|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Apr 15, 2016 18:22:23 GMT -5
Porcello and Vazquez for Cy Young
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Apr 15, 2016 17:32:48 GMT -5
Except, it's not that simple. Because you're totally forgetting about the offensive contributions and how they affect the club as well lol. Did he ask about that? Sorry bucko, your main point: "But that catcher will end up winning you 4 extra games. By himself." assumes their offense grades out similarly. Got a little ahead of yourself and didn't take into account the full picture. It happens to the best of us.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Apr 15, 2016 17:18:07 GMT -5
Well, Vazquez is back, so I'm assuming Porcello will throw a perfect game
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Apr 15, 2016 17:17:20 GMT -5
people need to get over age. Arrieta found it at 27
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Apr 15, 2016 17:15:18 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. This is really simple. If a catcher can take 0.25 to 0.30 points off the staff ERA, you will never notice that in an individual game. For one thing, it's one run saved every fourth game. And it's done by stealing a strike that puts a hitter in a 1-2 count rather than a 2-1 count, by calling for a better pitch here and there, and so on. It's essentially invisible. You don't even notice it when you look at how the pitchers did, because pitchers vary so much from year to year anyway. But that catcher will end up winning you 4 extra games. By himself. Regardless of who's pitching. And that's enough to turn Starling Marte into Mike Trout, or Edward Encarnacion into Paul Goldschmidt, or Martin Pado into Manny Machado, or your good AAA player into Matt Carpenter or Todd Frazier. And it's more value than Craig Kimbrel has ever had in a season. Vazquez in 2014 took exactly 0.25 off the team RA with his pitch-framing. His pitch-calling is much harder to measure, but an extra 0.05 runs may be very conservative. And, you're right, no one will talk about the catcher's contribution to one pitcher having a 2.50 ERA versus another having a 5.50, between pitchers who are great and those who suck. The differences between pitchers dwarf the contributions made by their catchers. But the catchers are behind the plate every inning, while an individual pitcher is at most out there for 2/3 of the game every five games. The catchers' contributions add up, big-time. Except, it's not that simple. Because you're totally forgetting about the offensive contributions and how they affect the club as well lol.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Apr 15, 2016 17:12:44 GMT -5
Now the trade would be a potentially elite LF bat with below average defense for a average defensive LF with average offense lol
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Apr 15, 2016 17:08:53 GMT -5
If you really want to hold onto Swihart because you believe in him a lot and you don't want to waste years of control maybe you do give him 10-15 games in left field and enable him to come back up this year as a 5th OF, back up catcher. He is very athletic and probably can be even an average defender in LF with a decent bat. An injury back up at catcher is a huge plus for the team and which team would be in a better situation in that regard going forward? Catchers get hurt a lot. With both Holt and guys like a Left field capable Swihart on this team maybe you can carry an extra reliever instead of a conventional 5th OF. I have no problem with this decision. I'd still trade Hannagan instead but I have no problem with this as a short term move. Wait, isn't making him a bench player on the ML roster the way you waste years of control?
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Apr 15, 2016 16:48:21 GMT -5
Swihart to LF isn't really as dumb as it seems at first glance, at least for the mid-term. Left fielders aren't the world beaters they were ten years ago. Last year the average LF hit .256/.321/.416. Swihart is certainly capable of that. That said, I wouldn't want him to get any atbats in LF for the major league club, but if he has no direct line to playing time at C and you aren't getting a haul for him via trade I see no real harm in it. If you can put Swihart in LF and he's a competent fielder and hitter there you can effectively carry three catchers with him, Vazquez and Hanigan. In a small sample he's shown to be much better against right-handers so you can roll with a lineup like this in the future: LF: Swihart CF: Betts RF: Bradley 3B: Shaw SS: Bogaerts 2B: Pedroia 1B: Ramirez C: Vazquez And Holt bouncing around wherever guys need days off. Or maybe this is all trash that I've typed. Mostly they probably just don't know what to do with Swihart. He's probably too good for AAA, but Vazquez is better than him and Hanigan is a perfect backup C. Any extra positional flexibility a player can acquire, the better off he is. I think I'd rather Swihart just spend the next half-season in AAA honing his defense (and being ready for if Vazquez re-injures his elbow), but I'm just trying to figure out the thought process from the organization's POV. This looks like a knee jerk move to find a righty hitting LF bat to add to the mix. Releasing David Murphy and then sending down Rusney a short while later was near asinine.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Apr 15, 2016 16:42:17 GMT -5
“@timbritton: Swihart will see time in LF while in Pawtucket.” 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.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Apr 15, 2016 16:24:08 GMT -5
Gonna be funny when Vazquez blows out his elbow again and DD has to go crawling back to Swihart
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Apr 15, 2016 16:21:13 GMT -5
The days he's not catching, why not try him in the easiest defensive position (Hanley non with standing) ? Because he should be preparing for being a full time catcher, where his bat is insanely valuable. Instead of learning a position he's not going to be great at for a while, where his bat represents a much more league average/replaceable value. I didn't mind Dombrowski's offseason moves, but his roster management has been horrendous so far.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Apr 15, 2016 16:06:20 GMT -5
We should all feel sick right now
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Apr 15, 2016 15:30:21 GMT -5
I'm on board with this. I listened to Bradfords podcast with Alex Cora and he said it's obvious Swihart isn't ready defensively yet. Long term that's still a tough call on which direction to go. With our inability to develop pitchers maybe we need Vazquez back there and package Swihart for a solid 2. One things for certain I'm glad it's not my call and I would hate for them to take him from behind the plate. Cora's not the most unbias guy lol
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Apr 15, 2016 15:12:02 GMT -5
I'm just looking forward to watching CV pop up and point his glove at the pitcher, called third strike in the mitt and fire raging in his eyes. The kid oozes leadership. Too bad the Sox will be down 4 runs if this happens during a Kelly, Porcello or Buchholz game lol
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Apr 15, 2016 14:22:55 GMT -5
Christian Vazquez can get Porcello's sinker to drop again, right? Like he'll go out to the mound and stand behind Porcello and guide his delivery like some dude in a romcom teaches a girl how to play pool, right?
|
|
|
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 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 pokeyreesespieces on Apr 14, 2016 15:07:45 GMT -5
Hazelbaker with another HR - that's 5 so far. If the Sox could only have let him develop for another 3-4 years (oh wait, this is Boston). That, in a nutshell, is exactly how the Cards work their farm. It's how they get enormous value on self-limited dollars. While it's not a strategy the Red Sox have to rely on, it's certainly worked for St. Louis. Ehh, I wouldn't bother counting sprint training homers. Spring is weird. He wallowed around the Sox system for 6 years, ending with a sub .700ops in his final two stops. Had another burned year in Dodgers system, then finally found his place in St. Louis last year. You seem to be trying to imply that the Sox aren't patient with guys (don't give them the extra 3-4 years development) while the Cardinals are, but then use an example with a guy the Cardinals didn't have to have any patience with. It's not like they let Hazelbaker hang around for 2-3 years and then he started hitting. Sox sign guys on the wrong side of 25 all the time as depth and give them shots in the minors.
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
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 pokeyreesespieces on Apr 14, 2016 12:53:41 GMT -5
I was at the game on the third base side and it wasn't intrusive at all. www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/04/10/protective-netting-fenway-thanks-but-thanks/HS3Yat4rLgRGYMk83a26zN/story.htmlI am with Steven King on this one. I've sat many times near the on deck circle at Fenway and near the dug out. Part of the enjoyment of those seats was how close it felt to be near the players. Back in the day a season ticket holder used to give cookies to the players in the on deck circle (the Red Sox have a plaque commemorating this fan). Now, those seats will feel more detached. Yes you need to pay attention and some terrible accidents happen, but that is a risk you assume and a risk that I (and many others) was willing to take. That doesn't entirely matter. It's not about what risks fans are willing to take, it's about the risks the Red Sox are willing to take. All you need is a shattered bat to ram a little kid in the jugular and you're suddenly wishing there were nets. The sport is evolving. Bats break quite often, though they're working to reduce this and have to a degree, Fenway has little foul territory, and players are smoking the ball 100+ mph off the bat on the reg. Stephen King will survive.
|
|
|
Hanigan
Apr 14, 2016 12:47:51 GMT -5
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Apr 14, 2016 12:47:51 GMT -5
Detroit could be another option with McCann out 2-4. (not quite the same need, but DD's familiarity is clearly there).
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Apr 14, 2016 12:41:12 GMT -5
Another aspect to this is Varvaro pitching very well down at Pawtucket. He's set up for Kimbrel before for a few years, and probably has Frank Wren on his side. Varvaro most likely has a looming opt out date, and would need a 40man transaction to come up. There are better options than Hanigan for clearing a 40 man spot (Coyle, Brentz, etc.) but maybe a Hanigan trade solves a few logjams? (bleh)
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Apr 14, 2016 12:32:01 GMT -5
I get the urgency behind the early season of this team, but I just have to say that I'm not entirely confident in how DD's offseason plan is working and his roster management thus far. The Sandoval DL and Castillo down takes steps to rectify that, but it's still been a bit of an odd construction.
I'm in the camp of getting Vazquez healthy for a few months in AAA. I'm in the camp of not trading veteran catching depth in April. Pitchers love throwing to Hanigan, I don't see the huge impetus to bring up Vazquez at the moment. If game calling is a big issue, play Hanigan more.
Guess we'll have to see what the next shoe to fall is, but I'm not sure what we get for Hanigan will end up being more valuable (to us) than Hanigan.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Apr 13, 2016 11:57:09 GMT -5
Can he pitch tho
|
|