Quote:
Originally Posted by Clavette
Would love to see the differences with a 75 or 80 ability catcher as well
|
I didn't have time to rerun the entire analysis, but I did look at the difference between a mediocre CA catcher and one with 80 CA.
I used Salvador Perez circa 2015 again and ran two sims, 100,000 games each vs. the Blue Jays. Sim #1 – Salvy’s CA was set to 200 (which equates to the midpoint of an 80 CA rating). Sim #2 – Salvy’s CA was set to 109 (which equates to the lowest 55 rating). No other changes to Salvy or any other players.
The results:
BB/9 +0.64
K/9 -0.49
ERA +0.71
HR Allowed +29.7%
In each case, there was a pretty big improvement both vs. borderline 50/55 CA Salvy and borderline 70/75 CA Salvy (see OP).
There's always a trade-off and it's hard to know where the line should be drawn, but my guess just from running all this is that an 80 CA, even one with a pretty weak bat, is going to be a good option for most teams.
My biggest take-away from this, at least personally, is that CA is every bit as important as hitting for a catcher. I always knew it mattered, but I still tended to value hitting more in a catcher and was almost always willing to sacrifice CA for a little more pop, eye, or contact. I think I've now come to the conclusion I should be searching for high CA catchers and then, within that group, looking for the best bat, rather than the other way around.