So the next question is, when do left-handed catchers get removed from the playing pool? Is it possible that left-handed throwers with a strong enough arm to play catcher are shifted to pitcher?
No, I am not insinuating anything. Although I will submit that fans and the media are more stats obsessed than players or coaches.
It is more important to throw quickly and accurately to second or third base and the fact that they might not do it as often makes it even more important that the throw be quick and accurate.
What faulty reasoning? Are you saying that because the hit-and-run is statistically unsuccessful, coaches shouldn’t attempt it?
As I said before, I don’t think it is merely tradition, lefty catchers have been tried in the past and their limitations became apparent. Secondly, they are encouraged to play positions where they are more of an asset such as pitcher or first base.
Statistically, there are fewer left handed people (approx. 4:1) so it makes sense to use them where they would be the most useful.
…depends on your definition of salient, I may or may not be pretending.
Here you go
It’s an excellent article.
Almost always… but I have seen batters switch for other reasons (look up Mickey Mantle) and I believe a left handed catcher would be one such reason.
I simply meant by deliberately putting a right handed batter up the plate or switch hitter whenever the left-handed catcher may be in a position that he might have to make a difficult throw. I’d consider it one of the small nuances of the game.
Here’s an interesting article regarding lefties at catcher.
Exactly.
That would make more sense to me than the reasoning that it’s harder to throw to third (which I alluded to in my previous post).
That article states that roughly 55% of batters are right-handed, 45% are left/SH. I think that would count as “near even”, which is what I said after my quick perusal of a few rosters.
Your example is a guy who retired 40+ years ago. I’ll go out on a limb and guess that 95% of at-bats by switch hitters are determined solely by the pitcher.
I note this paragraph near the beginning of your cite:
Why left-handed throwers are effectively banned from catching is less obvious than why they can’t play shortstop or third base. And perhaps completely wrong. The most common reason cited is that a left-handed catcher is at a disadvantage in making the throw to third base, especially with a right-handed hitter at the plate. While this may be true, the overall effect is debatable.
(My emphasis).
In fact, that article pretty much mirrors what I’ve been saying.
I missed this article until just now (sorry gonzo!). Sparky812, you should check it out. The author goes over all the reasons left-handed catchers are supposedly at a disadvantage and debunks them (and uses in-depth stats when available). He concludes “Based on the above reflections, I feel like it’s safe to say there is no good reason why a left-handed thrower could not succeed at the professional level.”
Sorry to spam the thread (but dammit when I’m right I want the world to know–it doesn’t happen all that often!–and I keep missing the edit window) but in the original article Cecil says:
The article gonzo cited debunks it, at least for throws to second base. With right-handed catchers there is no statistically significant difference in the success rate of the runner when broken out by the handedness of the batter.
Of course, neither of you have actually offered up a definition of anecdote supporting your cases.
But yes, this is derailing the thread, so I’m dropping it here.
About ten percent of the population is left handed. That would be about one player on the field if you picked random athletes. You want lefty pitchers (as mentioned gonzomax’s link) and lefty first basemen, as mentioned here. Perhaps leftys good enough to play in the majors just naturally get sucked away to those positions.
I read it when gonzo posted it, I just don’t necessarily agree with all the author’s “reflections”.
To be honest, I do agree that there may be no single good reason against a left-handed catcher but it is the sum of all these slight disadvantages which are the determining factor.
Oh for God’s sake, just look up “Anecdotal evidence” on bloody Wikipedia.
If you wish to continue the discussion on anecdote, start a new thread in GQ. I’m not discussing it here.
Okay, so Saturday was opening day, all the coaches got our new players and uniforms.
No lefties on my team (except my son who seems to be ambidextrous!?). The other coaches and I got a chance to discuss left-handedness in general, for batters and other positions such as catcher.
The consensus was that it would be too frustrating for a lefty catcher at the little league level and besides if you only have one or two lefties, they would be best used at first or pitching.
The discussion then evolved into left, right, or switch hitters and eye dominance…interesting topic maybe for another thread.
What part did you think would be frustrating?
Sorry if somebody mentioned this already, but yes, starting from little league, players are groomed, or even stereotyped, by body size, and by the time they hit high school, they’ve spent 10 years or so in a very narrow range of positions, even if their body type changes later.
Here’s a list of what I can remember:
Speed: the fastest kids were groomed to play centerfield, shortstop, or 2nd base. The slowest were usually catchers or right fielders. Right field, when I was young, was where the worst players got playing time.
Lefty’s: First base (to throw back into the infield easier)
Righties: Third base (to throw back into the infield easier)
Stocky build: catcher or first base (some weird assumption here that being fat would help you stop passed balls.)
The reason (as I heard it) for righties being preferred as catchers was to throw to 2nd base during steal attempts, and their throw would not be blocked by right handed batters, as batters had no obligation to get out of the way.
Long time viewer and first time poster – I feel like a radio caller.
As a former collegiate player and now instructor/coach I wanted to speak on a few of the comments…
This carries no weight. A LH hitter creates the same situation for a runner on first for a RH catcher throwing behind the runner. The only issue here is the quality of the pitcher and his ability to hold the runners effectively. Stealing 3rd base is risky considering the throw changing from 120 ft (home to 2nd) to 90 ft (home to 3rd). An athletic LH catcher would either step behind the runner on a inside pitch or step in front if down the middle / outside.
A quality throw to 2nd base from a MLB catcher is 1.8 seconds. A equally skilled LH catcher would at most add .15s to his time.
Again, with a semi-cognitive pitcher your runner is going no where.
A high percentage of sacrifice bunts are exactly that…sacrifices! Outs at first to move the runner forward. Unless you are sampling very poor baseball rarely are bunts so poor that the catcher (the pitcher, moreso) has the opportunity to get the runner going to 3rd on a sacrifice. Because a single will generally score a runner from 2nd base sacrifices and risks of stealing 3rd are poor risk v reward choices.
The true reason of not having a LH catcher,who presumbably has a good arm, would be the fact that he is lefty…and has a good arm. There is a reason that LH pitchers are coveted in the higher levels of baseball; they are a rarity.
There are a few benefits to being a LH pitcher. First, he is rare. This is undisputed…RH hitter splits vs RH pitchers compared to LH hitters vs LH pitchers are much less volatile. Growing up as kids playing and t hrough the levels of higher baseball EVERYONE sees plenty of RH pitchers. Even the best LH hitters frequently bail out on curves/sliders from LH pitchers. With much less frequency does this happen for RH hitters vs RH pitchers.
The LH pitcher is now starting to reap the rewards of early baseball specialization. Because most pitchers are RH parents/coaches are now teaching their children to bat LH. This will only increase the value of the LH pitcher.
The few times this ever happens is for knuckleballers. Other cases (Jose Valentin, for example) have become so poor on either side, usually the right, that they just drop it all together.
Hey High Heat, thanks for the post. I’m a fan of the Red Sox (and so, of course, Tim Wakefield) and it seems that most switch-hitters bat right-handed against Wakefield these days (for those who don’t know, Wakefield is a right-handed knuckleball pitcher). I forget who started it but a switch-hitter complained that Wakefield screwed up his batting mechanics for weeks and vowed ever after to bat right-handed. Other players have since followed suit. I’d say that in this case the pitcher is still determining the stance of the batter 
(and not the game situation, as Sparky812 contends).
Deeg,
I do recall reading that as well. It is also to note switch hitters have been known to bat RH vs RH pitcher (certainly your favorite :rolleyes:) Mariano Rivera due to his cutter being so effective vs LH hitters.
High Heat, welcome. That was an informed and informative post.
However, I would suggest you invest in a few commas. There were several sentences I had to read multiple times to figure out what you were saying.