The Twins Should Target James McCann as a New Half-Solution at Catcher

[jorgenswest]

13 minutes ago, bean5302 said:

Fangraphs uses the unstable pitch framing metric which creates wild swings in catcher value. If we average things between bWAR and fWAR...

Vazquez +0.3 avg WAR in 98 games per year
McCann +0.5 avg WAR in 63 games per year

McCann is the better player by a fair margin. Of course, I'd rather use bWAR for catchers because I dislike "catcher framing" as I don't think it's a valid metric.

Honest question…

I get that you don’t believe in the metric. Do you believe framing is a skill or do you believe it is a skill poorly measured by fWAR?

[nicksaviking]

23 minutes ago, RpR said:

There is no amount of offense that can make up for Jeffers , run at will, defense.

Yeah, there is. Ask fundamentals-are-essential God Tom Kelly who put Brian Harper behind the plate for six seasons.

[nicksaviking]

40 minutes ago, RpR said:

There is no amount of offense that can make up for Jeffers , run at will, defense.

 

9 minutes ago, nicksaviking said:

Yeah, there is. Ask fundamentals-are-essential God Tom Kelly who put Brian Harper behind the plate for six seasons.

And further update:

Uhhhhh, Jeffers only threw out 17% of his baserunners last year.

Compared to Vazquez's 16%.

I guess find another stat to cherry pick?

[tony&rodney]

16 minutes ago, jorgenswest said:

Honest question…

I get that you don’t believe in the metric. Do you believe framing is a skill or do you believe it is a skill poorly measured by fWAR?

Catching is a skill and the concept of strikes being called because the umpires are fooled can only be measured poorly. Umpires are human so mistakes are made and they also are very familiar with the catchers so there is going to be some natural bias on close pitches on a few seldom delayed calls.. With strike zone accuracies in the mid to upper 90% range umpires are really good at their jobs. Nevertheless, we have catchers posing as they receive the ball. If you ever umpired a game where the pitchers can throw in the 80s or better with an occasional decent breaking ball you understand that the umpire actually cannot see the catcher's glove. The focus is on the ball. The best umpires pay no attention to the catcher.

[bean5302]

12 minutes ago, jorgenswest said:

Honest question…

I get that you don’t believe in the metric. Do you believe framing is a skill or do you believe it is a skill poorly measured by fWAR?

There might be something to the skill or the metric in general. Catcher physical dimensions matter a lot. Taller catchers generally find it easier to get high strikes called and shorter catchers generally find it easier to get low strikes called when I was evaluating trends in the metric. Even if it's just body type resulting in more or less favorable strike calls, it's still valuable, but then there is the pitcher staff and umpire biases towards pitcher reputation. Great pitchers get better calls. Just like great hitters often get better calls.

The biggest problem I have with catcher framing is it is not stable at all, and the values assigned have enormous impact. Most catchers bounce around in terms of value.

J.T. Realmuto is an example: -11, +3, +5, +7, +3, +4, 0, -13, -3. So he started off horrible, then became one of the best, then became horrible, then became below average.

Christian Vazquez has a similar pattern: +4, +3, +3, +12, +3, +0, +2, +3, +6. Where did that +12 come from? That's +1.2 WAR. Vazquez's +6 from last year was out of whack, too, considering his playing time.

Brian McCann's career is all over the place as well. It's common to see framing value make wild changes when a catcher changes teams. Like Kurt Suzuki. He apparently forgot everything he knew about framing the moment he left Minnesota. It makes me suspect the pitchers have a much more substantial impact than the catcher. Jason Castro. Similar story. Terrible, then great when Houston decided he should be good at it, then he tanked back down with Minnesota...

Look at Buster Posey. Fangraphs' WAR = 57.6. Posey enjoyed a +31 Statcast framing runs in 2016 (first year); that's 3.1 WAR just in framing. Looking at the other framing runs source, Posey enjoyed +13 WAR in framing over his career. That's why Posey is 45 bWAR and 58 fWAR. 

So framing isn't stable and it has an enormous impact on perceived value, but I don't believe the catcher's skill usually has much to do with it.

[RpR]

58 minutes ago, nicksaviking said:

 

And further update:

Uhhhhh, Jeffers only threw out 17% of his baserunners last year.

Compared to Vazquez's 16%.

I guess find another stat to cherry pick?

Vazquez holds runners; they run at will on Jeffers.

Jeffers and Vazquez below, Vazquez did drop from last year, still much better than Jeffers, try again.

[nicksaviking]

30 minutes ago, RpR said:

Vazquez holds runners; they run at will on Jeffers.

Jeffers and Vazquez below, Vazquez did drop from last year, still much better than Jeffers, try again.

So despite them 'running at will' on Jeffers, he allowed a measly 6 more runners to advance (while throwing out two more) than Vazquez did. 

So saving 6 more stolen bases is worth the .575 OPS?

[chpettit19]

6 minutes ago, RpR said:

Vazquez holds runners; they run at will on Jeffers.

Jeffers and Vazquez below, Vazquez did drop from last year, still much better than Jeffers, try again.

They both have the same 1.9 pop time and have for years. They have the same arm and the running struggles the Twins have are on the pitchers.

[Parfigliano]

1 hour ago, DocBauer said:

OK, I'll bite. McCann is a solid, experienced, better offense replacement  for Vazquez. I also like Elias Diaz for the same reasons and he might cost less than McCann.

But this idea of works or has any merit if the Twins can clear all or nearly all of Vazquez's salary. I'm not saying they can or they can't do so, but I'm sure it would include someone from rookie or A ball to balance the trade. But as already, accuratey pointed out, eating $3-4M of Vazquez's deal and then signing someone else for $4M doesn't really save anything. The best you end up with is a little better bat for 1yr.

A] Find a way to clear all $10M of the deal, sign someone, possibly improve the offense a little, andhave a little $ to spend elsewhere.

B] Stay status quo for a 2025 and be content with the defense and experience Vazquez provides and hope for the best with his bat.

Not sure what other choice there really is.

What's so frustrating to me...with no disrespect toward Vazquez...is how damn stubborn the FO is at times in taking a look at players already on hand, such as Camargo. His bat came alive in 2022. He performed even better at St Paul in 2023. Why do so many dismiss that because he had an off 2024? He's also got a 31% caught stealing rate in his career. How bad would he have to be to defensively...not saying he's bad...to receive an opportunity to display his game at the ML level to replace Vazquez's anemic bat?

It's hard to find good catching. But you have a young catcher with potential on your hands and you'd rather spend FA $ or prospects to fill the spot vs giving your own prospect an opportunity? It just doesn't make sense and it's maddening to me.

The FO obviously isn't impressed with Camargo.  Don't know why but they will not give him a chance even over a nothing like Vazquez.

[Parfigliano]

3 minutes ago, nicksaviking said:

So despite that them 'running at will' on Jeffers, he allowed a measly 6 more runners to advance (while throwing out two more) than Vazquez did. 

So saving 6 more stolen bases is worth the .575 OPS?

Real world no.  TC world so far yes.

[chpettit19]

2 hours ago, Parfigliano said:

"Framing" is junk science.  An umpire consistently fooled by "framing" should not have the job.

Well I'll email all the teams and tell them to quit teaching it. They'll be happy to know. And Jeffers will be very happy to know he doesn't have to worry about it so can focus on blocking balls alone since how he receives doesn't matter. Thanks for clearing this up.

[nicksaviking]

12 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

Well I'll email all the teams and tell them to quit teaching it. They'll be happy to know. And Jeffers will be very happy to know he doesn't have to worry about it so can focus on blocking balls alone since how he receives doesn't matter. Thanks for clearing this up.

Just like running out ground balls, it's worth the effort to frame the pitches, but in today's game the results continue to diminish with the technology and uniform strike zone. I wouldn't go too far out of my way to find a good framer over a catcher with other positive attributes, and I certainly wouldn't go out of my way to sign or develop one for multiple years because robot umps could happen any season now.

[chpettit19]

1 minute ago, nicksaviking said:

Just like running out ground balls, it's worth the effort to frame the pitches, but in today's game the results continue to diminish with the technology and uniform strike zone. I wouldn't go too far out of my way to find a good framer over a catcher with other positive attributes, and I certainly wouldn't go out of my way to sign or develop one to multiple years because robot umps could happen any season now.

Oh, I totally agree. Had a comment earlier in the thread about the future of catching not including framing and thats what lead to the discussion of framing. But how catchers receive, or "frame," a pitcher has been a core skill of catching defense for a long time because the human eye/brain can in fact be tricked by such things. It's not that catchers fool umps constantly, but if you can steal a strike or 2 a game vs losing your pitcher a strike or 2 a game it's a big deal. 

Robot umps will remove the need for the skill all together, but the other poster's comment that it's "junk science" is something people have been saying for a while. Well every major league team has been wasting decades on catchers who receive well because of that "junk sceince" instead of getting catchers who hit well and block pitches instead. How foolish of the entire baseball industry for generations.

[RpR]

29 minutes ago, nicksaviking said:

So despite them 'running at will' on Jeffers, he allowed a measly 6 more runners to advance (while throwing out two more) than Vazquez did. 

So saving 6 more stolen bases is worth the .575 OPS?

  Vazquez had 4 errors, 2 double plays and 1 passed ball; Jeffers had 6 errors, 0 double plays and 3  passed balls.

Defense counts

At that, they both collapsed with the rest of the team, but Vazquez had a .245 BA in the last 30 games whereas Jeffers had a .227.

Que sera, sera.

[RpR]

42 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

Well I'll email all the teams and tell them to quit teaching it. They'll be happy to know. And Jeffers will be very happy to know he doesn't have to worry about it so can focus on blocking balls alone since how he receives doesn't matter. Thanks for clearing this up.

History abstract:

References to pitch framing: References to pitch framing date back to at least the 1950s. 

 

• Brewers instruction manual: In 1982, the Brewers prepared an organizational instruction manual that advised catchers to catch possible strikes with "a minimum of body movement" and "very smooth hand action".
• Sabermetricians: Historically, sabermetricians were generally dubious about the existence and impact of pitch framing
• Pitch framing in the popular press: There has been an explosion of interest in pitch framing in the popular press, especially in the last few years.

[High heat]

So what you’re saying is he is Jair Camargo?  Who we already have in our system and can play for league minimum?  
 

No thanks!  

[nicksaviking]

I wouldn't say it's 'junk science' but I also wouldn't say there's a terribly reliable methodology either since we don't know which pitches the umpire was going to miss with or without the 'framing'. 

Umpires are missing about 11 pitches per game now, which contrary to popular belief is way down from decades past:

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/strike-three-lets-check-in-on-umpire-accuracy/

Assuming half of those misses were called strikes but should be balls, they're missing 5-6 strikes per game available for catchers to steal, so 2-3 per team. Even if a catcher can steal all three, which sounds unlikely, I don't think a three net *possible* strikes is enough to prioritize that skill.

[nicksaviking]

14 minutes ago, RpR said:

  Vazquez had 4 errors, 2 double plays and 1 passed ball; Jeffers had 6 errors, 0 double plays and 3  passed balls.

Defense counts

At that, they both collapsed with the rest of the team, but Vazquez had a .245 BA in the last 30 games whereas Jeffers had a .227.

Que sera, sera.

Double plays for a catcher? What is this conversation about again?

You said the Twins shouldn't get rid of Vazquez for McCann because Jeffers doesn't throw out base runners.

Even though McCann is better at it than both Jeffers and Vazquez.

[TheLeviathan]

Is McCann floating out there that he'll sign for free?  

We should be scouting beer league softball tournaments.

[Doctor Gast]

2 hours ago, Fatbat said:

How is anyone gonna pay Vasquez  $10M to play besides us. And why would we retain $5M salary in a trade? We are stuck with him and the Pohlads are going to suck up the 142M.  Lastly, why dump Paddack? He is still young and can be a horse in the bullpen. His salary isn’t backbreaking high.

Agree with you Fatbat, Paddack's salary isn't outrageous for what he's worth. However, he could be easily replaced by a cheaper SP if as many are led to believe that they have to cut budget. They are just waiting around for another FO to offer them a reasonable offer, to help them out. That should have happened by now. If he's our easiest trade piece to move & they can't move him then what is going on their heads? That's what scares me. If the Pohlads are willing to suck up the extra $12M & Twins sign no FAs, I'm fine with that, Yet making trades don't cost you monetarily which they should be made to make us better. 

[stringer bell]

TDers love to talk catching and defense. I remain skeptical of most defensive metrics and very skeptical of Officially Scored stats (WP/PB and H/E). Given my skepticism on the numbers bandied about, I'll just give my opinions. 

Vázquez seems to have lost the ability to hit at any early age (32) and his defense isn't enough to justify the contract he has. As @Riverbrian has pointed out, getting rid of him as a salary dump isn't easy and clean since there is no one in the Twins organization to be the backup or alternate catcher in 2025. Adding another flawed vet makes no real sense.

Ryan Jeffers isn't a great defensive catcher, but for about a season and a third of half-time work, he was at least in the top third of catchers. He throws okay and seems to call a good game, but he may be well served by the 50-50 split his manager has used in the past two years.

The Twins collection of pitchers is ill-served in stopping the running game. The best way for them to hold it down is not letting runners on and secondly being far enough ahead that stealing a base isn't worth the risk. 

There seems to be no real belief that Camargo can be anything but a stopgap in the event of injury to one of the Twins' primary catchers. That said, there isn't anything about Gasper's resumé that indicates he's a better option as a catcher. I still won't be surprised if Gasper is on the major league roster for some pretty long stretches this year, especially if he can hit in line with his minor league production (I mean deduct maybe 100 OPS points from his Triple A numbers). 

Gasper is a switch hitter with quite a bit of first base experience and we know Rocco loves his switch hitters and flexible defenders. What he shows this spring might determine his role (if any). He might be a true third catcher who can also play first and second base or he might be a third catcher in the Kyle Farmer role (only in an absolute emergency). I don't want to hold out any false hope in his future, but he is on the 40-man roster, so we'll probably see him sometime in the 2025 season.

 

[tony&rodney]

Forever, at least in my lifetime, coaches have worked with catchers to "receive" the ball  as quietly  as possible. I was a pitcher, but caught some and was shown a few tricks. Coaches worked quite a bit with catchers on setup and receiving; a series of flips. 

I don't believe we should dismiss that there are several calls made each game due to proper catching but the measurement of it and comments by announcers has been a little out there. LaTroy Hawkins has discussed this on air several times. He gets pretty disgusted and dismissive actually. His comment goes something along the lines that stealing a strike is just bad umpiring. He does go on to explain that catchers work very hard to be smooth and also explains how frustrating it is for a pitcher to throw to a catcher who jerks all over the place and even obstructs the umpire. 

This post asks about picking up McCann and that seems like a slim odds deal. Gasper is AAA support only. I would almost expect a trade of Lopez before Vazquez is moved. I don't want that at all. Do wish the Twins would consider making a trade for a catching prospect, but have no idea what. I just throw out stuff like Brooks Lee for Jeferson Quero or Varland, Miranda/Julien for Harry Ford as thoughts and guesses.

[Parfigliano]

1 hour ago, chpettit19 said:

Well I'll email all the teams and tell them to quit teaching it. They'll be happy to know. And Jeffers will be very happy to know he doesn't have to worry about it so can focus on blocking balls alone since how he receives doesn't matter. Thanks for clearing this up.

Always happy to help.

[mnfireman]

1 hour ago, chpettit19 said:

Oh, I totally agree. Had a comment earlier in the thread about the future of catching not including framing and thats what lead to the discussion of framing. But how catchers receive, or "frame," a pitcher has been a core skill of catching defense for a long time because the human eye/brain can in fact be tricked by such things. It's not that catchers fool umps constantly, but if you can steal a strike or 2 a game vs losing your pitcher a strike or 2 a game it's a big deal. 

Robot umps will remove the need for the skill all together, but the other poster's comment that it's "junk science" is something people have been saying for a while. Well every major league team has been wasting decades on catchers who receive well because of that "junk sceince" instead of getting catchers who hit well and block pitches instead. How foolish of the entire baseball industry for generations.

Robot umps are not a given either. 

 https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/40377683/mlb-robot-umpires-automated-balls-strikes-challenge-system-umps-majors

[Blyleven2011]

1 hour ago, RpR said:

  Vazquez had 4 errors, 2 double plays and 1 passed ball; Jeffers had 6 errors, 0 double plays and 3  passed balls.

Defense counts

At that, they both collapsed with the rest of the team, but Vazquez had a .245 BA in the last 30 games whereas Jeffers had a .227.

Que sera, sera.

Jeffers had more passed balls  , they just called them wild pitches  , no more accountability by official scorers ...

[stringer bell]

1 hour ago, Blyleven2011 said:

Jeffers had more passed balls  , they just called them wild pitches  , no more accountability by official scorers ...

Did he have more relative to Vázquez in your opinion? As far as I'm concerned, official scorers are consistent but usually lenient when it comes to assessing errors and passed balls. Saying Jeffers (and only Jeffers) has more passed balls isn't fair IMHO. 

[Doctor Gast]

1 hour ago, Parfigliano said:

Real world no.  TC world so far yes.

 IMO at DH OPS is important, it should be around .850, defense is not. 1B & RF also important should be around, .800. LF & 3B w/ a solid glove around .750. 2B solid glove with good range .700 is fine. CF & SS great glove & range is priority, .650 or less. Catcher priority is all the aspects of defense tangibles & nontangibles, OPS ,600 or less is fine. If the catcher is average ish or less OPS becomes a bigger deal. DH- OPS is priority & as you go down the order OPS become less important & defense becomes more important to catcher where defense is priority. With no switching of priority.

[High heat]

What do you think it would take to get Henry Davis from the Pirates?  
 

Maybe a solid pitching prospect? Maybe an outfield prospect?

[chpettit19]

Christian Vazquez in his first year with the Twins had a catcher ERA of 4.09 and a RA9 of 4.28. In his second year he had an ERA of 4.34 and an RA9 of 4.63. In those 2 years while splitting catching duties essentially 50/50 Ryan Jeffers had ERAs of 3.61 and 4.17 with RA9s of 3.86 and 4.54. 

For all this talk of Vazquez's defense being so superior and it being so vital that they keep him around because of it and Jeffers being so bad defensively and his bat being the only useful thing about him, the same group of pitchers pitched to better ERAs and RA9s both seasons with him behind the plate than Vazquez. So the pitchers put up better stats while Jeffers also hit significantly better than Vazquez. What do people see in Vazquez that can't be replaced? I don't get it.

His defense isn't that good. He's not saving them runs. He plays and people argue for him to stay because of his name and what he represents, not what he's actually done on the field for the Twins. Christian Vazquez isn't helping the Twins pitching staff while he's on the field. If he's helping them while he's on the bench and Jeffers is the one actually catching, there's a much better role for him than $10 million can't hit, can't throw, can't reduce runs catcher, it's called "coach." I get the argument that catcher defense matters and we want someone who can defend the position well, but arguing that Vazquez is that guy makes no sense. He brings nothing to this team and is actively hurting it. He needs to go.

[Otaknam]

McCann is preferable to Vasquez, at half the cost. But who would trade for Vasquez and his bloated $10 million contract? The Twins would likely have to eat a large part of Vasquez’ contract to move him, so likely it won’t save money if they sign McCann. And saving money by dumping salary, even if it hurts the team, seems like the mandate from the penurious Pohlads.