that weird thing with catcher's interference early on, which seems like it's gone away, and he's got a really strong arm. I think this is more eye test than reality.

 

http://www.statcorner.com/CatcherReport.php

 

And he's had a few highly visible mistakes of late.

[squally1313]

"Kicking out" makes moving him to another position sound a tad dramatic.

If Contreras finishes with a career year like he's on pace to, and then in the offseason you go sign the catcher that was like, one of two or three people to be move valuable than him (and is four years older), and tell Contreras, undisputed starter at catcher for the last 3 years, to go join the revolving cast of outfielders, it's pretty close to kicking him out.

 

Why wouldn't he be a regular starter in the OF? No platoon player he.

 

He'd get more playing time, and arguably end up being even more valuable...this doesn't seem like it would be a very hard sell.

 

In the hypothetical world where Grandal is available, wants to sign, and the front office is cool with it and won't use it as justification to not do anything else, sure. I'm in.

 

In the other scenario, where we're plucking some version of Francisco Cervelli off the FA pile (still at around $10m/year)...I think we're making some marginal upgrade at the expense of a possibility of something more. We're stuck with Heyward on the roster regardless, and I assume you aren't bouncing Contreras around the outfield. Locking him into a spot makes the chance of a Schwarber, Happ, or Almora as above average regular Cubs very remote. And yes, for that group, maybe it's time for them to horsefeathers or get off the pot. Maybe it's past time. But doing it to bring in some revolving door of David Ross 2.0s doesn't seem like the solution. And this is all without mentioning that we're less than a year removed from Contreras falling off a cliff in the second half last year.

[Sammy Sofa]

If Contreras finishes with a career year like he's on pace to, and then in the offseason you go sign the catcher that was like, one of two or three people to be move valuable than him (and is four years older), and tell Contreras, undisputed starter at catcher for the last 3 years, to go join the revolving cast of outfielders, it's pretty close to kicking him out.

 

Why wouldn't he be a regular starter in the OF? No platoon player he.

 

He'd get more playing time, and arguably end up being even more valuable...this doesn't seem like it would be a very hard sell.

 

In the hypothetical world where Grandal is available, wants to sign, and the front office is cool with it and won't use it as justification to not do anything else, sure. I'm in.

 

In the other scenario, where we're plucking some version of Francisco Cervelli off the FA pile (still at around $10m/year)...I think we're making some marginal upgrade at the expense of a possibility of something more. We're stuck with Heyward on the roster regardless, and I assume you aren't bouncing Contreras around the outfield. Locking him into a spot makes the chance of a Schwarber, Happ, or Almora as above average regular Cubs very remote. And yes, for that group, maybe it's time for them to horsefeathers or get off the pot. Maybe it's past time. But doing it to bring in some revolving door of David Ross 2.0s doesn't seem like the solution. And this is all without mentioning that we're less than a year removed from Contreras falling off a cliff in the second half last year.

 

Yeah, I will fully cop to not caring at all about Almora, Happ or Schwarber losing playing time.

 

And I think the final point was due in no small part to him bring worn down as a catcher.

 

I just want this FO to do something different. They apparently can't spend, they don't really have the resources to pull off a trade...it's frustrating. Their whole plan at this point seems mostly just hoping/praying that guys like Bote, Happ, Almora, Schwarber and (ugh) Russell aren't the guys they likely already are. I look upon that OF, so easily bolstered by nothing more than money and/or moving some players around (what's up Machado at 3B and Bryant to RF), and it fills me with despair. Stupid scumbag Ricketts.

[squally1313]

Yeah I guess just given the roster, I still prefer Baez, Rizzo, Contreras, and Bryant locked into the line up, and then having everyone else basically be able to play multiple positions and use the matchups (while still leaving all of them around to see if one or two of them can develop into someone worthy of being an every day player). With the current situation, you've got 5 spots for Heyward, Schwarber, Russell, Bote, Happ, Almora, and while I have definitely lost some hope for their development, I still think there either is hope for a solid regular (Schwarber, Happ, ughhh Russell) or that they have their uses in the right situations (Almora against lefties, as an example). Bringing that number down to 4 just to slide in Francisco Cervelli doesn't really excite me right now.

[BigSlick]

I'll see your "Keep Willy at Catcher forever" bet and raise you "Move Schwarber back to Catcher"

:hello:

[Sammy Sofa]

I guess I just figure it's a safer gamble to find someone serviceable at catcher at a more reasonable cost than what it would cost to upgrade the OF at this point. But I appreciate all of your points, squally, and realize this was me going out on a limb to begin with.

 

Well, back to pining about the trade for Lindor that will never happen.

Edited May 29, 2019 by Sammy Sofa

[Sammy Sofa]

I'll see your "Keep Willy at Catcher forever" bet and raise you "Move Schwarber back to Catcher"

:hello:

 

I LOVE IT.

 

[squally1313]

Here's a super weird question. In the future where strikes and balls are called electronically, and there's no need for the umpire to stand over and call the pitches....are teams still going to be required to employ a catcher in that position?

[jersey cubs fan]

Here's a super weird question. In the future where strikes and balls are called electronically, and there's no need for the umpire to stand over and call the pitches....are teams still going to be required to employ a catcher in that position?

 

[squally1313]

I guess I just figure it's a safer gamble to find someone serviceable at catcher at a more reasonable cost than what it would cost to upgrade the OF at this point. But I appreciate all of your points, squally, and realize this was me going out on a limb to begin with.

 

Well, back to pining about the trade for Lindor that will never happen.

 

Yeah I realized like fifteen minutes ago I had spent an hour debating an idea you just tossed out as a half joke. But...I was really bored.

[squally1313]

Here's a super weird question. In the future where strikes and balls are called electronically, and there's no need for the umpire to stand over and call the pitches....are teams still going to be required to employ a catcher in that position?

 

 

There's probably an obvious answer I'm not thinking about....but with no one on base, no need to frame/receive the ball, and no umpire to protect, is there a rule that requires someone to catch/attempt to catch the pitch? Or can they go be a ninth fielder? I remember something about number of players starting in fair territory, but even like 40 feet back to catch foul tips/foul pop ups seems more 'effective' defensively.

[jersey cubs fan]

Here's a super weird question. In the future where strikes and balls are called electronically, and there's no need for the umpire to stand over and call the pitches....are teams still going to be required to employ a catcher in that position?

 

 

There's probably an obvious answer I'm not thinking about....but with no one on base, no need to frame/receive the ball, and no umpire to protect, is there a rule that requires someone to catch/attempt to catch the pitch? Or can they go be a ninth fielder? I remember something about number of players starting in fair territory, but even like 40 feet back to catch foul tips/foul pop ups seems more 'effective' defensively.

I would hate to be the pitcher who pitches to a catcher forty feet back of home.

[squally1313]

Yeah I get that there'd be a serious mental factor to it that pitchers would need to overcome. I guess just in a hypothetical that eliminates that concern (like in a video game world)...is it even legal?

[Regular Show]

Here's a super weird question. In the future where strikes and balls are called electronically, and there's no need for the umpire to stand over and call the pitches....are teams still going to be required to employ a catcher in that position?

 

[Sammy Sofa]

No, I love it; make it kinda be like the baseball version of pulling the goalie in hockey. Nobody's on base, just need one out, and you can move the catcher elsewhere onto the field as an extra fielder in front of the plate for that AB so long as you officially do it before the first pitch in the sequence (and then he has to stay out for the entire AB). So long as the pitcher fires in strikes called by the amazing pitcher tracker that replaced stupid useless umps, hey, who cares if you're firing to the backstop with nobody on. Of course, now there's the gigantic question of what the hell the pitcher is aiming for without anyone behind the batter, but these are mere quibbles.

 

This is pure insanity and I want it to happen. MAKE IT HAPPEN, MLB, YOU COWARDS.

[sneakypower]

why is the thinking that he won't be an absolute defensive abyss in the OF? (he'll be an absolute defensive abyss in the OF)

 

all for the luxury of saddling ourselves with unnecessary Russell Martin type of contract

[Sammy Sofa]

why is the thinking that he won't be an absolute defensive abyss in the OF? (he'll be an absolute defensive abyss in the OF)

 

all for the luxury of saddling ourselves with unnecessary Russell Martin type of contract

 

Because he's cool and has decent speed and he's cool and has a rockin' arm and he's super cool.

 

If Schwarber can be graded as being serviceable or better out there (well, or at least used to be), I've got no doubt Willson could swing it.

[jersey cubs fan]

I would just like to see him throw behind every runner from out there.

[JudasIscariotTheBird]

why is the thinking that he won't be an absolute defensive abyss in the OF? (he'll be an absolute defensive abyss in the OF)

 

all for the luxury of saddling ourselves with unnecessary Russell Martin type of contract

He's basically a faster, more athletic Schwarber with a better arm and more experience in the OF...and Schwarber is [highlight=green]ELITE[/highlight] in LF as it is.

Edited May 29, 2019 by JudasIscariotTheBird

[JudasIscariotTheBird]

why is the thinking that he won't be an absolute defensive abyss in the OF? (he'll be an absolute defensive abyss in the OF)

 

all for the luxury of saddling ourselves with unnecessary Russell Martin type of contract

 

Because he's cool and has decent speed and he's cool and has a rockin' arm and he's super cool.

 

If Schwarber can be graded as being serviceable or better out there (well, or at least used to be), I've got no doubt Willson could swing it.

Slow on the draw.

[Banedon]