You are here

CERA Thought Experiment

Replies

Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous on

Obviously not all MLB catchers are created equal in throwing out runners, blocking balls in the dirt, etc.  These, and CERA can be measured, counted.  Other things like knowledge, perception, and confidence are a lot fuzzier.  Is your pitcher confident enough in his catcher to throw a ball in the dirt with runners on, and on any count?  Where is the stat column for that?

-Watcher

SABR Matt's picture

While you can't look at CERA and infer too much from it about game-calling skill in any given season (because the samples are too small, and too biased), what the annual spread in CERA tells you is that the catcher himself is a significant factor in pitching (just as the home plate umpire is, as I've shown rather graphically with my attribution matrix).  When, year after year, your CERAs range +/- 1 or 1.5 runs above league average...that means the catchers are doing SOMEthing...even if we have not yet quantified exactly how much they're doing individually.

The problem with CERA is that it's not Strength-of-Pitcher and Strength-of-Opponent adjusted.  If someone bothered to calculate a CERA that accounted for which pitches Rob Johnson caught (and how many pitches from them he caught) and which hitters Rob Johnson was trying to get out (and how many times for each)...you would find a much more accurate evaluation.  And I'm fairly certain he'd still be rated as one of the best pitch-calling catchers in baseball.

jemanji's picture
Submitted by jemanji on

And we need to understand that there are some phenomena in baseball that are so complex that we'll never be able to isolate the variables on them.

There are simply too many moving parts for us to confidently measure and find out whether it was Roger Clemens' size that allowed him to throw 250* innings a year with no problems.  You can't control for things like his arm angle, the inverted W, the acceleration of his IP load, the mounds he threw off of with the footing, and literally >100 other things.

I suspect that catcher impact on ERA is just too buried in other variables to ever isolate it.

............

This is part of the reason that it's so unfortunate for the BP author to have the belief, "If I can't measure it, in practical terms that's the same thing as it not existing.  If I can't measure it, it doesn't matter."

Very harmful worldview.

Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous on

Maybe it was the roids, oh yeah, size.

Cool Papa Bell's picture

Are you saying that just because there is a large variation from year to year that there must be something meaningful going on? I don't think that follows at all.

SABR Matt's picture

I'm saying that because there is a large spread between worst and best catcher ERA within each individual season...there must be something meaningful going on.

Leave a Reply

Filtered HTML

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote> <ul> <ol> <li> <i> <b> <img> <table> <tr> <td> <th> <div> <strong> <p> <br> <u>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.