A case for more Gattitude

Now that Brian McCann has returned from the disabled list, there is little question that the first string position on the catcher depth chart is his, and rightfully so.  Since 2006, McCann has been one the game’s most consistent backstops, posting five 3+ WAR-value seasons.  He has also been, by all accounts, a model teammate, great with the media and fans, and an overall fan favorite, albeit in the shadow of Chipper Jones. 

When Frank Wren signed Gerald Laird to a two year, $3M contract in November of 2012, he most likely did so thinking that Laird would be the primary backup to McCann, and that McCann would be back in time from his shoulder surgery to start the season.  Fast forward to spring training, and the emergence of Evan Gattis.  No one in the baseball nerdosphere, including your truly, foresaw Gattis playing as well as he has, and I have a feeling that if you got Frank Wren off the record, he would say the same.  Given the nature of McCann’s injury, keeping him rested is of utmost importance, and there are dividends to be reaped later in the season if the Braves can do this successfully.  So the question is, who should be the second string catcher?

There are not many statistics available to rate catcher defense, but there is one measurement that I find particularly useful: the ratio of OZoneStrikes (strikes called on pitches outside the strike zone) to ZoneBalls (balls called on pitches inside the strike zone).  This metric allows us to understand which catchers are most effective at “framing” pitches, or compelling an umpire to make a call that he may not feel bound to make had the pitch not been “framed” effectively.  Here is an example of Brian McCann doing an excellent job framing a pitch from Tim Hudson, just to give you the idea:   

Gattis and Laird grade out accordingly:

Evan Gattis-1.23

Gerald Laird-.48

That is to say, Gattis has framed more strikes on pitches outside the zone, whereas Laird has framed more balls on pitches inside the zone.  This statistic is independent of time spent behind the plate, so long as the player has at least 60 pitches by which he can be judged.  The difference in the numbers between the two may not seem significant, but it is when taken in context: Gattis is more than twice as effective as Laird at this particular skill.

Here are the batting lines for each player through 5/27/13:

The most notable differences exist in the power department.  Gattis’ slugging percentage is 300 points higher than Laird, making up almost all of the discrepancy in their OPS numbers.  Gattis’ bat plays well in a power-heavy Atlanta lineup hitting behind Heyward, Freeman, and Justin Upton, and his bat also plays very well late in games, against pitchers that lack a diverse array of offerings.  There’s no reason to start Gattis over McCann, but there is ample evidence to point towards giving him the reps at catcher when McCann has days off, which leads us to another question: why is Laird getting the start every fifth day with Teheran on the mound? 

Gonzalez’s logic for starting Laird is rooted in Teheran’s spring training performance.  During his successful string of starts that landed him the fifth spot in the rotation, he was caught almost exclusively by Laird.  So, Teheran’s performance thus far can be attributed to having Laird as his battery mate, right?  Well, not quite.  There has been research on the correlation of a pitcher’s performance with a specific catcher (most notably here), but without a very large sample size, it is impossible to assemble any information relevant enough to use in decision-making.  It is understandable for Gonzalez to want a veteran catcher calling Teheran’s game, but why not let McCann be that guy?  He is the first string catcher, and he’s good enough to catch four other starters, all of whom have more service time than Teheran.  He’s also the best pitch framer of the three catchers on the roster (his OZoneStrikes to Zone Balls ratio is 1.33), and this doesn’t even consider his offensive prowess, which is more comparable to Gattis than Laird.  He offers a veteran presence blended with more productive pitch framing aptitude, and is an appreciable upgrade offensively. 

Perhaps there is an intangible benefit that Laird provides, invisible to those of us not privy to the inner-workings of a clubhouse environment.  At the end of the day, the essence of this issue is a net positive for the Braves, but if it isn't managed properly, any marginal benefit to be gained could very easily be lost. 

(Data for this article courtesy of FanGraphs and Baseball Prospectus)