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.
2017 Red Sox Major League Spring Training Thread
|
Post by James Dunne on Mar 8, 2017 12:25:26 GMT -5
Eh, I suppose the Yankees can be better than the Red Sox at one position. BLASPHEMY! This is on the hot-take side, but I really still think Blake Swihart might end up better than Sanchez anyway. So nevermind, the Red Sox will be better than the Yankees at every position in the foreseeable future. EDIT: And when they put Bryce Harper in right field that will continue to be the case.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Mar 8, 2017 12:33:16 GMT -5
EDIT: Remember Wily Mo Pena playing center field? That's not applicable to anything here, it just popped into my brain and I wanted to share it. 2006 was not Terry Francona's best work. And remember how he was almost sort of better out there because he was better at judging the ball off the bat from that angle? Man that was weird. I'm a little bit surprised that there hasn't been more of an overreaction here to all the time Selsky has seen in center field this spring. I was a pretty staunch defender of leaving Betts in right when Bradley didn't play - right field is nearly as difficult and important as center, and Betts is legitimately great at it. But I have to admit that I'm starting to get a skosh worried that they'll keep Benintendi in left field if Bradley goes down - a move that is much, much less defensible. EDIT: Remember Wily Mo Pena playing center field? That's not applicable to anything here, it just popped into my brain and I wanted to share it. 2006 was not Terry Francona's best work. John Farrell is a "keep your core players in a consistent role" kind of guy. Remember playing Chris Young in CF last year? I am resigned to the likelihood that Farrell keeps Betts in RF and Benintendi in LF and play a fill-in (Holt, Selsky, etc.) in CF on Bradley's days off. That said, I think he'd be more flexible about moving Betts or Benintendi to CF if Bradley misses significant time due to injury (or is benched due to underperformance). So that's good. I was about to disagree but then remembered (I keep forgetting this) that Selsky is on the 40 and has options, so that fits your suggestion. Castillo, on the other hand, would not at all, but I guess you play him in CF to get him at his best position (although it's not like anyone's trading for him with his contract).
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Mar 8, 2017 12:46:50 GMT -5
And remember how he was almost sort of better out there because he was better at judging the ball off the bat from that angle? Man that was weird. Well his range was in center was... let's use sub-optimal. But yeah, I'd kind of forgotten how much better he was in center at catching the ball out of the air, for sure. Catching "lazy" fly balls that fly like 275 feet in the air is one of those things that major league baseball players make look absurdly easy but isn't. So when someone can't do it consistently, it's really, really jarring.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Mar 8, 2017 15:58:26 GMT -5
Maybe it's just me but the Sox seem to be holding a bit of a grudge against Vasquez. I mean he wasn't called up last year until mid September. He was quickly sent down after he called for a fastball in the rain with Wright on the mound that gave up the grand slam. He has been named a predetermined backup before the season even starts. Sure Leon's hitting line looks nice overall but his numbers fell off the cliff by September. That didn't stop Shaw from losing his job and eventually getting traded when Shaw couldn't hit down the stretch but when it comes to Leon, he keeps his job. It should be a competition there if the Sox were open minded about things. I just hope it works itself out and Vasquez is starting by the third week of the season. 1) He was called up on September 5 immediately after Pawtucket's season ended. And before that, Leon had established himself as the starter - did you want them to call him up to play 1-2x/week? 2) He was with the team and the starter from early April until the beginning of July, which you seem to have just forgotten about entirely. 3) As for the "predetermined backup" thing, they have a catcher who pitchers love throwing to who hit .310/.369/.476 last year. They HAVE to at least outwardly say he's the starter, even if everyone involved knows he's likely not repeating that. And it's not like they're committing to running the same lineup for the entire season - you make it sound like the starter on opening day has to catch all 162 games or something. Hell, they replaced the opening day catcher two weeks in last year... with the guy they supposedly hold a grudge against. 4) Vazquez has hit .233/.293/.308 in the majors. You don't hand him the starting job with those numbers. 5) Farrell said he played Leon too much last year. "Predetermined backup" could still mean Vazquez catches 3x/week to start the year. 6) He was not "quickly sent down" after the Wright game - he caught the next day. He was sent down because he was hitting .220/.292/.254 in his previous 21 games going back to June 1. He had to completely re-tool his swing in Pawtucket - he eliminated a leg kick he added for... some reason during the 15-16 offseason. That's also why they left him down there for so long - he was going through major mechanical adjustments in his swing. But other than that, it's just you. He was sent down within the week of the Wright game. I just can't see anyone saying Holaday and Hanigan were better than Vasquez as even a second catcher last year. All 3 catchers can't hit, Vasquez trumps all the other 2 by far defensively. Instead of calling up Vasquez, they claimed Holaday. I'm not making it sound like Vasquez is the backup all year, I said that hopefully he takes over the starting catching spot by the second week, just like you mentioned like last year. I just think it should be a competition because Vasquez is the better overall player. I might be wrong but I remember that Vasquez got no playing time in September. I also think you get away with a light hitting Vasquez while trying to tinker his swing in the majors.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Mar 8, 2017 16:06:39 GMT -5
Maybe it's just me but the Sox seem to be holding a bit of a grudge against Vasquez. I mean he wasn't called up last year until mid September. He was quickly sent down after he called for a fastball in the rain with Wright on the mound that gave up the grand slam. He has been named a predetermined backup before the season even starts. Sure Leon's hitting line looks nice overall but his numbers fell off the cliff by September. That didn't stop Shaw from losing his job and eventually getting traded when Shaw couldn't hit down the stretch but when it comes to Leon, he keeps his job. It should be a competition there if the Sox were open minded about things. I just hope it works itself out and Vasquez is starting by the third week of the season. Going beyond the factual reasons that Chris gave to refute the idea... why in the world would the Red Sox hold a grudge against Vazquez? Your thought process here seems to be "I think Vazquez should start, the Red Sox don't, ergo the Red Sox are biased grudge-holders." Come on, man. The game calling. The lack of hitting. Avoiding to call him up age instead claiming names like Holaday last year. The fact that avoided playing him when he was called up last year. I don't think it was a "huge" grudge or anything, just small one that got him no playing time in the second half last year.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Mar 8, 2017 16:33:47 GMT -5
You would prefer he retool his swing playing twice a week against major league pitching instead of 5x a week against AAA pitching? I would say that the latter is far, far more productive.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Mar 8, 2017 17:03:36 GMT -5
You would prefer he retool his swing playing twice a week against major league pitching instead of 5x a week against AAA pitching? I would say that the latter is far, far more productive. Perhaps but when you are in the middle of a pennant race, I want my best players playing, even if they're on the bench to maximize production and value, which could lead to more wins.
|
|
|
Post by rookie13 on Mar 8, 2017 17:36:59 GMT -5
I understand how Catcher is an area of concern for the Sox, but I don't think the situation is nearly as dire as some people have made it out to be.
If if his offense remains well below average, Vazquez can still be a solid backup catcher with his excellent defense. I may be in the minority but I still have a ton of faith in Swihart. He was rushed to the majors, and played well the last few months of his first season, then got hurt last year playing a position he never should have been in.
Obviously I'm not expecting Swihart to turn into Buster Posey but to me he's still clearly the best option at Catcher.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Mar 8, 2017 18:57:56 GMT -5
You would prefer he retool his swing playing twice a week against major league pitching instead of 5x a week against AAA pitching? I would say that the latter is far, far more productive. Why was Halladay getting starts over Vazquez after he was called up? Vazquez started two games in almost a month after his callup. We talked about this when it was happening.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Mar 8, 2017 19:21:46 GMT -5
You would prefer he retool his swing playing twice a week against major league pitching instead of 5x a week against AAA pitching? I would say that the latter is far, far more productive. Why was Halladay getting starts over Vazquez after he was called up? Vazquez started two games in almost a month after his callup. We talked about this when it was happening. Because they thought Holaday was a better player and they were in the midst of a tight pennant race. It's fine if you disagree about that player evaluation, but I don't think it's really much of a mystery.
|
|
|
Post by Coreno on Mar 8, 2017 21:09:08 GMT -5
I think the problem is that a lot of people cling to CV's elite defense as a big aspect of his ability. He was not at the defensive level a lot of us expect from him last year, as he was still recovering from the injury.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Mar 8, 2017 21:11:59 GMT -5
Vasquez was still rated as the 4th best catcher in baseball last year in limited playing time, I believe. He was elite there, even if his arm wasn't there yet.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Mar 8, 2017 21:13:51 GMT -5
For me, the absolute worse case scenario is that we end up with an overall significantly better than average catching tandem.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Mar 8, 2017 22:04:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Mar 8, 2017 22:05:14 GMT -5
Vasquez was still rated as the 4th best catcher in baseball last year in limited playing time, I believe. He was elite there, even if his arm wasn't there yet. Fourth best at what? You've got to cite to stuff if you're going to make statements like that? Maybe he was but we need context here.
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Mar 8, 2017 22:05:47 GMT -5
Do you have some sort of grudge against spelling Vazquez's name correctly?
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Mar 8, 2017 22:22:49 GMT -5
Vasquez was still rated as the 4th best catcher in baseball last year in limited playing time, I believe. He was elite there, even if his arm wasn't there yet. Fourth best at what? You've got to cite to stuff if you're going to make statements like that? Maybe he was but we need context here. Sorry didn't look at the updated lists from last year but he's 20th on the list in all of baseball in a half season according to this- www.statcorner.com/CatcherReport.phpEdit- he was ranked 4th on this list when he was playing everyday. That's the last time I checked that page. I have no way of proving this but that's how I remembered it at least.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Mar 8, 2017 22:23:43 GMT -5
Do you have some sort of grudge against spelling Vazquez's name correctly? Haha yeah, don't make this into a spelling contest, or I'll lose by default. I'm terrible with names, grudge or no grudge.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Mar 8, 2017 22:28:04 GMT -5
Interesting, that would put Xander at the second spot in the order and Betts at cleanup. I don't mind this thinking by Farrell.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Mar 9, 2017 8:24:23 GMT -5
Going beyond the factual reasons that Chris gave to refute the idea... why in the world would the Red Sox hold a grudge against Vazquez? Your thought process here seems to be "I think Vazquez should start, the Red Sox don't, ergo the Red Sox are biased grudge-holders." Come on, man. The game calling. The lack of hitting. Avoiding to call him up age instead claiming names like Holaday last year. The fact that avoided playing him when he was called up last year. I don't think it was a "huge" grudge or anything, just small one that got him no playing time in the second half last year. Thinking a player isn't as good isn't the same as holding a grudge. It's not like game calling and hitting are these weird abstractions distracting from his team-improving on-field performance. If the Red Sox thought he was bad at those things then why would they play him during a pennant race? This seems so simple right on its face. Holding a grudge would be, like, Farrell doesn't like Vazquez because he had a bad breakup with his cousin or he played his music in the clubhouse too loud or something stupid that is separated from how good he is as a player. Not playing/calling up a dude because he can't hit enough and pitchers don't like throwing to him is an evaluation, not a grudge.
|
|
|
Post by costpet on Mar 9, 2017 9:19:19 GMT -5
In the old days, catchers always hit 8th and the pitchers 9th. That's because most of them couldn't hit, but their catching ability made up for that. A great catching catcher is more valuable than a great hitting/no catch catcher. Right now we have one of each. So, Vazquez trumps Swihart. A bad catcher can hurt a pitching staff no matter how he hits. A good catcher may not produce many runs, but he can prevent a ton. Pitchers like that. If Vazquez's arm is back, you have to start him.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Mar 9, 2017 9:42:10 GMT -5
In the old days, catchers always hit 8th and the pitchers 9th. That's because most of them couldn't hit, but their catching ability made up for that. A great catching catcher is more valuable than a great hitting/no catch catcher. Right now we have one of each. So, Vazquez trumps Swihart. A bad catcher can hurt a pitching staff no matter how he hits. A good catcher may not produce many runs, but he can prevent a ton. Pitchers like that. If Vazquez's arm is back, you have to start him. It's not a binary choice. There's a big difference between a catcher who "can't hit" putting up, like .240/.310/.310 (roughly his 2014 line) and .227/.277/.308 )what he hit in 2016). It's basically impossible to be good enough defensively to overcome that latter line - there just aren't enough runs out there that a catcher can prevent to make up that level of hitting. And all this doesn't even touch on the fact that pitchers supposedly preferred throwing to Leon, and also... you've all seen Leon throw, right? There's definitely some home grown bias going on here. If Leon puts up an OPS .100 better than Vazquez there is zero chance for Vazquez to be a better baseball player.
|
|
|
Post by mattpicard on Mar 9, 2017 11:34:57 GMT -5
I'm a little bit surprised that there hasn't been more of an overreaction here to all the time Selsky has seen in center field this spring. I was a pretty staunch defender of leaving Betts in right when Bradley didn't play - right field is nearly as difficult and important as center, and Betts is legitimately great at it. But I have to admit that I'm starting to get a skosh worried that they'll keep Benintendi in left field if Bradley goes down - a move that is much, much less defensible. EDIT: Remember Wily Mo Pena playing center field? That's not applicable to anything here, it just popped into my brain and I wanted to share it. 2006 was not Terry Francona's best work. John Farrell is a "keep your core players in a consistent role" kind of guy. Remember playing Chris Young in CF last year? I am resigned to the likelihood that Farrell keeps Betts in RF and Benintendi in LF and play a fill-in (Holt, Selsky, etc.) in CF on Bradley's days off. That said, I think he'd be more flexible about moving Betts or Benintendi to CF if Bradley misses significant time due to injury (or is benched due to underperformance). So that's good. "I would look to put Benintendi in center and then have Chris (Young) likely in left" - JF, a few weeks ago.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Mar 9, 2017 12:08:29 GMT -5
In the old days, catchers always hit 8th and the pitchers 9th. That's because most of them couldn't hit, but their catching ability made up for that. A great catching catcher is more valuable than a great hitting/no catch catcher. Right now we have one of each. So, Vazquez trumps Swihart. A bad catcher can hurt a pitching staff no matter how he hits. A good catcher may not produce many runs, but he can prevent a ton. Pitchers like that. If Vazquez's arm is back, you have to start him. It's not a binary choice. There's a big difference between a catcher who "can't hit" putting up, like .240/.310/.310 (roughly his 2014 line) and .227/.277/.308 )what he hit in 2016). It's basically impossible to be good enough defensively to overcome that latter line - there just aren't enough runs out there that a catcher can prevent to make up that level of hitting. And all this doesn't even touch on the fact that pitchers supposedly preferred throwing to Leon, and also... you've all seen Leon throw, right? There's definitely some home grown bias going on here. If Leon puts up an OPS .100 better than Vazquez there is zero chance for Vazquez to be a better baseball player. We also need to all disavow ourselves of this notion that Swihart is some stone-handed scrub behind the plate. The decision isn't elite defense/awful offense catcher versus awful defense/elite offense catcher. It's both more nuanced and not as simple. I see posters and members of the media both underestimating Swihart's defensive potential and overestimating his offensive potential (when I see things like writers wondering why they don't work him out at 3B, for example, where the bat would be way less valuable). In theory, you could have elite defense/below average (for C) offense Vazquez versus average defense/above-average offense (for C) Swihart. Or Vazquez could wind up above-average D/well below average O. Or Swihart could wind up average/average. Or Vazquez could... You see what I'm saying here? This isn't just "pick the defense guy over the offense guy." This isn't like when Federowicz and Lavarnway were coming up and you wanted to splice the two of them together.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Mar 9, 2017 13:10:19 GMT -5
John Farrell is a "keep your core players in a consistent role" kind of guy. Remember playing Chris Young in CF last year? I am resigned to the likelihood that Farrell keeps Betts in RF and Benintendi in LF and play a fill-in (Holt, Selsky, etc.) in CF on Bradley's days off. That said, I think he'd be more flexible about moving Betts or Benintendi to CF if Bradley misses significant time due to injury (or is benched due to underperformance). So that's good. "I would look to put Benintendi in center and then have Chris (Young) likely in left" - JF, a few weeks ago. Hope springs eternal. .
|
|
|