And none of those are measured by the statistics you utilized to "prove" Mauer is not elite. Not arguing he is or isn't...just saying that any number of factors could mean those three things scouts view don't show up in stats. You end up arguing exactly against yourself by trying to insist that stats show one thing or another and then refer to scouting views that don't show up in any statistic. That's be like comparing pitchers on wins and then saying that scouting evidence on ability to repeat delivery proves your point.

 

Over a large enough sample size, those things will absolutely show up in the stats.

Exactly. For instance, tonight Evan Gattis of the Braves grabbed a tough breaking pitch from Mike Minor and whipped the ball to 2nd base in a perfect spot for Dan Uggla to put a tag right on Chris Valaika of the Marlins attempting to steal. Uggla applied the tag and promptly had the ball pop out of his glove. The boxscore says Valaika stolen base off of Minor/Gattis, but there is absolutely nothing more that Gattis could have possibly done to prevent that steal, so now Evan Gattis is 0/1 at throwing runners out in the game, but even the Marlins announcers were wowed by Gattis' handling of the pitch and perfect throw on the play.

 

Scouting plus numbers is the only way to do it. Does any person watch every single game? No. However, unlike small sample size in statistics, a well-balanced viewing of a player (saw one game each month for instance) could provide a significant idea of HOW he does the job - for a catcher, how does he get out of his stance on a steal? how well does he move side to side blocking balls? do pitchers often shake him off? is he calling his own game or calling from the dugout? how accurate is his throwing arm? All those questions could be answered to a respectable level (not an infallible level, but a very good idea of normal) in 5 or more viewings of the same catcher spread over time.

 

Over a very large sample size those things are going to equal out.

Over a very large sample size those things are going to equal out.

 

You keep saying that, but every stat innovator would tell you different, from the guys at Baseball HQ to the guys at Baseball Prospectus. You don't ever see everything in any stat or group of stats because baseball has outliers and oddities that stats just cannot measure, which is why you always balance stats with scouting.

Yeah, if the stats are close, I can see how you would look to the scouting reports to get further insight, and/or to confirm or deny a belief that the stats give you.

But do we really need a scouting report when the stats show one guy to be far and away better than another guy?

Do we need to combine stats and a scouting report to know that Babe Ruth was a better baseball player than Lew Ford? Or is looking at the stats probably safe enough in some instances??

Jeez.

Do we need to combine stats and a scouting report to know that Babe Ruth was a better baseball player than Lew Ford?

 

Of course someone was making THAT argument. Jeez indeed.

Of course someone was making THAT argument. Jeez indeed.

 

You said, you ALWAYS balance stats with scouting.

Or did the word always take on a new meaning while I was away?

 

And Mauer vs. Posey's defensive numbers are about as night and day as you can get, so that comparison is apt to this discussion.

So Mauer's defense is the equivalent of Lew Ford hitting while Posey's defense is the equivalent of Babe Ruth hitting? Good to know.

So Mauer's defense is the equivalent of Lew Ford hitting while Posey's defense is the equivalent of Babe Ruth hitting? Good to know.

 

LOL, yeah that's what I meant.

The Ford/Ruth was an extreme example to make my point.

Mauer/Posey defensive numbers are far enough apart that it shouldn't take scouting reports to make a decision.

Not a Ford/Ruth margin, but maybe a Pujols/Howard margin.