The next person who cites CERA as an indication of why Catcher A is better than Catcher B is getting a boot to the face. I'm serious, cut it out. It's not cute, and it's not funny, and it certainly isn't useful.

Dear bobbob,

 

I concur.

I disagree

 

kick me.

 

well... I think some catchers are better suited for some pitchers... but that might not be what you are pissed at

 

but if it is

 

kick me.

I disagree

 

kick me.

 

well... I think some catchers are better suited for some pitchers... but that might not be what you are pissed at

 

but if it is

 

kick me.

Mostly it's the fact that CERA shows nothing about the catcher's ability, and for the most part, when two catcher's have a significant amount of innings logged with a certain pitcher, theywill generally have very similar stats, as CERA has much more to do with the pitcher.

Mostly it's the fact that CERA shows nothing about the catcher's ability, and for the most part, when two catcher's have a significant amount of innings logged with a certain pitcher, theywill generally have very similar stats, as CERA has much more to do with the pitcher.

maybe... but with guys like Treanor vs Olivo when catching Willis...

 

I want Treanor catching him

 

That doesn't mean I think Treanor is better, because I don't... I just think Willis is more comfortable/Treanor calls a better game/the stats show Willis/Treanor is a better combo

I fully agree a certain pitcher may be more comfortable with a certain catcher, and I have no qualms with prefering one over the other. But CERA is not the way to go about proving this.

I fully agree a certain pitcher may be more comfortable with a certain catcher, and I have no qualms with prefering one over the other. But CERA is not the way to go about proving this.

Well how else can you prove that Willis is better when caught by Treanor than by Olivo?

I fully agree a certain pitcher may be more comfortable with a certain catcher, and I have no qualms with prefering one over the other. But CERA is not the way to go about proving this.

Well how else can you prove that Willis is better when caught by Treanor than by Olivo?

 

Well, that's not really the point. The point of CERA is not to prove that the pitcher is better with that catcher, but rather that the catcher has some kind of intrinsic value that shows that he can lower a pitcher's ERA by simply being there. There are numerous examples of catchers who are regarded as good game callers and good defender's having a high CERA, and vice versa, and it's because the catcher doesn't generally have an effect.

 

If you want to show a certain pitcher being more comfortable with a certain catcher, look at the pitcher's ERA with said catcher, but it's also a case where you have to go with anectdotal evidence, because the statistical background is so flimsy.

I fully agree a certain pitcher may be more comfortable with a certain catcher, and I have no qualms with prefering one over the other. But CERA is not the way to go about proving this.

Well how else can you prove that Willis is better when caught by Treanor than by Olivo?

 

Well, that's not really the point. The point of CERA is not to prove that the pitcher is better with that catcher, but rather that the catcher has some kind of intrinsic value that shows that he can lower a pitcher's ERA by simply being there. There are numerous examples of catchers who are regarded as good game callers and good defender's having a high CERA, and vice versa, and it's because the catcher doesn't generally have an effect.

 

If you want to show a certain pitcher being more comfortable with a certain catcher, look at the pitcher's ERA with said catcher, but it's also a case where you have to go with anectdotal evidence, because the statistical background is so flimsy.

I think we're arguing the same thing kinda...

 

when I mean using CERA to see how should catch Willis, I mean CERA when the catch Willis. Which I assume is your argument above. I think we are on the same page, just different books

For the record, I can see it's uses in terms of figuring out whether a certain pitcher has a significant difference in stats depending on who catches them, but on the whole, there is barely any difference for 99% of pitchers. For a guy like Dontrelle, the guy catching him might make a difference, because there's a lot more to him than just "throw the ball". But In that case you aren't talking about Catcher's ERA as much as you are talking about a pitcher's ERA with a different catcher, which I think is a different thing altogether (even though they may seem like the same thing). Basically, I think one implies that a given catcher has some undefinable skill that magically lowers a pitcher's ERA, where the other just shows that a pitcher tends to have more success with a certain catcher. Which does not mean that that catcher is somehow better at catching him, but rather that he probably caught the pitcher on a few days he happened to be "on".

I think you're thinking too much.

 

It is what it is, nothing implied.

from the start of the 2006 season

 

with Olivo

5ip 1h 0r 3bb 3k

8ip 7h 2r(2er) 0bb 4k

5.2ip 8h 3r(2er) 2bb 2k

6ip 6h 4r(4er) 4bb 6k

7ip 5h 3r(3er) 3bb 6k

7.1ip 8h 8r(8er) 1bb 6k

4.2ip 12h 7r(6er) 1bb 3k

2.2ip 10h 7r(7er) 2bb 0k

7ip 6h 1r(1er) 1bb 5k

6.2ip 9h 5r(5er) 4bb 5k

2.1ip 5h 8r(6er) 3bb 2k

8ip 7h 1r(0er) 3bb 5k

5.1ip 8h 4r(3er) 5bb 6k

6.2ip 7h 4r(4er) 5bb 9k

7ip 4h 3r(2er) 3bb 5k

6ip 7h 2r(1er) 1bb 3k

7ip 9h 3r(3er) 1bb 5k

6.2ip 8h 5r(5er) 3bb 3k

6.1ip 9h 5r(4er) 1bb 7k

6ip 4h 4r(4er) 4bb 5k

7ip 6h 4r(4er) 5bb 1k

6ip 6h 2r(2er) 4bb 4k

7ip 5h 2r(2er) 3bb 7k

6.1ip 7h 3r(3er) 4bb 4k

7ip 7h 4r(4er) 1bb 2k

6ip 7h 2r(2er) 6bb 0k

7ip 8h 4r(4er) 4bb 5k

7ip 8h 3r(2er) 0bb 8k

1ip 3h 4r(4er) 3bb 0k

7ip 7h 3r(3er) 2bb 6k

4ip 2h 0r 1bb 1k

6ip 7h 5r(4er) 3bb 6k

3.2ip 8h 8r(3er) 3bb 0k

3ip 11h 6r(6er) 2bb 4k

----------------------------

Totals: 180ip 232h 113er 88bb 138k

5.65era/1.78whip

 

 

 

with Treanor

9ip 6h 2r(2er) 3bb 3k

8ip 8h 3r(2er) 3bb 3k

6ip 7h 3r(2er) 3bb 4k

7ip 7h 2r(2er) 1bb 3k

9ip 6h 1r(1er) 3bb 3k

7ip 9h 5r(4er) 1bb 4k

8.2ip 12h 2r(2er) 0bb 4k

8ip 7h 2r(2er) 3bb 6k

7ip 7h 2r(2er) 1bb 7k

7.1ip 9h 3r(3er) 5bb 9k

6ip 8h 3r(3er) 3bb 6k

7ip 7h 2r(2er) 1bb 7k

7ip 6h 1r(1er) 1bb 4k

6ip 5h 3r(3er) 3bb 4k

9ip 3h 0r 1bb 12k

7.1ip 9h 4r(4er) 2bb 6k

8.1ip 7h 3r(3er) 3bb 4k

5ip 7h 5r(5er) 5bb 3k

1.1ip 1h 0r 1bb 1k

6ip 7h 3r(3er) 2bb 9k

5ip 10h 8r(6er) 2bb 4k

6.2ip 9h 4r(4er) 2bb 4k

7ip 7h 2r(1er) 3bb 2k

6.1ip 6h 3r(3er) 1bb 5k

5.1ip 9h 5r(4er) 3bb 3k

---------------------------

Totals: 170.1ip 179h 64er 56bb 120k

3.38era/1.38whip

 

Take this however you want it.

I think most of the Treanor starts came in '06 when DTrain pitched relatively well and I think most of Olivo starts came in '07 when DTrain has stunk. That skews things a bit.. or a lot.

 

Do you think Olivo is to blame for DTrain's '07 struggles?

I think most of the Treanor starts came in '06 when DTrain pitched relatively well and I think most of Olivo starts came in '07 when DTrain has stunk. That skews things a bit.. or a lot.

 

Do you think Olivo is to blame for DTrain's '07 struggles?

I most certainly do

 

even throwing out this season's stats, with Treanor starting last season, Willis' era was far superior

Regardless of how you word it, Bob, you just agreed that CERA is significant. From my perspective, CERA is by no means a good measure to compare catchers who've caught different pitchers, but it will tell you whether one catcher is better than another if both are working with the same pitchers. It's essentially a controlled experiment versus an uncontrolled experiment.

 

Using CERA to compare Jason Varitek and Miguel Olivo would be a meaningless analysis, because the conditions under which the measurements were taken are too different. Too many factors can be in play that affect CERA (i.e. the pitchers are different, they play in different ballparks, they have different defenses behind them). On the other hand, using CERA to compare Olivo and Treanor can be quite valid, and could tell you important information concerning Olivo's ability to handle the staff. Especially if the measurements are taken over the same period of time, as they are in this instance.

 

This all goes back to one of Polo's favorite points: you have to know which statistics are good for answering which questions.

I just think there are too many mitigating circumstances (i.e. Treanor might start more sunday day games when our regulars also have days off, and thus we'll have secondary defenders, and the outfielders may have more trouble with fly balls, etc) to make it really useful. I'll admit, it can be used, but along with anectdotal evidence to paint a complete picture.

I think most of the Treanor starts came in '06 when DTrain pitched relatively well and I think most of Olivo starts came in '07 when DTrain has stunk. That skews things a bit.. or a lot.

 

Do you think Olivo is to blame for DTrain's '07 struggles?

NO!

Regardless of how you word it, Bob, you just agreed that CERA is significant. From my perspective, CERA is by no means a good measure to compare catchers who've caught different pitchers, but it will tell you whether one catcher is better than another if both are working with the same pitchers. It's essentially a controlled experiment versus an uncontrolled experiment.

What you say is true but if you had to assign weights between the pitcher and the catcher to who was responsible for their ERA when they work together I would give the pitcher about 95 and the catcher 5. How would you assign the weight?

 

BTW, Treanor's CERA is 4.55 and Olivo's is 4.73. Pretty much the same.