Should the Twins Give Ryan Jeffers a Look at First Base?

[RpR]

29 minutes ago, Riverbrian said:

If I could take my concerns throw it in a pot and simmer it down to one dish and throw it on the plate for consumption... This would be it. The lack of adjustment. 

We were dying for offense but yet didn't even make a significant playing time adjustment at the catcher position to reflect this crippling need for offense in June. I'm sure they have framing data and other things to consider but we needed offense in the worst way and we still need bats in my opinion.  

The season started with a 66/33 split in favor of Vazquez. Jeffers hit the ball, Vazquez did not. They have adjusted to a 50/50 so progress I guess but I don't understand why the ratio wasn't reversed to 66/33 in favor of Jeffers. 

This type of adjustment was in house. It wouldn't require the clearing of space on the roster to try someone else. If Jeffers goes into a deep funk... they can always reverse back. 

It certainly wasn't going to solve our overall offensive woes at the time because we are only talking about every third baseball game but it was a simple adjustment in the right direction. 

Yep... The lack of adjustment, slowness to react is where my finger points. 

With that said.

Our Playoff roster is here. Let's get them ready. They are who we got. They can do this.   

Vazquez is still the better fielding catcher, but Jeffers has vastly improved.

[chpettit19]

49 minutes ago, RpR said:

Baseball Ref. still shows Vazquez as slightly better than Jeffers but those two are the catcher next year unless hell freezes over.

DO NOT dork around sending them , either , else where on the field. (not sure why Vazquez plays First) one thing Jeffers could show Vazquez, is his weight control plan; Vazquez has the body shape of a bowling pin.

Shows Vazquez slightly better than Jeffers in what way?

[chpettit19]

24 minutes ago, Battle ur tail off said:

During the playoffs, IMO Vasquez rides the pine. I'm sure he will get a start here or there, but in a series that goes 5 games, I want Jeffers catching for 4 of them. 

We will see what Rocco does then. 

I agree, the younger guy outperforming, he should get 60% of the starts. Even Vasquez should see what is going on here, Jeffers is turning into a solid ML catcher or at the very least he is hot and having a great year. Ride the hot hand. 

 

PS I'm fine with some 1B starts(especially over GALLO!) also if that's what it takes to keep his bat in the lineup.

Yeah, I won't freak out if they catch Vazquez in 20% of the playoff games. I don't have faith that that's how it would play out if they make it beyond the WC round (I don't even have faith that they'll catch Jeffers the first 2 games of the WC series), but I'll wait and see what happens there.

I don't like the 1B idea at all. It's really about Gallo vs Vazquez, and, while I don't like either option, I'd stick with Gallo at 1B and Jeffers at C over either of the catchers at 1B. I think Gallo's glove makes up for any extra base hits Vazquez may get. I'd DH Jeffers over putting either C at 1B.

[RpR]

39 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

Shows Vazquez slightly better than Jeffers in what way?

Defense, but not by much.

[Riverbrian]

55 minutes ago, RpR said:

Vazquez is still the better fielding catcher, but Jeffers has vastly improved.

Maybe... I don't spend much time looking at defensive stats so I can't or won't argue. Although... I'm not one to trust the small sample defensive metrics available to us. 

However... if Vazquez is the better fielding catcher... OK... but in the end, it doesn't matter much to me. The offensive difference was/is enormous and we went through a long stretch where our offense was near the bottom if not at the very bottom. We needed offense much more than we needed defense at the time and still do. They needed to adjust to this acute need and did not.   

I get the defensive importance of the catcher position. A catcher is so much more. They frame, they call pitches. I understand the nature of the position is going to produce other considerations when it comes to defensive value but, I don't see pitchers getting lit up because Jeffers is behind the dish. 

 

[chpettit19]

5 minutes ago, RpR said:

Defense, but not by much.

Fair enough. But Jeffers is better on offense, and by a whole lot. So it doesn't change my stance at all. Jeffers is the significantly better overall player right now than Vazquez is. It's really not even close.

[Mike Sixel]

43 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

Fair enough. But Jeffers is better on offense, and by a whole lot. So it doesn't change my stance at all. Jeffers is the significantly better overall player right now than Vazquez is. It's really not even close.

They are so far apart I doubt they can see each other outside the dugout at this point.....Jeffers is a top 5 catcher, and isn't playing more than half the games.

[USAFChief]

9 hours ago, Mark G said:

If this has been said already, forgive me, but why don't we just stop using 1st base as an extra DH spot and target the position in free agency, landing a starting caliber guy who actually knows the position?  Rotating outfielders and utility players in and out of the position works while someone is recovering from an injury, but we have been doing this for way too long now.  When you have to teach your catcher to play 1st base, it should tell you something; like you need to find an actual first baseman!

The minor league system hasn't produced any, leaving the major league club to teach on the fly.  Spend a little money on the position and settle it.  Don't risk one of your two catchers to possible injury playing a position he doesn't know, just to get a right handed bat in the lineup.  

1. I believe this article is about 2023. There are no free agent 1st basemen currently available, AFAIK. 

2. Here's the list of 2024 free agent 1st basemen. Which of these should the Twins give 1st base to next year?

 

https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/free-agents/1st-base/

 

[USAFChief]

7 hours ago, dxpavelka said:

Sorry.  I have a life.

Lack of response noted.

[JD-TWINS]

On 8/17/2023 at 2:00 PM, chpettit19 said:

Yadier Molina hit 20 HRs at the age of 35. If they're worried about Jeffers at the age of 36 that's a problem. They're catchers, I couldn't care less if they can run. If you're sacrificing playing time in a player's prime because you're worried about what they may be in their mid-30s you're making a massive mistake. 9-10 years after Jeffers debut puts him at age 33. If they're limiting his play at 26 because of what he may be at 33 they're making a massive mistake. Especially for a team that doesn't tend to extend a large portion of their roster. The chances that Jeffers is even in their org 9-10 years after he debuted is small.

Always worrying about the future means you're never worried about today, and you're giving yourself a self-inflicted disadvantage. Don't dictate playing time in 2023 because you're worried about what a guy may be in 2030. What a terrible strategy.

I’m worried what Jeffers may be in October of ‘23 if all of a sudden he’s catching 5 days per week. Not concerned about 2030. Organization may have some concerns about 3-4 years out but that’s not the topic. Jeffers bat in ‘23 & how it may help is the topic.

Yadi caught all the time because of his defensive abilities and his handling of the staff……not because he might hit some HR’s.

We want Jeffers to play more for his bat and if he catches 50% more down the stretch than he has been, in my opinion, he may not hit as well which would be diminishing returns.

[JD-TWINS]

24 minutes ago, USAFChief said:

1. I believe this article is about 2023. There are no free agent 1st basemen currently available, AFAIK. 

2. Here's the list of 2024 free agent 1st basemen. Which of these should the Twins give 1st base to next year?

 

https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/free-agents/1st-base/

 

Didn’t check the list…….Alex Kirilloff & Donovan Solano……..total cost $4.5M.

[chpettit19]

5 minutes ago, JD-TWINS said:

I’m worried what Jeffers may be in October of ‘23 if all of a sudden he’s catching 5 days per week. Not concerned about 2030. Organization may have some concerns about 3-4 years out but that’s not the topic. Jeffers bat in ‘23 & how it may help is the topic.

Yadi caught all the time because of his defensive abilities and his handling of the staff……not because he might hit some HR’s.

We want Jeffers to play more for his bat and if he catches 50% more down the stretch than he has been, in my opinion, he may not hit as well which would be diminishing returns.

I'm sorry if I'm just missing your stance, but after I said I didn't think an extra game or 2 a week was going to crush him you responded with:

"Catching 4-5 games over 6-7 day series is a piece of cake for Jeffers ………..no argument………for a couple weeks……i.e. Playoffs.

The debate was about physical/mental fatigue doing it throughout 162 games. The game is a grind for left fielders in August let alone a catcher playing the bulk of the time."

I read that and:

"Guys like Molina are the typical “catcher” profile and theoretically is what organizations are trying to guard against. Lost power & can’t run at all after 9-10 years. See Vazquez. I get they weren’t burners to start but they appear really beat up.'

to mean you're worried about much more than just him catching an extra game or 2 a week for the rest of the year. But it wouldn't be the first time I've misunderstood someone.

But we just disagree on the impact of him catching and extra game or 2 a week. And even if he goes from being a 137 OPS+ bat the rest of the way to a 115 OPS+ bat the rest of the way because of an extra game or 2 I'll still take it over Vazquez's 61 OPS+ bat. Simply calling it "diminishing returns" and saying it's automatically a bad idea is ignoring all the context of how far he'd have to drop as a hitter for it to actually be diminishing returns for the team overall. I find it very hard to believe he's going to lose 76 OPS+ points from catching a couple extra games here and there.

[wabene]

24 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

I'm sorry if I'm just missing your stance, but after I said I didn't think an extra game or 2 a week was going to crush him you responded with:

"Catching 4-5 games over 6-7 day series is a piece of cake for Jeffers ………..no argument………for a couple weeks……i.e. Playoffs.

The debate was about physical/mental fatigue doing it throughout 162 games. The game is a grind for left fielders in August let alone a catcher playing the bulk of the time."

I read that and:

"Guys like Molina are the typical “catcher” profile and theoretically is what organizations are trying to guard against. Lost power & can’t run at all after 9-10 years. See Vazquez. I get they weren’t burners to start but they appear really beat up.'

to mean you're worried about much more than just him catching an extra game or 2 a week for the rest of the year. But it wouldn't be the first time I've misunderstood someone.

But we just disagree on the impact of him catching and extra game or 2 a week. And even if he goes from being a 137 OPS+ bat the rest of the way to a 115 OPS+ bat the rest of the way because of an extra game or 2 I'll still take it over Vazquez's 61 OPS+ bat. Simply calling it "diminishing returns" and saying it's automatically a bad idea is ignoring all the context of how far he'd have to drop as a hitter for it to actually be diminishing returns for the team overall. I find it very hard to believe he's going to lose 76 OPS+ points from catching a couple extra games here and there.

I agree to some extent but I would keep a keen eye on his performance and ease up if he starts fading. A 137 OPS+ Jeffers come playoffs would be much more valuable in those games than a worn out 115 OPS+ Jeffers.

 

Of course this would require them to do something they haven't done well yet, adjust quickly.

[chpettit19]

2 minutes ago, wabene said:

I agree to some extent but I would keep a keen eye on his performance and ease up if he starts fading. A 137 OPS+ Jeffers come playoffs would be much more valuable in those games than a worn out 115 OPS+ Jeffers.

Yeah, I wouldn't go out of my way to get him a ton of extra starts the rest of the way assuming they maintain their division lead. I would give him a number of stints where he's starting 4 games in 6 days, though, to help him get a feel for a playoff series.

Things have gotten a little confusing in this thread as there's a couple different things being discussed as there's talk about the rest of this year, catching in general, and Twins catchers usage this year as a whole. I'm not sure I've followed that other poster's thoughts clearly so I'm not sure when they're discussing the rest of this year vs this year as a whole vs games caught in general.

The rest of the year is all about maintaining the division lead and then preparing for the playoffs as they get closer to locking that spot up. But I will complain as they get into the Texas and Cleveland series coming up and continue the 50/50 split for those games. Those are huge for finishing this division off early enough to set your rotation and rest guys for the playoffs and need to be treated like it.

[dxpavelka]

10 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

Yadier Molina between 2009 and 2017 caught 130+ games every year but 1. And was the best catcher in baseball. He caught 118 games at the age of 38, but Jeffers can't catch 120 at the age of 26?

Salvador Perez has caught 120+ games 5 times.

Buster Posey won the MVP in 2012 catching 111 games. OPS+ of 134 in 2013 catching 119 games. OPS+ of 115 in 2016 catching 122 games. 

Sean Murphy joined JT Realmuto as the 2 best hitting catchers last year and caught 116.

2021: Salvador Perez at 120 games caught had a wRC+ of 130. Will Smith 111 games wRC+ 133. In his age 34 season Buster Posey was able to catch 102 games while maintaining a 140 OPS+. But 26 year old Jeffers can't maintain his numbers past 100 games caught, and it makes sense that the Twins are going to catch him 75-80 games this year?

Sorry my lack of a life has made it so difficult for you to prove your point, but there's more than 2 guys, none of which I had to go back 2 decades for. The 5 best hitting catchers of the last 2 years all caught well over 100 games, or were in their last professional season, and didn't collapse. 

There are 7 teams in baseball who have a team catcher OPS over .750. Jeffers has an OPS of .862. There is 1 team in baseball (Atlanta) who has a catcher OPS better than that. There are 26 teams in baseball who have a team catcher OPS over .600. Vazquez has an OPS of .579. There 2 teams in baseball (Detroit and Oakland) with a catcher OPS worse than that. You're going from Detroit's catchers to Atlanta's when you play Jeffers over Vazquez. Yes, I think it's pretty clear they have an advantage over all but 1 team in baseball when they play Jeffers, but they're choosing not to. Sorry if I question that decision. The Twins have the best hitting catcher in the AL, and 2nd best in baseball, this year and they're going to catch him in less than half the games. I don't see why people feel that's a defensible decision. But here we are.

 

So you named 5 and only had to go back 14 years.  Only left about a hundred and fifty (or more) guys out. 

[dxpavelka]

2 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

I'm sorry if I'm just missing your stance, but after I said I didn't think an extra game or 2 a week was going to crush him you responded with:

"Catching 4-5 games over 6-7 day series is a piece of cake for Jeffers ………..no argument………for a couple weeks……i.e. Playoffs.

The debate was about physical/mental fatigue doing it throughout 162 games. The game is a grind for left fielders in August let alone a catcher playing the bulk of the time."

I read that and:

"Guys like Molina are the typical “catcher” profile and theoretically is what organizations are trying to guard against. Lost power & can’t run at all after 9-10 years. See Vazquez. I get they weren’t burners to start but they appear really beat up.'

to mean you're worried about much more than just him catching an extra game or 2 a week for the rest of the year. But it wouldn't be the first time I've misunderstood someone.

But we just disagree on the impact of him catching and extra game or 2 a week. And even if he goes from being a 137 OPS+ bat the rest of the way to a 115 OPS+ bat the rest of the way because of an extra game or 2 I'll still take it over Vazquez's 61 OPS+ bat. Simply calling it "diminishing returns" and saying it's automatically a bad idea is ignoring all the context of how far he'd have to drop as a hitter for it to actually be diminishing returns for the team overall. I find it very hard to believe he's going to lose 76 OPS+ points from catching a couple extra games here and there.

You are correct that the debate may have been about the fatigue of doing it thru 162 games.  162 games which are meaningless without said Playoffs.

 

[chpettit19]

1 hour ago, dxpavelka said:

So you named 5 and only had to go back 14 years.  Only left about a hundred and fifty (or more) guys out. 

No, I named 5 in the last 2 years. Good try, though. The guys I left out are the bad hitting catchers. The point is that the great hitting catchers play way more than Jeffers is and it's not even debatable. 

[chpettit19]

58 minutes ago, dxpavelka said:

You are correct that the debate may have been about the fatigue of doing it thru 162 games.  162 games which are meaningless without said Playoffs.

 

And this team has just been running away with this brutal division, right? Those said playoffs have just been an absolute certainty while this team struggled to score 3 runs most nights and continually played a guy with a 61 OPS+ over a guy with a 137 OPS+? The playoffs are meaningless if you're not in them. It's why teams play their best players.

[dxpavelka]

34 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

No, I named 5 in the last 2 years. Good try, though. The guys I left out are the bad hitting catchers. The point is that the great hitting catchers play way more than Jeffers is and it's not even debatable. 

Or maybe Jeffers isn't a great hitting catcher.

[dxpavelka]

1 hour ago, dxpavelka said:

So you named 5 and only had to go back 14 years.  Only left about a hundred and fifty (or more) guys out. 

Not a single one of the 10 catchers who played over a hundred games had an OPS of .800   Three of the ten who played between 87 and 99 did and one of them was over .900

 

[chpettit19]

36 minutes ago, dxpavelka said:

Or maybe Jeffers isn't a great hitting catcher.

Best hitting catcher in the AL this year, but I guess you could try to argue that's not true if you want.

[dxpavelka]

13 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

Best hitting catcher in the AL this year, but I guess you could try to argue that's not true if you want.

Argue.  Why argue?  Your statement is a slam dunk.  If you take out Hiem, Rutschman, Jansen, Raleigh & Rogers.  Or limit the discussion to guys who might be starting to wear down based on being scratched from their last start due to back tightness.  Oh. WAIT.  You're gonna use batting average as your criteria. Which I don't really have an issue with.  Of course I get called a dinosaur when I use that stat.  NOW GET OFF MY LAWN.

[chpettit19]

5 hours ago, dxpavelka said:

Argue.  Why argue?  Your statement is a slam dunk.  If you take out Hiem, Rutschman, Jansen, Raleigh & Rogers.  Or limit the discussion to guys who might be starting to wear down based on being scratched from their last start due to back tightness.  Oh. WAIT.  You're gonna use batting average as your criteria. Which I don't really have an issue with.  Of course I get called a dinosaur when I use that stat.  NOW GET OFF MY LAWN.

https://www.fangraphs.com/leaders/major-league?stats=bat&lg=al&type=8&season=2023&month=0&season1=2023&ind=0&pos=c&qual=200&sortcol=17&sortdir=desc&pagenum=1

Nope, not using BA, but I guess I could. Not even all that close in wRC+. But, sure, you can take all those other guys. Rogers is a bold name to add to that list, by the way.

But, no, the Twins aren't screwing up by giving Jeffers less than half the PAs as Adley. He'd be way too tired if they increased his playing time. I see the argument.

[dxpavelka]

9 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

https://www.fangraphs.com/leaders/major-league?stats=bat&lg=al&type=8&season=2023&month=0&season1=2023&ind=0&pos=c&qual=200&sortcol=17&sortdir=desc&pagenum=1

Nope, not using BA, but I guess I could. Not even all that close in wRC+. But, sure, you can take all those other guys. Rogers is a bold name to add to that list, by the way.

But, no, the Twins aren't screwing up by giving Jeffers less than half the PAs as Adley. He'd be way too tired if they increased his playing time. I see the argument.

Bold is kind of my thing but I like guys that hit home runs score runs and drive runs in.  To be totally honest I don't give a s$@! about wRC+ and whatever comeback you're gonna come up with ain't gonna sway me so save your keystrokes.

 

[chpettit19]

2 hours ago, dxpavelka said:

Bold is kind of my thing but I like guys that hit home runs score runs and drive runs in.  To be totally honest I don't give a s$@! about wRC+ and whatever comeback you're gonna come up with ain't gonna sway me so save your keystrokes.

 

It's all good. There's no comeback to "I don't care about any if the stats."

[LanceJS]

For those saying a catcher who catches about 120+ games in a season - if that can be done, great, but really, you’re just one foul ball off the mask away from that guy having to sit out at least 7 days for concussion protocol. And then how will he be coming back? Have we already forgotten why Joe Mauer had to switch to first? Personally, I like when two capable catchers can share the load, like the Twins currently have. Yes, Vazquez’s bat is not good - but heck, he’s less a liability than Gallo right now. And if you REALLY want Jeffers’ bat in the lineup more often, he can occasionally DH if he’s on a hot streak.  He can then switch to catching if needed. Yeah, you lost the DH, hence why I would not recommend it every time but it’s better than switching him to 1B

[Major League Ready]

8 hours ago, dxpavelka said:

Bold is kind of my thing but I like guys that hit home runs score runs and drive runs in.  To be totally honest I don't give a s$@! about wRC+ and whatever comeback you're gonna come up with ain't gonna sway me so save your keystrokes.

 

What's your objection with wRC+.  BA is useless in comparison.

BTW .... It's quite evident you can't be swayed by a logical argument so you probably don't need to tell anyone it's useless trying.   

[dxpavelka]

6 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

It's all good. There's no comeback to "I don't care about any if the stats."

What I don't care about is the made up s@!#.  The stuff that I can see with my own eyes is important and I've quoted it.

 

[dxpavelka]

2 hours ago, Major League Ready said:

What's your objection with wRC+.  BA is useless in comparison.

BTW .... It's quite evident you can't be swayed by a logical argument so you probably don't need to tell anyone it's useless trying.   

You dug until you found one made up stat that says your guy is better than the next handful of guys.  GOOOD for you.

 

[Major League Ready]

1 hour ago, dxpavelka said:

You dug until you found one made up stat that says your guy is better than the next handful of guys.  GOOOD for you.

 

You didn't answer the question.  What is deficient about wRC+?  Here is what Fangraphs says about wRC+

If you’ve looking to measure a batter’s value using a cumulative statistic that credits a player for total production rather than on an at bat by at bat basis, then wRC is extremely useful. It combines the virtues of a weighted statistic like wOBA, which credits a hitter for how valuable each particular action truly is, with the virtues of counting stats that give players credit for producing at a given level over a great number of plate appearances. wRC isn’t necessarily better or worse than wRAA, it’s simply the same statistic communicated differently. Both provide you with a measure of how many runs a player contributed to his team with their bat.

If you want a rate statistic for hitters that weights each offensive action and controls for league and park effects, wRC+ is for you. While wOBA is a huge step forward from stats like batting average and slugging percentage, it doesn’t credit hitters who play in difficult parks or deduct points for hitters who play in smaller ones. wRC+ brings all the virtues of wOBA plus two added benefits; park and league adjustments. A .400 wOBA at Coors is much less impressive than one at Petco, for example. Additionally, wOBA tracks with overall league offense, so you can’t use it to compare players of different eras very effectively. A .400 wOBA in 2000 is much less impressive than one in 2014, but a 140 wRC+ in 2000 means essentially the same thing in 2014.

Here is another article entitled baseball statistics you should know.  It states wRC+ is the single best way to quickly measure a player’s offensive production, better than batting average, OPS, or a triple slash line. That’s because wRC+ properly values everything a player can do at the plate, allowing you to compare across playing styles. At the end of the day, despite the difference in playing styles, a slapstick hitter and a slugger are trying to create runs, and wRC+ allows you to easily compare the production.

Baseball stats you should know.  

What you don't understand is that wRC+ is calculated by combining a number of performance metrics and is therefore a far more comprehensive stat than most.  BA is useless without OBP and slugging.  RBI is useless without know the number of opportunities and conversion rate., etc.