2015 Spring Training Thread

SilenceS

Moderator
Staff member
Donator
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
21,848
Liked Posts:
9,042
At 22? Absolutely not but he does need time in AAA. Maybe all year.

Im not one to believe he needs time in AAA. Not because he doesnt need to work on things. I just think he needs to work on things on a grown man level. But, AAA would be the best because the media and the live for today Cubs fans would eat him up while he struggles to learn so AAA would be better. Baez is struggling with confidence and he can not lose his confidence. He loses his confidence then we lost Baez.
 

beckdawg

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 31, 2012
Posts:
11,750
Liked Posts:
3,741
Strike calls could just be the pitcher himself..

It could be more sophisticated than I'm making it but the general idea is that if a catcher is catching more strikes that's obviously a good thing. It would honestly surprise me if the are just using strike counts as that seems like it would have a lot of useless noise for teams with good pitching. If I come across anything on it I'll be sure to link it. It's one area I've not really been all that interested in with regard to metrics so I'm honestly not that well informed.

It *could* be using pitch f/x to measure out side the zone strikes that are called for strikes. That would make a lot more sense to me.
 

beckdawg

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 31, 2012
Posts:
11,750
Liked Posts:
3,741
Time will make it happen. It only makes sense.

I'm not sure it makes sense though. I mean I totally get your argument and may even side with it to an extent. But at some point you have to draw a line on what machines do vs officiating. For example, at what point do you stop in basketball? Do you have computers calling fouls? I'd argue that fouls are just as subjective as balls/strikes. If anything I could see the easiest solution just being the ability to review balls/strikes keeping in mind the limit to uses. Honestly how many times a game do you have questionable calls?
 

chibears55

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 18, 2013
Posts:
13,554
Liked Posts:
1,915
It *could* be using pitch f/x to measure out side the zone strikes that are called for strikes. That would make a lot more sense to me.


Well that could also be bad umpiring. ..lol..

I just dont think there a computerize way of telling if a catcher framing a pitch...

I think it more of a reputation then anything else. ..
 

TL1961

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 24, 2013
Posts:
34,927
Liked Posts:
19,052
Meanwhile, they continue to put Castro at SS every day.

Well that is a ridiculous statement.

Who would you have put at SS the past few years instead?

And his dWar last year was positive, wasn't it? He has improved defensively over where he was three years ago, but many don't seem to recognize that.
 

theberserkfury

Active member
Joined:
Jul 23, 2013
Posts:
626
Liked Posts:
149
Location:
Los Angeles, CA
I'm not sure it makes sense though. I mean I totally get your argument and may even side with it to an extent. But at some point you have to draw a line on what machines do vs officiating. For example, at what point do you stop in basketball? Do you have computers calling fouls? I'd argue that fouls are just as subjective as balls/strikes. If anything I could see the easiest solution just being the ability to review balls/strikes keeping in mind the limit to uses. Honestly how many times a game do you have questionable calls?

Definitely disagree with this... computers seem to already be very capable of accurately telling when a pitch passes through the strike zone. Doesn't seem like there's anything subjective about where the ball is when it crosses the plate and you're also just tracking one object in space.

Calling fouls involves making judgments of two moving bodies and the amount of contact they are or are not making as well as their positioning on the floor. Not sure how a computer's going to be able to make a reliable determination there very easily.

Unless maybe I'm missing something... which I am more than capable of doing...
 

TL1961

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 24, 2013
Posts:
34,927
Liked Posts:
19,052
Strike calls could just be the pitcher himself..
Having to catch Jackson and Wood last year doesn't help that cause for Castillo...

Im not saying certain catchers aren't exceptional at it..
heck my daughter was pretty good at it when she played in HS and travel ball...

I just would like to know how or what they use to determine one is that much better then another..

Is it more by what one sees, by reputation, or is there something being used to determine if a catcher framing or not...

I can't tell you exactly how they track the pitch framing, but I am reasonably certain they don't simply blame a pitcher's inability to throw strikes on the catcher!

People who track catchers' framing, rank Castillo among the very worst in baseball. The scout quoted in a post here earlier said "I get sick to my stomach" watching Castillo behind the plate. I will give these experts the benefit of the doubt that they know what they are talking about.

One poster said Castillo must have not been bad, and pointed out our successful pitchers last year, implying their was due to Castillo's catching. Another excuses Castillo for a poor pitch framing record because he had to catch Wood and Jackson.

Hello?
 

beckdawg

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 31, 2012
Posts:
11,750
Liked Posts:
3,741
Definitely disagree with this... computers seem to already be very capable of accurately telling when a pitch passes through the strike zone. Doesn't seem like there's anything subjective about where the ball is when it crosses the plate and you're also just tracking one object in space.

Calling fouls involves making judgments of two moving bodies and the amount of contact they are or are not making as well as their positioning on the floor. Not sure how a computer's going to be able to make a reliable determination there very easily.

Unless maybe I'm missing something... which I am more than capable of doing...

Maybe I wasn't clear. I meant a ref in basketball's decision making was as subjective as an umpire's ability to call ball/strikes. I didn't mean that computers can do one as well as the other. Basically the point I was trying to make is that there's always going to be some subjective nature to the game unless you literally replay every play to make sure it is called right.

The technology is almost certainly good enough to call ball's and strikes but to be honest I can't imagine why anyone would really want that. Regardless you're still going to have to have a guy keeping track of the count and lord knows how they would implement that. At best case it's as fast and at worst case you're adding several seconds to every pitch in a sport where they are trying to speed up the game. I'd agree more with the idea if missing calls was something that happened quite often or for that matter even really mattered. For example, if an ump blows a 0-0 count call it doesn't really have that much impact on the game. It's a minor disadvantage. What people care about is that missed strike 3 call that leads to a big inning. That's why I think it makes more sense to use it as a review type thing where you use it on important plays that may have been a mistake.

There's also the arguably misguided feeling many people have that part of the charm of the game is it's flaws. Something that connects todays game with the game from the early 1900's.
 

Ari Bear

Hall of Famer
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
5,395
Liked Posts:
986
Location:
Peoria, Arizona
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
I dont want to think that either but he still looks lost at the plate. If he does make it, he will at best be another Mark Reynolds. Which I could be ok with I guess.
 

JimJohnson

Well-known member
Joined:
May 31, 2014
Posts:
5,190
Liked Posts:
913
8 hr's already this spring trainning. I can't wait for this kid to get to Wrigley! :woot::cubs:

Gotta wait 12 MLB games and then he'll be up. While I know this is the right move, I just hope that Bryant doesn't hold a grudge against the Cubs for doing it this way.
 

Ari Bear

Hall of Famer
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
5,395
Liked Posts:
986
Location:
Peoria, Arizona
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Gotta wait 12 MLB games and then he'll be up. While I know this is the right move, I just hope that Bryant doesn't hold a grudge against the Cubs for doing it this way.
Oh, it's only 12? Thought is was like 20 something. I think he will be fine with it. I mean it's only the first two weeks of the season.
 

SilenceS

Moderator
Staff member
Donator
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
21,848
Liked Posts:
9,042
I dont want to think that either but he still looks lost at the plate. If he does make it, he will at best be another Mark Reynolds. Which I could be ok with I guess.

He is 22. The average age of a rookie in MLB is over 24. He could very well bust, but under 300 at bats at the majors isnt going to tell us that.
 

SilenceS

Moderator
Staff member
Donator
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
21,848
Liked Posts:
9,042
Oh, it's only 12? Thought is was like 20 something. I think he will be fine with it. I mean it's only the first two weeks of the season.

Im pretty sure its only 9 games, but 12 days. He would be eligible to play a friday home game 12 days in.
 

SilenceS

Moderator
Staff member
Donator
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
21,848
Liked Posts:
9,042
Maybe I wasn't clear. I meant a ref in basketball's decision making was as subjective as an umpire's ability to call ball/strikes. I didn't mean that computers can do one as well as the other. Basically the point I was trying to make is that there's always going to be some subjective nature to the game unless you literally replay every play to make sure it is called right.

The technology is almost certainly good enough to call ball's and strikes but to be honest I can't imagine why anyone would really want that. Regardless you're still going to have to have a guy keeping track of the count and lord knows how they would implement that. At best case it's as fast and at worst case you're adding several seconds to every pitch in a sport where they are trying to speed up the game. I'd agree more with the idea if missing calls was something that happened quite often or for that matter even really mattered. For example, if an ump blows a 0-0 count call it doesn't really have that much impact on the game. It's a minor disadvantage. What people care about is that missed strike 3 call that leads to a big inning. That's why I think it makes more sense to use it as a review type thing where you use it on important plays that may have been a mistake.

There's also the arguably misguided feeling many people have that part of the charm of the game is it's flaws. Something that connects todays game with the game from the early 1900's.

Tennis uses technology to call there balls. You have now gone to replay in the majors. NBA and NFL all have review policies. IF you are going to make the umpire responsible for outs on the field by review. They are going to have to make balls and strikes either reviewable in some way or give away to technology. Now, if you are arguing it will take away from the purity of the game then thats a different argument. But, if Montero made 800 balls, strikes then there evidentally are a lot of callls missed in the majors. Also, I have seen umpires completely control the game by their "zone". Dont get me wrong these guys are the best of the best but far from perfect.
 

Ari Bear

Hall of Famer
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
5,395
Liked Posts:
986
Location:
Peoria, Arizona
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
He is 22. The average age of a rookie in MLB is over 24. He could very well bust, but under 300 at bats at the majors isnt going to tell us that.
I got my fingers crossed. Hope the kid can turn it around.
 

TC in Mississippi

CCS Staff
Joined:
Oct 22, 2014
Posts:
5,305
Liked Posts:
1,816
Im pretty sure its only 9 games, but 12 days. He would be eligible to play a friday home game 12 days in.

9 games is right. He's eligible to come up and play 4/17 against the Padres but with the MLBPA already making noises that they will file a grievance if it appears that he was held down for contract reasons (which everyone knows anyway) it's unlikely he'll be up that day. Add that to the fact that Theo likes to start rookies on the road and he'll likely be up the following week sometime in Pittsburgh or Cincinnati. I've been guessing 4/21 for a long time but someone I know in a position to guess better than I thinks it might later in that week to put as much distance between that date and his eligibility date as possible given Boras' complaints and the MLBPAs scrutiny.
 

Top