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.
Trading Swihart: The Discussion Thread
|
Post by larrycook on Sept 9, 2015 20:49:07 GMT -5
Isn't 2016 the last year of hanigan's deal?
In my book swihart is untouchable, even if Oakland dangles gray out there.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Sept 9, 2015 23:15:55 GMT -5
Isn't 2016 the last year of hanigan's deal? In my book swihart is untouchable, even if Oakland dangles gray out there. You got to be kidding me? Gray is 25 and is one of the best starting pitchers in baseball. If the Sox traded Swihart for Gray it would be equivalent to what the Sox did with the Beckett/Hanley deal. Yeah you give up something rare in a hitter that can hit at a rare hitting position but you get back a 25 right handed dominant pitcher in his prime. I would try to avoid dealing Swihart. I would try a Owens/Margot/Guerra/Marrero package and see if that gets them to bite but if they demand Swihart plus another guy from that list, you have to do it. This rotation needs two top of the rotation starters, not just one. Price is only the start. Price and Gray in the same rotation? Forget it, the Sox are going to the playoffs. Ohh and I see people thinking that Swihart should play 1B if the Sox move him off catcher for playing time. That's not how I see it. The guy can run with a arm. I see him as a lf. He should fill in when one of the young outfielders need a day off.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Sept 9, 2015 23:44:27 GMT -5
I think people aren't taken into account that Swihart could very easily hit into a sophomore slump just like Xander did. Swihart's value might never be as high as it is right now. That also has to be taken into account. You might be able to lessen the package to get a Gray if Swihart is included now.
Plus Hanigan is a really good hitting backup catcher who can catch even 100 games next year if Vasquez needs a lot of time off in April and May to start the year.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Sept 9, 2015 23:52:19 GMT -5
Last point:
Either way you value him as a hitter in a rare hitting position, he still is a 6-8 hole hitter (bottom of the lineup hitter). He isn't Posey and he isn't mauer of 7 years ago. He isn't a game changing bat in the middle of a lineup. A really good player but not elite.
A guy like Sonny Gray is elite. I think people here are forgetting that.
|
|
|
Post by klostrophobic on Sept 9, 2015 23:56:48 GMT -5
Isn't 2016 the last year of hanigan's deal? In my book swihart is untouchable, even if Oakland dangles gray out there. You got to be kidding me? Gray is 25 and is one of the best starting pitchers in baseball. If the Sox traded Swihart for Gray it would be equivalent to what the Sox did with the Beckett/Hanley deal. Yeah you give up something rare in a hitter that can hit at a rare hitting position but you get back a 25 right handed dominant pitcher in his prime. I would try to avoid dealing Swihart. I would try a Owens/Margot/Guerra/Marrero package and see if that gets them to bite but if they demand Swihart plus another guy from that list, you have to do it. This rotation needs two top of the rotation starters, not just one. Price is only the start. Price and Gray in the same rotation? Forget it, the Sox are going to the playoffs. Ohh and I see people thinking that Swihart should play 1B if the Sox move him off catcher for playing time. That's not how I see it. The guy can run with a arm. I see him as a lf. He should fill in when one of the young outfielders need a day off. Gray is a lot better than Beckett, but consider this if you think the Hanley/Beckett swap was a winning move: Hanley as a Marlin: 4.4, 5.2, 7.5, 7.1, 4.2, .9, 1.1 WAR (30.4 WAR, $70 million) Beckett as a Red Sox: 1, 5.7, 4.1, 4.2, .9, 3.3, 1.4 WAR (20.6 WAR, $108 million) Anibal Sanchez as a Marlin: 1.9, 0, .3, .7, 3.9, 3.5, 2.1 (12.4 WAR, $15 million)
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,941
|
Post by ericmvan on Sept 10, 2015 1:07:18 GMT -5
I have to say that I haven't read much of this thread, because the question is pretty close to moot. The Sox can't be sure if Vazquez will be capable next year, and they *can't* trade Swihart until they know that. It's not really a question of weighing resources or anything like that, just the Sox aren't going into the year with Hanigan and a fungible backup catcher with no depth at AAA, which is what they'd be doing if Vazquez isn't ready. I was struck by the Tippett anecdote that traced the collapse of the Red Sox to Hanigan's injury. That shows how important they think catching (and specifically catching defense, probably) is to the team. Didn't you just shoot yourself in the foot here? Hanigan's bWAR / 125 games including pitch framing, where 2.5 is an MLB average starter: 2015, 2.8 2014, 3.5 2013, 0.5 (hurt) 2012, 3.4 If they have a good prognosis on Vazquez's elbow over the winter, and they trade Swihart, they can pick up someone like Martin Maldonado (career 3.7 but coming off a 1.1 season) for relatively little and feel very comfortable about being covered in the event of a Vazquez elbow setback.
|
|
|
Post by jodyreidnichols on Sept 10, 2015 4:18:06 GMT -5
I wouldn't trade Swihart. He should be one of the best catchers in the league over the next 6 years. He's just developing and he will improve. The player he is right now is pretty decent. An improved Swihart is an all-star catcher, one of the best in Red Sox history. I wouldn't be rushing to trade him. We don't know how Vazquez is going to be post-injury. We don't know if he's going to hit enough, although I suspect with what should be strong defense, he will, but I don't buy that his pitch framing skills are so superior to everybody else that it outweighs what Swihart can do with the bat, especially if he continues to improve defensively, too. Neither one of those two catchers are finished products, but if I have to gamble on one, I'll take the guy who I know I won't have to bat last. It's a big advantage to have a big bat in the catcher's spot, especially when it is one who can be a good defensive catcher. Swihart isn't there yet, but I think he can be. The only reason you trade him would be for a young ace, but frankly there's nobody that I'm drooling over. I'd rather see the Sox use Margot as bait or use free agency, whether it's going after Price, going after Cueto (if his medicals check out), or going after Otani, which would be ideal. The Sox, in my opinion, between having Margot, and having a guy like Buchholz, Owens, Kelly, or even Miley to deal, have starting pitching to offer another club who would need a cost controlled starter and a centerfielder with a high ceiling. They don't need to deal Swihart, nor do they need to deal Betts, nor do they need to deal Moncada, Devers, Benintendi or Espinoza. There is no young Pedro Martinez out there that's worth all that trouble. They can get good pitching, either by trade or free agency, without having to sacrifice those guys. There is no rush to trade Swihart unless he could bring back an ace type pitcher with arb. years still in effect and that's not likely to happen. No rush required, keep them together for a minimum of next deadline and hopefully beyond as I see both their values increasing at least for a few years. But what about Buchholz? The downside of resigning him, $13M for 2016 even if he's hurt again is worth the upside; he's healthy and possibly traded with the idea that the receiving team receives a pitcher who when healthy pitches like a #1 pitcher (Not an ace as he does not pitch enough IP/season to earn that honor) and at their own descretion can pick up an additional option for 2017 at $13M so the total deal would be less then around $18 for a season plus of #1 type pitching. Why would you trade that, you ask? Because even getting back 85%-90% of the pitcher Buchholz is by whatever measure you prefer for a more reliable pitcher aka a pitcher that can be penciled in at close to 200/IP per season is worth it to a team with out financial might. What would a package of Buchholz, Holt & Pedroia bring back? What about targeting a contending team at next seasons deadline such as a team like Houston, etc? This would negate Pedroia's long term deal which around August of next year would not be possible because he'd have 10/5 rights. This could potentially help the team in the short term, by freeing up money for short term deals for holes that are not yet apparent such as injuries or players inexplicably falling short of expectations and/or long term deals by targeting pitchers or firstbasemen. One fallback of such a deal would be the hole created in the outfield as you would move Betts back to his natural position at secondbase. But you could as part of the trade pick up a stop gap move as good as the Beltre signing to the Sox was (for the record that should have been a long term move, a claim I made at least a year and a half before they actually acquired him and will still claim today). (Before some here claim that I'm a blowhard making claims after the fact I declared Cecchini would be a poor man's Wade Boggs, how does that look right now?) Don't forget Margot's ETA is late 2016 and Benintendi's ETA is late 2017, so the hole created by moving Betts back to his natural position is temporary at worst, especially if you wait to next years trade deadline. If Margot arrives on time this 'hole' may never even exist. Margot, much like waiting on out current young catchers situation could actually improve his value by not rushing to make a deal. Everything hinges on signing an ace type free agent this off-season. It should allow the team time to let all these other various scenarios I and other have laid, out play out. More time to make decisions is the best asset any GM can have but unfortunately it is the one thing they never have the opportunity to utilize. Owners in their rush to win now often cause the very thing they want to avoid. Patience if the strategy is sound has to be adhered to even when the results are less than desireable. Shit happens, except that. Take the Red Sox this season. BC's team looks alot better now than it did at the seasons start, and if the young players either played better sooner and or were given playing time to facilitate that happening we'll never know. I've stated many many times here that young players need about 1,000 at bats to find their own level. That is actually paraphrasing Ted Williams, and time and time again it seems to be timeless advice. That deal should upgrade Buchholz with a more reliable cheaper starting pitcher, replace Holt with Rutledge whose already on board, and provide flexibilty with Pedroia whether you target short or long terms needs
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Sept 10, 2015 7:34:38 GMT -5
I have to say that I haven't read much of this thread, because the question is pretty close to moot. The Sox can't be sure if Vazquez will be capable next year, and they *can't* trade Swihart until they know that. It's not really a question of weighing resources or anything like that, just the Sox aren't going into the year with Hanigan and a fungible backup catcher with no depth at AAA, which is what they'd be doing if Vazquez isn't ready. I was struck by the Tippett anecdote that traced the collapse of the Red Sox to Hanigan's injury. That shows how important they think catching (and specifically catching defense, probably) is to the team. Didn't you just shoot yourself in the foot here?Hanigan's bWAR / 125 games including pitch framing, where 2.5 is an MLB average starter: 2015, 2.8 2014, 3.5 2013, 0.5 (hurt) 2012, 3.4 If they have a good prognosis on Vazquez's elbow over the winter, and they trade Swihart, they can pick up someone like Martin Maldonado (career 3.7 but coming off a 1.1 season) for relatively little and feel very comfortable about being covered in the event of a Vazquez elbow setback. Nope! I think that a winter prognosis is different than having that confirmed in live action. Vazquez won't be throwing in a game until at least spring training (and maybe after), so the Sox can never be confident in his taking a big role next season until it happens. Also, I'm not sure they'll be comfortable putting all of their future eggs in that basket, either. If his elbow doesn't come back (which is fairly unlikely but can't be dismissed), and they trade away Swihart, they have *nothing* in the pipeline for years and years. Overall, It's just taking on far too much risk when they don't have to do it. And again, that's leaving aside the general question of Swihart v Vazquez.
|
|
|
Post by malynn19 on Sept 10, 2015 8:12:58 GMT -5
This is just another OOTP thread, Vazquez just had TJ. We won't know his status until spring/summer. He should start in AAA until we know he's back in the swing of things. Why the rush to trade Swihart?
|
|
|
Post by p23w on Sept 10, 2015 8:50:45 GMT -5
I believe the desire to trade for an "ace" is misplaced. I have grave misgivings about Dombrowski ESPCIALLY due to his track record. The mistake was in not resigning Lester (or Miller for that matter). Trading Swihart is plain crazy.
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Sept 10, 2015 9:45:58 GMT -5
Something to think about: Dombrowski, in an interview with Bradford, stated that, in order to obtain quality talent, you can't be afraid to deal quality back. I assume from that he'd probably be willing to surrender a Swihart to obtain a TOTR pitcher. Margot will only get you so much, even if you're willing to throw in successful MiL prospects.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Sept 10, 2015 10:25:30 GMT -5
Agreed, although the real surplus is with CF, so that will be interesting to watch. Margot aside, this team has 3 MLB players who could all legitimately be sold as CFs - Bradley, Betts and Castillo. That is a position of wealth more so than catcher.
Also, like others here, I wonder if Hanigan isn't a more likely chip to be dealt in the off season. If Swihart is a starter, then all they need is a capable back-up to go every 5th day.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Sept 10, 2015 10:33:35 GMT -5
You got to be kidding me? Gray is 25 and is one of the best starting pitchers in baseball. If the Sox traded Swihart for Gray it would be equivalent to what the Sox did with the Beckett/Hanley deal. Yeah you give up something rare in a hitter that can hit at a rare hitting position but you get back a 25 right handed dominant pitcher in his prime. I would try to avoid dealing Swihart. I would try a Owens/Margot/Guerra/Marrero package and see if that gets them to bite but if they demand Swihart plus another guy from that list, you have to do it. This rotation needs two top of the rotation starters, not just one. Price is only the start. Price and Gray in the same rotation? Forget it, the Sox are going to the playoffs. Ohh and I see people thinking that Swihart should play 1B if the Sox move him off catcher for playing time. That's not how I see it. The guy can run with a arm. I see him as a lf. He should fill in when one of the young outfielders need a day off. Gray is a lot better than Beckett, but consider this if you think the Hanley/Beckett swap was a winning move: Hanley as a Marlin: 4.4, 5.2, 7.5, 7.1, 4.2, .9, 1.1 WAR (30.4 WAR, $70 million) Beckett as a Red Sox: 1, 5.7, 4.1, 4.2, .9, 3.3, 1.4 WAR (20.6 WAR, $108 million) Anibal Sanchez as a Marlin: 1.9, 0, .3, .7, 3.9, 3.5, 2.1 (12.4 WAR, $15 million) 2007 world series championship. Without Beckett you don't get that ring. That beats out anything you just posted
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Sept 10, 2015 10:42:57 GMT -5
Gray is a lot better than Beckett, but consider this if you think the Hanley/Beckett swap was a winning move: Hanley as a Marlin: 4.4, 5.2, 7.5, 7.1, 4.2, .9, 1.1 WAR (30.4 WAR, $70 million) Beckett as a Red Sox: 1, 5.7, 4.1, 4.2, .9, 3.3, 1.4 WAR (20.6 WAR, $108 million) Anibal Sanchez as a Marlin: 1.9, 0, .3, .7, 3.9, 3.5, 2.1 (12.4 WAR, $15 million) 2007 world series championship. Without Beckett you don't get that ring. That beats out anything you just posted With Gray, you have no idea if they win a ring. Especially now when the league is so much more equal than it used to be and with an extra wild card spot.
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Sept 10, 2015 11:14:10 GMT -5
2007 world series championship. Without Beckett you don't get that ring. That beats out anything you just posted With Gray, you have no idea if they win a ring. Especially now when the league is so much more equal than it used to be and with an extra wild card spot. Nothing is guaranteed in today's baseball. A team may be built to win it all, but get knocked out in a one game wild card. But, if you don't take a chance to fill a need on the team by surrendering quality players, you're most likely destined to mediocrity.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Sept 10, 2015 11:14:32 GMT -5
2007 world series championship. Without Beckett you don't get that ring. That beats out anything you just posted With Gray, you have no idea if they win a ring. Especially now when the league is so much more equal than it used to be and with an extra wild card spot. Are you telling me that the Sox have a better chance to win without Gray? No one can predict the future. A Sonny Gray can put u in the best position possible to get a championship though. That's all that matters.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Sept 10, 2015 11:52:20 GMT -5
With Gray, you have no idea if they win a ring. Especially now when the league is so much more equal than it used to be and with an extra wild card spot. Are you telling me that the Sox have a better chance to win without Gray? No one can predict the future. A Sonny Gray can put u in the best position possible to get a championship though. That's all that matters. Depends on what they give up. If in some alternative universe, the Red Sox don't make the Beckett trade, who knows what they would have done with Hanley and Sanchez?
|
|
|
Post by dcsoxfan on Sept 10, 2015 12:03:32 GMT -5
Gray is a lot better than Beckett, but consider this if you think the Hanley/Beckett swap was a winning move: Hanley as a Marlin: 4.4, 5.2, 7.5, 7.1, 4.2, .9, 1.1 WAR (30.4 WAR, $70 million) Beckett as a Red Sox: 1, 5.7, 4.1, 4.2, .9, 3.3, 1.4 WAR (20.6 WAR, $108 million) Anibal Sanchez as a Marlin: 1.9, 0, .3, .7, 3.9, 3.5, 2.1 (12.4 WAR, $15 million) 2007 world series championship. Without Beckett you don't get that ring. That beats out anything you just posted 1. 2008 Red Sox with Hanley Ramirez and the financial flexibility afforded by not paying Lowell, Beckett and Lugo would have been a monster team. 2. If Beckett and Lowell had their 2006 seasons in 2007 and 2007 seasons in 2006, the Red Sox would have come up with nothing for giving up wins in 2008 - 2010. There was a lot of luck in the Beckett deal.
|
|
Smittyw
Veteran
Posts: 1,293
Member is Online
|
Post by Smittyw on Sept 10, 2015 12:04:05 GMT -5
I don't see how the fact that we know in hindsight that the Red Sox won a World Series with Beckett is in any way useful in thinking about a potential Sonny Gray trade.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Sept 10, 2015 12:06:34 GMT -5
Are you telling me that the Sox have a better chance to win without Gray? No one can predict the future. A Sonny Gray can put u in the best position possible to get a championship though. That's all that matters. Depends on what they give up. If in some alternative universe, the Red Sox don't make the Beckett trade, who knows what they would have done with Hanley and Sanchez? If it depends on a Swihart, you do it. Nice player but not elite like Gray. Sanchez has been hurt a lot and Hanley was a problem really early in his career. Him and Jon Lester weren't exactly best friends. It was probably the best thing that happened at the time.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Sept 10, 2015 12:12:50 GMT -5
I don't see how the fact that we know in hindsight that the Red Sox won a World Series with Beckett is in any way useful in thinking about a potential Sonny Gray trade. Look at the history. Young up and coming 2007 team with a ton of homegrown talent. Josh Beckett a 25 year old right handed ace. Look at this team. Young up and coming team with a ton of homegrown talent. Sonny Gray a 25 year old right handed ace. I mean it's like deja vu all over again. I'd just stick to what you know what works. 2007 worked with Beckett. Try it again with Gray.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Sept 10, 2015 12:13:40 GMT -5
2007 world series championship. Without Beckett you don't get that ring. That beats out anything you just posted 1. 2008 Red Sox with Hanley Ramirez and the financial flexibility afforded by not paying Lowell, Beckett and Lugo would have been a monster team. 2. If Beckett and Lowell had their 2006 seasons in 2007 and 2007 seasons in 2006, the Red Sox would have come up with nothing for giving up wins in 2008 - 2010. There was a lot of luck in the Beckett deal. There's a lot of luck in any trade, except for the Andrew Miller for Miguel Cabrera trade. That was pretty much a slam dunk.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Sept 10, 2015 12:37:18 GMT -5
I don't see how the fact that we know in hindsight that the Red Sox won a World Series with Beckett is in any way useful in thinking about a potential Sonny Gray trade. Look at the history. Young up and coming 2007 team with a ton of homegrown talent. Josh Beckett a 25 year old right handed ace. Look at this team. Young up and coming team with a ton of homegrown talent. Sonny Gray a 25 year old right handed ace. I mean it's like deja vu all over again. I'd just stick to what you know what works. 2007 worked with Beckett. Try it again with Gray. If Papi was 29 instead of 39, maybe. I'm sure most wouldn't have thought twice about trading Mookie in 2013 or Shaw and JBJ this year for a relief pitcher either.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywater43 on Sept 10, 2015 12:48:45 GMT -5
Look at the history. Young up and coming 2007 team with a ton of homegrown talent. Josh Beckett a 25 year old right handed ace. Look at this team. Young up and coming team with a ton of homegrown talent. Sonny Gray a 25 year old right handed ace. I mean it's like deja vu all over again. I'd just stick to what you know what works. 2007 worked with Beckett. Try it again with Gray. If Papi was 29 instead of 39, maybe. I'm sure most wouldn't have thought twice about trading Mookie in 2013 or Shaw and JBJ this year for a relief pitcher either. Papi is still hitting like he's 29 and I wouldn't trade Mookie for anyone ever. He's going to be the best hitter on this team after Ortiz retires.
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Sept 10, 2015 14:16:30 GMT -5
If Papi was 29 instead of 39, maybe. I'm sure most wouldn't have thought twice about trading Mookie in 2013 or Shaw and JBJ this year for a relief pitcher either. Papi is still hitting like he's 29 and I wouldn't trade Mookie for anyone ever. He's going to be the best hitter on this team after Ortiz retires. Xander says hello!
|
|
|