Nationals Review: Catcher

There's probably no more misunderstood position than catcher. There's probably also no more lionized position than catcher. It's because the things that a catcher does is so hidden, tucked away in the corners, immune from any meaningful statistical analysis, that we're left with nothing but appeals to authority. We have to trust those "insiders" who fill us with stories about how great they are in the clubhouse.... how many runs they save by blocking the plate... the value of framing a pitch properly to steal a strike from a dozing ump... and the ability of a veteran receiver to shepherd and develop a pitching staff.

We saw all those this year with the Nats. And certainly much of it is warranted. Brian Schneider IS a terrific defensive catcher, with a strong, accurate arm. But those other things? I'm sure he contributes and is an asset there, but to what extent? and how much over what a different catcher would do?

When the Nats started the season, they carried 2.5 catchers in the lineup. Brian Schneider earned the starting job. And with a young 22-year old Rule 5 pickup who had never played above A-ball in the lineup, the Nats brought Robert Fick back to be the emergency catcher -- though he'd never see an inning behind the plate.

It seemed like the perfect situation to break in a young catcher, at least offensively. Since Schneider swings from the left side, spot starts of Flores against tough lefty pitchers would play to his strengths, while eliminating one of Schneider's weaknesses.

But the team was not focused on offense at all. For this season, at least, catching was purely about developing a relationship with the starting staff of castoffs and emphasizing defense. The team didn't quite trust Flores -- given his age and inexperience -- and rode Schneider hard... early and often.

He ended up starting 14 of the first 15 games the Nats played there. Flores' first start came against right-handed Livan Hernandez while Schneider would bat against a lefty four times in that stretch.

The team seemed to be emphasizing Schneider's work with the rotation, and the numerous quotes from various people affiliated with the team, praised his work. But after the fourth pass through the rotation, things started breaking down. Patterson and Williams went out as did Hill. Simontacchi, Bacsik and Speigner came in. With the jumbling in the staff and none of the replacements being purely long-term guys, Flores got handed the keys a few more times, getting a start at least once a week, usually every 5-6 games.

Schneider struggled mightily in that first month, but during May, he rebounded a bit, hitting about what you'd expect him to hit: .277 .333 .410. Good. Not great.

Meanwhile, Flores was tantalizing us all. Through the end of May he was hitting .244 .380 .341, showing a decent batting eye and patience at the plate, but also a strong, accurate throwing arm.

As Flores took on a more regular role, however, he struggled. The adjustment from A to NL is a giant one, especially for such a young kid and at such a demanding position. It especially doesn't help that Acta didn't spot him against lefties, instead doling out his starts based on when Schneider needed a rest. From the end of May to the end of August, Flores barely hit. (.222 .255 .333). But when he did hit, they were usually important hits.

It was around the beginning of August, though, that Acta changed their roles up. Flores took on an increasing share of the starts, starting once for every 3-4 games that Schneider played and getting the assignment more often than not when a tough lefty like Cole Hamels was on the mound. It wasn't a platoon in the strictest sense, but it was pretty close.

Schneider was making this an easy decision with a dreadful .161 .309 .232 line in July. He wasn't hitting for power, but he was showing a decent batting eye and ok selectivity at the plate. It seemed like he had decent pitch recognition, just that his body didn't have the skill to do much with it besides flip the occasional fliner over the second baseman's head.

Down the stretch, it was a full job-sharing arrangement, and Schneider hit reasonably well (.283 .400 .377) as did Flores (.250 .313 .386). The Nats had a pretty good two-headed monster (note: not actually scary) for a few weeks, and it gives one some hope for next year.

Offense
Neither catcher particularly stood out. Schneider ended up at .235 .326 .336, a 77 OPS+. Flores was basically the same, .244 .310 .361 with a 78 OPS+

But the whole there, is a whole lot greater than the sum of its parts -- if assembled in the right way.

Both players had pretty extreme platoon splits.

Schneider (career) versus righties: .254 .325 .389
Schneider (career) versus lefties: .247 .313 .336

Flores versus righties: .220 .276 .297
Flores versus lefties: .270 .343 .427

You thinking what I'm thinking?

Here comes stupid, incorrect math: If we weight 2/3 of Schneider v righties and 1/3 of Flores versus lefties, we get a catcher who hits about .259/ .331/ .402

I'll take that! The league average catcher hit .257/ .318/ .394, so the platoon 'o doom would outpace that by a considerable margin... even more when you factor in their rocket arms.

But that's the world of wishing. Not reality.

In the real world, Flores had more plate appearances against righties than lefties. And Schneider came to the plate 50 more times against lefties than did Flores. Add it up and it's still kinda ugly.

As with the other positions, I'll compare them to league average using Runs Created. The average NL catcher stinks, creating .149 runs for every out they make.

If we multiply that .149 figure by the 338 outs Schneider made, an average catcher would've created 50 runs. Schneider created 46. As bad as he was, he wasn't THAT much below league average.

If we do the same for Flores (.149 * 142), we get 21 runs created versus his... 21 runs created. Flores, with a 77 OPS+, was basically league average.

Wow, catchers suck.

Defense

I'm not even going to attempt to quantify a catcher's defense. I'll just throw some random stats that may or may not interest you.

Nationals pitchers had the 4th most wild pitches. They're "pitches" of course, but there's a school of thought that a good catcher can take away some of those.

Only 2 regular catchers saw fewer SB attempts against than Schneider -- they respect his arm.

He tied for the highest CS% in the league. So the few times they did run, he nailed them. He's as good at shutting down the opposing running game as any C in the league.

Only 4 NL catchers had a higher rate of WP+PB per game than Schneider did. Some of that can be explained by a terrible Joel Hanrahan and sinking and diving breaking pitches by Bergmann, but...

Few other bullets....

Much was made about how Schneider sacrificed his offense for the good of the pitching staff (and the team) this year. It's a nice story, I guess, but it doesn't pass the smell test when you see that he was just as terrible offensively in '06.

The other myth that took on a life of its own was that Schneider helped to develop all the Nats young starting pitching talent. Is that true?

First, I'd question who those young starting pitchers who developed were.

13 pitchers started a game for the Nats.

We can strike stopgap crap and flameouts from the list: Bacsik, Simontacchi, Hanrahan, Bowie, Patterson, Williams, Speigner and Traber.

That leaves us with Hill, Bergmann, Redding, Chico and Lannan.

I'll pull Lannan out of that list; he started only 6 games and any developing he did came in the minors.

Perhaps you could argue that they "developed" Redding, especially since his ERA went down when he got promoted. (But I'd point out that he's 29 and that his ERA is much lower than it should be given his BB/K and HR numbers).

I like what Bergmann did in the first half, but he had a 5.60 in the second half. Did he develop? or did he just have a hot run of games?

I'm comfortable with saying that Hill and Chico developed. Not really anyone else. And perhaps Schneider deserves credit there -- he caught the majority of Chico's starts. But there weren't nearly as many young pitchers developing as the team liked to portray, and there were certainly many more who crapped the bed. So there's not an overwhelming mountain of evidence to support that assertion either, even if there may be a grain of truth in it.