The Jorge Posada Appreciation Thread
By
(AP Photo/Tony Dejak)
Who has been the most valuable Yankee of the past 15 years? Last month Joe Posnanski wrote about the topic, assuming that it came down to Derek Jeter and Mariano Rivera. That’s not a poor assumption. Those two have been staples in the Yankees’ lineup during that span, and they’re certainly the two most famous Yankees of that period. But he missed someone who deserves to be in the conversation. In fact, if you run a quick text search on that post you won’t see Jorge Posada‘s name mentioned once.
According to the FanGraphs WAR system, Jorge Posada has been worth 52.8 wins over a replacement catcher in his career, which place him 14th all-time. That list also includes some players, like Joe Torre, who didn’t catch for their entire careers. The Baseball-Reference database has him at 46.4 WAR, 12th all-time among catchers. It’s just so rare to see a catcher be that good for that long. That gives Posada incredible value to the Yankees.
Even as he ages Posada continues to produce for the Yankees. He just turned 39 in August, though this is his age-38 season. Only one catcher in history has produced an OPS+ of more than 100 in his age-38 or later season while playing at least 60 percent of his games at catcher. That would be Carlton Fisk, who had a 136 OPS+ in 419 PA at age 41, and a 134 OPS+ in 521 PA at age 42. This year Posada has a 123 OPS+ in 421 PA. His .478 SLG currently ranks above any catcher in his age-38 or higher season.
(AP Photo/Chris O'Meara)
Posada takes care of everything for the Yankees. Sometimes that means hitting a gargantuan game-winning home run in Tampa. Other times it means working an 11-pitch at-bat to start the ninth, opening the door for a teammate to drive home the winning runs. He might not hit for that high an average, but he can hit for power and he gets on base at a clip far better than most catchers. He is one player who helps the lineup go ’round.
Chances are Posada will never be a Hall of Famer. He just doesn’t have the sexy numbers. But if he finishes this year strong and puts up a similar season next year, he has to at least cause a Bert Blyleven-like debate. I’ll look forward to that one sometime at the end of this decade. For now I just want to take the time to appreciate all Jorge Posada has been for the Yanks over the years.
Google+
151 Comments»
Keep up with RAB
Yankees News from YESNetwork.com
- Jeter records milestone hit in Monday's loss
- Three stars for Yankees against the Blue Jays
- Captain's Log: Derek Jeter's career against the Texas Rangers
- Chase Headley quickly adapting to the Yankee way
- Torre inducted into Baseball Hall of Fame
- Yankees Postgame Notebook: 'Today just wasn't our day'
- Yankees fan returns lost World Series ring
- Capuano's debut spoiled in loss to Blue Jays
- Ichiro's blast powers Yankees to 6-4 win over Jays
- Yankees will use Chris Capuano as a starter
Banner Design By
The Eric Jagielo Watch
Masthead
The Founders
Mike Axisa, Ben Kabak, Joe Pawlikowski
Editor-In-Chief
Mike Axisa Archives | Email
Managing Editors
Ben Kabak Archives | E-mail
Joe Pawlikowski Archives | E-mail
Technical Manager
Jay Gordon
Beloved Alumni
Larry Koestler (Archives)
Moshe Mandel (Archives)
Eric Schultz (Archives)
Matthew Warden (Archives)
(pees on hands in appreciation)
That comment was awesome. High five!!!
You probably don’t want to high five me after what I just did with my hands.
Who has been the most valuable Yankee of the past 15 years? Last month Joe Posnanski wrote about the topic, assuming that it came down to Derek Jeter and Mariano Rivera. That’s not a poor assumption. Those two have been staples in the Yankees’ lineup during that span, and they’re certainly the two most famous Yankees of that period. But he missed someone who deserves to be in the conversation.
He missed two people who deserve to be in the conversation.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_2Ueh.....osters.jpg
No one was feared as much as Bernaby was, that’s for sure.
His career FAR (Fear Above Replacement level) was a mind-bottling 127.4.
Though, at the same time, Bernie really didn’t have any great seasons after 2002. On the other hand his bWAR from 95-2006 was 41, so that’s pretty freaking valuable.
Bernie’s 47.3 career WAR in pinstripes is the 9th best in Yankee history (position players only).
Jorge is 11th. Don Mattingly is 20th.
Hideki was 44th.
Bernie gets forgotten WAAAAYYYY too often. He might have been the single most important Yankee of the 1995-2001 period (if someone wants to do the WAR calculations or whatever…). But the whole ~Core Four~ thing really hurts his rep, because he’s not still playing.
And because “four” rhymes with “core”.
He’d have to be part of the “Five Alive”, and that’s not as catchy. It was delicious, though.
Bernie hurt himself by being so shitty at the end, plus the awkward exit, plus being so under the radar as it was.
I still kind of resent him for being indirectly responsible for the Dark Age of Melky.
That’s why I can’t stand that big douchebag Lou Gehrig, because he had to die and be indirectly responsible for the Dark Age of Babe Dahlgren.
What an asshole.
That was so funny, I nearly peed on my hands.
WAR, 2995-2001
Bernie: 36.2
Jeter: 31.3
Andy: 26.9
Mo: 22.7
O’Neill: 17.9
Tino: 13.1 (17.7 overall from 1995-2001. This surprised me. 1997 was his only really good year in pinstripes.)
Jorge: 13.0 (not really fair–what with the playing time and all)
Brosius: 8.1 (12.7 overall from 1995-2001)
Knoblauch: 6.6 (28.3 overall from 1995-2001)
Paul O´Neill anyone?
Nope. Not enough time in pinstripes, producing, and not a high enough level.
Fun Fact: ARod in 7 years in pinstripes has produced almost TWICE the bWAR that O’Neill produced in 9 years in pinstripes.
O’Neill: 24.8
CentWAR Centaur™: 40.4 (and counting)
I think that more and more people are waking up to how great Posada really is. The Yankees would not have been nearly as good over the last decade + without him.
I’m glad this was written. I was just saying to myself a week ago how remarkable it is that Jorge Posada was able to give the Yankees 400+ PA’s, 3+ WAR and the league’s second-best offense at catcher (.295 TAv and .370 wOBA) as a 39-year-old. Really one of the best things to happen this year.
Fact: Posada has a higher brWAR & fgWAR than Fisk between the ages 26-35. I didn’t believe it myself when I looked it up. Of course, catcher defense is very hard to quantify.
Never be a hall of famer? Seriously? I think the rings should put him over the top.
I think the rings should never put anyone over the top, but sadly, you may be right. If it happens, Jorge’d be getting in for the wrong reasons (although he probably does deserve to be in).
This is all very subjective, but I actually disagree a little bit… I think ‘putting someone over the top’ is exactly the situation in which something like championships should be considered. Only in cases where someone is maybe borderline – look at the context of his career for some more color on his impact on the game. If you have a borderline guy who won a bunch of championships, I don’t have a problem looking at that as context and as something that could put that guy over the top.
It’s when we look at something like championships earlier in the process that I have a problem with it. A guy shouldn’t get into the discussion because of something like championships – the resume should be strong enough to put him, at the very least, right on the cusp. But using something like championships as that one tiny little push to put a guy with an otherwise worthy resume over the top? I think I’m ok with that.
This is where we just disagree, then. I can’t consider team accomplishments for an individual honorific.
But how do you just disregard things that happened on the field of play?
I get the hesitance to EVER consider team accomplishments for something like MVP or Cy Young – but the distinction is that those are awards that are competitive and only go to one guy per season, so docking a player for playing on a bad team, or rewarding a player for playing on a good team, is hard to swallow.
But for the Hall of Fame, we’re honoring a career body-of-work. And yeah, it sucks that some players get to play on bigger stages and in bigger moments than others, but that’s life. I think this idea that we can’t consider team accomplishments in ANY way, in that context, is putting your head in the sand a bit.
He’s not disregarding things that happened on the field. He’s just not giving a player credit for being on a team fortunate enough to win the WS. We can consider it, but team accomplishments are overrated in this type of evaluation.
That.
I’m not disregarding what happened on the field, I’m just recognizing that an individual honor (the Hall of Fame) should be judged based on what that individual did.
Jorge didn’t win those rings, the New York Yankees won those rings. No player has ever won a ring by himself.
No player has ever won a ring by himself.
Casey Kelly in 2004 and 2007.
Touché.
But he contributed to those wins, no? That’s all I’m saying.
What I’m saying isn’t far at all from what you guys are saying. I’ve had this conversation before and had this same problem. I’m not taking the stance that a guy gets into the Hall of Fame just because he was on a good team, I’m saying that in certain, pretty narrowly defined situations, the fact that a guy maybe hit a big postseason HR or had a big postseason start can factor into that player’s career accomplishments.
And I’m saying that you can consider that big postseason homer or big postseason start without considering whether or not his team went on to win the title that year.
Barry Bonds’s amazing 2002 postseason absolutely carries weight in his HoF candidacy. The fact that the Giants didn’t beat the Angels should not.
Whatever, I think the black-and-white nature of the way some people talk about this stuff just rubs me the wrong way. I’m not saying Bonds’ postseason should be discounted because his team didn’t win that WS.
Hypothetically, what if he had 5 rings but was utterly craptastic in the playoffs? Would you consider the rings to put him over the top or his actual performance and downgrade him?
No, that’s not what I’m saying at all, and I think you probably know that. I specifically said I’m talking about “things that happened on the field of play.” I’m not saying you push a guy over the top for simply being on a good team, I’m saying you might push a guy over the top for how he contributed to that good team, even though he may have only been in those situations because he was on a good team, etc.
Look… To everyone… I hear you, and I’m not saying we reward someone for something done by other people.
(Also… I think I was pretty clear that I’m talking about looking at this stuff in very few situations and in a very narrow context. I’m only talking about it as ancillary evidence to give context/color/further understanding of a guy’s career.)
So… Basically… Do I reward a guy who hit .125 in the postseason but whose team won? No. But do I consider it as evidence in his favor if he put up decent numbers and maybe even (I hesitate to say this because I know it’ll make heads explode a bit) had a big moment or two in the postseason? Yes.
Ok. I get that.
You’re arguing against a strawman of my position, though, Mondesi.
I didn’t say I don’t consider Jorge’s postseasons for his HoF candidacy. I don’t consider Jorge’s RINGS as part of his HoF candidacy.
If a player has a good postseason, it helps his candidacy. If he has a bad one, it hurts it.
Whether his team wins or loses in that postseason does not. A player who hits .100/.200/.300 in a postseason where his team wins a ring gets docked in my book; the ring doesn’t help. A player who hits .400/.500/.600 in a postseason where his team doesn’t win the ring gets lauded in my book; the fact that they didn’t win the ring doesn’t hurt.
Titles won ≠ postseason performance.
“You’re arguing against a strawman of my position, though, Mondesi.”
I could say the same thing about you guys. Like I said above, I think the problem here is that our positions aren’t really so different, I think we’re just saying things differently.
Yeah… no.
If you’re going to post a snarky-response with absolutely zero substance, you could choose to just, like, for the sake of civility, not post that response at all, right? Just throwing it out there.
“I’m saying you might push a guy over the top for how he contributed to that good team, even though he may have only been in those situations because he was on a good team, etc.”
Huh? Everyone is looking at what happens on the field… I mean what else would you look at? You look at how a guy contributed to a good team and you also look at how a guy contributed to a bad team: individual impact/performance/contribution. Your argument is effectively that team accomplishments should not be considered.
No, I think my argument is that you can put a little bit of special emphasis on a postseason accomplishment. A HR hit in the World Series in a big spot can be considered when analyzing a player’s career – again, in very narrowly defined and relatively rare cases. Or, even without a big postseason performance or moment, I think that if a guy who has a HoF consideration-worthy resume played on a team that won a bunch of division titles or pennants or WS championships, and that guy didn’t perform badly in those postseasons, I think you can mark that as a check in his column.
But none of that is TEAM TITLES WON, Mondesi.
All those postseason accomplishments — what he hit, how he pitched — are fine to include. Whether or not his team won the ring, that shouldn’t be included.
It’s totally unreasonable to think that a guy who played on 4 World Series winning teams should get some credit for those wins?
This is where I think the positions aren’t so different, a statement you seem to reject. Obviously once you say “well this guy was on 4 teams that won the WS, which I think is a check in his column,” you then look at his performance and make sure he wasn’t the last guy on the bench for those teams and/or didn’t shit the bed in the postseason, so it does come back to the individual player’s performance. But I don’t think it’s unreasonable to use WS titles won as an indicator, and I think it’s something to be considered. How many guys who fit my criteria (again, guys who have HoF consideration-worthy resumes) are going to turn out to be non-factors, or even negative contributors, to their teams that won 4 World Series titles? I think that’s pretty unlikely.
Heh, I don’t think playoff stats are actually considered. The rings will probably put him over the top, though. I’m not in favor of crediting a player for team accomplishments.
“Heh, I don’t think playoff stats are actually considered.”
What? I’m pretty sure playoff stats are considered.
They’re considered, but not very heavily. I mean they aren’t essential into getting in. If a great player has bad playoff numbers, so what?
It works more the other way. If a meh player has great playoff stats, then they get a boost.
The writers are generally smart enough not to penalize a player because their team didn’t make the playoffs.
You’re probably right, but it’s still retarded. Why reward a player who did well in 50 plus ABs?
Why reward a player who did well in 50 plus ABs?
Because they can?
Touché.
“You’re probably right, but it’s still retarded.”
I’m not angry here, I’m really just saying this in the spirit of participating in an interesting conversation and being a little helpful… But calling someone else’s position “retarded” is probably not the best way to go about things. I’m not coming in here flame-throwing and espousing completely asinine theories, and I don’t think I have a reputation for doing so. I may be wrong, but I think I’m, at the very least, participating in this conversation in good faith.
The writers consider whatever they want.
Included bullshit like how feared someone was. But not actually how feared they were. More like how feared people wished they were back in the day, but trying to remember that 20 years after the fact.
I agree with those who say team accomplishments should not be considered. In basketball I can see discussing the issue since there are 5 guys on the court and one guy has more impact, but with 9 guys in the line-up, 5 starting pitchers, and a bullpen/bench… one player only has so much control over his team’s performance.
Forgetting how he has performed in the postseason (not great, but not terrible), he has appeared in (not sure how many he started) 111 postseason games to date, which is not far off from another full season for a catcher.
One could (maybe)argue that the wear and tear of catching during his annual trips to the postseason have had a negative effect on his individual regular season numbers.
I agree. When folks look back on this era, and see what Jorge has managed to do, I don’t see how he doesn’t eventually make it. In fact, the five rings probably put Pettitte over the top too.
But Jorge stands on his own. He’s a better hitter than Pudge and a better fielder than Piazza. He was never the best catcher in the game but he’s been top 3 for over 15 years. I don’t see how voters miss that.
He’s a better hitter than Pudge and a better fielder than Piazza.
That doesn’t really matter, though. While he may have been a better hitter than Pudge (and that’s only because Pudge has had a long tail end of crappiness; Pudge during his prime was every bit the hitter that Posada was), Pudge’s defense more than makes up for it. While he may have been a better defender than Piazza, Piazza’s offense more than makes up for it.
Splitting his offense and defense into two separate evaluations and picking a defense-centric elite comparison to compare his offense to and an offense-centric elite comparison to compare his defense to is a bit disingenuous, IMO. Borderline quotemining.
“Pudge during his prime was every bit the hitter that Posada was”
I don’t see that. I see that Pudge had an excellent peak, but it was gone by the time he was 32.
My point was to show that Jorge falls between the both of them. And he does. If we could average Pudge with Piazza I think Posada comes out the other side. You get well-above average offense with average defense. Isn’t that Jorge?
32 was the end of his prime. For the decade before that, he had a 120 OPS+.
Problem is what do you call Jorge’s ten best years or his “prime”? 1998 to now? If so that’s a 128 OPS+.
Like I said, Jorge’s been the better hitter. 8% over 10 years is pretty significant. It’s also no wonder his bat has aged so well with the IsoP.
Fair enough.
Let’s amend my statement to say ““Pudge during his prime was
every bit thevery good, almost as good a hitterthatas Posada was.”Better?
Pudge during his prime was
every bit the hitter that Posada wasa pincushion.FTFY
Reading (well, skimming quickly) the thread, I’m not all that sure that TSJC and the Honorable Mondesi really disagree. I see common ground on the concept that the # of rings does not equal entry into the HOF, but how a player performs in the postseason could elevate him to the HOF if he was in s borderline area.
Mariano Rivera (who is not borderline in my book) has obviously fashioned quite an exceptional postseason resume, tossing what equates to approximately two full regular seasons (133 innings) of postseason ball, and doing it against a higher-level of competition, higher stakes, for multiple innings at a clip, and with overall better numbers than in the regular season, which is staggering considering his great regular-season numbers. Many have identified him as the most indespensible player of the late 90s dynasty Yankees in helping them to their four titles. Any voter would have to take that into account when deciding his entry into the HOF. If a voter viewed him as borderline (and there probably are some whom have issues with relievers in general making the Hall), then Rivera’s postseason work may push that voter over the top.
To put it another way, imagine it was Billy Wagner, who was the Yankees closer over the years, and he has the same regular season resume, but now craft Rivera’s postseason heroics and numbers onto Wagner’s resume. Wagner is regarded as a great reliever, but most don’t think he’s done enough for the HOF. If he had Rivera’s postseason record that might not be the case.
I can’t credit a guy for just being on the roster, yet I can’t ignore great accomplishments in the postseason.
Hip, hip Jorge!
That would be Carlton Fisk, who had a 136 OPS+ in 419 PA at age 41, and a 134 OPS+ in 521 PA at age 42.
That’s normal……
But those were from 1989 and 1990, and we all know that steroids didn’t enter baseball until 1993.
But those were from 1989 and 1990, and we all know that steroids didn’t enter baseball until
19931998 when Alex Rodriguez personally shared his own massive illegal steroids stash with Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa, Jose Canseco Barry Bonds, and every other single non-Red Sox member of baseball..Fixed.
Sincerely,
The MSM
I wish this were true.
Not to mention his 37 HR’s at the age of 37 while playing 153 games.
Didn’t he come out with strong words toward someone suspected of PEDs because they had a really good season while old?
He probably did.
But he’s from New Hampshire so he gets the Jim Thome “Country Strong” label and avoids any and all suspicion.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.c.....index.html
yea, he did. He was talking about McGwire
If you read the quotes, he basically rips into McGwire not so much for using steroids, but for claiming that they didn’t help him hit home runs. Fisk never claims that he was clean himself. He does point out the absurd power numbers, but to me it seems more a factual argument (steroids increase power numbers) and not a moral argument (steroids are evil).
bWAR per 650 PAs:
Johnny Bench: 5.35
Bill Dickey: 5.01
Mike Piazza: 4.96
Yogi Berra: 4.81
Gary Carter: 4.78
Thurman Munson: 4.78
Gabby Hartnett: 4.48
JORGE POSADA: 4.48
Carlton Fisk: 4.44
Ivan Rodriguez: 4.34
Joe Torre: 4.11
Seems about right, but I don’t think bWAR properly factors in Pudge. He should be higher.
Pudge is hurt because he has played so long. He has posted an OPS+ over 97 since 2004. Also he had 4 sub-100 OPS seasons early in his career.
Yup. It’s a Tale Of Three Pudges.
Pudge, Age 19-21: 348 games, .266/.301/.379 (89+)
Pudge, Age 22-32: 1410 games, 315/.357/.513 (120+)
Pudge, Age 33-38: 734 games, .277/.302/.409 (86+)
It was the worst of times, it was the best of times, it was the worst of times.
I’d argue that .266/.301/.379 (89+), coupled with stellar defense (he threw out over 50% of would-be base stealers over those two years) is pretty darn good for a 19-20 year old catcher.
True.
Right. I also mean to say that I don’t think any version of WAR does a good job factoring in catcher’s defense.
This.
Jorge Posada’s HOF case does not need to be made on the basis of team performance.
Relative to the performance of players at his position, Posada is easily one of the 15 best catchers to play all time and is approaching top 10 conversation.
Jorge has been great but is there anyone among us who saw them both play that would say he was better, or meant more to the Yanks success during his career, than Munson?
I didn’t see them both play.
What I do see, though, is that Jorge is a much better offensive force than Munson (.276/.378/.480 123+ v. .292/.346/.410 116+) and that Jorge’s teams had more success than Munson’s teams (four rings and counting v. two rings).
Whether that means Jorge’s “better” and “meant more to the Yanks success”, I’m not sure. It’s persuasive, though.
Not to denigrate Jorge but when you consider Thurmon’s post-season performances vs. Jorge’s it is really not close at all as to who you’d rather have.
It’s 135 plate appearances.
Yes, they’re impressive, but no, they’re not enough to drastically swing the balance to Thurman’s side or make us ignore the fact that Posada was a much more consistently dominant offensive force for a longer stretch of time.
less gritty for sure. Thurm was the original grittster and hit for higher average..
Not sure I agreed. Jorge has taken a beating back there. Except for the shoulder surgery, he’s been very durable too.
He hasn’t had to lead in the same way. Jeter arrived first. Without Jeter I have no doubt Jorge would have taken more of a vocal role. That’s his attitude. In fact, he seems very much like Munson.
Isn’t it Good Cop/Bad Cop, with Jeter offering positive words of advice and/or excess groupies while Jorge pees on people and throws their equipment into the hallway?
Munson’s career pales in comparison to Posada’s. He may have had a higher peak, but he declined much more quickly. I love the guy too, but don’t get all nostalgic on us.
Munson’s final season was his age 32 year. He certainly would’ve added to his counting stats more, but his rate stats definitely would have suffered as he got further away from his prime years.
As evidenced by the decline he already showed during the 1977-78-79 seasons (e.g., the slugging falling off a cliff).
Hard to compare them but Jorge has had a better cast around him. Munson batted third mostly, rookie of the year, MVP-1976 and a .357 post season batting average in 6 series. Hit .292/career and didn’t strikeout much. I’m glad we had them both and am strongly hoping/feeling that Montero will be better than both eventually.
Hard to compare them but Jorge has had a better cast around him.
He did?
Chambliss, Nettles, White, Maddox, Bonds, Randolph, Rivers, Gamble, Reggie, Pinella… seems like they both played on teams full of offensive talents. If Posada’s teams were better, it wasn’t by a lot, IMO.
Well-I’m glad you didn’t challenge any of my other points here!
You want it, you got it.
Munson batted third mostly,
And he hit .290/.332/.401 while doing it. And he batted third because he came up on a team that had only Roy White and Bobby Murcer as the only two other good offensive players. Posada batted 5th and 6th mostly, and hit better than Munson while doing it (.273/.372/.455 and .290/.394/.515), and he hit where he hit in the order because we already had an established 3-4-5 core in O’Neill/Williams/Martinez. A lot of batting order is timing and circumstance. If the Yankee team he joined had been weaker, Jorge probably would have hit 3 or 4 from the beginning.
rookie of the year,
A nice honorific, but one that doesn’t really help us determine who was better. Thurman came up and was the fulltime catcher instantly. Jorge was in a timeshare with Joe Girardi, who was one of our high-priced FA imports. He didn’t take over behind the dish fulltime until after his rookie eligibility had expired. Jorge didn’t have the same chance to win that Munson did.
MVP-1976
An award he may not have deserved. Go look at what George Brett did in 1976. Or, for that matter, Thurman’s teammates Graig Nettles and Mickey Rivers, who both had higher bWARs than Thurman did (thanks to excellent defensive campaigns).
Again, like RoY and other honorifics, the BBWAA is so frequently wrong that citing awards won isn’t a very reliable way to determine which player is better. If we went by RoYs and MVPs, we might stupidly think that Andre Dawson was a better player than Tim Raines and elect the wrong man into the Hall of Fame.
(Wait, that happened? DAMN YOU, BBWAA!!!!)
.357 post season batting average in 6 series
He’s a great postseason hitter, for sure. Better than Posada. I won’t argue this. It’s not more compelling than other counterarguments, though.
Hit .292/career and didn’t strikeout much.
But he didn’t hit extra-base hits as often as Jorge did, and he made outs at a higher rate than Jorge did. Batting average and strikeouts are not the end-all, be-all of offensive production.
Tommie and Chris,
Did you see Munson play? just curious since I know you’ll respond with “what does that have to do with it? if you didn’t…
I’ve already stated I didn’t. Munson died when I was two.
He may have had a higher peak
Munson’s best season was 1973 when he has a 141 OPS+. Posada topped that twice (144 in 2003 and 153 in 2007) and was close a third time (139 in 2000). Munson had 4 additional seasons with an OPS+ over 120 and Posada has had 5.
So it’s not even clear that Munson had a better peak.
Chances are Posada will never be a Hall of Famer.
I think he will be a Hall of Famer. Maybe not a first-balloter, but he’s never been tainted with PED accusations, and he has the offensive numbers to back up his candidacy.
Agreed. The Core Four will carry him too. Whereas he could have been a much more divisive personality, because of his red ass, he’s surround by three guys plus Bernie who make him look much better.
He’s borderline on his own. But the rings, the organization, and his teammates put him over.
…he’s never been tainted with PED accusations…
He’s been tainted with PEED accusations, though.
HIYOO
A+ comment
I think the fact that people are already discussing his HOF merits will help. I have a theory that guys who’s merits are discussed have a better chance. I think most people who watched Tim Raines play in the 1980’s knew they were watching a Hall of Famer, so his merits weren’t discussed. Then the HR era came and diminished many of the things that players did in the 80’s. The fact the Posada’s case is being debated more than 5 years before his name is on a ballot can only be a good thing for him, because if you dig deeper into more modern stats, you can make a fantastic case.
Speaking of digging deeper into modern stats…
Posada will absolutely be helped by the more astute voters, whereas Pettitte’s candidacy will probably be hurt.
He has a little bit of a Jack Morris-type career. Except Pettitte was more consistent, and much better. Lots of win, but not 300. Great postseason reputation, but probably overblown. No Cy Youngs, a few all-star games.
Don’t want to veer too far off topic, but I think its interesting that one guy will probably benefit from the paradigm shift, while his long-time teammate will not.
I think its interesting that one guy will probably benefit from the paradigm shift, while his long-time teammate will not.
I think it’s interesting and awesome.
Jack Morris: 105 ERA+
Andy Pettitte: 118 ERA+
They’re really not all that close in terms of performance.
And Morris pitched in a pitchers’ era, Pettitte pitched in a hitters’ era.
That’s why I said Pettitte was more consistent and much better. The comparison was making reference to both guys winning a bunch of games, but not reaching any magical plateau, having a good big game reputation, and not really having very high “black ink” scores.
Jack Morris was a poor man’s Andy Pettitte. If Morris gets into the HOF (god knows he has undeserved momentum), then Andy should be in. And so should Schilling and Mussina and many other pitchers.
Schilling and Moose should be in regardless of what happens with Pettitte and Morris, IMO.
Agreed. But as was the case with Rice, once you set that precedent a lot more guys deserve to make it. It’s a slippery slope.
He’s my boy. I really am incredibly fond of him. Like, you know how sometimes, if someone says something even moderately critical of Jeter, people get RAEG!!!!-y? That’s like me with Posada. I just feel like he’s not appreciated at all, and people treat him like he’s been a detriment to the team, which is ridiculous.
Not to keep dumping on Cervelli because God knows he gets it enough, but I STILL remember all the “we win with Cervelli! We don’t win with Posada!!” shit from the beginning of the year, and it just really pissed me off that people write Posada off like that. And it seems like they do, every year. Yeah, he sucks defensively, but he is a beast – still.
Andy feels jealous.
The Cervelli Magic Juice that some fans thought existed, both early in the year and last year when he chipped in when Jorge and Molina were dinged up/unavailable/whatever–that drove me crazy. Advocating less playing time for one of the best offensive Cs still active today and a franchise cornerstone for the last 15 years in favor of a no-hit backup was a disgustingly frustrating narrative to deal with. Give me the Glowering Jorge Urine over the Cervelli Magic Juice any day of the week.
and was that an infield hit I saw yesterday? And what about his SB’s this year? guy does it all….
According to B-R’s WAR system, Posada is 10th among catchers (with 75% of games at C).
The top 5 guys played considerably more games (between 400-800 more) – Fisk, Carter, Bench, Pudge, and Berra. Among those 5, only Bench and Yogi were better hitters than Posada.
The 6-9 catchers are Piazza (legendary hitter), Dickey (similar hitter to Jorge), Cochrane (interesting offensive numbers), and Hartnett (very similar rate stats to Jorge).
You could argue that Jorge is anywhere from the 4th to 8th best hitting catcher ever.
Dickey played a similar number of games to Posada. He hit for a higher average, similar SLG, but with 60 fewer HR’s. I assume the funky dimensions of YS1 and other parks of that era contributed to his high 3B totals.
Cochrane played in 223 fewer games, but had only 31 fewer doubles and 70 more hits. He had 1/2 as many HR’s, but he too hit a lot of triples. He has the highest OBP on the list (by a lot) – .419 to Jorge’s .378. Right now, Posada actually has the second highest OBP on the list, just .001 ahead of Piazza.
The most interesting comparison is Gabby Hartnett. His OPS is exactly the same. He had a slightly higher SLG, and lower OBP than Jorge. Hartnett also has Jorge beat in BA by .020 points. But in 290 fewer games, Posada has 25 more HR’s and just 32 fewer 2B’s. Cochrane, like Hartnett and Dickey hit a bunch of triples (64).
It’s clear to me that in today’s ballparks, many (perhaps 60-70%?) of these old-timer’s triples would probably be HR’s. But the game has changed, obviously. Jorge has drawn more walks than any of the guys on the list, despite being less of a hitter than some (Bench and Piazza), and not playing nearly as many games (Fisk, Pudge).
As Joe said above, if Jorge can put together just one more solid season, he should have a much more clear case for the HOF.
Another interesting factoid from B-R:
Mauer’s WAR 38.4 (832 games)
Posada’s WAR 46.4 (1705 games)
Except for that last bit, I was going to say “Great Post!”. Mauer could be the best catcher of all time when all is done and the usual caveats. There’s really no comparison.
B-R’s WAR calculator definitely favors Mauer. Fangraphs has Joe at 32.8 (and Bench 81.5 to B-R’s 71.3)
Why can’t we get 1 standard measurement of WAR?! I get the feeling it’ll be like the metric system and just drag on for decades.
Just wondering about the high 3B totals. I don’t know if anyone can check this, I wonder how many player were thrown out going from second to third trying to stretch a double to a triple. I am thinking the high triples may be a result of more catcher/players trying to go to third and being overly aggressive on the basepaths (in addition to larger ballparks preventing the triples from being homers). The high triples may be similar to how most players in the early years of baseball tried to steal a bunch of bases regardless of how ofter they would get caught stealing.
I believe they call that “Angels Baseball!!!”
Seriously though, I doubt they keep record of 2b’s with a guy thrown out at third. It’s possible that it occurred more often back in the day, but probably more for speed guys than catchers. The fast guys always have some leeway to take risks (see Gardner, Brett; Crawford, Carl).
The bigger impact is probably that the old stadiums were larger. For example Shibe Park (where Cochrane played most of his career) was 468ft to CF and 400ft to left and right center. That’s a lot of extra room to run if the ball gets past an outfielder.
RE rings, I completely disagree that the shouldn’t matter to HOF votes. It’s the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Accumulated Statistics and/or High Peak Seasons.
One shouldn’t get in on the basis of World Series rings alone, but when a guy is on the cusp of making it from his own individual accomplishments, being one of the top players on four world championship teams, and one of the greatest teams of all time, can certainly be thrown into the mix. I see nothing wrong with that at all.
Same goes for Pettitte.
Please use the reply button. Thanks in advance.
If it’s the Hall of “Fame” why isn’t Jose Canseco in then? He was awesome, won titles and has made a huge impact on the game long after he retired.
Same goes for Tommy John in a way.
Start the campaign to get John inducted not as a player, but as a pioneer.
Jose Canseco isn’t in because he’s an ass and admitted steroid user, which are two things the BBWAA hate.
The BBWAA doesn’t hate asses, they hate asses that were mean to them personally.
There’s plenty of asses already enshrined in the Hall, they all just got in before this current crop of idiot hypersensitive douchebag writers got hold of the reins of the Hall.
Ok, I’ll concede the point.
Jose Canseco isn’t in because he’s an ass to the writers and admitted steroid user, which are two things the BBWAA hate.
Is that better?
Yezzur.
Yeah. I don’t think Canseco belongs, I was just countering the argument that the Hall of Fame isn’t about stats and is about fame.
Rae Carruth should be in the NFL Hall of Fame, because that muthaf#$%&a is one of the most famous football players EVER.
Q.E.D.
I think you can make a reasonable case that just based on stats, Canseco could be considered a HOFer. He’s certainly not a slam dunk case, but it wouldn’t upset me to see him voted in.
Of course, with all of his off field baggage, I have a better chance of being elected than he does.
Jorge suffers from playing in NY. Jeter has always gotten the attention here. Much as I hate to say it, had Jorge played in Boston, or St. Louis, he would be more highly regarded by the press today, and would definitely be touted as HOF worthy.
He is similar, offensively, to Yogi Berra, in his effectiveness and durability.
I think he’s a marginal HOFer because of defense. Career wise, he isn’t so bad in terms of throwing out runners (I did the numbers once and he was essentially league average or slightly better, career wise; and not much different than Varitek on that score), but he just doesn’t get the respect from peers and writers in terms of his defense. Some of that is noise you have to ignore, but still I don’t think Jorge’s defensive ability is on the same level as Fisk, Boone, Bench, Yogi, etc.
IMO, his longevity neutralizes his average-to-poor defense. That, and the fact that he’s been an insanely awesome hitter for 14 years.
Oh and by the way: Jorge is an example of the “short guys with fat asses and short legs make great baseball players” theory. Bill James was the first guy I remember who wrote this.
Ron Cey. Yogi. Jorge. Strong, muscular legs, which are also short, gives you alot of power, and a low center of gravity. Stability at the plate, stability in the swing, compact power.
That’s our Jorge. Hip hip….or should it be “butt butt”.
There’s a Ron Dibble “stop looking at the players’ butts, you stupid woman!” joke in there somewhere.
I still can’t believe Yogi played 260 games in the OF, most of which coming towards the end of his career.
I had a professor who called that type Firehydrants.
Nitpick: Jorge is 6’2″.
I have nothing intelligent to add to this discussion, so i’ll just say:
hip motherfucking hip.
Me love me some Jorge. Had my wife not been a party pooper my first son would’ve been a Jorge.
I am currently in negotiations for the exclusive naming rights over the yet to be agreed upon third child. We have two boys and wife wants a girl. How does Jorge Derek Mariano Andy sound?
How about Andy Mariano Jorge Derek? If it’s a girl, she could just be like ‘Oh, my name is really Andrea, people call me Andy’ so people wouldn’t think she’s a dude. My older sister’s name is Blake, and she has no end to the frustration of people thinking she’s a guy when they see that name on paper.
http://www.baseball-reference......onec001seq
I think your daughter will be pretty kick-ass
Name her Georgia and then, you know, subvert that.
As for Posada, I’m just a fangirl and know nothing–nothing!–about baseball but for me Posada’s just an essential part of the heart and soul of a team I love.
Plus, he has ginormous ears. Which are awesome.
You know what they say about men with big ears:
Huge earmuffs.
Or alternatively:
Ferengi
Bernnie Williams the most underated Yankee of all time, not only on the field but of the field as well, it’s all good bernnie never went after the fame so i’m sure thats ok with him
jorge is old school and i like that. batting gloves? jorge scoffs at those wearing batting gloves. he’s a REAL man.
Thats cause his gloves would stink the place up!
I love Jorge Posada.
That is all.