Thread: Joe Mauer

Originally Posted by ChuckkJay

I think UChief means that we've seen nothing from Mauer to suggest he's ever again going to be the player he was that one season. The one that got him the contract. The one that was an aberration from his entire career....I'd say it's much more likely that he never hits a dozen HR again in a season, and might not ever even hit .325 again.

It may be surprising to you, but home runs and batting average aren't the only things used to measure a player's value.

Mauer posted a 7.9 WAR that year, the "aberration." He also had seasons of 6.4, 6.1, & 5.5 WAR. According to the Fangraphs explanation of WAR, anything above 6.0 is considered MVP level and anything from 5.0-6.0 is "superstar" level. The only times Mauer's WAR dipped below 5.5 was in his first full season (age 22) and the season where he played 109 games or less.

The Twins didn't pay him for one season, they payed him because he's been the best catcher in baseball when he plays. If you want to argue against his health, go ahead, but don't pretend he's not one of the best catchers in baseball when healthy.

Originally Posted by Seth Stohs

If you got into the SethSpeaks.net archives from the day that the Twins and Mauer finalized the 8 year, $184 M extension, I wrote that it would never make sense from a baseball perspective... but that was the position that the Twins were in. If they had let him walk, fans would have whined about that too.

Completely agree. The Joe Mauer contract extension was an absolute perfect storm. A hometown kid, drafted by the team, who was far and away the team's most popular player, and one of the most popular players in team history, playing a premium position, has the best offensive season in the history of baseball for that position, while simultaneously winning a Gold Glove, Batting Title and MVP, exactly one year before his contract expires, and the year before the team opens a publicly-financed stadium that the team claimed was necessary to keep their best players. The Twins had no choice but to sign him, and if you think 23m/year was more than the Twins needed to pay, you're crazy, because the Yankees or Red Sox would have offered more.

It's also worth noting, to whomever appluaded the Cardinals for letting Albert Pujols walk, that before he did, the Cardinals offered him 220m over 10 years, which would be a significantly worse deal at the tail end than Mauer's deal.

Mauer must be aware that every single scouting report on him states: "Will take the first pitch looking 99.9% of the time... will take second pitch 75% of the time..." He needs to, every once in awhile, swing at the first pitch. They are down the heart of the plate without fail. And if he does, maybe he'll start getting some balls thrown to him that first pitch.

Originally Posted by woolhouse

Mauer must be aware that every single scouting report on him states: "Will take the first pitch looking 99.9% of the time... will take second pitch 75% of the time..." He needs to, every once in awhile, swing at the first pitch. They are down the heart of the plate without fail. And if he does, maybe he'll start getting some balls thrown to him that first pitch.

This is my problem with Mauer. I love the guy and always have, and I have no problem with his contract because other teams would have paid him even more and I'd rather have him in a Twins uniform than any other.

BUT - he's become too predictable at the plate. Opposing pitchers can't be very afraid of him anymore; its easy for them to get ahead in the count when they know exacatly what he's going to do every time. It's maddening to see him watch those 88mph fastballs down the middle of the plate every single first pitch; not saying he needs to swing at them all...but even once in a while might keep them guessing.

Originally Posted by woolhouse

He needs to, every once in awhile, swing at the first pitch. They are down the heart of the plate without fail.

I'm sure you took the twelve seconds to look this up, but for the others that haven't... Mauer's first pitch strike % has never in his career NOT been well below league average and it's never been as high as even 56% in a season.

Originally Posted by Cap'n Piranha

Completely agree. The Joe Mauer contract extension was an absolute perfect storm. A hometown kid, drafted by the team, who was far and away the team's most popular player, and one of the most popular players in team history, playing a premium position, has the best offensive season in the history of baseball for that position, while simultaneously winning a Gold Glove, Batting Title and MVP, exactly one year before his contract expires, and the year before the team opens a publicly-financed stadium that the team claimed was necessary to keep their best players. The Twins had no choice but to sign him, and if you think 23m/year was more than the Twins needed to pay, you're crazy, because the Yankees or Red Sox would have offered more.

It's also worth noting, to whomever appluaded the Cardinals for letting Albert Pujols walk, that before he did, the Cardinals offered him 220m over 10 years, which would be a significantly worse deal at the tail end than Mauer's deal.

This is the definitive answer on the Mauer contract. Well done, Cap.

Originally Posted by StormJH1

Mauer is only a couple of seasons away from that point, yet all we ever hear is how he's going to be better later on. But he's already transitioning away from being a "full-time catcher" (which is the right approach), which means we really should be thinking about him as a first baseman. We're so hard on Mauer because he's our guy, and greatness was expected of him. But compare his career so far to, say, Victor Martinez, and I'm sorry, but V-Mart's career is far superior:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/pl...artivi01.shtml

Both have had their share of injury problems, as do many catchers, but when he played, V-Mart was a consistent .300 hitter, but a constant power threat in the middle of the lineup. It isn't about the "legs" or Target Field - Mauer isn't "overswinging". His approach is to put the ball into play making contact at all costs, and that leads to a lot of ground balls and opposite field liners. Which, yes, can lead to a .300 season, but also makes him fairly worthless as a #3 hitter.

I read a pretty fair amount on the Twins and I don't recall ever once seeing anybody expect or hope for him to improve into his 30's. I'm curious where you're getting "all we ever hear" is that.

As for your baseball reference link to the supposedly "far superior" career, it's laughable. I actually laughed. The very site you reference gives WAR values for Mauer of 1.5 (partial season), 3.4, 7.0 (!!), 4.6, 8.7 (!!!), 7.5 (!!), 5.9, and 1.7 last year in half a season. The "one career year" in a contract season that won him the MVP wasn't even his best one from a WAR perspective! V-Mart's, for comparison, are 0.0 and 0.4 in partial seasons, 4.1, 4.6, 3.3, 5.1, 0.6, 2.5, 1.4, 2.8, and 2.9. It's not even close.

Originally Posted by Cap'n Piranha

It's also worth noting, to whomever appluaded the Cardinals for letting Albert Pujols walk, that before he did, the Cardinals offered him 220m over 10 years, which would be a significantly worse deal at the tail end than Mauer's deal.

Not to mention also, a 10+ year contract to a 32-year-old is a little different than an 8-year contract to a 29-year-old.

anything from 5.0-6.0 [WAR] is "superstar" level

I think this is just an indictment of how all "superstar" level players are overpaid. It's like buying anything else: you get the best value in the middle of the price-performance curve. "Superstar" players have ~$25M/yr contracts, which is $5M a win. The free agent market is chock full of 2-3 WAR players for $3-6M. It's just another way of saying there's only so much one guy can do, even if they're a true superstar (and not an arguably struggling one like Mauer). It's never worth it. And while the Yankees of the world might be able to sign such contracts anyways, the Twins can't afford it if they ever expect to win.

Four games. You will undoubtedly find some 4-game stretch in the majority of baseball players' seasons where even the best hitters don't "hit it past an outfielder."

Anyone who thinks Mauer's overly large contract is prohibiting the club from signing a similarly large contract for another accomplished player is not being reasonable. If the Twins had somehow lost Mauer, the team payroll would be exactly $23 million less than it is right now. That money is auxillary and a completely independent listing in the budget as a revenue producing asset. The Twins would never make the same deal with another teams superstar. This front office would never have offered Fielder, Pujols, Sabathia or anyone not from the organization a long term contract no matter how much room is in the teams payroll.

Arguments centered around WAR have little to no value IMO. WAR is unproven at best, junk at worst. WAR for catchers is particularly problematic, since even the strongest proponents of WAR admit they are just guessing at the defensive component of a catchers "value."

Arguments centered around WAR have little to no value IMO

Not sure if this was directed at my comment. I'm sympathetic to WAR being imperfect, but I suggest my point still stands: Joe Mauers are bad values the way Ferraris are bad values. It's not to say they're not awesome, but they're not in everbody's budget.

Originally Posted by CDog

I read a pretty fair amount on the Twins and I don't recall ever once seeing anybody expect or hope for him to improve into his 30's. I'm curious where you're getting "all we ever hear" is that.

As for your baseball reference link to the supposedly "far superior" career, it's laughable. I actually laughed. The very site you reference gives WAR values for Mauer of 1.5 (partial season), 3.4, 7.0 (!!), 4.6, 8.7 (!!!), 7.5 (!!), 5.9, and 1.7 last year in half a season. The "one career year" in a contract season that won him the MVP wasn't even his best one from a WAR perspective! V-Mart's, for comparison, are 0.0 and 0.4 in partial seasons, 4.1, 4.6, 3.3, 5.1, 0.6, 2.5, 1.4, 2.8, and 2.9. It's not even close.

I might not have stated clearly enough what I was getting at. My sense from the supporters of the contract is that they look at 2009 in the Metrodome and expect him to return to that level in future seasons, which are the ones covered by the bulk of this contract. My point is that Mauer turns 29 in a couple of weeks, and it really isn't realistic to expect him to improve significantly upon his game at this point.

Mauer's breakout season was as a 26 year old in 2009. The "perfect storm" referenced by the other poster (great description) was the combination of the new ballpark, the associated expansion of the budget (from about 60 million to 100 million or more), and the timing of Mauer's free agency. Yes, I was happy that they got the deal done too. I was happy because .365 with 28 HR's and an 1.031 OPS was one of the greatest seasons in baseball history, and it was believed that Mauer had developed in his strength and his willingness to attack the ball as hitter. But the reality is that 2009 was an absolute aberration. His 2007 and 2008 seasons are very similar statistically to what he did in 2010 and 2011. Good average, impressive production for a catcher, but no interest in driving the ball, and a focus on "avoiding outs" instead of trying to make a more significant impact on the game, which is what you ask of a superstar player.

I'm not interested in WAR as a sabermetric tool either, sorry. I'm not opposed to all advanced metrics, but any statistic that claims you can tell how good a player is by measuring difference in a a couple of WINS over the course of a 162-game season when Joe Mauer is only 1/9 of a baseball lineup is garbage.

As for Mauer vs. Puljos, I'm not at all convinced the Puljos contract is worse. Does anyone here seriously think that Puljos, who just helped St. Louis win a second World Series last season won't be an immediate impact bat in the middle of the lineup for any team he played for until he's at least 35 or 36? Even if his skills decline dramatically after that, it's not at all unreasonable to think he could be a impact power bat as a DH into his early 40's, the way that Thome was. Mauer isn't even that guy NOW, and he's in the prime of his career. His durability is nowhere near what Puljos' has been. And Mauer's skills will decline also, except a 36-year old DH who hits .275 with 5 HR's a year (instead of the .300 hitter with 8-12 HR's a year he averages now) has virtually no value. I think Puljos is more valuable as a 32-37 year old than Mauer is from age 28-33, and if LAA wins a single World Series out of it, the results would be hard to argue with.

Originally Posted by USAFChief

Arguments centered around WAR have little to no value IMO. WAR is unproven at best, junk at worst. WAR for catchers is particularly problematic, since even the strongest proponents of WAR admit they are just guessing at the defensive component of a catchers "value."

Quite a coincidence then that the all-time greats perform marvelously measured by WAR. I don't think it's my place to defend WAR. There are piles of information on it. I am fairly confident that it's better than "it seems like" that gets thrown around like gospel sometimes.

Since you specifically object to the defensive component of catcher WAR, you'll be happy to know that it can be broken down into offensive and defensive pieces. And it is on baseball reference pages that were given as the place to see how "clearly" Martinez's career has been better than Mauer's. Mauer has gained less than 5 WAR from defense according to BR's calculation. Marntinez is just below 0. Stripping those out, it's 35.6 to 29.8 in Mauer's favor (in fewer seasons).

And to remove WAR altogether for you, if you rank order all of Mauer's and Martinez's seasons by weighted runs created, Mauer has the top 4. His career average is 132 to V-Mart's 121. Using weighted on-base average .376 to .361 in Mauer's favor. Using OPS is .872 to .840 in Mauer's favor. Keep in mind those are comparing him to a very offensively successful catcher, not the average or some scrub.

Originally Posted by USAFChief

Arguments centered around WAR have little to no value IMO. WAR is unproven at best, junk at worst. WAR for catchers is particularly problematic, since even the strongest proponents of WAR admit they are just guessing at the defensive component of a catchers "value."

Exactly, and see my other comments above.

There isn't even a uniform definition of how you calculate WAR (BP and other sources use different methods), so you can't even say "WAR" and know what it means...

Moreover, the scale of evaluating players is so narrow that it's basically useless. (I've had a similar complaint about faceoff percentages in hockey...even the best of the best are around 59% often, which tells you that it's basically a 50/50 crapshoot on any given play). Take the 2011 Twins. So, according to FanGraphs, Michael Cuddyer was the best Twins player (3.1). Okay. Span was next (2.2) and Revere after him (2.0). Excuse me?! So, according to WAR, Revere was better than Mauer last year when he played.

Oh yeah...and the grand difference in "wins" for the entire year for having Mauer as your catcher versus Drew Butera is about 2 wins. So, no, not a very useful stat.

Originally Posted by MileHighTwinsFan

I love how people are down on Mauer after 4 games. Using the same logic we should be talking about the historic season Josh Willingham is going to have. He's on pace for 162 RBI and 81 homers - watch out Barry Bonds.

It basically means he's picking up where he left off last season.

Originally Posted by StormJH1

There isn't even a uniform definition of how you calculate WAR (BP and other sources use different methods), so you can't even say "WAR" and know what it means...

Moreover, the scale of evaluating players is so narrow that it's basically useless. (I've had a similar complaint about faceoff percentages in hockey...even the best of the best are around 59% often, which tells you that it's basically a 50/50 crapshoot on any given play). Take the 2011 Twins. So, according to FanGraphs, Michael Cuddyer was the best Twins player (3.1). Okay. Span was next (2.2) and Revere after him (2.0). Excuse me?! So, according to WAR, Revere was better than Mauer last year when he played.

Oh yeah...and the grand difference in "wins" for the entire year for having Mauer as your catcher versus Drew Butera is about 2 wins. So, no, not a very useful stat.

The different calculations almost always come up with the same result and especially the same rank ordering. Their differences are small and when they come up with different results it's almost always in cases of a small sample.

Second, so 59% to (presumably) 41% is too small of a scale? Like say a super high batting average of 37% to a super low of 15%? Or a winning % that gives a 95-96 win season (59%)? Or any racing event where the differences are measured in tenths or hundreths of a second and yet the same people are always at the top? Like that?

Third, Revere played 35 games (that's more than 1/5 of a season) more than Mauer last year and Mauer hit worse than he ever has. So that's not shocking at all.

Fourth, Mauer was at 1.7 WAR last year and Butera at -1.2 (baseball reference). That's 2.9 games. Butera played in just over half the games and Mauer in almost exactly half. Five and a half games over a full season from one position is pretty big. So yeah, that checks out, too.

What exactly on V-Mart's baseball reference page that you cited was the evidence of this "far superior" career? This is more pertinent to the thread than a debate on value of a particular statistic.

Haha, thanks CDog for the WAR discussion. I greatly dislike some of the disregard for actual objective statistics in favor of something else . . .

Originally Posted by ChuckkJay

If I were a GM, I like to think that I would've done the same thing. Short term pain when the fans and writers go nuts, but 3 years later they're all still following the team and then you're not saddled with a $24M part time catcher who slaps singles.

And I have to say, everyone who is talking about how it's only four games into this season seem to have forgotten 2011.

\

Wait, ChuckkJay you're kind of contradicting yourself there, SOoo you're saying you would have paid Mauer or you wouldn't have? You sound like , "If you were GM you'd like to think you would have let him walk" Meaning like Pujols, Fielder you would have let Mauer walk?

Come on man, WE ALL know that wasn't a practicall option, EVEN if you predicted a massive setback and career lulls on the short-term horizon for Joe Mauer you STILL would have signed him if you were GM.

(just hopefully maybe not at that steep a price)