Nats sign Josh Bard

[Minty Fresh]

Minty, I haven't watched Bard much at all, but is he considered a significantly inferior catcher to Nieves? 

If Nieves is slightly better defensively, and Bard a little better offensively, might be a push.

As a CATCHER, I liked Brad better than Martinez in the Indians system.  Bard was less of a hitter and the Tribe neded offense so Martinez won the job.  Now, Martinez has actually worked quite hard at becoming better at the position and the year off may actually help him since he's had even more time to work on mechanics. 

I always though Bard was a good catcher to begin with and I liked what I saw in Boston, I just don't hink he got a fair shake there.  I understand his offense improved dramatically in San Diego.  If he's still the guy I saw in Cleveland with better offensive capabilities, I'd say he's quite comparable to what we've seen so far from Flores.

[Minty Fresh]

4 every THOUSAND chances. A couple more per season, no? Who gives a crap? Posada was hitting a huge number of HR's.

But the difference then becomes that if a pitcher cannot trust his catcher to block a pitch in the dirt, he's less likely to throw it down and thereby leading to leaving his pitches up, thereby leading to more mistakes high in the strikezone, thereby leading to more extra-base hits, thereby leading to more runs scored against him, etc., etc., etc.

Ask pitchers in Texas, Detroit and New York what they felt about throwing to Ivan Rodriguez.

[tomterp]

Christina Kahrl discusses the release of Bard by the Red Sox:

Bard's release had very little to do with his having a good or bad camp—he was hitting just fine, but the Sox would have owed him as much as a fifth of his salary instead of a sixth had they kept him any longer, and the entire $1.7 million had he made the team on Opening Day. Now, perhaps holding onto him could have made some extra bit of sense, you might think, because surely they'd be able to peddle him before that point, no? No. Because included in the elaborately silly explanation to themselves about what their non-Tek catcher must do is that this unnamed someone or somebody must catch Tim Wakefield, because the alternative, like, say, asking Jason Varitek to, y'know, do so is apparently inconceivable and defies several local ordinances, not to mention that it contravenes matters of faith handed down from William Bradford or Cotton Mather or Eddie Collins or some other rigid keeper of unquestioned tradition. I guess I look at the scenario and wonder again why retaining Varitek made any sense. Consider the median projected performances of Boston's alternatives for donning the tools of ignorance:


Dude     Age  PA  AVG/ OBP/ SLG/ EqA   VORP   WARP
Varitek   37 258 .235/.323/.389/.249    3.4    1.4
Bard      31 245 .265/.337/.386/.253    4.9    1.0
Kottaras  26 404 .214/.302/.370/.235  -10.0    0.6
Brown     27 336 .205/.275/.326/.209  -11.5    0.3

There's a lot of unproductive bloodlessness here, and with the choice being between something to sink your teeth into or cucumber sandwiches, I'm left asking, "where's the beef?"* Instead, we have a special sort of sacred cow that people shouldn't necessarily stop traffic for, let alone accommodate when the ticklish subject of catching flutterballs arises. Not that there's no time like the present for Kottaras, but the present isn't going to be very special, and if something happens to Varitek, the Sox get left with the same sorry state of affairs they had to deal with last year: something in a scrubby or non-prospect flavor, while punting offensive production at a lineup slot in the name of turning the catcher position into a sinecure for a former talent and a former prospect. If getting rid of the best hitter of the four catchers in camp sounds like a great idea to you, you probably work for the Rays or Yankees.

At its core, this just doesn't make much sense. The financial stakes of retaining Bard are relatively low as these things go, but because the Red Sox seem to be operating their decision tree on who does what behind the plate with a group of iron-clad if/then statements—"if Wakefield pitches, then Tek cannot catch"—they don't seem to be considering the more basic question of whether or not they have a good catcher, and what might actually make them better while trying to avoid the fate of last year's Yankees.

[blue911]

Good to see Neut give Varitek a kick in the crotch. Or is this a backhanded shot a Bill James?

[PANatsFan]

Kottaras is a lousy hitter. Why don't they teach a bench player to catch Wakefield?

[blue911]

Kottaras is a lousy hitter. Why don't they teach a bench player to catch Wakefield?

Why don't they asking their freaking captain to do his freaking job?

[Minty Fresh]

Why don't they asking their freaking captain to do his freaking job?

While I your sentiment, I really like Varitek (though am willing to admit that he's not what he once was).

[blue911]

While I your sentiment, I really like Varitek (though am willing to admit that he's not what he once was).

I don't have a problem with using the backup guy as Wakefield's chauffeur to a point. Varitek can't play every day and a personal catcher isn't a bad idea. But when you make the team worse because the TEAM CAPTAIN doesn't/won't catch one of the starters I get a little pissy.

[PANatsFan]

Why don't they asking their freaking captain to do his freaking job?

ssh I'm trying to bait Minty.

[blue911]

ssh I'm trying to bait Minty.

Oh! Well then I'll just keep this between the two of us.