Did I call anyone a dumbass or stupid? I think you might be misremembering... I clearly have an opinion. Just because it isn't a negative one doesn't mean I don't have one. I agree that some of the lineups are questionable, at best. But I'm not calling Baker names because of it. I'm not saying he has dementia like some posters have. He's not going to get fired nor do I think he should be. I think he's more than earned the right to see this season out. I would prefer another ring and he gets to walk off into the sunset as they don't renew his contract.
And maybe if they had Diaz more, he can develop while the pitchers that it is not a bad thing that a catcher can block curveballs in the dirt and throw out runners.
I have a sick feeling in my stomach that the Astros are going to fall a couple of games short of winning the division, a deficit that likely could have been entirely erased and then some simply by playing the best player available at catcher. If that happens and he gets brought back again then I think that would be solid evidence that this is a toy for Crane and he's not that serious about winning.
I don't think there is any question that Crane wants to win. The issue is that he thinks legends of the game like Dusty, Bagwell, and Reggie Jackson are the end all be all of baseball knowledge. By all accounts he is knowledgeable about modern metrics and philosophies, but those still don't trump his old school advisors. Dusty is very stubborn and set in his ways and Crane trusts that his decisions are best.
They don't have a 100-win team. Their starting pitching has been wiped out by injuries; their bullpen has significantly regressed; two of their best hitters have missed significant time while two more of their best hitters have had long stretches of not hitting.
I think he wants to win, but it may be the case that cultivating personal friendships with legends of the game like Dusty, Bagwell, and Reggie are similarly important as winning - hence this is as much of a toy for Crane's personal enjoyment as it is a business through which Crane intends to eventually realize sizable capital gains.
Because last year is a 175-game sample size, which is significantly larger than this year's. *That's* why it's relevant. So the notion that their current -14-game swing this year is somehow rooted in Martin Maldonado's playing time is just beyond silly. It's a remarkably small sample size: Diaz has started 29 games at C. This idea that giving a previously inexperienced rookie more opportunities would deliver the same results is counter to every fundamental understanding we have of sample sizes. Given how many issues the Astros have *outside* of their catching situation, there is no evidence to suggest swapping Diaz for Maldonado would solve some fundamental flaws with this team. Also, why are we writing the story of the 2023 Astros? This team has been to four World Series since 2017 - why are we suddenly concerned about regular season records in August? It's not like the Astros are out of contention. They're not by any measure.
Stop setting up a strawman. No one is saying it is the only or even primary cause of the swing. That would be injuries. Last year is absolutely irrelevant to this discussion. Maldy was younger, they were running away with the division and Diaz wasn’t an option. Diaz playing more than Maldonado would have resulted in more wins this year. That is the point and you haven’t even tried seriously to argue it (because that is impossible). The sample size argument is BS - nothing suggests Diaz wouldn’t outperform the literal worst player in MLB if he played catcher. Every single statistic says Diaz would be all star level at catcher. Just saying “yeah, but what if it doesn’t last” is ridiculous. Even fo you believe that, play him until it stops lasting. Then play even an average DH and the team is better off. with a tight division race, every decision matters. Just saying “sit back and be happy” is fine, but I’d prefer they made the choice to at least try to win the division.
First things first... The Astros' team ERA is still a .5 run better than league average so let's not pretend the pitching staff has been *bad.* It hasn't been as good as last year - but last year was also historically good. And Martin Maldonado had nothing to do with JV leaving or McCullers, Garcia & Urquidy getting hurt. And I'm not sure Javier or Montero is his fault, either - especially Montero, as relievers are notoriously up/down. He has managed Hunter Brown through a very successful rookie season; he's coaxed a near-miracle season out of JP France.... I mean, I can't speak to how much a catcher really matters - but we can't just pick all the bad stuff, dump it on MM, and then pretend nothing else matters. As for Diaz - I'd love to see him get more opportunities - but we also need to recognize that more playing time is almost certainly going to expose Yanier, who doesn't walk, who can't hit LHP.... 245 PAs is not enough to make any declarative judgments, beyond.... he's earned a longer look. But history suggests the longer look probably evens things out significantly more.
Except that Yainer Diaz has managed even better results out of Hunter Brown and JP France has basically been the same guy regardless. Brown has been awful when Maldy catches.
I fully agree. Diaz coaxed a fantastic season from Brown. Go check the splits. While you are there, look at Diaz’s expected stats vs lefties and repeat you favorite line about sample size as you contemplate the impact of luck on expected vs actual. Dude, I respect your Bagwell stumping, but this is a losing position. Nothing supports the idea that Maldy should be catching 75%+ of the games. Nothing.
Wait- you are giving Maldy credit for Brown? The guy who’s been cy young with Diaz and below average with Maldy?
here - I did it myself. Brown: 3.72 for Diaz, 4.98 for Maldy in equal innings France: basically equal in equal innings
Literally in this response, you say, and I quote: "Diaz playing more than Maldonado would have resulted in more wins this year." Those are *your* parameters. And last year, with MM playing ~70% of their games, the Astros won 117 games and a ring. That's relevant to the point *you're* making. This team - just last year - has proven Martin Maldonado is not getting in the way of them winning games. He was younger, lol, as if he aged five years.... He was old last year, too. And yes: they ran away with the division... with Martin Maldonado as their catcher. I have argued it: it's an impossible conclusion to draw. Diaz's sample size is too small. He's started 29 games at catcher. Sample sizes are not BS; it is woven into the very fabric of the game: baseball is a marathon, and sustaining performance over the long-term is the ultimate goal. We can speculate how Diaz's results might translate to more playing time - but it would be just that: speculation. What we do know, generally, is that for younger, inexperienced players, sustaining success can prove difficult. I'm not, and never have, argued Diaz shouldn't get the longer look. Just that concluding his production would automatically translate with more opportunities is not rooted in a very plausible reality I can't speak to whatever impact MM has on the staff. They all claim to love pitching to him. So we can't just extract a small offensive sample size, ignore the pitching staff, and draw the conclusions we want. I think the Astros are exactly where they are. They are overwhelmed by injuries; they've had too many players underperform... I think the catcher situation is waaaaay down the list of 2023 issues.
“More wins this year” is absolutely correct and not the same as “the 14 game swing is rooted in Maldy” … an argument no one made, which is the definition of a strawman. You can keep throwing out a sample size argument, but every single statistic says Maldy is one of the worst players in baseball (on a GIGANTIC sample size), and Diaz is at or near all star level. He doesn’t deserve “a longer look” - he deserves more than half of the starts. It doesn’t matter if he falls off - I never said he would keep the same production. That is another strawman. But I am 100% certain he would remain ahead of Maldy because I am 100% certain he won’t be the worst hitter in baseball and one of the worst fielders. As for whether other factors matter in the general underperformance of the team, of course they do. Pretending anyone said otherwise was your original strawman. The point is this and only this - playing Maldy less and Diaz more at catcher would have given and still will give the Astros a better chance of winning this year, and every win matters. If you have a counter argument based on something that has actually happened, on the field, in 2023, I would love to hear it.
Is it though? Among addressable issues I sure as hell can't think of one higher. The team around him got much worse, so carrying around a dead weight mascot is significantly harder this season. 250 Points of OPS is a f**king ton, and the expected numbers say Diaz is still underperforming by quite a bit, not getting lucky.
It’s basically the difference between Tucker and Cory Julks. Imagine the ability to clone Tucker and have 2 of them and saying- no thanks- I’m good playing Cory Julks here. Basically every day. That’s what the difference is between Diaz and maldonado.
It’s worse than that. 3.12 with Diaz. 4.98 with maldy. Overall the pitchers era is 3/4 of a run less with Diaz catching. He’s caught generally shittier pitchers than MM. however, the OpS is basically the same. Any advantage to Diaz catching right now is probably some combination of luck and him doing a better job of shutting down the running game and. It being a wild pitch/ passed ball machine.
