Catcher's defense. (mainly range)

torzh · 05-15-2005, 04:35 PM

I was playing a fictional league and I had a catcher who was very good offensively but his range was only 4/10, he does have a good arm (8/10) and .990 FPCT. The thing was that despite good DIPS numbers my pitchers had ERA's in the low 4s.

My good offensive catcher was struggling on offense, so on June 15th I replaced him with my backup catcher, who is ok offensively but very good defensively 8/10 range 9/10 arm .989 FPCT. I made no other changes to my defense but my pitchers ERAs dropped and were around 3.50 ERA.

The next season I went with offensive catcher again and again my pitchers started slowly despite good DIPS. So despite his good offense I replaced him and again my pitchers have started doing better.

This could all be luck (small sample size), and I was wondering if anyone else noticed this? Since what I read previously was that catcher's range doesn't matter.

Dan Theman · 05-15-2005, 04:38 PM

Range has no impact on a pitcher's performance - it's just a coincidence.

PS - there's been some debate over whether there should be some ability to call games included in OOTP, so if this is something that interests you I'd suggest searching the suggestions board.

torzh · 05-15-2005, 04:55 PM

Maybe that changed with a patch? Surely it has some significance, not probably to the degree that I noticed but there should be some effect, even if it's just on flyball fouls and plays at the plate.

BTW I don't think catchers calling games should be a factor, because a few teams call the game from the bench (Cubs) unless Maddux is pitching who calls his own game. There is the framing of strikes etc. but that would effect dips.

Dan Theman · 05-15-2005, 05:08 PM

Nah, the patch didn't change anything with that.

A catcher's range DOES matter, but it just doesn't effect pitcher performance. It effects fielding only. The difference between a catcher with good range and poor range is minimal, which is why some people just generalize and say it doesn't matter.

Joshv02 · 05-15-2005, 05:17 PM

Listen to Dan; he is a smart man.

Fibonacci · 05-15-2005, 05:49 PM

A lot of sources don't even compute range for catchers. Those that do usually define a catcher's range as dealing with stolen bases per inning (sometimes steal attempts per inning) with throwing/arm as being caught stealing (rate) per inning. (Sometimes these numbers may be normalized to represent a 9 inning game.) I don't think this would account for a team ERA diference of a half run per game as torzh experienced. I don't think a shortstop would have that much effect.

torzh · 05-15-2005, 06:31 PM

Y'all are probably right that it has a minimal effect. I just don't want to assume that without evidence from the game. Fibonacci is definitely correct that the 1/2 a run per game probably has more to do with pitchers slumps than anything else, even though it wasn't one or two pitchers who were slumping but 4 out of 5 starters.

[q]but it just doesn't effect pitcher performance. It effects fielding only.[/q]

I was talking about the non DIPS part of pitching, which is primarily fielding. I mentioned that the DIPS where solid.

I'm curious has anyone done a recent study on the effect of fielding at the various positions in the game. It should follow real life, but once again I don't want to make that assumption.

Oh and I think Range factor is so flawed to be relatively useless; but that's a personal opinion.

Joshv02 · 05-15-2005, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by torzh

I'm curious has anyone done a recent study on the effect of fielding at the various positions in the game. It should follow real life, but once again I don't want to make that assumption.

Kieran did a study for v.6 Defense. It looked to mimic a great study by Jason Moyer that was done with v 4 or v 5, I forget which. http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...d.php?t=70268&

Also, iirc, Big Phesta did a study for defense in v. 6. There used to be a study hoster at bigcitybaseball, too.

All have come to the same conclusion, I think -- C range is fairly close to being worthless (just like 1B range), while C arm has some value, but not a ton.

Qwerty75 · 05-15-2005, 06:43 PM

Quote:

while C arm has some value, but not a ton.

Isn't C arm a big factor in RTO%, which is the biggest part of a C's defensive value?

WS allots a big share to catcher defense, so I'd think C arm is important, no?

torzh · 05-15-2005, 06:45 PM

Thanks.

05-15-2005, 04:35 PM	#1
torzh Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 27	Catcher's defense. (mainly range) I was playing a fictional league and I had a catcher who was very good offensively but his range was only 4/10, he does have a good arm (8/10) and .990 FPCT. The thing was that despite good DIPS numbers my pitchers had ERA's in the low 4s. My good offensive catcher was struggling on offense, so on June 15th I replaced him with my backup catcher, who is ok offensively but very good defensively 8/10 range 9/10 arm .989 FPCT. I made no other changes to my defense but my pitchers ERAs dropped and were around 3.50 ERA. The next season I went with offensive catcher again and again my pitchers started slowly despite good DIPS. So despite his good offense I replaced him and again my pitchers have started doing better. This could all be luck (small sample size), and I was wondering if anyone else noticed this? Since what I read previously was that catcher's range doesn't matter. Last edited by torzh; 05-15-2005 at 04:37 PM.

05-15-2005, 04:55 PM	#3
torzh Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 27	Maybe that changed with a patch? Surely it has some significance, not probably to the degree that I noticed but there should be some effect, even if it's just on flyball fouls and plays at the plate. BTW I don't think catchers calling games should be a factor, because a few teams call the game from the bench (Cubs) unless Maddux is pitching who calls his own game. There is the framing of strikes etc. but that would effect dips. Last edited by torzh; 05-15-2005 at 04:56 PM.

05-15-2005, 05:17 PM	#5
Joshv02 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: , " Posts: 3,082	Listen to Dan; he is a smart man. __________________ Brookline Maccabees. RIP

05-15-2005, 05:49 PM	#6
Fibonacci Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 283	A lot of sources don't even compute range for catchers. Those that do usually define a catcher's range as dealing with stolen bases per inning (sometimes steal attempts per inning) with throwing/arm as being caught stealing (rate) per inning. (Sometimes these numbers may be normalized to represent a 9 inning game.) I don't think this would account for a team ERA diference of a half run per game as torzh experienced. I don't think a shortstop would have that much effect. __________________ It is not certain that everything is uncertain. - Blaise Pascal

05-15-2005, 06:31 PM	#7
torzh Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 27	Y'all are probably right that it has a minimal effect. I just don't want to assume that without evidence from the game. Fibonacci is definitely correct that the 1/2 a run per game probably has more to do with pitchers slumps than anything else, even though it wasn't one or two pitchers who were slumping but 4 out of 5 starters. [q]but it just doesn't effect pitcher performance. It effects fielding only.[/q] I was talking about the non DIPS part of pitching, which is primarily fielding. I mentioned that the DIPS where solid. I'm curious has anyone done a recent study on the effect of fielding at the various positions in the game. It should follow real life, but once again I don't want to make that assumption. Oh and I think Range factor is so flawed to be relatively useless; but that's a personal opinion. Last edited by torzh; 05-15-2005 at 06:36 PM.

05-15-2005, 06:45 PM	#10
torzh Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 27	Thanks.