PDA

View Full Version : Hanigan Best Defensive Catcher?



TheNext44
08-07-2009, 03:06 AM
He is according to this guy (who seems pretty smart, by the way, since I have no idea what he is talking about.)

Sorry if the was already posted, I looked and couldn't find it.

http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2009/8/5/978302/an-attempt-to-capture-catcher


An Attempt to Capture Catcher Defense

Adam1_tiny by chuckb on Aug 5, 2009 11:09 AM EDT Comment 45 comments

A couple of weeks ago I put something together over at VEB about catcher defense in the NL at the All-Star break and was invited to extend my analysis to all major league catchers over here. As we all know, the impact of catcher defense is very difficult to quantify. Even Fangraphs has a difficult time with it, since it uses UZR to evaluate defense at every other position on the field. Just looking at its list of qualifying catchers, only Victor Martinez and Yadier Molina ostensibly receive any value from their defense whatsoever Ė and that comes from the time theyíve each spent at first base.

Itís not true, of course, that catchers have no defensive value. We do know, from The Book that a catcherís ability to throw runners out attempting to steal has value and that his inability to do so detracts from that value. The Book tells us that a stolen base is worth 0.175 runs and a caught stealing is worth minus 0.467 runs. We also know that wild pitches and passed balls are worth approximately 0.27 runs as well. Using those run expectancies, Iíve taken the catcher on each team who has garnered the most playing time behind the plate and figured out how many runs each caught stealing has added to his team and how many runs each stolen base, passed ball, and wild pitch has subtracted from his team.

Star-divide

The CS% and WP+PB/G donít tell the entire story, however. There has to be some value in a catcherís reputationís ability to prevent other teams from even attempting to steal a base. Is Bengie Molina really more valuable than Yadier b/c heís thrown out 20 runners in 84 attempts while Yadiís only thrown out 14 of 37? Why should catchers with reputations that prevent teams from attempting to steal be punished? I figured that the value of a catcherís reputation is equal to the value of a stolen base times the likelihood that the runner will get caught times the number of times runners have forgone the opportunity to steal b/c of the catcherís reputation. In other words, I figured the average number of stolen base attempts per catcher game (0.869) and determined each catcherís expected stolen base attempts based on his number of games played. I then subtracted his actual stolen base attempts from the expected number and multiplied it times the run value of the SB (0.175) times the likelihood the runner would be caught stealing (CS%). If a catcher had more SB attempts than expected, he has the reputation of being easy to run against and if a catcher had fewer SB attempts than expected, itís b/c his reputation prevented base runners from attempting the steal. I called this number Rep runs.

I then added BR runs, Miss Runs, and Rep Runs together to determine the total runs scored against a catcher on the basis of his inability to stop balls in the dirt or prevent runners from stealing a base. Then, as UZR does, I computed the total runs on a 150 game basis in order to level the playing field. Perhaps 150 games isnít the right number to use since catchers almost never play 150 games, but it allows us to compare them and squares it w/ UZR. I then figured the average and determined how many runs above or below average each catcher was, on a 150 game basis. The results are below:


Inn SB CS WP+PB BRruns Missruns Repruns Totruns R/150 RAA
Hanigan 462 18 17 22 4.79 -5.89 0.86 -0.24 -0.693 16.26
Laird 711 31 23 27 5.32 -7.23 1.47 -0.44 -0.834 16.12
Y. Molina 802 23 14 29 2.51 -7.77 4.40 -0.86 -1.446 15.51
Ruiz 554 35 16 10 1.35 -2.67 0.30 -1.02 -2.489 14.47
Santos 454 24 11 11 0.94 -2.94 1.06 -0.94 -2.808 14.467
Mauer 540 27 13 19 1.35 -5.09 1.43 -2.31 -5.770 11.19
Pudge 669 30 14 26 1.29 -6.96 2.46 -3.21 -6.486 10.47
Zaun 427 29 10 9 -0.40 -2.41 -0.29 -2.53 -7.987 8.97
Barajas 645 39 19 25 2.05 -6.69 0.50 -4.14 -8.663 8.29
Iannetta 575 33 13 20 0.30 -5.35 1.20 -3.86 -9.058 7.90
Suzuki 771 53 17 23 -1.34 -6.16 0.59 -6.91 -12.102 4.85
McCann 668 43 16 26 -0.05 -6.95 0.70 -6.30 -12.733 4.22
Johnson 477 27 13 27 1.35 -7.22 0.72 -5.15 -14.589 2.37
Soto 542 38 16 25 0.82 -6.69 -0.21 -6.07 -15.116 1.84
Salty 675 56 19 23 -0.93 -6.16 -1.28 -8.37 -16.74 0.22
Jaramillo 401 30 9 15 -1.05 -4.00 -0.04 -5.09 -17.134 -0.18
Kendall 794 48 13 38 -2.33 -10.17 2.16 -10.34 -17.586 -0.63
Navarro 677 45 14 32 -1.34 -8.55 0.85 -9.04 -18.024 -1.07
Martin 796 50 22 49 1.52 -13.11 0.59 -10.99 -18.643 -1.69
Montero 528 41 12 27 -1.57 -7.23 -0.27 -9.08 -23.213 -6.26
B. Molina 749 64 20 37 -1.86 -9.91 -1.56 -13.32 -24.015 -7.06
Olivo 599 36 17 49 1.64 -13.10 0.57 -10.89 -24.542 -7.59
Pierzynski 725 65 14 32 -4.84 -8.55 -1.30 -14.69 -27.349 -10.39
Varitek 690 77 13 13 -7.40 -3.49 -3.50 -14.39 -28.155 -11.20
Baker 574 52 15 33 -2.10 -8.84 -1.57 -12.50 -29.410 -12.45
Bard 385 31 11 28 -0.29 -7.50 -0.62 -8.41 -29.478 -12.52
Napoli 497 50 16 27 -1.28 -7.22 -2.39 -10.89 -29.579 -12.62
Shoppach 467 42 10 25 -2.68 -6.69 -0.98 -10.35 -29.910 -12.95
Posada 508 60 22 32 -0.23 -8.56 -4.22 -13.01 -34.564 -17.61
Hundley 363 41 4 14 -5.31 -3.74 -1.59 -10.64 -39.560 -22.60

This isnít a perfect measure, of course, as pitchers bear at least some of the responsibility for wild pitches and stolen bases but it does try to capture the run value of the most important plays that catchers make. And Iíll add again that perhaps a 150 game measure isnít the way to go but Iím not sure itís clear what the standard should be. 130 games? If so, the runs above and below average would be closer to 0 than they are now but the ones at the top would still be at the top and Posada, Varitek, and Hundley would still be at the bottom. On the other hand, who'd have guessed Ryan Hanigan would be at the top of this list. Still, when you're throwing out nearly half of all potential base stealers, you're helping your team quite a bit.

Iím interested in whatever feedback you have to offer as Iím always trying to figure out ways to make this stuff more precise.

*BaseClogger*
08-07-2009, 03:11 PM
I was a big supporter of Hanigan this offseason. There were a lot of posters who thought he would get exposed if he played everyday. I'm not saying that can't still happen, but he is an excellent defensive catcher who doesn't have to do very much offensively to perform up to league average...

Joseph
08-07-2009, 03:14 PM
I'm a fan. He's got two things going for him, he's a hard worker, and a decent skill set.

I'd be comfortable going into '10 with him as the main catcher so long as Dusty bats him 7th or 8th where he seems most comfortable.

Brutus
08-07-2009, 03:15 PM
I was a big supporter of Hanigan this offseason. There were a lot of posters who thought he would get exposed if he played everyday. I'm not saying that can't still happen, but he is an excellent defensive catcher who doesn't have to do very much offensively to perform up to league average...

Though I keep waiting for it to happen, he's shown the ability to gun down runners and draw a walk at every stop. At this juncture, it seems he's legit. The Reds might want to find a veteran backup for next season, but I would approach the year as Hanigan being my starter.

WMR
08-07-2009, 03:16 PM
Kid seems to be a hard-nosed baseball player and his defense behind the plate is very, very nice.

RedsManRick
08-07-2009, 03:19 PM
I'm a fan. He's got two things going for him, he's a hard worker, and a decent skill set.

I'd be comfortable going into '10 with him as the main catcher so long as Dusty bats him 7th or 8th where he seems most comfortable.

305 of his 324 career PA have come batting 6th, 7th, 8th, or 9th. How can you possible know where he feels most comfortable. A near .400 OPS is an awful waste at the bottom of the order.

WMR
08-07-2009, 03:20 PM
305 of his 324 career PA have come batting 6th, 7th, 8th, or 9th. How can you possible know where he feels most comfortable. A near .400 OPS is an awful waste at the bottom of the order.

He's not Willy Taveras is he? :p:

Eric_the_Red
08-07-2009, 03:22 PM
305 of his 324 career PA have come batting 6th, 7th, 8th, or 9th. How can you possible know where he feels most comfortable. A near .400 OPS is an awful waste at the bottom of the order.


Maybe if he played CF or SS....

jojo
08-07-2009, 03:22 PM
A near .400 OPS is an awful waste at the bottom of the order.

Dusty is that you? :D

Joseph
08-07-2009, 03:26 PM
305 of his 324 career PA have come batting 6th, 7th, 8th, or 9th. How can you possible know where he feels most comfortable. A near .400 OPS is an awful waste at the bottom of the order.

I don't disagree that its a waste nor do I profess to know where he is most comfortable. I just know he's hit second a few times of late and hasn't produced the same way as when he hits lower. I'd rather have a decent defensive catcher who OBP's around 400 hitting 7th than one who hits like...well Willy T batting second.

RANDY IN INDY
08-07-2009, 03:29 PM
305 of his 324 career PA have come batting 6th, 7th, 8th, or 9th. How can you possible know where he feels most comfortable. A near .400 OPS is an awful waste at the bottom of the order.

Not necessarily, if he can't post the same % at the top or middle. I think the sample size is too small. He has not been tearing it up lately, or maybe I am not seeing something. At the top, pitchers are more apt to go directly after him instead of pitching cautiously, to get at the pitcher or someone below him. That type of approach can change things. You better be able to swing the bat a little in those positions and I think he will get exposed. For that reason, I don't see Hannigan as a good fit for the top or middle of the order, but that's only my opinion. I think his performance will be better at the bottom of the order.

TheNext44
08-07-2009, 03:30 PM
305 of his 324 career PA have come batting 6th, 7th, 8th, or 9th. How can you possible know where he feels most comfortable. A near .400 OPS is an awful waste at the bottom of the order.

And it's not like this is a fluke. He has a career .383 OBP in the minors, and his last season at AAA it was .392. This is so obvious that even Baker put him in the two hole once.

I am not a big believer in lineups making that big of a difference, but I have to think that batting Hanigan 2nd and Gonzo 8th would make a meaningful difference if done for a whole season. If anyone knows how to figure these things out, I would love to see it.

RANDY IN INDY
08-07-2009, 03:33 PM
For what it is worth, I don't think it would hurt anything to see what he could do in the 2 hole for the rest of the season. He isn't the fastest guy in the world, but if he gets on base, it is more than anyone else has been doing. Worth a try. Nothing to lose. The Reds don't really have anyone on the active roster that fits the leadoff or two-hole positions, anyway.

RedsManRick
08-07-2009, 03:36 PM
My point is that we have a ridiculously small number of plate appearances from which to make the judgment, be it based on scouting or stats.

I'm willing to concede that it's possible he hits better lower in the order, but we should give him plenty of opportunity to prove us wrong. Our starting assumption should be that the guy knows how to get on base and will continue to do so until he proves otherwise - and proof is along the lines of a full season. Certainly not 10, 20, 50, or even 100 PA.

And not only does he have a high OBP, but he has a low SLG -- so he's not going to be driving in a ton of guys down in the order. Outside of the fact that he plays catcher and can't steal 40 bags, he's ideal for the top of the order.

RANDY IN INDY
08-07-2009, 03:48 PM
My point is that we have a ridiculously small number of plate appearances from which to make the judgment, be it based on scouting or stats.

I'm willing to concede that it's possible he hits better lower in the order, but we should give him plenty of opportunity to prove us wrong. Our starting assumption should be that the guy knows how to get on base and will continue to do so until he proves otherwise - and proof is along the lines of a full season. Certainly not 10, 20, 50, or even 100 PA.

And not only does he have a high OBP, but he has a low SLG -- so he's not going to be driving in a ton of guys down in the order. Outside of the fact that he plays catcher and can't steal 40 bags, he's ideal for the top of the order.

How can you make that statement when you don't know if he will, or can, perform in that position in the order? I would not mind seeing him there for an extended periond, but "Ideal?"

RedsManRick
08-07-2009, 04:09 PM
How can you make that statement when you don't know if he will, or can, perform in that position in the order? I would not mind seeing him there for an extended periond, but "Ideal?"

The statement was a reference to the skill set he's displayed thus far, getting on base but not hitting for power. We have no good reason to believe his production will decline significantly because of a move in the batting order. He's a good contact hitter who can take a walk. That won't change because he's hitting behind or ahead of somebody else.

Though his ability to sustain his current level of production is an open question, whether he hits 2nd or 8th or anywhere else. We just shouldn't confuse that with the effect of batting order.

RANDY IN INDY
08-07-2009, 04:13 PM
Over the years, in coaching, I've seen a lot of guys that could hit at the bottom, but can't do it at the top. There is a difference in the way that pitchers go after hitters that are hitting in front of a very good hitter. Hannigan? Votto? I go after Hannigan with my best stuff. I'm not saying with any surety that it will make a difference, but it most certainly can and to totally dismiss that is a little silly from where I sit. I am not so sure that Hannigan is an "Ideal" #2 hitter.

Eric_the_Red
08-07-2009, 04:14 PM
Career numbers:
Hanigan - .295/.388/.363/.752 OPS+ 97
Jason Kendall - .290/.369/.383/.751 OPS+ 96

I'm comfortable with Hanigan as the #1 C until his numbers suggest otherwise.

# of games started at each position in the order for Kendall:
1 - 463
2 - 306
3 - 309
4 - 0
5 - 97
6 - 150
7 - 43
8 - 406
9 - 89

Mario-Rijo
08-07-2009, 04:20 PM
How can you make that statement when you don't know if he will, or can, perform in that position in the order? I would not mind seeing him there for an extended periond, but "Ideal?"

Yeah I'd have to agree. There's no way to tell since he hasn't done it but I don't think he'd be ideal. For one when players have been on base (usually in scoring position) for him he tends to change his approach to a more aggressive style swinging at balls out of the zone which shocked me because he rarely does that when they are not. So he'd have to refine his approach a bit which I think he can do. But when he is hitting in front of Votto I doubt he gets many opportunities to work a walk, he'll swing when given the pitches to do so. I think it's more likely he'd turn into a GIDP kind of guy. But it would be worth a look.

I like his game though and think hitting him in the 7th spot is probably a bit more ideal. And I think he could maintain enough offense to be an above average catcher for a few years.

Oh and in regards to his defense I always felt Yadier was the best defensive catcher in baseball but Hanigan is right there in that realm he's an excellent top notch defender not sure why that was never mentioned much while he was on his way up.

RedsManRick
08-07-2009, 05:04 PM
Over the years, in coaching, I've seen a lot of guys that could hit at the bottom, but can't do it at the top. There is a difference in the way that pitchers go after hitters that are hitting in front of a very good hitter. Hannigan? Votto? I go after Hannigan with my best stuff. I'm not saying with any surety that it will make a difference, but it most certainly can and to totally dismiss that is a little silly from where I sit. I am not so sure that Hannigan is an "Ideal" #2 hitter.

In no way am I totally dismissing the possibility that he won't hit as well as a #2 hitter. I'm just saying that it's not the right starting assumption. Perhaps "ideal" was the wrong word -- though I think we can agree on best option we have at the moment.

RANDY IN INDY
08-07-2009, 05:28 PM
An assumption is just an assumption. Don't know if there is a right one or a wrong one.

By the way, I agree with letting him hit in the two hole for a while. Can't be any worse than what they are running out there.

Big Klu
08-08-2009, 12:28 AM
An assumption is just an assumption. Don't know if there is a right one or a wrong one.

By the way, I agree with letting him hit in the two hole for a while. Can't be any worse than what they are running out there.

I agree. I don't think he is an ideal #2 hitter, but he's probably the best option the Reds have right now I would like to see him get some time there for a while.

On a somewhat related note, I would like to see Phillips in the leadoff spot instead of Taveras. Again, I don't think that Brandon is an ideal leadoff hitter, but he's likely the best available option right now.

Phillips 2b
Hanigan c
Votto 1b
Rolen 3b
Balentien rf
Nix/Gomes lf
Gonzalez ss
Taveras cf
<pitcher>

HokieRed
08-08-2009, 07:25 AM
OPS now at .741. If he catches every day the rest of the way, I doubt it will stay above .700. Has both to do with batting him up in the order and with the weariness factor. IMHO, he's not the answer at starter. Very good backup, not a starter.

RANDY IN INDY
08-08-2009, 10:16 AM
I agree. I don't think he is an ideal #2 hitter, but he's probably the best option the Reds have right now I would like to see him get some time there for a while.

On a somewhat related note, I would like to see Phillips in the leadoff spot instead of Taveras. Again, I don't think that Brandon is an ideal leadoff hitter, but he's likely the best available option right now.

Phillips 2b
Hanigan c
Votto 1b
Rolen 3b
Balentien rf
Nix/Gomes lf
Gonzalez ss
Taveras cf
<pitcher>

I would like to see Phillips out of the 4 hole and in the leadoff spot, as well. Far from "ideal" but I would like to see how he would respond.

Highlifeman21
08-08-2009, 10:41 AM
I would like to see Phillips out of the 4 hole and in the leadoff spot, as well. Far from "ideal" but I would like to see how he would respond.

Phillips batting leadoff?

Huh?

RedsManRick
08-08-2009, 10:43 AM
Not to turn this in to a lineup thread, but so long as he playing, Taveras is a prime candidate to bat 9th. That would give Dusty his "double leadoff" arrangement without giving Taveras an undeserved number of PA.

I'd actually go:

Hanigan c
Votto 1b
Rolen 3b
Phillips 2b
Nix/Gomes lf
Balentien rf
Gonzalez ss
<pitcher>
Taveras cf

nate
08-08-2009, 10:45 AM
Phillips batting leadoff?

Huh?

I'd be down with that too. Far from ideal but fewer opportunities to GIDP. Plus, he has some speed and pop.

I mean, it's better than Willy, right?

RANDY IN INDY
08-08-2009, 10:46 AM
Phillips batting leadoff?

Huh?

With the options that they have now, it couldn't be any worse than Taveras, plus, I really hate him in the cleanup spot.

Highlifeman21
08-08-2009, 10:56 AM
With the options that they have now, it couldn't be any worse than Taveras, plus, I really hate him in the cleanup spot.

Just b/c he's not Taveras-esque in making outs doesn't mean we should kick the tires on him batting leadoff, IMO.

I'd almost venture a guess that we'd see Phillips' OBP go the wrong way if he batted leadoff, as we'd see him increase his out-making ways.

The only time Phillips should bat 4th is vs. LHP. Any other time, 5th or 6th.

I really wanna see what Hanigan can do in the 2 hole, though.

RANDY IN INDY
08-08-2009, 10:59 AM
So who is your leadoff man?

Highlifeman21
08-08-2009, 11:26 AM
So who is your leadoff man?

Great question, and I should have anticipated it.

When healthy, I guess Dickerson.

In the meantime, I'd kick the tires on Balentien, although I fear that he'd probably end up closer to OBP'ing .300 than .350, given his propensity to hack. But at this point, what have we got to lose with him? To me, he's definitely an unknown commodity.

I'd probably do something crazy like:

Dickerson/Balentien
Hanigan
Votto
Rolen
Nix
Phillips
Gomes
Gonzalez

... although I'm ok with trying multiple combinations in the 5 - 7 slots with Nix, Phillips and Gomes.

But sure, kicking the tires on Phillips leading off is probably about as good of an idea as Balentien, and given the Reds' record, why not Phillips @ leadoff?

I'd love to be wrong about Phillips offensively in the leadoff spot, but nothing points to him having success there.

But I've been wrong before, and I'd gladly be wrong again if Phillips solved our leadoff problem.

RANDY IN INDY
08-08-2009, 12:11 PM
I don't think he is the answer, either, but I would definitely, "kick the tires" as you say. When he is healthy, I like Dickerson in the leadoff spot, as well. Best in-house option that they have. Balentien? I feel a little less confident about that one than I do about Phillips, but that one is probably roughly the same with Phillips getting a little edge from me. I wouldn't hesitate to try it.

Falls City Beer
08-08-2009, 06:12 PM
Hanigan is never going to be anything offensively; he's currently getting pantsed as an everyday hitter. It will be hard to top his defensive skills, however.

Smells like a back-up to me.

Mario-Rijo
08-08-2009, 06:44 PM
Hanigan is never going to be anything offensively; he's currently getting pantsed as an everyday hitter. It will be hard to top his defensive skills, however.

Smells like a back-up to me.

If Brad Ausmus can start for all those many year sso can Hanigan. Frankly I think he is a starter, he has enough offensive game and acumen to not be a complete black hole.

jojo
08-08-2009, 06:48 PM
To me the question is just how badly will his bat wilt under the grind?

Profound, I know.

Falls City Beer
08-08-2009, 06:50 PM
To me the question is just how badly will his bat wilt under the grind?

Profound, I know.

The trajectory's right there before our eyes. Hint: it's not tracking up.

Mario-Rijo
08-08-2009, 06:58 PM
To me the question is just how badly will his bat wilt under the grind?

Profound, I know.

Stellar defense is half the game. On offense he runs very well for the position, works the pitcher, takes BB's, makes contact and is just all around intelligent. No he will never be a great offensive player but he plays 2/3 or more of the game better than most at the position. That my friends is a starter in my books, at least for a few years.

jojo
08-08-2009, 07:05 PM
Stellar defense is half the game. On offense he runs very well for the position, works the pitcher, takes BB's, makes contact and is just all around intelligent. No he will never be a great offensive player but he plays 2/3 or more of the game better than most at the position. That my friends is a starter in my books, at least for a few years.

To me, it's a limbo issue concerning whether he's a starter.....i.e. how low can his OPS go? There is an offensive threshold even at catcher.

That said, I like Hanigan. I just don't know if he's a guy who can handle 500 PAs.

HokieRed
08-08-2009, 07:29 PM
He's not a starter. No way he can put up a decent OPS over 450 or 500 AB's as a catcher without any SLG. I'm sure Walt knows this. I think we'll see a move for a C.

mth123
08-08-2009, 08:34 PM
My candidate to share the role:

Chris Snyder - Signed for 4.75 Million in 2010 and 5.75 Million in 2011 with a 750K buy out of a 2012 option. Montero emerged in 2009 and the d-backs may just be looking for a little relief. Willy for Snyder saves them 750K in 2010, 5.75 Million in 2011 and 750K in 2012. If the Reds need to add a borderline prospect to make it go, then OK. The 40 Man is jammed anyhow. I'd happily add a Lecure or a Valiquette to the deal.

Snyder/Hanigan would be a pretty fair tandem IMO. Snyder is younger BTW.

OnBaseMachine
08-08-2009, 08:42 PM
I would love to see the Reds acquire Chris Snyder to pair with Hanigan.

Emin3mShady07
08-09-2009, 01:09 AM
My candidate to share the role:

Chris Snyder - Signed for 4.75 Million in 2010 and 5.75 Million in 2011 with a 750K buy out of a 2012 option. Montero emerged in 2009 and the d-backs may just be looking for a little relief. Willy for Snyder saves them 750K in 2010, 5.75 Million in 2011 and 750K in 2012. If the Reds need to add a borderline prospect to make it go, then OK. The 40 Man is jammed anyhow. I'd happily add a Lecure or a Valiquette to the deal.

Snyder/Hanigan would be a pretty fair tandem IMO. Snyder is younger BTW.

I don't think the D'backs would want Taveras. Not saying a trade can't happen, but why would they want to take on 4 million dollars of dead weight?

Ron Madden
08-09-2009, 01:41 AM
That said, I like Hanigan. I just don't know if he's a guy who can handle 500 PAs.

I like Hanigan too. Like Jojo I have my doubts about him offensively.

mth123
08-09-2009, 05:18 AM
I don't think the D'backs would want Taveras. Not saying a trade can't happen, but why would they want to take on 4 million dollars of dead weight?

I'm sure they don't want Taveras, but sometimes you have to take on some money to unload a contract. With Montero a cheap guy who has siezed the job, Snyder is a little pricey as a back-up for a team as cash strapped as the D-backs are. The Reds would likely have to add a young player or two. As long as no real top guys are included, it would be worth it. With Tony Pena already dealt, Doug Davis a free agent and expensive options for Jon Garland and an iffy Brandon Webb, they may be wanting some near ready back of the rotation options like Maloney or Lecure and/or some depth for the pen.

It would be the same type of deal the Reds made when they moved Freel. The Reds are pretty strapped themselves so adding Taveras evens up 2010 while the D-Backs free-up some money in 2011 when the Reds have a couple of bigger contracts coming off the books. The D-backs could take that 2011 savings and apply it to a contract for pitching. My understanding is that the D-backs are still fighting Bud's debt limit and moving Snyder's 10 Million plus in exchange for Willy's $4 million would help. Snyder is just pricey enough that he may not bring much in return. If the Reds add a real bottom of the rotation option to help replace one of those three guys on the cheap the D-Backs might be interested and take Willy to make it work.

As with all of these types of hypothetical fan ideas, it won't happen. Just trying to spur some discussion on ideas for addressing next year's catching situation. I agree with most on here that Hanigan needs to have his role limited. He's a nice catcher for a tandem and one of the more solid pieces in place for 2010, but he's a 300 AB guy at best. He needs another part time starter to share the spot. That is what Snyder has been, but like Hernandez, he's getting kind of pricey for what he does.

Highlifeman21
08-09-2009, 08:01 AM
How well does Hanigan call a game?

Can we attribute some of the pitching woes to what he's asking for from our arms, or is it more of a problem of lack of execution on the part of the arms?