Is a catcher worth buying? - Page 3

Orcin · 01-30-2019, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kushiel

Ah, but it shows that the ratings work over the long haul and those 2 should show that the catcher matters as this thread is about.

No, it just means you have good pitchers.

zrog2000 · 01-30-2019, 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chazzycat

still would be on much firmer ground (statistically) than attempting to find correlation in just 2 data points...

You would have to adjust for pitching quality, batting quality and park differences, which would be close to impossible to determine with the limited data we get.

It would be best to see how pronounced it is around the extremes, like comparing a 40 something rated Piazza to a 108 rated Bench.

Orcin · 01-30-2019, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zrog2000

You would have to adjust for pitching quality, batting quality and park differences, which would be close to impossible to determine with the limited data we get.

So, in other words, no one knows for sure.

bobbycockstrong · 01-30-2019, 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zrog2000

Over a large enough sample size using identical cards which do not change, you would definitely get your answer. You can't compare different teams in different parks in different leagues. But you can definitely do it for each team with the same pitchers, the same park and same league. It probably takes several seasons to be meaningful.

If you could set up the exact same seasons with the exact same schedule with the exact same pitchers, then MAYBE it would have a tiny bit of limited value. But you cant do that in PT. There are too many variables. Sample size, in terms of time/innings doesnt really matter - there are so many other factors at play, not just the pitchers but the batters as well. Not to mention in PT, there is different levels/quality from bronze to perfect. Can you compare bronze season catcher ERA of catcher A to diamond season catcher ERA of catcher B? Of course not. The number has no real value.

rudel.dietrich · 01-30-2019, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rudel.dietrich

I have never seen one, but does PT have a good version of Mike Piazza?

Seems like you could also go the other way and say '**** defense, I want my catcher to create as many runs as possible'

I hate to quote myself but I just found his peak card and it is disappointing.
Seems like a card based on his 1997 season would be as near a perfect card for a catcher as you can find.
His OPS+ for that season was the highest for a catcher I could find on BB reference.

zrog2000 · 01-30-2019, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orcin

So, in other words, no one knows for sure.

It would be pretty easy to see if someone had a Bench/Piazza tandem and ran it for a few seasons.

zrog2000 · 01-30-2019, 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobbycockstrong

If you could set up the exact same seasons with the exact same schedule with the exact same pitchers, then MAYBE it would have a tiny bit of limited value. But you cant do that in PT. There are too many variables. Sample size, in terms of time/innings doesnt really matter - there are so many other factors at play, not just the pitchers but the batters as well. Not to mention in PT, there is different levels/quality from bronze to perfect. Can you compare bronze season catcher ERA of catcher A to diamond season catcher ERA of catcher B? Of course not. The number has no real value.

No, I wouldn't compare different league levels, which is why I said that. And the variability would be taken care of with a large enough sample size.

zrog2000 · 01-30-2019, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zrog2000

I do have a question. Has anyone tried changing catchers every game so they are never tired to see if they hit better?

bump to see if anyone has tried this

zrog2000 · 01-30-2019, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rudel.dietrich

I hate to quote myself but I just found his peak card and it is disappointing.
Seems like a card based on his 1997 season would be as near a perfect card for a catcher as you can find.
His OPS+ for that season was the highest for a catcher I could find on BB reference.

The problem is that fatigue is set to very high in PT so no catcher is going to perform like they did in real life. They get a lot more tired and their performance suffers a lot.

Matt Arnold · 01-30-2019, 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobbycockstrong

CERA probably isnt really the worlds great indicator because the pitchers performances are always variable. I think its tough to use it as a comparison unless your pitcher(s) pitched exactly the same every single game - which they never do, let alone when everyone making comparisons has different sets of pitchers.

If player A has the best rotation/bullpen in teh world and player B has the worst rotation/bullpen, but player A has an awful 45 rated catcher and player B has the best catcher ability in the game - its still possible (likely even, I would suspect) for catcher A to have a better catcher ERA. Its too variable to really matter.

Even if you had the same exact rotation/bullpen for 2 full seasons - and season 1 has catcher X and season 2 catcher Z, its still not a great comparison because the pitchers performances are going to be different regardless of catcher ability, not to mention your pitchers are going to face different lineups/opponents in seasons 1 and 2.

The point is, stats probably wont tell you too much here via catcher ERA.

Yeah, as much as having more data can help, maybe it muddies things too. Take my Ramos vs Molina team. I was looking at career numbers for them, but that's not fair to Molina, who was my starter in 2023 (103 GS for him vs 38 for Ramos) and put up a bad CERA (4.36). Taking 2024 to 2027, where each year Ramos starts around 113 games and Molina the other 49, a weighted sum of their CERA actually brings them to 3.97 vs 3.92, or virtually tied.

But even playing for the same team, there's differences. Molina comes in as a defensive sub ~40 times a season, so there's probably 60-100 innings (of his ~500) per year that he's now catching a different quality pitcher than starting the game. Given my team, I'd think that should help him, but maybe not. Also, the fact that this is over 4 seasons with a much changed rotation, and through 3 different league levels.

I'm not going to say it doesn't matter, because I've looked at the code and it does

But how much it matters, that is very hard to quantify.

Orcin · 01-30-2019, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zrog2000

It would be pretty easy to see if someone had a Bench/Piazza tandem and ran it for a few seasons.

You would have to run it with the same pitchers against the same lineups and in the same parks. There is too much variation in PT to ever make a valid comparison.

Orcin · 01-30-2019, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt Arnold

I'm not going to say it doesn't matter, because I've looked at the code and it does

But how much it matters, that is very hard to quantify.

The question is does it matter enough to offset the runs lost with a poor offensive catcher like Tony Pena vs. someone like McCarver or Cochrane?

Abnerdoubleday · 01-30-2019, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt Arnold

I'm not going to say it doesn't matter, because I've looked at the code and it does

But how much it matters, that is very hard to quantify.

So probably not enough to keep trotting out Charles Johnson (136 Catcher rating) and his .096 batting average

zrog2000 · 01-30-2019, 06:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orcin

The question is does it matter enough to offset the runs lost with a poor offensive catcher like Tony Pena vs. someone like McCarver or Cochrane?

The whale in my division has Cochrane with a perfect Campanella as his backup. Cochrane only has an 80 OPS+ for him. Good.

bobbycockstrong · 01-30-2019, 06:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt Arnold

Yeah, as much as having more data can help, maybe it muddies things too. Take my Ramos vs Molina team. I was looking at career numbers for them, but that's not fair to Molina, who was my starter in 2023 (103 GS for him vs 38 for Ramos) and put up a bad CERA (4.36). Taking 2024 to 2027, where each year Ramos starts around 113 games and Molina the other 49, a weighted sum of their CERA actually brings them to 3.97 vs 3.92, or virtually tied.

But even playing for the same team, there's differences. Molina comes in as a defensive sub ~40 times a season, so there's probably 60-100 innings (of his ~500) per year that he's now catching a different quality pitcher than starting the game. Given my team, I'd think that should help him, but maybe not. Also, the fact that this is over 4 seasons with a much changed rotation, and through 3 different league levels.

I'm not going to say it doesn't matter, because I've looked at the code and it does

But how much it matters, that is very hard to quantify.

Well I think the "catcher ability" matters for sure, or else whats the point of having it? Is that what impacts the code? Ive always valued ability/arm for catchers. But yeah, the output of that ability is in my opinion too tough to measure because of all the aforementioned variables.

Dogberry99 · 01-30-2019, 06:35 PM

I recall reading somewhere that catching ability is a composite rating built off several different hidden values. If this is true, can we even assume that two equal catching ability ratings for two different cards would exert the same influence on CERA specifically?

rudel.dietrich · 01-30-2019, 06:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zrog2000

The problem is that fatigue is set to very high in PT so no catcher is going to perform like they did in real life. They get a lot more tired and their performance suffers a lot.

I was stating that the ratings were disappointing. I have never seen the card in action so I cannot state how it would play out.
In real life 1997 Mike Piazza had a line of .362/.431/.638 with a OPS + of 185
IMO that is a 'perfect' card since that is the best offensive season by a catcher I could find that was not in the 19th century.
But it does seem that even elite hitting catchers have a hard time getting an OPS+ of over 100 even down in the bronze leagues where I am still out.

That Piazza card is not super expensive so I may purchase one and give it a try.
I have tried many different catchers with dissaponting results.

For a while I was using Grandel and his OPS+ was anywhere between 70-85 and downright unplayable.
Now I am using Realmuto and while a bit closer to league average he is still up and down a lot.
My best catcher has actually been the silver Sanzhez card I got in my starting packs.
He is not a good catcher but in his backup role his one elite skill (HR power) and average other hitting skills make him pretty consistent at the bottom of the order.

Thalion · 01-30-2019, 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abnerdoubleday

So probably not enough to keep trotting out Charles Johnson (136 Catcher rating) and his .096 batting average

Yeah, I think if you're better off with a pitcher hitting, then you may look at replacing him.

Though I'm the kind of guy who will let his players "play through" their slumps because I'm a firm believer in that the Random Number Gods are blind and have no memory.

Thalion · 01-30-2019, 10:43 PM

I value and rely on my pitching way too much to take a chance on a catcher without a high catcher ability. I figure I can afford to carry one weak bat.

chazzycat · 01-31-2019, 12:29 PM

I still think it would be nice to have the catcher ERA and other defensive stats exportable for the entire careers for all the players in your league, like the offensive stats are.

Of course there are many variables. All baseball stats are like that. That's exactly why we need larger datasets, to help separate the noise from the signal.

I mean, everyone can edit their ballpark factors for home runs so a direct comparison between HR hitters is certainly unfair, no? But still, with a large enough sample of data, that all evens out and you will see a direct correlation between "POWER" (ratings) and SLG (results).

I would bet money with a large enough sample, we would see a direct correlation between "catcher ability" and CERA as well.

01-30-2019, 06:35 PM	#56
Dogberry99 All Star Starter Join Date: Nov 2018 Location: Wichita Falls, TX Posts: 1,328	I recall reading somewhere that catching ability is a composite rating built off several different hidden values. If this is true, can we even assume that two equal catching ability ratings for two different cards would exert the same influence on CERA specifically? __________________ "And, Masters, do not forget to specify, when time and place shall serve, that I am an [censored]." (Much Ado About Nothing 5.1.255-256) Primary Team Collection Rewards (Cards & Packs) F2P Theme Team Movers F2P Theme and Adam Schlesinger Memorial Team Last edited by Dogberry99; 01-30-2019 at 06:36 PM.

01-30-2019, 10:43 PM	#59
Thalion Major Leagues Join Date: Apr 2016 Posts: 413	I value and rely on my pitching way too much to take a chance on a catcher without a high catcher ability. I figure I can afford to carry one weak bat.

01-31-2019, 12:29 PM	#60
chazzycat All Star Starter Join Date: Dec 2014 Posts: 1,685	I still think it would be nice to have the catcher ERA and other defensive stats exportable for the entire careers for all the players in your league, like the offensive stats are. Of course there are many variables. All baseball stats are like that. That's exactly why we need larger datasets, to help separate the noise from the signal. I mean, everyone can edit their ballpark factors for home runs so a direct comparison between HR hitters is certainly unfair, no? But still, with a large enough sample of data, that all evens out and you will see a direct correlation between "POWER" (ratings) and SLG (results). I would bet money with a large enough sample, we would see a direct correlation between "catcher ability" and CERA as well.