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.
8/31-9/2 Red Sox vs. Yankees Series Thread
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,851
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Sept 3, 2015 6:54:28 GMT -5
Swihart with a 145 wRC+ in the second half with a 450 BABIP. I think his trade value is extremely high right now. Question is how good we think the bat will truly be.
|
|
|
Post by threeifbaerga on Sept 3, 2015 8:04:41 GMT -5
Hanigan is signed for 2016, with a team option for 2017 (and a buyout, if not exercised). Don't know the answer to your question yet. DD could trade any of the three catchers, and who he trades may depend on the relative offers and who he is able to sign in FA. Swihart could fetch a monster package in trade. Assessing trade value is fun and all, but do we remember where this team was in May? When they had to bring up their 22 year old catcher who by all admission was not ready for full time duty at the major league level? When they had traded for Sandy effing Leon? Both Vasquez and Swihart have options.
|
|
|
Post by semsox on Sept 3, 2015 8:06:36 GMT -5
At some point, the Red Sox will probably have to trade one of their catchers. But if they trade either of them this off-season, they will be selling low -- way low. This has been my position for awhile. If both Swihart and CVaz reach something near their potential (that is, starting C on a 1st division team), then keeping both is a mis-allocation of resources. the TJ for Vazquez was obviously a huge hit to his trade value, but if after next year they both look to be starters, I think you have to look into building a package around one of them for a deeper organizational need.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Sept 3, 2015 8:09:39 GMT -5
Sure, Swihart's trade value is extremely high right now. VERY high. And there's a reason for that ... he's a potential cornerstone player at the hardest defensive position on the field. That's nearly impossible to find. Maybe he's not Mike Trout, but he very well may be Buster Posey. I'm not sure he's untradeable exactly, but you'd really have to be blown away by a deal.
I could see an argument that Swihart's the most valuable guy on the Red Sox 40-man roster this year, actually, even more than Bogaerts or Betts. I'm not sure I'd make that argument, but I could see it's a rational one. The three are certainly in the same tier.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Sept 3, 2015 8:33:05 GMT -5
Swihart has less than 100 AB in the 2H of the season. He's been impressive, and you can chalk some of it up to him adjusting to the league after being called up earlier than he should of, but I don't think you can make the argument that his last 100 at bats are more telling than his first 150. The answer is probably somewhere in between.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,677
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Sept 3, 2015 9:07:45 GMT -5
Swihart with a 145 wRC+ in the second half with a 450 BABIP. I think his trade value is extremely high right now. Question is how good we think the bat will truly be. Obviously he won't be as good as you're seeing right now post all-star break, but he won't be anywhere near as overmatched as he was during the first half. He's hitting .280 something (and rising) with minimal power and not a ton of plate discipline. His defense is a work in progress. I hardly think he has peaked. I think his future will be a .280 something hitter who develops a lot more power than you're seeing right now. A finished product like him will probably generate 15 - 20 homers per year, and I think he'll gain better plate discipline with more experience. I also expect that his defense and game calling will improve. He was a good defensive minor league catcher with a good arm, but he still has a ways to go, but I think he'll get there. I think trading this kid away would be foolish. I know the Sox eventually will have to be on the futures of Swihart and Vazquez. I love Vazquez's defense and I don't think he's a lost cause at the plate, but I don't know that he'll necessarily be more than a #9 hitter or an excellent backup catcher. For the here and now, and not knowing how well Vazquez will bounce back, I think the Sox should most definitely hang on to both catchers. They don't have a lot of catching depth in the system behind them, and I think in time Swihart will hit enough to eventually be a #6/#7 type hitter in a good lineup, and I do think Swihart will be an all-star catcher. I also think Vazquez, because his defense is so good, will be an asset.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 3, 2015 9:16:00 GMT -5
Hanigan is also on board for a few more years, I believe. He's brought a bit to the lineup. Do you keep or trade him? Hanigan is signed for 2016, with a team option for 2017 (and a buyout, if not exercised). Don't know the answer to your question yet. DD could trade any of the three catchers, and who he trades may depend on the relative offers and who he is able to sign in FA. Swihart could fetch a monster package in trade. Both my friends who are college head coaches are convinced Hanigan calls a lousy game. I have no way of assessing this. Are there any decent articles on this that anyone knows of? Since they both independently brought it up I am really curious about this. I always felt it was on the pitcher to know the hitters proclivities and the umps' zones (Schilling was an obsessive about this) but I know it's traditional to have catchers handle/marshal this info.
|
|
|
Post by jerrygarciaparra on Sept 3, 2015 9:33:40 GMT -5
Both my friends who are college head coaches are convinced Hanigan calls a lousy game. I have no way of assessing this. Are there any decent articles on this that anyone knows of? Since they both independently brought it up I am really curious about this. I always felt it was on the pitcher to know the hitters proclivities and the umps' zones (Schilling was an obsessive about this) but I know it's traditional to have catchers handle/marshal this info. this post is certain to cue up a response from a certains sage sabermetric analyst on this website.....5....4.....3......2......
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Sept 3, 2015 10:34:19 GMT -5
Swihart has less than 100 AB in the 2H of the season. He's been impressive, and you can chalk some of it up to him adjusting to the league after being called up earlier than he should of, but I don't think you can make the argument that his last 100 at bats are more telling than his first 150. The answer is probably somewhere in between. Eh, sure you can. These aren't random samples of equal weight. It's normal to have an adjustment period to the majors ... especially when you're rushed because of injury. However, "more telling" doesn't mean that it's exclusive to the earlier data, just that you can weight it a little more. And it's not like there weren't holes in his game in the second half, either. He won't have a .450 BABIP going forward, so we know his top-line stats don't really reflect how he did post-ASB in a sustainable way. In the end, he wasn't even supposed to play in the majors this year. He's really young and talented, but he's still developing.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 3, 2015 10:49:05 GMT -5
"We are human beings, not chess pieces!" www.providencejournal.com/article/20150903/SPORTS/150909779/14009I've brought this up a few times when we get too mired in stats and predicted outcomes, and I can be just as guilty as anyone here. In fact, I remember being shocked once when an MLB GM I met told me the reason they thought player X was mired in a 4 week slump. "His long time girlfriend dumped him." And he was absolutely serious. Now, whether that led to the player staying out late and trying to hit everything that was willing or just a depression or some other change in behavior, we didn't get into. But the GM did follow with, "These guys are human like anyone else. And most of them are creatures of habit and daily ritual more so than the rest of us. Sometimes any little thing can throw them off their game. Other times, they're bullet proof. You never know." FWIW
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Sept 3, 2015 14:16:23 GMT -5
As Swihart matures physically and becomes stronger. Some of those singles will become doubles. And, some of those doubles will be HR's. Sure looks like he's going to be a 290-300 hitter with some pop. Maybe, 15 HR's. Will be up to him how well he learns the league and figures out how to call a game. Much more important than throwing. Needs work on receiving skills too.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,936
|
Post by ericmvan on Sept 4, 2015 2:23:11 GMT -5
Swihart with a 145 wRC+ in the second half with a 450 BABIP. I think his trade value is extremely high right now. Question is how good we think the bat will truly be. Obviously he won't be as good as you're seeing right now post all-star break, but he won't be anywhere near as overmatched as he was during the first half. He's hitting .280 something (and rising) with minimal power and not a ton of plate discipline. His defense is a work in progress. I hardly think he has peaked. I think his future will be a .280 something hitter who develops a lot more power than you're seeing right now. A finished product like him will probably generate 15 - 20 homers per year, and I think he'll gain better plate discipline with more experience. I also expect that his defense and game calling will improve. He was a good defensive minor league catcher with a good arm, but he still has a ways to go, but I think he'll get there. I think trading this kid away would be foolish. I know the Sox eventually will have to be on the futures of Swihart and Vazquez. I love Vazquez's defense and I don't think he's a lost cause at the plate, but I don't know that he'll necessarily be more than a #9 hitter or an excellent backup catcher.For the here and now, and not knowing how well Vazquez will bounce back, I think the Sox should most definitely hang on to both catchers. They don't have a lot of catching depth in the system behind them, and I think in time Swihart will hit enough to eventually be a #6/#7 type hitter in a good lineup, and I do think Swihart will be an all-star catcher. I also think Vazquez, because his defense is so good, will be an asset. His very modest Steamer / Oliver projections for this year at the plate, plus his throwing defense last year regressed a little, plus his old pitch framing estimate regressed rather more (BP later adjusted their metric to be in line with that regressed figure), projected him as THE FIFTH BEST CATCHER IN MLB THIS YEAR.
You're not the only person making this mistake. What is so hard to understand that catcher defense is vastly more important than offense? Vazquez, assuming the arm recovers well, is a +5.0 WAR DEFENDER (per 125 games) . At least (he was +5.5 last year). He is the best defensive player in MLB. This line of thought re Vazquez is like saying "I know Scarlett Johansson is smart and talented and beautiful and smoking hot, but I'm not sure if she's actually girlfriend material because I'm not sure she can cook." If Scarlett Johansson actually can cook or Christian Vazquez can hit a little, that is gravy.
I absolutely agree that Swihart has Posey-esque offensive potential that he has a very good chance of reaching, but he's going to need to actually do that to surpass Vazquez in value, such is the value gap between his good defense and Vazquez's. Latest bWAR + pitch framing updates, per 125 games: 1.7, Blake Swihart 2015 6.5, Christian Vazquez 2014
Best bWAR performances by Sox players per 150 games (125 for catchers, includes pitch framing), 2014-15 6.5 Christian Vazquez, 20146.3 Mookie Betts, 2014 5.9 Jackie Bradley, Jr,. 2015 5.8 Mookie Betts, 2015 5.6 Dustin Pedroia, 2014 4.7 Rusney Castillo, 2014-5 4.6 Xander Bogaerts, 2015
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,851
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Sept 4, 2015 7:13:55 GMT -5
As Swihart matures physically and becomes stronger. Some of those singles will become doubles. And, some of those doubles will be HR's. Sure looks like he's going to be a 290-300 hitter with some pop. Maybe, 15 HR's. Will be up to him how well he learns the league and figures out how to call a game. Much more important than throwing. Needs work on receiving skills too. Yeah I don't think it's that simple regarding his power. His FB% is 11.2% after taking out pop ups (which is a whopping 14%). He makes up for that by hitting a ton of line drives, but that doesn't really equate to home run power. Unless he changes his swing to get more loft, he's always going to be a doubles hitter.
|
|
|
Post by raftsox on Sept 4, 2015 8:29:10 GMT -5
Both my friends who are college head coaches are convinced Hanigan calls a lousy game. I have no way of assessing this. Are there any decent articles on this that anyone knows of? Since they both independently brought it up I am really curious about this. I always felt it was on the pitcher to know the hitters proclivities and the umps' zones (Schilling was an obsessive about this) but I know it's traditional to have catchers handle/marshal this info. this post is certain to cue up a response from a certains sage sabermetric analyst on this website.....5....4.....3......2...... Listen to the Baseball Prospectus' Effectively Wild podcast #686. They're doing a good job quantifying catcher game calling. I don't know if the stat itself is publically available yet, though.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,677
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Sept 4, 2015 9:37:53 GMT -5
Obviously he won't be as good as you're seeing right now post all-star break, but he won't be anywhere near as overmatched as he was during the first half. He's hitting .280 something (and rising) with minimal power and not a ton of plate discipline. His defense is a work in progress. I hardly think he has peaked. I think his future will be a .280 something hitter who develops a lot more power than you're seeing right now. A finished product like him will probably generate 15 - 20 homers per year, and I think he'll gain better plate discipline with more experience. I also expect that his defense and game calling will improve. He was a good defensive minor league catcher with a good arm, but he still has a ways to go, but I think he'll get there. I think trading this kid away would be foolish. I know the Sox eventually will have to be on the futures of Swihart and Vazquez. I love Vazquez's defense and I don't think he's a lost cause at the plate, but I don't know that he'll necessarily be more than a #9 hitter or an excellent backup catcher.For the here and now, and not knowing how well Vazquez will bounce back, I think the Sox should most definitely hang on to both catchers. They don't have a lot of catching depth in the system behind them, and I think in time Swihart will hit enough to eventually be a #6/#7 type hitter in a good lineup, and I do think Swihart will be an all-star catcher. I also think Vazquez, because his defense is so good, will be an asset. His very modest Steamer / Oliver projections for this year at the plate, plus his throwing defense last year regressed a little, plus his old pitch framing estimate regressed rather more (BP later adjusted their metric to be in line with that regressed figure), projected him as THE FIFTH BEST CATCHER IN MLB THIS YEAR.
You're not the only person making this mistake. What is so hard to understand that catcher defense is vastly more important than offense? Vazquez, assuming the arm recovers well, is a +5.0 WAR DEFENDER (per 125 games) . At least (he was +5.5 last year). He is the best defensive player in MLB. This line of thought re Vazquez is like saying "I know Scarlett Johansson is smart and talented and beautiful and smoking hot, but I'm not sure if she's actually girlfriend material because I'm not sure she can cook." If Scarlett Johansson actually can cook or Christian Vazquez can hit a little, that is gravy.
I absolutely agree that Swihart has Posey-esque offensive potential that he has a very good chance of reaching, but he's going to need to actually do that to surpass Vazquez in value, such is the value gap between his good defense and Vazquez's. Latest bWAR + pitch framing updates, per 125 games: 1.7, Blake Swihart 2015 6.5, Christian Vazquez 2014
Best bWAR performances by Sox players per 150 games (125 for catchers, includes pitch framing), 2014-15 6.5 Christian Vazquez, 20146.3 Mookie Betts, 2014 5.9 Jackie Bradley, Jr,. 2015 5.8 Mookie Betts, 2015 5.6 Dustin Pedroia, 2014 4.7 Rusney Castillo, 2014-5 4.6 Xander Bogaerts, 2015
Wait a minute here. Vazquez has played how long in the majors and he's already the best defensive player in baseball? With what track record? Oh, I don't doubt that he might very well become the best defensive catcher in baseball, but he played a few months in the majors in 2014. That's it. I'm sorry, but I want a longer track record before we make it definitive that he IS the best catcher in baseball, let alone the best defensive player in baseball. And the projection systems don't sway me. They're educated guesses, but hardly infallible. It's quite possible that Vazquez BECOMES the best defensive catcher in baseball - I wouldn't bet against that at all, but I can't anoint him that already. To me, that's like saying a guy who had 150 ABs in the majors is the best hitter in the majors. I suspect that as time goes on Swihart won't be Buster Posey but might put up numbers reminiscent of a young Jason Varitek, but with a better arm, but a long, long, long way to go when it comes to calling a game, and I'm sure between that and the pitch framing capabilities he won't be Vazquez, who I suspect could be in a defensive league of his own, where you already have him. Because Vazquez doesn't strike out a lot, I think he could ping the ball around for a decent BA. I'd love it if he hit like he did in Greenville, then it would be a no-brainer. I get your argument that defense with catching is so much more important that defense elsewhere but if Vazquez hits like JBJ circa 2014 and Blake starts raking, it's not a slam dunk that Vazquez is the answer. My gut tells me that Swihart will improve a lot defensively and become a good defensive catcher, but I could be wrong, and I think he will be a very good offensive player, not Buster Posey, but young Tek. My gut tells me that Vazquez will be a #9 hitter who's not an automatic out at the plate, and he will be a gold glove caliber catcher. And that's all I got. I know not to get too far into a battle of wits with you because I'm smart enough to know I have absolutely no shot at winning that battle (as I respectfully tip my cap to you).
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,936
|
Post by ericmvan on Sept 5, 2015 18:54:26 GMT -5
Vazquez, assuming the arm recovers well, is a +5.0 WAR DEFENDER (per 125 games) . At least (he was +5.5 last year). He is the best defensive player in MLB. Wait a minute here. Vazquez has played how long in the majors and he's already the best defensive player in baseball? With what track record? Oh, I don't doubt that he might very well become the best defensive catcher in baseball, but he played a few months in the majors in 2014. That's it. I'm sorry, but I want a longer track record before we make it definitive that he IS the best catcher in baseball, let alone the best defensive player in baseball. And the projection systems don't sway me. They're educated guesses, but hardly infallible. It's quite possible that Vazquez BECOMES the best defensive catcher in baseball - I wouldn't bet against that at all, but I can't anoint him that already. To me, that's like saying a guy who had 150 ABs in the majors is the best hitter in the majors. I suspect that as time goes on Swihart won't be Buster Posey but might put up numbers reminiscent of a young Jason Varitek, but with a better arm, but a long, long, long way to go when it comes to calling a game, and I'm sure between that and the pitch framing capabilities he won't be Vazquez, who I suspect could be in a defensive league of his own, where you already have him. Because Vazquez doesn't strike out a lot, I think he could ping the ball around for a decent BA. I'd love it if he hit like he did in Greenville, then it would be a no-brainer. I get your argument that defense with catching is so much more important that defense elsewhere but if Vazquez hits like JBJ circa 2014 and Blake starts raking, it's not a slam dunk that Vazquez is the answer. My gut tells me that Swihart will improve a lot defensively and become a good defensive catcher, but I could be wrong, and I think he will be a very good offensive player, not Buster Posey, but young Tek. My gut tells me that Vazquez will be a #9 hitter who's not an automatic out at the plate, and he will be a gold glove caliber catcher. And that's all I got. I know not to get too far into a battle of wits with you because I'm smart enough to know I have absolutely no shot at winning that battle (as I respectfully tip my cap to you). I know that when Vazquez was in AAA, one scout called him the best throwing catcher in MLB, "and it's not particularly close." He obviously receives the ball fantastically. I think a majority of scouts would agree that Vazquez is no worse than a tie as the best defensive catcher in baseball, without looking at a single stat. The best defensive catcher in MLB is by definition the most valuable defender in MLB. And in fact I should have used that phrase rather than "best." Vazquez' doesn't necessarily dominate the position defensively. It's just that great catcher D is inherently more valuable. You're correct that there is a scenario, something like a 10% chance (it would be 5% if not for CV's injury), that Swihart becomes a better overall catcher than Vazquez, and soon enough and by a large enough margin to make it worthwhile to trade Vazquez and not Swihart. The question is whether it makes any sense to wait until the odds of that scenario go down before pulling the trigger on a trade. It's a very good question.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Sept 5, 2015 20:38:56 GMT -5
Wait a minute here. Vazquez has played how long in the majors and he's already the best defensive player in baseball? With what track record? Oh, I don't doubt that he might very well become the best defensive catcher in baseball, but he played a few months in the majors in 2014. That's it. I'm sorry, but I want a longer track record before we make it definitive that he IS the best catcher in baseball, let alone the best defensive player in baseball. And the projection systems don't sway me. They're educated guesses, but hardly infallible. It's quite possible that Vazquez BECOMES the best defensive catcher in baseball - I wouldn't bet against that at all, but I can't anoint him that already. To me, that's like saying a guy who had 150 ABs in the majors is the best hitter in the majors. I suspect that as time goes on Swihart won't be Buster Posey but might put up numbers reminiscent of a young Jason Varitek, but with a better arm, but a long, long, long way to go when it comes to calling a game, and I'm sure between that and the pitch framing capabilities he won't be Vazquez, who I suspect could be in a defensive league of his own, where you already have him. Because Vazquez doesn't strike out a lot, I think he could ping the ball around for a decent BA. I'd love it if he hit like he did in Greenville, then it would be a no-brainer. I get your argument that defense with catching is so much more important that defense elsewhere but if Vazquez hits like JBJ circa 2014 and Blake starts raking, it's not a slam dunk that Vazquez is the answer. My gut tells me that Swihart will improve a lot defensively and become a good defensive catcher, but I could be wrong, and I think he will be a very good offensive player, not Buster Posey, but young Tek. My gut tells me that Vazquez will be a #9 hitter who's not an automatic out at the plate, and he will be a gold glove caliber catcher. And that's all I got. I know not to get too far into a battle of wits with you because I'm smart enough to know I have absolutely no shot at winning that battle (as I respectfully tip my cap to you). I know that when Vazquez was in AAA, one scout called him the best throwing catcher in MLB, "and it's not particularly close." He obviously receives the ball fantastically. I think a majority of scouts would agree that Vazquez is no worse than a tie as the best defensive catcher in baseball, without looking at a single stat. The best defensive catcher in MLB is by definition the most valuable defender in MLB. And in fact I should have used that phrase rather than "best." Vazquez' doesn't necessarily dominate the position defensively. It's just that great catcher D is inherently more valuable. You're correct that there is a scenario, something like a 10% chance (it would be 5% if not for CV's injury), that Swihart becomes a better overall catcher than Vazquez, and soon enough and by a large enough margin to make it worthwhile to trade Vazquez and not Swihart. The question is whether it makes any sense to wait until the odds of that scenario go down before pulling the trigger on a trade. It's a very good question. This doesn't seem like a truism to me, do you have numbers to show that catcher defense is so much more significant? Also regarding your last paragraph, I think it certainly makes sense to wait at least until next trade deadline given Vazquez's injury (obviously dependent on trade offers this off-season). As an aside, everyone here is assuming Swihart would fetch more in a trade, but if to Eric and others it's so apparent that Vazquez is a better choice (and I'm not sure I disagree), then wouldn't certain teams also value him more highly in a trade as well?
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Sept 5, 2015 21:05:37 GMT -5
I think a majority of scouts would agree that Vazquez is no worse than a tie as the best defensive catcher in baseball, without looking at a single stat. I think this is a very aggressive statement and one that I don't think is true.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,936
|
Post by ericmvan on Sept 6, 2015 8:40:59 GMT -5
I know that when Vazquez was in AAA, one scout called him the best throwing catcher in MLB, "and it's not particularly close." He obviously receives the ball fantastically. I think a majority of scouts would agree that Vazquez is no worse than a tie as the best defensive catcher in baseball, without looking at a single stat. The best defensive catcher in MLB is by definition the most valuable defender in MLB. And in fact I should have used that phrase rather than "best." Vazquez' doesn't necessarily dominate the position defensively. It's just that great catcher D is inherently more valuable. You're correct that there is a scenario, something like a 10% chance (it would be 5% if not for CV's injury), that Swihart becomes a better overall catcher than Vazquez, and soon enough and by a large enough margin to make it worthwhile to trade Vazquez and not Swihart. The question is whether it makes any sense to wait until the odds of that scenario go down before pulling the trigger on a trade. It's a very good question. This doesn't seem like a truism to me, do you have numbers to show that catcher defense is so much more significant?Also regarding your last paragraph, I think it certainly makes sense to wait at least until next trade deadline given Vazquez's injury (obviously dependent on trade offers this off-season). As an aside, everyone here is assuming Swihart would fetch more in a trade, but if to Eric and others it's so apparent that Vazquez is a better choice (and I'm not sure I disagree), then wouldn't certain teams also value him more highly in a trade as well? 1) Yes. It's the pitch-framing. If you factored in pitch-calling, which we don't have readily available numbers for, it might be even bigger. 2) Most of the teams that value pitch-framing correctly have already gotten themselves a good one. The teams that are looking for an elite pitch-framer know that there are few teams actively making the same valuation, and won't offer you paper value. It's a market inefficiency, and is likely to remain so for a while. It's also true that catchers who were top-20 prospects have had a tremendous track record, and that will (correctly, I think) color Swihart's value. Vazquez, meanwhile, wasn't highly regarded at all as a prospect (inexplicably -- I remember arguing here that his future projections were all wrong), and that probably still colors his trade value, even if only unconsciously. I think a majority of scouts would agree that Vazquez is no worse than a tie as the best defensive catcher in baseball, without looking at a single stat. I think this is a very aggressive statement and one that I don't think is true. You would have to limit it to scouts who have seen him catch. And what I mean by that is that this is, indeed, likely not the casual opinion of all the baseball scouts alive at the present time, but if you sent a bunch of good pro scouts to make that evaluation with sufficient study, that's absolutely, unquestionably the finding you'd get. I didn't make that clear at all, of course.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Sept 6, 2015 9:47:24 GMT -5
And what I mean by that is that this is, indeed, likely not the casual opinion of all the baseball scouts alive at the present time, but if you sent a bunch of good pro scouts to make that evaluation with sufficient study, that's absolutely, unquestionably the finding you'd get. I didn't make that clear at all, of course. I understood what you meant. I still think you're wrong. Take, for instance, the following scouting reports, all of which come short of describing Vazquez as "no worse than a tie as the best defensive catcher in baseball." SoxProspects: "Field: Potential plus-plus defender. Excellent receiving and pitch-framing skills. Has struggled in the past blocking balls in the dirt, but has made strides controlling his body to front offerings. Knows how to take control of the game form the catcher’s position. Game calling still needs some work, but has improved considerably." Sickels: "Depending on the source, his glove is described as either "very good" or "one of the best defenders in baseball." He has a good arm: strong, accurate, catching 40% of runners this year and 35% in his career. He's mobile behind the plate, with quick reactions. He's been vulnerable to errors and passed balls at times, but he's cleaned that up this year. He has a reputation as a field leader and is said to be a great favorite of the pitching staff for his ability to handle both the intellectual and physical demands of the position." BP: "While the arm is an "8," the rest of Vazquez’s defensive game has emerged as plus over the last year. His quick feet didn't always translate to good blocking and lateral movement. The tools and athleticism have always been there, but for whatever reason he exhibited some sloppy actions while in the lower levels that he's finally fixed. His receiving is marked by soft hands and strong framing skills. There was some sentiment (as there was with Pudge) that Vazquez would at times sandbag his pitcher by calling for too many fastballs with runners on base. Pitchers have indeed been happier throwing to him this year, and those problems appears to be behind him. None of this is unusual to see in a catcher honing his craft in the minors."
|
|
|
Post by maxwellsdemon on Sept 6, 2015 10:18:21 GMT -5
Jmei while you use evaluations to back up your contention I note that the SP one is the standard blurb which really doe not get updated much and that the other two you cite are dated July 10, 2014. CV made his major league debut on 7/9/14 so I'm not sure they are the best examples of how he was viewed by scouts AFTER SPENDING 3 Months in MLB where he seems to have wowed a lot of people and gained the trust of the pitching staff.
I'm not in a position to argue this case either way, but based on what Eric has presented your response seems to be more debating points and not illumination.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Sept 6, 2015 12:35:22 GMT -5
Jmei while you use evaluations to back up your contention I note that the SP one is the standard blurb which really doe not get updated much and that the other two you cite are dated July 10, 2014. CV made his major league debut on 7/9/14 so I'm not sure they are the best examples of how he was viewed by scouts AFTER SPENDING 3 Months in MLB where he seems to have wowed a lot of people and gained the trust of the pitching staff. I'm not in a position to argue this case either way, but based on what Eric has presented your response seems to be more debating points and not illumination. It's a very fair point. Unfortunately, once prospects make their debuts and lose prospect status, there are many fewer updated and detailed publicly-available scouting reports that are available. I struggled to find one from this past offseason that discussed his defense in any great detail. I certainly could not find anything backing up the assertion that scouts think that he's, at worst, tied for the best defensive catcher in the major leagues. My broader point is that I want to push back some against the routine grade inflation that I see with scouting reports. This happens all the time where, for instance, a scouting report for a guy says "he has the potential to be [XYZ]" and the "potential" part of that gets dropped somewhere down the line or where "plus defender" becomes "Gold-Glove-caliber defender." Does Vazquez have the potential to be the best defensive catcher in the majors? Yes, but I would not be confident asserting that he's there already, especially since he's coming back from TJ surgery and one of his strengths is his arm.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,936
|
Post by ericmvan on Sept 7, 2015 9:53:59 GMT -5
Jmei while you use evaluations to back up your contention I note that the SP one is the standard blurb which really doe not get updated much and that the other two you cite are dated July 10, 2014. CV made his major league debut on 7/9/14 so I'm not sure they are the best examples of how he was viewed by scouts AFTER SPENDING 3 Months in MLB where he seems to have wowed a lot of people and gained the trust of the pitching staff. I'm not in a position to argue this case either way, but based on what Eric has presented your response seems to be more debating points and not illumination. It's a very fair point. Unfortunately, once prospects make their debuts and lose prospect status, there are many fewer updated and detailed publicly-available scouting reports that are available. I struggled to find one from this past offseason that discussed his defense in any great detail. I certainly could not find anything backing up the assertion that scouts think that he's, at worst, tied for the best defensive catcher in the major leagues. My broader point is that I want to push back some against the routine grade inflation that I see with scouting reports. This happens all the time where, for instance, a scouting report for a guy says "he has the potential to be [XYZ]" and the "potential" part of that gets dropped somewhere down the line or where "plus defender" becomes "Gold-Glove-caliber defender." Does Vazquez have the potential to be the best defensive catcher in the majors? Yes, but I would not be confident asserting that he's there already, especially since he's coming back from TJ surgery and one of his strengths is his arm. Those are both very fair points, too. I thought that there would be an objective way of measuring this, by seeing where Vazquez ranked in last year's poll for the Fielding Bible Awards. But he was ineligible. They require 500 innings by a catcher or 10 DRS, and Vazquez had 458 and 5. He finished 9th anyway. Bill James voted him 2nd, Peter Gammons 5th, and Dave Cameron 7th, among others (presumably, measuring his value even in his 40% of a season). I'm willing to bet he's the first ineligible player to rank in the top 10 in the award's history (but unwilling to do the research to back that up! ). That five voters felt compelled to put him somewhere on the ballot even though he'd played just 40% of the season and was ineligible says a lot. I will say that being a huge CV fan from the beginning, I read every tidbit of scouting reaction I could find once he made it to MLB, and I do think folks generally responded as I've claimed.
|
|
TX
Veteran
Posts: 265
|
Post by TX on Sept 7, 2015 10:49:24 GMT -5
I think a majority of scouts would agree that Vazquez is no worse than a tie as the best defensive catcher in baseball, without looking at a single stat. I think this is a very aggressive statement and one that I don't think is true. Regardless if it is true or not, to the Sox org it likely doesn't matter. Vazquez must hit if he wants to start here, otherwise he'll go the way of Iglesias, Rizzo, and, presently, JBJ - who must prove his offense is legit or he's at best a LF waiting to be replaced by a better bat. Defensive value means less at Fenway so I get it and somewhat agree. But if you don't just try to recall the last defensive specialist the Sox employed as a starter. Not as a fill-in but as an actual starter - and assumed starter for years to come. I go back 40 years and can't think of a single one. Maybe Aparicio at the tail-end of his career?
|
|
|
Post by blizzards39 on Sept 7, 2015 11:14:30 GMT -5
Does/can Swihart hit enough to make a possision change??? And to what possision? or does this devalue his to much??
|
|
|