Can we re-visit this whole catching thing for a moment?

[Thrylos]

 

So because the Yankees have some good young pitchers who were not previously recognized as top prospects, it doesn't make sense to acquire good prospects??? I'm failing to see the logical progression there. I'm all for getting top young, controllable talent for prospects, but when has that been available? And no, Jonathan Lucroy does not count as young controllable talent, being 29 years old, having only two years of control left, and coming off his by far worst year.

 

Who is talking about Lucroy?  The Mets have 2 young controllable Catchers.  Go after one of them.  Maybe even the As Josh Phegley or Otherwise go with Pinto.  

 

The logical progression is that prospects do not always made it and you need more than prospects to win.  If all you needed is prospects, the Twins should be where the Royals are now.  And they are not.

 

Also.  You are competing.  Prospects are competing in the minors.  That's part of the problem.  You are looking at the future and the future is always tomorrow, if you don't care about the present.

[nytwinsfan]

Who is talking about Lucroy?  The Mets have 2 young controllable Catchers.  Go after one of them.  Maybe even the As Josh Phegley or Otherwise go with Pinto.  

 

The logical progression is that prospects do not always made it and you need more than prospects to win.  If all you needed is prospects, the Twins should be where the Royals are now.  And they are not.

 

Also.  You are competing.  Prospects are competing in the minors.  That's part of the problem.  You are looking at the future and the future is always tomorrow, if you don't care about the present.

I mean, I started my post by saying "Even if the Twins don't go out and get a big name catcher or top 100 catching prospect this offseason." So I'd love to go after one of the Mets' catchers. But the premise of my post is that in addition to going after the talent you clearly need, keep your system balanced. I know prospects sometimes or often fail. Which is why I was saying Terry Ryan is crazy to rely on Turner/ Garver. Go out and get more prospects OR better yet a young talented catacher that is controllable (although the cost for the latter will be much higher).

The thing about the Royals makes no sense, and in fact disproves your point. The Royals had a top system four or five years before the Twins, and look at them now. So by that logic, just wait until 2018-19. No? Seriously, what are you talking about?

As for the last line, that is just a bunch of empty platitudes. I have no idea what you are talking about.

[jorgenswest]

As far as dWAR goes the last two years Suzuki has rated +.04 and +.05, while Wieters has rated -.01 and .02. By that calculation Suzuki is a much better defensive catcher which is surprising to me. But wouldn't you take a chance on Wieters over Suzuki as a hitter who might come at a reasonable rate for 2016?

Does the overall dWAR also adjust for position? Wieters time at DH would add negative value defensively. Somehow Ortiz has a negative dWAR in seasons he never played in the field.

 

Additionally, catcher dWAR does not include game calling or framing.

 

I don't think their dWAR supports Suzuki as a better defensive catcher.

[Otto von Ballpark]

As far as dWAR goes the last two years Suzuki has rated +.04 and +.05, while Wieters has rated -.01 and .02. By that calculation Suzuki is a much better defensive catcher which is surprising to me. But wouldn't you take a chance on Wieters over Suzuki as a hitter who might come at a reasonable rate for 2016?

dWAR is a counting stat, and Wieters has barely played the last two years, so it shouldn't surprise he is near zero.

 

Plus, Suzuki's dWAR is mostly just the positional credit which all catchers get according to playing time. His Rfield, the measure of his actual defensive performance, has been negative the past two years.