SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,923
|
Post by ericmvan on Dec 10, 2014 8:15:39 GMT -5
FanGraphs runs/win by year since 2012: 9.544, 9.264, 9.117. Not unreasonable to project 8.95 as the next number in that series. Then again, longer term it's been somewhat cyclical and 9.117 is the lowest number since 1981... We're using different methodologies. They're using a quick-and-dirty formula that Tom Tango gave them: RA/9*1.5 +3. I'm using the Pythagorean formula. The average RS/G this year was 658.7, which yields a 1.82 exponent via Pythagenport formula. Keeping the total amount of offense constant, a team that scored 663.18 runs and allowed 654.22 would have won 82.00 games. That's an 8.95 difference, when taken to further decimals. I'll defend my way of doing it as the more accurate. The only tweak I need to make is to normalize RS/G to a historic average of IP/G (it was 8.974 this year, a very high figure). Without that, an unusually high or low number of extra-inning games will skew the results slightly. OK, IP/G over the last 10 years turns out to be a significant (p = .01) function of RA/9; the lower the scoring, the more extra innings get played, which makes perfect sense. Using the regression formula, that reduces the IP/G to 8.966, which is to say that 39 extra innings got played this year by sheer chance, boosting RS/G slightly. Adjusting for that reduces RS/G to 658.1, which reduces R/W to 8.944.
|
|
|
Post by greenmonstah on Dec 10, 2014 20:29:48 GMT -5
Trade for a guy like Jaso for Oakland to split time with Vazquez? I'd like that a lot.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Dec 10, 2014 21:17:34 GMT -5
Trade for a guy like Jaso for Oakland to split time with Vazquez? I'd like that a lot. If by "split" you mean "play one game a week or less", then sure. Wendelin Castillo looks to be available on the trade market, now that Cubs have Montero and are trying to sign Lester's besty David Ross as well.
|
|
|
Post by geostorm on Dec 12, 2014 10:43:44 GMT -5
I understand this is a "2015 Catching Options" thread...but if I could look at this from a longer view, of 2015, building into 2016-2019 or so period, given the value of pitching in general, and SP especially, would I be in a significant minority that wants to see the Sox have both Vasquez & Swihart together, at least through their controllable years?...
Impact catching is in short supply. Most scouting reports have them both as, or potential to be plus defenders...Swihart a SH w/ a plus bat, and I may be more optimistic than most on Vasquez hit tool developing, in time...a la Y Molina, albeit not necessarily to that extent.
To my thinking, that would be great value, a significant competitive advantage, and an ability to keep both players fresh throughout the entirety of the season (not to mention insulating the team from injury, should one go down...).
|
|
|
Post by aussiesox on Dec 19, 2014 17:09:42 GMT -5
Didn't know where else to post this, but I made a video towards the end of the season of Christian gunning down runners and threw it up on youtube... Someone just commented with some cool data in relation to POP time With the first 10 catchers he's analysed, here is the order: 1. Vazquez 1.78 2. Gomes 1.80 3. Martin 1.85 4. Joseph 1.87 5. Perez 1.88 6. Molina 1.90 7. Lucroy 1.91 8. Rivera 1.94 9. Posey 1.95 10. Conger 2.03 You can read about it more here, he's obviously a Cards fan, and as it appears, now a huge Christian Vazquez fan lol. gatewayredbirds.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=55733
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,923
|
Post by ericmvan on Dec 19, 2014 23:35:03 GMT -5
Now that we have a first-division starter as Vazquez's backup, the future strategy is easy. At some point in the season, probably sometime in July, Swihart replaces Butler as the guy who gets called up as an injury replacement. And he gets called up in September and, assuming his season has gone well, gets a handful of starts against pitchers who have trouble with LHB. That should get you enough pitch-framing data to figure out how he actually compares and projects compared to Vazquez. In 90% of the scenarios, you're using one in the off-season as the centerpiece of a major trade. The extra year of evaluation on all the young pitchers will be critical for fleshing that out, so the timing here is good. If I had to predict right now, I'd say it's 60% or more they trade Swihart, 40% Vazquez: 1) Vazquez's pitch-framing ability is invisible to some teams, lowering his trade value relative to his actual value 2) Vazquez will be the more proven commodity 3) Defense is more valuable in the post-season 4) Defense for catchers is quite likely more consistent and reliable year-to-year due to injuries affecting hittingI see a scenario where Swihart projects to be a bit better than Vazquez, but Vazquez is nearly a lock to have his value while Swihart has a typical rookie's risk. And where Swihart will be one of the most sought-after trade chips in MLB, while Vazquez will be on the next rung down.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Dec 23, 2014 0:20:32 GMT -5
With our potential five starters next season, do any of them get either Vazquez or hanigan as their personal catcher?
|
|
|
Post by blizzards39 on Dec 23, 2014 2:13:57 GMT -5
With our potential five starters next season, do any of them get either Vazquez or hanigan as their personal catcher? Not a bad idea. Seeing as both are RH the opposition starter shouldn't play as big of a role. I'm guessing 100 starts for Vazquez and 60 hanigan depending on how each is doing. I know they don't like doing it but why not pinch run or hit for your catcher more often? We should have LH and speed on the bench!!
|
|
|
Post by wskeleton76 on Dec 23, 2014 5:32:18 GMT -5
With our potential five starters next season, do any of them get either Vazquez or hanigan as their personal catcher? Not a bad idea. Seeing as both are RH the opposition starter shouldn't play as big of a role. I'm guessing 100 starts for Vazquez and 60 hanigan depending on how each is doing. I know they don't like doing it but why not pinch run or hit for your catcher more often? We should have LH and speed on the bench!! There is Holt. I like your idea.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater on Dec 23, 2014 8:57:36 GMT -5
Now that we have a first-division starter as Vazquez's backup, the future strategy is easy. At some point in the season, probably sometime in July, Swihart replaces Butler as the guy who gets called up as an injury replacement. And he gets called up in September and, assuming his season has gone well, gets a handful of starts against pitchers who have trouble with LHB. That should get you enough pitch-framing data to figure out how he actually compares and projects compared to Vazquez. I'm pretty sure the pitch framing data for the minor leagues exists somewhere. I can't seem to find it for 2014, but in 2013 Vazquez was #2 in the minor behind some non-prospect catcher who couldn't hit. 2013 ptch framing leaders
So I'm sure Swihart's #s are out there somewhere.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 23, 2014 9:14:17 GMT -5
Now that we have a first-division starter as Vazquez's backup, the future strategy is easy. At some point in the season, probably sometime in July, Swihart replaces Butler as the guy who gets called up as an injury replacement. And he gets called up in September and, assuming his season has gone well, gets a handful of starts against pitchers who have trouble with LHB. That should get you enough pitch-framing data to figure out how he actually compares and projects compared to Vazquez. I'm pretty sure the pitch framing data for the minor leagues exists somewhere. I can't seem to find it for 2014, but in 2013 Vazquez was #2 in the minor behind some non-prospect catcher who couldn't hit. 2013 ptch framing leaders
So I'm sure Swihart's #s are out there somewhere. You can't have pitch framing data without PitchFX. I'm pretty sure there aren't nearly enough minor league ballparks that have it. I could be wrong I guess.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 23, 2014 10:04:11 GMT -5
I'm pretty sure the pitch framing data for the minor leagues exists somewhere. I can't seem to find it for 2014, but in 2013 Vazquez was #2 in the minor behind some non-prospect catcher who couldn't hit. 2013 ptch framing leaders
So I'm sure Swihart's #s are out there somewhere. You can't have pitch framing data without PitchFX. I'm pretty sure there aren't nearly enough minor league ballparks that have it. I could be wrong I guess. If you read the article, it's an estimation. Near as I can tell by skimming the related articles, it looks like it essentially looks at pitches that aren't swung at, controls for the variables and tries to attribute to the catcher what percentage he's responsible for. Strikes me as problematic.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Dec 23, 2014 10:24:31 GMT -5
If you read the article, it's an estimation. Near as I can tell by skimming the related articles, it looks like it essentially looks at pitches that aren't swung at, controls for the variables and tries to attribute to the catcher what percentage he's responsible for. Strikes me as problematic. Yeah, lots of fascinating stuff to be found by following the links. I'm surprised he got as high a correlation as he did but what it amounts to is basically a highly educated guess. (And to be honest with all this super-secret methodology coming up with unpublished data you have to be somewhat skeptical that there could be uncaught errors in there.)
|
|
|