Milwaukee Locks Up Lucroy
The Brewers added another to their list of core players under long-term contracts, inking catcher Jonathan Lucroy to a four or five year deal Monday. Lucroy, who broke through to the majors in 2010 and was the starter from day one in 2011, will be covered through at least his arbitration seasons and possibly his first free agent year.
Although Lucroy hit well for a catcher last season at .265/.313/.391 (94 wRC+), he hasn’t developed into the hitter he showed he could be in the minor leagues. Between rookie ball, both levels of A-ball and Double-A, Lucroy posted wRC+ totals above 125 in every one of his minor league stints, showcasing solid contact rates and patience. The patience has left him in the majors, as he’s walked in just 6.2% of his major league plate appearances. His free-swinging ways partially resulted in his 21.2% strikeout rate as well, nearly five percentage points above his previous high at any level.
But any extra offensive production from Lucroy will be gravy at this point. His glovework provides immense value to the Brewers’ pitching staff. According to Mike Fast’s seminal work on catchers framing pitches, only Jose Molina betters Lucroy on a per-game basis. Lucroy’s ability to get umpires to call strikes saves 24 runs per 120 games – similar to the impact of an All-Star level bat.
The Brewers may be able to get similar or better value on Lucroy going year-to-year with his arbitration years, but the monetary risk is minimal here and the Brewers really need some cost certainty with the rest of their core progressing up the payroll ladder yearly. Yovani Gallardo, Ryan Braun, Rickie Weeks, Aramis Ramirez, and Corey Hart will all see raises soon, and the Brewers need to lock in some cheap pieces to be able to maintain this core throughout the next few years.
Jonathan Lucroy isn’t a key part of the Brewers’ core just yet, but he provides some value at the plate and heaps of value behind it. Although we don’t know the exact financial details, it’s hard to imagine this deal breaking the bank – think a bit more expensive than Salvador Perez’s $7 million deal, but not exorbitantly so. As a cost-controlled player over the next five years who can help balance the monetary loads of the Brewers’ stars, he and his contract could be very important in keeping the Brewers competitive over the next half-decade.
Jack Moore's work can be seen at VICE Sports and anywhere else you're willing to pay him to write. Buy his e-book.
Can we please stop talking about “locking up” in reference to arbitration years? “Locking up” only properly applies to bought out years of free agency. There’s no need to “lock up” that which is already obligated to a team.
I feel a better term would be “locking in” since the player is guaranteed a certain salary…but really it’s just semantics for the most part.
If Ryan Braun is innocent then Pete Rose should be in the Hall of Fame.
Pete Rose should be in the Hall of Fame regardless
What does this have to do with Lucroy?
Jeez, it looks like we’re 2-2 in stupid comments so far. Way to go, guys!
As for the contract, it obviously depends on the dollars and what’s going on with the 5th year, but I wonder if Lucroy is the type of player you don’t want to lock up through his arbitration years. If he saves about 25 runs by framing pitches, these should essentially be ‘free’ runs for the Brewers because they won’t show up in arbitration hearings. Given the injury risk with a catcher, and how his skills are undervalued in the arbitration process, they might have been better off going year to year rather than locking him up.
Who knows though – maybe they’re paying him as a 94 wRC+ catcher when he has the potential to be much more.
That’s what you get with the evening crowd.
Again, you don’t “lock up” arbitration years. It makes absolutely no sense to talk about it that way.
You are annoying sir
Does it really make a huge difference if we call it “locking up” or “guaranteeing” or “locking in” or “who really gives a damn?” Is there nothing more interesting here to discuss than semantics?
They’ve locked up cost certainty for the next few years. It’s not “locked up” in the terms of possession, but in the terms of knowing what he’ll cost.
This comment makes no sense and everyone here is dumber for having read it, I award you no points and may god have mercy on your soul.
FREE JONATHAN LUCROY! Not sure what he did but I’m sure he’s been wrongly convicted. And I think identifying him as a catcher in the article is inappropriate and may make life locked up tough on him. #TakingThingsTooLiteral
*Complaint About Semantics*
can we please stop talking about mike fast’s article like it’s gospel? until there’s been more work on catcher pitch framing, it’s just once piece of additional consideration, and should be taken with as much salt as catcher UZR
Please point out flaws in his methodology or link to your studies which disagree with the results.
I’m very interested in the topic and like to see the alternative you’re proposing.
because that was totally my point
One flaw is that we don’t know if the results are predictive. Will the best pitch framer last year be the best one this year? We need more data. Also, what type of aging curve does catcher pitch framing have? Do older catchers get better with experience or do they slow down with age? Fast’s research is brilliant, but it’s always healthy to be a little skeptical.
You’re right about all of that but it did have 5 years worth of data. That’s not nothing. I wonder how many pitches it takes for us to be able to determine that the results are due to some discernible skill rather than luck. My guess is that 5 years of data has reached that threshold but I suppose at this point, no one knows for sure.