Ramon Castro signs with Blue Jays for 1/1$M

In other words, for the average annual salary of some crappy old catcher, say, I dunno, ~~Jason Kendall~~ Ivan Rodriguez, the Blue Jays have signed two of the three best free agent catcher. The third is probably ~~Rod Barajas~~ Jason Kendall, of course. Full post on Jays catcher "bonanza" tomorrow PM at FanGraphs.

3 months ago Matt Klaassen 42 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I think the success of their catching unit depends on which John Buck shows up. Between the two of them they caught 103 games last year and I think Buck is the guy who is going to be expected to catch 100+ games this year. I hope he is over the injury bug, but herniated disks have nasty habit of recurring. I was playing around with some numbers and Buck was a very solid defensive catcher until last year with his injury.

Also, to be fair, didn’t Dayton say Barajas was out of our price range?

by WURoyal on Dec 14, 2009 11:27 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I don't mind the ROyals not getting Barajas

the “Best” fa catcher is not very good. Barajas is like Buck — much better defense, much worse offense, comes out the same.

Castro is another guy who has injury problems. But by getting both guys, the Jays are better on getting most of a full season out of both (they can spell each other), and get around average or better total production for the cost of a one good part-timer. And Raul Chavez, their 3rd guy, is on a minor league deal. Horrible hitter, even worse than Kendall… but his glove is actually legit, on the same level as Barajas. Let me repeat that: He’s probably almost as good as Kendall, he’s their third catcher, and he’s no a minor league deal. See, THAT’s what you do with near-replacement level “talent.”

I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.

Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.

by Matt Klaassen on Dec 14, 2009 11:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Hopefully it will work out for Buck.

by WURoyal on Dec 15, 2009 12:04 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

I don’t see the love we have for Buck. This is the main issue I have with Buck and many of the stat heads: Buck is usually doing well in the start and end of the season with monster numbers. But during the summer months of late May, June, July and August, his performance drops dramatically. Then in September when games become meaningless for the Royals he posts really good stats. What good is that, because during the months where he needs to grind and do well, that is when he falters and under performs. I am really happy to see him leave the Royals and sign a reasonable deal with the BJ’s. But, I really believe he is the wrong fit with the Royals.

by Rogue Buddhist on Dec 15, 2009 6:08 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

No one here loves Buck.

Some still like him, but I really don’t think anyone is sad to see him go. Pretty much every is really upset that Dayton Moore thinks Jason Kendall is better than him—and all other free agent catchers—to the point of paying him $6M (+ incentives).

by BrRoyal on Dec 15, 2009 8:20 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

let's see

Buck is a) better, and b) cheaper

how is Kendall a better fit?

I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.

Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.

by Matt Klaassen on Dec 15, 2009 11:12 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

yeah, have to agree with you

this was a pretty indefensible move. I was thinking last night, what I don’t understand is that with all of the bad moves he’s made, there have also been many, many good moves.

I don’t say this to defend DM, I honestly don’t understand how the same person/team can trade for Bannister, trade for Crisp (I liked the move), trade for Callaspo, sign Gil Meche, sign Cuthbert, sign Arguelles, etc. can sign Bloomquist for $1.8 million, sign Farnsworth, trade for Jacobs, etc.

The Royals have a team of solid executives in place. Even if Moore says, “let’s sign Jason Kendall and do it for two years”, where are Dean Taylor/Mike Arbuckle/JJ Piccollo saying, “let’s hold off and see what develops” or, “let’s pick up x scrub for the minimum instead”.

I’m not absolving DM, I’m more just trying to get my arms around how 1) there can be such a dichotomy of moves good and bad, and 2) where are the voices of reason or devil’s advocates poking holes in proposed moves?

"He once had an awkward moment, just to see how it felt...he lives vicariously...through himself- He is the most interesting man in the world"

by Home Run Tony Cogan on Dec 15, 2009 9:04 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Like I've said before

Dayton would probably be a pretty darn good GM if he had Allard Baird’s budget.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Dec 15, 2009 9:11 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

If the 2 sides don't compute, what's the simplest explanation?

That DM is really, really bad, and got lucky on the good players. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

by AxDxMx on Dec 15, 2009 10:39 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

do you really believe that?

there is enough there to suggest that he has a lot of ability.

Trades-middle of the road
FA signings-generally horrible
Draft-jury’s out

One of the things I wanted to see was an admission, either tacit or not, that he acknowledged what he was doing wasn’t working and to make some changes. The Kendall signing is evidence that things haven’t changed, sadly. There’s a lot of offseason left, but so far from the ML signing standpoint he is not off to a good start.

"He once had an awkward moment, just to see how it felt...he lives vicariously...through himself- He is the most interesting man in the world"

by Home Run Tony Cogan on Dec 15, 2009 1:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Aren't his trades generally horrible?

He brought in Bannister and Davies by trade, any other positive trades so far? I know I’m missing a few somewhere. Coco could maybe fit in here, although that might be generous right now.

Bad trades- acquiring Yuni, acquiring Jacobs, acquiring Gathright, was Anderson a PTBNL?

I used to work with an old man that told me- Son, every workplace has a dumbass. If you don't have one where you work, then I'm afraid you're it.

by Warden11 on Dec 15, 2009 1:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

MacDougal for Cortes/Lumsden

Dessens for Pimentel/Wood

Neither of those have really panned out, but they were still good moves to make.

Callaspo for Buckner turned out really well.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Dec 15, 2009 1:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

forgot about Callaspo, never remember he was acquired in a trade.

I used to work with an old man that told me- Son, every workplace has a dumbass. If you don't have one where you work, then I'm afraid you're it.

by Warden11 on Dec 15, 2009 1:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yes I do believe it

Scouts aren’t always wrong. In this case, they’ve brought us Soria, Bannister, Callaspo, etc. But man, when a scout is wrong, he can be waaaaaaaay wrong. Art Stewart, one of the greatest scouts in Royals history, was so high on Lubanski that he uttered his infamous quote. The thing about statistical analysis is that while you can be wrong, I think it might be impossible to be wrong to that degree. Sure you miss a projection, somebody gets injured and is out for the season, or Brady Anderson hits 50 homers out of nowhere, but statistical analysis will never tell you that Yuniesky Betancourt is good. It can tell you that he used to be good and has done nothing but go downhill since. That doesn’t bode well for his future. As for your 3 areas:

Trades: you say middle of the road, I say below average. Here’s a list, first column is what the Royals gave up, 2nd is what they got(losses in bold, wins in italics):
==========
Cash Brandon Duckworth
J.P. Howell Joey Gathright and Fernando Cortez
Ruben Gotay Jeff Keppinger – would have been better if he hadn’t traded Keppinger away
Mike MacDougal Tyler Lumsden and Daniel Cortes
Elmer Dessens Odalis Perez, Blake Johnson, Julio Pimental and cash
Tony Graffanino Jorge de la Rosa
Matt Stairs Jose Diaz
Jeremy Affeldt and Denny Bautista Ryan Shealy and Scott Dohmann
Cash Jason LaRue
Donnie Murphy Cash
Ambiorix Burgos Brian Bannister
Andy Sisco Ross Gload
Jeff Keppinger Russ Haltiwanger
Erik Cordier Tony Pena
Max St. Pierre Ben Hendrickson
Graham Koonce Bill McCarthy
Daniel Christensen Roman Colon
Octavio Dotel Kyle Davies
Billy Buckner Alberto Callaspo
PTBNL: Henry Arias Brad Salmon
Justin Huber Cash
future considerations Ramon Ramirez
Jorge de la Rosa Future Considerations <—- 2nd part of Ram Ram trade, turns into a wash, maybe favoring CO, but not terrible
Angel Berroa Juan Rivera and cash
Travis Dawkins Future Considerations
Horacio Ramirez Paulo Orlando
Lumsden Jordan Parraz
Leo Nunez Mike Jacobs
Ramon Ramirez Coco Crisp <—— I’m going for a wash here, but I believe it is a loss based on WAR, salary, and years of control
Dan Gutierrez for Tim Smith/Manny Pina
Cortes/Saito Yuniesky Betancourt
Teahen for Getz/Fields (originally thought this was a big win, but really depends on how Getz/Fields are used, I guess something for someone who would’ve been nontendered is better than nothing though, so slight win)

Did I miss any other recent trades?

Stole most of the above list from an Excel spreadsheet found here: http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/05/dayton-moore-gm-trade-history.html

So on trades, he has 2 small wins and a solid win since he got Callaspo in December of 2007. His best trade was MacDougal for Lumsden and Cortes (which was his 4th trade and right after he got here and cleaned house), then he went and undid that by getting rid of Cortes. I suppose Parraz came out of that so we’ll see (I count Parraz as the solid win, in which he fleeced one of the only GMs worse than he is). So I’ll say at best, below average, and I think I’m being generous considering he recently gave away 2 Top Prospects for garbage. And if Bill Bavasi wasn’t just as dumb as DM, we’d have had Yuni a long time ago, and Billy Butler would be raking for Seattle.

Free Agents
=====
I’ll agree with your assessment of “generally horrible”, let’s not rehash it.

Draft
==========
I’m going to argue that he’s done what’s expected in the draft. They didn’t go all Matt Bush on us like the Padres did at one point. Though I think DM has continually passed up top notch college talent for high schoolers that are too far away to help in the immediate future. I understand he has a long term plan, but he seemingly went out his way to avoid them until this last draft. That hurts a little. Also, if your owner is willing, it’s really easy to make your drafts look good by signing guys that fall for money reasons and giving them what they want. Grabbing 2-3 first rounders a year will do that for anyone. Where DM has failed to shine in the draft is in the later rounds. It’s almost a complete wasteland. Anyways, the jury is still out, but at this point, if a lesser known player pays off big, it was complete luck a la Mike Sweeney. So I’m going to say he’s average at best here, and leave it at that.

So trades: Below Average
FAs: “generally horrible”
Draft: Average
Overall: Bad to Below Average

I suppose he could just be having a rough streak and will eventually regress to the mean. Probably not though. After these last 2 years, I think we’ve pegged his modus operandi.

by AxDxMx on Dec 15, 2009 2:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Regression to the mean sounds nice

until you remember that you have to regress to the mean of the population of which the GM is a part: Chuck LaMar, Frank Wren, Omar Minaya

I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.

Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.

by Matt Klaassen on Dec 15, 2009 3:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

So you're saying he's actually performing as expected when compared to his peers?

Can’t disagree there.

by AxDxMx on Dec 15, 2009 3:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Ramon Castro

Would have fit in with our other character guys – Alberto Callaspo, Jose Guillen, Roman Colon…

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=1934609

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Dec 15, 2009 9:10 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Jason Kendall vs. Joe Giradi

If you compare JK’s stat’s and JG stat’s with the NY Yankees. They are virtually identical. Girardi only OPS between 625 to 720 in his 4 years with the Yankees. If we signed Joe Girardi right now people would be howling about the same thing, age, performance, and probably price. However, Girardi did 2 things while with the Yankees, handled the pitching staff and mentored Jorge Posada. Plus they won 3 WS titles in his 4 years.

If you look further back in history, Jim Sundberg had an OPS 689 and 625 with the Royals in 1985 and 1986. But he was the key in winning the WS that year. Offensively, he was an offensive black hole.

I am not saying the Royals will win the WS in 2010, still a few too many holes to fix. However, you want to win in baseball shore up catching, pitching, and defense first. At least DM is starting to do the right thing. In 2009, Royals catchers hit 31 HR’s and had one of the highest SLG%. It lead us to a whopping 65 wins. I think we are way overrating offensive performance in a position where intangibles and defense are far more important.

by Rogue Buddhist on Dec 15, 2009 10:14 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Ok, Kendall's defense is in the crapper, too.

Now what?

I used to work with an old man that told me- Son, every workplace has a dumbass. If you don't have one where you work, then I'm afraid you're it.

by Warden11 on Dec 15, 2009 10:19 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Dewan Rating had him as one of the top 5 defensive ratings

What metric are you using claiming Kendall’s defense is in the crapper? Probably not Dewan

by Rogue Buddhist on Dec 15, 2009 10:23 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

I don't think Castro's defense is that bad

are you talking about a Dewan’s “metric?” I’m not sure they have one for catcher. If you meant he Fielding Bible Awards, well, those are polls, not metrics

I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.

Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.

by Matt Klaassen on Dec 15, 2009 11:10 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

d_f, looks like he's questioning my crapper comment.

I’m at school and can’t get around the links very well, can you link yours and the baseball projection pieces for me?

I used to work with an old man that told me- Son, every workplace has a dumbass. If you don't have one where you work, then I'm afraid you're it.

by Warden11 on Dec 15, 2009 11:44 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

yeah

Sean Smith on Stuff including Buck/Kendall

Me on Kendall

My piece on Toronto’s Catching Bonanza will be out at 8 EST, I think

I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.

Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.

by Matt Klaassen on Dec 15, 2009 12:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Buck was very bad last year. He accounted for about as many runs below average defensively as Kendall did in 1/3 of the games.

I think the difference is a little larger than some stats were showing too. Based on last year’s stats alone, Buck was projected to have given up 60.5 more SB than Kendall over the course of 120 games. That facet of catching defense alone would put Buck 11.5 runs below Kendall. Buck also had far more errors per PA etc.

Like I said above, this is largely a situation where it will depend entirely on which John Buck shows up. A Buck based off of him previous seasons (the “projected” John Buck) or the guy we saw last year. Over the course of their careers, Buck has been the statistically better defensive catcher (or Kendall barely beats him out). I think we will see one John Buck or the other. With injuries (specifically herniated disks) a lot of times it’s one way or the other.

by WURoyal on Dec 15, 2009 12:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

one portion of a season does not = true talent

that’s why you have to take muitple weighted seasons into account and regress to the mean

that’s why CHONE has Kendall projected at -2 and Buck at -5

I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.

Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.

by Matt Klaassen on Dec 15, 2009 12:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I understand that, but when the real issue is injury, not talent, what CHONE will give you is a projection that is unlikely to occur. Like I said, it’s a tale of two John Bucks.

Buck will probably either be better than the projection or much, much worse. Not a whole lot in between. It’s entirely dependent on whether he’s still affected by the back injury or if he’s recovered and the back issue doesn’t come back.

by WURoyal on Dec 15, 2009 1:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah two John Bucks

The John Buck that catches Greinke, and the John Buck that doesn’t.

Riddle me this, Batman.

Olivo caught 31 Greinke starts and allowed 5 SBs while catching 8, for a total CS% of 8/13 = 61.5%

Pena caught 2 Greinke starts and allowed 0 SBs and caught 1.

Buck caught ZERO Greinke starts.

Olivo’s CS% in non-Greinke games? 21.5%, hmmm… You think our other pitchers have anything to do with the high SB rates? Buck’s arm is obviously not as good as Olivo’s, but Buck put up a 16% in his starts.

Let’s look at 2008. Buck caught Greinke 19 times, Olivo just 13. Greinke gave up 2 SBs and had 4 CS. I wouldn’t necessarily attribute that rate to either of them, obviously Greinke is damn good at holding runners.

So you’re asking, what is the point of all this? Here’s the point: Buck’s projected SBs given up wouldn’t have been as high if he’d have caught Greinke at all in 2009. The other pitchers must be absolutely terrible at holding runners, because NOBODY ran on Greinke in 2008 even when Buck was catching.

by AxDxMx on Dec 15, 2009 3:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Why do you want to argue Buck was throwing well last year?

Clearly the pitcher and the middle infielders play a large role in CS percentage. The fact is though Buck was hurt last year and that severely impacted his ability to throw. This was reported as well. In addition to not catching runners he had 8 throwing errors in 1700 PA’s in 2009 while he had only 6 in 4200 PA’s in 2008.

But for sake of argument lets take Greinke completely out of the mix (Greinke pitched one game in 2006). in 2006 Buck allowed only 33 SBs and had 6 throwing errors in 4300 PA’s.

Buck is is a fine defensive catcher when healthy, not so much when he’s not. Did the quality of the Royals pitching staff overall drastically decrease last year relative to 2005-2008? No. This would essentially be necessary to prove your point because Buck gave up more SB’s in 2009 than he did in 3 times as many PA’s in 2006.

by WURoyal on Dec 15, 2009 4:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

First of all, I'm not arguing Buck was throwing well, I know his arm is terrible.

You said this:

I think the difference is a little larger than some stats were showing too. Based on last year’s stats alone, Buck was projected to have given up 60.5 more SB than Kendall over the course of 120 games.

I’m just saying that if you project his SBs out to that number it is unfair as he didn’t get regular work, wasn’t mixed in with all the pitchers on the team, and had a small sample size as well as an injury. If he was the #1 catcher, he’d have had Greinke to help pad his CS stats. Or at the very least, he would have had more innings and made less throws.

And yes, the quality of the Royals pitching staff did go down last year, or were all the extra runs given up over 2008 solely due to defense?

And my final point, which I failed to articulate before, is that if Greinke has such a huge effect over runners and CS%, shouldn’t we assume that the pitchers themselves are mostly at fault for SBs, or could do more to help avoid them?

by AxDxMx on Dec 15, 2009 9:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

My entire point is that Buck’s defense suffered last year due to injury. An injury which is notoriously chronic as well. If he isn’t hampered by the injury he will do much better, if he is then I expect last year to be a good indicator of his performance.

I agree that there are reasons why the number could be much less, but I don’t feel Buck got the shaft last year and that’s why his numbers were bad. His numbers were bad because his arm was terrible, hence more three times the throwing errors per year than normal.

On sample sizes. The problem is that with a small sample size you can just as easily say that his numbers should have been even worse. It’s an estimate with a higher variance. I’d weight the value of last year less because of the small sample size but like I’ve said elsewhere we aren’t saying he had an off year. There was a definite reason for the difference: injury.

But is it even really that small of a sample size? Really? We are talking over 300 innings. It’s not like I’m saying he gave up 3 SB’s in 10 innings so he projects to be the worst defensive catcher of all time.

I don’t see how Greinke really factors into this. I gave you a direct comparison between two years where Zack wasn’t throwing to him. The important factor to distinguish between 2006 and 2009 is injury. Even if Zack would lower the rate that has more to do with Zack being awesome and nothing to do with Buck. There aren’t many pitchers as good as Zack.

So, I agree the pitcher is a significant part of the equation, but the catcher is as well. Look at the Boston Red Sox. So you’re going to tell me that Varitek’s SB’s are Beckett’s fault? I think it’s a combination of the two. You also have to factor in that good pitching means there are fewer base runners and therefore fewer stolen base opportunities so the rate isn’t necessarily impacted as much.

Take away: I agree catching Greinke might have helped his stats, but it doesn’t change the fact that Buck was very, very bad last year at throwing out base runners and projects this year to either be much better or equally terrible. Not so much in between

by WURoyal on Dec 15, 2009 10:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

the smaller the sample size

the less it is likely to reflect true talent

and, yes, 300 innings is an extremely small sample size of defense. Although catcher defense involves different kinds of evaluations (and thus probably requires different amounts of regression,e tc..), a general rule is that three full seasons of defensive stats are the “sample” equivalent of one full season of offensive stats.

I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.

Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.

by Matt Klaassen on Dec 15, 2009 10:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah I definitely see the need for very large sample sizes when determining a Zone rating or such.

Again, I’m not arguing Buck’s sample last year was reflective of his talent. Buck is a good/average defensive catcher based on his stats pre 2009/injury.

If he returns injury free, he will have a great year I’m sure

by WURoyal on Dec 16, 2009 1:20 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Neither does Dewan

Dewan has Kendall well below average: -8 runs saved
-6 runs saved for pitcher handling (31st among ranked catchers)
-2 runs saved for stolen bases (24th among ranked catchers)

by Gopherballs on Dec 15, 2009 12:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

is that stuff on BJ Online?

I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.

Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.

by Matt Klaassen on Dec 15, 2009 12:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yes

I keep thinking I will cancel my subscription, but then I end up using it.

by Gopherballs on Dec 15, 2009 12:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I've looked on there, and I can't find the catcher stats

argh

I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.

Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.

by Matt Klaassen on Dec 15, 2009 1:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

go to stats

fielding profies
and then search for Kendall

Unfortunately, there is no “view all” like fangraphs.

Don’t tell your boss, but I would totally pay $35 a year for fangraphs.

by Gopherballs on Dec 15, 2009 1:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

shhh

I used to work with an old man that told me- Son, every workplace has a dumbass. If you don't have one where you work, then I'm afraid you're it.

by Warden11 on Dec 15, 2009 1:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

me, too

I don’t know anything about the finances/business end of the site, but I wonder if Appelman is able to get the permission to use stuff like WPA, WPA/LI, Leverage INdex, bUZR, and the various projections on the condition that he keeps the site free? SEriously, I don’ t know, but that makes sense to me.

Before I joined, I thought about it, too, or maybe having a premium service (does THT still have theirs?), but again, not sure how that would work if the above is true.

I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.

Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.

by Matt Klaassen on Dec 15, 2009 1:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs