Swihart v. Vazquez: The Value of Framing

[shaggydog2000]

Are the piches being called from the dugout now? If so, I did not realize that. Regardless, no, I am not blaming the catcher for a pitcher's particular ineptitude. But if we can agree that catchers *can* make a difference . . . .the question is why/how?
There's a whole lot of chicken-and-egg speculation here (by me), but anyway.....if a pitcher has less confidence in a catcher catching a ball in the dirt does he throw it a bit higher? Does he go more toward the middle if he doesn't think the catcher can turn it into a strike as effectively? Is there any reasonable analogy at all to Tom Brady and comfort level with his receivers?

The bottom line for me is that Vazquez is a million times a better catcher than is Swihart (he may be 999,999 times better than almost every catcher).. That can only help a pitching staff that needs help.

From what I can tell he looks into the dugout before each pitch and relays that to the pitcher. If that is 100% of the time, I'm not sure, but it sure seems like it.

And Vazquez is definitely a better pitch framer. He passes the eye test, and the numbers back it up. But the bombs that were hit against the Sox pitchers were down the pipe meatballs that missed the glove placement. And when Kelly was walking everyone in sight, he was missing the glove by a lot too. The real bad mess-ups we're all frustrated by were not caused by framing. They were pitchers flat out failing. The catcher isn't helping that. Swihart's defensive shortcomings are not the cause of these losses. It's a pretty small factor in them, if it factors at all. Pitchers doing their job competently is a much, much bigger issue in unconnected ways. After a few trips through the rotation we can see if it has just been bad luck and the pitchers straighten out. But I can't see how you can blame Blake for their underperformance so far. Especially when the relievers have been mostly fine throwing to him. Kimbrel has had one bad outing, and Noe Ramirez has always walked too many people, so you can't say they Blake's fault.

 

[whatittakes]

No I don't think it's reasonable to lay any real amount of the blame for the failure of the staff on Blake. That's not why I want Vazquez in per se, I'm always in favor of improving the defense at catcher in particular, IMHO there are few things on the team more important than the defensive skills of the catcher. Having a bad catcher is a constant dead weight on the team, and having a great catcher is a potentially substantial improvement over even having an average one.

 

[joe dokes]

From what I can tell he looks into the dugout before each pitch and relays that to the pitcher. If that is 100% of the time, I'm not sure, but it sure seems like it.

And Vazquez is definitely a better pitch framer. He passes the eye test, and the numbers back it up. But the bombs that were hit against the Sox pitchers were down the pipe meatballs that missed the glove placement. And when Kelly was walking everyone in sight, he was missing the glove by a lot too. The real bad mess-ups we're all frustrated by were not caused by framing. They were pitchers flat out failing. The catcher isn't helping that. Swihart's defensive shortcomings are not the cause of these losses. It's a pretty small factor in them, if it factors at all. Pitchers doing their job competently is a much, much bigger issue in unconnected ways. After a few trips through the rotation we can see if it has just been bad luck and the pitchers straighten out. But I can't see how you can blame Blake for their underperformance so far. Especially when the relievers have been mostly fine throwing to him. Kimbrel has had one bad outing, and Noe Ramirez has always walked too many people, so you can't say they Blake's fault.

"Fault" is a loaded word that I didn't use. It's not a question of "fault." Its just that in all aspects of catching, Vazquez is better. And not by a little. I'm not opposed to another turn or two through the rotation. But I'd like to see if Vazquez's "betterness" helps the pitchers.

 

[Mighty Joe Young]

In the abstract one can always argue the merit of Defense vs. Offense at the catcher position. A lot depends on how much one buys in to the pitch-framing skill. Regardless of who has more value I think it's pretty clear that Vazquez will be up pretty soon. Then the Red Sox will have a big decision to make .. Namely what to do with Hannigan. He's far too valuable to DFA so a trade will have to be made.

I've seen a few suggestions that they might option Swihart to work on his defense but I think that pretty unlikely. The guy had a very good rookie year and you don't want to mess with his development by sending him back to AAA just because he has an option available. His defense - to my eye - is slightly below average at this stage. I would think major league coaching will be far more beneficial than anything available at Pawtucket.

 

[alwyn96]

From what I can tell he looks into the dugout before each pitch and relays that to the pitcher. If that is 100% of the time, I'm not sure, but it sure seems like it.

And Vazquez is definitely a better pitch framer. He passes the eye test, and the numbers back it up. But the bombs that were hit against the Sox pitchers were down the pipe meatballs that missed the glove placement. And when Kelly was walking everyone in sight, he was missing the glove by a lot too. The real bad mess-ups we're all frustrated by were not caused by framing. They were pitchers flat out failing. The catcher isn't helping that. Swihart's defensive shortcomings are not the cause of these losses. It's a pretty small factor in them, if it factors at all. Pitchers doing their job competently is a much, much bigger issue in unconnected ways. After a few trips through the rotation we can see if it has just been bad luck and the pitchers straighten out. But I can't see how you can blame Blake for their underperformance so far. Especially when the relievers have been mostly fine throwing to him. Kimbrel has had one bad outing, and Noe Ramirez has always walked too many people, so you can't say they Blake's fault.

Yeah, I don't think Swihart is calling for a lot of crushable pitches in the middle of the zone and balls that miss his glove. I'm willing to believe that catcher defense can make a pitcher feel more comfortable and steal a strike call here and there, but I don't think even having Yadier Molina back there would shave more than a fraction of a run off the Red Sox 5.90 ERA at this point.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

The framing, receiving, calling the game, footwork, blocking, throwing - its all elite for Vaz, its a huge question mark for Blake. People act like you just throw an athletic kid back there and he's going to develop into an elite catcher. I don't see it happening with Blake. If it was that easy, every team would draft a college shortstop and convert him to catcher.

You're exaggerating his inexperience at the C spot. As Speier notes, he's been catching his whole pro career, now in its fifth year, and before that he caught at least occasionally in high school. He's not just "an athletic kid", nor a late-converted defensive lottery ticket like Lavarnway; he's someone who was frequently described by scouts in the upper minors as a future plus catcher, based not just on raw athletic ability but on direct observation of his rapidly developing skills behind the plate.

Of course there's no certainty that he can be an above-average defensive catcher in the major leagues, but that's true of virtually any 24-year-old with less than a year of MLB catching experience; it isn't especially true of Swihart.

 

[shaggydog2000]

According to Statscorner, the difference in framing between 2014 Vazquez and 2015 Blake Swihart was 2.09 strikes per game. It adds up over the length of a year, definitely, but the Sox starters have been off by much more than half a walk a game so far. The offense has been very good, 3rd in the AL in runs/game. The relievers have been pretty good. The defense has been fine, even with Shaw at 3rd, Holt in LF, and Hanley moving to 1B. The starters have stunk, and it has all been there fault, not anybody else's. They are the one glaring weakness on the team.

We are a very analytical and questioning forum, so it's natural to try to look for deeper issues and possible optimization, but we're really missing the Forrest for the trees on this one. The starting pitching needs to be considerably better, and either the pitchers we have need to improve (and we know they all are more capable than they have been up to now, and the sample of suck is pretty small), or they need to try new starters like owens, Johnson, or Elias. Swapping Vazquez for Swihart would be a marginal improvement. Subbing a pitcher that doesn't suck for the performances we've had so far is a huge improvement, and were we should be focusing.

 

[simplicio]

Has anyone been testing Vazquez's arm in AAA? Haven't heard any reports about how his throws look, and that's such an important part of his game (I think especially for Clay).

If that's working right, I say bring him up.

 

[alwyn96]

Has anyone been testing Vazquez's arm in AAA? Haven't heard any reports about how his throws look, and that's such an important part of his game (I think especially for Clay).

If that's working right, I say bring him up.

From Speier:

His throws have been inconsistent in terms of velocity and accuracy – the “can you believe this” comparisons of stopwatches among scouts after seeing Vazquez throwing from home-to-second haven’t been necessary so far – but he’s making a compelling case that he’s close, if not ready, to return to the big leagues.

 

[whatittakes]

What are the odds that he'll recover strength and accuracy in his arm as he gets back into the flow of things?

 

[Jordu]

What are the odds that he'll recover strength and accuracy in his arm as he gets back into the flow of things?

Very good. Takes time, though, so they should leave him in AAA for a while.

 

[The Price Is Wrong]

we're really missing the Forrest for the trees on this one.

They do say young catchers are like a box of chocolates...

 

[PaulinMyrBch]

You're exaggerating his inexperience at the C spot. As Speier notes, he's been catching his whole pro career, now in its fifth year, and before that he caught at least occasionally in high school. He's not just "an athletic kid", nor a late-converted defensive lottery ticket like Lavarnway; he's someone who was frequently described by scouts in the upper minors as a future plus catcher, based not just on raw athletic ability but on direct observation of his rapidly developing skills behind the plate.

Of course there's no certainty that he can be an above-average defensive catcher in the major leagues, but that's true of virtually any 24-year-old with less than a year of MLB catching experience; it isn't especially true of Swihart.

I'm not down on Blake if were talking about him as developmental catcher in a vacuum. I'm just high on the defensive stud catcher that appears close to being able to catch 4 days a week. You do realize Vaz isn't just good, he's one of the top 2-3 defensive catchers on the planet. Period. Don't accuse me of exaggerating the inexperience of a guy who has caught 32 games in AAA and admits himself that he's still learning how to handle a staff and read hitters during at bats. Again, its not his fault he was forced up before he was ready. My point is when Vaz is ready, he's the catcher.

Please dig up those comments from scouts that say he is going to be a future plus defensive catcher. Not has the tools to be a future plus catcher, or could possibly be, but I'm waiting on the scout that would write on a report "Blake Swihart will be a future plus defensive catcher" as definitively as you wrote it above.

 

[whatittakes]

I reiterate -- I have never heard a comment by any member of the Red Sox organization that said in so many words "Blake Swihart is our starting catcher." The commitment so far still seems to be to Vazquez, with Swihart up mostly for the experience due to CV's injury. Swihart has had a long chance to make his case, and the case he's made is of a player with a vast amount of potential as a catcher, but one that's still badly in need of practice at his position.

No one is saying that Blake is bad. I see a lot of people saying that he's still green and needs some seasoning and I agree with that. I also believe that if Swihart is sent down, it will be with a good idea of what to do to improve his game and what exactly skills he needs to work on. Fielding popups and learning how to call the game seem to be areas I would expect to be in heavy focus.

I also would not be quick to gut our catching depth by throwing Ryan Hanigan overboard, not by any means. It's easy to rationalize the idea of having both of our rising young catchers on the team, but that won't help Swihart get the reps he needs to improve as much as possible, and it robs us of a very good veteran backup catcher. I think Hanigan plays out his contract with the team.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

Please dig up those comments from scouts that say he is going to be a future plus defensive catcher. Not has the tools to be a future plus catcher, or could possibly be, but I'm waiting on the scout that would write on a report "Blake Swihart will be a future plus defensive catcher" as definitively as you wrote it above.

I've already posted them once in this thread. Darnell's Son posted some more.

No one is disputing that Vazquez is an outstanding defensive catcher, possibly elite already (assuming 100% recovery from TJ), and certainly with a clear path to becoming elite with a bit more experience if he isn't there already. He could very well turn out to be a generational defensive talent a la Molina. The question is, which Molina? If CV's offense is Yadier-level (99 wRC+), then Swihart may have to hit his ceiling to be the better player. If it's Jose-level (64 wRC+), then Swihart is the better player unless he seriously busts. If it's Bengie-level (85 wRC+)--which seems to me the most plausible outcome--that's where it gets interesting.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

I reiterate -- I have never heard a comment by any member of the Red Sox organization that said in so many words "Blake Swihart is our starting catcher." The commitment so far still seems to be to Vazquez, with Swihart up mostly for the experience due to CV's injury.

Can you provide a shred of evidence for this statement?

 

[GaryPeters71]

Joe Zarbano
‏@JoeZWEEI
Source: Catcher Christian Vazquez did not make the Paw Sox trip to Lehigh Valley and is headed for Boston. #RedSox

 

[PaulinMyrBch]

I've already posted them once in this thread. Darnell's Son posted some more.

No one is disputing that Vazquez is an outstanding defensive catcher, possibly elite already (assuming 100% recovery from TJ), and certainly with a clear path to becoming elite with a bit more experience if he isn't there already. He could very well turn out to be a generational defensive talent a la Molina. The question is, which Molina? If CV's offense is Yadier-level (99 wRC+), then Swihart may have to hit his ceiling to be the better player. If it's Jose-level (64 wRC+), then Swihart is the better player unless he seriously busts. If it's Bengie-level (85 wRC+)--which seems to me the most plausible outcome--that's where it gets interesting.

I've read those and I'm familiar with his tool assessments and projections. A few plus tools and "could" become a plus defender is where he's at....in development. Because we haven't seen it at the MLB level and Blake admitted after Tuesday's game he's got work to do. I think there are a bunch of people that don't understand the process it takes to become an elite catcher. How games matter to develop all the skills. You can work on framing and get really good at that with drills, but pop ups, blocking, calling games, throws to bases all need work at game speed. I've been consistent in this thread in that Blake has the tools, but there is no guarantee he gets there. Vaz's D is the only known variable in this whole catcher equation.

 

[RIrooter09]

3 fucking catchers? Can he pitch?

 

[Jeff Van GULLY]

Joe Zarbano
‏@JoeZWEEI
Source: Catcher Christian Vazquez did not make the Paw Sox trip to Lehigh Valley and is headed for Boston. #RedSox

Wouldn't be surprised to see Hanigan traded to Texas in the coming days.

 

[PrometheusWakefield]

How much better would this team be right now if we had Cole Hamels (in addition to Price) instead of Blake Swihart?

Vaz's D is the only known variable in this whole catcher equation.

And it's been said before, by me, but lets remember that Steamers triple slash projections for the two are:

Swihart .253/.318/.389 88 RC+
Vazquez ..259/.322/.374 87 RC+

 

[Buzzkill Pauley]

3 fucking catchers? Can he pitch?

This is unexpected.

But, Farrell.

 

[BestGameEvah]

Thrilled to hear Vaz is on the way. Time will tell if it's an appropriate move.
I like the idea of keeping the veteran catcher, Hanigan, to compliment Vazquez.
Sounds like the pitchers value the relationship they have with both of them.
Maybe Swihart could use to time in AAA, to work on the issues that these scouts identify:

Here are the views of three scouts who have followed Swihart throughout his pro career.


Scout 1: “In a perfect world he would get another 50-plus games [in Pawtucket]. He will hold his own with the bat — [he’s] not overmatched. His throwing and catching was not as clean and crisp [in Pawtucket as in the past]. . . . Seems more mechanical [than in the past, focused on] pitch framing [but] not as athletic. Looks like he has a checklist going on. The major league staff will need to be patient [with a] diverse five starters to catch.”

Scout 2: “Hitting [is] no problem. He can hit. Catching is still a work in progress — his hands are [a] tick hard and blocking ability is suspect — no problem with effort, he is just not very soft. Game-calling and feel for the position is below [average] — but, fortunately, major league starters are veterans and will call their own game anyway. He can throw with a 70 arm [on the 20-80 scouting scale] but accuracy is sporadic. He is an offensive catcher, just never seems comfortable [with] catching and all that it entails: Leadership, softness, game-calling ability – but again, a veteran staff will help there.”

Scout 3: “He will have some defensive lapses just from a lack of total development time but his athleticism, arm, and makeup will help him survive . . . Won’t be shocked if he contributes offensively and may be the only catcher in the AL who can create a run with an astute approach, [strike zone], [and] legs. [The major leagues] may bring out more than we might think but it’s going to be a good learning process with the glove.”

Speier May 2015

 

[Saints Rest]

Is it only football that uses the concept: "You don't lose your job due to injury?" Vaz was the starter a year ago, I see no reason why he shouldn't be again.

Early returns seem to suggest that this team will have no problem scoring runs, even with Swihart only batting as well as most would hope for from Vaz (.669 OPS). So I would much rather bring in the awesome defensive catcher since that upgrade will almost certainly be notably greater than any falloff offensively.

 

[johnnywayback]

This seems dumb. Assuming they're okay with the usage of the bullpen pieces (I'm a little worried), then what we really need is a healthy and effective Pablo Sandoval. Not just because it would be less aggravating than the hurt and bad Pablo Sandoval we have now, but because we actually need that profile on the bench of a fifth OF (or a 3B who can allow Holt to play more OF), ideally one who can PH for Young if Young has been PH for Shaw and is back up again facing a tough RH. You know, like what happened the other day.

Given how quickly they gave up on Castillo-as-a-bench-piece, they should have kept Murphy over him. And given how quickly it became obvious that we need a bench bat, I would have liked to see them give Murphy a call here instead of reducing reps for both of our talented C prospects.

(And, no, they shouldn't trade Hanigan, who's one of the better backups in the league and a perfect veteran caddy for whichever young guy you prefer -- and who also appears to have the confidence of the mercurial Joe Kelly.)

 

[SumnerH]

Is it only football that uses the concept: "You don't lose your job due to injury?"

No, that concept exists with incompetent managers in any sport.

 

[whatittakes]

Unless Swihart becomes that backup 3b I can't see them keeping all three catchers longterm. They may make it work for a few weeks but not for the full season. You don't have 3 catchers none of whom do anything but catch clogging up the roster. If this is going to work, Swihart's going to be doing some off-position work and part timing at catcher. And if he was going to do that I'd rather he broke into that style of play in the minors.

 

[Buzzkill Pauley]

Unless Swihart becomes that backup 3b I can't see them keeping all three catchers longterm. They may make it work for a few weeks but not for the full season. You don't have 3 catchers none of whom do anything but catch clogging up the roster. If this is going to work, Swihart's going to be doing some off-position work and part timing at catcher. And if he was going to do that I'd rather he broke into that style of play in the minors.

The Sox have already added Rutledge to the 40-man roster, and recalled him from Pawtucket.

They don't need another 3B. They need someone able to play SS who isn't the starting LF, and maybe someone able to play CF who isn't the starting LF or RF. They need, you know, an actual utility infielder. Someone like Marco Hernandez, who wasn't called up instead of Rutledge.

Or maybe, Farrell needs another catcher, before he can work his expected magic with the starting pitching.

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

Sounds like they are going with three catchers, which doesn't seem to make any sense at this stage of the season and given the fact that CV's arm strength may be "close to returning" but isn't there yet, but what do I know?

Yeah, I don't think Swihart is calling for a lot of crushable pitches in the middle of the zone and balls that miss his glove. I'm willing to believe that catcher defense can make a pitcher feel more comfortable and steal a strike call here and there, but I don't think even having Yadier Molina back there would shave more than a fraction of a run off the Red Sox 5.90 ERA at this point.

Interesting that Red Sox's starters have an ERA of 6.86 (was above 7 before last night) with a 5.16 FIP and a 3.99 xFIP and 3.97 SIERA. CV might shave more than a fraction off the ERA number but so could Swihart if allowed to continue.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

Is it only football that uses the concept: "You don't lose your job due to injury?" Vaz was the starter a year ago, I see no reason why he shouldn't be again.

I think "your job" needs to be a good deal more nailed down than CV's was before that concept would apply. Vazquez had fewer starts in 2014 than Swihart did last year.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

Interesting that Red Sox's starters have an ERA of 6.86 (was above 7 before last night) with a 5.16 FIP and a 3.99 xFIP and 3.97 SIERA. CV might shave more than a fraction off the ERA number but so could Swihart if allowed to continue.

This probably has a lot to do with the fact that they've played 3/4 of their early schedule against two teams that were expected to be offensive powerhouses, three of those games in a notorious HR launching pad. If we had an above-average FIP or ERA at this point, that would be cause for giddiness.

 

[Hank Scorpio]

From what I've seen of Swihart this season, he's looked sloppy defensively in many cases. Seems like he had trouble handling Price in the home opener, he's had trouble locating balls that have gotten away from him, and it seems like a lot of balls hit the pocket of his mitt only to bounce out, which could be a symptom of him trying and failing to frame pitches.

I like Swihart and think he'll be a valuable MLB player, but the only reason I balk at trading him away is because I'm still leery on CV's recovery from TJS, and not because of the off-base Buster Posey comparisons.

 

[EllisTheRimMan]

3 fucking catchers? Can he pitch?

Thanks for the belly laugh. I heart this post.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

They don't need another 3B. They need someone able to play SS who isn't the starting LF

Why? To sit there for 6 months and watch Bogaerts play 9 innings every night? He's never being pinch hit for, not being replaced for defense, there are no more double headers, maybe an occasional day game off every now and then where you can call up Marrero if you don't want to play Holt there for a day.

Our 25th man has no role except for emergency situations so a 3rd catcher while not important is about as important as a backup SS or Rusney. The only argument I'd make is an extra bullpen arm to eat innings but if overuse in the backend becomes an issue we can always address it with another minor move

 

[PaulinMyrBch]

It's not as if the Sox are going to carry 3 catchers for 6 months. Things have a way of working themselves out.

V gets the Blue Jays with Porcello Friday, so we'll be able to have an apples to apples short sample size catcher ERA discussion next week. Looking forward to that.

 

[koufax37]

Hannigan to Texas? Seems like a good dude, but I'm getting really frustrated by his role in the (Dis)Evolution of Joe Kelly, and his bat and defense would both seem to be behind Vazquez, while not providing a Lester/Ross crucial role.

 

[Buzzkill Pauley]

Why? To sit there for 6 months and watch Bogaerts play 9 innings every night? He's never being pinch hit for, not being replaced for defense, there are no more double headers, maybe an occasional day game off every now and then where you can call up Marrero if you don't want to play Holt there for a day.

Our 25th man has no role except for emergency situations so a 3rd catcher while not important is about as important as a backup SS or Rusney. The only argument I'd make is an extra bullpen arm to eat innings but if overuse in the backend becomes an issue we can always address it with another minor move

This same argument can be made about literally every starter on the Red Sox, with the exception of catcher.

Betts - nope
Pedroia - nope
Bogaerts - as you said, nope
Ortiz - he can rest at NL parks
Ramirez - nope
Shaw - strong-side platoon w/Young
Holt - definitely no rest for him!
Catcher - needs rest
Bradley - nope

Bench:
Young - weak-side platoon with Shaw
Rutledge (sits on bench)
Catcher - getting rest
Catcher - getting rest

Whew! Glad we cleared that up. That's a tidy roster.

 

[Rovin Romine]

I don't know if anyone's mentioned this, but is it possible that CV can help Blake with some aspects of Blake's defensive game? You don't have to be the typical "elder statesman" figure to help teach your teammates skills.

Otherwise, CV coming up almost smells like a panic move. Clearly the Sox think he can provide something that the other two can't, even at the risk of CV having no offense.

 

[PaulinMyrBch]

I don't think its a panic move. He had spring training with the pitchers, including the new ones. Pitchers know, coaches know. You're not going to see a quote from anyone in the paper saying I want to pitch to Vazquez instead of Swihard, but I'd be shocked if those conversations weren't being had by the pitchers and coaches behind the scenes.

 

[keninten]

The only rational for this move seems to be he can pinch hit for CV with 2 catchers on the bench.

 

[Rovin Romine]

I don't think its a panic move. He had spring training with the pitchers, including the new ones. Pitchers know, coaches know. You're not going to see a quote from anyone in the paper saying I want to pitch to Vazquez instead of Swihard, but I'd be shocked if those conversations weren't being had by the pitchers and coaches behind the scenes.

I don't doubt that at all. It just feels like it's in reaction to the poor SP we've seen lately. Which is fine, I suppose, as long as it does not impact CV's recovery, or there's no unreasonable expectation on him to turn the staff around.

 

[johnnywayback]

Hannigan to Texas? Seems like a good dude, but I'm getting really frustrated by his role in the (Dis)Evolution of Joe Kelly, and his bat and defense would both seem to be behind Vazquez, while not providing a Lester/Ross crucial role.

What role would that be? I would say that his role is "the guy whom Kelly, a talented but inconsistent pitcher clearly trying to figure things out who had some success on that front last year and is trying to build on it, is most comfortable working with."

 

[Rovin Romine]

I don't think its a panic move. He had spring training with the pitchers, including the new ones. Pitchers know, coaches know. You're not going to see a quote from anyone in the paper saying I want to pitch to Vazquez instead of Swihard, but I'd be shocked if those conversations weren't being had by the pitchers and coaches behind the scenes.

Maybe I missed it in the excellent macro analysis in this thread (and they are small sample sizes, and there may not be a correlation) but Clay and Wright both have some history of pitching to both Swihart and Vazquez - the results starkly favor CV. For the bullpen, Barnes and Koji (injury stretch?) are slightly worse with CV, Taz is slightly better with CV.

FWIW, I'd use a spot on the 25 man for Clay's caddy alone - if it brought out Good Clay. Overall in 2014, Clay was more effective pitching to CV (70 something innings, with his ERA 2 points less than when caught by anyone else.)

 

[Toe Nash]

Thrilled to hear Vaz is on the way. Time will tell if it's an appropriate move.

Here are the views of three scouts who have followed Swihart throughout his pro career.

Speier May 2015

I'm sort of confused why these scouts are saying the opposite of other scouts when Swihart was coming up.

Here's soxprospects on Swihart:
"Arm: Plus-to-better arm strength. Accurate thrower. Gets out of his crouch easily. Consistently throws out runners at a high percentage.

Field: Consistent sub 2.0 pop times, typically between 1.8-1.9. Athletic behind the plate with quick feet and lateral movements. Frames well, and athleticism provides mobility for excellent blocking skills on balls in the dirt. Future plus defense with plus athleticism. "

Baseball America, in naming him catching prospect of the year 2014: "While his defense alone could make him a big league regular, Swihart offers offensive promise as well. "

John Sickels, 2015 "Hitting .259/.301/.345 in 210 at-bats in the majors, not showing any power at this point, wRC+ just 75. However his defense has been quite strong and given his age there is every reason to be optimistic about his future."

Sickels, when Swihart was called up last year: "Swihart is highly-regarded defensively: he is very effective at controlling the running game, throwing out 39% of runners in his minor league career. He is a sound receiver as well: amazingly, he gave up zero passed balls in 97 games behind the plate in 2014. He hasn't maintained that impossibly perfect pace this year, coughing up four PBs for Pawtucket already, but there seems little doubt that he is ready for major league competition with the glove. Scouting reports regarding his leadership skills and field generalship abilities are also glowing."

I think scouts kind of don't know what they're talking about or Speier cherry picked.

Edit: Plus, Swihart has worked with the staff all last year and all spring training. Not to mention learning MLB hitters. Won't there be a learning curve for Vazquez?

 

[Rasputin]

Would it be rude of me to suggest that Swihart start working at one or more of first, third, and left? It's the only way carrying three catchers for any real length of time is going to work. If they only plan on it being an issue for a week or two--say until Sandoval can force his way off the DL--that's one thing. If it's longer, the slightest tweak of a hamstring makes a roster move necessary.

 

[In my lifetime]

Is there a disconnect between the front office and the manager now? The RS clearly stated the manager is going to make the decisions as to who is playing. Of course, you would assume he gives the front office a heads up on his thoughts. His thoughts then should translate into transactions before the RS position is so weak that they have no negotiating power. Yet that seems to be what is happening.

Panda comes into camp 50 pounds overweight. Decision is made that he won't be starting. Then as soon as this decision is made and before any announcement or actually change in the lineup, Panda should be moved. Granted it will take a large subsidy, but the RS have inside information and should trade on that information before a declaration is made as to who is the starter. That is, RS know he won't be starting, keep it under wraps and Front Office now has 10 days (or whatever to move him)

Castillo - decision is made he won't be starting. Again hold off on making the move by 10 days or so and move him. Now he is in the minors and has just increased his negative trade value.

Swihart - hasn't looked great behind the plate (which I agree as much as I wanted him to be the starter). CV is rehabbing. Well before he is recalled to the majors with the assumption of reclaiming the starting job, let's shop Hanigan or Swihart (preferably Hanigan).

Maybe all of this was done and Dombrowski could not find any takers. However, I think he should probably be compelled to take what he can get, since it is unlikely the value is going up considering the player or the RS negotiating position which is likely to just get weaker. Of course with Panda, it is just a matter of how much salary the RS have to eat, and that goes similarly but less painfully with Castillo. But one would figure after how things played out it is just going to be more expensive for the RS not less. Basically the RS should have cut their losses instead of holding for what looks to be a continued drop in value.

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

How much better would this team be right now if we had Cole Hamels (in addition to Price) instead of Blake Swihart?

And it's been said before, by me, but lets remember that Steamers triple slash projections for the two are:

Swihart .253/.318/.389 88 RC+
Vazquez ..259/.322/.374 87 RC+

What makes you think it is even remotely likely they would have signed Price if they had traded for Hamels?

You also keep pointing to STEAMER projections, but their formula isn't public and they build on weighted averages from previous seasons. With Swihart and Vazquez, that data is incredibly suspect because it has to also rely on a translation of minor league stats and there is no accounting for the fact that Swihart was called up way too early and had to adjust on the fly at the major league level at a very young age. His production at the plate last year being used to project his 2016 leaves us little reason to have any real confidence in that number. Similarly, Vazquez's projection is based on very little major league information and should be taken with a huge grain of salt.

In short, both projections are basically wild ass guesses and should not be used when discussing who the starter should be going forward. I'd be very surprised if anyone who actually knows anything about these two would be comfortable projecting them as similar offensive players going forward.

 

[Sprowl]

The team wouldn't be calling up Vazquez if they had any doubts about his recovery from TJ surgery, so I expect that the team will carry three catchers for 1-2 series, pinch-hitting for them often (while leaving Travis Shore in to play 3B and face LHP), and then demote Swihart to work on his defense in the Bucket.

Most scouts seem to agree that Swihart has the tools (throwing arm, pop time, athleticism) but recent observation (eg, mine, and others' too, I suspect) is that he needs to refine his technique (pitch-blocking, framing, and game management, regardless of who calls the pitches), which is costing the team in each game. He just turned 24, and has been rushed because of need. He'll be back in July, or sooner if OSHA pulls Hanigan off the job.

 

[daveuk]

I'm sort of confused why these scouts are saying the opposite of other scouts when Swihart was coming up.

Here's soxprospects on Swihart:
"Arm: Plus-to-better arm strength. Accurate thrower. Gets out of his crouch easily. Consistently throws out runners at a high percentage.

Field: Consistent sub 2.0 pop times, typically between 1.8-1.9. Athletic behind the plate with quick feet and lateral movements. Frames well, and athleticism provides mobility for excellent blocking skills on balls in the dirt. Future plus defense with plus athleticism. "

Baseball America, in naming him catching prospect of the year 2014: "While his defense alone could make him a big league regular, Swihart offers offensive promise as well. "

John Sickels, 2015 "Hitting .259/.301/.345 in 210 at-bats in the majors, not showing any power at this point, wRC+ just 75. However his defense has been quite strong and given his age there is every reason to be optimistic about his future."

Sickels, when Swihart was called up last year: "Swihart is highly-regarded defensively: he is very effective at controlling the running game, throwing out 39% of runners in his minor league career. He is a sound receiver as well: amazingly, he gave up zero passed balls in 97 games behind the plate in 2014. He hasn't maintained that impossibly perfect pace this year, coughing up four PBs for Pawtucket already, but there seems little doubt that he is ready for major league competition with the glove. Scouting reports regarding his leadership skills and field generalship abilities are also glowing."

I think scouts kind of don't know what they're talking about or Speier cherry picked.

Edit: Plus, Swihart has worked with the staff all last year and all spring training. Not to mention learning MLB hitters. Won't there be a learning curve for Vazquez?

Of course some of the pitching staff could just get over itself and stop serving up meatballs. If the ball doesn't reach the catcher it doesn't matter if it's BS, CV or RH back there. Porcello sucks period. It's nothing to do with the catching. Clay could have Molina back there and he'd still get injured. Fix the pitching.

 

[mfried]

How quickly could Swihart learn left field? He's a good athlete with legs and he can hit with doubles power. Learning to play the wall would not be so incredible. His arm is adequate. We could keep Hannigan and Brockstar could be the super sub which is his proper role. In this scenario possibly Young is the odd man out. This doesn't bother me that much. He's really bad against most (RH) pitchers.