SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
|
Post by joshv02 on Oct 17, 2014 4:10:48 GMT -5
He obviously meant for Shiwhart to DH on off days. Don't read the stupidest possible intent into what someone posts.
However , what teams provided significant DH at bats to a C while having only 2 catchers on the roster? I don't know of any that do that. Teams obviously will have an emergency catcher DH (eg Victor Martinez) but that is significantly different.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 17, 2014 4:43:04 GMT -5
He obviously meant for Shiwhart to DH on off days. Don't read the stupidest possible intent into what someone posts. However , what teams provided significant DH at bats to a C while having only 2 catchers on the roster? I don't know of any that do that. Teams obviously will have an emergency catcher DH (eg Victor Martinez) but that is significantly different. The Sox have a built in emergency catcher in Napoli. That allows them to freely substitute in game but as joshv02 points out, DHing is still an unlikely situation.
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Oct 17, 2014 10:02:45 GMT -5
Can you imagine what would happen if Nap was put into a game due to dire emergency, was then forced onto the DL long term in his walk year because he blew out one of his hips with his disease that is well known and documented that's the reason Boston hasn't had him catch any at all since they signed him? It would cost him huge 5 figures after the season.
Not picking on you here Philsbosox, but man.. He's passed whatever physicals I understand, but it's that "what if" on those hips and the degenerative issue there.
|
|
|
Post by mattpicard on Oct 17, 2014 10:13:39 GMT -5
Can you imagine what would happen if Nap was put into a game due to dire emergency, was then forced onto the DL long term in his walk year because he blew out one of his hips with his disease that is well known and documented that's the reason Boston hasn't had him catch any at all since they signed him? It would cost him huge 5 figures after the season. Not picking on you here Philsbosox, but man.. He's passed whatever physicals I understand, but it's that "what if" on those hips and the degenerative issue there. He's perfectly fine to dive and tumble around at first base and isn't feeling any symptoms with his hip. I find it extremely unlikely that he'd suffer a devastating injury from three innings behind the plate.
|
|
|
Post by joshv02 on Oct 17, 2014 10:34:04 GMT -5
I guess there are a ton more examples of Cs seeing significant time at a non C position -- e.g., Posey (35 games at 1B), Brian McCann (30 games split b/w 1B and DH), Dioner Navarro (19 games at DH) and Jonathan Lucroy (19 games at 1B). Some others saw 10 games or less at DH or 1B (e.g., Gomes, Suzuki, Norris).
I suppose I could see Swihart with 100 games at C, and 30 games elsewhere (1B or DH) in 2016/2017 something. The drop off in offense b/w Swihart and whoeverelse would man those positions, vs. the incresae in D with Christian, would seem, to me, to be calculus.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Oct 31, 2014 20:55:30 GMT -5
I do not see the sox bringing back Ross, but could signing Hundley be a better option while swihart gets more at bats in Pawtucket?
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Oct 31, 2014 21:29:48 GMT -5
I'd think about Swihart doing some time in the OF. Maybe LF? Primarily a catcher but occasionally do some OF or maybe 3rd.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Oct 31, 2014 22:13:05 GMT -5
I'd think about Swihart doing some time in the OF. Maybe LF? Primarily a catcher but occasionally do some OF or maybe 3rd. Why move swihart from catching?
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Nov 1, 2014 7:58:06 GMT -5
I guess he's the more athletic of the two. Vasquez, to me, seems ideally suited to remain behind the plate. Whereas, if you wanted to keep both on the roster and retain Swihart's bat in the lineup, his value would increase by being available and capable to play another position.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Nov 1, 2014 9:45:03 GMT -5
I guess he's the more athletic of the two. Vasquez, to me, seems ideally suited to remain behind the plate. Whereas, if you wanted to keep both on the roster and retain Swihart's bat in the lineup, his value would increase by being available and capable to play another position. I know it's unorthodox, but I'm a big fan of reducing catcher workloads. And even if such an arrangement is untenable and the Sox do eventually have to trade one, it would be nice to get an extended look at each guy at the MLB level before making that decision.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Nov 1, 2014 11:41:57 GMT -5
Guys, Swihart's projected to have a good bat, but not at "all-star in left field" level. He's not the catching Mookie Betts or anything. I think that's the thing that everyone is missing when they suggest playing him elsewhere. We have him pegged as a plus hit tool with solid-average power. BA's grades on their top ten bear that out as well.
I'm not saying this is a direct comparison for the skill set, but think Varitek with the bat - it's a nice bat, especially at catcher, but it's not SO good that you need to find ways to keep it in the lineup on his days off, although you may DH him or something on occasion.
Swihart has development to do both behind the plate and from both sides of the plate. Let's allow him to develop there before giving him more to do, yes?
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Nov 1, 2014 14:18:14 GMT -5
Many here are describing Vasquez as already one of the best catchers in baseball. Do we want to sit him or the top catching prospect in baseball if both make it big? Swihart is universally regarded as either the top or 2nd best catching prospect in baseball. No doubt he will start the year in the minors but it may well be an issue at some point.
No one is saying give him outfield time now, and I imagine they wouldn't for 2-3 years to come if ever, but if it does become an issue, Swihart is the one who gets PT elsewhere in all likelihood. And if that happens, I don't think it's adviseable to put him in a high skilled position but he already was moved around a lot in USA baseball and has shown the kind of athletic ability to maybe be a multipositional player some day.
I read once that most people have multiple careers in their lifetime, usually completely different careers before their life is over. I've already had 4 different career focuses in my lifetime. These guys can learn multiple positions. It's not rocket science.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Nov 1, 2014 14:44:34 GMT -5
For some people, rocket science is easier than left field. The fact that Blake Swihart probably has some other employable skill doesn't necessarily mean "chasing fly balls" is it.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 1, 2014 15:14:35 GMT -5
It's not that Swihart can't play left field-- he very well may be able to field the position at a high enough level. It's that his bat is probably not good enough to make him much more than an averagish left fielder, which means that if he isn't catching a healthy majority of his games, he's probably more valuable as a trade chip than as a left fielder.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Nov 1, 2014 16:43:16 GMT -5
Swihart is still only 22 years old. We don't know yet how good he will become. He may end up an above average hitting left fielder before he's through. Of course Swihart is going to be primarily a catcher and yes maybe even completely a catcher, but a whole lot of teams would love to have his bat in the lineup more than 110 games a year if he ends up being a stud. No matter what team he ends up on. Look around the league. If a catcher can hit, teams often put them in the lineup in other positions to keep their bat in the lineup.
I'm a huge advocate of increased positional flexibility in lineups, in part because I love having specialists off the bench who can snag 3-4 games a year with their unique abilities. For example, I love having a guy like Billy Hamilton as a 4th or 5th OF who you can put in late in games to steal a base if needed. If a team has several players with positional flexibility they can provide good injury back up from 24 roster spots and enable an open slot in the lineup for a specialist. Another reliever or a specialist base runner/defensive back up.
I think it is one of the unknown stories in baseball. Someone should run the numbers on the real value of such options. Billy Hamilton won 3-4 games in a 3 week period 2 years ago just with his legs. Having an extra reliever can win several games a year for a team also.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan1615 on Nov 1, 2014 16:53:12 GMT -5
Swihart is still only 22 years old. We don't know yet how good he will become. He may end up an above average hitting left fielder before he's through. Of course Swihart is going to be primarily a catcher and yes maybe even completely a catcher, but a whole lot of teams would love to have his bat in the lineup more than 110 games a year if he ends up being a stud. No matter what team he ends up on. Look around the league. If a catcher can hit, teams often put them in the lineup in other positions to keep their bat in the lineup. I'm a huge advocate of increased positional flexibility in lineups, in part because I love having specialists off the bench who can snag 3-4 games a year with their unique abilities. For example, I love having a guy like Billy Hamilton as a 4th or 5th OF who you can put in late in games to steal a base if needed. If a team has several players with positional flexibility they can provide good injury back up from 24 roster spots and enable an open slot in the lineup for a specialist. Another reliever or a specialist base runner/defensive back up. I think it is one of the unknown stories in baseball. Someone should run the numbers on the real value of such options. Billy Hamilton won 3-4 games in a 3 week period 2 years ago just with his legs. Having an extra reliever can win several games a year for a team also. If he somehow became an above average hitting left fielder, and we wanted to play Vazquez at C instead of him for some reason, it would be moronic not to trade him. At C he would be one of the most valuable trade pieces in the game, while he'd only be a decent left fielder. If both Vazquez and Swihart work out, one should be traded
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Nov 1, 2014 17:19:37 GMT -5
Then Mauer should have been a full time catcher his entire time in the majors I guess. But he has been DHing since he was 22 years old and has only caught more than 120 games once in his career. And Posada, and Carlos Santana and any number of other good hitting catchers. Victor Martinez...etc.
Swihart does not project as being as good a hitter as those guys but he is still only 22 years old and he has been a real decent hitter in the minors. He could well have a bat that is so good teams will want him in the lineup beyond 120 games a year. I don't mean to be polemical. No one here is saying his bat will be that good. Some of us are just saying it's possible.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan1615 on Nov 1, 2014 17:23:21 GMT -5
Then Mauer should have been a full time catcher his entire time in the majors I guess. But he has been DHing since he was 22 years old and has only caught more than 120 games once in his career. And Posada, and Carlos Santana and any number of other good hitting catchers. Victor Martinez...etc. Swihart does not project as being as good a hitter as those guys but he is still only 22 years old and he has been a real decent hitter in the minors. He could well have a bat that is so good teams will want him in the lineup beyond 120 games a year. I don't mean to be polemical. No one here is saying his bat will be that good. Some of us are just saying it's possible. Well we have 2 of them, so one is going to have to play for a lot less than 120 games. I would suggest playing one for 120 games a year and trading thw other.
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Nov 1, 2014 17:40:32 GMT -5
That could well be the best option but either way, if Swihart hits, he's gonna play more than 120 games a year.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Nov 1, 2014 18:47:43 GMT -5
It's not that Swihart can't play left field-- he very well may be able to field the position at a high enough level. It's that his bat is probably not good enough to make him much more than an averagish left fielder, which means that if he isn't catching a healthy majority of his games, he's probably more valuable as a trade chip than as a left fielder. MLB left fielders hit .257/.322/.402 in 2014. That bar isn't THAT high. It would take a weird confluence of circumstances for it to happen, but I do think there's some merit to the idea.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Nov 1, 2014 20:43:40 GMT -5
Why are you guys talking about left field, anyway? Are you sure Swihart can't play 3rd base?
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 1, 2014 20:45:00 GMT -5
It's not that Swihart can't play left field-- he very well may be able to field the position at a high enough level. It's that his bat is probably not good enough to make him much more than an averagish left fielder, which means that if he isn't catching a healthy majority of his games, he's probably more valuable as a trade chip than as a left fielder. MLB left fielders hit .257/.322/.402 in 2014. That bar isn't THAT high. It would take a weird confluence of circumstances for it to happen, but I do think there's some merit to the idea. The thing is, the better he hits, the harder it is for him to coexist with Vazquez. Swihart isn't some Victor Martinez/Carlos Santana-esque butcher behind the plate. He looks like he's going to be above-average defensively, and if you have an above-average defensive catcher who hits like a left fielder, that's one of the five or ten best catchers in the league and a guy you want playing behind the plate as much as possible. Sure, on his days off, if he's your best option at LF/1B/DH/etc., go ahead and play him there. But if he's playing more than 20 or so games at a non-catcher position, he's being misused. The caveat to all this is that it's only true if you can get equivalent value for whichever of Vazquez or Swihart you end up dealing, and that's not always possible. The trade market is fairly inefficient (limited number of interested teams, mismatches in perceived value, endemic risk aversion, etc.), which means you often see situations where "blocked" players don't get traded and are played at a less-valuable defensive position (think Andrus/Profar, Pedroia/Betts, etc). However, those situations almost always involve only a minor move down the defensive spectrum. While there certainly is a difference between SS and 2B or 2B and CF, it's a relatively minor one. The difference between catcher and LF/1B/DH, however, is literally the largest one you could possibly have, and you almost never see catchers moved off the position for significant chunks of time unless they're well below-average defensively (ADD: or if there are serious health concerns about them staying at catcher, a la Mauer in 2014). If Swihart and Vazquez are both as good as we hope they'll be, you're either forced to sit one of the best defensive catchers in the league (a guy who might also be able to hit decently enough for the position) or play an above-average defensive catcher at a position where his bat is much, much less valuable. That's an inefficient use of resources, and why I think it makes no sense to keep both guys if they're as good as we think they are. Of course, that's a fairly significant caveat, and if Vazquez doesn't hit or Swihart's plate discipline/power stagnate, this whole exercise will be moot. And we're still at least a year or two away from this being a problem, because you want to give both guys sufficient major league time to fully evaluate what the best course of action might be. But it's something you want to remember in the back of your head, especially if there happens to be a team that covets one of them and might be offering the kind of talent that gives you serious pause about possibly moving one of them...
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Nov 1, 2014 22:48:38 GMT -5
I agree with you jmei overall but even Mauer only played more than 120 games at catcher 1 season. Teams are not going to beat their catcher into the ground by playing them 140-150 games. It just does not appear to happen in mlb any more. So yes, Swihart will get PT in some other positions if he turns out to be a plus hitter.
And I think we probably all agree that if we have 2 starting level catchers in Vasquez and Swihart a strong case could be made for trading one of them. There are factors which could effect that scenario though. For example, both are extremely low cost players for a while. The catching position involves a whole lot of injuries and starting either for more than 120 games is probably not optimal. So at least 42 games will be started by the back up guy. The back up will also get into other games as a sub, pinch hitter etc...and one of the catchers may well be able to play another important slot like 2nd or 3rd base, as has been speculated with Swihart ever since he was drafted.
I think on a championship contender, having 2 starting level catchers with that sort of positional flexibility and cost is near optimal. At least for 3-4 years of their control.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Nov 2, 2014 1:16:15 GMT -5
Between dh, catching and first base, we can get swihart and Vazquez enough at bats for 1016 and beyond but is that what is best for the team and the players development?
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 2, 2014 9:59:56 GMT -5
I agree with you jmei overall but even Mauer only played more than 120 games at catcher 1 season. Teams are not going to beat their catcher into the ground by playing them 140-150 games. It just does not appear to happen in mlb any more. So yes, Swihart will get PT in some other positions if he turns out to be a plus hitter. And I think we probably all agree that if we have 2 starting level catchers in Vasquez and Swihart a strong case could be made for trading one of them. There are factors which could effect that scenario though. For example, both are extremely low cost players for a while. The catching position involves a whole lot of injuries and starting either for more than 120 games is probably not optimal. So at least 42 games will be started by the back up guy. The back up will also get into other games as a sub, pinch hitter etc...and one of the catchers may well be able to play another important slot like 2nd or 3rd base, as has been speculated with Swihart ever since he was drafted. I think on a championship contender, having 2 starting level catchers with that sort of positional flexibility and cost is near optimal. At least for 3-4 years of their control. Under this scenario, you're still limiting a clear starter-level catcher in Vazquez to 40-odd games a year. He'd also add some value as injury insurance for Swihart, but still, that seems like you're wasting a good bit of Vazquez's value. On the other hand, teams do frequently balance two starter-level catchers on their roster. There have been a few teams with overqualified backups in recent history-- think David Ross (backup to Brian McCann) in Atlanta and Ryan Hanigan (backup to Ramon Hernandez) in Cincinnati). Currently, there's the platoon situation in Oakland (which is a special case, but is worth mentioning), Rene Rivera and Yasmani Grandal in SD, and Martin Maldonado (Lucroy's backup) in Milwaukee. The Yankees have a surplus of decent catchers as well, as Cervelli might be an average-ish starter if given a chance. Most of those backups seem to be the fringy-bat, elite-defense (including framing)-types, which fits Vazquez to a tee. It may be possible that other teams are unwilling to give up real assets to trade for backup catchers in that mold and install them as starters, which means you're best off keeping them as backups and injury insurance. That may very well turn out to be the case with Vazquez, although the increased recognition of the importance of pitch framing may change things (see the Rays trading for Hanigan and installing him as starter). So maybe they end up with Swihart starting 110 games at catcher and 30ish at 3B/LF/1B/DH, and Vazquez catching the rest, and that ends up being the best use of resources.
|
|
|