Can someone give me the top 50 or so WAR seasons in which the player played more than half time at catcher? Or we can do it for guys who caught at least 80 games if that works. Maybe we could get all the 7+ seasons that qualify?
Thanks
Registered User
Can someone give me the top 50 or so WAR seasons in which the player played more than half time at catcher? Or we can do it for guys who caught at least 80 games if that works. Maybe we could get all the 7+ seasons that qualify?
Thanks
Registered User
I found this, though it only lists top-25. Also, it was done mid-September so Yadier's should read 6.7 & Posey's 7.2 - which shoots him into the top-10.
Top 25 War Seasons For Catchers Since 1901
"Chuckie doesn't take on 2-0. Chuckie's hackin'." - Chuck Carr two days prior to being released by the Milwaukee Brewers
Registered User
Here are some more, below Carter's 6.2 in 1980:
Mickey Cochrane 1933 6.1
Yogi Berra 1956 6.1
Bill Dickey 1937 6.0
Mike piazza 1995 6.0
Carlton Fisk 1978 5.6
mickey Cochrane 1932 5.3
Yogi Berra 1950 5.3
Yogi Berra 1952 5.3
Mike Piazza 1998 5.2
Mickey Cochrane 1931 5.2
Gabby Hartnett 1930 5.2
Mickey Cochrane 1930 5.1
Mike Piazza 1996 5.1
Bill Dickey 1936 5.0
Bill Dickey 1938 5.0
Roy Campanella 1955 5.0
I'm sure there are some others interspersed here- I only checked some of the biggest names.
Registered User
Add in...
Gene Tenace 1979 5.7
Tony Pena 1974 5.7
Bill Freehan 1967 5.7
Mickey Tettleton 1991 5.4
Ted Simmons 1978 5.3
Ted Simmons 1973 5.3
Ernie Lombardi 1938 5.3
Bill Freehan 1964 5.1
Jim Sundberg 1978 5.0
Ted Simmons 1977 5.0
Last edited by Ben Grimm; 01-03-2013 at 02:47 PM.
"Chuckie doesn't take on 2-0. Chuckie's hackin'." - Chuck Carr two days prior to being released by the Milwaukee Brewers
Registered User
As the lists have progressed, I note that initially no catcher prior to 1951 qualified at all. Subsequently they appear but are still rather scattered. I see Gabby Hartnett listed only for 1930. Being neither a fan nor practitioner of WAR, I can't qualify to calculate WAR for Hartnett; but it's hard to believe he doesn't fit in at least the following seasons, when he excelled with the bat and was a clear leader defensively behind the plate:
1928: .1767 RC/PA vs LG average of .1204
1934: .1602 RC/PA vs LG average of .1210
1935: .1974 RC/PA vs LG average of .1218
1937: .2049 RC/PA vs LG average of .1178
In each of these seasons, had there been GG Awards, he would have won or been a top contender behind the plate. For such combined offense + defense,
I can't see him not being in the top 25 or whatever list one compiles at least more than once.
Registered User
Without commenting on my opnions of WAR, I'll speculate that Hartnett was handicapped somewhat in the referenced seasons by his playing time:Originally Posted by leewileyfan
1928 464 PA 4.3 WAR
1930 577 PA 5.2 WAR
1934 487 PA 3.8 WAR
1935 461 PA 4.8 WAR
1937 405 PA 4.6 WAR
In a 154 games schedule most top flight players (non-catchers) were collecting more than 600 PAs unless they missed more than a few games. Only in 1930 did Hartnett play in what comes close to a "typical" season for position players. This, of course, is part of the dilemma for catchers. The nature of their job makes it extremely difficult to play "every day". When they're not in the lineup they can't contribute value. This results in lower WAR or Win Share totals. Unfair? Who knows?
Registered User
My personal remedy is to give catchers an additional 1.1 war per 162 games caught by lowering the replacement level, because if a catcher goes out, a team will likely split time between a replacement and a sub replacement level player. In addition I think that the positional value should be adjusted. Hartnett only gets 4 positional runs in 1933 for catching 140 games. Modern catchers are given more like 9-10 per 162 games caught. Cochrane is getting only 4. Anyone know what's the issue there? I am not sure why catchers got a smaller adjustment back then and if anything, based on games caught they should probably get even more of a replacement bonus, like maybe 22 runs per 162 EXTRA because of the toll and likelyhood of a team needing 2-3 guys to make up the difference.
Registered User
I've also noticed a lot of volatility. Berra was scooping up about 6 runs a year, while contemporary catchers are getting 9 or 10.
One reason could be that catchers catch more nowadays. (But they also put in more time at negative defensive positions.) At the time, I thought it was just the nature of the catching personnel and their level of batting varying from year to year. But if there's a steady increase from Cochrane to Berra to Piazza, probably not. Maybe the presence of a real third string catcher (your replacement level replacement) in the old lineups makes some difference. They had a real quadruple A player on the team instead of a triple A call up.
Last edited by Jackaroo Dave; 01-03-2013 at 09:22 PM.
Indeed the first step toward finding out is to acknowledge you do not satisfactorily know already; so that no blight can so surely arrest all intellectual growth as the blight of cocksureness.--CS Peirce
Nerd
Here you go:
Most WAR, 50% or more of games played at catcher
Code:Rk Player Year Tm WAR 1 Mike Piazza 1997 LAD 8.46 1 Johnny Bench 1972 CIN 8.46 3 Gary Carter 1982 MON 8.30 4 Johnny Bench 1974 CIN 7.69 5 Joe Mauer 2009 MIN 7.58 6 Darrell Porter 1979 KCR 7.40 7 Buster Posey 2012 SFG 7.17 8 Gary Carter 1984 MON 7.15 9 Johnny Bench 1970 CIN 7.09 10 Carlton Fisk 1972 BOS 6.95 11 Thurman Munson 1973 NYY 6.94 12 Gary Carter 1983 MON 6.84 13 Mike Piazza 1993 LAD 6.83 14 Roy Campanella 1953 BRO 6.81 15 Yadier Molina 2012 STL 6.75 16 Darren Daulton 1992 PHI 6.73 17 Carlton Fisk 1977 BOS 6.66 18 Gary Carter 1985 NYM 6.62 19 Javy Lopez 2003 ATL 6.59 20 Chris Hoiles 1993 BAL 6.51 21 Bill Freehan 1968 DET 6.46 22 Rick Wilkins 1993 CHC 6.45 23 Johnny Bench 1975 CIN 6.40 24 Roy Campanella 1951 BRO 6.32 25 Thurman Munson 1975 NYY 6.26 26 Gary Carter 1980 MON 6.21 27 Ivan Rodriguez 1997 TEX 6.20 28 Joe Torre 1966 ATL 6.17 29 Yogi Berra 1956 NYY 6.11 29 Ivan Rodriguez 1998 TEX 6.11 31 Ivan Rodriguez 1999 TEX 6.10 32 Mickey Cochrane 1933 PHA 6.05 33 Mike Piazza 1995 LAD 6.04 33 Bill Dickey 1937 NYY 6.04 35 Johnny Bench 1969 CIN 6.03 36 Mike Piazza 1998 3TM 5.97 37 Ivan Rodriguez 1996 TEX 5.85 38 Tim McCarver 1967 STL 5.80 39 Gary Carter 1979 MON 5.76 40 Bill Freehan 1967 DET 5.72 40 Gene Tenace 1979 SDP 5.72 42 Tony Pena 1984 PIT 5.66 43 Jorge Posada 2003 NYY 5.63 44 Roger Bresnahan 1908 NYG 5.62 45 Gary Carter 1978 MON 5.61 46 Carlton Fisk 1978 BOS 5.60 47 Joe Mauer 2006 MIN 5.55 48 Joe Mauer 2010 MIN 5.53 49 Mickey Tettleton 1991 DET 5.38 50 Yogi Berra 1950 NYY 5.35 50 Johnny Bench 1979 CIN 5.35 50 Jason Kendall 1998 PIT 5.35 50 Russell Martin 2007 LAD 5.35 54 Ernie Lombardi 1938 CIN 5.34 54 Elston Howard 1964 NYY 5.34 56 Brian Downing 1979 CAL 5.33 57 Yogi Berra 1952 NYY 5.31 57 Ted Simmons 1978 STL 5.31 59 Joe Mauer 2008 MIN 5.28 59 Mickey Cochrane 1932 PHA 5.28 61 Mike Napoli 2011 TEX 5.27 61 Thurman Munson 1970 NYY 5.27 61 Ted Simmons 1973 STL 5.27 64 Brian McCann 2008 ATL 5.26 65 Joe Torre 1970 STL 5.24 66 Gabby Hartnett 1930 CHC 5.23 67 Jorge Posada 2000 NYY 5.22 68 Mickey Cochrane 1931 PHA 5.19 68 Gary Carter 1977 MON 5.19 70 Rich Gedman 1985 BOS 5.16 71 Mike Scioscia 1985 LAD 5.14 71 Mike Piazza 1996 LAD 5.14 71 Mickey Cochrane 1930 PHA 5.14 74 Elston Howard 1961 NYY 5.13 75 Bill Freehan 1964 DET 5.11 76 Joe Torre 1964 MLN 5.10 77 John Stearns 1978 NYM 5.09 78 Walker Cooper 1947 NYG 5.08 79 Gene Tenace 1978 SDP 5.05 79 Jorge Posada 2007 NYY 5.05 81 Elston Howard 1963 NYY 5.03 81 Jim Sundberg 1978 TEX 5.03 81 Yogi Berra 1954 NYY 5.03 84 Bill Dickey 1936 NYY 5.02 84 Bill Dickey 1938 NYY 5.02 86 Ted Simmons 1977 STL 5.01 87 Roy Campanella 1955 BRO 5.00 88 Thurman Munson 1976 NYY 4.99 89 Ray Fosse 1970 CLE 4.95 90 Gene Tenace 1975 OAK 4.92 91 Bill Dickey 1939 NYY 4.91 91 Joe Torre 1967 ATL 4.91 93 Mike Piazza 2000 NYM 4.90 93 Ted Simmons 1980 STL 4.90 93 Deacon White 1875 BOS 4.90 96 Art Wilson 1914 CHF 4.89 97 Johnny Bench 1968 CIN 4.88 98 Alex Avila 2011 DET 4.87 99 Gabby Hartnett 1935 CHC 4.83 99 Charles Johnson 2000 2TM 4.83 99 Lance Parrish 1982 DET 4.83
Last edited by DJC; 01-03-2013 at 09:51 PM.
*** Submit your personal HOF as your ballot for the Single Ballot BBF Hall of Fame! ***
Registered User
The list, while neatly presented, is essentially a copy of the link provided by poster Grimm [post 2 of this thread]. If those are final figures, I know for certain why I have had no use for WAR to date.
Once again the list reverts to a flat out allegation that there was no great catching done prior to 1951. Anyone wanting to buy into that ... I've got a bridge to sell.
I recently forced myself to review WAR, just to be sure that I was not harboring some ill-advised bias against something I hadn't read carefully enough. No, I believe I had a fair grasp of it to begin with:
-A player is judged essentially from a model of 600 PA;
-A player falling short of that standard is penalized because his PA below 600 forces his team to use someone else, less qualified than he, to make up the shortage;
-The shortage is taken to be filled in WAR-world by an individual who qualifies as a Replacement Player, available in the MLB recycling market for about $400,000 [of player value in a full season];
-Replacement Players are predestined, like Calvinists. They are presumed to cost 20 runs per 600 PA, before donning a glove; and their performance is then applied to the regular catcher's line as an albatross for not playing every inning. Therefore, if a LG average per 600 PA is .12 or 72 runs of value, a guy who plays 440 PA worth at .18 [vs. LG average of .12] is shackled with 20 runs less that average, like 52/600 = .0867.
His line would be like this: 440*.18 = 79.2 runs + 160 * .0867 = 14 = 93.2/600 = .155. Add in a pre-determined position number diminished in like fashion for playing time and a preset position "value" and you end up with a first string catcher who plays [when he plays] like a HoF candidate, but is valued more like an also ran because his is Replacement Level when he sits. [Even at .155, how low on a greatest "x" number of slots for catcher seasons would that be?]
Catchers get cruel treatment in this scenario; but the entire approach is too "cute" in its precise watering down of positions and player values. Teams prior to 1950 were lwell represented with catchers like Frankie Pytlak and Buddy Rosar ... scattered especially between 1921 and 1949 who were a far cry above the Replacement concept.
The value I do see for WAR is in the front office during budget time. Then I can see bean counters evaluating the cheapest players in the current market, who might just fill a much-needed backup niche for a club with an open spot or two on the roster[s].
Last edited by leewileyfan; 01-03-2013 at 08:39 PM.
Nerd
Hey, it's what Brett asked for. I expanded the list just now to the top 100, and there seems to be a greater frequency of pre-'50s seasons. If a perceived dearth of pre-'50s catchers in these lists is indicative of a genuine problem (and just not a small sample size or simply because there were fewer players before the expansion era), it may be just a matter of adjusting the formula for WAA/WAR to account for runs created/saved by catchers that haven't yet been accounted for. No need to pooh-pooh the whole concept.
For what it's worth, here's a list by WAA instead of WAR. I've come to prefer comparing players to the average rather than to replacement.
Code:Rk Player Year Tm WAA 1 Mike Piazza 1997 LAD 6.79 2 Johnny Bench 1972 CIN 6.61 3 Gary Carter 1982 MON 6.36 4 Joe Mauer 2009 MIN 5.76 5 Johnny Bench 1974 CIN 5.71 6 Buster Posey 2012 SFG 5.54 7 Darrell Porter 1979 KCR 5.42 8 Carlton Fisk 1972 BOS 5.28 8 Javy Lopez 2003 ATL 5.28 10 Thurman Munson 1973 NYY 5.26 11 Yadier Molina 2012 STL 5.24 12 Mike Piazza 1993 LAD 5.22 13 Johnny Bench 1970 CIN 5.19 14 Darren Daulton 1992 PHI 5.15 14 Gary Carter 1984 MON 5.15 16 Rick Wilkins 1993 CHC 5.11 17 Gary Carter 1983 MON 5.03 18 Chris Hoiles 1993 BAL 4.99 19 Roy Campanella 1953 BRO 4.87 20 Carlton Fisk 1977 BOS 4.82 21 Mike Piazza 1995 LAD 4.78 22 Gary Carter 1985 NYM 4.73 23 Bill Freehan 1968 DET 4.69 23 Johnny Bench 1975 CIN 4.69 25 Yogi Berra 1956 NYY 4.53 26 Roy Campanella 1951 BRO 4.48 27 Gary Carter 1980 MON 4.36 28 Mickey Cochrane 1933 PHA 4.34 29 Mike Piazza 1998 3TM 4.32 30 Thurman Munson 1975 NYY 4.31 31 Ivan Rodriguez 1998 TEX 4.26 31 Ivan Rodriguez 1997 TEX 4.26 33 Art Wilson 1914 CHF 4.24 34 Ivan Rodriguez 1999 TEX 4.22 35 Gary Carter 1979 MON 4.16 36 Bill Dickey 1937 NYY 4.15 37 Joe Torre 1966 ATL 4.13 38 Johnny Bench 1969 CIN 4.07 39 Gene Tenace 1979 SDP 4.05 40 Bill Freehan 1967 DET 4.02 41 Tim McCarver 1967 STL 4.00 42 Mike Napoli 2011 TEX 3.95 43 Roger Bresnahan 1908 NYG 3.90 44 Tony Pena 1984 PIT 3.88 45 Gary Carter 1978 MON 3.86 46 Jorge Posada 2003 NYY 3.85 46 Ivan Rodriguez 1996 TEX 3.85 48 Johnny Bench 1979 CIN 3.82 48 Elston Howard 1961 NYY 3.82 50 Ernie Lombardi 1938 CIN 3.80 51 Brian McCann 2008 ATL 3.75 52 Joe Mauer 2010 MIN 3.74 53 Russell Martin 2007 LAD 3.72 54 Joe Mauer 2006 MIN 3.71 55 Yogi Berra 1952 NYY 3.70 56 Jason Kendall 1998 PIT 3.69 56 Elston Howard 1964 NYY 3.69 58 Carlton Fisk 1978 BOS 3.68 59 Yogi Berra 1950 NYY 3.62 59 Thurman Munson 1970 NYY 3.62 59 Gabby Hartnett 1930 CHC 3.62 62 Rich Gedman 1985 BOS 3.60 63 Brian Downing 1979 CAL 3.58 63 Elston Howard 1963 NYY 3.58 63 Bill Dickey 1936 NYY 3.58 66 Mickey Cochrane 1931 PHA 3.57 67 Ted Simmons 1978 STL 3.56 67 Mike Scioscia 1985 LAD 3.56 69 Bill Freehan 1964 DET 3.55 69 Gene Tenace 1978 SDP 3.55 71 Mickey Tettleton 1991 DET 3.54 72 Gary Carter 1977 MON 3.51 72 Gabby Hartnett 1935 CHC 3.51 74 Mike Piazza 1996 LAD 3.47 74 Mike Piazza 2000 NYM 3.47 76 John Stearns 1978 NYM 3.46 77 Charlie Bennett 1883 DTN 3.45 78 Buck Ewing 1884 NYG 3.44 78 Gabby Hartnett 1937 CHC 3.44 80 Jack Clements 1895 PHI 3.43 81 Ivan Rodriguez 2000 TEX 3.42 82 Charles Johnson 2000 2TM 3.40 83 Mickey Cochrane 1930 PHA 3.39 83 Ray Fosse 1970 CLE 3.39 85 Art Wilson 1915 CHF 3.38 86 Joe Mauer 2008 MIN 3.37 86 Jorge Posada 2000 NYY 3.37 88 Lance Parrish 1982 DET 3.36 89 Mickey Cochrane 1932 PHA 3.35 89 Bill Dickey 1938 NYY 3.35 89 Ivan Rodriguez 2001 TEX 3.35 89 Buck Ewing 1883 NYG 3.35 93 Ted Simmons 1973 STL 3.31 93 Ted Simmons 1977 STL 3.31 95 Jim Sundberg 1978 TEX 3.30 96 Yogi Berra 1954 NYY 3.29 96 Bubbles Hargrave 1923 CIN 3.29 98 Roy Campanella 1955 BRO 3.28 99 Jorge Posada 2007 NYY 3.27 100 Joe Torre 1970 STL 3.26
Last edited by DJC; 01-03-2013 at 10:00 PM.
*** Submit your personal HOF as your ballot for the Single Ballot BBF Hall of Fame! ***
Registered User
I realize that your response was gracious and not defensive, and I appreciate your realizing that I was not launching a personal attack oon you or your post. I see the expanded 100 list for WAA; and the sparse [and low] scatteringss of 1901-1950 catchers, with a nearly equal representation of pre 1900 receivers just sets me off, personally against WAR ... especially with how wide and diverse a representation it purpordedly establishes.Hey, it's what Brett asked for. I expanded the list just now to the top 100, and there seems to be a greater frequency of pre-'50s seasons. If a perceived dearth of pre-'50s catchers in these lists is indicative of a genuine problem (and just not a small sample size or simply because there were fewer players before the expansion era), it may be just a matter of adjusting the formula for WAA/WAR to account for runs created/saved by catchers that haven't yet been accounted for. No need to pooh-pooh the whole concept.
In just the 1901-1950 period, concentrating on back-up catchers, I can reasonably ask, "Was HE a Replacement player when he backed up Y?" Any metric model that is so fixed on so base a comparison has to have limitations. Perhaps part of the trouble is a mis-application of WAR by some who have exaggerated convictions about its general practicality or who misapply it in debate.
I just know that it is not my cup of tea, except for the guys in the front office sweating over spreadsheets at budget time and trading seasons.
For what it's worth, here's a list by WAA instead of WAR. I've come to prefer comparing players to the average rather than to replacement.
[/QUOTE]Code:Rk Player Year Tm WAA 1 Mike Piazza 1997 LAD 6.79 2 Johnny Bench 1972 CIN 6.61 3 Gary Carter 1982 MON 6.36 4 Joe Mauer 2009 MIN 5.76 5 Johnny Bench 1974 CIN 5.71 6 Buster Posey 2012 SFG 5.54 7 Darrell Porter 1979 KCR 5.42 8 Carlton Fisk 1972 BOS 5.28 8 Javy Lopez 2003 ATL 5.28 10 Thurman Munson 1973 NYY 5.26 11 Yadier Molina 2012 STL 5.24 12 Mike Piazza 1993 LAD 5.22 13 Johnny Bench 1970 CIN 5.19 14 Darren Daulton 1992 PHI 5.15 14 Gary Carter 1984 MON 5.15 16 Rick Wilkins 1993 CHC 5.11 17 Gary Carter 1983 MON 5.03 18 Chris Hoiles 1993 BAL 4.99 19 Roy Campanella 1953 BRO 4.87 20 Carlton Fisk 1977 BOS 4.82 21 Mike Piazza 1995 LAD 4.78 22 Gary Carter 1985 NYM 4.73 23 Bill Freehan 1968 DET 4.69 23 Johnny Bench 1975 CIN 4.69 25 Yogi Berra 1956 NYY 4.53 26 Roy Campanella 1951 BRO 4.48 27 Gary Carter 1980 MON 4.36 28 Mickey Cochrane 1933 PHA 4.34 29 Mike Piazza 1998 3TM 4.32 30 Thurman Munson 1975 NYY 4.31 31 Ivan Rodriguez 1998 TEX 4.26 31 Ivan Rodriguez 1997 TEX 4.26 33 Art Wilson 1914 CHF 4.24 34 Ivan Rodriguez 1999 TEX 4.22 35 Gary Carter 1979 MON 4.16 36 Bill Dickey 1937 NYY 4.15 37 Joe Torre 1966 ATL 4.13 38 Johnny Bench 1969 CIN 4.07 39 Gene Tenace 1979 SDP 4.05 40 Bill Freehan 1967 DET 4.02 41 Tim McCarver 1967 STL 4.00 42 Mike Napoli 2011 TEX 3.95 43 Roger Bresnahan 1908 NYG 3.90 44 Tony Pena 1984 PIT 3.88 45 Gary Carter 1978 MON 3.86 46 Jorge Posada 2003 NYY 3.85 46 Ivan Rodriguez 1996 TEX 3.85 48 Johnny Bench 1979 CIN 3.82 48 Elston Howard 1961 NYY 3.82 50 Ernie Lombardi 1938 CIN 3.80 51 Brian McCann 2008 ATL 3.75 52 Joe Mauer 2010 MIN 3.74 53 Russell Martin 2007 LAD 3.72 54 Joe Mauer 2006 MIN 3.71 55 Yogi Berra 1952 NYY 3.70 56 Jason Kendall 1998 PIT 3.69 56 Elston Howard 1964 NYY 3.69 58 Carlton Fisk 1978 BOS 3.68 59 Yogi Berra 1950 NYY 3.62 59 Thurman Munson 1970 NYY 3.62 59 Gabby Hartnett 1930 CHC 3.62 62 Rich Gedman 1985 BOS 3.60 63 Brian Downing 1979 CAL 3.58 63 Elston Howard 1963 NYY 3.58 63 Bill Dickey 1936 NYY 3.58 66 Mickey Cochrane 1931 PHA 3.57 67 Ted Simmons 1978 STL 3.56 67 Mike Scioscia 1985 LAD 3.56 69 Bill Freehan 1964 DET 3.55 69 Gene Tenace 1978 SDP 3.55 71 Mickey Tettleton 1991 DET 3.54 72 Gary Carter 1977 MON 3.51 72 Gabby Hartnett 1935 CHC 3.51 74 Mike Piazza 1996 LAD 3.47 74 Mike Piazza 2000 NYM 3.47 76 John Stearns 1978 NYM 3.46 77 Charlie Bennett 1883 DTN 3.45 78 Buck Ewing 1884 NYG 3.44 78 Gabby Hartnett 1937 CHC 3.44 80 Jack Clements 1895 PHI 3.43 81 Ivan Rodriguez 2000 TEX 3.42 82 Charles Johnson 2000 2TM 3.40 83 Mickey Cochrane 1930 PHA 3.39 83 Ray Fosse 1970 CLE 3.39 85 Art Wilson 1915 CHF 3.38 86 Joe Mauer 2008 MIN 3.37 86 Jorge Posada 2000 NYY 3.37 88 Lance Parrish 1982 DET 3.36 89 Mickey Cochrane 1932 PHA 3.35 89 Bill Dickey 1938 NYY 3.35 89 Ivan Rodriguez 2001 TEX 3.35 89 Buck Ewing 1883 NYG 3.35 93 Ted Simmons 1973 STL 3.31 93 Ted Simmons 1977 STL 3.31 95 Jim Sundberg 1978 TEX 3.30 96 Yogi Berra 1954 NYY 3.29 96 Bubbles Hargrave 1923 CIN 3.29 98 Roy Campanella 1955 BRO 3.28 99 Jorge Posada 2007 NYY 3.27 100 Joe Torre 1970 STL 3.26
Registered User
50% Games as Catcher, .0333333333 WAR per Schedule Game
Sparsest eras: 1890s, 1900s, 1910s, 1920s, 1940sCode:Player Year WAR/pos Cal McVey 1871 1.7 Nat Hicks 1872 2.2 Deacon White 1873 2.9 Deacon White 1875 4.9 Deacon White 1876 3.5 John Clapp 1876 3.0 Cap Anson 1877 2.1 Cal McVey 1877 2.5 John Clapp 1877 2.1 Deacon White 1878 2.3 Lew Brown 1878 2.0 Silver Flint 1879 3.1 Deacon White 1879 3.6 John Clapp 1880 3.4 Emil Gross 1880 2.8 Charlie Bennett 1881 4.1 Charlie Bennett 1882 4.0 Charlie Bennett 1883 4.7 Buck Ewing 1883 4.6 Charlie Bennett 1884 3.9 Buck Ewing 1884 4.5 Jack Rowe 1884 4.5 Charlie Bennett 1885 4.3 Buck Ewing 1885 3.9 Jack Clements 1895 4.5 Roger Bresnahan 1908 5.6 Gabby Hartnett 1930 5.2 Mickey Cochrane 1930 5.1 Mickey Cochrane 1931 5.2 Mickey Cochrane 1932 5.3 Mickey Cochrane 1933 6.1 Bill Dickey 1937 6.0 Ernie Lombardi 1938 5.3 Walker Cooper 1947 5.1 Yogi Berra 1950 5.3 Roy Campanella 1951 6.3 Yogi Berra 1952 5.3 Roy Campanella 1953 6.8 Yogi Berra 1956 6.1 Joe Torre 1966 6.2 Bill Freehan 1967 5.7 Tim McCarver 1967 5.8 Bill Freehan 1968 6.5 Johnny Bench 1969 6.0 Johnny Bench 1970 7.1 Carlton Fisk 1972 7.0 Johnny Bench 1972 8.5 Thurman Munson 1973 6.9 Johnny Bench 1974 7.7 Johnny Bench 1975 6.4 Thurman Munson 1975 6.3 Carlton Fisk 1977 6.7 Carlton Fisk 1978 5.6 Gary Carter 1978 5.6 Gene Tenace 1979 5.7 Darrell Porter 1979 7.4 Gary Carter 1979 5.8 Gary Carter 1980 6.2 Jim Sundberg 1981 3.8 Gary Carter 1981 3.6 Gary Carter 1982 8.3 Gary Carter 1983 6.8 Tony Pena 1984 5.7 Gary Carter 1984 7.2 Gary Carter 1985 6.6 Mickey Tettleton 1991 5.4 Darren Daulton 1992 6.7 Mike Piazza 1993 6.8 Rick Wilkins 1993 6.5 Chris Hoiles 1993 6.5 Mike Piazza 1995 6.0 Ivan Rodriguez 1996 5.8 Ivan Rodriguez 1997 6.2 Mike Piazza 1997 8.5 Mike Piazza 1998 5.9 Ivan Rodriguez 1998 6.1 Jason Kendall 1998 5.4 Ivan Rodriguez 1999 6.1 Javy Lopez 2003 6.6 Jorge Posada 2003 5.6 Joe Mauer 2006 5.6 Russell Martin 2007 5.4 Joe Mauer 2009 7.6 Joe Mauer 2010 5.5 Yadier Molina 2012 6.7 Buster Posey 2012 7.2
1871-1949 : 18 individual catchers
1950-2012 : 27 individual catchers
I think if we consider the length of these time spans and how many teams existed in these years, the rate comes out relatively even.
Last edited by dgarza; 01-04-2013 at 05:44 AM.
Lee why the beef on a counting number, when catchers has a shorter schedule and split time much more frequently back in the days of yore? Surely a single season hit, runs, RBI board would be similarly skewed as well. If someone did a WAR/PA or G and it was skewed against pre-50s catchers I would jump on board with you.
Nerd
Why, of course. That's what Mr. Winky () implied....
*** Submit your personal HOF as your ballot for the Single Ballot BBF Hall of Fame! ***
Registered User
that's what I was going to suggest: looking at wins above average, because when players produce in a more concentrated fashion their WAA will go up, and also we know what average was. In fact, if a player plays an average amount of playing time for his position, then WAA might be a valid method of evaluation.Hey, it's what Brett asked for. I expanded the list just now to the top 100, and there seems to be a greater frequency of pre-'50s seasons. If a perceived dearth of pre-'50s catchers in these lists is indicative of a genuine problem (and just not a small sample size or simply because there were fewer players before the expansion era), it may be just a matter of adjusting the formula for WAA/WAR to account for runs created/saved by catchers that haven't yet been accounted for. No need to pooh-pooh the whole concept.
For what it's worth, here's a list by WAA instead of WAR. I've come to prefer comparing players to the average rather than to replacement.
Code:Rk Player Year Tm WAA 1 Mike Piazza 1997 LAD 6.79 2 Johnny Bench 1972 CIN 6.61 3 Gary Carter 1982 MON 6.36 4 Joe Mauer 2009 MIN 5.76 5 Johnny Bench 1974 CIN 5.71 6 Buster Posey 2012 SFG 5.54 7 Darrell Porter 1979 KCR 5.42 8 Carlton Fisk 1972 BOS 5.28 8 Javy Lopez 2003 ATL 5.28 10 Thurman Munson 1973 NYY 5.26 11 Yadier Molina 2012 STL 5.24 12 Mike Piazza 1993 LAD 5.22 13 Johnny Bench 1970 CIN 5.19 14 Darren Daulton 1992 PHI 5.15 14 Gary Carter 1984 MON 5.15 16 Rick Wilkins 1993 CHC 5.11 17 Gary Carter 1983 MON 5.03 18 Chris Hoiles 1993 BAL 4.99 19 Roy Campanella 1953 BRO 4.87 20 Carlton Fisk 1977 BOS 4.82 21 Mike Piazza 1995 LAD 4.78 22 Gary Carter 1985 NYM 4.73 23 Bill Freehan 1968 DET 4.69 23 Johnny Bench 1975 CIN 4.69 25 Yogi Berra 1956 NYY 4.53 26 Roy Campanella 1951 BRO 4.48 27 Gary Carter 1980 MON 4.36 28 Mickey Cochrane 1933 PHA 4.34 29 Mike Piazza 1998 3TM 4.32 30 Thurman Munson 1975 NYY 4.31 31 Ivan Rodriguez 1998 TEX 4.26 31 Ivan Rodriguez 1997 TEX 4.26 33 Art Wilson 1914 CHF 4.24 34 Ivan Rodriguez 1999 TEX 4.22 35 Gary Carter 1979 MON 4.16 36 Bill Dickey 1937 NYY 4.15 37 Joe Torre 1966 ATL 4.13 38 Johnny Bench 1969 CIN 4.07 39 Gene Tenace 1979 SDP 4.05 40 Bill Freehan 1967 DET 4.02 41 Tim McCarver 1967 STL 4.00 42 Mike Napoli 2011 TEX 3.95 43 Roger Bresnahan 1908 NYG 3.90 44 Tony Pena 1984 PIT 3.88 45 Gary Carter 1978 MON 3.86 46 Jorge Posada 2003 NYY 3.85 46 Ivan Rodriguez 1996 TEX 3.85 48 Johnny Bench 1979 CIN 3.82 48 Elston Howard 1961 NYY 3.82 50 Ernie Lombardi 1938 CIN 3.80 51 Brian McCann 2008 ATL 3.75 52 Joe Mauer 2010 MIN 3.74 53 Russell Martin 2007 LAD 3.72 54 Joe Mauer 2006 MIN 3.71 55 Yogi Berra 1952 NYY 3.70 56 Jason Kendall 1998 PIT 3.69 56 Elston Howard 1964 NYY 3.69 58 Carlton Fisk 1978 BOS 3.68 59 Yogi Berra 1950 NYY 3.62 59 Thurman Munson 1970 NYY 3.62 59 Gabby Hartnett 1930 CHC 3.62 62 Rich Gedman 1985 BOS 3.60 63 Brian Downing 1979 CAL 3.58 63 Elston Howard 1963 NYY 3.58 63 Bill Dickey 1936 NYY 3.58 66 Mickey Cochrane 1931 PHA 3.57 67 Ted Simmons 1978 STL 3.56 67 Mike Scioscia 1985 LAD 3.56 69 Bill Freehan 1964 DET 3.55 69 Gene Tenace 1978 SDP 3.55 71 Mickey Tettleton 1991 DET 3.54 72 Gary Carter 1977 MON 3.51 72 Gabby Hartnett 1935 CHC 3.51 74 Mike Piazza 1996 LAD 3.47 74 Mike Piazza 2000 NYM 3.47 76 John Stearns 1978 NYM 3.46 77 Charlie Bennett 1883 DTN 3.45 78 Buck Ewing 1884 NYG 3.44 78 Gabby Hartnett 1937 CHC 3.44 80 Jack Clements 1895 PHI 3.43 81 Ivan Rodriguez 2000 TEX 3.42 82 Charles Johnson 2000 2TM 3.40 83 Mickey Cochrane 1930 PHA 3.39 83 Ray Fosse 1970 CLE 3.39 85 Art Wilson 1915 CHF 3.38 86 Joe Mauer 2008 MIN 3.37 86 Jorge Posada 2000 NYY 3.37 88 Lance Parrish 1982 DET 3.36 89 Mickey Cochrane 1932 PHA 3.35 89 Bill Dickey 1938 NYY 3.35 89 Ivan Rodriguez 2001 TEX 3.35 89 Buck Ewing 1883 NYG 3.35 93 Ted Simmons 1973 STL 3.31 93 Ted Simmons 1977 STL 3.31 95 Jim Sundberg 1978 TEX 3.30 96 Yogi Berra 1954 NYY 3.29 96 Bubbles Hargrave 1923 CIN 3.29 98 Roy Campanella 1955 BRO 3.28 99 Jorge Posada 2007 NYY 3.27 100 Joe Torre 1970 STL 3.26
Registered User
here is an example of what I am talking about with regard to extra positional value for catchers, but instead in terms of pitchers. If a pitcher pitches 200 innings and we rate the replacement level as being 32% winning percentage (winning rate) for those innings, he is picking up 18% of a "win" per 9 innings by being above replacement, but what if a player pitched 350 innings? Or 80 innings. Are we to assume that a team would get the same 32% winning percentage for the 80, 200, and 350 innings if each of those pitchers had to be replaced?
For the same reason, the "next" replacement level game for a team at catcher might be at a 32% winning percentage, but if you have to replace a guy who caught 120 games, by the time you are replacing games 80-120 for example, you may be getting only an 18% level.
Another question I have about the calculations is this. If a catcher puts up say 3 WAA in 120 games, plus 1.5 (15 runs) above replacement then he is getting 4.5 war. If he had played at an average level for the other 40 games he would have picked up another .5 war or gotten 5.0. He didn't though, but somebody else did. If the average #1 catcher is catching 120 games, then the first 40 games caught by someone else on average is actually contributing to the AVERAGE level for catchers so its not really replacement level.
Last edited by brett; 01-04-2013 at 07:11 AM.
Nerd
Brett, I like your idea of redistributing more wins from non-catchers to catchers because the latter play a more physically demanding position and thus allow other players to not suffer from having to catch. This would be in addition to the positional adjustment catchers already get, and would place catchers on a more even scale with other players. The trick is how to quantify the catcher bonus without being arbitrary about it. Have you mentioned your idea to Sean Smith or Forman?
*** Submit your personal HOF as your ballot for the Single Ballot BBF Hall of Fame! ***
Registered User
These are just my observations, as an interested observer who sees himself as unqualified [sabermetrically, meaning acceptable level of statistical regression options to fit universally accepted models that inform the structure of WAR.
1. Why should any position carry an automatic +/- value simply for being THAT particular position? Why can't defensive evaluations be based on individual player performance as measured against a unique position-defined template? In other words, each position would start out neutral as far as +/- runs are concerned, with player performance "earning" individual ratings that may be +, - or neutral against the position model.
The position limitations would be position-experience unique; and template value would be governed by these limitations without making the position value a negative from the start.
2. Purely from the perspective of budgets, it seems to me that WAR is better suited to finacial planning and asset allocation than to player evaluation performance. Behind the plate, I can cite many examples illustrating that back up catchers were far above Replacement level in actual performance. Replacement is a concept universally applied, when the reality of roster management has many instances of utility men who were more nearly "average" than Replacement when put into lineups.
3. I see mixed metaphors in the various claims for what WAR can do. Is it that a concept is being universally applied when it should not be? I realize it makes for more work; but why not measure each roster player/position/activity against seasonal average in category and let player "value" stand on that?
Perhaps, specific to catchers, a regressed model of playing time could be developed that constitutes a "season" for catchers only. Just for the sake of an example, if that model came to 140 games then that would constitute a "season" behind the plate. Beyond that amount of playing time, a catcher would have no extra credits. However, the "other" 10, 15, 20 or whatever number of games might be applied at "replacement" formula.
Just thinking out loud here and trying to be as unbiased as possible.
Registered User
The problem here is that an average fielding SS and an average fielding first baseman who both hit the same, (lets say league average) are not equally valuable to a team. The shortstop is giving his team about 10 runs compared to an average SS, and the first baseman is losing his team about 10 runs compared to an average hitting first baseman. While the defensive positions have unique defensive needs, they also have unique offensive needs (you need more offense from first base than SS all else being equal AND one of the reasons SSs don't hit as well may be that they stay a little smaller, and quicker to field their position).
And I think that an average fielding ss who hits as well as an average fielding first baseman is a better player. If we give the players defensive value for what they do in the field above a LOWER baseline, we could plausibly do what you are saying. An average shortstop would be making say 40 more plays than a low baseline, while an average first baseman might be making 20 more than the low baseline for first base. If we set a below average baseline for each position, we could eliminate the positional adjustment.
And by the way, the positional adjustment is generally in line with the OFFENSIVE differences in production by position, but not completely in line (DHs are -14 while first basemen are -10 even though they hit/run better for example.)
Registered User
I like the idea of an adjusted full season for a catcher. They should get the full value between an average and a replacement player IF they play an average number of games for their position. Though it depends a little on the meaning of the terms average and replacment. If average is actually the league average rates then it would mean that no replacement level player has ever played an inning at the major league level.
Registered User
I have no problem at all in recognizing the higher demands defensively at SS over 1B. However, I have a problem with an evaluation model that starts one position off as a positive value and another with a negative value. Both contribute in a positive way to the defense, although the 1B position has limitations of opportunity, challenge and individual play value in run prevention. It see it a bit like two 1939 Ford sport coupes ... one souped up, the other with a governor on the speed control. One can go 110 mph, while the other is held to a maximum of 60 mph. Both move. Both will get you where you're going. The capacity is different.
I don't believe you can get much lower than the Replacement Level as a ML concept, unless you take a scrawny kid from the stands [always the last one picked chosing sides] and put him in the field. [Slight exaggeration, that!]:And I think that an average fielding ss who hits as well as an average fielding first baseman is a better player. If we give the players defensive value for what they do in the field above a LOWER baseline, we could plausibly do what you are saying. An average shortstop would be making say 40 more plays than a low baseline, while an average first baseman might be making 20 more than the low baseline for first base. If we set a below average baseline for each position, we could eliminate the positional adjustment.
Since we're talking catchers more specifically, I "get" the concept of Replacement; but as applied as a model it gives a distorted sense of value with a very low standard.
And by the way, the positional adjustment is generally in line with the OFFENSIVE differences in production by position, but not completely in line (DHs are -14 while first basemen are -10 even though they hit/run better for example.)[/QUOTE]
Registered User
[/QUOTE]
The most common WAR methodologies only rate defense relative to "average" at a position. They assume that playing an entire team of replacement level players will produce a team with a 32% winning percentage. They assume that putting a replacement level player at any position in the field will cost an average team about 2 wins overall but do not parse it out over offense or defense (a replacement shortstop will lose a lot of runs on defense, but a replacement first baseman is going to lose a ton on offense).
There are WAR methods that set a replacment level for offense and defense separately so that an average fielder would get a positive score.
In fact a way to look at it is that a first baseman gets -10 for position, while a shortstop gets +7, but they BOTH get about 22 runs above replacement level with about 25% of the contribution coming from defense and 75% from offense. That would mean theoretically that they BOTH are getting about 5.5 defensive runs above replacement for their positions. Still leaves the first baseman at -4.5 and the shortstop at 12.5 versus a neutral replacement fielder, and it implies that a replacement third baseman or centerfielder is a better fielder than an average fielding first baseman.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks