Joe fucking Blanton for 4 Mil?

So Blanton gets lucky for a half season and gets a $4M reward... So?

The downside, as if it needs stated openly is ... "Joe fucking Blanton"

not much lower to go than that...

 

That's nice. But at the end of the day he's Joe Blanton. Once the hitters remember that, we're fucked even if a Jesus/Mohammed in their prime were behind home dish swaying the umpires with their magical powers.

 

Maybe we need David Blaine behind the plate?

 

I wonder if all the HOF K guys like Ryan, Johnson, Carlton, Koufax, Blyleven, Clemens, Sutton, etc. threw to great pitch framing catchers, or were just great pitchers that simply struck out guys?
Being that pitch framing is now a regular stat, measuring one guy better/worse than the next, before it was a legit usable number, did it matter? What does Nolan Ryan wind up with throwing to Cervelli then?
Because I never read or heard a thing about it with any of those guys...not one. Ever.
Or no one ever mentioned it because they didn't know it existed or something? Seems weird...

 

Counting on a rehabbing roider to help a total fucking loser fool fat fuck umpires while the Yankees watch the guy who throws 100 all night long thrive.....

Yup, the Nerds science is tight.....

 

I don't think it's as huge of a factor as it's played out to be, but it's something that can only help the pitcher. The biggest eye test for me is seeing Kershaw throw to Grandal and then to Ellis. I think everyone can agree that there's a noticeable difference there.

 

Hahahahaha! Classic.

 

When they bring Montas up, who hits 100-102 on the gun, then what?

 

Yeah...I'm not trying to imply that it doesn't matter...I was thinking if you take the top say, 10 K guys of all time( I listed some) and take their years they all pitched cummulatively, then how many catchers did they throw to over their careers...quite a few, I think. How many were good framers? Did it matter at all?
When you think of who Campy caught, and what they did over their careers...but I never read that he was a good framer, although he may have been.
Just seems odd that something deemed so important now, was rarely, if ever, a criteria for a catcher. Or if it was, who knew back then?

 

To be honest, I learned this at a very young age. As a catcher my entire baseball life this has always been a big deal but the difference was you just didn't talk about it. You would never hear "great frame" shouted out at you by your teammates like you would for a nice hit or big RBI.

You may occasionally hear someone call out your number with an atta boy when framing a strike three that was clearly off the plate but it was done in an "incognito"type of way.

The reason was you didn't want the umpire to know what your doing. It basically shows them up.

With the stats the way they are now, they look at every thing. Nothing is kept on the low anymore.

Bottom line is if you "catch the ball right" thumb parallel with the ground and get around the baseball, you are going to get more borderline calls to go your way.

I teach catching every week to about 6-7 really good 10 year olds. The thing I tell them is to catch the ball correctly and present the pitch to the umpire. I don't call it framing and I don't emphasize stealing strikes! I emphasize catching the ball quietly and never trying to bring an obvious ball over the plate to show the umpire up.

 

Yeah, receiving skills for catchers have been coveted for a long time.
Really the only difference now is that they're keeping record to find out exactly how much value a catcher's receiving skills bring on a pitch by pitch basis.
Not much different than say tracking batted ball velocity, to which most of us have known for a long time that if you hit the ball really hard it's got a solid chance of finding a hole.
Personally, I feel the constant skepticism has more to do with numbers being attached to this aspect of the game.
Change would seem to be an underlying issue...of course 60 years ago change was an issue for different reasons in this sport.
Change is not something that's taken lightly within MLB's culture in general, but once they came to grips with that reality...here we are.
MLB Now is a good watch on the network, watching the constant battles between Brian Kenny and those against the data driven era and against change in general, give MLB credit for providing that forum.
But yeah, this data driven age, quantifying and ultimately placing value on these age old aspects of the game is where the game is now.
All to the good for me if it helps valuation and helps identify the real from the fake, giving execs an edge here and there.

 

Then we can only HOPE he can control it like everyone KNOWS Chapman can...

 

And the hitters that are in the box better hope the same.
But Chapman's control has waned at times, which is why he walks more guys than Kenley does.
Nature of the beast in throwing 100+ gas, Ryan tallied a load of walks himself in his day.
But that's also half the battle already won when hitters just aren't sure if this 100-102 throwing guy can control what he's got.

 

Being able to seperate the "real from the fake " is important...and not only for executives valuation...
It trickles down from the top, even over and above the divinity of bb execs... from the very creation of the game itself. The DH is fake , imo, and that particular change is as phony as a 3 dollar bill...and as queer, too.
It's fake baseball. no matter who can't wait for it, or who it gives a job to for a longer time.
It's not the real game.
It's a fake version of it. Fits right in with the fraudulent society we are engulfed in.
No matter who or how many try to simplify it down to reticence of traditionalists who abhor "change".

 

You mean when they think he can't but he knows he can.

 

Can I get a fucking AMEN to that!!

NZ for the win!!