Vazquez plays defense, or The New Molina
- Thread starter Sprowl
- Start date
It's not like Swihart is weak defensively. He also has excellent rates in the minors (47% this year) and with some excellent reviews on his receiving too.
I think it's fair to say that Vazquez is better defensively, but that Swihart is no slouch and improving constantly.
Pitch framing etc in the minors is a bit... dubious to assess of course and that's where Vazquez is shining. Despite positive reviews it's hard to think Swihart can be this good.
I think it's fair to say that Vazquez is better defensively, but that Swihart is no slouch and improving constantly.
Pitch framing etc in the minors is a bit... dubious to assess of course and that's where Vazquez is shining. Despite positive reviews it's hard to think Swihart can be this good.
The X Man Cometh said:
He was already doing that in Greenville. He also didn't put up with any shit as in one game Almanzar was moping his way off the field from 3rd, so Vaz went out and ripped him before he even made it to the first base line.
Swihart is likely to go into 2015 as the highest ranked catching prospect in all of baseball, given that his competition this year was Hedges (laying an egg at AA) and Gary Sanchez (behind Swihart to start the year on most lists, posting a solid AA season but nearly as good as Swihart's).HomeRunBaker said:
That said, I don't think the Sox are obligated to trade either one. Swihart was projected as a potential .800+ OPS guy if his power ever developed and this year it has developed in a big way (23 doubles, 3 triples, and 12 homers in 380 PAs). No catcher should be doing a full 162 behind the dish if it can be helped and someone who hits like Swihart definitely shouldn't as his offensive contributions will be diminished by the extra wear and tear, both in-season and by likely shortening his career.
This really does seem like the perfect opportunity for the Sox to have Vazquez work as the established catcher in 2015/2016 when Swihart is ready while Blake is the #2 catcher and taking a good chunk of ABs at 1B and DH.
A 2016 C/1B/DH rotation including Vazquez getting ~100 games at C, Swihart getting ~62 games at C, 40 at 1B, and 40 at DH, Travis Shaw getting 122 games at 1B, and Craig or some other quality bat getting the other 122 games at DH would be a nice arrangement.
Yeah I totally agree on this and you don't waste Swihart's athelticism at 1b or DH when he gets so much of his value from being a catcher assuming he is a quality defensive receiver. One or the other are eventually going to end up as part of a big trade......I only asked because I keep hearing Swihart in the trade talks and not Vazquez.Rudy Pemberton said:
Wasn't Sickels quoted recently as saying that Swihart is the only untouchable in the Red Sox organization?HomeRunBaker said:
Rudy Pemberton said:
But the goal isn't to best utilize his skill set, the goal is to win the World Series as many times as possible before we die which means you want some combination of putting the pieces together to get more out of them than any other team does and shuffling the pieces around so we're very good as often as possible.
Imagine for the moment, that Swihart hits the bigs to start 2015. I don't think anyone thinks that's going to happen, it's just a hypothetical.
If Vazquez starts five times at catcher during a week, and Swihart starts two times at catcher, and two times at first base, what happens?
Well, it means Napoli gets two days where he isn't playing first base. If you DH him one of those days, you're giving Napoli and Ortiz both a day off. I don't think anyone really thinks Swihart is going to hit as well as Napoli or Ortiz, but I do think that giving guys time off is one of the best things you can do to keep them healthy. Human bodies are great at healing themselves but they need some downtime to do it. Giving Napoli and Ortiz more time off is likely to keep them healthier, which means they're more likely to be around when you really need them like, say, in post season games.
And the same thing aplies to the catchers. If they share the load, they will likely both be healthier and since we're talking about young guys who are going to be around for a while, this is fairly likely to extend their careers.
And you know what? Having two starting caliber catchers is some of that deep depth that gets bandied about. If we trade Swihart and Vazquez gets a significant injury, our chances of winning it all that season take a sizeable hit.
I understand your point however if Swihart can be used as a piece to acquire Stanton that would give the Red Sox a much greater chance of winning more than simply playing him a couple times a week at 1b. If you really want to give Napoli a day off there are other options equivalent to Swihart......so you still have to decide on which starting catcher is your guy to allow you to then trade the backup catcher for a greater everyday value at another position.Rasputin said:
I think it would be crazy to deal either of them anytime soon. Obviously it would be worth trading Swihart as the major piece in a Stanton deal, but I am not sure it would make sense to trade him as one of three major pieces in a Stanton deal (e.g., Swihart, Betts, Owens and a couple of grungier guys).
At this point, neither Vazquez or Swihart is a certainty to succeed in the majors. If having an all star caliber catching is important then hanging on to both of them is the best way to ensure that. Swihart is probably not limited to 1B and DH - he's probably athletic enough to contribute at 3B and corner OF. Catchers suffer a lot of wear and year and are frequently injured, so having two very good ones does not necessarily mean that one should be moved.
As for Ortiz and Napoli, one guy is nearing 40 and can barely run anymore while the other is not signed beyond 2016. By the time Swihart and Vazquez agave both earned everyday roles, one or both is likely to be gone anyway.
At this point, neither Vazquez or Swihart is a certainty to succeed in the majors. If having an all star caliber catching is important then hanging on to both of them is the best way to ensure that. Swihart is probably not limited to 1B and DH - he's probably athletic enough to contribute at 3B and corner OF. Catchers suffer a lot of wear and year and are frequently injured, so having two very good ones does not necessarily mean that one should be moved.
As for Ortiz and Napoli, one guy is nearing 40 and can barely run anymore while the other is not signed beyond 2016. By the time Swihart and Vazquez agave both earned everyday roles, one or both is likely to be gone anyway.
HomeRunBaker said:
There's a valuation question.
Pitch framing (and catcher defense generally) seems a hot topic for stats guys, as it seems like the value may be far greater than people think.
If Swihart is valued by the league much higher than Vazquez (which seems to be the case) then it makes sense to think he will be the name people ask about, hence comes up more often.
But there's a good chance if Vazquez plays well for the rest of the season adn the Sox say no to trading Swihart maybe Vazquez starts coming up.
Swiharts defense looks good, Vazquez MAY be elite but there is a gap on the bat side. I can't see the Sox trading Vazquez as he's not highly valued (yet), and needed.
Eddie Jurak said:
This is where I am also, keep them both. How cool would it be to not worry about catcher and have two tremendous talents under team control for the foreseeable future? I think corner bats are easier to acquire than potential all star level catchers, to have one with a plus bat with the flexibility and athleticism to play first increases his value to the sox tremendously. It's just so damn nice to see a talent pipeline like the sox have now bearing fruit, it's going to be a fun ride the next few years.
And that's before pitch framing. Depending on how seriously you take the statistics - and it may be going too far to take them too seriously given that this is a much less charted territory than other statistics - a good pitch framing could turn a good defensive catcher like Vazquez into a 7 WAR player on defense alone.Papelbon's Poutine said:
...along with moderate diet and exercise?Rasputin said:
A potential offensively skilled catcher with solid defensive skills can impact every defensive play on the field. All things considered a hypothetical star catcher is more valuable to me than a hypothetical equally talented star short stop - assuming they both have an equal blend of offensive and defensive abilities.jscola85 said:
But that is just my opinion.
Maybe ... but on the flip side, a talented SS can play every day, while a C can't play more than 130-140 games or so.RetractableRoof said:
Moving away from the hypothetical into the concrete - Xander is 6 months younger than Swihart. So while Bogaerts' 2014 has been disappointing, he's playing in the majors already while Swihart just got to AAA.
I haven't been able to watch the games the past few nights, but I was looking through the highlights and oh my goodness did Vazquez do an incredible frame job for RDLR's last strikeout of the night. That was amazing. Plus his perfect 10/10 throw to nab Trout earlier on too. I love this kid.
According to our framing metrics, on a per rate basis (Framing runs per 7000 opps), Vazquez currently ranks second in baseball, behind Molina:
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/sortable/index.php?cid=1718502
(To those who saw the presentation the other day, I used a slightly different method for computing value which pinned Molina at 4th.)
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/sortable/index.php?cid=1718502
(To those who saw the presentation the other day, I used a slightly different method for computing value which pinned Molina at 4th.)
Had to look to see which Molina. I know Jose gets tons of framing praise here, but Yadier is good at everything else, so...Jnai said:
Surprised to see Yadier halfway down the list. Salty 84 out of 91.
Someone else who presented on catcher defense at saberseminar noted that where Jose's value is from excelling at framing, Yadier's value comes from being good to very good at all catcher tasks without necessarily being the best at any one thing.Al Zarilla said:
Pierzynski is 59 out of 81. And I'm seeing Vazquez as being in 1st place as of now, a tiny bit in front of Jose Molina
Of all the catchers to be 81st whoever would have expected Carlos Santana to not show "Persuasion?"Lose Remerswaal said:
Pierzynski was far and away the worst catcher I've ever seen at framing pitches. The outright drops of balls near the strike zone were a phenomenon I'd previously witnessed only in little league. A system that has him near the middle of the pack needs to be tweaked.Lose Remerswaal said:
On the Sox, me neither.Rasputin said:
Two things: I haven't seen much discussion of his solid work on tags at the plate. Not blocking it and being athletic enough to receive the ball away and get back to the runner and the plate. (The one whiff excepted of course).
While in Dallas for most of the last 21 years, I was privileged to see a catcher completely change the game on the defensive side. The opposing teams running game became non-existent. Hell, even their LEADS were reduced lest they be picked off. Picking up an extra out or two a game, preventing extra bases, it was a work of art on a weekly basis. I thought the man had a legit shot at the Hall Of Fame from his defense alone. Add in his bat and his longevity and it became a no brainer.
This kid is young, cheap and has the potential to be in the same defensive league as (the other) Pudge. If he plays the same level of defense he's shown so far and hits even a little (.250 and 12 bombs a year) he is a very valuable player.
And if Swihart is as good or potentially better, well boys, that's a pretty good first world problem.
Plympton91 said:
1) AJP is one of the worst catchers in baseball this year in terms of framing (76 out of 91) on a counting basis.
2) We had two former catchers (one MLB) rate framing talent without seeing our model resutls, and correlated our model to their ratings. The results were very favorable.
What do you think we should tweak?
This years results line up better with what we saw in Boston. I thought the previous numbers were 2014.
It's a model so it'll have errors, but if you asked me to rate Salty vs AJP I'd say Salty was light years better last year than AJP this year. So, if they're close or AJP comes out better, I don't see how that's possible. And Ross should be significantly better than both of them.
It's a model so it'll have errors, but if you asked me to rate Salty vs AJP I'd say Salty was light years better last year than AJP this year. So, if they're close or AJP comes out better, I don't see how that's possible. And Ross should be significantly better than both of them.
Plympton91 said:
Ross is significantly better than both of them. Salty last year was a bit worse than average, and AJP this year is worse than that. Salty's been a disaster this year, unclear exactly why that is. Haven't followed him very closely since he left.
I understand "it's a model so it'll have errors", but you still haven't pointed out any of those errors. I don't understand what the gripe is.
Actually given what you just described I don't have much of a gripe. Sounds like I was getting tripped up following the thread and mixing years. From reading along I was understanding it to say that Salty was consistently significantly worse than AJP. The way you laid it out makes more sense.Jnai said:
A comment with no stats: Vasquez and Holt are the only players playing with enthusiasm and energy. Ortiz is hot but grim-looking. Cespedes is quite professional though sui generis undependable. Much of the team looks lifeless - X, Koji, Nava, etc. Not a fun way to end the year.
The other thing Vazquez seems to do so well is be active behind the plate in other phases of the game. He's constantly shifting to try to confuse the batter, he stands up to request high pitches, he signals with his glove. He also loves the snap throw to first, which he seems to execute very well.
I have no idea if any of this is useful, but it certainly seems like he's way more into the game from a catching perspective than AJP.
I have no idea if any of this is useful, but it certainly seems like he's way more into the game from a catching perspective than AJP.
Boston Red Sox @RedSox 20m
Christian has 3 pickoffs in 30 games at catcher this season, most by a #RedSox backstop since Rich Gedman has 5 in 1985. #DontRunOnVazquez
Also - obviously not up here very long, but if he throws out next player who attempts a stolen base, he will lead MLB in % caught stealing.
Christian has 3 pickoffs in 30 games at catcher this season, most by a #RedSox backstop since Rich Gedman has 5 in 1985. #DontRunOnVazquez
Also - obviously not up here very long, but if he throws out next player who attempts a stolen base, he will lead MLB in % caught stealing.
It's a damn good thing that he plays good defense because his offence is now worse that JBJ.
I'm not ragging on him but just sayin'
We had three months of hand ringing over JBJ's anemic hitting but nary a peep about Vazquez ..
I'm not ragging on him but just sayin'
We had three months of hand ringing over JBJ's anemic hitting but nary a peep about Vazquez ..
The scary thing is, CV is putting up these numbers while actually looking like he's swinging an OK stick by the eye test. At least JBJ just looked obviously lost. Expectations matter, though. Vazquez's bat has been projected as 2016 if ever all the way, whereas JBJ looked ready to make the leap in Pawtucket, hence increased handwringing.
We expect more hitting out of a center fielder than out of a catcher though, don't we?BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
The average CF had a .730 OPS last year, and the average C had a .698 OPS, so yes. That said, two of the best hitters in the majors are CFers (Trout and Cutch). I suspect if you remove their contributions the two positions hit close to the same. We're not exactly comparing DH and SS here.Al Zarilla said:
I think the impact of all that a catcher does defensively, especially if Vazquez has a positive impact on the pitching staff through both framing and "game-calling" (the latter being unclear at this point), would provide more opportunity for value than the few plays a center fielder can make in any game. So it's not that we expect more hitting out of the CF exactly, but that a catcher who is elite in all aspects of defense probably provides more value than a center-fielder who is elite at all aspects of defense, offense constant.
Toe Nash said:
To make the adjustment you suggested, I removed the top 2 teams in OPS at that position from the MLB totals - so MIL & OAK from catching totals, PIT & LAA from centerfielder totals.
Removing these, you get a 682 OPS for catchers and 703 for centerfielders, This also slightly understates the difference, as the CF advantage is somewhat larger in OBP than in SLG.
Oh, and I used 2014 totals.
No reason to think that Vazquez will never get any better at the plate than he has been in his first 100 PAs.
Expectations. All the scouting reports had JBJ as a good hitter with some power. Vasquez has always been reported as a great defensive catcher with questions if he could hit enough to be a starter for the Sox.BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
Regardless of expectations - which probably does explain the lack of angst - a .560 ops (or whatever he's down to now) is just not going to cut it. (I think)
At least with a CF we have some fielding metrics that can be used to measure defensive contributions - but that's rather more difficult with a Catcher. I suppose if you use Catcher Framing stats, SB%, Pickoffs, WPs and PBs you can come up with measurable numbers -but it's rather vague. Especially with the Framing numbers .. (Not disputing the numbers presented - I'm just not sure what they really mean)
With JBJ you get the impression he would be a useful MLB player if he could get his ops up to about .650. What' the number for Christian?
I know the OPS from Vazquez isn't all that sexy, but I think his approach will start paying dividends going forward. He's putting the ball in play on the ground, hitting line drives, taking walks, and making great contact. He does have some occasional pop which we haven't seen come into play yet.
I like what I've seen so far, and he doesn't look like a guy who's over matched from the eye-test (SSS I realize). His upside is limited offensively for sure, but he doesn't look like he's trying to do too much up there anyways.
I like what I've seen so far, and he doesn't look like a guy who's over matched from the eye-test (SSS I realize). His upside is limited offensively for sure, but he doesn't look like he's trying to do too much up there anyways.
Nava is hitting 302/372/362 with a 734 ops since being called up. Not sure I would call that lifeless. Sorry to hijack.mfried said:
I take that as the not scary thing. He's got a plan when he goes to the plate, he doesn't get beat by the same pitches in the same spot all the time, he goes to the opposite field when it presents itself, and he draws walks once in a while while keeping his strikeout rate down. If he can keep all that up, the hits will start dropping in (BABip only .258), and with another year of maturity, maybe some more power will come.JimBoSox9 said:
Plus, all catchers wear down at the end of the season and often have terrible last month or so. In addition he was getting ridden pretty hard while Ross was out, which may have contributed to even greater fatigue. I wouldn't worry much about him based on the sample of this season in the major leagues.
I think that as his BABIP normalizes (20.2 LD% currently), you'll end up seeing a guy who is somewhere in the ballpark of .250/.320/.350 over the next couple of years. Pretty close to league-average with the bat for the position, and clearly far superior on the defensive side of the ball. Anything above that is probably overly optimistic at this point, though we clearly have seen a few defensive catchers who have picked up the offensive side as they have gone along. Vazquez hasn't shown any signs of being a consistent power threat in his ML numbers, but his contact rates are really solid, and I could see him ending up as .280/.350/.400 guy for a few career years.