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.
2015 Official Spring Training thread
|
Post by joshv02 on Mar 28, 2015 20:07:09 GMT -5
The Sox would be dumb to break camp with Swihart and lose a year of control.... The fact he's in minor league camp tells us they aren't going to anyways so it's a dumb conversation. What was wrong with the Shaunessey article? It was spot on. I know people hate DS but he's a good writer and while he's a douche a lot he's also spot on quite a bit. His job is to write opinion and it's what he does and I think he gets a bad rap for it. He ruffled feathers but I don't think he's a jerk just to be a jerk as much as people think. People right him off and it's a shame because he has a lot to offer and his call out of Ortiz is spot on and legit. You defend chb and Felger. I don't think we're going to see eye to eye, but I certainly don't want to.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Mar 28, 2015 20:07:28 GMT -5
Yea, I don't think having Butler available would really change my opinion of the situation right now. The whole thing really comes down to how much of a drop off defensively/pitch framing it is from Vazquez to Hannigan/?, and how much it would/does effect the pitching staff, which is the obvious question. Vazquez being out weeks vs. months changes things in so much as it may be necessary to part with a piece to fix the situation. Not too much available on the last year of a deal catcher market, and they aren't going to trade for a "starter", who likely has a long deal left, if Hannigan is healthy and with Swihart likely half a season to a year away. On framing, I'd probably characterize it as going from Andrew McCutcheon to Jacoby Ellsbury ... from super-elite to very good. Defense overall is probably about the same, although with controlling the running game, change "McCutcheon" in that analogy to "Trout." Vazquez really was so insanely good at throwing a baseball quickly and accurately. Hope he will be again. Hanigan has generally been solid in that area, although he had a bad year last year. Tell you one thing, I'm soooo glad the Sox traded WMB for Hanigan. If they had a lesser backup, this would've been even worse, obviously.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Mar 28, 2015 20:50:21 GMT -5
Again, you're not getting anyone better than Hanigan in a trade unless you do something crazy like trade away Mookie. Yes, you might be able to improve by a quarter of a win over the course of the season if you trade for Navarro to back him up rather than Quintero, but who knows what the Blue Jays will want in return. Demanding any sort of action now is just silly.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Mar 28, 2015 21:00:08 GMT -5
All signs are pointing to TJ here, right? Yes. Vazquez will have a 2nd (contrast-enhanced) MRI, where dye is injected. My speculation is that the first MRI showed a UCL tear but did not definitively show the extent (complete or partial) of the tear. If it is partial, there's a chance for a six-week rehab (see Tanaka, Masahiro). However, rehab doesn't typically fix the tear and the player almost always requires TJ at a later date. Therefore, I would expect the Red Sox to announce next week that Vazquez will have TJ surgery and will miss the season. The good news is that he should be able to have a reasonably normal offseason and be ready for next season.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Mar 28, 2015 21:17:31 GMT -5
Again, you're not getting anyone better than Hanigan in a trade unless you do something crazy like trade away Mookie. Yes, you might be able to improve by a quarter of a win over the course of the season if you trade for Navarro to back him up rather than Quintero, but who knows what the Blue Jays will want in return. Demanding any sort of action now is just silly. Again, the permutations aren't as limited as you think, but thanks for your input all the same.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Mar 28, 2015 21:28:24 GMT -5
Again, the permutations aren't as limited as you think, Are you just making a sentence out of random words or does this mean something? In the latter case please explain it to me.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Mar 28, 2015 21:45:58 GMT -5
Anyone remember the Butler discussion ? I didn't want to mention it, but I was pretty annoyed when they decided to DFA Butler instead of Britton (who they ended up losing anyways) to sign Breslow (a guy who I think won't be any good), and this is sort of the worst-case scenario where that decision comes back to bite you in the ***. What makes it even worse is the fact that the front office apparently doesn't see Luke Montz as a defensive catcher anymore (I think he's exclusively played 1B/DH during Spring Training), which means it's either rush Swihart up to be the starter or Hanigan plus a 35-year-old Humberto Quintero. Maybe the Nationals would be willing to trade him back for Brentz.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Mar 28, 2015 22:18:20 GMT -5
I'm really glad people here aren't discussing service time with regards to Swihart. I understand there is a decision to be made, but the decision should be made based on whether the team things Swihart actually needs more developmental time in AAA and not based on getting an extra year of service time out of him. That is small market team thinking. The reason most people here aren't discussing service time in regards to Swihart is because: 1) Most people think he still has some defensive work to strengthen and he has yet to prove he can hit AAA pitching, let alone major league pitching and 2) It's downright moronic to sacrifice one year of service time which is usually a full prime year because a team is too stupid to wait a couple of weeks in April to bring the kid up. I mean the difference between Hanigan/Quintero and Swihart/Hanigan over two weeks of the season in April is downright negligible and the value of Swihart's 2021 season, most likely a prime season, is far more valuable. It's a no-brainer. Small market thinking/big market thinking is a ridiculous way to look at it. You're talking a year of guaranteed control versus a very real possibility of losing a good player. Just because the Sox are big market doesn't mean that they don't lose good players because other teams outbid them. I'm sure if Swihart progresses the way we think he will, he'll have plenty of suitors when he's a free agent. Realistically, the best the Sox can hope for is that Swihart pounds AAA pitching and sharpens his defensive game and will be up to stay come June.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Mar 28, 2015 22:22:44 GMT -5
Again, the permutations aren't as limited as you think, Are you just making a sentence out of random words or does this mean something? In the latter case please explain it to me. there not random words....they fit very will in context. In a nutshell, and given that i don't put too much time into all the catchers available in MLB, I would like the FO to consider trading anyone not named Boegarts and Betts for a major league catcher that will help this team succeed this year. I don't know if it's possible, it may be unlikely, but going into a season with a career backup who hasn't played more than 91 but once in the last 6 years as your #1 catcher, along with a terrible backup is not acceptable. You develop your farm system to take risks in cases just like this. There would be nothing wrong with acquiring a firs team, first division catcher if it meant parting with the other valuable prospects/players in your system. Your not trying to replace a 1/2 win with a backup. Your trying to replace your primary catcher on your team and that may be 2, 3, 4 wins..who really knows.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Mar 28, 2015 22:59:29 GMT -5
Are you just making a sentence out of random words or does this mean something? In the latter case please explain it to me. there not random words....they fit very will in context. In a nutshell, and given that i don't put too much time into all the catchers available in MLB, I would like the FO to consider trading anyone not named Boegarts and Betts for a major league catcher that will help this team succeed this year. I don't know if it's possible, it may be unlikely, but going into a season with a career backup who hasn't played more than 91 but once in the last 6 years as your #1 catcher, along with a terrible backup is not acceptable. You develop your farm system to take risks in cases just like this. There would be nothing wrong with acquiring a firs team, first division catcher if it meant parting with the other valuable prospects/players in your system. Your not trying to replace a 1/2 win with a backup. Your trying to replace your primary catcher on your team and that may be 2, 3, 4 wins..who really knows. So you're saying, you have no idea if it's possible, but you are absolutely convinced it's possible. Thanks for your input. (BTW, the Sox won the World Series in 2013 with a "career backup" catching. Nice label you've got there.)
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Mar 29, 2015 7:02:05 GMT -5
For a little light-hearted interlude in this dour discussion, I give you ... Nick Cafardo! Seriously, Nick, this man-crush ... it's getting a little weird. Or maybe RAJ offered Cafardo some kind of cut of the salary savings if Hamels got traded? He's sounding desperate.
|
|
|
Post by adiospaydro2005 on Mar 29, 2015 7:32:22 GMT -5
The only guy that the Red Sox need to trade or release is Victorino who is blocking Castillo a much younger and better player. He also doesn't appear ready to accept his role as a part-time player who will platoon with Nava.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Mar 29, 2015 7:48:53 GMT -5
The Sox would be dumb to break camp with Swihart and lose a year of control.... The fact he's in minor league camp tells us they aren't going to anyways so it's a dumb conversation. What was wrong with the Shaunessey article? It was spot on. I know people hate DS but he's a good writer and while he's a douche a lot he's also spot on quite a bit. His job is to write opinion and it's what he does and I think he gets a bad rap for it. He ruffled feathers but I don't think he's a jerk just to be a jerk as much as people think. People right him off and it's a shame because he has a lot to offer and his call out of Ortiz is spot on and legit. You defend chb and Felger. I don't think we're going to see eye to eye, but I certainly don't want to. That makes a lot of sense Josh. Someone defends two people for pretty specific reasons and you draw the co conclusion that we won't see eye to eye on anything... Very open minded of you. Basically I said DS is a good writer and is spot on sometimes so people shouldn't dismiss him out right. Not sure what I said so outlandish. As for Felger, I believe I said he doesn't need to know all the details of every teams system and he doesn't pretend like he knows something when he doesn't. Which is true when I've listened which maybe I catch an hour total a week considering I'm 15 mins between job and home and I'm usually on the phone.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Mar 29, 2015 8:21:53 GMT -5
there not random words....they fit very will in context. In a nutshell, and given that i don't put too much time into all the catchers available in MLB, I would like the FO to consider trading anyone not named Boegarts and Betts for a major league catcher that will help this team succeed this year. I don't know if it's possible, it may be unlikely, but going into a season with a career backup who hasn't played more than 91 but once in the last 6 years as your #1 catcher, along with a terrible backup is not acceptable. You develop your farm system to take risks in cases just like this. There would be nothing wrong with acquiring a firs team, first division catcher if it meant parting with the other valuable prospects/players in your system. Your not trying to replace a 1/2 win with a backup. Your trying to replace your primary catcher on your team and that may be 2, 3, 4 wins..who really knows. So you're saying, you have no idea if it's possible, but you are absolutely convinced it's possible. Thanks for your input. (BTW, the Sox won the World Series in 2013 with a "career backup" catching. Nice label you've got there.) C'mon man, that's not at all what he said. He just said there are other possibilities out there than your assertion that to improve the catching situation via trade they'd have to give up Mookie. The truth is neither one of you can say either thing as a fact because we don't know. It's funny they got Hannigan for a bag of baseballs (WMB) and now your assertion is the next step is Mookie Betts to find something better. I don't agree that they should use top guys to get a catcher but he's just stating the possibility is out there or at least it's likely enough that they should explore it. Pretty sure it's safe to assume any team would explore what's out there tho. I'd look into Molina, if he's still strong Defensively then it's a good replacement for Vasquez who wasn't good offensively. Himself.
|
|
wcp3
Veteran
Posts: 3,834
|
Post by wcp3 on Mar 29, 2015 8:27:55 GMT -5
The problem with Shaughnessy isn't that it's opiniated; it's that his main goal for every piece is to get as big of a reaction out of people as possible. He's basically getting paid to annoy people,, and the occasional great (not good; great) articles he writes doesn't negate the 90% of drivel.
Felger and Mazz started out as fun talk radio and a nice alternative to the arrogance on WEEI, but they seem to have gone down the DS path. They're straight up clowns now.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 29, 2015 8:37:21 GMT -5
I didn't want to mention it, but I was pretty annoyed when they decided to DFA Butler instead of Britton (who they ended up losing anyways) to sign Breslow (a guy who I think won't be any good), and this is sort of the worst-case scenario where that decision comes back to bite you in the ***. What makes it even worse is the fact that the front office apparently doesn't see Luke Montz as a defensive catcher anymore (I think he's exclusively played 1B/DH during Spring Training), which means it's either rush Swihart up to be the starter or Hanigan plus a 35-year-old Humberto Quintero. Maybe the Nationals would be willing to trade him back for Brentz. I'd have to imagine they're keeping him as a 3rd catcher, like we had for awhile.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Mar 29, 2015 8:42:16 GMT -5
I don't understand why people feel the need to have a black and white opinion on someone. I don't disagree with much of what you just wrote, but my only point was it's silly to dismiss an article simply because he wrote it and not consider the content. Now if you want to choose not to read it all together because he wrote it then fine, but then don't comment on it. If you choose to read it, then don't close yourself off to what's written.
In this case, people love Papi and gate DS. All well and good,but if your opinion on this matter is swayed by that then, it's worthless to the discussion. DS wrote a compelling piece and it shouldn't be dismissed as it's relevant to the Ortíz piece that people salivated over.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Mar 29, 2015 8:42:29 GMT -5
People need to accept that Papi is a user and he's contradicted himself while trying to defend himself. Oh well, who cares? We don't know the extent but we do know he hasn't been suspended for it. I'm sure I'm in the minority, but I don't care if steroids are used or not. It was a fun time to be a baseball fan and I'd be fine seeing them back in the game. If they let me see players for longer and gave me Manny the I have no issues with them. They aren't going in my body.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Mar 29, 2015 9:46:43 GMT -5
Man, all this angst about Butler ... folks would really feel better about all of this if Butler were around? It's not entirely clear to me that Butler's a better option than Quintero. I mean, he might be, maybe even probably would be, but it's certainly not worth getting too worked up about. In fact, I've sort of talked myself off the ledge about the whole question of the backup catcher, anyway. Almost every backup catcher is terrible, so whatever ... at least the Sox had a good one before this happened. Except, of course, Hanigan can't stay healthy. That's bad. So the Sox need to sign another Humberto Humberto type for AAA or acquire him rather cheaply. This is a very bad development because Vazquez was very good, but not having Butler isn't really that big a part of it. I only hope Swihart develops quickly and is ready mid-year ... You're right that the difference between Butler and Quintero isn't huge over a typical backup catcher's workload, but every little bit counts in what should be a tight divisional race. I would certainly feel a good bit better if Butler was in the mix, but I always thought he was grossly underrated 'round these parts. More importantly, as you allude to, they're now dangerously thin-- they have a 34-year-old starter with an injury history and a 35-year-old replacement-level backup at the position with the highest DL rate amongst position players. If either of those guys gets injured, they now have pretty much no choice but to call up Swihart, whether he's ready or not.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 29, 2015 9:46:49 GMT -5
rjr, you need to accept what I say. Don't be an *** and don't start this steroid crap again. I don't want kids thinking they need to do steroids to make the major leagues.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Mar 29, 2015 10:19:57 GMT -5
Man, all this angst about Butler ... folks would really feel better about all of this if Butler were around? It's not entirely clear to me that Butler's a better option than Quintero. I mean, he might be, maybe even probably would be, but it's certainly not worth getting too worked up about. In fact, I've sort of talked myself off the ledge about the whole question of the backup catcher, anyway. Almost every backup catcher is terrible, so whatever ... at least the Sox had a good one before this happened. Except, of course, Hanigan can't stay healthy. That's bad. So the Sox need to sign another Humberto Humberto type for AAA or acquire him rather cheaply. This is a very bad development because Vazquez was very good, but not having Butler isn't really that big a part of it. I only hope Swihart develops quickly and is ready mid-year ... You're right that the difference between Butler and Quintero isn't huge over a typical backup catcher's workload, but every little bit counts in what should be a tight divisional race. I would certainly feel a good bit better if Butler was in the mix, but I always thought he was grossly underrated 'round these parts. More importantly, as you allude to, they're now dangerously thin-- they have a 34-year-old starter with an injury history and a 35-year-old replacement-level backup at the position with the highest DL rate amongst position players. If either of those guys gets injured, they now have pretty much no choice but to call up Swihart, whether he's ready or not. Yeah, that's fair enough ... I still don't think that difference between Butler and Quintero is large enough to have justified jettisoning, say, Spruill in the offseason instead of Butler. Especially when considering the low likelihood of Vazquez suffering a season-ending injury in spring training like this. But, opinions differ on the margins on stuff like this ... I don't feel as strongly about it as I do, say, Craig over Victorino. But how thin they are does bother me right now. I really hope they can scare up another Quintero type to stash at AAA in case something happens before it's acceptable to call up Swihart. In the end, this sucks. You can't be 100% prepared for every risk, and this is possibly the outcome the Sox were least prepared for outside of maybe Porcello needing season-ending surgery (knocking on wood and throwing salt over my shoulder)
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Mar 29, 2015 10:47:51 GMT -5
rjr, you need to accept what I say. Don't be an *** and don't start this steroid crap again. I don't want kids thinking they need to do steroids to make the major leagues. You're entitled to your feelings on the matter as am I and it doesn't make either an ass. It's irrelevant anyways considering they are illegal and now against MLB rules and neither will be changing. Doesn't change the fact that Papi failed a drug test, hasn't taken responsibility for it and DS is correct to point this out. A lot of things he does are douchy but his pointing his out is not one of them and in this case he's simply responding to an unprovoked attack on him.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Mar 29, 2015 10:49:02 GMT -5
C'mon man, that's not at all what he said. He just said there are other possibilities out there than your assertion that to improve the catching situation via trade they'd have to give up Mookie. The truth is neither one of you can say either thing as a fact because we don't know. It's funny they got Hannigan for a bag of baseballs (WMB) and now your assertion is the next step is Mookie Betts to find something better. That was a different situation - the heart of the offseason. Now the music has stopped playing and everyone has sat down in their chair. MLB-quality catchers are rare, everyone has at most as many as they want, likely less. And there are probably only 2 GMs who are dumber than A.J. Preller, and I dunno which Diamondbacks catcher you might have your eye on but I sure ain't interested. In the end, this sucks. You can't be 100% prepared for every risk, and this is possibly the outcome the Sox were least prepared for I don't think there's another team in MLB that was better prepared for such an outcome than the Sox. Because, as I was just saying, MLB-quality catchers are rare.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Mar 29, 2015 10:54:42 GMT -5
Yes, different situations but Dionner Navarro and Wellington Castillo are both reportedly available. It would not cost Mookie Betts to land either. I'm not advocating to trade what it would take yo get them, but I'm confident they could be had for much less than that. I bet if they offered Barnes for either they'd get him. I wouldn't want the Sox to do that, but it's she'll of a lot less than Mookie Betts which is all he was saying.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,946
|
Post by ericmvan on Mar 29, 2015 11:39:01 GMT -5
I don't know if it's possible, it may be unlikely, but going into a season with a career backup who hasn't played more than 91 but once in the last 6 years as your #1 catcher, along with a terrible backup is not acceptable. What's really genuinely disturbing about the fact that Hanigan is a career backup is that he was actually the Reds' starting catcher from 2009 to 2012, and the Rays' last year. That's freaking Twilight Zone material. One possibility would be to trade Will Middlebrooks for a guy who, when pitch-framing is included conservatively, is projected to be about the 10th best starting catcher in MLB. That would fill your prescription neatly, at a Romneycare cost to boot. It's true that Hanigan has had a lot of trouble staying healthy, but he's an excellent defender, excellent pitch-framer, and has some stick (that may well play up in a better lineup; he may actually be a guy who will benefit from the protection of hitting in front of Betts and Pedroia). The major concern here is over Quintero or an unready Swihart as a starter should Hanigan suffer one of his all-too frequent injuries. I'm all for grabbing a second-division starter type to back him up. And I can bet you that the downside-risk-aversive Cherington is burning up the phones right now trying to do that.
|
|
|