I do. In fact, I think he has a LOT better idea than you do.

What are the odds that any team will win the world series in a given year?

Factor that in with how few 37-year-old catchers have ever even caught for pennant-contending teams, and you might have a more accurate statistic to look at.

That said, is there some rule that says a 37-year-old catcher can’t win the world series? Just because it’s never been done before, should that mean that every team with a catcher that age should just dump him automatically? What happens to a catcher after the age of 36 that precludes him from winning a world series? You are aware that these catchers are not robots, but human beings, and everyone is different. Some started catching at a very early age, so they have more wear and tear. Others, like Posada, started catching very late.

This argument has very little validity, imo. Every year, in some sport, someone is doing something that has never been done before. You can draw up arbitrary numbers and claim that “this has never been done before” and try to use it to advance your point. What you are saying is that Posada is too old to catch. Yet, what part of his game is breaking down? His bat still has batspeed. He’s on pace to hit .288 with 34 homers and 105 rbis. His arm still works pretty well, he has a .319 caught stealing percentage, 6th in all of MLB if he qualified in games played. What part of his game has broken down?

Game calling? That’s what a lot of you are claiming. How does that relate to his age? Has he gone senile and forgotten how to call a game?
What?

Again: Where did you get these “indications”???? Out of your a**???? I mean, I read what AJ said. Maybe he’s more comfortable throwing to someone else. Big deal. It happens. But CC? Joba? Joba shaking Posada off a few times? Again, that’s baseball. And when asked about it, Joba laughed it off and offered a mea culpa. As far as CC, I’ve heard nothing, and Jorge’s catching him tonight. So what “indications”? Other than exist in your own mind?

This is the problem we have with your arguments. YOU think you can read CC’s mind, Joba’s mind, etc. YOU claim there are these “indications” yet you cite NO source other than your own imagination.

We have what Joba has said himself. Yet you think you know something he’s not saying. How do you know this insider information? Do you hang out with Joba? Are you hiding under the desk at his shrink’s? What?

So the challenge is out there. What “indications”? Beyond just what some fan on a fanboard “suspects”. EVIDENCE.

And, you really want to base your argument on what a FANTASY baseball writer has to say? Who bleeping cares what some fantasy geek has to say? This is real baseball we’re talking about here, not a bunch of …. people…. playing some silly game in their office or basement.

If you want to believe what some “award-winning fantasy baseball writer” has to say over the manager of the team, former catcher Joe Girardi, the coaches, pitchers like Andy Pettitte, Mariano Rivera, Roger Clemens, etc., be my guest. Just don’t try and foist it off as some authoritative voice on real baseball.

Oh, and CC’s pitching today. The catcher: Posada. So much for CC wanting to use a personal catcher other than Posada.

Like someone else before, this is a guy that should be called Captain. Sorry Pete, but your defense of Posada has very little affect on the Posada truthers.

Wow lil’ m.

So here is what someone greatly respected by Pete, Tyler Kepner, has to say about Posada:

“One unsettling fact for the Yankees is the difference when Jorge Posada catches. With Posada behind the plate, the Yankees’ pitchers have a 6.31 E.R.A. The combined E.R.A. with Francisco Cervelli, Jose Molina and Kevin Cash is 3.81.”

And quoting Girardi: “Cervelli and Molina are more one-sided, to the defensive side. I can’t really say why there’s a difference. It could be sample size. It could be that the other guys are just better defensive players.”

Unless of course you think Tyler Kepner is just perpetuating an argument “based on gossip and fueled on petulance”?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06.....ref=sports

And here’s something that posted on last night’s forum, citing a 6-time award winning fantasy baseball writer, as part of his evaluation of some of the older players in the game:

*Jorge Posada, C, Yankees: Age 37. I’m a little skeptical that Posada will make it through the season without another DL stint, and he’s a well-below-average defensive catcher and game caller at this point, but he can still hit. He’s drilled four homers in 11 games since coming back from injury May 29 and seems sufficiently recovered from the shoulder problems that saw his OPS drop nearly 200 points last season. He’s still available in nearly 5 percent of ESPN.com leagues, and that shouldn’t be so.*

http://sports.espn.go.com/fant.....wski090612

And so it appears that those of us who continued to say we had questions and concerns were right on the money to have those concerns. Or at least there are minds greater than those posting on the lohud blog who have brought out the same concerns. It’s a real pity that some on the other side felt the need to be so nasty and demeaning in their responses to what we were posting. It looks like those people specifically have ended up with some egg on their faces.

Incidentally, iIt shows Posada as having deteriorated from contributing a LOT behind the plate to contributing relatively little — at least with his glove — although, needless to say, it still shows him contributing mightily with his bat.

Contradicting my position further, Baseball Prospectus believes that Carlton Fisk was an excellent defensive catcher at age 37 — unlike Johny Bench, who they suggest was nothing special behind the plate by age 33, and Yogi Berra, who they apparently suggest began a rapid decline at age 37.

I NEVER say the stats I quote prove my point. It’s completely impossible to prove anything with stats. If the Yankees’ pitchers had an ERA north of 20 for five straight years with Posada behind the plate and an ERA below 1 with everyone else for that same five year period, that STILL wouldn’t prove my point. I would find it very persuasive. But it wouldn’t be proof.

Like the old Mark Twain quote, there are lies, damn lies, and statistics. We’re all free to interpret them as we see fit.

But I’m still waiting to hear one team in the history of Major League Baseball that’s won the World Series with a catcher who was 37 years old or older.

In the absence of anyone answering my question, I’ll assume that the answer is that there has never been one.

Have any of you who pooh pooh every statistic about the Yankees giving up far more runs with Posada behind the plate, every indication that CC and AJ and Joba are more comfortable with someone else behind the plate, and the lack of success of teams with catchers who are that old THAT THERE MIGHT BE A REASON WHY?

As for Baseball Prospectus, neither I nor anyone else can prove that their article is the BS that I think it is any more than any of you can prove that the Yankees’ pitchers’ penchant for giving up WAY more runs this year with Posada behind the plate and the apparent preference of at least two or three Yankees’ starters not to have Posada behind the plate is the BS that YOU think it is.

But I think it’s worth noting that the Red Sox pitchers reportedly LOVE pitching to Varitek and believe that he ENHANCES their performance — in stark contrast to Posada. But maybe the guy at Baseball Prospectus is more knowledgeable than the Red Sox, CC, and AJ and everybody else who thinks that a catcher — who, after all, calls and handles every pitch — is one of the key cornerstone defensive positions (along with shortstop and center fielder) that greatly influences a team’s success or failure.

At least Pete is consistent. Early on in the negotiations with Pettitte, he said: “The big lefty said Friday night he wants a one-year deal and he doesn’t want to go anywhere else. So give him a little pay cut (say to $12 or $13 million) and get it over with.” And if you check the blog, you’ll see that he thought the Marte deal made sense. I suspect he thought paying A-Rod $30 million per year for 10 years (through age 42!), extending a 36-year old Posada at $13 million per year for four years, and extending a 38 year old Mariano Rivera for three years at the highest annual rate ever paid a reliever was a good idea, too.

If I’m correct, he and the Yankees have shown far less respect for Father Time than the Red Sox and I. And so far, it looks to me like the Red Sox have a lot more to show for their strategy than the Yankees. By allowing themselves to be outbid for Pedro, they avoided that land mine. By factoring in Varitek’s age (and his subpar 2008) they paid a fraction of what the Yankees paid for Posada. And at best, Posada’s time on the DL last year and A-Rod’s this year should make it clear that a history of not being injured doesn’t protect a player from the ravages of Father Time. Even Rivera, who has performed FAR better than I thought was likely last year, is beginning to show signs of being human as he approaches the 40-year mark.

Pointing to our players’ past achievements and successes as an indication that they’re above scrutiny for their performance this year is a fool’s game. While it’s not one the Red Sox play themselves, I’m sure they love seeing us play it. I’m sure they hope that the Yankees revel in those glories until Posada and Jeter and Damon are well into their 40s and they win a few more World Series trophies while ours are out playing on the field.

Again, can anyone name a team that’s ever won a World Series with their primary catcher being one who was 37 years old or older? If not, doesn’t that tell you something? Oh wait, it’s not statistically significant. It’s not proof. Right. And it won’t be proof either — or even the only cause — when the Red Sox continue to beat us like a cheap mule with a payroll far less than ours in the years to come.

. As for those who wish to rely on the observations of ballplayers-turned-broadcasters over reliable statisitcal analysis, for the love of Bill James, it has consistently been shown that broadcasters and sportswriters reach some pretty screwed-up conclusions by relying on gutty, gritty observations instead of what can be reliably measured…