November 9, 200718 yr I rather see this need being filled via trade. In one of the two packages involving Willis and Cabrera. I rather have a top prospect filling the void, than Torrealba I hate trading Cabrera, but if you are going to do it. time to get a future catcher (future = cheap years, without arbitration) rather than a one year stop gap. I wholeheartedly agree with this. I do not understand the fascination with Torreablba, especially for the price, other than he's the best FA available--which isn't saying much. I'm always a little suspicious when a catcher's strongest attribute is supposed to be how he "calls a game." I think it is difficult to truly say how much of a staff's performance is actually due to the catcher and how much is due to other factors, such as the quality of the pitchers, the pitching coach, luck, etc. His home/road splits are a little troubling and, just based on his stats, it doesn't appear that his arm is anything to write home about. And if the emphasis is on a catcher who can actually catch the ball, you do not want Barrett either. That was one of the reasons (along with his "handling of the pitching staff") the Cubs tired of him, despite his hitting prowess (which was not in evidence last year). That being said, I favor the trade scenarios involving the Dodgers, even though they do not involve a catcher (while those with Angels do--either Mathis or Conger). He's not the best free agent available.
November 9, 200718 yr I have to admit to being baffled by this as well, although over the years the Mike Piazza's and the Pudge's have really been the except to the rule. Sure there have been any number of good hitting catchers but they really are the exception rather than the rule. Overall I really had no problem with Olivo EXCEPT he had such an awful time receiving the ball, and I don't know if that part of his game is fixable. It seems to me he was not so inept the year before but I don't have time this morning to go on a stat hunt to confirm or deny that notion. If we're going to make a change though, and I'm assuming that's the case, I hope whoever is back there next season can catch the ball, call a good game and at least keep base-runners honest. Any offensive stats north of .235-240 and an OBP over .300 is good enough for me, although I know for many people here it isn't. Just one person with a POV.
November 9, 200718 yr I rather see this need being filled via trade. In one of the two packages involving Willis and Cabrera. I rather have a top prospect filling the void, than Torrealba I hate trading Cabrera, but if you are going to do it. time to get a future catcher (future = cheap years, without arbitration) rather than a one year stop gap. I wholeheartedly agree with this. I do not understand the fascination with Torreablba, especially for the price, other than he's the best FA available--which isn't saying much. I'm always a little suspicious when a catcher's strongest attribute is supposed to be how he "calls a game." I think it is difficult to truly say how much of a staff's performance is actually due to the catcher and how much is due to other factors, such as the quality of the pitchers, the pitching coach, luck, etc. His home/road splits are a little troubling and, just based on his stats, it doesn't appear that his arm is anything to write home about. And if the emphasis is on a catcher who can actually catch the ball, you do not want Barrett either. That was one of the reasons (along with his "handling of the pitching staff") the Cubs tired of him, despite his hitting prowess (which was not in evidence last year). That being said, I favor the trade scenarios involving the Dodgers, even though they do not involve a catcher (while those with Angels do--either Mathis or Conger). He's not the best free agent available. Ah, forgot about Lo Duca, right? Anyone else?
November 9, 200718 yr Just one person with a POV. Has this forum gotten so bad that one needs to point this out so as not to be attacked? Wow.
November 9, 200718 yr Just one person with a POV. Has this forum gotten so bad that one needs to point this out so as not to be attacked? Wow. Gotten? As long as I've been around it's been like that. But I think that's just 2003's style. He usually says things like "as I see it" or "from my perspective".
November 9, 200718 yr Just one person with a POV. Has this forum gotten so bad that one needs to point this out so as not to be attacked? Wow. judging by some of the topics it has
November 9, 200718 yr I rather see this need being filled via trade. In one of the two packages involving Willis and Cabrera. I rather have a top prospect filling the void, than Torrealba I hate trading Cabrera, but if you are going to do it. time to get a future catcher (future = cheap years, without arbitration) rather than a one year stop gap. I wholeheartedly agree with this. I do not understand the fascination with Torreablba, especially for the price, other than he's the best FA available--which isn't saying much. I'm always a little suspicious when a catcher's strongest attribute is supposed to be how he "calls a game." I think it is difficult to truly say how much of a staff's performance is actually due to the catcher and how much is due to other factors, such as the quality of the pitchers, the pitching coach, luck, etc. His home/road splits are a little troubling and, just based on his stats, it doesn't appear that his arm is anything to write home about. And if the emphasis is on a catcher who can actually catch the ball, you do not want Barrett either. That was one of the reasons (along with his "handling of the pitching staff") the Cubs tired of him, despite his hitting prowess (which was not in evidence last year). That being said, I favor the trade scenarios involving the Dodgers, even though they do not involve a catcher (while those with Angels do--either Mathis or Conger). He's not the best free agent available. Ah, forgot about Lo Duca, right? Anyone else? Posada
November 9, 200718 yr The problem with acquiring a "catcher of the future," is that most likely, when we do, he'll be young. And, because of that, calling a game and handling a young pitching staff will probably not be his strong suit. With the expected make-up of this team for the next few years, we need a catcher who can actually "catch" more than producing offensively, and maybe Torrealba best fits that mold for the next two years while our young pitchers develop (whomever we acquire for Cabs, Volstad, Hurk, Sanchez, etc.). I'm not saying I'm for this, I just see why Torrealba is probably intriguing to Beinfest. In a few years, we can probably acquire our "catcher of the future" and bring him in the fold when our pitchers are more fully developed.
November 9, 200718 yr The problem with acquiring a "catcher of the future," is that most likely, when we do, he'll be young. And, because of that, calling a game and handling a young pitching staff will probably not be his strong suit. With the expected make-up of this team for the next few years, we need a catcher who can actually "catch" more than producing offensively, and maybe Torrealba best fits that mold for the next two years while our young pitchers develop (whomever we acquire for Cabs, Volstad, Hurk, Sanchez, etc.). I'm not saying I'm for this, I just see why Torrealba is probably intriguing to Beinfest. In a few years, we can probably acquire our "catcher of the future" and bring him in the fold when our pitchers are more fully developed. So then you just let Treanor be the catcher.
November 9, 200718 yr The problem with acquiring a "catcher of the future," is that most likely, when we do, he'll be young. And, because of that, calling a game and handling a young pitching staff will probably not be his strong suit. With the expected make-up of this team for the next few years, we need a catcher who can actually "catch" more than producing offensively, and maybe Torrealba best fits that mold for the next two years while our young pitchers develop (whomever we acquire for Cabs, Volstad, Hurk, Sanchez, etc.). I'm not saying I'm for this, I just see why Torrealba is probably intriguing to Beinfest. In a few years, we can probably acquire our "catcher of the future" and bring him in the fold when our pitchers are more fully developed. So then you just let Treanor be the catcher. i second that
November 9, 200718 yr Just one person with a POV. Has this forum gotten so bad that one needs to point this out so as not to be attacked? Wow. Gotten? As long as I've been around it's been like that. But I think that's just 2003's style. He usually says things like "as I see it" or "from my perspective". Boy is that the truth! 003 is just getting paranoid especially with a comment like that about Olivo. I believe he expected the worse
November 9, 200718 yr The problem with acquiring a "catcher of the future," is that most likely, when we do, he'll be young. And, because of that, calling a game and handling a young pitching staff will probably not be his strong suit. With the expected make-up of this team for the next few years, we need a catcher who can actually "catch" more than producing offensively, and maybe Torrealba best fits that mold for the next two years while our young pitchers develop (whomever we acquire for Cabs, Volstad, Hurk, Sanchez, etc.). I'm not saying I'm for this, I just see why Torrealba is probably intriguing to Beinfest. In a few years, we can probably acquire our "catcher of the future" and bring him in the fold when our pitchers are more fully developed. So then you just let Treanor be the catcher. Obviously, if Beinfest thinks he needs to go outside of the organization, that speaks volumes of his opinion on whether Treanor can fill this role. I can sit here and tell you "well, I think Treanor calls a good game" or "Treanor can be a starter in this league," but I don't really know if those statements are true. If Benifest thought Treanor could handle a young pitching staff, I am 100% sure he'd prop up Treanor as a low cost option to start so that we could spend some of this "allocated money" on other areas of need, like pitching. But, if Beinfest is the one pushing for someone of the likes of Torrealba, I think it an indictment (at least in the eyes of our GM) of Treanor as nothing more than a quality back-up.
November 9, 200718 yr The problem with acquiring a "catcher of the future," is that most likely, when we do, he'll be young. And, because of that, calling a game and handling a young pitching staff will probably not be his strong suit. I agree with this comment completely. You can't expect a Jeff Mathis or Jeff Clement to be able to come in and handle our staff the way Pudge did, or even the way LoDuca did and Treanor has. If the Marlins were strictly out for a defensive catcher, they could go with a cheaper option. While Torrealba did have a better defensive year than Olivo, he isn't a huge step up defensively. If they are just looking for a defensive upgrade, then old man Lieberthal or Rod Barajas could be given a shot in the spring. Or you could just make the argument that a young catcher like Mathis, Spollach or Jeff Clement could learn what it takes to handle a big league staff under Matt Treanor. Of course, I realize a lot of people on this forum would love to have Paul LoDuca back, but I think, considering his age, his off year and his nack for wasting away in the second half....he should be taking a pay cut this year. If the price is right then LoDuca could be a temporary solution.
November 9, 200718 yr Just one person with a POV. Has this forum gotten so bad that one needs to point this out so as not to be attacked? Wow. Gotten? As long as I've been around it's been like that. But I think that's just 2003's style. He usually says things like "as I see it" or "from my perspective". :notworthy Thanks Flum...I'm old enough (way old) to know I don't have all the answers, so I try make sure no one thinks I'm speaking in absolutisms.
November 9, 200718 yr The problem with acquiring a "catcher of the future," is that most likely, when we do, he'll be young. And, because of that, calling a game and handling a young pitching staff will probably not be his strong suit. With the expected make-up of this team for the next few years, we need a catcher who can actually "catch" more than producing offensively, and maybe Torrealba best fits that mold for the next two years while our young pitchers develop (whomever we acquire for Cabs, Volstad, Hurk, Sanchez, etc.). I'm not saying I'm for this, I just see why Torrealba is probably intriguing to Beinfest. In a few years, we can probably acquire our "catcher of the future" and bring him in the fold when our pitchers are more fully developed. So then you just let Treanor be the catcher. Obviously, if Beinfest thinks he needs to go outside of the organization, that speaks volumes of his opinion on whether Treanor can fill this role. I can sit here and tell you "well, I think Treanor calls a good game" or "Treanor can be a starter in this league," but I don't really know if those statements are true. If Benifest thought Treanor could handle a young pitching staff, I am 100% sure he'd prop up Treanor as a low cost option to start so that we could spend some of this "allocated money" on other areas of need, like pitching. But, if Beinfest is the one pushing for someone of the likes of Torrealba, I think it an indictment (at least in the eyes of our GM) of Treanor as nothing more than a quality back-up. Meh, Beinfest isn't infallible. I think this offseason may be his full on "I'm Keith Hernandez" moment. And, of course, this also means Beinfest would subscribe to that rubbish of a catcher's value being all in "calling a good game" or whatever the hell it's called. I think this is suggestive of Beinfest's seeing value in Torrealba's offensive upside, because you're not paying the $4.5 million a season it's going to take to sign him for him to "call a good game." Do you see Torrealba as an offensive standout?
November 9, 200718 yr Do you see Torrealba as an offensive standout? He is about as mediocre on offense as a catcher can get. That's why Beinfest must think he "calls a good game," because he doesn't do much else to merit a $6 million contract over 2 years. I don't know how you measure such a thing, because I don't think you can simply quantify it and say one guy calls a better game than another. But, I think an outside observer could easily say that the guy we had catching the ball last year couldn't "call a good game" at all. In fact, most of the time he couldn't even "catch" the ball, which is essential for a "catcher." So, Beinfest is looking to upgrade, and, for better or worse, Torrealba seems to be the best low cost option. $6 million for 2 years is not really low cost, but there isn't a whole lot available this year.
November 9, 200718 yr I agree with penguino. If all you're getting in Torrealba over Olivo is better defense, may as well just go with Treanor. Hell, he even hit a little last season. And he doesn't cost 4 million.
November 9, 200718 yr Do you see Torrealba as an offensive standout? He is about as mediocre on offense as a catcher can get. That's why Beinfest must think he "calls a good game," because he doesn't do much else to merit a $6 million contract over 2 years. I don't know how you measure such a thing, because I don't think you can simply quantify it and say one guy calls a better game than another. But, I think an outside observer could easily say that the guy we had catching the ball last year couldn't "call a good game" at all. In fact, most of the time he couldn't even "catch" the ball, which is essential for a "catcher." So, Beinfest is looking to upgrade, and, for better or worse, Torrealba seems to be the best low cost option. $6 million for 2 years is not really low cost, but there isn't a whole lot available this year. OK, so "calling a good game" is worth, in your opinion, $6 million or thereabouts? Just so we're all on the same page...
November 9, 200718 yr Do you see Torrealba as an offensive standout? He is about as mediocre on offense as a catcher can get. That's why Beinfest must think he "calls a good game," because he doesn't do much else to merit a $6 million contract over 2 years. I don't know how you measure such a thing, because I don't think you can simply quantify it and say one guy calls a better game than another. But, I think an outside observer could easily say that the guy we had catching the ball last year couldn't "call a good game" at all. In fact, most of the time he couldn't even "catch" the ball, which is essential for a "catcher." So, Beinfest is looking to upgrade, and, for better or worse, Torrealba seems to be the best low cost option. $6 million for 2 years is not really low cost, but there isn't a whole lot available this year. OK, so "calling a good game" is worth, in your opinion, $6 million or thereabouts? Just so we're all on the same page... No, I'm not saying that, nor am I saying that I like Torrealba at all. I'm just saying that, if Beinfest does actually get this guy, those will be the reasons. I think Treanor would do fine, but obviously Beinfest doesn't agree (if he does this). I'm not a "trust the coaches" kind of guy, but in this instance I think I'm going to defer to Beinfest.
November 9, 200718 yr Do you see Torrealba as an offensive standout? He is about as mediocre on offense as a catcher can get. That's why Beinfest must think he "calls a good game," because he doesn't do much else to merit a $6 million contract over 2 years. I don't know how you measure such a thing, because I don't think you can simply quantify it and say one guy calls a better game than another. But, I think an outside observer could easily say that the guy we had catching the ball last year couldn't "call a good game" at all. In fact, most of the time he couldn't even "catch" the ball, which is essential for a "catcher." So, Beinfest is looking to upgrade, and, for better or worse, Torrealba seems to be the best low cost option. $6 million for 2 years is not really low cost, but there isn't a whole lot available this year. OK, so "calling a good game" is worth, in your opinion, $6 million or thereabouts? Just so we're all on the same page... No, I'm not saying that, nor am I saying that I like Torrealba at all. I'm just saying that, if Beinfest does actually get this guy, those will be the reasons. I think Treanor would do fine, but obviously Beinfest doesn't agree (if he does this). I'm not a "trust the coaches" kind of guy, but in this instance I think I'm going to defer to Beinfest. So you're saying that no matter what, even if your own logic tells you it's a bad idea, you won't question it? Awesome. Fascism started this way, too.
November 9, 200718 yr Do you see Torrealba as an offensive standout? He is about as mediocre on offense as a catcher can get. That's why Beinfest must think he "calls a good game," because he doesn't do much else to merit a $6 million contract over 2 years. I don't know how you measure such a thing, because I don't think you can simply quantify it and say one guy calls a better game than another. But, I think an outside observer could easily say that the guy we had catching the ball last year couldn't "call a good game" at all. In fact, most of the time he couldn't even "catch" the ball, which is essential for a "catcher." So, Beinfest is looking to upgrade, and, for better or worse, Torrealba seems to be the best low cost option. $6 million for 2 years is not really low cost, but there isn't a whole lot available this year. OK, so "calling a good game" is worth, in your opinion, $6 million or thereabouts? Just so we're all on the same page... No, I'm not saying that, nor am I saying that I like Torrealba at all. I'm just saying that, if Beinfest does actually get this guy, those will be the reasons. I think Treanor would do fine, but obviously Beinfest doesn't agree (if he does this). I'm not a "trust the coaches" kind of guy, but in this instance I think I'm going to defer to Beinfest. So you're saying that no matter what, even if your own logic tells you it's a bad idea, you won't question it? Awesome. Fascism started this way, too. No. My decision to trust the coaches has more to do with whether Treanor can serve as a good catcher for the development of our staff. If he can, then I'd say he's better then pretty much any of the FA catching options out there, other than the elite FAs (Posada, etc.). But, if our coaches, who have been able to see Treanor day-in-day-out, don't think Treanor can do the job and are looking outside of the organization for a starting catcher, I'm going to trust their judgment. In light of our payroll constraints, I'm pretty sure Beinfest would want to start Treanor if he could. He's cheap and he's already paid for. So, with the assumption that Treanor cannot do the job (i.e., cannot "call a good game," which seems to be the priority here), who else can we get and what would we have to pay them? I'm not trusting the FO's judgment unconditionally on its evaluation of the FA market, I'm trusting their judgment on whether Treanor can handle the every day catching job. If he can't, then maybe Torrealba fits the bill as someone who can be brought in to help develop the pitching staff at a cost that, although high, is probably the best we can do in the current market.
November 9, 200718 yr What a big mistake it would be to sign this guy.... :banghead :banghead :banghead
November 10, 200718 yr Signing a HORRIBLE catcher for 2/10-3/15 (I wonder if it'll get even more considering how many big market teams have interest in him) while saying you can't afford what's essentially 1/10 for one of the top three hitters in the game just screams ineptness to me. That's not me bashing the Cabrera trade (I do think it's a good idea), but the absolute STUPIDITY of signing Torrealba for whatever his price rises too. EXPECIALLY CONSIDERING WE HAVE AN OPTION THAT IS, AT WORST, JUST AS GOOD AND IS MAKING THE MINIMUM. HOLY SH*T LET'S NOT SAVE MONEY! I'm f***ing foaming at the mouth at this because the catcher hole was my biggest beef all last season (well, besides the horrendous pitching, but that didn't really come until the second half) when we had a better option sitting on the bench. LOOKS LIKE IT'LL BE THE SAME NEXT YEAR, EXCEPT AN EVEN MORE IDIOTIC OPTION CONSIDERING THE PRICE
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.