Flowers signs 2.675

[Rowand44]

It all comes down to whether you believe in magical glasses or not.

[YouCanPutItOnTheBoardYES!]

Do you really believe WAR is that accurate for catchers?

 

I think WAR is a nice stat, but it's not an end all be all type of thing. I mean what is the definition of a replacement player anyway?

[Leonard Zelig]

I think WAR is a nice stat, but it's not an end all be all type of thing. I mean what is the definition of a replacement player anyway?

 

Mike, I know you're new here, but please, don't get the Sabes started. There's a whole separate thread for that.

 

Thanks,

Leonard

[Vance Law]

Do you really believe WAR is that accurate for catchers?

 

It should at very least be a good frame of reference. Would you argue that the value of the two seasons I referenced were drastically different?

 

Pierzynski 2005 wRC+ 88

Flowers 20014 wRC+ 93

 

They both grade out positively as defenders and game callers. If you want to give a slight edge to AJ, that's fine. The point I was making remains: if Tyler Flowers is "a hole" on this team, well, you can win a World Series with a hole (see 2005).

[shysocks]

It should at very least be a good frame of reference. Would you argue that the value of the two seasons I referenced were drastically different?

 

Pierzynski 2005 wRC+ 88

Flowers 20014 wRC+ 93

 

They both grade out positively as defenders and game callers. If you want to give a slight edge to AJ, that's fine. The point I was making remains: if Tyler Flowers is "a hole" on this team, well, you can win a World Series with a hole (see 2005).

AJ proves that you can win with "a hole" as well as A-hole.

 

Ha, I was trying to be diplomatic.

[Eminor3rd]

Those flies could also become doubles, which adds about a half run back on (1.283 double constant * .126 league fly ball BABIP * 3 = .485; I'm assuming the type of flies that affect HR/FB rate would turn into doubles far more often than singles).

 

I cited GB/FB rate by half as evidence that perhaps he changed his approach.

 

Unless a 95 wRC+ from him next year would shock you, I don't think we even disagree by much here. Lemme put it this way - I'll live with 1 WAR because Flowers is about 20th on my list of things that will make or break the Sox.

 

I'm not expecting him to repeat a .401 OPS June either.

 

95 wouldn't SHOCK me, in that it's possible, but I think it would be him having another "good" season. His career 83 seems more likely, though Steamer's projected 76 seems a bit harsh as it projects a below career and below league average BABIP.

 

Also, I don't think it's that useful to break him (or anyone) down by month -- it's normal for players to be streaky by month, what they end up with at the end of the season is what is most helpful for evaluation/prediction. He's most likely going to lose 50 or 60 points on his average on ball in play next year, and probably 5% or so on his HR/FB rate, and I think that is going to contribute to a sub-90

 

World Champion A.J. Pierzynski: 2005 WAR 1.8

Tyler Flowers : 2014 WAR 1.8

 

I'm not sure what you're getting at here, but I assume it's either (1) you don't need an awesome catcher to win the WS, (2) AJP wasn't as good as we remembered, or (3) WAR doesn't mean s*** for catchers.

 

If it's #1: the fact that you CAN win without having an above average player at each position does not mean you wouldn't RATHER have an above average player at every position, so that's not a good argument for upgrading on Flowers. We should get as good as we can.

 

Also, the key to what I'm arguing is that Flowers is not going to repeat even his mediocre 2014 season. If 2014 was "good enough," then we're likely going to have to deal with much less.

 

If it's #2: Interesting

 

If it's #3: You're right that we can't quantify C defense and gamecalling very well, but it doesn't change the fact that his bat is garbage. Again, 93 is passable if we think he's good at everything else, but he doesn't look anything like a true talent 93 wRC+ from his batted ball profile. You can throw WAR out the window and still see he's a bad bat.

 

Mike, I know you're new here, but please, don't get the Sabes started. There's a whole separate thread for that.

 

Thanks,

Leonard

 

Don't pick fights, LEONARD.

Edited January 20, 2015 by Eminor3rd

[shysocks]

95 wouldn't SHOCK me, in that it's possible, but I think it would be him having another "good" season. His career 83 seems more likely, though Steamer's projected 76 seems a bit harsh as it projects a below career and below league average BABIP.

 

Also, I don't think it's that useful to break him (or anyone) down by month -- it's normal for players to be streaky by month, what they end up with at the end of the season is what is most helpful for evaluation/prediction. He's most likely going to lose 50 or 60 points on his average on ball in play next year, and probably 5% or so on his HR/FB rate, and I think that is going to contribute to a sub-90

Only cited June because wite pointed to his HR/FB in September. I understand all the arguments based on his peripherals, I think I just dissected his season and came to a different conclusion than you. ZiPS somehow has him at a higher OPS than last year and it knows all about his batted ball profile. Let's bet on it. Put the wRC+ over/under at 88.5. Loser has to eat a hat.

[Eminor3rd]

Only cited June because wite pointed to his HR/FB in September. I understand all the arguments based on his peripherals, I think I just dissected his season and came to a different conclusion than you. ZiPS somehow has him at a higher OPS than last year and it knows all about his batted ball profile. Let's bet on it. Put the wRC+ over/under at 88.5. Loser has to eat a hat.

 

Can I use hot sauce?

 

I'll take the under, but give me 89.5 to make it nice and round at "below 90."

[shysocks]

Can I use hot sauce?

 

I'll take the under, but give me 89.5 to make it nice and round at "below 90."

Fine, 89.5. You can season and prepare the hat however you'd like. It might as well taste good.

[Eminor3rd]

Fine, 89.5. You can season and prepare the hat however you'd like. It might as well taste good.

 

If I fried it and buried it in cheese, could it really be THAT much worse than eggplant parmesan?

[Vance Law]

I'm not sure what you're getting at here, but I assume it's either (1) you don't need an awesome catcher to win the WS, (2) AJP wasn't as good as we remembered, or (3) WAR doesn't mean s*** for catchers.

 

If it's #1: the fact that you CAN win without having an above average player at each position does not mean you wouldn't RATHER have an above average player at every position, so that's not a good argument for upgrading on Flowers. We should get as good as we can.

 

Also, the key to what I'm arguing is that Flowers is not going to repeat even his mediocre 2014 season. If 2014 was "good enough," then we're likely going to have to deal with much less.

 

If it's #2: Interesting

 

If it's #3: You're right that we can't quantify C defense and gamecalling very well, but it doesn't change the fact that his bat is garbage. Again, 93 is passable if we think he's good at everything else, but he doesn't look anything like a true talent 93 wRC+ from his batted ball profile. You can throw WAR out the window and still see he's a bad bat.

 

1 and 2, I suppose. I get your points and agree it'd be nice to have a better catcher. His bat is not good, but neither are the majority of catchers. If you throw out Jaso and Gattis, who i assume are no longer catchers, his 93 wRC+ was 16th best in MLB last year. That's how few good-hitting catchers there are in the world. I get that he's probably due for a BABIP regression. There's also the possibility that his second half involved legitimate improvement. With a legit backup, he'll also get less playing time this year, and less at bats against righties.

[BigEdWalsh]

If I fried it and buried it in cheese, could it really be THAT much worse than eggplant parmesan?

WTF?! I LOVE eggplant parmesan!

[Eminor3rd]

WTF?! I LOVE eggplant parmesan!

 

Haha, THAT was the reaction I was going for