davearm2

I don't think catchers "vary so significantly defensively". Absent any reason to believe otherwise, I suspect they probably vary about as much as any other position. The other guy was the one taking the rather confusing (to me at least) position that there is almost no variation amongst catchers, and significantly less than at other positions. That's not really what he said. He said the difference between an average catcher and an elite catcher is probably not as large (or impactful) as the difference between an average CF and an elite CF. I tend to agree. I get the hypothesis, I just happen to think it's probably wrong. Here's why. At other spots on the diamond, a guy's defensive rating is mostly a function of speed/range, fielding/hands, and arm strength and accuracy. These are the criteria where one guy differentiates himself from other guys. For a catcher, you can essentially drop speed/range (although the ability to get out from behind the plate to field bunts and chase popups is certainly a factor); the other elements still matter. But you also have to add in a whole slew of other criteria under the umbrella of defense, which have already been discussed. The catcher's job just has many more dimensions to it, and therefore it stands to reason that there is likely more variability in the abilities of the different guys that do it.

I don't think catchers "vary so significantly defensively". Absent any reason to believe otherwise, I suspect they probably vary about as much as any other position. The other guy was the one taking the rather confusing (to me at least) position that there is almost no variation amongst catchers, and significantly less than at other positions.

Why? Because there's nothing inherent about that position to suggest the talent range is significantly narrower than it is at other spots. How are you coming to this conclusion? Wow you guys say the darnedest things straining to make me look bad. How did I come to the conclusion that not all catchers are more or less equal defensively? Really? That's a question you need me to answer? So apparently you believe I'm wrong about this?

Why? Because there's nothing inherent about that position to suggest the talent range is significantly narrower than it is at other spots.

Bad defensive catchers or guys who aren't good at all that stuff you cited don't make it and stick at the MLB level unless they absolutely rake. The overwhelming majority of MLB catchers are no hit all defense guys. That makes the gap between great and average very small. I don't buy that at all. There's a spectrum of talent at catcher just as there is at other positions. I would agree that the minimum level of competence is higher at catcher than at, say, LF. But the notion that all catchers are more or less equal defensively seems totally speculative and almost certainly incorrect.

I'm not quite sure where 0.3 wins is coming from. Since becoming a full time player he's average +8.4 runs/year by fangraphs defensive numbers. So, nearly a win per year with the glove over other MLB catchers. 0.3 was cited in the earlier Fangraphs article. I think the exact opposite. The catcher is an integral part of every pitch. Of course I'm using a pretty comprehensive interpretation of defense, that includes handling the pitchers, calling the game, framing pitches, limiting the running game, etc. etc. I hope we can all agree that there's a whole lot more going on than just CS% and (PB+WP)/NP. That point is fine. But you're assuming that Yadi is off the charts good at the stuff that can't be quantified very well. I have no idea how you got here. I'm not defending the contract.

Have you read the fangraphs articles? Not saying you're wrong and they're right, but they address each of these things in great detail, and that analysis produces a much different conclusion.

Welp, mineaswell drop 15M on him then. We have no way to know what Molina is worth, using the normal saber-tools. So to argue for or against $15M based on sabermetrics makes one look kinda foolish. So basically if we don't agree with your assessment of sabermetrics we're foolish? No one is saying they're perfect, but they're a lot more accurate than "the eye test" especially when we have a as many years to reference as we do for Molina. So basically, no. Hey don't take my word for it if you don't want. Read the Fangraphs article linked earlier. Emphasis mine. I'd like to see a show of hands of folks that believe Molina's defense is worth just 0.3 wins. Sure "the eye test" is even more flawed, but at some point you have to step back and say the numbers just don't make any sense here. Which brings us back to my original point: Molina's defense is unquestionably worth something, but we have no reliable way to quantify that value.

Welp, mineaswell drop 15M on him then. We have no way to know what Molina is worth, using the normal saber-tools. So to argue for or against $15M based on sabermetrics makes one look kinda foolish.

I don't think that it means that there will be less sellers, but certainly more buyers. It's a zero-sum game. 30 teams total. If there are more buyers, then by definition there are fewer sellers. (Unless you think there's a third, "none of the above" category.)

My position was stated in my first post. And since then, I have restated it and elaborated upon it for you.

You may have your head in the sand on this, I don't really know. But the 600# gorilla in the proverbial corner of the sabermetric clubhouse is that defensive metrics still aren't very reliable. All you have to do is look at how often there are huge discrepancies between the ratings produced by the various systems to see that a lot of very smart people still haven't cracked this particular nut. And for catchers, hey, it's great that they're innovating and all, but they're nowhere close to having a handle on how to measure all of these factors effectively. Of all the positions on the field, this is the one that's furthest away from meaningfulness.

Okay I'll indulge your question since you are perpetually clueless... What's the WAR value of a catcher... gaining the trust of his pitching staff? controlling the other team's running game (and this goes far beyond CS%)? understanding opposing hitters through experience and video study? knowing how to call a game, sequence pitches in an AB, etc.? quarterbacking the infield defense? giving the pitcher the confidence that if he throws a 2-strike slider in the dirt, it's going to get blocked? ... and on and on. And furthermore, how would any of the above be measured in any sort of meaningful way? This isn't a traditionalist vs. sabermetric rant. And it's not even really about Molina. He's assumed to be good at a lot of these things, but who really knows since they're virtually impossible to quantify? CERA was intended to capture these things, but most everyone agrees it's virtually worthless as a metric. Like Einstein said, not everything that counts, can be counted. Noplace in a baseball game is this more true than at the catcher position.

Massive WHOOOOSH

There's no doubt in my mind that the sabermetric community has no clue how to put a WAR value on an elite defensive catcher. Or even how to identify an elite defensive catcher.

A "What's Wrong with Castro???" thread pops up in late April, and stays active all year.

LOL I thought you were talking about the old LOOGY Mike Stanton. And I was like, why would we be talking about him in the first place.

Of course we haven't heard the whole story, and probably never will. All we know is that things don't add up. And that there's a cup full of pee with synthetic testosterone in it that Braun can't explain. I would like to see Braun demonstrate, using his own urine, how a sample tested immediately can come back clean, but a second sample drawn at the same time, but left sitting out for 44 hours, can come back with synthetic testosterone in it. See now that would be compelling. But that's not going to happen for the simple reason that it's a scientific impossibility.

Too bad it isn't Tim McCracken

Oh good lord. Two summers ago, you kept saying over and over that Colvin would never hit 20 HRs. It was a running debate for weeks between you and a bunch of other posters, and you were steadfast (as always). I'm too lazy to dig up two-year-old posts but I'm quite certain you know exactly what I'm referring to. Tell me you were happy when Colvin hit his 20th HR that year, and wish he would've hit even more. I dare you. It's no different with LaHair this year.

You've never admitted you were wrong either. I'm guessing if you had to pick, you'd rather see LaHair flop.

How about an offer that improves the Braves' chances in 2012. If ever there was a team looking for a deal that puts them over the proverbial top, this would be it.

The writing is so clearly on the wall on this one --the bandwagon of Cub "fans" that will be cheering against LaHair is going to be pretty staggering. Folks like you would rather see the guy fail, so you can gloat about being right. See also: Colvin, Tyler. 2010 was a rough year for this crowd, but 2011 was sure sweet.

If the caption for Rizzo is "pure sex", I wonder what it is for LaHair in the same pose...

trading a major-league ready starter for a guy like szczur would be absurd. the braves would be looking for someone like brett jackson in return, a (nearly) major-league ready offensive prospect. I'm going to have to side with Truffle on this one. Minor isn't quite on the same level as Latos/Pineda/Cahill/Gio, but he still should command a solid return if the Braves decide to trade him. He's young, cheap, talented, and capable of contributing immediately to any team's rotation. It would probably take Brett Jackson plus a solid upside guy in the low minors (maybe Rhee or Torreyes) to get the discussions started, in my opinion. Or even, Minor and so-and-so for Garza... or even Castro. I'm sure the Braves want to get better at the MLB level if they're trading a guy like Minor.