Who had the better career?

[metirish]

I found this question posed on Twitter very interesting, not least the phrasing and the discounting (why would you discount WS wins )

Anyway, thoughts? Add your own who had a better career question



Without looking at any numbers I would say Posey , but that's purely on name recognition, and that's terrible way to view things, I rarely saw Mauer play.



If the question asked was who was the better player /hitter/catcher that might have been better phrasing

[MFS62]

Mauer played more years (15-12) and had marginally better counting stats. But the last four years, Mauer was more a first baseman than catcher. Posey had more dWAR so I guess that makes him a better catcher.

But all-around player, I'd take either one. Flip a coin.

As a sidelight, though, anyone who has to go through life with the name Buster Posey has to be one tough sumbitch.

Later

[vtmet7]

One couldn't handle the rigors of catching, so he changed positions...one couldn't handle the rigors of catching, so they changed the rules to cater to him

[DocTee]

Putting postseason aside is silly.



Posey, and not close.

[Edgy MD]

Well, the problem is that post-season opportunities aren't equally distributed.



Johnny Bench was blessed to play on a team surrounded by MVP candidates, and thanks to that sort of redundancy, he got to play in four World Series. Yogi Berra played in 14.



FOURTEEN!



I'll listen to any argument that suggests that Yogi Berra was the better catcher, but giving him an edge over Bench because of World Series performance would be a tough sell.

[Benjamin Grimm]

The fourteen World Series may not have made Yogi a better catcher than Bench, but you could certainly argue that he had a better career* in that he got to go to the World Series fourteen times.



(*In the sense of how satisfied was he with his career when he retired.)

[Fman99]

=DocTee post_id=120434 time=1679581420 user_id=85]
Putting postseason aside is silly.

[metsmarathon]

boy, fangraphs and bbref really have a difference of opinion on these two, don't they?



posey has 57.5 fWAR but only 44.8 bWAR

mauer has 53.0 fWAR and 55.2 bWAR



there's certainly some difference in offensive RAR happening, but wow is the big difference in defensive RAR, let alone the positional penalty/benefit that fangraphs plays vs bbref.

[Marshmallowmilkshake]

One couldn't handle the rigors of catching, so he changed positions...one couldn't handle the rigors of catching, so they changed the rules to cater to him

I'm not sure this is fair to Posey. The rule wasn't changed because he "couldn't handle the rigors of catching." The rules were changed because it makes no sense for a player running full speed to be crashing into a defender in hopes of getting them to drop the ball -- but only at one of the four bases. Can you imagine if this was allowed at first base - even if the first baseman was armored up?



Now, would MLB have changed the rule if the backup catcher had been injured and not the All-Star? Maybe not - but maybe.

[G-Fafif]

Posey was a major National League figure who was prominent in three World Series, making me hyperaware of him, whereas although I knew of Mauer, I mostly knew he was in the other league and his team found ways to lose every playoff game it contested, usually to the MFYs.



The last vestiges, perhaps, of being “a National League fan”.

[batmagadanleadoff]

I'm not sure this is fair to Posey. The rule wasn't changed because [Posey]"couldn't handle the rigors of catching." The rules were changed because it makes no sense for a player running full speed to be crashing into a defender in hopes of getting them to drop the ball -- but only at one of the four bases. Can you imagine if this was allowed at first base - even if the first baseman was armored up? Now, would MLB have changed the rule if the backup catcher had been injured and not the All-Star? Maybe not - but maybe.

What rule change are you talking about? A runner is still allowed to run "full speed" into the catcher and intentionally collide with him "in hopes of getting [the catcher] to drop the ball".



As to first base collisions, I don't think that the "Posey" rule even addresses first base collisions. I assume that the rules are the same at every base. It's just that you don't see home plate style collisions at the other bases because the base defenders aren't "armored up", a run isn't directly at stake, and at second and third bases, the runner isn't allowed to overrun the base, but must remain in contact with the base at all times or risk being tagged out even if he initially arrives safely.

[Edgy MD]

First baseman are rarely in the path of the runner because there's a force on for all runners going to first, so virtually all plays are forceouts, and a collision wouldn't undo that.



If a runner wanted to attempt a takeout slide to stop the firstbaseman from continuing the play after the putout, he would be prevented by the rule constricting him to the marked lane.



Fielders covering the other bases, however, are more exposed, and responsible for their own protection.

[Marshmallowmilkshake]

Edgy MD wrote: First baseman are rarely in the path of the runner because there's a force on for all runners going to first, so virtually all plays are forceouts, and a collision wouldn't undo that. If a runner wanted to attempt a takeout slide to stop the firstbaseman from continuing the play after the putout, he would be prevented by the rule constricting him to the marked lane. Fielders covering the other bases, however, are more exposed, and responsible for their own protection.

Makes sense.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Edgy MD wrote: First baseman are rarely in the path of the runner because there's a force on for all runners going to first, so virtually all plays are forceouts, and a collision wouldn't undo that. If a runner wanted to attempt a takeout slide to stop the firstbaseman from continuing the play after the putout, he would be prevented by the rule constricting him to the marked lane. Fielders covering the other bases, however, are more exposed, and responsible for their own protection. Makes sense.

Yes. Edgy's post was a very good one. But there could be first base collisions before the runner nears first base on bunts or on slow rollers where there's a tag play before the base.



And my post was very good, too, whether you ignore it or not. Know what doesn't make any sense? That a runner isn't allowed to intentionally collide with a catcher. You can have nasty intentional collisions at any base. That you don't usually see them at the first three bases has more to do with context and the dynamics of baseball. But the rules don't prohibit those collisions.



batmags 1; edgy 1; ron darling negative three; metsguyinmichigan TILT.

[metirish]

What an odd thing to say

[vtmet7]

One couldn't handle the rigors of catching, so he changed positions...one couldn't handle the rigors of catching, so they changed the rules to cater to him I'm not sure this is fair to Posey. The rule wasn't changed because he "couldn't handle the rigors of catching." The rules were changed because it makes no sense for a player running full speed to be crashing into a defender in hopes of getting them to drop the ball -- but only at one of the four bases. Can you imagine if this was allowed at first base - even if the first baseman was armored up? Now, would MLB have changed the rule if the backup catcher had been injured and not the All-Star? Maybe not - but maybe.

it's been happening in baseball since...forever...it's still the Pussy Poser rule...did they make immediate rule changes when another golden boy, Chase Utley, broke Rueben Tejada's leg at 2nd?

[Edgy MD]

Yes, they did.

[Centerfield]

I don't think I really have a firm handle on these rules.



I saw a play at second base where the fielder kneeled in front of the bag, making it impossible for the runner (sliding headfirst) to reach the bag. The runner was out. If you're not allowed to obstruct a baserunner, it's kinda counterintuitive that you should be allowed to do it when you get really close to the base.

[batmagadanleadoff]

=Centerfield post_id=122980 time=1682012601 user_id=65]
I don't think I really have a firm handle on these rules.



I saw a play at second base where the fielder kneeled in front of the bag, making it impossible for the runner (sliding headfirst) to reach the bag. The runner was out. If you're not allowed to obstruct a baserunner, it's kinda counterintuitive that you should be allowed to do it when you get really close to the base.

[Centerfield]

I could be wrong, but i thought I had seen a play where the runner beat the throw, ran into the shortstop's leg, and then the ball arrived and was tagged. But I guess I could be misremembering.



I'm guessing this isn't the case at first right? Like you can't set up in front of the bag and force the runner to slow down or change directions.