I think I’ve heard this story before.

I’ve read Baseball Prospectus’ case and was unconvinced. It seemed more that they started with the conclusion that it had no influence, and they tried to find/present data that supported the conclusion they started off with.

DMZ – funny you should mention Bill James, I recently read a piece in which, in so many words, Bill James said, ‘I was wrong, clutch hitting does exist.’

If I can dig it up I’ll point you to it. Turns out watching David Ortiz’ repeated clutch performances brought him out of denial.

I wouldn’t be surprised if catcher influence existed at lower levels – such as high school – where there might be vast differences in skill and knowledge between two catchers. But at the major league level, there is just no evidence of a catcher consistently improving or worsening pitcher performances.

Everyone who’s looked at this so far, from Woolner to James and on and on, has found no evidence that different catchers have a significant effect on the game through their pitch selection.

It’s a lot like clutch hitting, if you will. If you took a survey of everyone in baseball, you’d probably find the vast majority believed in clutch hitting and so forth. But there’s no evidence that at the major league level there’s such a thing as a clutch hitter, someone who consistently hits better tahn expected in those situations.

In both cases, we can talk about why that is, but a large part of it is that the selection process to get to the majors is so rigorous that catchers, like hitters, who can’t call a game are weeded out just as hitters who can’t hit with runners on don’t advance.

Further, the battery is a shared responsibility. Veteran pitchers often call their own games, and all pitchers do the things that you cite as possible influences on the game, from scouting to umpire management. If a catcher was totally incompetent, you might see it, but the pitcher’s knowledge of those things would cover. But again, they wouldn’t be there if they were totally incompetent.

If you haven’t read the Woolner/James/etc research into this, I highly recommend it. At the very least, it would help you understand that the people who have a different viewpoint aren’t doing so out of spite or arrogance.

Most catchers believe it, most pitchers, coaches, seems like most of the GM’s I’ve heard speak on the issue believe it…and these are all people that make their living from the game, not only believe it matters, but that its significant. I guess they’re all just ignorant?

So, it doesn’t matter if the catchers read the scouting reports? Or, is it that they all read and interpret them exactly the same way? It doesn’t matter if the catchers know which umps have a wide strike zone? which squeeze the pitchers? Reading the pitcher’s stuff, how well its moving on a given night and whether certain pitches are good enough for a certain situation, that doesn’t make a difference?

….interesting theory.