Wouldnt a better calculation of POP time be the pop to the catchers glove to the point the SS or 2nd baseman catches the ball and his glove hits the bag or hits the ground in front of the bag? Hopefully that makes sense.
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
If it was done the way you suggest, the times would be impacted by the length of time it would take to get the tag down, which could vary a lot depending on the location of the throw and from play to play.
Pop to Pop takes some of the subjectivness out of it, is easy to "hear" or measure, and the quality of the throw would also impact the pop time.
In other words, the time would be better for a more effecient throw.
Just measuring pop to pop not only provides a more standardized comparison of catchers, but is valuable information when used with the time to plate for pitchers and the speed of the runner is known.
An MLB average catcher pop is 2.0, average pitchers time to plate is around 1.5, and the average runner for 90 feet is 3.5.
The average times I've used may be off a little, but my point is the the average pop and time to plate is about equal to the average runner speed from first to second.
If your catcher is Pudge at 1.7 and your pitcher is 1.2 to the plate, and you know the runner is 3.2 to second, what is likely to happen?
Every see first base coaches with a stop watch?
Pop to Pop takes some of the subjectivness out of it, is easy to "hear" or measure, and the quality of the throw would also impact the pop time.
In other words, the time would be better for a more effecient throw.
Just measuring pop to pop not only provides a more standardized comparison of catchers, but is valuable information when used with the time to plate for pitchers and the speed of the runner is known.
An MLB average catcher pop is 2.0, average pitchers time to plate is around 1.5, and the average runner for 90 feet is 3.5.
The average times I've used may be off a little, but my point is the the average pop and time to plate is about equal to the average runner speed from first to second.
If your catcher is Pudge at 1.7 and your pitcher is 1.2 to the plate, and you know the runner is 3.2 to second, what is likely to happen?
Every see first base coaches with a stop watch?
quote:length of time it would take to get the tag down, which could vary a lot depending on the location of the throw and from play to play.
I guess that was my point - if you have two throws, both identical with the exception of one is off the bag and the other is right on it - the time to tag for the second throw would be less and have a better chance of recording an out.
I agree that it enters a bit of subjective judgement (very little in my opinion) but it would "award" an accurate throw over a wild one.
Catcher09, I agree 100% with FO. I don’t think the tag being applied to the base or the tag being applied to the ground awaiting the sliding runner will ever be included in the poptime measurement because that would be a less accurate way of measuring a catcher’s arm strength, ball transfer, and his foot work. Poptime is a measurement of a catcher’s ability and it’s NOT used to evaluate a catcher’s total worth. So, why do evaluators put so much importance on poptime when it is just part of the evaluation? Probably because the “innacurate throws” can be corrected whereas lack of arm strength cannot. We know the accuracy of the throw is paramount in getting the runner out but this is not what is being measured here. Just like the radar gun measures just the velocity of a pitcher, it’s understood that control and location are an integral part of his evaluation. A hitter can be a power hitter but struggle at the plate but he remains a power hitter. So, what good is a strong armed catcher if he can’t make good throws? He’s about as effective as the power hitter that can’t hit the baseball or the fireball pitcher that can’t find the strike zone ---- but that will never overshadow the fact they each have desirable traits that coaches and scouts can build on.
In hindsight I now see both of your points. I like the analogy to a power hitter. I have seen a lot of guys hit with power that couldnt hit a change up to save thier lives. Over time they learned - and they were still power hitters.
I guess my reasoning for my post was there really are very few measurements for a catcher thus my attempt at getting at a better (game situation) measurement - almost like a strike to ball ratio. For example Brian McCann only threw out 6 runners is last year in HS - bad right - no, nobody tried to steal on him. When it really comes down to it you know a good catcher when you see him play
I guess my reasoning for my post was there really are very few measurements for a catcher thus my attempt at getting at a better (game situation) measurement - almost like a strike to ball ratio. For example Brian McCann only threw out 6 runners is last year in HS - bad right - no, nobody tried to steal on him. When it really comes down to it you know a good catcher when you see him play
I think its fine the way it is.
I still think too much is put into a pop time.Dont get me wrong,if you can get the ball to 2b in 1.8,1.9 time range,then thats awesome.But if you are an accurate thrower,block the ball well,and work well with pitchers,I see nothing wrong with throwing 2.1,even 2.2 at the HS level.
I still think too much is put into a pop time.Dont get me wrong,if you can get the ball to 2b in 1.8,1.9 time range,then thats awesome.But if you are an accurate thrower,block the ball well,and work well with pitchers,I see nothing wrong with throwing 2.1,even 2.2 at the HS level.
POP time are important when being evaluated, but a good receiver can play a long time.. how many 1.8's are thrown?..... not a lot and only by a couple of people, a lot of those guys in the big leagues are over 2.0, so keep working
The key element is how many would base stealers you are throwing out---at the end of the pop times mean very little if the runners are stealing bases on you and your pitcher
Fungo that is the best post I have read in a long time.
For the best evaluation, we like the combination of pop time, radar reading and video.
Accuracy is always part of evaluating a catcher, as is the movement on his throws.
The radar and eyes give a definite number regarding the arm itself. The pop time gives a number that includes everything from foot work, transfer, release.
Sometimes you see a catcher with tremendous arm strength (radar/eyes) but slower pop times (stopwatch). Some times you see good pop times (stopwatch) but less arm strength.
Both arm strength and quickness can be improved some, but if the video shows mechanical problems it is much easier to improve quickness than it is to improve arm strength.
Usually in the end... it is the catcher who has both who becomes the DI or draft guy. But if I had to rank them on potential, I'd rank them kind of like this.
1. Arm
2. Pop Time
3. Hands
4. Feet
5. Accuracy
Of course there are many other things involved besides throwing to second base. Like being able to catch and hit! But that's a different topic.
Accuracy is always part of evaluating a catcher, as is the movement on his throws.
The radar and eyes give a definite number regarding the arm itself. The pop time gives a number that includes everything from foot work, transfer, release.
Sometimes you see a catcher with tremendous arm strength (radar/eyes) but slower pop times (stopwatch). Some times you see good pop times (stopwatch) but less arm strength.
Both arm strength and quickness can be improved some, but if the video shows mechanical problems it is much easier to improve quickness than it is to improve arm strength.
Usually in the end... it is the catcher who has both who becomes the DI or draft guy. But if I had to rank them on potential, I'd rank them kind of like this.
1. Arm
2. Pop Time
3. Hands
4. Feet
5. Accuracy
Of course there are many other things involved besides throwing to second base. Like being able to catch and hit! But that's a different topic.
I just read Fungo's post and agree with Coach May.
Guess one should read all the other posts completely before blabbering away.
Guess one should read all the other posts completely before blabbering away.
