Buck being shopped to Red Sox?

I found this to be very interesting, according to mlbtraderumors Buck, along with virtually every catcher on the planet, is being brought to the Red Sox attention that they are avaliable. If this were to happen, and it surely isn't, they have alot better catchers avaliable to them than John Buck, we would be left with Olivo and Pena at catcher. What does the RR nation think about a tandem of Olivo and Pena?

11 months ago gordonrules 35 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I think

It saves us $3 million and doesn’t cost us a terrible amount offensively. I wouldn’t mind taking a flyer on that Chris Skelton kid in the Rule 5 either.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Nov 26, 2008 12:26 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Pena is out of options, so if he doesn’t make the 25-man roster out of ST, we will have to trade him or expose him to waivers (where another team will almost certainly snatch him up). So that, combined with the Royals and Olivo picking up the mutual option on Olivo’s contract means that I think Buck being shopped is something that was going to happen eventually. Buck definitely has more trade value than Pena.

That being said, I would much rather have a Buck/Pena tandem than an Olivo/Pena tandem. I’ve been saying this pretty much since Olivo’s option was picked up (and probably before that, too), but Buck is simply a better catcher—he’s younger, has way better plate discipline (his low OBP is due to a low batting average—he is actually pretty good about taking walks), and his platoon splits are not nearly as obsence as Olivo’s. Plus, the pitching staff loves Buck, and I do think that matters. About the only element where Olivo has a clear edge over Buck is throwing out baserunners, which, while significant, is not the most important part of a catcher’s job.

So, if I had to rank the potential tandems going into Opening Day, it’d probably go:
Buck/Pena
Buck/Olivo
Olivo/Pena

(as for Pena versus Olivo, I just don’t think backup catcher is that important of a position in the grand scheme of things, and I think Pena will do a good job at it for a fraction of the cost of Olivo. Pena was hitting the ball pretty well at Omaha, and I think he has probably earned the backup spot)

In the grand scheme of things, it isn’t a huge deal…but I just don’t get the preference Moore and Hillman seem to have for Olivo over Buck. I really don’t.

by DarthYoshi on Nov 26, 2008 12:28 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Could just be as simple as...

Olivo being a “Moore/Hillman Guy” and Buck being a leftover “Baird Guy.”

by Sweep_the_Leg on Nov 26, 2008 12:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Buck may be younger but he plays older.

Olivo is faster, has a better arm, more power, hits for a greater average and is simply a superior athlete. The only thing Buck seems to do better is “nothing” (by which I mean take a few walks). His OBP is still low in spite of that. I think Olivo was the better catcher last year and has better potential to be this year. The two are close but there seems to be a lot of John Buck love. He’s okay but other than a torrid April in 2007 he has been pretty terrible the last two seasons. Age is really not that much of a factor between the two anyways as they are both on year to year contracts.

by djk royal on Nov 26, 2008 1:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

both Bill James and Marcel project Buck to be better offensively next year

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Nov 26, 2008 1:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Was it close?

by djk royal on Nov 26, 2008 1:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

James/Marcel

The only real difference I see is the 20 BB’s, both project better BA for Olivo slightly more power for Miggy. The tradeoff one has to decide is again on the defensive side.

James has Miggy at about a .693 OPS vs Buck at a .687
Marcel has Buck at .690 vs Miggy at a .667

It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.

by kcscoliny on Nov 26, 2008 1:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I think Buck is declining in dog years.

We would all agree Buck was good at the beginning of 2007. Post All Star Break 2007 Buck’s OPS was 570 vs Olivo’s 683. 2008 OPS for Buck was 669 versus 722 for Olivo. I hate to pick arbitrary starting points but that is 1 1/2 straight season Buck has been a worse player. Throw in baserunning and defense and I think Olivo is better.

Contrary to popular belief Buck did not see a greater portion of RH pitching versus LH pitching in 2008 compared to 2007 either. The ratio was practically the same.

by djk royal on Nov 26, 2008 1:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

He didn't, but Olivo faced more LH than normal in 2008

Not really trying to pimp Buck, but I think Olivo’s numbers next year are going to be a major disappointment

by Top Ramen on Nov 26, 2008 1:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Definitely possible.

I just can’t stand watching Buck play anymore.

by djk royal on Nov 26, 2008 1:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I guess I don't like the arbitrary splits

I’ll leave the split issue aside

I know people are frustrated with Buck, and that he isn’t great. We’ll have to wait for better projections to come out. I also think there is something of an analogy between the perception and reality of Buck/Olivo as there is with Teahen/Guillen. But that’s another long post.

Buck has a higher wOBA (which is much, much better than OPS). Over a full season of ABs (which almost on one, even catchers, ever get, but still gets at the different), assuming a .338 lgwOBA, buck is 5 runs, or half a win, better.

Marcel has them closer, but Buck is two runs better.

PrOPS isn’t perfect, but it might also help put the last year or two into perspective as it neutralizes for B ABIP luck and park:

Olivo 2008 (“three slash” = PrOPS breakdown)
OPS: .772
PrOPS: .705 (.249/.272/.433)
OPS -PrOPS: .017 (lucky)

Buck 2008
OPS: 669
PrOPS: .710 (.245/.324/.386)
OPS-PrOPS: -.041 (unlucky)

Olivo 2007 (vs NL pitching):
OPS: .667
PrOPS: .690 (.246/.272/.418)
OPS-PrOPS: -.023 (unlucky)

Buck 2007:
OPS: .738
PrOPS: .809 (.252/.337/.472)
OPS-PrOPS: -.071 (unlucky)

Take it for what you think its worth, natch. I’m no scout. I take the various indicators to be that Buck is a better hitter as far as “true talent” is concerned, and I think he’s a better bet to be a better player going forward, but I can see why people would differ. No biggie.

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Nov 26, 2008 1:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I admit a personal bias in this...

when I see Buck come up to bat I almost immediately flip the channel.

Let me ask you this. Is Buck’s trend of low BABIP due to a slow bat and foot speed or bad luck? I’ve read Keith Law say that people are automatically attributing a low BABIP this to luck when it is often an indicator of diminishing skills (i.e. bat speed). Didn’t know if you had read about that topic at all but wouldn’t be interested in your comments.

by djk royal on Nov 26, 2008 1:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Here is what Law said in a chat

Steve (NYC): Keith, Swisher’s BB, K, LD, GB rates and ISOP were essentially unchanged from ’07 to ’08, but his BABIP dropped from .308 to .251. Does bad luck explain most of his supposed decline last year?

Keith Law: I’ve gotten a bunch of questions along these lines … hitter BABIP isn’t entirely luck. A drop in BABIP could also reflect erosion of skills. Swisher is young for that, of course, but we can’t just discount the possibility. When I saw him this year, his bat was absolutely slower than in the past.

by djk royal on Nov 26, 2008 2:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

There’s something to that. You’d have to do some regression (which I don’t know how to do) against his career (PrOPS only goes against one season). And my recent post on Speed Score does indicate that Olivo has far superior speed to Buck.

PrOPS isn’t just about BABIP, though — it’s much more statistically sophisticated than LD% +.12, and also deals with luck re: power and plate discipline, two things with which which Buck is overall superior in to Olivo.

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Nov 26, 2008 2:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

D_F, you've mentioned before that you don't how to do regressions

but with your statistics/analytical ability there’s no reason you couldn’t pick up the basics to regression really quickly. For the types of exercises we do in baseball analytics, you could easily use excel as your regression tool.

Regression analysis is a great tool so I highly recommend taking the time to study it further. I have a feeling you’d pick it up really quickly.

by jsolo on Nov 26, 2008 3:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't have any stats ability

I just pick stuff up from elsewhere and apply it here

I only sort of know what regression is. the wikipedia (~!) article gets real technical real fast…

I mean, I can factor some “league average” into a crude projection or something… but if someone can guilde me to a very basic primer (if baseball-related, even better0, that would be really cool.

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Nov 26, 2008 3:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Hmm. I'll have to see if I can find something

I’ve never looked for anything baseball related (I generally stick to finance and let you guys do all the baseball work!) but I imagine there has to be something reasonable out there.

by jsolo on Nov 26, 2008 4:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

BABIP is definitely a skill

So a drop could reflect an erosion of skills. However it could also be attributed to luck because it definitely flucutates. When it comes to swisher I would think that if LD, GB and iso rates were unchanged, then it could just be luck.

by wt on Nov 26, 2008 2:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

agreed on swisher for sure

His LD% was the highest of his career, his BABIP the lowest. He’s going to rebound and embarrasse Kenny next year.

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Nov 26, 2008 2:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

It is certainly right that for hitters, lower babip can be falling skill

but that’s usually considered visible with the fall in LD% (the guy just doesn’t ‘drive’ the ball anymore) xBABIP and PrOPS neutralize that fact. i.e. they look at a repeatable skill (LD%), not a high variance rate (BABIP).

basically,
LD% causes BABIP, or LD% + luck + park = BABIP

by ZeppelinDZ on Nov 26, 2008 4:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Buddy Bell is a genius

That’s right about the time Buddy Bell’s genius brain decided that Buck hitting a bunch of homers wasn’t good enough to keep his current swing and he made Buck get rid of the leg kick or whatever it was he did. THANKS BUDDY!!

by AxDxMx on Nov 26, 2008 5:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Not sure about the "dog years" but he definitely declines in the dog days every year.

by Steve Hovley on Nov 26, 2008 6:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

although that it seems that is true for most catchers

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Nov 26, 2008 6:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Olivo was the better offensive catcher last year, sure

But Olivo also had an abnormally good year (in part because, as was pointed out, he got a lot of DH AB’s against LH pitchers). The guy turns 31 next year, I think the chances of him having another such season are not that great.

The idea that Olivo hits for way more power than Buck is a myth. Their career SLG’s are not that far apart (.398 for Buck, .411 for Olivo), and the difference in SLG is easily made up by Buck’s 23-point advantage in OBP. I would much rather have that than a 13-point advantage in SLG—it is why Buck’s career OPS+ is four points higher than Olivo’s. And batting average is one of the most overrated baseball stats ever, I put very little stock into Olivo ‘hit[ing] for a greater average" than Buck. When you consider the overall offensive package, over the course of his career, Buck has been the better hitter. Not by a lot, but he is. That, combined with the pitching staff’s confidence in him certainly outweighs his lack of a relatively strong arm.

And I do think two years difference in age is a factor, especially with how fast catchers often physically deteriorate as a result of the demands of their position.

by DarthYoshi on Nov 26, 2008 1:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I would agree that the stats suggest Buck...

has been a little better than Olivo over their careers but I’m less sure of Buck being better next year.

by djk royal on Nov 26, 2008 2:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Turn and Burn

I wanted Buck traded midseason last year and I think he should be turned for something now. He isn’t a big upgrade over Olivo if at all. Defensively Olivo is probably better and as we have went back and forth Buck is maybe a slight upgrade with the bat or a wash. If KC can trade Buck for a BP arm or a prospect of value I think now is a good time.

It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.

by kcscoliny on Nov 26, 2008 2:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Always trade whoever for value

so I can agree with that even if I think Buck is a better player.

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Nov 26, 2008 2:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

And based on their track records, I'm not sure why one should think that

Buck is younger, has been largely injury-free…there is no logical reason why his skills ought to be deteriorating, which is why I’m happy to give him a chance to show that 2008 was a fluke. Because, looking at his year-to-year stats for his career, it pretty clearly was.

If, midway through the season, Buck is still posting a 2008-esque line, I will be much more amenable to cutting bait on him for whatever we can get.

by DarthYoshi on Nov 26, 2008 4:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Why Wait?

It’s been a year and a half of misearable hitting and a substandard arm behind the plate. Take advantage of his so called youth while you can. This should’ve been done last all star game but GMDM must not have been pursuing it or got an offer he deemed reasonable.

As for Buck’s so called youth versus Olivo I think that is a bit overplayed. Buck has caught 761 games since ‘02 compared to Olivo’s 826 since ’00. Olivo is the superior athlete and his body should be able to last as long as Buck if not longer.

KC needs to take advantage of Buck while he still has a market. Unfortunately that time has probably passed.

It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.

by kcscoliny on Nov 26, 2008 8:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I've been in favor of a Olivo/Pena platoon for sometime now.

Buck tools are getting worse he lacks consistent power and his arm is shot. I don’t think Pena would be a huge falloff from what Buck can do against RH pitchers.

It takes 46 muscles to frown but only 4 to flip 'em the bird.

by kcscoliny on Nov 26, 2008 12:59 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

When was Buck's arm ever good?

I think Buck still has more upside than Olivo. I think a season with .250/.320/.450 and 20 homers isn’t out of reach. But that’s probably wildly optimistic and assumes more than 400 ABs, which he probably doesn’t get.

by AxDxMx on Nov 26, 2008 6:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I wouldn't mind the Royals trading Buck

Hopefully they could get something decent in an area of need in return. I like Buck, but I don’t love him. He’s decent. Some upside remaining. Mostly he’s just a pretty good catcher. Having Olivo and Pena as the catching tandem would be fine.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Nov 27, 2008 3:40 PM EST reply actions 0 recs