Hey Mike. Sorry if I tweaked a nerve with you there. I was trying to make a joke in that the first point I read from you in a while managed to (please don't dissect my words here) question Bench's greatness to a degree and attempt to rule out Pujols' decline. It wasn't a positive statement for Bench for sure, and it wasn't a negative one for Pujols. My beerme symbol was meant to show the lightheartness, but that failed. Sorry.Originally Posted by MikeThierry
As with so many contracts at this stage in a player's career... it won't be the salary, it will be the length that hamstrings his suitor.
If I were Vegas, I'd give the Cards the edge with the Cubs and Brewers (if Prince signs first, elsewhere) slightly farther behind. Which will only inflate the contract.
Which will only help the rest of the Central in the long-term (and possibly short-term if said club can't resign its other important pieces).
I have a love-hate relationship with Albert Pujols. Mostly hate.
Its all good Kal, I was just up early this morning and probably a bit tired, lol.
I was sort of thinking about this the other day. How does signing Pujols affect the Cardinals compared to the rest of the NL Central going forward after this year? I see this division continuing to be a rather weak division for the next couple of years. Houston is lightyears from competing, the Cubs look like they are trying to build up some sort of farm system and waiting for bad contracts to expire, the Pirates have some nice pieces but they are a ways off, Milwaukee might be successful this year but their moves have destroyed their farm system and their team might start to decline after Fielder has gone. The Reds are intriguing but it looks like they will continue the whole "wait for prospects to mature" approach instead of infusing the team with a mixture of prospects and quality free agents. Even if the Cards sign Pujols to a large contract, they will still be competitive in a division where all the teams, including the Cardinals, have question marks going forward well into the decade.Which will only help the rest of the Central in the long-term (and possibly short-term if said club can't resign its other important pieces).
Bench's career OPS+ adjusted for park: 126
I-Rod's career OPS+ adjusted for park: 106
Bench had 78 more homers in nearly 2,000 fewer plate appearances and unlike I-Rod, played outside of a steroid era and didn't get the benefit of playing in too many homer-happy parks that started popping up in the 90s.
I think it's a pretty open-and-shut case.
As far as Pujols, I don't care what he's been, I only care what he's likely to be going forward. At 31 years old, it's just not prudent to expect his level of production for too many more years. The system of free agency in baseball is backwards in that it rewards too many players for what they've done and not what they're going to do. Signing Pujols for too big a contract is simply going to reward him for being a great Cardinal and not for being a great Red. He may not fall off a cliff, but I wouldn't anticipate more than 2-3 more Pujols-like years out of him.
Last edited by Brutus; 08-23-2011 at 11:42 AM.
"No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda
What's this batting average you speak off? You are basing offensive ability based on this? FWIW, Bench had a superior OBA .
Are you basing defensive abilty on fielding average too?
And Gary Carter is overlooked in the arguments of best catcher ever for a reason.
Last edited by PuffyPig; 08-23-2011 at 12:30 PM.
Firstly, I get it that offense has declined, but Pujols has gone from the very top every year in WAR to about 30th in the majors. That's a ranking stat, so decline in offense won't affect it.
Secondly, you would think that if pitchers are pitching to Pujols more, giving him better pitches to hit as they don't want to walk him, his walks would decline and his hitting would improve.
Instead, his walks are cut in half, and his hitting has also declined.
The first indication of a hitting decline is that pitchers are pitching to you more often. We saw it with Griffey, and when he couldn't produce more offensive when they pitched to him, it was very telling.
When you watch the Cards play these days, pitchers are pitching to Pujols and pitching around Berkman.
Playing w/ a perm disqualifies him immediately from any best-ever discussions.
Baseball is like church. Many attend, few understand
Bench's OBP is just nine points higher than Rodriguez so its not exactly like comparing Pujols OBP to Bench's. I'm also taking defense into account in this debate. Bench was an brilliant defensive catcher but Rodriguez might be the greatest defensive catcher in the history of the game. The thing with Ivan is that he is pretty much played Catcher his whole career where as Bench played other positions including in his last days where he mostly played first base and third base. If the question is "who is the best catcher in the history of the game", longevity at that position has to be taken into account. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that Bench isn't the greatest catcher in the history of the game, my point was that there is an argument to be made that Rodriguez is and it isn't as much as a shut case as it is being made out to be here. Granted, I know it will fall on a lot of deaf ears here considering this is a Reds forum so its difficult for some to be objective about the topic.
Puffy, I know Pujols WAR is down this year but I find it hard to believe that he goes from the best hitter in the game to just an above average player in the span of one season. I think there were some goofy circumstances this season (broken forearm, first free agency coming up, bad first two months, etc) that play into it. Since the All Star break, Pujols has led the Cards in WAR and has looked like his old self.
Their OBPs are similar, but they played in completely different eras. If we look at wRC+, which is both league and park adjusted and based on wOBA, we get a completely different story. Bench posted a 125 wRC+ for his career, whereas Rodriguez comes in at 104 wRC+. Bench was 25% above average offensively for his career, whereas Rodriguez was only 4% above average. WAR is also very much in Bench's favor. Their overall WAR is reasonably close (81.5 for Bench, 73.4 for Rodriguez), but you have to consider that Bench played in roughly 400 fewer games over his career. When we adjust this to a per 162 games number, again, we get a much clearer picture. Bench's WAR/162 is 6.2, where Rodriguez weighs in at 4.7. You can make the argument that Rodriguez's improved longevity should be factored in when determining who should be named the best catcher of all time, but given the fact that Bench was much more effective on a per game basis and still put up a higher career WAR despite playing in 400 fewer games, I do, indeed, think it's a pretty open-and-shut case.
I'd even argue that Piazza was better than Rodriguez. His overall WAR comes out a bit lower (66.7 to Pudge's 73.4), but he played in roughly 600 fewer games than Pudge. Piazza's WAR/162 comes out to 5.7, even with his horrid defense. The guy was a beast at the plate.
Well, considering that the only offensive category where Rodriquez distinquished himself is "getting on base', it's relevant that he still trailed Bench.
Bench was an exceptional hitter his whole career, Rodriquez was a very good hitter "for a catcher".
Apples and oranges.
And IMO Bench set the standard for defensive catchers. He doesn't take a back seat to anyone.
I"m not suggestuing that Pujols is washed up or anything.
But his continuing lack of walks will affect his OBA an exceptionally amount.
Right now, he's more Jay Bruce than Joey Votto. Until his walks reappear, it will likely stay that way. It was Pujols walks (which added 100 points to his OBA) which separated him from the pack.
I believe that Yogi Berra has a better case than Ivan Rodriguez. Taking nothing away from Pudge, I just can't put him on the level with the others due to his alleged steroid usage. Great player for his time, yes. But there's a major question of "what would he have been?" that I can't get past.
And Pujols has slowly, but surely declined the last four years. Nothing drastic, still a hell of a player and a Hall of Famer, but his peak years are behind him. I think we'll continue to see a steady and slow regression. I don't think he'll fall off a cliff and I think he'll continue to be a very productive player. But I'm not sure how many more years of "franchise caliber player" he has left in him. Could be 3-4, could be fewer. Either way, he's a good bet to be an All Star going forward.
Yes, he's declining. But the guy reached heights very few have ever seen, so even a decline for him still looks pretty damn good numbers wises.
Considering that Rodriguez is a better defensive catcher than Bench, Bench certainly does take a back seat to someone. Comparing and contrasting their defensive skills is like comparing two high performance race cars. Both had stellar defense so you would like to have both of them behind the plate but I-Rod stands out from the rest of the pack when it comes to defense.Well, considering that the only offensive category where Rodriquez distinquished himself is "getting on base', it's relevant that he still trailed Bench.
Bench was an exceptional hitter his whole career, Rodriquez was a very good hitter "for a catcher".
Apples and oranges.
And IMO Bench set the standard for defensive catchers. He doesn't take a back seat to anyone.
I think you completely underestimate I-Rod's offensive abilities as well. Even if you take into account Rodriguez's offensive decline around age 36, he still has a career .297 batting average compared to Bench's .267. Bench had more power but I-Rod batting 30 points higher for a career than Bench is something to note and shouldn't be dismissed as "being a good hitter for a catcher".
I just can't put Piazza in the same class as Bench, Rodriguez, or Berra simply because Piazza's defense was so horrible. Defense is arguably more important for a catcher than any offensive numbers they can produce for a given team. It is one reason why catchers are automatically given a +1 when calculating WAR (as much as a flawed stat as it is). Looking at pure offensive numbers doesn't do the catchers position justice in my opinion.I'd even argue that Piazza was better than Rodriguez. His overall WAR comes out a bit lower (66.7 to Pudge's 73.4), but he played in roughly 600 fewer games than Pudge. Piazza's WAR/162 comes out to 5.7, even with his horrid defense. The guy was a beast at the plate.
Batting average is the only offensive category in which Rodriguez rates higher, and that's even more important when you consider that batting average is easily the most useless wide-spread rate stat we can use when comparing the value of players. Bench got on base more frequently and hit for more power in an era that was much more offensively starved. Rodriguez may have been better defensively, but he was much worse offensively when you take league factors into account. As stated earlier, their wRC+ is very different, with Bench coming in at 25% above league average for his career, compared to Rodriguez only being 4% above league average. You may say that's because Rodriguez played many years past his prime, but even in their prime, Bench fared much better. Bench posted six seasons of 130+ wRC+; Pudge, two. Both were really good, but there really is no comparing their offensive numbers. Bench wins in a landslide.
And for all the love Pudge gets for being a great base stealer, his career SB% is 66.5%. That means his attempts at stealing bases actually cost his teams more runs than they earned, considering 75% is the break-even rate.
OPS+ of 102 means he was essentially an average hitter in his career, or "very good for a catcher"
And that 30 points in BA means very little when Bench had a better OBA.
You can keep plugging that BA all you want but in isolation it means very little.
|
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |
Reply With Quote
