|
Post by libertine on Apr 18, 2016 20:18:54 GMT -5
Very encouraged by the start Chavis is off to this season. I know it is early, but...
Any word on how his defense has been. I know there were some questions about it this spring.
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Apr 18, 2016 13:16:35 GMT -5
The bullpen and defense look to have cost us here. For the most part both have been solid this season so I am going to view this as an outlier. In no way would I pin this on Kimbrel. Bringing in the closer with 1 out in the 8th and the bases juiced usually does not end up well no matter how good the closer is...
But the bottom of the 9th is coming up so this isn't over quite yet. This site is nuts lol. Kimbrel has two rough outings and he's a bum. Manuel Margot can't hit righties above A ball and he's the second coming of Christ Nawwww, this site isn't nuts. Well at least no more nuts than most internet message boards. A lot of type A personalities, etc.
Can Ortiz provide some more Papi Magic?
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Apr 18, 2016 13:07:03 GMT -5
The bullpen and defense look to have cost us here. For the most part both have been solid this season so I am going to view this as an outlier. In no way would I pin this on Kimbrel. Bringing in the closer with 1 out in the 8th and the bases juiced usually does not end up well no matter how good the closer is...
But the bottom of the 9th is coming up so this isn't over quite yet.
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Apr 16, 2016 16:52:46 GMT -5
I am saying moving forward enough to displace CV from the job. I never said that anyone here said that he wouldn't improve defensively. I am really not into people twisting my words around, not into at all... You took a cheap shot at the guy and tried to cover yourself. I've taking plenty of shots at him, but stand behind them. For the love of God! He quoted me saying he (Swihart) would not improve enough to displace CV. And then claims I said something else (that people were saying Blake would never improve defensively). Somewhere Orwell is smiling at all of this...
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Apr 16, 2016 16:48:38 GMT -5
Look at what you quoted! Are you kidding me? You quoted me saying "to displace CV". Are you for real?
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Apr 16, 2016 16:32:04 GMT -5
... I am going to cease going on about this since I am never going to convince the people who think that Blake will never develop into a good enough defensive catcher, to go along with his bat, to displace CV from the job. ... You're making stuff. There are no comments at all about Swihart never moving forward with his catching skills, none. I am saying moving forward enough to displace CV from the job. I never said that anyone here said that he wouldn't improve defensively. I am really not into people twisting my words around, not into at all...
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Apr 16, 2016 16:28:10 GMT -5
I am not doubling down on anything else other than Clay did collapse after that pop foul wasn't handled. He wasn't able to record another out...
And you suggest he may have done poorly on purpose to spite Swihart. That's what the word intentional means in that sentence. I never said it was intentional, though I indicated it could've been. I never "suggested" anything other than the possibilities, I can't read the man's mind. The one thing we know for sure, and he is on the record about it, is he really doesn't like pitching to Swihart. I think it is more about Clay being emotionally fragile in competition. I have seen many pitchers exhibit that level of fragility and collapse when a mistake is made behind them.
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Apr 16, 2016 16:15:11 GMT -5
So I will definitely put you in the "or not" column because he did collapse after that foul pop wasn't caught. Glad you find that humorous, I guess. I don't... Are you really doubling down on this? You think Buchholz might have lost the game on purpose just to spite the catcher? I am not doubling down on anything else other than Clay did collapse after that pop foul wasn't handled. He wasn't able to record another out...
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Apr 16, 2016 16:03:16 GMT -5
Yay Xander! First homer of the year for him...
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Apr 16, 2016 16:00:26 GMT -5
... He failed to catch one wind blown foul ball with a SP going that doesn't like him, who folded like a house of cards (intentionally or not) ... Thank you for that bit of silliness. That's the funniest thing I've read on the inter webs today. So I will definitely put you in the "or not" column because he did collapse after that foul pop wasn't caught. Glad you find that humorous, I guess. I don't...
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Apr 16, 2016 13:56:34 GMT -5
He hasn't been that bad in the field imo. He failed to catch one wind blown foul ball with a SP going that doesn't like him, who folded like a house of cards (intentionally or not) instead of trying to pick-up his battery mate, after the foul pop was missed. In fact during the broadcast Remy was uncomfortable with his silence when O'Brien tried to pin the blame for Buchholz's inability to miss any bats in the 6th on Swihart's miscue. Later in the game Remy referred to it as "the Red Sox inability" to field that foul pop.
Swihart was vilified in the media for that miss (though a social media whisper campaign involving trusted media figures...I heard O'Brien et al talking up Christian and how close he was to returning, when he should still be rehabbing) and then was sent packing after 8 whole games and told to work on his D and while he was at it find a new position to play. If there is something being read into this that shouldn't it is because of the way the team handled this whole situation.
See, this is exactly what I mean. You're reading a lot into the media noise, which only very tenuously related to what this front office and other front offices actually think. The Red Sox (and many folks here, including myself) think that Vazquez is better than Swihart, so they promoted one and demoted the other. That does not mean that they or other teams think Swihart is suddenly a bad player. Believing that all of these media types saying independently and at the same time that CV was close to being recalled was pure coincidence? Interesting...
Anyhoo like I said in my previous comment I am going to cease going on about this since I am never going to convince the people who think that Blake will never develop into a good enough defensive catcher, to go along with his bat, to displace CV from the job. Reasonable people can disagree. I am hoping the best for both of them, unfortunately I am thinking I will have to be doing that with Blake on a different team. I think for many years to come each of them will be perennial all-star candidates behind the plate...
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Apr 16, 2016 13:41:14 GMT -5
He hasn't been that bad in the field imo. He failed to catch one wind blown foul ball with a SP going that doesn't like him, who folded like a house of cards (intentionally or not) instead of trying to pick-up his battery mate, after the foul pop was missed. In fact during the broadcast Remy was uncomfortable with his silence when O'Brien tried to pin the blame for Buchholz's inability to miss any bats in the 6th on Swihart's miscue. Later in the game Remy referred to it as "the Red Sox inability" to field that foul pop.
Swihart was vilified in the media for that miss (though a social media whisper campaign involving trusted media figures...I heard O'Brien et al talking up Christian and how close he was to returning, when he should still be rehabbing) and then was sent packing after 8 whole games and told to work on his D and while he was at it find a new position to play. If there is something being read into this that shouldn't it is because of the way the team handled this whole situation.
This. I think the Red Sox needed a Scapegoat and Blake was perfect. I am happy that CV is back, but to treat Blake like shit for all that went wrong with the staff and bullpen is sad. BS, just joined Devers and Owens as the official team pinatas. But hey CV is a 10 WAR player, I mean Pitch Framing alone gets him 4-5 WAR. So that should help us in the playoffs and World Series. Thank you. I can now stop going on about it since I now know I am not the only person in the world who sees it this way.
I realize I am never going to convince the people who think that Blake is a below average defender (I disagree) and will always be a below average defender (I also disagree). I fully acknowledge that CV is an elite defender behind the plate and hopefully will be part of many Red Sox championship teams. If he can hit .260-.280 with 10-15 HR per year, he might rightly be considered the best catcher in the game. But right now he is still recovering from TJ surgery and I worry that rushing him back to make Blake the scapegoat for an underperforming starting rotation (in a handful of cold weather starts when it is difficult to grip/have a good feel for the ball and a couple where the wind was blowing out in a gale) is very a risky gamble to take.
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Apr 16, 2016 12:20:47 GMT -5
Is that really any less "humiliating," though? I mean, his defensive shortcomings have been obvious to everyone, and by all accounts, he'll still get substantially all of his playing time behind the plate in Pawtucket. Plus, the really scary thing is that if Holt has to fill in at 2B/SS due to an injury, Swihart might actually be one of the better major-league-ready outfielders in the system versus RHP. His long-term future is not at OF, but in the short-term... He hasn't been that bad in the field imo. He failed to catch one wind blown foul ball with a SP going that doesn't like him, who folded like a house of cards (intentionally or not) instead of trying to pick-up his battery mate, after the foul pop was missed. In fact during the broadcast Remy was uncomfortable with his silence when O'Brien tried to pin the blame for Buchholz's inability to miss any bats in the 6th on Swihart's miscue. Later in the game Remy referred to it as "the Red Sox inability" to field that foul pop.
Swihart was vilified in the media for that miss (though a social media whisper campaign involving trusted media figures...I heard O'Brien et al talking up Christian and how close he was to returning, when he should still be rehabbing) and then was sent packing after 8 whole games and told to work on his D and while he was at it find a new position to play. If there is something being read into this that shouldn't it is because of the way the team handled this whole situation.
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Apr 16, 2016 11:58:43 GMT -5
If they thought he was a ML caliber C they should have just left it at "go down to AAA to work on your defense a bit more". His future in the ML, at least with the Red Sox, is not in the OF...
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Apr 16, 2016 11:42:17 GMT -5
I strongly doubt that Swihart will bring a "good" SP in a trade. Not in a straight up trade at least. We will not get the proper value in return for him. Like I said on the other thread announcing his demotion, I just hope it is more than Larry Anderson this time. And with the humiliating way this was handled (imo at least), barring an injury to CV or Hanigan, I think we've seen Swihart in a Red Sox uniform for the last time...If that were the case I don't think they'd be giving him time in LF. His trade value is as a catcher. His value to the Red Sox is papering over their miserable OF depth. To me the Sox suggesting that Swihart find a new position to play is what I was talking about when I mentioned humiliating him. The Sox just said to him, and all potential trading partners, that he does not have the skills needed to be a MLB caliber C and should find a new position to play.
And as far as "papering over" our organizational shortcomings in the OF I think that is selling Benintendi waaaaaaaaaay too short. Moncada also projects as an OF or 3B in the majors. And as underwhelming as he has been Castillo is at AAA still.
I agree that with the trade that sent Margot to SD we are not as deep in the OF as we once were. But I think that there is a belief in the organization that we will be seeing a Benintendi-Bradley-Betts OF (the new Killer B's?) as soon as 2017...so where does that leave Swihart?
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Apr 16, 2016 11:30:32 GMT -5
I am almost certain Swihart will be traded by the AS break. And I am almost as certain he will not bring a #2 SP in a deal straight up. That would involve more than just Swihart to bring that return. He is undervalued, he will continue to remain undervalued (unless he is raking the ball in AAA at a +.350 clip...which is possible I guess) and the Sox by publically saying his defense is not of MLB caliber, while also suggesting publically he find a new position to play while at AAA, have not strengthened their hand in trading Swihart.
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Apr 16, 2016 11:15:33 GMT -5
I strongly doubt that Swihart will bring a "good" SP in a trade. Not in a straight up trade at least. We will not get the proper value in return for him. Like I said on the other thread announcing his demotion, I just hope it is more than Larry Anderson this time. And with the humiliating way this was handled (imo at least), barring an injury to CV or Hanigan, I think we've seen Swihart in a Red Sox uniform for the last time...
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Apr 16, 2016 9:38:14 GMT -5
Oops. Meant to say above ^^^ when CV injured his elbow.
|
|
|
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 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 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 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 libertine on Apr 15, 2016 17:14:47 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.
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Mar 25, 2016 12:26:22 GMT -5
I saw at the Sox OS something I forgot/didn't realize. The current mayor of NYC is a long time Red Sox fan, lol. There is something very wrong about that but I like it...
|
|
|
Post by libertine on Mar 11, 2016 22:50:09 GMT -5
I know I am a bit late to this discussion, but...
Tbh I am appalled at ST coverage by NESN. What else do they have to broadcast on weekday afternoons? Bruins replays? I live in the Hartford area and was a Whalers season ticket holder. I still hate the B's with a passion, lol. The only reason I would watch them is to root for their opposition (Go Habs Go!). Celtic replays? Other than that on NESN weekday afternoons right now? Old episodes of The Mad Fisherman? Dining Playbook repeats? They think those replays/repeats will get better ratings instead of broadcasting ST games live? Really?
Many of us are very interested in ST because we get a chance to see the next generation of Red Sox players, players we rarely get a chance to see once camp breaks. The last I checked neither the B's or the Celtics play many weekday afternoon games. And they can show repeats/replays of those games and the other shows they broadcast the remaining 21+ hours of the day. Never mind the fact the have NESN Plus if they don't want to disappoint all the potential viewers of those repeats/replays! Is it because they don't have to pay the crew they have down there if they don't broadcast the games?
/rant
|
|