Thoughts on Lucroy getting some time at 3rd in the future?

[HiAndTight]

I don't think there is a rush to do this by any means, but I think Luc is proving with more and more certainty that he's a quality bat and I don't think he's a prototypical C in that he's relegated to either 1st or behind the plate(with DH not being an option in the NL).

 

I think he's got the athletic ability and the arm to play 3rd, and it also gives Maldy some more starts behind the plate.

 

In Lucroy's last 715 AB's, he's hitting .302/.351/.505 with an OPS of .856, 27 HR's and 115 RBI's. Maldonado obviously hasn't performed as well behind the plate this year, but I think he's capable of hitting much better, but just as importantly, he's a stud defensive catcher whereas Lucroy is solid, but with the lack of legitimate 3rd base prospect working his way up, this seems like an idea worth exploring.

 

It certainly beats just giving everyone a 1st basemen's glove and sticking them over there.

 

And I'm not talking about 150 games a year. I'm talking about 30 or so games starting next year after work in ST'ing and then play it by ear. If he proves he can handle it, and a guy like Delmanico doesn't force the issue POSSIBLY make it his home moving forward.

 

 

I suspect it'll be met with some disagreement, but it's something I've been thinking about for a while. I thought 2nd base initially, but he likely doesn't have the feet to play there, whereas I think he has all the tools he needs to play 3rd, [sarcasm]leaving 1st base open for Yuni B after we give him the 3 year 36 million dollar deal he's shown he deserves this year....[/sarcasm]

[igor67]

Maldy has gone back to hitting like what his minor league record suggests he can. The nice thing for him is that he has gotten those valuable big league starts, so he can bounce around for the next 10 years as a defensive oriented back-up catcher but his better arm is not enough to try and grab more starts from Lucroy. I kind of like Lucroy grabbing some starts at first, but only because they have hit so poorly. In general though letting a catcher get 1/5 days off and staying fresh is a pretty good usage of resources in my book.

[Baldkin]

Nope. Nope, nope and nope.

 

Why would you take the best (or 2nd best) pitch framer in the league and move him to 3B?

 

To give a guy with a career .646 minor league OPS more PAs?

[JimH5]

Maldonado is inconsequential. There will always be a backup catcher, whether it is him or some other guy.

 

The point is to keep the rigors of catching from reducing Lucroy's effectiveness at bat.

 

Catchers burn out much faster than position players, so it makes sense to move them to other positions at times. Yogi played the OF. Mauer and Posey have spent some time at 1B. Johnny Bench played 3B. Even Dave Nilsson got out from behind the plate.

 

I think the Brewers should pick one or the other, either 1B or 3B, to give Lucroy a place for some time away from catching--but not both. To me, 3B seems beyond his ability, but I'm not a scout.

[JohnBriggs12]

Nope. Nope, nope and nope.

 

Why would you take the best (or 2nd best) pitch framer in the league and move him to 3B?

 

To give a guy with a career .646 minor league OPS more PAs?

 

 

Answer: Joe Torre

 

Torre wasn't a bad catcher at all, but his bat needed to be in the lineup everyday. He became an MVP at 3rd Base. Lucroy is a nice pitch framer but he's at best average defensively and he's not an ironman that you can start 150 games behind the plate without it being detrimental to his offense.

 

Obviously they'd go out and find a better offensive catcher to pair with Maldanado if they moved Lucroy. A guy like a Dioneer Navarro would make a lot of sense.

[logan82]

Maldonado is inconsequential. There will always be a backup catcher, whether it is him or some other guy.

 

The point is to keep the rigors of catching from reducing Lucroy's effectiveness at bat.

 

Catchers burn out much faster than position players, so it makes sense to move them to other positions at times. Yogi played the OF. Mauer and Posey have spent some time at 1B. Johnny Bench played 3B. Even Dave Nilsson got out from behind the plate.

 

I think the Brewers should pick one or the other, either 1B or 3B, to give Lucroy a place for some time away from catching--but not both. To me, 3B seems beyond his ability, but I'm not a scout.

As long as it is moving him to 1B to get a little rest away from catcher and not moving him there on a day he should have off. I fully believe catchers need complete days off not just a day away from catcher.

[And That]

I think he's athletic enough to play third, and with enough time there I bet he'd be pretty decent at it.

 

That said, you either have to move him there full time or not do it at all. Expecting him to be competent defensively while playing only 30 games (about once a week) is an unneeded risk.

[logan82]

Lucroy's bat isn't good enough that it needs to be in the lineup every day. He is better than what we have now but that is setting the bar low and I would hate to burn him out playing every day on a losing team.

[JohnBriggs12]

I would agree with the full time move idea, though until Ramirez departs, I think he'll transition switching between catcher and 1B next year, again sort of what Torre's career looked like.

[Funketown]

At least for this season, it seems like a good idea to give him 10-20 games at 1B and another 20-30 at C. A lot of this just depends on how well Lucroy can handle playing 1B on some of his "off" days. I don't think there's any reason to move him to 1B long term, but if the Brewers have a 1B situation like they do this year it might be a good idea to go something like 120 C/30 1B rather than just starting him for 130-135 games at C.

 

But, a lot of this just depends on who they pick up to play 1B next season. If they sign a player who really only plays 1B and is at least a solid hitter, then there probably isn't a lot of value gained from moving Lucroy to 1B for 20-30 games. I don't think 3B is an option, as I'm skeptical of Lucroy's ability to learn 3B quickly and play the position well.

[jerichoholicninja]

If you put him anywhere put him in right field. There is less to learn and less to do. Catchers are just like pitchers in that during BP (when they're not hitting) they're standing in the outfield shagging a ball or two.

[Fear The Chorizo]

So we have a very good catcher (defensively and offensively), who's signed to a very team-friendly deal that will probably lead to a modest-length, team-friendly extension that has LuCroy playing through his prime years as a Brewer, and people want to experiment with him at third or another position?? Lucroy puts up very good offensive numbers for a catcher, not a third baseman. Keep Lucroy as a catcher and let the Brewers work on finding a quality third baseman. Guys like Coulter should be moved off catcher, projectable power bats that have time to learn a different position in the minors.

[zzzmanwitz]

You guys are overreacting to the initial post. He is not saying move him from being the full time catcher, but just giving him an option to play the field and get some rest away from catcher. I think he could handle 3B and he would need some time to learn it. This year is as good as any.

 

Now, this may be a mute point if MLB goes to a DH format in both leagues, which is likely to happen soon.

[And That]

So we have a very good catcher (defensively and offensively), who's signed to a very team-friendly deal that will probably lead to a modest-length, team-friendly extension that has LuCroy playing through his prime years as a Brewer, and people want to experiment with him at third or another position?? Lucroy puts up very good offensive numbers for a catcher, not a third baseman.

 

Second point first, Lucroy's OPS this year is .833. MLB third basemen this year have posted a collective .731 OPS. He would have the 7th best OPS among qualified third basemen, between Evan Longoria and Ryan Zimmerman, granted he'd be probably be playing inferior defense to those two. His offense is more than good enough for third.

 

The desire to see Lucroy (small c) play less catcher is to cut down on wear and tear. If his bat plays at another position, why not? It's quite arguable that he's "very good" defensively, especially outside of the pitch framing theory. Plus, he's flat-out stated that he wants to play other positions sometimes.

 

I wouldn't be opposed to giving him only a handful of more starts at catcher this year. It won't affect our playoff chances and would give him the playing time (that he desires to have) at other positions.

[Thurston Fluff]

Torre wasn't a bad catcher at all, but his bat needed to be in the lineup everyday. He became an MVP at 3rd Base. Lucroy is a nice pitch framer but he's at best average defensively and he's not an ironman that you can start 150 games behind the plate without it being detrimental to his offense.

 

I think his catching abilities are far more advanced now than they were a couple season's ago. He's pretty good at throwing out runners and does a decent job of blocking balls in the dirt as far as I can tell. Not great but at least average. I don't know how well he calls a game but then again neither do you so I'm not sure what you are basing your assessment of his sub par defense on.

The desire to see Lucroy (small c) play less catcher is to cut down on wear and tear.

 

If we are concerned about him in the mid 30's this would make sense. He's probably going to be before he breaks down so does that really matter?

[And That]

If we are concerned about him in the mid 30's this would make sense. He's probably going to be before he breaks down so does that really matter?

 

I'm concerned about him right now - there's a reason catchers don't play every day. It's a wear and tear position. He's not good enough defensively (IMO) that we need to stick with him behind the plate all the time and his bat isn't special to the point where he could afford to lose something and not lose most of his value.

 

I value his bat more than his defense, so I'd rather not see the former suffer due to the latter.

 

And again, he himself said that he'd like to help out at other positions. I have no problem with that, as long as he's not being plunked down at a somewhat high learning curve position like third base randomly a handful of times a month.

[Thurston Fluff]

He isn't playing every day. He playing about what normal catchers do isn't he? Has there been any sign that he does wear down as the year goes on?

[BrewCrewForever]

I don't really like the idea of him playing 3B, but I would not be opposed to him getting some more time at 1B on the days Maldonado catches.

[HiAndTight]

Maldonado is inconsequential. There will always be a backup catcher, whether it is him or some other guy.

 

The point is to keep the rigors of catching from reducing Lucroy's effectiveness at bat.

 

Catchers burn out much faster than position players, so it makes sense to move them to other positions at times. Yogi played the OF. Mauer and Posey have spent some time at 1B. Johnny Bench played 3B. Even Dave Nilsson got out from behind the plate.

 

I think the Brewers should pick one or the other, either 1B or 3B, to give Lucroy a place for some time away from catching--but not both. To me, 3B seems beyond his ability, but I'm not a scout.

 

 

 

I picked 3rd base because I think that he has the feet for it and I think he's athletic enough for it while 1st base it much easier to fill. To use his our collective performance at 1st base is a poor reason not to however as I'm not advocating moving him next year to play 130 games there.

 

 

But your 1st sentence was exactly the point. You VERY seldom see catchers sustain success while sticking behind the plate. Too many things can go wrong, injuries, just the wear and tear, the focus needed to play catcher. Just a way to keep him in the lineup and healthier over a longer period of time.

[HiAndTight]

Nope. Nope, nope and nope.

 

Why would you take the best (or 2nd best) pitch framer in the league and move him to 3B?

 

To give a guy with a career .646 minor league OPS more PAs?

 

First of all, are we serious about this "pitch framing stuff?"

 

Even throughout the article the author cites several reasons why it's not exactly a valid "stat," if you even want to call it that.

 

Once more, reading a little closer;

What you can’t do with these numbers — which you can do with PITCHf/x — is split them up by catcher. So simply based on this, we don’t know how much credit should go to Lucroy or how much should go to Martin Maldonado.

 

 

So maybe Maldonado is just that good?

[HiAndTight]

You guys are overreacting to the initial post. He is not saying move him from being the full time catcher, but just giving him an option to play the field and get some rest away from catcher. I think he could handle 3B and he would need some time to learn it. This year is as good as any.

 

Now, this may be a mute point if MLB goes to a DH format in both leagues, which is likely to happen soon.

 

 

Especially since I specifically stated this would be in theory a very slow transition and something they STARTED to do next year, not this year(so not just throwing him into the fire).

 

This is being met with almost exclusively short term objections. I'm looking at his bat and looking down the road and simply suggesting the Brewers explore the possibility of giving Lucroy some more days off from catching so he can continue to hit well and give him some starts in the field.

 

And the natural inclination is to make 1st base. I simply happen to believe that Lucroy had the athletic ability to play the other corner IF position.

 

With regard to Maldonado, I'll stick with what I said. I think he's a vastly superior defensive catcher, and I believe if he were given 30-40 starts behind the plate the next couple years he could post a line a lot closer to last years than this years. He was starting to hit well in AA and AAA. And those dismissing him are dismissing his catching ability. I've already stated my opinion on trying to quantify which catcher is the best at framing pitching because I frankly think it's just a laughable statistic.

 

 

Right now if you made a list of the best catchers in baseball I'd go something like this;

Buster Posey(6'1 225)

Yadier Molina(5'11 225) A generous listing IMO, but he's certainly much thicker).

Matt Wieters(6'5 245)

Joe Mauer(6'5 230)

Brian McCann(6'3 230)

Salvador Perez(6'3 245)

Jason Castro(6'3 215)

 

Lucroy checks in at about 6'0 and 195.

 

 

So it's got nothing to do with "wanting," to move him from out behind the plate for any reason other than I think he's more likely to break down physically and would like to take some of the pressure off his body so he can sustain his success. Although it does help having a guy whom I believe is an elite defensive catcher with some pop in his bat on the team as well. And it's pretty easy to see why most catchers move to 1st base or DH when their not playing. Their quite a bit bigger(which as Jason Kendall proved doesn't ALWAYS mean more durable, but about 100 others have) and built to take the pounding of catching 140 games a year.

 

People on this board(and rightfully so) are constantly talking about how the Brewers should be proactive. Well, I think a "proactive move," would be giving Lucroy fewer games behind the plate, and it's quite a bit easier to find a good offensive 3rd basemen than a 1st basemen. Prolong his prime years and if we're lucky enough to be playing big games in Sept or Oct in the next few years, by all means, keep him behind the plate for those where he is most valuable.

 

He'll be 28 next June so it's not like there is a rush to do this, but there is no harm in having him field some GB's at 3rd base next ST'ing. If he struggles there, he struggles.

[igor67]

Not sure why you think the framing research is laughable. The results are repeatable year to year, they are consistent in terms of identifying catchers who were identified as good framers prior to the methodology, and framing has long been a skill talked about by baseball men. About the only thing surprising about the research has been the magnitude of the effect for the best catchers.

[jerichoholicninja]

Framing shouldn't make one bit of difference since the umpire shouldn't be looking at the catcher's glove. He should be looking at the front of the plate since that's where the strike zone is.

[logan82]

It shouldn't but it does and will continue until the rise of the robot overlords, I mean umpires.

[RockCoCougars]

I'm not a fan of the idea. Over the years, it seems the few times that the Brewers have developed a catcher who can hit, they can't move him off the position fast enough. In five years, I may be on board, but not now.