I read your post. You said "Suzuki was never that good of a hitter in MLB, he was always below average in Oakland by OPS+."

 

You used OPS+ to say that he wasn't a very good hitter in MLB. I countered that OPS+ is perhaps a bad stat to use for discussing how good of a hitter a catcher is because it compares him to all positions and not just catchers. Then I offered a better way to decide if he was a good hitter at any point in his career, concluding that for the first three years of his career he was a good hitter.

 

I don't see an issue. You sited OPS+ to talk about his hitting - I countered that OPS+ is not a fair way to measure a catcher's hitting.

Read harder. In the very post of mine you quoted, I said he was GOOD FOR A CATCHER. What do you think that means? I understand the relative difference in offense between positions.

 

Indeed, rather than ignoring position, the purpose of my post was actually adding the positional qualifier to a claim made by another poster.

 

OPS+ is a perfectly fine way to measure a catcher's hitting, as long as you understand average for catchers is below 100, which I do, hence my post. You can even use it to measure pitcher's hitting, knowing that the pitcher average will be way under 100. But just like we say "good hitter for a pitcher", the same can be said of catchers, because they are not necessarily "good hitters" in an absolute sense without positional context.

Edited February 5, 201610 yr by spycake

I like Suzuki and respect what he does as a catcher and teammate. I do have doubts as to his ability to hit at this point, rest or not. Anxious to see what Murphy does on all respects and I hope he gets a real shot, not the token/usual backup catcher treatment. I echo the 50/50 split to begin the year.

 

Maybe I'm just an optomist who looks at quick promotions and strong second halves of seasons, but I still like Turner and Garver. A year or two, I am hoping we have an extra catcher to move somewhere.

Suzuki provided the Twins with what they needed at the time - stability at the catcher position while some other areas were addressed.  One can certainly argue that there may have been better options out there.  He did, however, provide an excellent first year.  After focus on other positions in the journey of improvement of the Twins roster, it is the catcher's turn for scrutiny. (Certainly some will argue the timing of this attention legitimately.) I don't feel cheated for the time he's been here (nor am I ecstated). And I totally agree with Doc's take.

 

I like Suzuki and respect what he does as a catcher and teammate. I do have doubts as to his ability to hit at this point, rest or not. Anxious to see what Murphy does on all respects and I hope he gets a real shot, not the token/usual backup catcher treatment. I echo the 50/50 split to begin the year.

Maybe I'm just an optomist who looks at quick promotions and strong second halves of seasons, but I still like Turner and Garver. A year or two, I am hoping we have an extra catcher to move somewhere.

I agree--you are an optomist.  I am just hoping the Twins have one catcher to keep.

 

I'm impressed with TD readers as there is an article about Twins catchers and no one (yet) has suggested moving Mauer back behind the plate (until now).  Looks like we finally all accepted that moving Mauer back behind the plate was not going to happen.  YIPPIE! 

Just started reading to your post: SHHHHHHHHHUUUUSSSHHHH!!!!!!

Snow is melting, day light increasing, feeling a touch of baseball fever here

And this catcher thread, as most rocks...I like Suzuki and Murphy as a 1-2 punch!

Edited February 6, 201610 yr by Jerr

My problem with Suzuki last year went beyond hit hitting (or lack thereof).  By the end of the season, he couldn't throw the ball to 2nd without 2 hops.  My guess is, the veteran Suzuki starts the season catching 4 or 5 games a week, then by about the end of May, it becomes more of a 50/50 timeshare.  

I'd love to see Murphy play more at the outset, but I have a feeling they'll let Zuk play himself out of the lineup.