Barrett's Play

[goonys evil twin]

It's not about complicated interpersonal relationships, it's about production and the Cubs' organizations blatant disregard for what constitutes production.

 

...and announcers not giving the players nicknames.

 

Nice addition, Cornstalk.

 

just pulling my weight around here.

 

also, anyone notice how farnsworth's poor attitude is just killing the braves right now? whew, am i glad the cubs ditched him.

 

That's my point. Same player...why is he successful now? This isn't about chemistry but adjustments by the manager/coaches and catcher.

 

he was successful when he was with the cubs...at times. he got abused by baker last season and wore down. the tools were always there, and the cubs were stupid to give up on him.

 

But he kicked a fan, man.

[fromthestretch]

Why is it that the starters seem to prefer having Blanco catch them?

 

Because Barrett makes a good scapegoat.

 

Unless the catcher is dropping everything and not blocking anything in the dirt, the pitcher can't blame him for mistakes. And I don't think that any pitcher should complain about a catcher's pitch selection for two reasons:

 

1. If the signs are coming from the dugout, that's not the catcher's fault.

2. If the catcher is calling the game, the pitcher has every right to shake him off.

 

I can understand a pitcher having a certain level of comfort with a specific catcher behind the plate. However, Barrett has caught enough games that he knows what he's doing back there. He's not going to win a Gold Glove, but he isn't the reason the Cubs lose. As far as the pitcher should be concerned, having Barrett or Blanco behind the plate shouldn't matter. A strike is still a strike, and if you can't locate your pitches, you're not going to fare too well.

[fromthestretch]

Have you ever pitched and worried if you threw a ball in the dirt it might get by your catcher? If you let a fastball go and worry that the catcher might not get to it in the air? Had a baserunner on and know that your catcher couldn't throw out Ramirez? Some pitchers can block this stuff out and some can not. This effects the pitch before the ball gets to the batter and changes the spot thus changing how the ball may be hit so before you can look at the defensive burden of the other 7 fielders this problem has to be addressed.

 

If you're that worried about the catcher, then either the catcher is much worse than Barrett defensively, or you're paranoid.

 

The baserunning argument has some merit. However, with Blanco behind the plate, don't you worry about run support a little more?

 

As long as the guy behind the plate can catch the ball, can manage to get his body in front of balls in the dirt, and can avoid throwing the ball into center field on throws down to second, then a pitcher should be comfortable.

[Satch80]

Strong defense up the middle is not a new idea that's overvalued. It's been important from day one. Catcher and middle infielders are involved in a ton of plays. If they can't catch the ball. throw the ball and make good decisions you're not going to win many games.

 

Barrett is a liability behind the plate. He has trouble blocking balls in the dirt, throwing out runners, making plays at the plate and I'm not sure he's much good at framing pitches and calling games. Prior and Z prefer the 2nd string catcher. You figure it out.

 

Yes he has a good bat for his position and if we had not also sacrificed

defense for Nomar (poor range, throws) and Walker ( poor range, decisions and hands) and Aramis ( throws, slow footwork. poor range)

we could probably absorb Barrett. But we can't have an entire infield with shakey defense ( except Lee) and expect to win. It just aint done.

[fromthestretch]

Barrett is a liability behind the plate. He has trouble blocking balls in the dirt, throwing out runners, making plays at the plate and I'm not sure he's much good at framing pitches and calling games. Prior and Z prefer the 2nd string catcher. You figure it out.

 

I'm still trying to figure out why everyone blames a catcher for pitch selection when it's the pitcher that ultimately throws it. Everyone says the catcher needs to study the team they're facing, know how to approach each hitter. More of that should fall on the pitcher. The starting pitcher has four freaking days to prepare. He's the one who should know exactly how he wants to approach each hitter. I'd also like to think that a pitching coach is involved in this aspect of the game.

 

As for framing pitches, Barrett's caught enough games to the point where he's not going to blow a game because he didn't frame a pitch properly.

 

Yes he has a good bat for his position and if we had not also sacrificed defense for Nomar (poor range, throws) and Walker ( poor range, decisions and hands) and Aramis ( throws, slow footwork. poor range) we could probably absorb Barrett. But we can't have an entire infield with shakey defense ( except Lee) and expect to win. It just aint done.

 

Not sure about this year, but Nomar's range has been above average for his career. If it's down this year, that might have something to do with a certain muscle that was torn from the bone. Walker has had average range throughout his career. Aramis is Aramis. He'll have his good days and his bad. I would wager that if he could get healthy, his glovework would improve a bit. Having nagging leg problems can throw a person's game off a bit.

 

I agree that defense is important, but I think a lot of people make the Cubs defense out to be worse than it really is. Yes, the infield defense could be much better, but the Cubs would probably have to sacrifice quite a bit offensively to improve defensively. At that point, we can have a long thread about how much worse we are offensively.

[CuseCubFan69]

Have you ever pitched and worried if you threw a ball in the dirt it might get by your catcher? If you let a fastball go and worry that the catcher might not get to it in the air? Had a baserunner on and know that your catcher couldn't throw out Ramirez? Some pitchers can block this stuff out and some can not. This effects the pitch before the ball gets to the batter and changes the spot thus changing how the ball may be hit so before you can look at the defensive burden of the other 7 fielders this problem has to be addressed.

 

If you're that worried about the catcher, then either the catcher is much worse than Barrett defensively, or you're paranoid.

 

The baserunning argument has some merit. However, with Blanco behind the plate, don't you worry about run support a little more?

 

As long as the guy behind the plate can catch the ball, can manage to get his body in front of balls in the dirt, and can avoid throwing the ball into center field on throws down to second, then a pitcher should be comfortable.

 

You might be assuming that pitchers are robots and don't think about these things. What they should think and what they do think may not happen as we would like them to. Look, I'm not saying it's a all or nothing thing which a lot of people seem to think. I like Barrett but he needs to improve in certain aspects of the game. I don't think he will defensively at this age so IMO it's always a good idea to look and see how the Cubs can improve their team and if Barrett is part of that equation so regarding run support I also have to think about how many runs he gives up.

 

Barrett has problems catching the ball and blocking the balls in the dirt. His slow glove and body bother me as it also may bother the pitchers. I don't know how much it effects the pitchers but I would look into it. Winning may be the effect the pitchers need and then Barretts D could be over looked but if Barrett does have them not thinking about their job then let's find out why and have the staff talk this over and find a solution.

[fromthestretch]

You might be assuming that pitchers are robots and don't think about these things. What they should think and what they do think may not happen as we would like them to. Look, I'm not saying it's a all or nothing thing which a lot of people seem to think. I like Barrett but he needs to improve in certain aspects of the game. I don't think he will defensively at this age so IMO it's always a good idea to look and see how the Cubs can improve their team and if Barrett is part of that equation so regarding run support I also have to think about how many runs he gives up.

 

Barrett has problems catching the ball and blocking the balls in the dirt. His slow glove and body bother me as it also may bother the pitchers. I don't know how much it effects the pitchers but I would look into it. Winning may be the effect the pitchers need and then Barretts D could be over looked but if Barrett does have them not thinking about their job then let's find out why and have the staff talk this over and find a solution.

 

Actually, no. I'm not making that assumption. What I'm assuming is that pitchers are professionals and that if they've made the major leagues they no how to go about their job.

 

If a catcher is so bad that you're worried on every pitch whether he is going to catch it or not, then that person shouldn't ever be catching. Barrett is nowhere near that bad. He's adequate. He has four passed balls this year in just over 930 innings. Blanco has two passed balls in just under 370 innings. Blanco's ratio is actually worse. In fact, Barrett is actually on the low end as far as number of passed balls when you look at catchers who have caught 800 innings this season. I'll admit, his throwing does leave a bit to be desired, but there are a lot of catchers that don't throw well. Kendall, V. Martinez, and Lieberthal have been as bad, if not worse, at throwing out base-runners. Zaun, Lo Duca, Vartiek, and Pierzynski haven't been much better.

 

Sure, a certain level of comfort comes with having a defensively-gifted catcher. A certain level of comfort also comes knowing that you have one less weak spot in the lineup when Barrett is playing.

 

I think his mistakes get magnified on this board, since most of us see him play more than other catchers around the league. However, I'd bet that at worst he's probably middle of the pack or (more likely) just slightly below that when compared to other starting catchers at the major league level.

 

*edited to correct the fact that Varitek does not have a "z" in it

[CuseCubFan69]

You might be assuming that pitchers are robots and don't think about these things. What they should think and what they do think may not happen as we would like them to. Look, I'm not saying it's a all or nothing thing which a lot of people seem to think. I like Barrett but he needs to improve in certain aspects of the game. I don't think he will defensively at this age so IMO it's always a good idea to look and see how the Cubs can improve their team and if Barrett is part of that equation so regarding run support I also have to think about how many runs he gives up.

 

Barrett has problems catching the ball and blocking the balls in the dirt. His slow glove and body bother me as it also may bother the pitchers. I don't know how much it effects the pitchers but I would look into it. Winning may be the effect the pitchers need and then Barretts D could be over looked but if Barrett does have them not thinking about their job then let's find out why and have the staff talk this over and find a solution.

 

Actually, no. I'm not making that assumption. What I'm assuming is that pitchers are professionals and that if they've made the major leagues they no how to go about their job.

 

If a catcher is so bad that you're worried on every pitch whether he is going to catch it or not, then that person shouldn't ever be catching. Barrett is nowhere near that bad. He's adequate. He has four passed balls this year in just over 930 innings. Blanco has two passed balls in just under 370 innings. Blanco's ratio is actually worse. In fact, Barrett is actually on the low end as far as number of passed balls when you look at catchers who have caught 800 innings this season. I'll admit, his throwing does leave a bit to be desired, but there are a lot of catchers that don't throw well. Kendall, V. Martinez, and Lieberthal have been as bad, if not worse, at throwing out base-runners. Zaun, Lo Duca, Vartiez, and Pierzynski haven't been much better.

 

Sure, a certain level of comfort comes with having a defensively-gifted catcher. A certain level of comfort also comes knowing that you have one less weak spot in the lineup when Barrett is playing.

 

I think his mistakes get magnified on this board, since most of us see him play more than other catchers around the league. However, I'd bet that at worst he's probably middle of the pack or (more likely) just slightly below that when compared to other starting catchers at the major league level.

 

Again, I am not saying I don't want Barrett to be the Cubs catcher. The two points I am making or trying to make are that:

 

A: Does Barrett have an effect on the Cub pitchers mentally when they pitch. It's not that the pitchers may worry about him catching the ball all the time but if it even enters their thoughts. Professional yes but they are not perfect.

 

B: The plus/minus of a catchers offensive/defensive and leadership abilities and how they effect the team. As I've said many times that Barrett hits well enough to keep himself in the lineup and since the Cubs have too many holes in their offense it doesn't make sense to trade him unless it's a deal that can improve the team.

[fromthestretch]

Again, I am not saying I don't want Barrett to be the Cubs catcher. The two points I am making or trying to make are that:

 

A: Does Barrett have an effect on the Cub pitchers mentally when they pitch. It's not that the pitchers may worry about him catching the ball all the time but if it even enters their thoughts. Professional yes but they are not perfect.

 

I'm sure certain pitchers feel more comfortable with certain catchers. I'm just saying that shouldn't be a factor. I understand that certain factors outside of a pitcher's control (defense from the other eight guys on the field, run support, umpire calls, etc.) will always be in the back of his mind. When I pitch, those things are always there. But the back of the mind is where they should stay. If a pitcher starts thinking about those things while he's on the mound, it's only going to lead to trouble. If a pitcher is constantly worried about those things everytime out, then a coach needs to step in and talk to him.

 

B: The plus/minus of a catchers offensive/defensive and leadership abilities and how they effect the team. As I've said many times that Barrett hits well enough to keep himself in the lineup and since the Cubs have too many holes in their offense it doesn't make sense to trade him unless it's a deal that can improve the team.

 

Agreed.

[CuseCubFan69]

If a pitcher starts thinking about those things while he's on the mound, it's only going to lead to trouble. If a pitcher is constantly worried about those things everytime out, then a coach needs to step in and talk to him.

 

This is why I like the catcher to be the coach on the field. Does Barrett notice these things? Yeah, the coaches and manager are suppose to see what's going on but having a catcher that can take care and recognize things on the field, during the flow of the game, are very important IMO. He sees the release point better than anyone. He sees the movement better then anyone. Can he commute this to the pitcher? Does he have the respect from the staff to do so?

[goonys evil twin]

If a pitcher starts thinking about those things while he's on the mound, it's only going to lead to trouble. If a pitcher is constantly worried about those things everytime out, then a coach needs to step in and talk to him.

 

This is why I like the catcher to be the coach on the field. Does Barrett notice these things? Yeah, the coaches and manager are suppose to see what's going on but having a catcher that can take care and recognize things on the field, during the flow of the game, are very important IMO. He sees the release point better than anyone. He sees the movement better then anyone. Can he commute this to the pitcher? Does he have the respect from the staff to do so?

 

I remember the highly regarded Joe Girardi once talking about a Cubs pitcher who got injured and saying something to the effect of, "I noticed behind the plate that his delivery was off, he looked like he was wearing down." Yet Joe never went out and talked to that pitcher in that game, and he never said anything pre-injury that might have caused the manager to pull the guy before the injury got worse.

 

I don't know where the myth of the all-knowing, soothing, Dr. Phil-esque catcher leading the weak-minded and timid pitchers through a ballgame came from. But it probably got a big boost from Crash Davis, and almost always comes after the fact. When Pudge was in Texas he first received high praise for his masterful arm. Then as Texas pitchers routinely got hammered, conventional wisdom said he was selfishly calling too many fastballs so he could gun down baserunners more easily, and therefore jeopardizing the team. He was considered a terrible leader in the offseason before signing with Florida, then his reputation soared after winning the world series. Now that Detroit is struggling with him around, that reputation is taking another hit.

 

Jason Varitek is considered perhaps the ultimate catcher as coach in the game today, yet for years his genius was unable to help the Red Sox faltering pitching staff from taking advantage of that team's great offense. And now that Boston's pitching is struggling again, you don't hear nearly as much about his greatness.

 

Damien Miller was supposed to be a defensive stud with great ability to manage the pitchers. Yet when he came to Chicago, he routinely failed to prevent wild pitches and passed balls with what many saw as a lazy approach to blocking pitches, and when he went to Oakland the big three suffered a decline and the team failed to make the playoffs for the first time in 5 years. The almighty Mike Matheny doesn't seem to have meant anything in terms of seeing a decline out of STL pitching or an improvement out of SF.

 

All this talk about catcher coaches, much like clutch hitting and other intangibles, just doesn't hold up to objective analysis.

 

Now, I'm not saying there's no value in great catcher defense. I just think many of the Barrett bashers are really getting carried away with the talk of finding his replacement. All things considered, Barrett is top half of the league as a catcher. He does not kill the team with his defense or game calling. But he's not great at either. I would have no problem with the Cubs replacing him, as I was never a fan of his from the start. But the offensive hit would likely be significant, and you'd have to make serious upgrades elsewhere to make it worthwhile. Right now the Cubs pay about $5.5m for all around good catching (offense and defense). If you could bring that figure down to about $2m and still get all around above average catching and get significant value from a Barrett trade, and fill needs elsewhere in the lineup, then it makes sense. But none of that is going to be easy. Hendry has not shown a great aptitude for filling multiple needs at once, I don't they should make their job any more difficult than it already is.

[CuseCubFan69]

Sometimes it takes awhile for that trust to happen and sometimes some pitchers and catchers just don't see eye to eye. Look at Maddux. He has pitched for years with the second string catchers. Why?

[Tim]

Sometimes it takes awhile for that trust to happen and sometimes some pitchers and catchers just don't see eye to eye. Look at Maddux. He has pitched for years with the second string catchers. Why?

Because Bobby Cox always picks one pitcher that will work with the backup catcher to get the regular guy rest. Maddux didn't need any assistance calling a game, didn't have pitches that were particularly hard to catch and prevented runs to the extent that the offense could take a hit and still leave the team with a good chance to win.

 

That and he needed a catcher who could throw better than Javy & Barrett.

[abuck1220]

Strong defense up the middle is not a new idea that's overvalued. It's been important from day one. Catcher and middle infielders are involved in a ton of plays. If they can't catch the ball. throw the ball and make good decisions you're not going to win many games.

 

 

boston's done all right with some pretty shaky defense up the middle.

[CuseCubFan69]

Sometimes it takes awhile for that trust to happen and sometimes some pitchers and catchers just don't see eye to eye. Look at Maddux. He has pitched for years with the second string catchers. Why?

Because Bobby Cox always picks one pitcher that will work with the backup catcher to get the regular guy rest. Maddux didn't need any assistance calling a game, didn't have pitches that were particularly hard to catch and prevented runs to the extent that the offense could take a hit and still leave the team with a good chance to win.

 

That and he needed a catcher who could throw better than Javy & Barrett.

 

So a good staff could use a good defensive catcher? Do you think the Cubs have a good staff?

[CuseCubFan69]

Strong defense up the middle is not a new idea that's overvalued. It's been important from day one. Catcher and middle infielders are involved in a ton of plays. If they can't catch the ball. throw the ball and make good decisions you're not going to win many games.

 

 

boston's done all right with some pretty shaky defense up the middle.

 

And Atlanta has done well being solid there.

[Chocolate Milk]

Strong defense up the middle is not a new idea that's overvalued. It's been important from day one. Catcher and middle infielders are involved in a ton of plays. If they can't catch the ball. throw the ball and make good decisions you're not going to win many games.

 

 

boston's done all right with some pretty shaky defense up the middle.

 

And Atlanta has done well being solid there.

 

If you can do well without it or with it doesn't it mean it's really not of the utmost importance?

[burnt out cubbie fan]

Sometimes it takes awhile for that trust to happen and sometimes some pitchers and catchers just don't see eye to eye. Look at Maddux. He has pitched for years with the second string catchers. Why?

Because Bobby Cox always picks one pitcher that will work with the backup catcher to get the regular guy rest. Maddux didn't need any assistance calling a game, didn't have pitches that were particularly hard to catch and prevented runs to the extent that the offense could take a hit and still leave the team with a good chance to win.

 

That and he needed a catcher who could throw better than Javy & Barrett.

 

So a good staff could use a good defensive catcher? Do you think the Cubs have a good staff?

That's not the point. If you can find a great defensive catcher that puts up numbers close to what Barrett puts up then I would be all for getting him. The chances are you aren't going to be able to find that, though, and Barrett provides too much to the offense to get some no bat defensive catcher.

[CuseCubFan69]

Strong defense up the middle is not a new idea that's overvalued. It's been important from day one. Catcher and middle infielders are involved in a ton of plays. If they can't catch the ball. throw the ball and make good decisions you're not going to win many games.

 

 

boston's done all right with some pretty shaky defense up the middle.

 

And Atlanta has done well being solid there.

 

If you can do well without it or with it doesn't it mean it's really not of the utmost importance?

 

I think it depends on the makeup of the team. If you can put studs all over the field or have huge hitting strengths to overcompenate sure. But, Boston didn't start winning until they got Cabera or at least showed improvement. Nomars a better hitter than Cabera is and Epstein decided to go in a more defensive mode Also, it's been mentioned by Goony that Variteck calls a heck of a game so Boston is not near as weak up the middle as some may think.

[abuck1220]

Strong defense up the middle is not a new idea that's overvalued. It's been important from day one. Catcher and middle infielders are involved in a ton of plays. If they can't catch the ball. throw the ball and make good decisions you're not going to win many games.

 

 

boston's done all right with some pretty shaky defense up the middle.

 

And Atlanta has done well being solid there.

 

they're also 3rd in the NL in runs and 6th in the NL in era. are you saying their defense at c, 2b, ss and cf is a bigger reason for their success than their hitting and pitching?

 

 

seattle has the fewest errors in mlb...they must be winning their division by 25 games.

[abuck1220]

Strong defense up the middle is not a new idea that's overvalued. It's been important from day one. Catcher and middle infielders are involved in a ton of plays. If they can't catch the ball. throw the ball and make good decisions you're not going to win many games.

 

 

boston's done all right with some pretty shaky defense up the middle.

 

And Atlanta has done well being solid there.

 

they're also 3rd in the NL in runs and 6th in the NL in era. are you saying their defense at c, 2b, ss and cf is a bigger reason for their success than their hitting and pitching?

 

 

seattle has the fewest errors in mlb...they must be winning their division by 25 games.

[burnt out cubbie fan]

Strong defense up the middle is not a new idea that's overvalued. It's been important from day one. Catcher and middle infielders are involved in a ton of plays. If they can't catch the ball. throw the ball and make good decisions you're not going to win many games.

 

 

boston's done all right with some pretty shaky defense up the middle.

 

And Atlanta has done well being solid there.

 

they're also 3rd in the NL in runs and 6th in the NL in era. are you saying their defense at c, 2b, ss and cf is a bigger reason for their success than their hitting and pitching?

 

 

seattle has the fewest errors in mlb...they must be winning their division by 25 games.

But their players up middle of the diamond are horrible! That's why they lose. (forget the pitching outside of Felix)

[CuseCubFan69]

Sometimes it takes awhile for that trust to happen and sometimes some pitchers and catchers just don't see eye to eye. Look at Maddux. He has pitched for years with the second string catchers. Why?

Because Bobby Cox always picks one pitcher that will work with the backup catcher to get the regular guy rest. Maddux didn't need any assistance calling a game, didn't have pitches that were particularly hard to catch and prevented runs to the extent that the offense could take a hit and still leave the team with a good chance to win.

 

That and he needed a catcher who could throw better than Javy & Barrett.

 

So a good staff could use a good defensive catcher? Do you think the Cubs have a good staff?

That's not the point. If you can find a great defensive catcher that puts up numbers close to what Barrett puts up then I would be all for getting him. The chances are you aren't going to be able to find that, though, and Barrett provides too much to the offense to get some no bat defensive catcher.

 

Of course you would like a catcher like that...all the teams in MLB would. And why is nobat/good D always grouped together? How about average bat and good D. I just don't understand the extremes.

 

Barrett has his plus/minuses like every player and my point for the 100th time is that the Cubs have to continue to look at that...as they do any player..and figure out what is the best thing for the team.

 

Also, again....how do the Cub pitchers, mainly the starters, feel about Barrett? We do not know, only the players know. I am not saying they don't like him nor am I saying they do.

[CuseCubFan69]

Strong defense up the middle is not a new idea that's overvalued. It's been important from day one. Catcher and middle infielders are involved in a ton of plays. If they can't catch the ball. throw the ball and make good decisions you're not going to win many games.

 

 

boston's done all right with some pretty shaky defense up the middle.

 

And Atlanta has done well being solid there.

 

they're also 3rd in the NL in runs and 6th in the NL in era. are you saying their defense at c, 2b, ss and cf is a bigger reason for their success than their hitting and pitching?

 

 

seattle has the fewest errors in mlb...they must be winning their division by 25 games.

 

Again with extremes. It's a balance that needs to be addressed and if you tell me that if you have two exact teams only one has worse defensive players up the middle that that team would be better?

 

Also, errors are objective...score keepers are not reliable in what I would look at. Also, If you have pitchers giving up missles it doesn't matter who have out there. Balance is needed..good balance and solid up the middle Defense is always a good place to start. Look at the dominate 70 Red teams...yeah they could hit but they were also awesome up the middle.

[abuck1220]

Strong defense up the middle is not a new idea that's overvalued. It's been important from day one. Catcher and middle infielders are involved in a ton of plays. If they can't catch the ball. throw the ball and make good decisions you're not going to win many games.

 

 

boston's done all right with some pretty shaky defense up the middle.

 

And Atlanta has done well being solid there.

 

they're also 3rd in the NL in runs and 6th in the NL in era. are you saying their defense at c, 2b, ss and cf is a bigger reason for their success than their hitting and pitching?

 

 

seattle has the fewest errors in mlb...they must be winning their division by 25 games.

 

Again with extremes. It's a balance that needs to be addressed and if you tell me that if you have two exact teams only one has worse defensive players up the middle that that team would be better?

 

Also, errors are objective...score keepers are not reliable in what I would look at. Also, If you have pitchers giving up missles it doesn't matter who have out there. Balance is needed..good balance and solid up the middle Defense is always a good place to start. Look at the dominate 70 Red teams...yeah they could hit but they were also awesome up the middle.

 

of course you'd rather have the team that's solid defensively up the middle. but no team is good-great at everything...and, for me, in a fantasy draft of team skills, good d up the middle would be pretty low on my draft board.

 

if you can show me a replacement for barrett that is a perfect balance of offense and defense, maybe i'd want him. but i don't know who that is.