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.
Swihart vs. Vazquez vs. Hanigan
|
Post by splendidsplinter on Apr 14, 2016 13:24:58 GMT -5
I'm in the three catchers camp, at least for a while. Vazquez has made a remarkable recovery from his surgery but he is going to need time to fully regain all his talents. In spring training his throwing to the bases was improving but not good enough to stop a good running game. Hopefully he is now better but even if not he is a talented receiver and should be able to help our pitching staff reach their potential. So I think the idea is to have Vazquez be the primary catcher with limited innings and have the other two in reserve and selected starter duties. I doubt if the Sox make any moves or trades until they are sure he is fully recovered.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Apr 14, 2016 13:27:16 GMT -5
I'm in the three catchers camp, at least for a while. Vazquez has made a remarkable recovery from his surgery but he is going to need time to fully regain all his talents. In spring training his throwing to the bases was improving but not good enough to stop a good running game. Hopefully he is now better but even if not he is a talented receiver and should be able to help our pitching staff reach their potential. So I think the idea is to have Vazquez be the primary catcher with limited innings and have the other two in reserve and selected starter duties. I doubt if the Sox make any moves or trades until they are sure he is fully recovered. It makes zero sense for Swihart to not play. If Vazquez needs to build strength or innings, he can do that in AAA.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Apr 14, 2016 13:40:48 GMT -5
It makes zero sense for Swihart to not play. If Vazquez needs to build strength or innings, he can do that in AAA. If Swihart needs to play, he can do that in AAA too. Hanigan is more than capable of playing two or three extra games. I'm sure they wouldn't have called Vazquez up if it were about more than that.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Apr 14, 2016 14:55:31 GMT -5
It makes zero sense for Swihart to not play. If Vazquez needs to build strength or innings, he can do that in AAA. If Swihart needs to play, he can do that in AAA too. Hanigan is more than capable of playing two or three extra games. I'm sure they wouldn't have called Vazquez up if it were about more than that. Then Swihart should go down. I think they're hitting the panic button with their pitchers, and I think it's probably mostly because Porcello likes Vazquez. I bet he'll get the friday start. Maybe there's more comfort there, but I don't see how Vazquez is going to help Porcello's sinker. Look at the vertical rise on his sinker during his good stretch in Detroit. Not anywhere close. Even in his strong run at the end of last year, his sinker wasn't sinking.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,932
|
Post by ericmvan on Apr 14, 2016 14:57:38 GMT -5
So what happens if the Red Sox saw Swihart as the sole catcher of our future, and relegated Vazquez to backup (or a trade), but the overall preference for the pitchers is pitching to Vazquez instead of Swihart? In that case, is the staff told that Swihart is assuredly the starter and they have to deal with it, or would Vazquez be the starter? How much of it would be in the pitchers' hands? Given that Vazquez was literally almost ten times as good overall as Swihart in their respective emergency rookie seasons, that's just not on the table. We're talking about a guy, who based on his modest offensive projections, his 2014 non-framing defense regressed reasonably, and his framing regressed a lot, projected to be a top 3 catcher in MLB. Even with some diminished arm strength he's still likely a top 5 catcher. Swihart clearly has the potential to be that as well, but in terms of overall value Vazquez is already the guy we reasonably dreamed Swihart would be.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Apr 14, 2016 15:18:41 GMT -5
So what happens if the Red Sox saw Swihart as the sole catcher of our future, and relegated Vazquez to backup (or a trade), but the overall preference for the pitchers is pitching to Vazquez instead of Swihart? In that case, is the staff told that Swihart is assuredly the starter and they have to deal with it, or would Vazquez be the starter? How much of it would be in the pitchers' hands? Given that Vazquez was literally almost ten times as good overall as Swihart in their respective emergency rookie seasons, that's just not on the table. We're talking about a guy, who based on his modest offensive projections, his 2014 non-framing defense regressed reasonably, and his framing regressed a lot, projected to be a top 3 catcher in MLB. Even with some diminished arm strength he's still likely a top 5 catcher. Swihart clearly has the potential to be that as well, but in terms of overall value Vazquez is already the guy we reasonably dreamed Swihart would be. How are you determining "overall value"? Fangraphs WAR might be too simple for catchers, but they have Swihart had 1.5WAR in 84 games last year. Vazquez 0.6 in 55 games in 2014.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 14, 2016 17:08:53 GMT -5
So what happens if the Red Sox saw Swihart as the sole catcher of our future, and relegated Vazquez to backup (or a trade), but the overall preference for the pitchers is pitching to Vazquez instead of Swihart? In that case, is the staff told that Swihart is assuredly the starter and they have to deal with it, or would Vazquez be the starter? How much of it would be in the pitchers' hands? Given that Vazquez was literally almost ten times as good overall as Swihart in their respective emergency rookie seasons, that's just not on the table. We're talking about a guy, who based on his modest offensive projections, his 2014 non-framing defense regressed reasonably, and his framing regressed a lot, projected to be a top 3 catcher in MLB. Even with some diminished arm strength he's still likely a top 5 catcher. Swihart clearly has the potential to be that as well, but in terms of overall value Vazquez is already the guy we reasonably dreamed Swihart would be. I think you're going to need to teach everyone about this again. I've been arguing it for awhile, but I don't have the numbers and everyone just says "I don't agree". Vazquez should catch as many games as he is capable of if we care about winning this year.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,932
|
Post by ericmvan on Apr 14, 2016 22:08:10 GMT -5
Given that Vazquez was literally almost ten times as good overall as Swihart in their respective emergency rookie seasons, that's just not on the table. We're talking about a guy, who based on his modest offensive projections, his 2014 non-framing defense regressed reasonably, and his framing regressed a lot, projected to be a top 3 catcher in MLB. Even with some diminished arm strength he's still likely a top 5 catcher. Swihart clearly has the potential to be that as well, but in terms of overall value Vazquez is already the guy we reasonably dreamed Swihart would be. How are you determining "overall value"? Fangraphs WAR might be too simple for catchers, but they have Swihart had 1.5WAR in 84 games last year. Vazquez 0.6 in 55 games in 2014. I think you're going to need to teach everyone about this again. I've been arguing it for awhile, but I don't have the numbers and everyone just says "I don't agree". Vazquez should catch as many games as he is capable of if we care about winning this year. It's bWAR plus BP's pitch framing. Vazquez had 3.5 framing wins per 125 games in 2014, while Swihart was -1.1 in 2015. Now, it's true that fWAR has a better measure of baserunning runs. And BP is an alternate source of that, plus pitch-blocking runs, etc. So if I get a chance I'll try to pull together a best-estimate of the WARs for their rookie seasons.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Apr 15, 2016 1:07:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by justinp123 on Apr 15, 2016 6:23:26 GMT -5
So what i'm seeing is that vasquez being brought up and being the everyday catcher, is so he can be the pitchers binky. So what happens when the pitchers still suck? It just seems pretty rediculous to assume that Vasquez is going to make our pitching staff better. I don't follow baseball as closely as a lot of the people on these threads, but i can safely say, that when a really good pitcher is talked about, it's not like, well he pitched well, but that catcher. Man he really carried that pitcher that game. When we signed Price, was management talking about how great he will be with a really good catcher? I doubt it. If a pitcher is good, he's good. It shouldn't matter who's behind the plate. If they are that sensative and need someone to hold their hands, then we should be re-evaluating our pitching staff entirely.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 15, 2016 6:38:40 GMT -5
So what i'm seeing is that vasquez being brought up and being the everyday catcher, is so he can be the pitchers binky. So what happens when the pitchers still suck? It just seems pretty rediculous to assume that Vasquez is going to make our pitching staff better. I don't follow baseball as closely as a lot of the people on these threads, but i can safely say, that when a really good pitcher is talked about, it's not like, well he pitched well, but that catcher. Man he really carried that pitcher that game. When we signed Price, was management talking about how great he will be with a really good catcher? I doubt it. If a pitcher is good, he's good. It shouldn't matter who's behind the plate. If they are that sensative and need someone to hold their hands, then we should be re-evaluating our pitching staff entirely. Whether it's mental or not, the results are real. Jon Lester has had a personal catcher of his choosing for most of his career. While it may annoy you, I'll still take the better pitching results.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Apr 15, 2016 6:39:16 GMT -5
Well, we might wait to see if they "still suck", right? It's well established that there can be a significant difference in ERA for a given pitcher with two different catchers. As for the pitcher's "binkie", you pay players that much, you may just want to listen to what they have to say about the person at the other end of their 100+ pitches.
Add: I might mention we're going easy on you here. Eric is probably getting ready to whip you with his statistical lash as I write this.
|
|
|
Post by seadogs34 on Apr 15, 2016 9:10:36 GMT -5
Evan Drellich of the Boston Herald reports that the Red Sox could consider a position change for Blake Swihart. The club hasn't been thrilled with Swihart's defense and will activate Christian Vazquez (elbow) from the disabled list prior to Friday's game. They'll likely keep Ryan Hanigan around as Vazquez's backup and send Swihart to Triple-A Pawtucket, and it's possible they'll work Swihart in at other positions, too. The 24-year-old has never played anything but catcher as a pro, but he's a good athlete and likely would be able to handle a switch. However, his bat obviously wouldn't be nearly as interesting at another position.
|
|
|
Post by terriblehondo on Apr 15, 2016 9:12:23 GMT -5
So what i'm seeing is that vasquez being brought up and being the everyday catcher, is so he can be the pitchers binky. So what happens when the pitchers still suck? It just seems pretty rediculous to assume that Vasquez is going to make our pitching staff better. I don't follow baseball as closely as a lot of the people on these threads, but i can safely say, that when a really good pitcher is talked about, it's not like, well he pitched well, but that catcher. Man he really carried that pitcher that game. When we signed Price, was management talking about how great he will be with a really good catcher? I doubt it. If a pitcher is good, he's good. It shouldn't matter who's behind the plate. If they are that sensative and need someone to hold their hands, then we should be re-evaluating our pitching staff entirely. You might want to read what they say about Molina then. Really any of the brothers although Yadi is be far the best. Steve Carlton also had a personal catcher.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Apr 15, 2016 9:34:51 GMT -5
Evan Drellich of the Boston Herald reports that the Red Sox could consider a position change for Blake Swihart. The club hasn't been thrilled with Swihart's defense and will activate Christian Vazquez (elbow) from the disabled list prior to Friday's game. They'll likely keep Ryan Hanigan around as Vazquez's backup and send Swihart to Triple-A Pawtucket, and it's possible they'll work Swihart in at other positions, too. The 24-year-old has never played anything but catcher as a pro, but he's a good athlete and likely would be able to handle a switch. However, his bat obviously wouldn't be nearly as interesting at another position. I wouldn't have an issue with part-timing him elsewhere, but they'd be making a huge mistake taking him off of catcher completely. His value would drop significantly unless he suddenly became a .300/.360/.475 hitter or so. I think he's best off playing catcher every day in the minors. Look at Varitek...he didn't become an everyday MLB regular until he was 26. Swihart is a talented, athletic guy, pushed prematurely into the job. He seems like the type of personality who would take a demotion well, and use it as a chance to work on his weaknesses.
|
|
|
Post by mandelbro on Apr 15, 2016 11:14:22 GMT -5
Evan Drellich of the Boston Herald reports that the Red Sox could consider a position change for Blake Swihart. The club hasn't been thrilled with Swihart's defense and will activate Christian Vazquez (elbow) from the disabled list prior to Friday's game. They'll likely keep Ryan Hanigan around as Vazquez's backup and send Swihart to Triple-A Pawtucket, and it's possible they'll work Swihart in at other positions, too. The 24-year-old has never played anything but catcher as a pro, but he's a good athlete and likely would be able to handle a switch. However, his bat obviously wouldn't be nearly as interesting at another position. I don't see how you can justify a full time position change for Swihart. Trade him if that's on the table.
|
|
ianrs
Veteran
Posts: 2,418
|
Post by ianrs on Apr 15, 2016 11:29:08 GMT -5
Christian Vazquez is going to immediately and significantly improve the MLB club. Most of the improvement will come on the pitching side.
|
|
chill
New Member
Posts: 4
|
Post by chill on Apr 15, 2016 12:44:26 GMT -5
D'accord!
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Apr 15, 2016 13:11:21 GMT -5
Christian Vazquez is going to immediately and significantly improve the MLB club. Most of the improvement will come on the pitching side. I'm sure Vazquez will "improve" the pitching. It's hard to pitch much worse, and it's only been a sample size of 8 games. Where are the Sox going to move Swihart defensively to where it benefits them? LF is kind of an open position, but I doubt he'd be better than Holt defensively, and he's not necessarily better offensively. They could move Swihart to 3b and if Shaw flops that could make some sense, but he's not going to play over Shaw unless Shaw totally flops. I think he'd have more value in a deal for the Red Sox. I can see him and Owens being packaged for a #2/#3 type starter in July. If they want him to work on his defense at AAA, I can understand that. I also think Vazquez's defense will be top notch and his bat ordinary. It's just too bad that the Sox will likely wind up dealing away somebody with as high a ceiling as Swihart. I really do believe this kid will hit well in the majors. I'm impressed with how he hit last season considering he shouldn't have even been up in the majors. I also think, if given a chance, he'll improve defensively over time. Tek wasn't a great catcher early in his career. It took Gedman awhile to succeed as well. I think if given time, Swihart can be a better overall player than Vazquez, but I don't think the Sox will find out. Dombrowski trades from surplus and if Vazquez holds his own, meaning he hits well enough to have a .650 - .700 OPS, plays terrific defense, and "settles down" the pitching, he'll wind up the regular catcher and Dombrowski will wind up preserving his "non"-surplus guys in Benintendi, Espinzona, Devers, Moncada, and Travis, and have a trade chip to fill what will probably be the biggest need - help in the top half of the rotation. I'm just hoping it doesn't come down to this. I believe in Swihart's future that much (while acknowledging that Vazquez might be a lot better for their present).
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Apr 15, 2016 13:43:18 GMT -5
Evan Drellich of the Boston Herald reports that the Red Sox could consider a position change for Blake Swihart. The club hasn't been thrilled with Swihart's defense and will activate Christian Vazquez (elbow) from the disabled list prior to Friday's game. They'll likely keep Ryan Hanigan around as Vazquez's backup and send Swihart to Triple-A Pawtucket, and it's possible they'll work Swihart in at other positions, too. The 24-year-old has never played anything but catcher as a pro, but he's a good athlete and likely would be able to handle a switch. However, his bat obviously wouldn't be nearly as interesting at another position. This is pure conjecture. His value is really tied up in that position, and really a half season of experience at AAA will not hurt him, and will likely improve his value, whether they want to keep him or use him as the centerpiece of a significant deal with a team that still likes him as a catcher.
|
|
|
Post by xycosis on Apr 15, 2016 13:51:06 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Apr 15, 2016 14:19:47 GMT -5
And here I thought that blowing up a player's value was a thing of the past with the Cherington regime out of town. Ahhh, I'm home
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 15, 2016 15:54:32 GMT -5
If Blake Swihart makes more than the occasional emergency start in left field for the Boston Red Sox, that will have been one of the dumber front office decisions in recent history, and there are plenty to choose from. I have no idea what they're thinking playing him there, especially since he's been optioned to the minors and can work on his defense behind the plate instead.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Apr 15, 2016 16:06:20 GMT -5
We should all feel sick right now
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,825
|
Post by nomar on Apr 15, 2016 16:08:48 GMT -5
So the goal here is to make Swihart a glove first LF? Because his bat isn't going to plus anywhere but behind the plate.
|
|
|