Swihart v. Vazquez: The Value of Framing

[Buzzkill Pauley]

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.

Here's my #1 problem with keeping Swihart around for 1-2 series: he reaches 1 year MLB service time with his 16th day on Boston's roster.

That clock strikes Monday.

Service time absolutely needs to be a concern of Hazen and DDski. Not because the Sox can't afford to pay Swihart, but because losing 1 year of club control means Swihart loses 1/6 his total value to trade partners looking for cheap club control. And that much devaluation can thereafter only be recouped through adding more or better prospects to any package for a #2 starter. For example, if DDski wants to trade for Sonny Gray later this season, then 6 years of Swihart is obviously more valuable to Beane than only 5.

Carrying three catchers on a 25-man roster is stupid, and trying to convert Swihart to play another position during games that count is even more stupid. But the most stupidest is keeping three catchers or trying to convert one on-the-fly, when that also means losing a full year of club control on the player who appears to be DDski's most appealing mid-season trade chip.

For the record, I'd much rather the Sox keep Swihart than trade him. He's not the reason that Buchholz and Kelly have stunk. Maybe Vazquez would be better right now, and how much better may be worth checking into right now. But if Blake's not the team's starting catcher, he needs to be sent down right now.

 

[BestGameEvah]

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

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?

Alex doesn't strike me as the kind of journalist who would cherry pick.
Bradford has a podcast with Alex Cora today, and he addresses the catching situation at the 32:50 mark.

http://media.weei.com/a/114671462/bradfo-show-alex-cora-talks-rusney-pablo-and-vazquez.htm

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

Here's my #1 problem with keeping Swihart around for 1-2 series: he reaches 1 year MLB service time with his 16th day on Boston's roster.

So just to be clear, for those of us who are not CBA gurus, in order to avoid this catastrophe the Sox need to send him down now and leave him in the minors for the rest of 2016? Or is there something magic about sending him down and then bringing him back up later that stops the clock?

 

[Bowlerman9]

So just to be clear, for those of us who are not CBA gurus, in order to avoid this catastrophe the Sox need to send him down now and leave him in the minors for the rest of 2016? Or is there something magic about sending him down and then bringing him back up later that stops the clock?

All of 2016.

 

[Buzzkill Pauley]

So just to be clear, for those of us who are not CBA gurus, in order to avoid this catastrophe the Sox need to send him down now and leave him in the minors for the rest of 2016? Or is there something magic about sending him down and then bringing him back up later that stops the clock?

Swihart would need to be sent down no later than Sunday, and then stashed in Pawtucket until traded at the deadline or in the offseason. As long as he's kept him down in AAA all season, Swihart would then still have 6 full years before hitting free agency starting with opening day 2017.

Stashing Swihart -- who clearly has work to do refining his defensive catching skills -- for the remaining 2016 season sounds about as egregious as Theo not breaking camp with Bryant to start 2015 with the Cubs, of course. But for a rebuilding team looking to open a window 2 years away, it may still be justifiable IMO.

And since those are just the sort of teams who may be willing to sell off their #2 or better starting pitchers. So DDski and Hazen have to consider it.

 

[mfried]

I still see a scenario which sends Swihart to Pucket to learn left field. When that is at a decent level, shift Holt to straight utility infield and only Young is a spare piece. Getting a bit more out of our pitchers and our stolen base-passed ball defense, while still using Swihart's overall athleticism and offensive potential seems like a good answer.

 

[whatittakes]

When it comes to Swihart it's important to remember that he was never intended to be the big league starter at all. He was called up at least a year, probably more like 2 years too early. If things had gone to plan we would be talking about his major league debut this year. I don't think it's particularly inappropriate, now that our catching depth has been restored, to send him down and let him get the reps he missed in the minors. If he's the kind of player I think he is, he'll learn from it, work hard, polish his defensive approach, and come back stronger for it.

 

[Minneapolis Millers]

I still see a scenario which sends Swihart to Pucket to learn left field. When that is at a decent level, shift Holt to straight utility infield and only Young is a spare piece. Getting a bit more out of our pitchers and our stolen base-passed ball defense, while still using Swihart's overall athleticism and offensive potential seems like a good answer.

I hate the idea of moving Swihart off catcher. Honestly, I don't see great offensive potential in him. I see excellent offensive potential - as a catcher. At other positions, he's going to look like, well, Brock Holt.

If the Sox truly don't think he can be a solid MLB catcher, or they can't "choose" between Swihart and Vazquez, then they should do whatever's necessary to preserve Swihart's trade value and trade him. The one thing the Sox do not seem to possess that other, rebuilding clubs do, is patience. There are other teams that have the ability/willingness to give Swihart another year or two to refine his catching defense, even at the MLB level. The Sox can get good value back for Swihart as a catching prospect. As a LF prospect? Not so much.

 

[moondog80]

I hate the idea of moving Swihart off catcher. Honestly, I don't see great offensive potential in him. I see excellent offensive potential - as a catcher. At other positions, he's going to look like, well, Brock Holt.

If the Sox truly don't think he can be a solid MLB catcher, or they can't "choose" between Swihart and Vazquez, then they should do whatever's necessary to preserve Swihart's trade value and trade him. The one thing the Sox do not seem to possess that other, rebuilding clubs do, is patience. There are other teams that have the ability/willingness to give Swihart another year or two to refine his catching defense, even at the MLB level. The Sox can get good value back for Swihart as a catching prospect. As a LF prospect? Not so much.

Yeah, this. He's way more valuable to another team as a C than to us in LF.

 

[EllisTheRimMan]

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.

How many big name trades are made this time of the season or even in Spring Training?Panda is the only big risk of losing value by waiting until the trade deadline and his value now is so low, it really doesn't hurt in any tangible way to wait and see if he can turn it around. Castillo, Swihart and Hanigan will almost certainly be more valuable at the deadline even if at Triple A. Trading any of the 4 now might get you more than later, but would mean they all sucked badly this year. These are all bullets in the Sox clip both in terms of plan B's for injuries or poor performance elsewhere. I believe they will have more value at the deadline when team's are thinking playoffs and they need an injury replacement or an upgrade at 3B, C or OF. Any of these 4 guys may not be the centerpiece of a deal, but could be a sweetener even to a non-contender when combined with prospects.

 

[Buzzkill Pauley]

Yeah, this. He's way more valuable to another team as a C than to us in LF.

Seriously. Trading Hanigan alone would likely return a more immediately valuable LHH LF than starting to convert Swihart now.

And since one of Swihart's notable problems as a catcher appears to be tracking pop-ups off the bat, why would anyone expect him to excel in the outfield, anyway?

 

[Mighty Joe Young]

One of the things that bugs me about this whole thing .. Swihart has to be sent down to "work on his defense" as if he's not good enough to be playing in the Show.

But why shouldn't Vazquez be kept in AAA to work on his offense ??? When last seen at the MLB level he was a far worse offensive player than Swihart is a defensive one. He was basically at a JBJ-2014 level of performance - which is to say abysmal.

Both of these guys are imperfect players at this stage and need time to develop. But I'd far rather have a slightly below average defensive catcher who can mash - and may become a star - as opposed to a great defensive catcher who can't hit a lick - and probably never will.

 

[joe dokes]

One of the things that bugs me about this whole thing .. Swihart has to be sent down to "work on his defense" as if he's not good enough to be playing in the Show.

But why shouldn't Vazquez be kept in AAA to work on his offense ??? When last seen at the MLB level he was a far worse offensive player than Swihart is a defensive one. He was basically at a JBJ-2014 level of performance - which is to say abysmal.

Both of these guys are imperfect players at this stage and need time to develop. But I'd far rather have a slightly below average defensive catcher who can mash - and may become a star - as opposed to a great defensive catcher who can't hit a lick - and probably never will.

I suspect its because the team thinks that Vazquez's defensive skills will also help the pitching staff in ways that make up for some part of the difference in offense. At least for now.

I also think that Swihart really doesn't need to be sent down to work on his defense. I think its more "Vazquez is such a gifted defensive C that we want him up here." Corresponding moves flow from that premise.

 

[PrometheusWakefield]

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.

The point of citing the projection systems is that the presumption that Swihart is a better offensive player than Vazquez lacks objective evidence.

 

[Sprowl]

But why shouldn't Vazquez be kept in AAA to work on his offense ??? When last seen at the MLB level he was a far worse offensive player than Swihart is a defensive one. He was basically at a JBJ-2014 level of performance - which is to say abysmal.

Not even close:

JBJ 2014: OPS .543, wRC+ 46, wOBA .243, SwStr% 11.7%
CV 2014: OPS .617, wRC+ 70, wOBA .277, SwStr% 6.1%

If JBJ 2014 had hit like CV 2014, Jackie would have been playing centerfield at Fenway throughout 2015. CV has a low ceiling, because he doesn't have any power worth speaking of, but he protects the plate, doesn't chase much, can go the other way, and generally puts up a professional at-bat.

They are both at premium defensive positions, so their subpar bats as worth carrying in the lineup -- but CV 2014 was an easier load to haul, and he's playing at the single most important defensive position on the field.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

Both of these guys are imperfect players at this stage and need time to develop. But I'd far rather have a slightly below average defensive catcher who can mash - and may become a star - as opposed to a great defensive catcher who can't hit a lick - and probably never will.

The one thing that jumps out clearly about Christian Vazquez' progress through the minors is that every time he repeats a level, he gets better.

Greenville, year 1 (299 PA): .259/.324/.333, 90 wRC+
Greenville, year 2 (444 PA): .283/.358/.505, 133 wR+

He didn't need a second year in Salem, because he hit pretty well there right away: .266/.360/.396, 114 wRC+

Portland, year 1 (82 PA): .205/.280/.260, 51 wRC+
Portland, year 2 (399 PA): .289/.376/.395, 119 wRC+

Pawtucket, year 1* (270 PA): .279/.336/.385, 98 wRC+
Pawtucket, year 2: SSS, but through 20 PA he's killing it

I see no reason to assume this pattern will not repeat at the major league level. I think his ceiling is pretty low as a hitter, because he's never shown much sign of power potential. But he has good discipline and contact numbers, had respectable minor league BABIPs, and I think it would be reasonable to project OBPs in the .320-.340 range from him. He's never going to be an offense-first catcher, but he doesn't need to be, and I don't see any reason to assume he'll be a black hole, either, though of course that's a possibility at this stage.

 

[PaulinMyrBch]

Seriously. Trading Hanigan alone would likely return a more immediately valuable LHH LF than starting to convert Swihart now.

And since one of Swihart's notable problems as a catcher appears to be tracking pop-ups off the bat, why would anyone expect him to excel in the outfield, anyway?

I'm sure there are multiple reasons, athleticism for instance. But he didn't miss that pop because he can't catch, as you noted it was a tracking issue, he missed it because he was lost it off the bat and once he located it, he had to scramble to get over to catch it in the wind.

A bunch of catchers, Buster Posey for instance, catch with their eyes closed at impact. Meaning on swings, or the instant before the ball hits their mitt, they have their eyes shut. They usually don't know they are doing it and its involuntary, but it makes it more difficult to locate a pop up if you don't track it off the bat. I'm guessing Blake has that issue. If you watch enough young catchers, HS games for instance, you can usually see who is catching eyes open or shut at impact based on how well they pick up the ball. Outfielders don't share the same problem.

 

[BestGameEvah]

Boston Red SoxVerified account‏@RedSox
The #RedSox announced the following roster moves today:

 

[SouthernBoSox]

This screams some serious impatience.

Blake was one of the bright spots in the second half last year.

If they move him off the position then I'll be forced to start questioning some of these moves

 

[rodderick]

Don't know if I like this move. Feels a little like they're pinning some of the pitching woes on Swihart, and that rubs me the wrong way 8 games in.

I can understand why they'd be reluctant to deal Hanigan and keep both Swihart and Vazquez up: this way they have depth and both young guys getting regular ABs, but I don't see the harm in keeping Christian in Pawtucket a little longer until he gets over the rust completely. Seems hasty.

 

[simplicio]

Given what Buzzkill Pauley noted about service time above, I think this makes perfect sense. You get the better defensive guy up to handle the struggling staff, and put Swihart back in the oven to finish baking while leaving the option for retaining an extra year of control. If it turns out to be a mistake you can always swap them back again.

Let's not forget that Swihart's nice second half last year was largely fueled by an astronomical BABiP- if that drops 40 points or so, as has largely been projected, we're looking at something a lot less exciting if his defense is merely okay.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

This screams some serious impatience.

Blake was one of the bright spots in the second half last year.

If they move him off the position then I'll be forced to start questioning some of these moves

Why is there an assumption that Swihart being sent to Pawtucket involves a position change? It's not as though Pawtucket is overstocked with catchers and Swihart will have to play another position to get at bats. He's going to slide right into the spot Vazquez is vacating and catch two out of every three days with some DH days scattered in. No reason and no sense in playing him at another position right now.

 

[PrometheusWakefield]

This screams some serious impatience.

Blake was one of the bright spots in the second half last year.

If they move him off the position then I'll be forced to start questioning some of these moves

I wouldn't assume that this was ever Blake's job to lose. Another view here is that Vazquez was always the starting catcher and Blake was just filling in until CV was ready.

Also, the pitching staff sucked last year, throughout the season. If catching is really a big part of overall pitching performance, then maybe Blake wasn't actually as bright a spot as you think.

 

[EllisTheRimMan]

This screams some serious impatience.

Blake was one of the bright spots in the second half last year.

If they move him off the position then I'll be forced to start questioning some of these moves

The only place it "screams" anything is in this thread. My view is the Sox leadership calmly said, "Blake only got called up last year because. After CV and RH went down our MLB catchers were Sandy Leon and Mike Napoli". "He was rushed a bit and now that RH and CV are healthy, let's get Blake back on his original development plan". If anything I'm giddy that the Sox think Vazquez is recovered enough from TJ to be called back up. Nothing to see hear, move along please.

 

[joe dokes]

The only place it "screams" anything is in this thread. My view is the Sox leadership calmly said, "Blake only got called up last year because. After CV and RH went down our MLB catchers were Sandy Leon and Mike Napoli". "He was rushed a bit and now that RH and CV are healthy, let's get Blake back on his original development plan". If anything I'm giddy that the Sox think Vazquez is recovered enough from TJ to be called back up. Nothing to see hear, move along please.

Not just this thread. There's another one, too.

 

[Bowlerman9]

Given what Buzzkill Pauley noted about service time above, I think this makes perfect sense. You get the better defensive guy up to handle the struggling staff, and put Swihart back in the oven to finish baking while leaving the option for retaining an extra year of control. If it turns out to be a mistake you can always swap them back again.

Let's not forget that Swihart's nice second half last year was largely fueled by an astronomical BABiP- if that drops 40 points or so, as has largely been projected, we're looking at something a lot less exciting if his defense is merely okay.

If your goal is to save a year of service time, you better be committed to trading him in July. He isn't going to help anyone if he gets zero at-bats in the month of September (thus making the Sox carry a 4th catcher on the 40 man roster) and other teams are going to question why he didnt get called up when rosters expand.

 

[EllisTheRimMan]

Not just this thread. There's another one, too.

Yeah, saw that after I posted.

 

[sdcraigo]

If your goal is to save a year of service time, you better be committed to trading him in July. He isn't going to help anyone if he gets zero at-bats in the month of September (thus making the Sox carry a 4th catcher on the 40 man roster) and other teams are going to question why he didnt get called up when rosters expand.

It looks like the Rays could use a catcher:

Five steals part of bad game for Rays catcher Conger
http://www.prosportsdaily.com/Headlines/ExternalArticle?articleId=405303

"thus far Conger is 0-for-7 with the Rays, and 0-for-his-last-44."

 

[Snodgrass'Muff]

The point of citing the projection systems is that the presumption that Swihart is a better offensive player than Vazquez lacks objective evidence.

Then you are citing the wrong thing. Projections of any kind are on the opposite end of the spectrum from objective evidence. Plus, requiring objective evidence, which I take to mean production at the major league level, to make arguments about which is the better bat or which is going to be the better bat going forward is asinine. If that's the benchmark before it's okay to make claims, then no player who isn't at least arb eligible is up for discussion.

So, looking at all of the evidence we do have, subjective as it may be, it's pretty easy to make the case for Swihart being the better hitter now and and the better bet going forward at the plate.

 

[richgedman'sghost]

If your goal is to save a year of service time, you better be committed to trading him in July. He isn't going to help anyone if he gets zero at-bats in the month of September (thus making the Sox carry a 4th catcher on the 40 man roster) and other teams are going to question why he didnt get called up when rosters expand.[/QUOTE
Is there any exception for service time in September? I thought if a player is added to the roster in September, it does not count towards his service time? Sorry if I'm totally confused. I should know better than to doubt Bowlerman.

 

[SumnerH]

Is there any exception for service time in September? I thought if a player is added to the roster in September, it does not count towards his service time? Sorry if I'm totally confused. I should know better than to doubt Bowlerman

No. September time counts toward service time.

It doesn't count toward option years, but that's a separate thing.

 

[Plympton91]

It looks like the Rays could use a catcher:

Five steals part of bad game for Rays catcher Conger
http://www.prosportsdaily.com/Headlines/ExternalArticle?articleId=405303

"thus far Conger is 0-for-7 with the Rays, and 0-for-his-last-44."

Build a package for Archer around be Swihart and Devers? You'd need at least 2 more top 10 prospects, probably, but as long as they keep Moncada and Espinoza I'd do it.

 

[geoduck no quahog]

What's lost in focusing on the pitch framing thing is some of the other critical things a guy like Vazquez does. First off (as Swihart unfortunately acknowledged) is the ability to read the hitters, know what's working against them that day, and use that to develop a mix of pitches during the game. Then there's the field general quotes from some pitchers, what it means for them to think the guy behind the plate knows what he's doing, letting him run the game (imagine the difference between thinking about the next pitch versus just doing what you're told and throwing the ball, particularly for certain #2-4 starters). Lastly there's having in-your-face Saturn Balls, which I see from Vazquez after every strikeout and good play.

It's really early, but I think that kind of stuff just never goes away.

 

[Sampo Gida]

What's lost in focusing on the pitch framing thing is some of the other critical things a guy like Vazquez does. First off (as Swihart unfortunately acknowledged) is the ability to read the hitters, know what's working against them that day, and use that to develop a mix of pitches during the game. Then there's the field general quotes from some pitchers, what it means for them to think the guy behind the plate knows what he's doing, letting him run the game (imagine the difference between thinking about the next pitch versus just doing what you're told and throwing the ball, particularly for certain #2-4 starters). Lastly there's having in-your-face Saturn Balls, which I see from Vazquez after every strikeout and good play.

It's really early, but I think that kind of stuff just never goes away.

We used to call them intangibles when Tek was around. I'm a believer. Some guys can just figure out/sense what the hitter is looking for and call something different. Pitchers soon believe in them and their confidence grows. Positive feedback. Whether Vazquez has it I hesitate to say based on such a limited sample and watching from afar, but its a good start, and he has looked good.

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

We used to call them intangibles when Tek was around. I'm a believer. Some guys can just figure out/sense what the hitter is looking for and call something different. Pitchers soon believe in them and their confidence grows. Positive feedback. Whether Vazquez has it I hesitate to say based on such a limited sample and watching from afar, but its a good start, and he has looked good.

Some people say that this is called "reading a hitter's swing" and it's an important skill to have to call a game.

 

[RedOctober3829]

For all of you that think Vazquez is some kind of pitch framing wizard and Swihart isn't anywhere near his level....

Red Sox Stats ‏@redsoxstats 13m13 minutes ago
Vazquez got 15 pitches out of the strike zone called a strike yesterday. Swihart got 16 in Price's first start.

 

[Kenny F'ing Powers]

Same ump?

 

[iayork]

For all of you that think Vazquez is some kind of pitch framing wizard and Swihart isn't anywhere near his level....

That's just silly. He's obviously not using any realistic zone to make that judgement, because no catcher can get remotely close to that number of strikes out of a real strike zone. He's probably using the "official" zone as a guide, which bears little resemblance to the actual zone as it's called. That means his numbers are meaningless.

 

[PaulinMyrBch]

For all of you that think Vazquez is some kind of pitch framing wizard and Swihart isn't anywhere near his level....

I don't know much about this website, but its got catcher framing stats for 2016 and Vazquez is already the leader if you sort the chart by "per game".

I do know when I clicked the other link, it didn't show up because I blocked them a while ago. Lol. If I remember correctly, I think it was because they were using BABIP in extremely SSS to make the case for a pitcher after 1-2 starts last year.

Statcorner Catcher Report

 

[simplicio]

Jesus. Not just leading, but more than doubling the rate of everyone else in the game except Kevin Plawecki. I'm trying to temper my enthusiasm reminding myself it's only two games and both umps seemed to be moonlighting as Santa, but damn do I ever have a crush on this guy.

 

[RedOctober3829]

Jesus. Not just leading, but more than doubling the rate of everyone else in the game except Kevin Plawecki. I'm trying to temper my enthusiasm reminding myself it's only two games and both umps seemed to be moonlighting as Santa, but damn do I ever have a crush on this guy.

I'm not singling you out so don't take this the wrong way.

Porcello and Price don't get any of the praise here??? It's all about Vazquez??? Believe me, I think Christian is a very good defensive catcher and deserving of the praise he gets. But both in the media and around here he is made out to be some sort of savior. A catcher can not make a pitcher have better command. Yes, it helps to steal some strikes but it's as much about the pitcher executing his plan as it is pitch framing and believing in the catcher he is throwing to. You can believe all you want in a catcher's ability to read hitters and love his feel for the game but he can't turn a crappy pitcher into a good one.

 

[PaulinMyrBch]

I agree that Price and Porcello get praise here, but there is some to be shared with Vazquez IMO. Do you agree that he can help the pitcher in ways that don't lead to framing? Calling the game, research, pace of calling pitches (rhythm), approach to the hitters the 2nd and 3rd time through the lineup. Because in addition the tangible positives that we can see, I believe Vazquez brings these things to the table as well. Pitchers praise him, so I think the confidence they have in them shows up in their ERA. This stat is probably a small sample, and the non-Vazquez category includes AJ and Leon, but....

 

[Sprowl]

It certainly helps a receiving savant like Vazquez when pitchers throw pitches that are close enough to be stolen. By that standard, one would expect Vazquez to have a more positive impact on pitchers who can hit the edges (like Price, Porcello and Uehara), rather than those whose pitches often miss by feet (Kelly and any knuckleballer, including Wright).

Good Buchholz lives on the edges; Bad Buchholz grooves his fastball right down the middle. Enquiring minds want to know: is Vazquez is also a squirrel whisperer?

 

[RedOctober3829]

I agree that Price and Porcello get praise here, but there is some to be shared with Vazquez IMO. Do you agree that he can help the pitcher in ways that don't lead to framing? Calling the game, research, pace of calling pitches (rhythm), approach to the hitters the 2nd and 3rd time through the lineup. Because in addition the tangible positives that we can see, I believe Vazquez brings these things to the table as well. Pitchers praise him, so I think the confidence they have in them shows up in their ERA. This stat is probably a small sample, and the non-Vazquez category includes AJ and Leon, but....

Everybody has the same access to information on the hitters. Yes I do agree that some catchers have better feel for calling a game than others. If Vazquez proves over time that he truly has a half-run difference on the pitching staff then he is one of the special defensive catchers in the game. But, he's caught 58 games in his career so let's let him play a full season before we anoint him The Catching Whisperer. My whole point is that the catcher can do and have all these things but it still falls on the pitcher to execute pitches. He can't turn a below-average pitcher into an above average one.

 

[iayork]

I don't know much about this website, but its got catcher framing stats for 2016 and Vazquez is already the leader if you sort the chart by "per game".
Statcorner Catcher Report

StatCorner is very good, by which I mean that his framing stats generally agree with mine.

That said, it's pointless to look at framing numbers at this point. Earlier this year I looked at sample size vs framing numbers. The smallest sample size I tried was about 7 games (500 chances) and the error bars on that were huge.

You can probably more or less distinguish the best framer in the league from the worst at that sample size, but that's about it. Wait for another 30 games or so.

 

[Todd Benzinger]

It's all about Vazquez??? ... You can believe all you want in a catcher's ability to read hitters and love his feel for the game but he can't turn a crappy pitcher into a good one.

Well, sure, Price's one somewhat rough start is probably on him, not Swihart, but Porcello?? obviously Porky has talent but seems to underperform it regularly. Last year, during his struggles, there were stories about him falling in love with the wrong pitch etc--he may well be a guy who is bad when he thinks too much, and hence does benefit from a strong defensive catcher. Possibly just trusting his catcher helps him

Admittedly, he was terrible before Vaz was hurt last year, and seems to have pitched some of his best and worst games with Swihart last year, so who knows..

 

[RetractableRoof]

I'm not singling you out so don't take this the wrong way.

Porcello and Price don't get any of the praise here??? It's all about Vazquez??? Believe me, I think Christian is a very good defensive catcher and deserving of the praise he gets. But both in the media and around here he is made out to be some sort of savior. A catcher can not make a pitcher have better command. Yes, it helps to steal some strikes but it's as much about the pitcher executing his plan as it is pitch framing and believing in the catcher he is throwing to. You can believe all you want in a catcher's ability to read hitters and love his feel for the game but he can't turn a crappy pitcher into a good one.

I'm not in the 'savior' boat, but I do believe in miracles... wait, that's not what I mean either! lol

Every single pitcher the Sox have in their rotation has 'stuff', and for many moons we as fans have been looking for consistency or getting the most out of their stuff. To me confidence is what gets the most out of any pitcher - it's why Pedro could get by throwing in the 80's against Cleveland that game. And yes, confidence contributes to a pitchers ability to command. Even if CV is a placebo, if it works for the pitchers - doesn't he deserve some credit? When Okajima handed out the magic necklaces, all the pitchers wore them - unity, placebo, magic - who cares. IMO Clay is a headcase, *IF* CV takes his mind off of everything except throwing the ball does CV deserve some credit? We heard stories of Pena rifling a ball back to a pitcher with serious heat - in a manner of chastising the pitcher. That is handling a pitcher. It is real, and I don't know how one measures any of it in a realistic manner.

Frankly if he helps/contributes to the starters getting 1 or 2 additional outs a game by keeping their pitch count down, stealing a 3rd strike or pressuring the batter by flipping an occasional 3-1 count to 2-2 he might save Farrell from burning out Noe Ramirez or Tazawa in half a season. [ETA: That's not counting him personally accounting for outs by erasing runners already on basepaths, or keeping them a bit more tentative on the bases.] That's a very real consideration that I for one have no way to quantify.

No catcher deserves pitching credit, but some pitching coaches and some catchers can certainly deserve credit for handling, encouraging, or coaxing the most out of their pitchers talent. I wouldn't say CV is magic, but I think he is one of 'those' catchers. Given time, he might show that he is even a generational catcher defensively. I enjoy watching him - and I've never been one to study or pay real close attention to a catcher until he arrived.

 

[NoXInNixon]

I remember this same debate back when the Braves had both Brian McCann and Salty. Since they were both such good players, they should find a way to keep both on their roster. But the reality then, and the reality now, is that good young starting catching is such a valuable resource that not to trade one of them would be a huge squander.

The Braves got Teixeira for Salty and some prospects. The Red Sox have lots of prospects. I have no doubt the Red Sox are receiving lots of calls about both Swihart and Vazquez, and as soon as someone comes up with an offer that gets the Red Sox a solid #2/#3 starter, they'll pull the trigger. Heck, there might even be a possible deal with one of the catchers plus one of the prime prospects for a second ace.

 

[Red(s)HawksFan]

Everybody has the same access to information on the hitters. Yes I do agree that some catchers have better feel for calling a game than others. If Vazquez proves over time that he truly has a half-run difference on the pitching staff then he is one of the special defensive catchers in the game. But, he's caught 58 games in his career so let's let him play a full season before we anoint him The Catching Whisperer. My whole point is that the catcher can do and have all these things but it still falls on the pitcher to execute pitches. He can't turn a below-average pitcher into an above average one.

Was just having a conversation this morning about this very thing. Some of the reaction to Vazquez's return would lead one to think that with him the pitching will be a gigantic strength while without him they're hopeless. As good as Vazquez is, it's not like he's turning a rotation of bums into a group of Cy Young candidates. There is talent there and there's no reason it can't or won't shine through with Hanigan or Swihart behind the plate as well.

All of these guys have had success throwing to other catchers not named Vazquez. They shouldn't be dependent on his presence to have a good game. I'd rather Vazquez be a difference maker in a 6 IP, 3 ER vs 7 IP, 2 ER kind of way than a 4 IP, 6 ER vs 7 IP, 2 ER situation.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

Same ump?

No, and the ump in Swihart's case was Hirschbeck, who calls a notoriously large zone.

I don't think it's realistic to expect that Swihart will ever match Vazquez' framing skills, but that doesn't mean his framing is a serious weakness, either. Swihart rated out last year as a bit below average according to Stat Corner; among 62 guys with a sample size of 2000 or more, he ranked 40th, with a per-game rate of -0.17 calls. In other words, about every six games, Swihart cost his pitchers one strike. Not exactly a crippling problem. Also, Swihart in 2015 was a 23-year-old rookie; it's reasonable to anticipate some improvement. So in the long run, he's probably average at worst.