Caleb Joseph Could Be 2016’s Francisco Cervelli
Matt Wieters is a free agent, and as Mike Podhorzer explained, the Orioles appear unlikely to extend him a qualifying offer. The team could still bring Wieters back on a new contract, but I expect them to move on in part because of the less-expensive in-house option, Caleb Joseph.
Joseph does not fit the mold of a prospect who would inherit the job of a departing veteran. In fact, he is less than a month younger than Wieters. However, because of a lengthy minor league career, Joseph has just two years of major league service time and remains under team control with the Orioles in 2016 for very little salary. Meanwhile, while Joseph does not share the offensive potential that once made Wieters such a prized prospect, he does offer the team enough defensive value to merit a full-time job.
Based on Defensive Runs Saved, Joseph is a positive contributor in all aspects of catcher defense, but he stands out in two skills, in particular. First, Joseph has a tremendous arm and has been effective in limiting the opposing runners on the basepaths. Over the last two seasons, he has thrown out 33.6 percent of baserunners attempting to steal against him. That is fifth best among the 72 catchers with at least 1,000 innings behind the plate over the last two seasons.
| Player | Catcher Caught Stealings | Stolen Bases | CCS Rate |
| Yadier Molina | 39 | 60 | 39.4% |
| Wilson Ramos | 33 | 60 | 35.5% |
| Russell Martin | 53 | 99 | 34.9% |
| Rene Rivera | 52 | 98 | 34.7% |
| Caleb Joseph | 36 | 71 | 33.6% |
Second, Joseph is an above average pitch framer. He has earned 0.49 extra strikes per 100 called pitches since 2014, 21st of those 72 qualified catchers according to Strike Zone Runs Saved. In total, Joseph’s 26 Runs Saved trail only Jonathan Lucroy (27) at the position over the last two seasons, and that is despite being limited to less than 1,500 innings.
Because of his framing ability, his age, and his clear backup status to Wieters in recent seasons, Joseph reminds me a lot of Francisco Cervelli, who the Pirates smartly signed to an inexpensive contract because of his excellent defensive numbers on a per inning basis. Of course, Cervelli became a breakout fantasy player this season because, in addition to his new full-time status, he really hit. I am pretty confident Joseph will see that full season of at-bats next season, and I also see a lot of offensive similarities between Joseph now and Cervelli this time last year.
| Francisco Cervelli | Caleb Joseph | |
| AVG | .278 | .223 |
| OBP | .348 | .284 |
| SLG | .381 | .376 |
| BABIP | .330 | .259 |
| K% | 8.2% | 7.0% |
| BB% | 17.2% | 22.4% |
| GB/FB | 1.33 | 0.78 |
| IFFB% | 5.4% | 8.0% |
| Contact% | 82.6% | 79.3% |
| Soft% | 15.0% | 18.3% |
| Hard% | 28.3% | 30.4% |
Joseph’s plate discipline, contact ability, and power are all very similar to Cervelli’s. More than anything, their radically different actual production is a product of a close to 100 point difference in BABIP. That probably isn’t entirely a fluke. For one, Cervelli continued to enjoy a high BABIP (.359) in his full season of at-bats in 2015, and he puts the ball on the ground much more frequently than Joseph and so should expect to have a higher BABIP. Still, Cervelli isn’t any faster than Joseph—at least as evidenced by their combined two stolen bases over the last two seasons—and Joseph is not dramatically worse than Cervelli in terms of soft contact percentage or infield fly rate. I feel like it’s reasonable to assume Joseph should see his BABIP improve with more plate appearances.
With a neutral BABIP season, Joseph could hit something in the order of .250/.320/.400 with 12-15 home runs. That isn’t exceptional, but it is more or less what Derek Norris did this season, and Zach Sanders valued Norris as the No. 6 catcher. I wouldn’t draft Joseph as a top-10 option at the position—there is too much talent at the position, even if a lot of it failed to have top 10 seasons for various reasons. Still, Joseph may be completely off the radar for many drafters next season, and he shouldn’t be. He is the perfect upside play in deeper and two-catcher leagues and may well be someone you can draft in the final rounds.
Scott Spratt is a fantasy sports writer for FanGraphs and Pro Football Focus. He is a Sloan Sports Conference Research Paper Competition and FSWA award winner. Feel free to ask him questions on Twitter – @Scott_Spratt
I think you switched the BB% and K%.
There will be a day in the future on which we can look back with barely-contained disgust at the energy spent discussing pitch framing.
You are welcome.
– Your robot overlords
It is pertinent to the current environment, but I see your point and the day is coming, isn’t it?
Is it safe to assume Joseph’s power (read: HR) will continue to outpace Cervelli’s?
Joseph 44.1% FB; 10.6% HR/FB; Average FB and HR distance of 278.1 ft; Plays in BAL
Cervelli 27.7% FB; 7.0% HR/FB; Average FB and HR distance of 282.5 ft; Plays in PIT
I may have answered my own question – just based on his FB% I guess we can expect a higher HR total – but your opinion holds more weight than mine. I guess we can’t predict any luck.
What do you think?
Question about framing even though that isn’t relevant to fantasy.
If framing (turning would-be balls into strikes) is a catcher skill – isn’t the reverse also true? Batters who swing outside the zone and miss are also turning would-be balls into strikes but I don’t see where that is really marked against them. Obviously some of them end up with K’s – and presumably others end up more frequently in bad counts and have to deal with both a pitchers better out pitches and an expanded strike zone caused by their own hackiness.
Given what seems to me to be a pretty rapid growth overall in league hackiness, it seems to me that this is not being measured as a batting detriment.
O-swing%
It is measured, it’s O-Swing %. Sometimes this is bad (Sandoval led the league last year in this) sometimes people say it will eventually spell doom (Adam jones was 2nd), Arendao was 9th, Cespedes 13th, Segura 11th and Howard 12th. Cargo 16th. So sometimes it’s bad news, sometimes it’s not. guys on the top of that leaderboard (lowest swing % outside the zone) include Votto at 1, Bautista 6, Carpenter 7, Goldschmidt 9, Mccutchen 13th. My guess is that that see the ball hit the ball guys are at the lower spectrum while guess hitters (guess fastball, curve) end up at the higher end of spectrum, both approaches can work for a player.
I know O-swing is measured. But afaik it is not included in a WAR measure or anything similar to the way framing is calculated as a measure of catcher value.
From what i understand, 1 successful ‘frame’ (a ball turned into a strike) is considered positive .1 runs or something for a catcher. One batter hack (a ball turned into a strike) is not considered negative .1 runs for that batter.
Ah, I see what you are saying Jfree. Why isn’t this part of the WAR calculation.
I think the answer is that ‘stealing’ a strike has a definitive value to it that can be measured, whereas from some of the players I posted above, there is a lower correlation between OSwing% and batter outcome. I could be wrong here, someone somewhere has probably run the R2 on this.