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.
Swihart vs. Vazquez vs. Hanigan
radiohix
Veteran
'At the end of the day, we bang. We bang. We're going to swing.' Alex Verdugo
Posts: 6,425
|
Post by radiohix on Apr 15, 2016 16:16:28 GMT -5
The days he's not catching, why not try him in the easiest defensive position (Hanley non with standing) ?
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 15, 2016 16:20:32 GMT -5
The days he's not catching, why not try him in the easiest defensive position (Hanley non with standing) ? Swihart is literally two wins less valuable in LF than he is at catcher. Until it has been firmly established that he is unplayably bad defensively at catcher, he should be concentrating on improving his catcher defense.
|
|
|
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 klostrophobic on Apr 15, 2016 16:41:27 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.
|
|
|
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.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,942
|
Post by ericmvan on Apr 15, 2016 17:06:30 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.
|
|
|
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.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,942
|
Post by ericmvan on Apr 15, 2016 17:25:12 GMT -5
The days he's not catching, why not try him in the easiest defensive position (Hanley non with standing) ? Swihart is literally two wins less valuable in LF than he is at catcher. Until it has been firmly established that he is unplayably bad defensively at catcher, he should be concentrating on improving his catcher defense. I couldn't agree with you more. He's got to be going down to AAA primarily to become a great catcher. But at the same time, you can step back from the bridge railing, because there's a perfectly good reason for Swihart to learn to play an adequate LF, based on perfectly reasonable scenarios. If Castillo continues to struggle, who is your best option in LF versus RHP on days when Brock Holt is needed elsewhere? Swihart's not a good enough hitter to be a good LF, but to help the team this year he doesn't need to be. He just needs to be good enough that a lineup with him in LF and Holt at, say, 2B, is better than one with Holt in LF and Marrero or Hernandez at 2B. (If he can play LF adequately, he's automatically a better option in LF versus most or all RHP than Young). So there's a scenario where he's a third catcher and 4th / 5th OFer for a little while before they trade Hanigan, and one where he is the backup catcher and an extra option in LF, and one where he comes up in September and fills that role. So I think playing him in LF on days he would not be playing at all is completely smart. I'm not sure it will harm his development as a catcher. It can't hurt and will probably help his development as a hitter -- there are guys who really benefit from not getting days off. Now, if he catches less at Pawtucket than he would if they weren't trying this, it's a fudge cluster. But I'll be surprised if that happens.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,942
|
Post by ericmvan on Apr 15, 2016 17:26:05 GMT -5
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. Did he ask about that?
|
|
|
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 redsox04071318champs on Apr 15, 2016 17:35:18 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. Exactly. Murphy has his limitations but he fit the roster a lot better than Castillo did. When Farrell decides to pinch-hit for Shaw with Young in the 6th inning, drags Holt to 3b, he would have a viable option to pinch-hit in the 8th or 9th against a righty if they're losing and then go defense with Murphy - if you're losing it's not a bad gamble. He fit the roster better than Castillo, who needed the atbats, did. I think that was very poor foresight. As it is it would be nice if they had an OF who can play corner OF/1b and be a decent lefty bat off the bench. The roster would fit better with that rather than two utility men in Marrero and Hernandez.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Apr 15, 2016 17:38:54 GMT -5
I have trouble believing the Sox are serious about putting Swihart in LF, especially when Benintendi the likely answer to LF in 2017.
They'd be destroying his value as his bat wouldn't be as valuable.
I hope he only plays LF on days where he's caught a bunch of games in a row and otherwise would be out of the lineup or else it's a serious waste of his development. He needs to improve his catching defense in AAA.
I hope Dombrowski is being genuine that Swihart is part of the team's future (if he improves his catching).
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,942
|
Post by ericmvan on Apr 15, 2016 18:11:17 GMT -5
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. I'm talking about a catcher who "can take 0.25 to 0.30 points off the staff ERA." So what does " that catcher will end up winning you 4 extra games" mean other than "compared to one who doesn't?" So no, I'm not assuming anything about their offense because we're not f***ing talking about it. We're ignoring it, so that we can talk about the thing we're talking about. Everyone knows that it's also a factor. (And in fact we just finished having the offense versus defense discussion, in so much depth that we came close to renaming everyone involved after comic-book characters. And not superheroes, either!)
It's like I've explained how eating pizza instead of a salad twice a week will put on 10 pounds over the course of a year, and your big smart point in rebuttal is that I'm not including exercise. Well, maybe that's because we're talking about diet and its effect on weight. That other things also affect weight is something everybody knows. And including them in the discussion on diet is off-topic. (Your error seems to be that you thought this was a post comparing the two catchers. WTF? A poster asked about, how in general, a catcher can make pitchers better. I explained, in general, how a catcher can make a staff better and how valuable that can be. A question was posed about catcher defense and how it gets its value, so that's what my post was about.) (BTW, if you do reply, don't think you're getting the last word; you're going on ignore.)
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Apr 15, 2016 18:18:46 GMT -5
I hope Dombrowski is being genuine that Swihart is part of the team's future (if he improves his catching). You know, he's been genuine to a fault. Everything he's said, he's done. I'm really willing to take him at his word at this point. And why the absolutes from so many? Does learning LF preclude him from being a catcher? He's also messed around at 3rd and 1st. Why wouldn't you want to take advantage of the bat when it's in utility mode? And anyone who thinks Holt is a better bat is delusional in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by ray88h66 on Apr 15, 2016 18:20:35 GMT -5
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. I'm too late. I read your post and started typing by prepared to have your IQ questioned, or be ignored. You got ignore for questioning the almighty. Jmei is the only one I've seen him take anything from. I'll take Jmei every day and twice on Sunday. Not all brilliant people are like this.
|
|
|
Post by pokeyreesespieces on Apr 15, 2016 18:22:23 GMT -5
Porcello and Vazquez for Cy Young
|
|
|
Post by mgoetze on Apr 15, 2016 18:35:11 GMT -5
And anyone who thinks Holt is a better bat is delusional in my opinion. Are we talking this year? If so, I'll take Holt for sure.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 15, 2016 18:36:34 GMT -5
Let's keep the personal stuff out of here, please.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Apr 15, 2016 19:20:21 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. I think his pitch calling and the way he manages the game has a bigger impact then his pitch framing.
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Apr 15, 2016 19:37:45 GMT -5
How is pitch calling distinct from "manages a game"? The latter includes pixie dust?
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Apr 15, 2016 19:39:55 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. ^ This is a well-written, clear explanation
|
|
|
Post by klostrophobic on Apr 15, 2016 19:51:14 GMT -5
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. I think his pitch calling and the way he manages the game has a bigger impact then his pitch framing. Wouldn't this theoretically make him more valuable than prime Mickey Mantle?
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Apr 15, 2016 20:34:57 GMT -5
How is pitch calling distinct from "manages a game"? The latter includes pixie dust? Biggest thing is how he can calm down pitchers, example of him calming down John Lackey when he first got called up. Another thing for me is his pace, when compared to Swihart.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Apr 15, 2016 20:38:29 GMT -5
I think his pitch calling and the way he manages the game has a bigger impact then his pitch framing. Wouldn't this theoretically make him more valuable than prime Mickey Mantle? Please help me understand what in the world your talking about.
|
|
|
Post by blizzards39 on Apr 15, 2016 21:15:53 GMT -5
I love Vazquez. Blue jays television just called him game MVP. He makes everybody around him better
|
|
|