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.
Marco Hernandez & Christian Vazquez recalled, Swihart to AAA
|
Post by ramireja on Apr 15, 2016 17:21:57 GMT -5
The Kimbrel trade really is the gift that keeps on giving. Swihart in left is horrendous. But the Kimbrel trade has nothing to do with it. Margot sucks against righties, and sucked in winter ball and thus far this year (facing almost all righties.) Another OFer who can only hit lefties is not what this team needs. Also Guerra has struck 15 times in 30 PA at High-A.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Apr 15, 2016 17:58:47 GMT -5
The Kimbrel trade really is the gift that keeps on giving. Swihart in left is horrendous. But the Kimbrel trade has nothing to do with it. Margot sucks against righties, and sucked in winter ball and thus far this year (facing almost all righties.) Another OFer who can only hit lefties is not what this team needs. I don't see it quite like that but either way, if they're taking reps at catcher away from Swihart just because they need a slightly better righty platoon option, that's still no good.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 15, 2016 18:36:03 GMT -5
Well I fully expect the team ERA to go down 3 full runs and the club to win at least 25 of their next 30...or it will be CV's fault.
It seems the woes of the same mediocre pitching staff have all been pinned on Swihart (by some here and in the Boston media). So if it doesn't immediately change who will be the next escapegoat.
Please trade Swihart Boston. I'd rather see him develop into an all-star somewhere else rather than watch this club screw up his development. That's a lot dramatic.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Apr 15, 2016 19:59:13 GMT -5
I would rather they trade Swihart then play him in LF!
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Apr 15, 2016 20:05:08 GMT -5
What's the point in having both Rutledge and Hernandez on the roster? This could be a showcase? I'm not usually one for trade proposals, but how about Hanigan and Hernandez on the block? That might bring back a substantial return. Substantial return? I think you can get a substantial return for Swihart, not Hanigan and Hernandez.
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Apr 15, 2016 21:20:13 GMT -5
Well I fully expect the team ERA to go down 3 full runs and the club to win at least 25 of their next 30...or it will be CV's fault.
It seems the woes of the same mediocre pitching staff have all been pinned on Swihart (by some here and in the Boston media). So if it doesn't immediately change who will be the next escapegoat.
Please trade Swihart Boston. I'd rather see him develop into an all-star somewhere else rather than watch this club screw up his development. That's a lot dramatic. Intentionally so. Just like O'Brien blaming Swihart for the loss the other night, and Peter Abe doing the same in his write-up the next day.
I get it. There are a lot of CV fan boys out there. And I am pulling for CV to fully come back and be able to realize his potential. But there is only room for one starting C and if that is CV then trade Blake and let him get on with his career. We won't get the value back we deserve for him but c'est la vie. What are we going to do? Let his rot in AAA? Screw him up by trying to make a LF out of him? His value is the bat he brings to the C position. That bat will take a few years to fully develop. No way with the OF prospects in the organization is his future in the OF at Fenway. So what will he do? Ride the shuttle between AAA and Boston uncertain of his future with the club?
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Apr 15, 2016 21:22:43 GMT -5
Swihart in left is horrendous. But the Kimbrel trade has nothing to do with it. Margot sucks against righties, and sucked in winter ball and thus far this year (facing almost all righties.) Another OFer who can only hit lefties is not what this team needs. I don't see it quite like that but either way, if they're taking reps at catcher away from Swihart just because they need a slightly better righty platoon option, that's still no good. Did the Boston pitching staff lose faith in swihart as a catcher?
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 15, 2016 21:48:39 GMT -5
Intentionally so. Just like O'Brien blaming Swihart for the loss the other night, and Peter Abe doing the same in his write-up the next day.
I get it. There are a lot of CV fan boys out there. And I am pulling for CV to fully come back and be able to realize his potential. But there is only room for one starting C and if that is CV then trade Blake and let him get on with his career. We won't get the value back we deserve for him but c'est la vie. What are we going to do? Let his rot in AAA? Screw him up by trying to make a LF out of him? His value is the bat he brings to the C position. That bat will take a few years to fully develop. No way with the OF prospects in the organization is his future in the OF at Fenway. So what will he do? Ride the shuttle between AAA and Boston uncertain of his future with the club?
They could trade Hanigan mid-season and split the catching reps 50/50 or 60/40 and figure out a long-term solution over the offseason. In fact, that's probably the most likely scenario.
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Apr 15, 2016 21:58:07 GMT -5
Intentionally so. Just like O'Brien blaming Swihart for the loss the other night, and Peter Abe doing the same in his write-up the next day.
I get it. There are a lot of CV fan boys out there. And I am pulling for CV to fully come back and be able to realize his potential. But there is only room for one starting C and if that is CV then trade Blake and let him get on with his career. We won't get the value back we deserve for him but c'est la vie. What are we going to do? Let his rot in AAA? Screw him up by trying to make a LF out of him? His value is the bat he brings to the C position. That bat will take a few years to fully develop. No way with the OF prospects in the organization is his future in the OF at Fenway. So what will he do? Ride the shuttle between AAA and Boston uncertain of his future with the club?
They could trade Hanigan mid-season and split the catching reps 50/50 or 60/40 and figure out a long-term solution over the offseason. In fact, that's probably the most likely scenario. I think the decision was already made, based on the 8 games Blake played this season. CV is the man. I don't have a problem with that, other than giving Swihart only 8 games before making the decision. The best case scenario for the club is Blake tears it up in AAA and increases his trade value. The Red Sox currently value a C's defense much more than his offense. I just hope we get more than Larry Anderson this time...
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Apr 15, 2016 22:02:28 GMT -5
Again, Dombrowski has already said that Swihart is part of the team and it's future. Everything he's said he's carried through on. If you mean that's what you want, fine. None of us has much say over trades though.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 15, 2016 22:05:09 GMT -5
They could trade Hanigan mid-season and split the catching reps 50/50 or 60/40 and figure out a long-term solution over the offseason. In fact, that's probably the most likely scenario. I think the decision was already made, based on the 8 games Blake played this season. CV is the man. I don't have a problem with that, other than giving Swihart only 8 games before making the decision. The best case scenario for the club is Blake tears it up in AAA and increases his trade value. The Red Sox currently value a C's defense much more than his offense. I just hope we get more than Larry Anderson this time... What? Vazquez is going to need more rest than the average catcher, and the average catcher typically only starts 3 out of every 4 games anyways. The fact that the Red Sox prefer Vazquez's defense over Swihart's offense does not prevent them from preferring Swihart's offense over Hanigan's defense.
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Apr 15, 2016 22:14:10 GMT -5
Again, Dombrowski has already said that Swihart is part of the team and it's future. Everything he's said he's carried through on. If you mean that's what you want, fine. None of us has much say over trades though. What? As a part time catcher? I don't think it is fair to Christian or Blake to be a part time anything.
This is a problem. We all knew it. There is only room for one full time catcher. And we potentially have two. The math doesn't work. I know what DD said. But sending Blake down after such a short span of games, in the face of a media lynch mob, doesn't seem to jive with what DD said. The Sox were off to a sluggish start, due to their poor starting pitching, and Blake was sent out with CV being recalled before, imo, he was fully ready/recovered. It fully smacks of scapegoating. Is that how you treat what you consider a future cornerstone of this franchise (again, if we are taking DD at his word)?
|
|
|
Post by thelavarnwayguy on Apr 15, 2016 22:15:17 GMT -5
The pitching staff was obviously created for Vasquez last year. They saw a huge benefit for his pitch framing skills with sinkerball pitchers and they want some of that value this year. I think they clearly like Swihart also and want to maximize his value to the team even this year and if that means he plays the OF some that's just another way of getting more value from him if they have 2 starting level catchers on staff. Of course he is of more value as a catcher but maybe they really think they have 2 special young catchers developing who will both be worth a small fortune if they pan out as expected. Why trade them early if you believe in them both? Why not find a way to utilize them both at least temporarily until they maximize their player value?
Which appears to me to be their intention. Hannigan is the perfect trade candidate by the break or sooner if some contending team needs a catcher badly.
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Apr 15, 2016 23:09:57 GMT -5
Who's Vasquez?
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Apr 15, 2016 23:11:59 GMT -5
As far as catching goes, I generally feel pretty good when hanigan is behind the plate. I would not be upset if they hung on to him for the rest of the year.
|
|
|
Post by jclmontana on Apr 16, 2016 0:19:58 GMT -5
DDo has been a straight shooter since he got to Boston. As Norm pointed out, DDo has backed up his statements with corresponding action. But the move to left field for Swihart, plus the weird "I can't tell you why we are doing that" explanation raises the possibility that the Sox are in deception mode.
I could see the sox having an active trade scenario for Swihart, but the other team is not offering quite enough. So how do you put pressure on a potential trading partner? Create the impression that you are happy to keep Swihart long-term by creating positional flexibility and all that.
I know, my scenario is a bit of a stretch, but the handling of Swihart and the non-explanation for putting him in LF(!) doesn't seem on the level.
Add: Maybe not deception per se, but rather sending out the clear message that they would rather keep Swihart than send him off for a poor return (which is as it should be). But hey, make a quality offer and we would listen.This would fit the image of Dave the straight shooter, while also explaining why Dave had to be coy about the move to LF. After all, it wouldn't do to create a media frenzy by referencing trade possibilities.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Apr 16, 2016 0:49:12 GMT -5
Again, Dombrowski has already said that Swihart is part of the team and it's future. Everything he's said he's carried through on. If you mean that's what you want, fine. None of us has much say over trades though. I agree that Dombrowski is a straight shooter and I don't think he's lying when he says Swihart is part of the club's future, but if you look at what he's done, he has traded what he has deemed as surplus - they have a SS in Bogaerts for the long-term, Guerra is blocked so he is dealt. They have a long-term solution in CF in Bradley and also have Betts and Benintendi on the way, all of whom play CF so Margot was blocked and dealt. He never really got a chance to evaluate Vazquez last year. If Dombrowski determines that Vazquez is everything Eric Van says he is and more, then Swihart becomes surplus as well. A lot of people don't like what Margot and Guerra were traded for but the fact is that the Sox bullpen had major issues last season and Dombrowski went out and got one of the best closers in baseball. Likewise if the rotation continues to have issues behind Price, then Swihart who would be blocked by Vazquez could go in a deal. It doesn't mean that at this particular moment that Dombrowski doesn't feel like Swihart is part of the future, but he could change his mind as he watches Vazquez develop. If Vazquez fails miserably with the bat, then Dombrowski could very well continue to see Swihart as the future. Hopefully Varitek is in Dombrowski's ear a lot because Tek sees Swihart as a future all-star. The one irony that could keep Swihart in Boston is if Vazquez can work that much magic with the rotation, the Sox play very well, and Price pitches like the ace he has been, Buchholz stays healthy and pitches like the #2 starter he's capable of being, Rodriguez gets healthy and pitches like a #2/#3 starter, and perhaps two of Porcello, Wright, Kelly, Johnson, Owens emerge, and the pen stays healthy, Hanley works out at 1b, Shaw at 3b, and the tandem of Holt/Young is effective as Benintendi quickly forces his way thru the system, then perhaps there would be no need for any major deal to be made on 7/31, meaning that Swihart would remain in the Sox organization with a chance to unseat Vazquez down the road once his defense improves and his offense continues to make strides.
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Apr 16, 2016 1:24:03 GMT -5
The Kimbrel trade really is the gift that keeps on giving. Manuel Margot is OPSing .507 in the PCL if you mean for a right now LF. If you mean a future LF, yeah it's a shame we don't have another top OF prospect who is killing it or even an equally awesome young 2B who could also end up the OF.
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Apr 16, 2016 4:50:33 GMT -5
CV being recalled before, imo, he was fully ready/recovered. OK, and is there any factual basis for this opinion of yours?
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Apr 16, 2016 5:14:45 GMT -5
CV being recalled before, imo, he was fully ready/recovered. OK, and is there any factual basis for this opinion of yours? More than one person said that his arm is stronger than at the beginning of the season but still not 100%. On the other hand...
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Apr 16, 2016 6:55:06 GMT -5
OK, and is there any factual basis for this opinion of yours? More than one person said that his arm is stronger than at the beginning of the season but still not 100%. On the other hand... Well, as far as I can recall he's already made more pickoffs at 1B than Swihart, so I would say it seems ready enough.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Apr 16, 2016 8:03:41 GMT -5
The Kimbrel trade really is the gift that keeps on giving. Manuel Margot is OPSing .507 in the PCL if you mean for a right now LF. If you mean a future LF, yeah it's a shame we don't have another top OF prospect who is killing it or even an equally awesome young 2B who could also end up the OF. He's also walking as much as he's striking out (12%), and has a .211 BABIP. No power yet, but more to the point, it's 25 PAs. The Padres also thought enough of him to send him to AAA even though he only had about half a season at AA last year, and a AAA assignment generally means a player is seen as ready to fill in at the major league level if needed. If nothing else, if you called him up you'd get speed and defense from him, so he's already as good as Rusney.
|
|
|
Post by Nick Rabasco2 on Apr 16, 2016 8:56:54 GMT -5
The thought I had when I first heard about all this was that maybe a group of pitchers went to Farrell/front office/whoever and told them they either don't really like throwing to Swihart or that they'd really prefer Vazquez and Hanigan.
Obviously we know the numbers and can see with our eyes how good Vazquez is back there, but sometimes it can be more than that. Porcello's comments praising Vazquez about being a leader and stuff like that is important. I've talked to pitchers I've played with in college over the past couple years that say they preferred one catcher over another because the one guy didn't get low enough in his catching stance and that made the target less appealing. Not at all saying this has anything to do with Vazquez and Swihart but I absolutely believe that there can be really little things like that that a catcher does to make a pitcher feel more comfortable and confident.
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Apr 16, 2016 9:36:03 GMT -5
I thought the same thing about an intervention by the pitchers on CV's behalf. But then again the only pitcher in the rotation who has thrown to CV in meaningful games is Buchholz. Other than that all the rest of the rotation came here after CV hurt his shoulder.
And it would make sense that Clay would want a different catcher seeing last year before he was hurt Leon was his personal caddy. He just doesn't work well with Swihart.
So if it was an intervention "by the pitchers" it would probably be more accurate that Buchholz almost singlehandedly got Swihart demoted.
Whatever the reason(s) I still think it is harsh to pin the struggles of a rotation, making a handful of starts in cold weather/or with the wind fiercely blowing out, on a second year catcher.
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Apr 16, 2016 9:38:14 GMT -5
Oops. Meant to say above ^^^ when CV injured his elbow.
|
|
|