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.
|
Post by jimed14 on Jul 11, 2014 15:10:32 GMT -5
If both Vazquez and Swihart develop into MLB starters at catcher, one is gone. Catching is too scarce in today's MLB to waste perfectly good defensive catchers at other positions, unless you're doing it to prolong a great hitter's career like Mauer. The most likely way you get to a Swihart/Vazquez tandem for longer than a year or two is if one, likely Vazquez, turns into a guy who doesn't quite hit enough to start. But that said, I can't see some team with a deficiency at catcher not coming around to give him a shot at that point. And then that's only if we get value for him, which seems to be more iffy than it has been. I mean it's been quite awhile since we traded a young player/prospect as good as him. I'd probably go back to Josh Reddick. OK, I convinced myself that I want to keep both.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Jul 11, 2014 23:23:41 GMT -5
I don't think people should get too wound up about who plays where at this time. The team is really foretunate to have two outstanding catching prospects. We should savor that.
Most teams would give a lot just to have one. If Vazquez was in the Cards'system, he'd be taking over for an injured Molina right about now, and if Swihart was in the MFY org, he would be their top prospect, with all the hype that entails. That's how good they are.
Whether the Sox trade one or the other, or whether they re-engineer their post-Ortiz roster (my preference), these are players they drafted and cultivated. They will benefit from the value those players will bring, and it will be substantial. Great catching prospects, and both these guys are, are as rare as a political compromise in modern day DC.
|
|
|
Post by grmoore27 on Jul 12, 2014 0:00:17 GMT -5
Umm... Why can't the sox hold on to both? in a year or two the sox will need a first baseman and DH. Vazquez can be the main guy catching 110-120 games and Swihart can do a combination of 1st DH and catch when Vazquez is sitting. Swihart is a hell of an athlete and would probably play a great 1ST base. NO NEED TO TRADE EITHER OF THEM.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,923
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 12, 2014 1:22:58 GMT -5
Pitch-framing is such a hugely important skill that we won't be certain that Swihart is the better player until we get a sufficient amount of pitch-framing data on both. Sometimes early next week I'm going to look at the year-to-year correlations of BP's pitch-framing metrics and try to see what kind of sample size will suffice. And of course I intend to post CVaz's numbers after every game.
In the meantime, it seems to make sense to keep them both until at least the end of Swihart's rookie year. Then you'll hopefully have a very good idea which guy is better, and you'll know whether the lesser player will be of more value if traded to fill a hole elsewhere, or as part of tandem.
|
|
|
Post by sturmrider on Jul 12, 2014 8:40:09 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jul 12, 2014 10:58:00 GMT -5
You also have six years of control on each guy and need 2 catchers. Vasquez will also be at least a year if not 2 ahead of Swithart. I see little reason to not keep them both around. People here get a little too carried away at times with "theoretic value". You can't move play X because his value at Catcher is so much greater than his value at First/DH so you trade him and find another first baseman or DH. Theory us nice, practical application is another thing.
Let's see how it all plays out, but having 2 great young catchers competing year after year doesn't seem like a bad thing. Especially since Swithart has a bat that should play almost anywhere and should be even better if he's not catching a full-slate. Having your backup catcher at DH isn't a good situation but there are other options like first base. Time to develop a group of players who just play baseball. Also, injuries happen quite often with catchers.
|
|
|
Post by grmoore27 on Jul 12, 2014 11:18:36 GMT -5
You also have six years of control on each guy and need 2 catchers. Vasquez will also be at least a year if not 2 ahead of Swithart. I see little reason to not keep them both around. People here get a little too carried away at times with "theoretic value". You can't move play X because his value at Catcher is so much greater than his value at First/DH so you trade him and find another first baseman or DH. Theory us nice, practical application is another thing. Let's see how it all plays out, but having 2 great young catchers competing year after year doesn't seem like a bad thing. Especially since Swithart has a bat that should play almost anywhere and should be even better if he's not catching a full-slate. Having your backup catcher at DH isn't a good situation but there are other options like first base. Time to develop a group of players who just play baseball. Also, injuries happen quite often with catchers. couldn't agree more. again Swihart wouldn't be a full time DH but i envision the sox doing what the tigers do with victor martinez. he catches plays first and plays DH. Same thing the twins do with Mauer and giants do with posey save for Dh because thats not in the NL. But people who want to rush to trade one or the other soley because there is a scarcity of young catching talent is well... not smart. I also what to reiterate how short sited trading either of them is when we have roster holes to fill for years to come and won't have to pay top dollar for first baseman or worry about replacing ortiz.
|
|
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Jul 12, 2014 11:44:48 GMT -5
These things have a habit of working themselves out. Remember when Varitek came up. He alternated with another catcher - whose name I just can't think of right now, but he went on to be the 1B for Oakland and was featured in the book about Beane. In any case, Varitek won out.
I definitely would not trade either of these catchers now. As long as they perform well their values will rise. And all kinds of things can happen, not the least of which are injuries. Lavarnway's opportunity, such as it was, probably is gone now because of injury.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Jul 12, 2014 12:12:23 GMT -5
These things have a habit of working themselves out. Remember when Varitek came up. He alternated with another catcher - whose name I just can't think of right now, but he went on to be the 1B for Oakland and was featured in the book about Beane. In any case, Varitek won out. I definitely would not trade either of these catchers now. As long as they perform well their values will rise. And all kinds of things can happen, not the least of which are injuries. Lavarnway's opportunity, such as it was, probably is gone now because of injury. Scott Hatteberg
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Jul 12, 2014 12:36:07 GMT -5
You also have six years of control on each guy and need 2 catchers. Vasquez will also be at least a year if not 2 ahead of Swithart. I see little reason to not keep them both around. People here get a little too carried away at times with "theoretic value". You can't move play X because his value at Catcher is so much greater than his value at First/DH so you trade him and find another first baseman or DH. Theory us nice, practical application is another thing. Let's see how it all plays out, but having 2 great young catchers competing year after year doesn't seem like a bad thing. Especially since Swithart has a bat that should play almost anywhere and should be even better if he's not catching a full-slate. Having your backup catcher at DH isn't a good situation but there are other options like first base. Time to develop a group of players who just play baseball. Also, injuries happen quite often with catchers. couldn't agree more. again Swihart wouldn't be a full time DH but i envision the sox doing what the tigers do with victor martinez. he catches plays first and plays DH. Same thing the twins do with Mauer and giants do with posey save for Dh because thats not in the NL. But people who want to rush to trade one or the other soley because there is a scarcity of young catching talent is well... not smart. I also what to reiterate how short sited trading either of them is when we have roster holes to fill for years to come and won't have to pay top dollar for first baseman or worry about replacing ortiz. I agree with your overall point. It would be a mistake to trade either one of them at this point. I also think it would be a mistake to move either of them off catcher at this point. There is just to much to be learned at that position to sacrifice development time at other spots. I also think you can build a really effective roster with both of them on it and each getting plenty of playing time. Something like Vazquez playing 100 games at catcher and 20 games at DH. Swihart playing 60 games at catcher, and 80 games at 1B/DH. Vazquez would play against all lefties and about 50% of the time against righties. Swihart would play basically everyday. Small nitpick - VMart has played only 5 games at catcher since 2011. Even in 2011 he only played 26 games at catcher. The Tigers basically signed him as a 1B/DH. Posey also plays basically 120 games a year at catcher. He's just good enough to play 1B/DH on his days off from behind the plate. Mauer in 2011/2012 is a decent comp for what Swiharts time could look like in this arrangement.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 12, 2014 12:41:27 GMT -5
Just to clarify my post:
A) I don't think either Vazquez or Swihart is going anywhere soon. I'm not advocating to trade them right now at all. I'm saying that I sincerely doubt that both players will stay with the Red Sox for all six years of team control if they both reach their ceilings as catchers. Like 2017 or later or something. That's because:
B) It's a massive waste to play a very good defensive catcher at another position half the time the way some folks are suggesting. Vic Martinez wasn't a horrible defensive catcher, but he was not a particularly good one either. Carlos Santana plays other positions because he's not great behind the plate. On the other hand, there's a reason Pudge Rodriguez never moved to first base or DH, even when he was a plus offensive player as well. You don't take a plus defensive catcher and put him at DH or 1B for half of his games - it's a massive waste. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I can't remember a plus defensive catcher who got significant time at another position while they were still catching... ever. Maybe someone can refresh me on how Mauer was behind the plate (I remember him basically being league average?), but in that situation, we're talking potential HOF at the plate good. If Swihart gets there, then yeah, we can start thinking about saving his knees. And if there is, I'd guess that it was due to injuries. (Tangent - was Biggio good behind the plate before he moved to second? Anyone remember? Seems to have been good enough throwing guys out and made one ASG as a catcher before moving, not that the latter means anything.)
My point is that plus catcher "defense," (for lack of a better term to encompass all parts of the catcher's duties behind the plate) paired with acceptable offense, is such a rare commodity that the Red Sox could get a great return for the likes of Vazquez if he can hit, getting them a better-hitting DH or 1B or something. There's a tendency to want to hold on to the guys who've come up through the system, and I get that, but guys like Vazquez at his ceiling are worth a lot more to a team with two awful catchers than they are to a team that also has Swihart performing at his ceiling. It'd be one thing if one of them could do something crazy like play shortstop (athletic as Swihart is, that's a stretch), but DH'ing a plus defensive catcher half of the time or putting him at first base is a massive waste of resources. Once or twice a week to save knees? OK, fine.
Now, if Vazquez only develops into an MLB backup at the plate, then yeah, let's keep both of them, although I honestly don't foresee both staying if that happens either. Someone will try to give him a shot.
|
|
radiohix
Veteran
'At the end of the day, we bang. We bang. We're going to swing.' Alex Verdugo
Posts: 6,261
|
Post by radiohix on Jul 12, 2014 13:13:30 GMT -5
Swihart is an athletic freak: There's a saying that your shortstop is your most athletically gifted guy in the field, especially the good ones but look at this video from the last Rookie camp, you have Swihart and Marrero doing a drill and Blake looks like the superior athlete.. They want do that (because they want to give as much reps as possible behind the plate)but I'm pretty sure he can play very good 3rd base if they want to learn another position. But it's not like Swihart is the second coming of Lavarnway (although he has 4.00 GPA and his father is scientist in Los Alamos reserch center ), he's the reigning farm defensive player of the year, throwing 52% of the base stealers this year and reported (Jason Parks) to have an off the sharts make up, it just that he's so good with the stick that we tend to look at him as an offensive catcher only.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 12, 2014 13:27:39 GMT -5
Just to clarify my post: A) I don't think either Vazquez or Swihart is going anywhere soon. I'm not advocating to trade them right now at all. I'm saying that I sincerely doubt that both players will stay with the Red Sox for all six years of team control if they both reach their ceilings as catchers. Like 2017 or later or something. That's because: B) It's a massive waste to play a very good defensive catcher at another position half the time the way some folks are suggesting. Vic Martinez wasn't a horrible defensive catcher, but he was not a particularly good one either. Carlos Santana plays other positions because he's not great behind the plate. On the other hand, there's a reason Pudge Rodriguez never moved to first base or DH, even when he was a plus offensive player as well. You don't take a plus defensive catcher and put him at DH or 1B for half of his games - it's a massive waste. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I can't remember a plus defensive catcher who got significant time at another position while they were still catching... ever. Maybe someone can refresh me on how Mauer was behind the plate (I remember him basically being league average?), but in that situation, we're talking potential HOF at the plate good. If Swihart gets there, then yeah, we can start thinking about saving his knees. And if there is, I'd guess that it was due to injuries. (Tangent - was Biggio good behind the plate before he moved to second? Anyone remember? Seems to have been good enough throwing guys out and made one ASG as a catcher before moving, not that the latter means anything.) My point is that plus catcher "defense," (for lack of a better term to encompass all parts of the catcher's duties behind the plate) paired with acceptable offense, is such a rare commodity that the Red Sox could get a great return for the likes of Vazquez if he can hit, getting them a better-hitting DH or 1B or something. There's a tendency to want to hold on to the guys who've come up through the system, and I get that, but guys like Vazquez at his ceiling are worth a lot more to a team with two awful catchers than they are to a team that also has Swihart performing at his ceiling. It'd be one thing if one of them could do something crazy like play shortstop (athletic as Swihart is, that's a stretch), but DH'ing a plus defensive catcher half of the time or putting him at first base is a massive waste of resources. Once or twice a week to save knees? OK, fine. Now, if Vazquez only develops into an MLB backup at the plate, then yeah, let's keep both of them, although I honestly don't foresee both staying if that happens either. Someone will try to give him a shot. Mauer was definitely an above-average defensive catcher. Not that this means that much, but he won three Gold Gloves at catcher, and (IIRC) he was generally lauded for his strong arm and his ability to handle pitchers. He rated very well by advanced defensive metrics, too, not that those are that useful at assessing catcher defense. But his defense slipped as he aged, which is one reason he was moved off the position (though concussions and his durability generally were the driving factors). That aside, I generally agree. Moving a plus defensive catcher off the plate is one of those situations where the loss in defensive value is so great that it really makes sense to look for a trade rather than trying to shoehorn him at 1B/DH. The difference in positional adjustment between C and 1B is 2.5 wins; it's a full 3 wins at DH. (Even at third base, there's a 1 win difference, though that's small enough that I think you could make it work.) Playing a plus defensive catcher at DH/1B for half the season is a colossal waste of his skills, enough that you'd have to think a trade would be the best option. Again, though, this is a discussion that is at least 2-3 years premature. Let's wait for these guys to establish themselves first.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Jul 12, 2014 13:40:08 GMT -5
I tend to think there are plenty of at bats for both Vazquez and swilhart.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jul 12, 2014 13:40:23 GMT -5
Yea no one should be moving off catcher until it's known you want both playing as much as possible in the majors.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jul 12, 2014 14:02:36 GMT -5
Just to clarify my post: B) It's a massive waste to play a very good defensive catcher at another position half the time the way some folks are suggesting. A waste for who? Baseball? Who cares? If this scenario were to play out, the Sox are getting great Defense either way. If this scenario, plays out it's entirely possible Vasquez is a good hitter for a catcher plus a better defender and Swithart is an excellent defender in his own right but a good hitter for a baseball player. My point is that plus catcher "defense," (for lack of a better term to encompass all parts of the catcher's duties behind the plate) paired with acceptable offense, is such a rare commodity that the Red Sox could get a great return for the likes of Vazquez if he can hit, getting them a better-hitting DH or 1B or something. That aside, I generally agree. Moving a plus defensive catcher off the plate is one of those situations where the loss in defensive value is so great that it really makes sense to look for a trade rather than trying to shoehorn him at 1B/DH. The difference in positional adjustment between C and 1B is 2.5 wins; it's a full 3 wins at DH. (Even at third base, there's a 1 win difference, though that's small enough that I think you could make it work.) Playing a plus defensive catcher at DH/1B for half the season is a colossal waste of his skills, enough that you'd have to think a trade would be the best option. Again, though, this is a discussion that is at least 2-3 years premature. Let's wait for these guys to establish themselves first. This is the line of thinking that's good in theory but not all that practical. Since we are using first base as the likely position change we will stay there. First, the offensive bar at first is a lot lower than it used to be, as is the case every where. Great D at first is now valued more than ever and outside of the really top echelon of first basemen the rest of the crop isn't that exciting. Some of the next best guys are Moss, Loney, LaRoche etc and they haven't exactly had stable careers. So saying you can trade for a better hitting first baseman is questionable. We had all 3 and let them go for baseball reasons that were legit. No one cried when they left for good reason. Not to mention trades of MLB player for MLB player are not all that common. Therefore, it'd take multiple trades. Vasquez for prospects, then prospects for a first baseman. To find a team willing to give a big prospect haul for a catcher at the same time someone is willing to trade a top hitting first baseman at the exact time you have two all-star caliber catchers is a perfect storm in the real world. Looks nice on paper and is fun to talk about. And yes this is premature..
|
|
|
Post by chavopepe2 on Jul 12, 2014 14:16:10 GMT -5
I agree with Chris that if both guys prove to be all-star level players the optimal roster construction does not include both of them.
But until we get there, I do think having both of them on the team to prove themselves is perfect. Vazquez gets this year to show he can handle the primary catching responsibilities next year. Sometime late next year Swihart joins him and they mix the two of them into the lineup. In 2016 you go with those two as your two catchers and mix them in at DH/1B. If they both kill it then there will be some decisions to make in the 2016/2017 offseason.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 12, 2014 18:12:08 GMT -5
Just to clarify my post: B) It's a massive waste to play a very good defensive catcher at another position half the time the way some folks are suggesting. A waste for who? Baseball? Who cares? If this scenario were to play out, the Sox are getting great Defense either way. If this scenario, plays out it's entirely possible Vasquez is a good hitter for a catcher plus a better defender and Swithart is an excellent defender in his own right but a good hitter for a baseball player. It's a waste for the team doing it. If you're going to play Swihart at first base half the time if Vazquez is around, then in theory, if Swihart has also developed into a plus defender, you trade Vazquez for a first baseman who hits better than Vazquez does. Now the offense with Swihart + acquisition as opposed to Swihart and Vazquez is better, and the defense isn't all that much worse (use, say, Dan Butler as the backup, if you want to use an internal guy). Maybe it's a bit easier to illustrate this way: you've got six league average starting pitchers. Sure, you could move one to the bullpen, but you maximize value by trading one for a part that your team needs at a place your team is weak, and that's a better use of resources. But yeah, super premature at this point. I'm in agreement with what chavo laid out.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Jul 12, 2014 18:47:15 GMT -5
Regardless of how we diagnose swihart's potential, I really do hope swilhart gets a full year at Pawtucket next season ( September call up) and we bring Ross back on a one year deal to continue to work with Vazquez.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Jul 12, 2014 20:44:24 GMT -5
Chris, the only analogous situation I could think of was when Elston Howard came up (I'm dating myself here) and Yogi Berra was the catcher in residence. Howard was a very good defensive catcher, and a good hitter also. He didn't get a lot of reps at catcher till he was in his late 20s. Even after that, he and Berra would be shuttled around various positions, with lots of outfield and first base. So it has happened, but it's not very common. And neither were as young as these guys will be once their both on the team.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Jul 28, 2014 17:30:43 GMT -5
|
|
|