Proud fans of a 128-year old tradition

It is currently Fri Oct 24, 2014 10:26 pm

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 54 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 11:28 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 11:28 pm
Posts: 2170
Okay so Doumit and Barajas both suck on defense? Agreed, then why wouldn't we actually resign Doumit who is a MUCH better hitter?

_________________
0 straight losing seasons


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 12:13 am 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
Ryann wrote:
Okay so Doumit and Barajas both suck on defense? Agreed, then why wouldn't we actually resign Doumit who is a MUCH better hitter?

Because we needed a catcher, not a DH.

Also, Doumit was due a lot more money in 2012 than the Pirates paid Barajas in 2012.

_________________
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
~H. L. Mencken


Last edited by Willton on Thu Oct 11, 2012 12:40 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 12:28 am 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:21 am
Posts: 5633
Willton wrote:
Ryann wrote:
Okay so Doumit and Barajas both suck on defense? Agreed, then why wouldn't we actually resign Doumit who is a MUCH better hitter?

Because we needed a catcher, not a DH.


And because before this season, Barajas had only once (in 11 ML seasons) ended with a -dWAR. The complete erosion of his catching skills (or, at least throwing out runners) wasn't expected.

While Barajas had equal terrible dWAR to Doumit last year, one has to consider that Barajas is 10 years older than Doumit.

So what Willton says is a generous understatement.

_________________
Rage, rage against the regression of the light.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 12:45 am 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
NSMaster56 wrote:
Willton wrote:
Ryann wrote:
Okay so Doumit and Barajas both suck on defense? Agreed, then why wouldn't we actually resign Doumit who is a MUCH better hitter?

Because we needed a catcher, not a DH.


And because before this season, Barajas had only once (in 11 ML seasons) ended with a -dWAR. The complete erosion of his catching skills (or, at least throwing out runners) wasn't expected.

While Barajas had equal terrible dWAR to Doumit last year, one has to consider that Barajas is 10 years older than Doumit.

So what Willton says is a generous understatement.

Also keep in mind that Doumit is injury prone, and a good reason why the Twins were able to keep him healthy and hitting is because they have the DH. Doumit caught fewer games for Minnesota in 2012 (59) than he caught in his injury-plagued 2011 with the Pirates (60). Even if the Pirates resigned Doumit, they would need an additional catcher as a backup for the backup.

_________________
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
~H. L. Mencken


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 12:55 am 
Offline
User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 8:43 pm
Posts: 4983
Location: Omaha, NE via Sioux City, Kansas City, and Chicago
Willton wrote:
Also keep in mind that Doumit is injury prone, and a good reason why the Twins were able to keep him healthy and hitting is because they have the DH. Doumit caught fewer games for Minnesota in 2012 (59) than he caught in his injury-plagued 2011 with the Pirates (60). Even if the Pirates resigned Doumit, they would need an additional catcher as a backup for the backup.


I've been arguing this entire time that the Pirates misused Doumit. It's no secret that when over-used he became run down, his numbers slipped, and he became injury prone. When he was fresh he was an adequate catcher and well above average hitting catcher. You can argue all you want but the proof is in how he played this season. I fear the same will happen to McKenry next season. If thrust into a starting position where he plays in 70% of the games his production will suffer. While a 50/50 split might not be realistic, I believe staying as close to that as possible for the best interest of the catcher(s) and the team.

_________________
Iowa State Cyclones (2-4) at Texas Longhorns (2-4)
Darrell K Royal-Texas Memorial Stadium
October 18, 2014
7:00 PM


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 12:58 am 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 6:18 pm
Posts: 5060
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ
IA Pirate wrote:
Willton wrote:
Also keep in mind that Doumit is injury prone, and a good reason why the Twins were able to keep him healthy and hitting is because they have the DH. Doumit caught fewer games for Minnesota in 2012 (59) than he caught in his injury-plagued 2011 with the Pirates (60). Even if the Pirates resigned Doumit, they would need an additional catcher as a backup for the backup.


I've been arguing this entire time that the Pirates misused Doumit. It's no secret that when over-used he became run down, his numbers slipped, and he became injury prone. When he was fresh he was an adequate catcher and well above average hitting catcher. You can argue all you want but the proof is in how he played this season. I fear the same will happen to McKenry next season. If thrust into a starting position where he plays in 70% of the games his production will suffer. While a 50/50 split might not be realistic, I believe staying as close to that as possible for the best interest of the catcher(s) and the team.

I would agree that Doumit would be best used as the Twins used him, but that still leaves the Pirates without a starting catcher. Who is supposed to catch the 100 games that Doumit cannot?

_________________
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
~H. L. Mencken


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:52 pm
Posts: 5430
Location: Pittsburgh
Ryann wrote:
Okay so Doumit and Barajas both suck on defense? Agreed, then why wouldn't we actually resign Doumit who is a MUCH better hitter?

Doumit sucks on defense. Barajas is a good defensive catcher. But that isn't the point.

The only way the Pirates could have kept Doumit was by exercising his option, and I think that we're all agreed that would have been a terrible move. He had no desire to resign with the Pirates. He wanted out.

_________________
"Enjoy every sandwich." - Warren Zevon


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:52 pm
Posts: 5430
Location: Pittsburgh
IA Pirate wrote:
Willton wrote:
Also keep in mind that Doumit is injury prone, and a good reason why the Twins were able to keep him healthy and hitting is because they have the DH. Doumit caught fewer games for Minnesota in 2012 (59) than he caught in his injury-plagued 2011 with the Pirates (60). Even if the Pirates resigned Doumit, they would need an additional catcher as a backup for the backup.


I've been arguing this entire time that the Pirates misused Doumit. It's no secret that when over-used he became run down, his numbers slipped, and he became injury prone. When he was fresh he was an adequate catcher and well above average hitting catcher. You can argue all you want but the proof is in how he played this season. I fear the same will happen to McKenry next season. If thrust into a starting position where he plays in 70% of the games his production will suffer. While a 50/50 split might not be realistic, I believe staying as close to that as possible for the best interest of the catcher(s) and the team.

Doumit was NEVER an adequate catcher. He was terrible when rested, he was terrible when tired. He bitched if he was asked to play another position. He was a fine hitter, no doubt about it. He remains the worst defensive catcher I have ever seen.

_________________
"Enjoy every sandwich." - Warren Zevon


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 9:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 8:43 pm
Posts: 4983
Location: Omaha, NE via Sioux City, Kansas City, and Chicago
Willton wrote:
I would agree that Doumit would be best used as the Twins used him, but that still leaves the Pirates without a starting catcher. Who is supposed to catch the 100 games that Doumit cannot?


Jeff Clement, of course.

;)

_________________
Iowa State Cyclones (2-4) at Texas Longhorns (2-4)
Darrell K Royal-Texas Memorial Stadium
October 18, 2014
7:00 PM


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2012 2:13 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 11:28 pm
Posts: 2170
sisyphus wrote:
Ryann wrote:
Okay so Doumit and Barajas both suck on defense? Agreed, then why wouldn't we actually resign Doumit who is a MUCH better hitter?

Doumit sucks on defense. Barajas is a good defensive catcher. But that isn't the point.

The only way the Pirates could have kept Doumit was by exercising his option, and I think that we're all agreed that would have been a terrible move. He had no desire to resign with the Pirates. He wanted out.

Wow do you even watch baseball?! Barajas is a good defensive catcher?! Jose Tabata is as good as Justin Upton??? What kind of stuff are you smoking?

_________________
0 straight losing seasons


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2012 4:31 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:21 am
Posts: 5633
Ryann wrote:
Barajas is a good defensive catcher?!


Barajas, 11 full seasons before Pittsburgh: 6.2 dWAR (1 -dWAR season)
Doumit, 7 full seasons in Pittsburgh: 0.8 dWAR (4 -dWAR seasons)

2012:
Barajas: -0.6 dWAR
Doumit: -1.1 dWAR

_________________
Rage, rage against the regression of the light.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:28 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 11:28 pm
Posts: 2170
NSMaster56 wrote:
Ryann wrote:
Barajas is a good defensive catcher?!


Barajas, 11 full seasons before Pittsburgh: 6.2 dWAR (1 -dWAR season)
Doumit, 7 full seasons in Pittsburgh: 0.8 dWAR (4 -dWAR seasons)

2012:
Barajas: -0.6 dWAR
Doumit: -1.1 dWAR

So a -.6 dWAR is qualifications for a "good defensive catcher"??? wow who knew...

Doumit more then makes up for his shortcomings on defense with his hitting ability. Rod Barajas can't hit anything and he sucks on defense.

_________________
0 straight losing seasons


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2012 7:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:52 pm
Posts: 5430
Location: Pittsburgh
Ryann wrote:
sisyphus wrote:
Ryann wrote:
Okay so Doumit and Barajas both suck on defense? Agreed, then why wouldn't we actually resign Doumit who is a MUCH better hitter?

Doumit sucks on defense. Barajas is a good defensive catcher. But that isn't the point.

The only way the Pirates could have kept Doumit was by exercising his option, and I think that we're all agreed that would have been a terrible move. He had no desire to resign with the Pirates. He wanted out.

Wow do you even watch baseball?! Barajas is a good defensive catcher?! Jose Tabata is as good as Justin Upton??? What kind of stuff are you smoking?

I'm smoking the same stuff that is making you think that I said that Jose Tabata is as good as Justin Upton. Learn to read.

_________________
"Enjoy every sandwich." - Warren Zevon


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2012 7:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:52 pm
Posts: 5430
Location: Pittsburgh
NSMaster56 wrote:
Ryann wrote:
Barajas is a good defensive catcher?!


Barajas, 11 full seasons before Pittsburgh: 6.2 dWAR (1 -dWAR season)
Doumit, 7 full seasons in Pittsburgh: 0.8 dWAR (4 -dWAR seasons)

2012:
Barajas: -0.6 dWAR
Doumit: -1.1 dWAR

I'm sorry, but dWAR is close to worthless as a measure of defensive play, in my opinion, and more than worthless for catchers. Among all the other problems I have with that stat, I'll note a couple of problems that apply directly to this comparison.

Does dWAR take into account the fact that Pirates pitchers were instructed to virtually ignore baserunners? Does it take into account all of the times that a catcher makes no throw at all, because he hasn't got a snowball's chance in hell in getting the runner?

Does dWAR measure the effect of pitchers being willing to bounce a breaking ball in the dirt with runners on third? When Doumit was here, a bounced curveball with a man on third was pretty much a guarantee that a run was going to score. With Barajas they didn't have to stick with fastballs when they got in trouble, and the difference was very noticeable to me.

_________________
"Enjoy every sandwich." - Warren Zevon


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2012 7:52 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:21 am
Posts: 5633
Ryann wrote:
So a -.6 dWAR is qualifications for a "good defensive catcher"??? wow who knew...

Doumit more then makes up for his shortcomings on defense with his hitting ability. Rod Barajas can't hit anything and he sucks on defense.


No, you have misunderstood.

-0.6 dWAR is not good, but it is better than Doumit. Ergo, it would 'prove' that Barajas was better than Doumit defensively (if one wanted to use a 'statistical base'). Also, you're isolating your opinion of Barajas to this last year. Again, if you look at his career stats he had been a good defensive catcher. So saying he is a bad defensive catcher is a misnomer, as he technically is now, but it's not like he had been his whole career (hence why the Bucs signed him).

Lastly, I am curious to know your opinion, since you seem to believe that Doumit over Barajas would have been a better move/signing: If so, how/why did the Bucs win more games post-Doumit (79) than with him (72 in 2011, 65.7 AVG in his 7 years with the team)?

_________________
Rage, rage against the regression of the light.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Fri Oct 12, 2012 7:53 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:21 am
Posts: 5633
sisyphus wrote:
I'm sorry, but dWAR is close to worthless as a measure of defensive play, in my opinion, and more than worthless for catchers. Among all the other problems I have with that stat, I'll note a couple of problems that apply directly to this comparison.

Does dWAR take into account the fact that Pirates pitchers were instructed to virtually ignore baserunners? Does it take into account all of the times that a catcher makes no throw at all, because he hasn't got a snowball's chance in hell in getting the runner?

Does dWAR measure the effect of pitchers being willing to bounce a breaking ball in the dirt with runners on third? When Doumit was here, a bounced curveball with a man on third was pretty much a guarantee that a run was going to score. With Barajas they didn't have to stick with fastballs when they got in trouble, and the difference was very noticeable to me.


You may be right; I surely wouldn't doubt it.

Personally, I too doubt there is a quantifiable way to measure defense, especially at a position like catcher.

Still, I was just pointing out how one of the better measures currently available demonstrates greater defensive ability over a previous option.

_________________
Rage, rage against the regression of the light.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Sat Oct 13, 2012 6:07 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 11:28 pm
Posts: 2170
sisyphus wrote:
doug frobel wrote:
No, I'm not telling you all to put on your jock strap, but I would like to hear what kind of package you think it would take to pry Justin Upton from the D-Backs. It is likely he will be dealt, and I think he is poised for a big year (just a hunch). He's just the kind of bat we need to complete this lineup.

I'd offer:

Taillon
Tabata
Jones

No Marte for now.

I'd offer a couple of dubious prospects from State College. Justin Upton is an illusion created by playing in a ballpark that loves hitters. Granted, he's only 24 and he might show a ton of improvement over the next three or four years, but if the Pirates traded Taillon or Tabata for Upton I'd lead the march on Federal Street to depose the current management team.


You said you wouldn't want a trade Tabata for Upton...

_________________
0 straight losing seasons


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Sat Oct 13, 2012 6:08 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 11:28 pm
Posts: 2170
NSMaster56 wrote:
Ryann wrote:
So a -.6 dWAR is qualifications for a "good defensive catcher"??? wow who knew...

Doumit more then makes up for his shortcomings on defense with his hitting ability. Rod Barajas can't hit anything and he sucks on defense.


No, you have misunderstood.

-0.6 dWAR is not good, but it is better than Doumit. Ergo, it would 'prove' that Barajas was better than Doumit defensively (if one wanted to use a 'statistical base'). Also, you're isolating your opinion of Barajas to this last year. Again, if you look at his career stats he had been a good defensive catcher. So saying he is a bad defensive catcher is a misnomer, as he technically is now, but it's not like he had been his whole career (hence why the Bucs signed him).

Lastly, I am curious to know your opinion, since you seem to believe that Doumit over Barajas would have been a better move/signing: If so, how/why did the Bucs win more games post-Doumit (79) than with him (72 in 2011, 65.7 AVG in his 7 years with the team)?

The Pirates won more games this season because of Rod freaking Barajas...you got me.

_________________
0 straight losing seasons


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Sat Oct 13, 2012 6:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 8:43 pm
Posts: 4983
Location: Omaha, NE via Sioux City, Kansas City, and Chicago
NSMaster56 wrote:
Lastly, I am curious to know your opinion, since you seem to believe that Doumit over Barajas would have been a better move/signing: If so, how/why did the Bucs win more games post-Doumit (79) than with him (72 in 2011, 65.7 AVG in his 7 years with the team)?


I'm 109% sure Barajas was not the reason for the seven game improvement from last season. Having McCutchen improve his OPS by well over 100 points and his BA by 75 points may have been a big factor in this.

_________________
Iowa State Cyclones (2-4) at Texas Longhorns (2-4)
Darrell K Royal-Texas Memorial Stadium
October 18, 2014
7:00 PM


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Revisiting the Maholm and Doumit Decisions
PostPosted: Sat Oct 13, 2012 10:13 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:21 am
Posts: 5633
Ryann wrote:
NSMaster56 wrote:
-0.6 dWAR is not good, but it is better than Doumit. Ergo, it would 'prove' that Barajas was better than Doumit defensively (if one wanted to use a 'statistical base'). Also, you're isolating your opinion of Barajas to this last year. Again, if you look at his career stats he had been a good defensive catcher. So saying he is a bad defensive catcher is a misnomer, as he technically is now, but it's not like he had been his whole career (hence why the Bucs signed him).

Lastly, I am curious to know your opinion, since you seem to believe that Doumit over Barajas would have been a better move/signing: If so, how/why did the Bucs win more games post-Doumit (79) than with him (72 in 2011, 65.7 AVG in his 7 years with the team)?

The Pirates won more games this season because of Rod freaking Barajas...you got me.


Once again there has been a miscommunication and the error is probably mine. I tend to ramble, so I was as succinct in my last post and for that I apologize for any confusion or what may have sounded like 'snark'.

Let me elaborate:

Obviously Rod Barajas was not solely responsible for the Pirates winning 7 more games. That's foolish for many reasons. There are far more plausible reasons why the Pirates won more games than 2011: the continuing emergencence of Cutch, the return of Pedro, J-Mac's first half surge, A.J.'s addition, etc.

However, the one thing which is clear is that the Pirates got better without Doumit. The Twins meanwhile, improved merely 3 games with Doumit on board (again, not saying he is/was the sole reason for that spike, just pointing out facts).

Your position is unclear to me beyond, 'Barajas sucks'. So I am asking you to please clarify.

Why do you think (for certain) that the Bucs would have improved even more with Doumit as everyday catcher over Barajas (when all statistical evidence has shown that the Bucs weren't successful with him before and/or that Barajas is/was a better defensive catcher)?

If you answer is simply "because Doumit was a better hitter [than Barajas]", that is really no more of a better position than saying that the addition of Barajas (and Barajas alone) added 7 wins to the Bucs total. This would appear true as, once again, Doumit's superior bat did not yield better W-L results in the previous 7 seasons and any number of factors could have negated the addition of Doumit's offensive numbers the same way that certain factors obviously overcame Barajas' deficiencies to lead to a better 2012 record for the Pirates (Doumit's inferior defense/repore with the pitching staff could have nullified his offensive value(s)).

I hope I presented my question as clearly as possible and look forward to a more detailed response.

v/r

_________________
Rage, rage against the regression of the light.


Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 54 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group  
Design By Poker Bandits