Comments on: Update

By: cariocacardinal

cariocacardinal — Wed, 07 Mar 2012 01:59:29 +0000

Only if you discard the idea of a FA signing or a trade.

By: RCHIII

RCHIII — Tue, 06 Mar 2012 21:02:48 +0000

I really have no idea what the term confirmation bias means – feel free to explain (but whatever it is, I suspect you may be guilty of it).

What you say here could be true considering value – however, it does not invalidate what I said. I have one scenario, you have another. Either one could be correct. When you say the organization only has to value him more as a pitcher, that does not invalidate the possibility he just wasn’t a very good catcher. My guess is you believe he was a good catcher, so you tend to believe he was switched for positive reasons. However, given that Stock is apparently not happy about this move, I tend to discount the move being made for positive reasons – still doesn’t mean that wasn’t the reason though.

By: bc

bc — Tue, 06 Mar 2012 19:58:40 +0000

Yeah, confirmation bias. It doesn’t look like you read anything I wrote – nothing about my point says that Stock ought to play CF or SS.

“If they really thought he could catch, he would still be at Catcher.” No, not so. The team doesn’t even have to think that Stock has a better chance to make it to the majors as a pitcher than as a catcher to think it is a good idea for him to move. They only have to think that he has more value as a pitcher because his chance of contributing as a pitcher is greater than as a catcher because of positional opportunity.

By: RCHIII

RCHIII — Tue, 06 Mar 2012 18:02:22 +0000

He got moved to pitcher because he isn’t a good catcher – period. The Organization made the decision to force him to pitcher because they had seen enough. They have $525K wrapped up in him and figure their only chance at a return is at pitcher. To follow your logic, he ought to play CF or SS because that is where the MLB Club needs help. The truth is that Stock is a long way down the pitching depth chart as well. Maybe he can move up, but he has a lot of talent to pass. If they really thought he could catch, he would still be at Catcher. As noted, Matheny didn’t want to give up yet, but make no mistake, the key words are “give up” – not “where do we put him now that Molina has him blocked”. I thought Stanley was better than Stock last year and Stock’s promotion to PB was frankly puzzling. That is what I was referring to when I said the Club “figured out” – it was in the context of “what took you so long?” My gut instinct is that they did figure this out last year, but decided to give him one more offseason and an NRI so they could get a close look because that was Stock’s preference. I also think they delayed due to Matheny’s support. And, in fact, Stock was reported to be none to pleased with the decision.

None of this is meant to slam Stock. Granted, I only saw him catch one game, but I have read other accounts from folks saying the same thing, so I’m not some lone ranger here. I hope he is able to zoom right up there behind Shelby Miller – but he has a lot of work to do. It will be interesting to see where he gets assigned to start. Hopefully he can maintain a positive outlook.

By: bc

bc — Tue, 06 Mar 2012 16:58:35 +0000

Very doubtful (and illogical) that the Org just now “figured out” that Stanely was better than Stock, over the offseason, when no one was playing, and when Stanley is a year older and a level below Stock. Sounds like confirmation bias, IMO.

Moreover, it’s irrelevant. Even if Stock were thought to be better, the Org would still have him change positions because he has a positional option that other catchers (like Stanley) don’t have. The fact that “good catchers are valuable” is besides the point; good pitchers are valuable too and there is a much greater chance now that Stock could contribute to the ML team as a pitcher.

If we were to think of a very simple decision tree in the Org’s player development offices that weighs the values and risks associated with various positions and depth charts, the idea that Molina’s extension has “no effect” on the path of Stock, who has another possible development path, is kind of silly.

By: Gruntosaurus

Gruntosaurus — Tue, 06 Mar 2012 14:26:39 +0000

There’s also the point that he doesn’t need to be a backup catcher any time soon, either. One of the things the Molina extension does is to make it clear that in the short to medium term, Cruz, Anderson, etc. are only competing for one slot on the 25-man roster, not two. Inability to reach a deal with Molina would have left open the prospect that one of those two would be pressed into a starting role next year, with corresponding effects on the line of minor-league catchers queuing up behind them.

By: RCHIII

RCHIII — Tue, 06 Mar 2012 14:26:38 +0000

PD reported that Matheny did not want the change – so that was probably part of the reason. I also tend to believe they figured out that Stanley is better, so Stock would have been stuck. I also don’t think the Molina signing had any effect. Good catchers are valuable, so there is no reason to move a player away from catching because of personnel on the MLB club. Vuch decided that if he is going to get any return on the draft pick and bonus, it was going to be at pitcher, but like I said, Matheny apparently disagreed – at least for this year.

By: bc

bc — Tue, 06 Mar 2012 13:28:03 +0000

I wouldn’t agree with your timeline. I don’t know why the the Cards would develop Stock for 3 more years, until he’s 25, only to have him serve as a backup for 3 more additional years, until he’s 28. That’s not a normal development timeline for a C. If there’s no reason to think that he could be a starting catcher for 6 more years, why keep him in that role, when another role is available? As a pitcher, he could help in a more substantive role, potentially on a quicker timeline. You asked why the Cards “wasted” Stock’s offseason – it seems that the obvious thing that has changed in that time is a long-term contract for Molina. If you don’t think that Molina’s signing has “anything” to do with this decision, well, I guess you’re entitled to your opinion.

By: UofIx3

UofIx3 — Tue, 06 Mar 2012 13:01:47 +0000

Mentioned in this article

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/baseball/professional/cards-make-first-player-moves/article_787657fd-0841-522a-a501-488ebbf50875.html

By: cariocacardinal

cariocacardinal — Tue, 06 Mar 2012 12:15:08 +0000

You’d have a real hard time convincing me that this decision had anything to do with the Molina signing. Stock is probably 3-4 years away from the bigs as a catcher. A couple as the back up and he’d be ready to step in for Molina at the of his contract. The timing would be near perfect if they truly thought he was their catcher of the future.