Barrett's Play

[goonys evil twin]

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.

 

I think you, and all the others dogging Barrett, are the ones going to extremes. Those of us that are addressing the need for balance, are acknowledging that Barrett has his pluses and minuses. He's a top line offensive catcher, and just average defensively. Overall, with Blanco and Barrett, the Cubs are getting top line offense out of catcher (2nd in NL in OBP and OPS), and above average defense. That's pretty good balance. Those of you ripping Barrett to shreds and begging for a replacement to solidify up the middle defense are completely ignoring offense. Because quite frankly there is no realistic option to significantly upgrade the Cubs overall catching defense without significantly decreasing their offensive production, thus, throwing off the balance.

 

I can't believe I have to fall on the side of Barrett defense. I never liked his acquisition. But the fact is catcher is not a trouble spot on the Cubs, and the chances of upgrading there are slim to none. Other problems are far more pressing, and much easier to address.

[burnt out cubbie fan]

Ok, what catcher would you like to see the Cubs get instead of Barrett?

[Garwilly]

Ok, what catcher would you like to see the Cubs get instead of Barrett?

 

Bench

[Tim]

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.

Johjima. ;)

[brfahey]

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.

 

I think you, and all the others dogging Barrett, are the ones going to extremes. Those of us that are addressing the need for balance, are acknowledging that Barrett has his pluses and minuses. He's a top line offensive catcher, and just average defensively. Overall, with Blanco and Barrett, the Cubs are getting top line offense out of catcher (2nd in NL in OBP and OPS), and above average defense. That's pretty good balance. Those of you ripping Barrett to shreds and begging for a replacement to solidify up the middle defense are completely ignoring offense. Because quite frankly there is no realistic option to significantly upgrade the Cubs overall catching defense without significantly decreasing their offensive production, thus, throwing off the balance.

 

I can't believe I have to fall on the side of Barrett defense. I never liked his acquisition. But the fact is catcher is not a trouble spot on the Cubs, and the chances of upgrading there are slim to none. Other problems are far more pressing, and much easier to address.

 

A couple of things: I don't think anyone is "ripping Barrett" to shreds." I will leave that stuff to those obsessed with neifi and macias. Barrett's defensive lapses are being brought up as they relate to the Cubs weakness as a team.

 

Second, unless it's all due to Blanco, where do you get the Cubs have above average defense at catcher. I don't think there's a knowledgeable baseball person who would tell you Barrett is above average defensively.

 

Catcher may not be the most pressing spot to fill but it ain't far off. Our defense has killed us all year. We are a stupid team on offense and defense and Barrett is a part of that.

 

Finally, offense does not erase defense. If a Barrett defensive lapse lets in a rn which costs us a game, him hitting a homer the next night does not even the scales. Every run you give up means you have to score two to overcome it.

[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.

 

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.

 

Again...I am not saying I want Barrett gone. Barrett offensively helps hide the Cubs weaknesses in other offensive areas. This also isn't fantasy baseball. If you put teams on paper and play the games that way sure but there are many variables that go into building a team. I'm not into the chemistry thing but I am into building a dominate team that can win and continue winning. If you add ARod/SS, Roberts/2B, Manny Ramirez/LF to the Cubs then the catcher position doesn't need to be so offensive and the plus/minus at catcher changes and comes into play. If the Cubs can win with Barrett continuing to be their catcher then it works. If not, why? Again, I am not blaming Barrett but he is one of the pieces that you would have to look at.

 

I just do not believe that extremes make a team dominate. I like a balance and when things happen like the power hitting is shut down a little small ball. Pitchers duel a guy makes a diving catch or rips a ball into the stands. A 8-8 game and see what the flow of the game develops or do I need to breakup that flow with a stolen base or drag bunt. Yeah, it's a slugfest but did the wind change and start blowing in? You see, these are the things I am looking at that along with the numbers that a player brings to the table. Versatile moves and options. Hendry has to have a manager that can do this and he has to supply the players that can execute them.

[imb]

This is ridiculous. Why are people that mention his less than stellar defense totally ignoring his offensive advantage? If you'd take an average bat/good D, why not take good bat/average D?

[CuseCubFan69]

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.

 

I think you, and all the others dogging Barrett, are the ones going to extremes. Those of us that are addressing the need for balance, are acknowledging that Barrett has his pluses and minuses. He's a top line offensive catcher, and just average defensively. Overall, with Blanco and Barrett, the Cubs are getting top line offense out of catcher (2nd in NL in OBP and OPS), and above average defense. That's pretty good balance. Those of you ripping Barrett to shreds and begging for a replacement to solidify up the middle defense are completely ignoring offense. Because quite frankly there is no realistic option to significantly upgrade the Cubs overall catching defense without significantly decreasing their offensive production, thus, throwing off the balance.

 

I can't believe I have to fall on the side of Barrett defense. I never liked his acquisition. But the fact is catcher is not a trouble spot on the Cubs, and the chances of upgrading there are slim to none. Other problems are far more pressing, and much easier to address.

 

I agree 100% that the Cubs have more pressing needs than at catcher. Have you seen anything that I have wrote that suggests otherwise? I have said what I like from a catcher and if he gives more in any area that is wonderful. I wonder what the Cub pitchers think of pitching to Barrett...does that mean I want him traded? No. But, everytime I look at a comment someone writes that I want Barrett traded and not once have I said that.

[brfahey]

This is ridiculous. Why are people that mention his less than stellar defense totally ignoring his offensive advantage? If you'd take an average bat/good D, why not take good bat/average D?

 

It's not average defense, it's below average defense. And, as has been discussed above, catcher is the most crucial defensive position on the field. You got bad catching defense chances are you are going to have poor team defense.

[goonys evil twin]

Second, unless it's all due to Blanco, where do you get the Cubs have above average defense at catcher. I don't think there's a knowledgeable baseball person who would tell you Barrett is above average defensively.

 

Our defense has killed us all year. We are a stupid team on offense and defense and Barrett is a part of that.

 

Barrett is average, maybe a little below. Blanco is very good. Barrett plays about 2.5 times as much as Blanco, put those together and I see above average. If you want to say average, fine. Either way, they are fine in the catchers spot overall.

 

Defense has not killed this team all year. There have been bad episodes. However, bad pitching and poor approaches at the plate have been far more damaging to the team. It's nont like they were a few less mistakes from taking the division.

 

Everybody likes to point out specific times when defensive lapses lost games, but opponents' defensive lapses have also won games for the Cubs. And when you talk about things like Barrett in Philly, who in their right mind could say the Cubs would have won if he didn't make that mistake? Odds are they still lose. It's not like they were winning and he let in the tying and winning run with stupidity. Simply improving defense is not nearly enough to make this team better. Odds are, when you improve the defense, the lineup will decline, and more times than not, that offensive decline will be greater than the defensive improvement, because of many factors previously discussed. Yes, defense is important, but it's clearly 3rd on the list. You can't win just with defense, you must pitch and hit first and second. The total OF production, hitting and fielding combined, has been the biggest problem on this team.

 

The catcher position is fine overall. Not great, but fine, and I've yet to hear any realistic option to improve it, while improving the team as a whole as well.

[CuseCubFan69]

This is ridiculous. Why are people that mention his less than stellar defense totally ignoring his offensive advantage? If you'd take an average bat/good D, why not take good bat/average D?

 

I like his bat and you're right it is better than average while his D is average...maybe below average. Obviously, his bat keeps him as the main starter as it should with Blanco being the other choice.

[imb]

Isnt his rate like 97/100? That's barely below average. I would argue that our team defense is bad because of the combo of Aramis/Nomar/Hollandsworth/Dubois that we've been running out there all year, not because of a slightly below average catcher.

[brfahey]

Second, unless it's all due to Blanco, where do you get the Cubs have above average defense at catcher. I don't think there's a knowledgeable baseball person who would tell you Barrett is above average defensively.

 

Our defense has killed us all year. We are a stupid team on offense and defense and Barrett is a part of that.

 

Barrett is average, maybe a little below. Blanco is very good. Barrett plays about 2.5 times as much as Blanco, put those together and I see above average. If you want to say average, fine. Either way, they are fine in the catchers spot overall.

 

Defense has not killed this team all year. There have been bad episodes. However, bad pitching and poor approaches at the plate have been far more damaging to the team. It's nont like they were a few less mistakes from taking the division.

 

Everybody likes to point out specific times when defensive lapses lost games, but opponents' defensive lapses have also won games for the Cubs. And when you talk about things like Barrett in Philly, who in their right mind could say the Cubs would have won if he didn't make that mistake? Odds are they still lose. It's not like they were winning and he let in the tying and winning run with stupidity. Simply improving defense is not nearly enough to make this team better. Odds are, when you improve the defense, the lineup will decline, and more times than not, that offensive decline will be greater than the defensive improvement, because of many factors previously discussed. Yes, defense is important, but it's clearly 3rd on the list. You can't win just with defense, you must pitch and hit first and second. The total OF production, hitting and fielding combined, has been the biggest problem on this team.

 

The catcher position is fine overall. Not great, but fine, and I've yet to hear any realistic option to improve it, while improving the team as a whole as well.

 

It's OK that Barrett brain-locked and acted like a little leaguer because "odds are, they still lose?" What kind of argument is that? Why even try to get the other team out because "odds are" you are going to lose about forty perent of the time, even in a good year." Why improve the offense? "Odds are" they will still make outs 7 times out of ten.

 

Using that "odds are" crap as an excuse for poor play is weak.

[CuseCubFan69]

Isnt his rate like 97/100? That's barely below average. I would argue that our team defense is bad because of the combo of Aramis/Nomar/Hollandsworth/Dubois that we've been running out there all year, not because of a slightly below average catcher.

 

I can't argue with that. What I can ask is what if the Cubs pitchers say to themselves..."Oh crap, Barretts my catcher today."? How do you deal with that?

[imb]

I think that's idle speculation. There's no way to know whether they think that or not, so why even bother? Why not just look at the numbers that we can? Barrett is a slightly below average defensive catcher, and an above average offensive catcher. The overall product is one of the top catchers in the game, whether the pitchers are afraid to throw to him or not.

[brfahey]

I think that's idle speculation. There's no way to know whether they think that or not, so why even bother? Why not just look at the numbers that we can? Barrett is a slightly below average defensive catcher, and an above average offensive catcher. The overall product is one of the top catchers in the game, whether the pitchers are afraid to throw to him or not.

 

It may be speculation, but it isn't idle. There is no definitive way to know it, but that doesn't make it unworthy of exploring. Numbers are a good guide, not a be all and end all.

[imb]

I think that's idle speculation. There's no way to know whether they think that or not, so why even bother? Why not just look at the numbers that we can? Barrett is a slightly below average defensive catcher, and an above average offensive catcher. The overall product is one of the top catchers in the game, whether the pitchers are afraid to throw to him or not.

 

It may be speculation, but it isn't idle. There is no definitive way to know it, but that doesn't make it unworthy of exploring. Numbers are a good guide, not a be all and end all.

 

If there's no definitive way of knowing, why bother exploring it? If there's no answer, there's no use for the question.

 

What are you going to do? Have Bruce Miles ask Prior if he is afraid to pitch to Barrett? Please, it's a waste of time.

[brfahey]

I think that's idle speculation. There's no way to know whether they think that or not, so why even bother? Why not just look at the numbers that we can? Barrett is a slightly below average defensive catcher, and an above average offensive catcher. The overall product is one of the top catchers in the game, whether the pitchers are afraid to throw to him or not.

 

It may be speculation, but it isn't idle. There is no definitive way to know it, but that doesn't make it unworthy of exploring. Numbers are a good guide, not a be all and end all.

 

If there's no definitive way of knowing, why bother exploring it? If there's no answer, there's no use for the question.

 

What are you going to do? Have Bruce Miles ask Prior if he is afraid to pitch to Barrett? Please, it's a waste of time.

 

You're not much on philosophy, are you?

[burnt out cubbie fan]

It really shouldn't be that big of a surprise if he is catching them since he does catch somewhere around four out of every five games and he usually sticks to the pitchers. At some point the pitcher just has to adjust because he can't go through a 162 game thinking oh crap it's Barrett pitching today.

[imb]

What exactly does that have to do with whether or not the pitchers are afraid of pitching to Barrett again?

[fromthestretch]

What I can ask is what if the Cubs pitchers say to themselves..."Oh crap, Barretts my catcher today."? How do you deal with that?

 

You tell them to suck it up and do their job.

 

Barrett has done nothing to warrant that much disrespect. If a pitcher doesn't have enough confidence in his own stuff to get people out with Barrett behind the plate, then that pitcher has bigger problems than the person catching him.

[burnt out cubbie fan]

I think that's idle speculation. There's no way to know whether they think that or not, so why even bother? Why not just look at the numbers that we can? Barrett is a slightly below average defensive catcher, and an above average offensive catcher. The overall product is one of the top catchers in the game, whether the pitchers are afraid to throw to him or not.

 

It may be speculation, but it isn't idle. There is no definitive way to know it, but that doesn't make it unworthy of exploring. Numbers are a good guide, not a be all and end all.

 

If there's no definitive way of knowing, why bother exploring it? If there's no answer, there's no use for the question.

 

What are you going to do? Have Bruce Miles ask Prior if he is afraid to pitch to Barrett? Please, it's a waste of time.

 

You're not much on philosophy, are you?

When you are using it as an arguement against a player without any proof that it is actually true I do have a bit of a problem with it. Have you ever heard one of the Cubs pitchers in the last two years say that they don't like to throw to Michael or that his defensive abilities sometimes worries them and decreases their effectiveness?

[brfahey]

What exactly does that have to do with whether or not the pitchers are afraid of pitching to Barrett again?

 

Youu said it can't be answered definitively so don't even ask it. That is a very uncurious (Incurious?) position, that's all. And I don't think it's a matter of fear for the pitchers, it's confidence in the catcher.

[CuseCubFan69]

I think that's idle speculation. There's no way to know whether they think that or not, so why even bother? Why not just look at the numbers that we can? Barrett is a slightly below average defensive catcher, and an above average offensive catcher. The overall product is one of the top catchers in the game, whether the pitchers are afraid to throw to him or not.

 

Of course it's idle speculation. We, the fans, do not know what goes on behind the scenes. When you look at numbers how does that tell you they couldn't have been better given different circumstances? My big question is how the Cub pitchers react and feel about Barrett as their catcher. I don't care to see him traded but if the Cubs do move him would this be a reason why?

 

I also wouldn't say afraid but not thinking about pitching like they should be doing. say you're a GM and you have been told by your staff that they do not like pitching to a certain catcher. Now please realize this doesn't pertain to Barrett as we both don't know how the Cub pitchers feel. What would you do? You see IMB...this is my question and I just tied it into this Barrett thread.

 

If the Cubs have...statistically speaking...above average players like Barrett at every position I'd be thrilled.

[brfahey]

I think that's idle speculation. There's no way to know whether they think that or not, so why even bother? Why not just look at the numbers that we can? Barrett is a slightly below average defensive catcher, and an above average offensive catcher. The overall product is one of the top catchers in the game, whether the pitchers are afraid to throw to him or not.

 

It may be speculation, but it isn't idle. There is no definitive way to know it, but that doesn't make it unworthy of exploring. Numbers are a good guide, not a be all and end all.

 

If there's no definitive way of knowing, why bother exploring it? If there's no answer, there's no use for the question.

 

What are you going to do? Have Bruce Miles ask Prior if he is afraid to pitch to Barrett? Please, it's a waste of time.

 

You're not much on philosophy, are you?

When you are using it as an arguement against a player without any proof that it is actually true I do have a bit of a problem with it. Have you ever heard one of the Cubs pitchers in the last two years say that they don't like to throw to Michael or that his defensive abilities sometimes worries them and decreases their effectiveness?

 

No, and I haven't heard any of the Cubs be quoted for attribution saying that patterson sucks, although I suspect a lot of them share that opinion.