Posey's Huge Deal

[YourHouseIsMyHouse]

I thought TD would already be up in arms when I heard the news, but there isn't even a thread so here it is. Buster got signed for 9/167 which is 1 year more and 17 million less total. Posey also came off an MVP year like Mauer. Posey's MVP season wasn't as good as Mauer's, but I am not really sure who will be the better catcher over the next 8-9 years.

[Mr. Brooks]

You can debate who the better catcher is, but it's close enough that for the Giants to lock up Posey for $5 million less per year than Mauer is a steal, comparatively speaking.

[Scheherezade]

As soon as I saw that contract, I figured the Giants got a sweet deal from Posey. Same age (26) at the time of contract, and both coming off MVP years.

 

However, Mauer had 5 full years of productive MLB seasons to Posey's 2. Plus, he's from SAINT PAUL!

[Mr. Brooks]

As soon as I saw that contract, I figured the Giants got a sweet deal from Posey. Same age (26) at the time of contract, and both coming off MVP years.

 

However, Mauer had 5 full years of productive MLB seasons to Posey's 2. Plus, he's from SAINT PAUL!

 

That tips the scales even further in the Giants favor, because it means Posey has less miles on his knees than Mauer did.

[PseudoSABR]

That tips the scales even further in the Giants favor, because it means Posey has less miles on his knees than Mauer did.

What you say seems to make some sense, but it's just not the case. Service time matters in terms of how much a player gets paid. Mauer's big contract was his second extension (the first was 4/33 in 2006). Posey wasn't even arbitration eligible yet.

 

Mauer was the same age and had a longer track record of success. Mauer simply got to the bigs sooner; the notion that there are less miles on Posey knees is unsubstantiated--innings are innings, minors, majors, college, highschool. I don't buy that major league innings are substantially more damaging to a catcher's durability than any other level.

 

Mauer's contract

Posey's contract

(scroll for details)

[Mr. Brooks]

What you say seems to make some sense, but it's just not the case. Service time matters in terms of how much a player gets paid. Mauer's big contract was his second extension (the first was 4/33 in 2006). Posey wasn't even arbitration eligible yet.

 

Mauer was the same age and had a longer track record of success. Mauer simply got to the bigs sooner; the notion that there are less miles on Posey knees is unsubstantiated--innings are innings, minors, majors, college, highschool. I don't buy that major league innings are substantially more damaging to a catcher's durability than any other level.

 

Mauer's contract

Posey's contract

(scroll for details)

 

They play less games in college and in the minors (per season) than they do in the majors.

[Seth Stohs]

Yeah, at this stage, Mauer signed a four year, $40 (or so) million deal and had to wait three more years to sign his big contract, so it's not completely apples to apples.

[old nurse]

They play less games in college and in the minors (per season) than they do in the majors.

When they are not in college they play summer league games. 80 college games plus exhibition games against d2 schools during the week that do not count, 44 summer league games plus their post season. The college season starts earlier than the pro season does. The time spent playing baseball is about the same.

[Mr. Brooks]

When they are not in college they play summer league games. 80 college games plus exhibition games against d2 schools during the week that do not count, 44 summer league games plus their post season. The college season starts earlier than the pro season does. The time spent playing baseball is about the same.

 

Fair enough, I'm willing to retract my "mileage" statement.

[drjim]

Mauer was one year from free agency while Posey was just entering his first of four arb years. Every year of Mauer was valued the same while Posey had four "cheap" years before his free agent years were valued.

 

As is, it looks like each of Mauer's free agent years were $23 mil while each of Posey's were $21.4 mil so the Giants do get a discount, but I imagine this can be explained partially by leverage but probably more by the fact that Mauer was one year away from free agency while Posey was four, that factors into the value of the years.

[Scheherezade]

What you say seems to make some sense, but it's just not the case. Service time matters in terms of how much a player gets paid. Mauer's big contract was his second extension (the first was 4/33 in 2006). Posey wasn't even arbitration eligible yet.

 

Mauer was the same age and had a longer track record of success. Mauer simply got to the bigs sooner; the notion that there are less miles on Posey knees is unsubstantiated--innings are innings, minors, majors, college, highschool. I don't buy that major league innings are substantially more damaging to a catcher's durability than any other level.

 

Mauer's contract

Posey's contract

(scroll for details)

 

Yup, that's pretty much exactly what I was going for.

[kab21]

Mauer was one year from free agency while Posey was just entering his first of four arb years. Every year of Mauer was valued the same while Posey had four "cheap" years before his free agent years were valued.

 

As is, it looks like each of Mauer's free agent years were $23 mil while each of Posey's were $21.4 mil so the Giants do get a discount, but I imagine this can be explained partially by leverage but probably more by the fact that Mauer was one year away from free agency while Posey was four, that factors into the value of the years.

 

This is the key. Of course Posey's deal is better but it also happened at a different part of their careers. If the Twins screwed up at all it was not getting an 8 yr deal while Mauer was in arb but I'm not sure the stadium was even approved at that point. Imo Mauer's contract is not that big of a deal. he makes a lot of money and so far he is worth it and more. It's likely that he might not be worth it during the last couple of years but that's pretty common with most FA contracts (big and medium).

[Oldgoat_MN]

Posey is excellent. I wish him a good career.

 

Mauer will be in the Hall of Fame. Posey is not a sure thing there.

[CDog]

I was glad to find out this thread was about his contract.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Also, Posey was not a catcher until his second year of college. Probably not a huge deal, but it seems to imply a few less "miles" on him.

 

Posey's 2012 is equivalent to Mauer's 2009 in terms of OPS+.

 

I like Posey's proven power (in both his "full" MLB seasons he's had .200+ isolated power, Mauer has never approached that outside of 2009), although Mauer's got better plate discipline and the advantage of DHing.

 

Posey's deal runs through age 34, Mauer's age 35.

 

They're probably about equivalent deals, considering when they were signed (obviously Posey looks better right now as he is 4 year younger).

 

I'd be happy with either on my team, but if forced to choose for a non-Minnesota team (basically, no hometown hero bonus for Joe), I'd probably give the edge to Posey and his contract right now. Although maybe that's mig

[Mr. Brooks]

Also, Posey was not a catcher until his second year of college. Probably not a huge deal, but it seems to imply a few less "miles" on him.

 

Posey's 2012 is equivalent to Mauer's 2009 in terms of OPS+.

 

I like Posey's proven power (in both his "full" MLB seasons he's had .200+ isolated power, Mauer has never approached that outside of 2009), although Mauer's got better plate discipline and the advantage of DHing.

 

Posey's deal runs through age 34, Mauer's age 35.

 

They're probably about equivalent deals, considering when they were signed (obviously Posey looks better right now as he is 4 year younger).

 

I'd be happy with either on my team, but if forced to choose for a non-Minnesota team (basically, no hometown hero bonus for Joe), I'd probably give the edge to Posey and his contract right now. Although maybe that's mig

 

Its worth noting that Posey is also an elite defensive catcher, Mauer is not, for whatever that is worth.

[biggentleben]

Its worth noting that Posey is also an elite defensive catcher, Mauer is not, for whatever that is worth.

 

That 100% depends on your circle in baseball. Most NL fans would be very quick to tell you that Posey is a fairly average catcher back there, and national pundits still praise Mauer's athleticism behind the plate after all his injury struggles, so I'm not sure it's "worth noting" as accepted fact, certainly.

[Mr. Brooks]

That 100% depends on your circle in baseball. Most NL fans would be very quick to tell you that Posey is a fairly average catcher back there, and national pundits still praise Mauer's athleticism behind the plate after all his injury struggles, so I'm not sure it's "worth noting" as accepted fact, certainly.

 

Mauer has thrown out 59 of his last 252 stolen base attempts, Posey has thrown out 78 of 232.

Posey's passed ball rate is also nearly half that of Mauer's.

Luckily we live in an age where the stats are easily accessible and don't have to rely on the "eye test" of stubborn old baseball writers any more.

 

If Posey is not an elite defensive catcher, then I don't know if any are.

[drjim]

Mauer has thrown out 59 of his last 252 stolen base attempts, Posey has thrown out 78 of 232.

Posey's passed ball rate is also nearly half that of Mauer's.

Luckily we live in an age where the stats are easily accessible and don't have to rely on the "eye test" of stubborn old baseball writers any more.

 

If Posey is not an elite defensive catcher, then I don't know if any are.

 

How much of this has to do with Posey catching one of the best pitching staffs in baseball vs. the collection Mauer has had to catch. Posey might be elite and Mauer might not be but I question if citing these two stats proves anything either way. So yes, the eye test still provides value.

[Mr. Brooks]

How much of this has to do with Posey catching one of the best pitching staffs in baseball vs. the collection Mauer has had to catch. Posey might be elite and Mauer might not be but I question if citing these two stats proves anything either way. So yes, the eye test still provides value.

 

Being that we see every Twins game, I don't understand what you are disputing then?

Mauer is no longer very good back there, his throws are all over the place and he gets lazy on balls in the dirt (see Roenicke's passed ball the other day).

[IdahoPilgrim]

Mauer has thrown out 59 of his last 252 stolen base attempts, Posey has thrown out 78 of 232.

Posey's passed ball rate is also nearly half that of Mauer's.

Luckily we live in an age where the stats are easily accessible and don't have to rely on the "eye test" of stubborn old baseball writers any more.

 

If Posey is not an elite defensive catcher, then I don't know if any are.

 

Do we know if all other variables have been held even? A successful stolen base attempt also depends on how effective the staff is in holding players to the bag and on a pitchers mechanics (how long it takes to come to the plate with a pitch), just to name a couple of variables over which neither Mauer or Posey have any control.

[Mr. Brooks]

Do we know if all other variables have been held even? A successful stolen base attempt also depends on how effective the staff is in holding players to the bag and on a pitchers mechanics (how long it takes to come to the plate with a pitch), just to name a couple of variables over which neither Mauer or Posey have any control.

 

That is why I used a large sample size.

If this is going to be the argument, then the same thing could be said regarding comparisons between any two players in baseball, regarding any stat or set of stats.

So, we can either trust that over a large sample size, most of those variables are going to (somewhat) even out, or we can just never use any stats whatsoever.

I am a mega Mauer fan, he's a HOF player, and a top 25 player in baseball today, but I get the feeling there is just a bit of homerism in this thread. I'm seeing a lot of excuses why we should "throw out" the numbers that are not so flattering when it comes to Mauer, but I'm guessing there wouldnt be the same sentiment if we wanted to "throw out" the positive numbers that support him.

[drjim]

That is why I used a large sample size.

If this is going to be the argument, then the same thing could be said regarding comparisons between any two players in baseball, regarding any stat or set of stats.

So, we can either trust that over a large sample size, most of those variables are going to (somewhat) even out, or we can just never use any stats whatsoever.

I am a mega Mauer fan, he's a HOF player, and a top 25 player in baseball today, but I get the feeling there is just a bit of homerism in this thread. I'm seeing a lot of excuses why we should "throw out" the numbers that are not so flattering when it comes to Mauer, but I'm guessing there wouldnt be the same sentiment if we wanted to "throw out" the positive numbers that support him.

 

I won't argue that Mauer is elite defensively anymore (though hes strikes me as perfectly adequate), but citing those stats strikes me as similar to using rbis to determine who great hitters are. Using stats for defense is difficult to being with, and doing so for catcher defense is that much more difficult.

[Mr. Brooks]

I won't argue that Mauer is elite defensively anymore (though hes strikes me as perfectly adequate), but citing those stats strikes me as similar to using rbis to determine who great hitters are. Using stats for defense is difficult to being with, and doing so for catcher defense is that much more difficult.

 

I guess I'm not buying that a catcher has no control, over very large sample sizes, over the % of baserunners that he throws out.

Who knew that all of these years, scouts all over the world have wasted their time judging catching prospects on things (arm strength, accuracy, release speed) that apparently are irrelevant.

[IdahoPilgrim]

That is why I used a large sample size.

If this is going to be the argument, then the same thing could be said regarding comparisons between any two players in baseball, regarding any stat or set of stats.

So, we can either trust that over a large sample size, most of those variables are going to (somewhat) even out, or we can just never use any stats whatsoever.

 

Yes.

 

That's why I've grown to be skeptical about arguments that are based primarily on statistics. I know how statistics can be massaged to make them say whatever somebody wants.

 

I understand that others in these forums put (much) more stock in statistical analysis. That's fine. More power to them. I guess I'm just tired of having posts hammered down (and I'm not referring to you here; just in general) because I haven't backed them up with a detailed sabermetric discussion.

 

Both statistical analysis and eyewitness/gut feeling need to go into player evaluation, and there should be room on these boards both for those who enjoy detailed statistical discussion and those who wish merely to share an opinion based on what we've seen and watched, without either feeling denigrated by the other.

 

Again, I'm not pointing this at you. I guess this whole thread (among others recently) just highlighted this for me, so I'm venting a little.

[Mr. Brooks]

Yes.

 

That's why I've grown to be skeptical about arguments that are based primarily on statistics. I know how statistics can be massaged to make them say whatever somebody wants.

 

I understand that others in these forums put (much) more stock in statistical analysis. That's fine. More power to them. I guess I'm just tired of having posts hammered down (and I'm not referring to you here; just in general) because I haven't backed them up with a detailed sabermetric discussion.

 

Both statistical analysis and eyewitness/gut feeling need to go into player evaluation, and there should be room on these boards both for those who enjoy detailed statistical discussion and those who wish merely to share an opinion based on what we've seen and watched, without either feeling denigrated by the other.

 

Again, I'm not pointing this at you. I guess this whole thread (among others recently) just highlighted this for me, so I'm venting a little.

 

Fair enough in theory.

Problem is though, none of us on this board are watching every single game, every single team, every single year.

Short of that, you can never evaluate a player on the "eye test", more accurately than you can using stats.

The few times a year that you've seen Player X, may have been the 5 best or 5 worst games of his season.

This isnt football, not much happens that doesn't show up in the boxscore.

[IdahoPilgrim]

Fair enough in theory.

Problem is though, none of us on this board are watching every single game, every single team, every single year.

Short of that, you can never evaluate a player on the "eye test", more accurately than you can using stats.

The few times a year that you've seen Player X, may have been the 5 best or 5 worst games of his season.

This isnt football, not much happens that doesn't show up in the boxscore.

 

This is kind of what I was talking about.

 

And I respectfully disagree with the last sentence.

[drjim]

I guess I'm not buying that a catcher has no control, over very large sample sizes, over the % of baserunners that he throws out.

Who knew that all of these years, scouts all over the world have wasted their time judging catching prospects on things (arm strength, accuracy, release speed) that apparently are irrelevant.

 

I don't follow how this is a response to my point. I would argue all of those things are critical for a catcher but can be easily neutralized by pitchers who do a poor job holding runners or are slow to the plate. That's kind of my point.

[biggentleben]

This is kind of what I was talking about.

 

And I respectfully disagree with the last sentence.

 

Exactly. For instance, tonight Evan Gattis of the Braves grabbed a tough breaking pitch from Mike Minor and whipped the ball to 2nd base in a perfect spot for Dan Uggla to put a tag right on Chris Valaika of the Marlins attempting to steal. Uggla applied the tag and promptly had the ball pop out of his glove. The boxscore says Valaika stolen base off of Minor/Gattis, but there is absolutely nothing more that Gattis could have possibly done to prevent that steal, so now Evan Gattis is 0/1 at throwing runners out in the game, but even the Marlins announcers were wowed by Gattis' handling of the pitch and perfect throw on the play.

 

Scouting plus numbers is the only way to do it. Does any person watch every single game? No. However, unlike small sample size in statistics, a well-balanced viewing of a player (saw one game each month for instance) could provide a significant idea of HOW he does the job - for a catcher, how does he get out of his stance on a steal? how well does he move side to side blocking balls? do pitchers often shake him off? is he calling his own game or calling from the dugout? how accurate is his throwing arm? All those questions could be answered to a respectable level (not an infallible level, but a very good idea of normal) in 5 or more viewings of the same catcher spread over time.

[biggentleben]

I guess I'm not buying that a catcher has no control, over very large sample sizes, over the % of baserunners that he throws out.

Who knew that all of these years, scouts all over the world have wasted their time judging catching prospects on things (arm strength, accuracy, release speed) that apparently are irrelevant.

 

And none of those are measured by the statistics you utilized to "prove" Mauer is not elite. Not arguing he is or isn't...just saying that any number of factors could mean those three things scouts view don't show up in stats. You end up arguing exactly against yourself by trying to insist that stats show one thing or another and then refer to scouting views that don't show up in any statistic. That's be like comparing pitchers on wins and then saying that scouting evidence on ability to repeat delivery proves your point.