And it can only be better for Vazquez and the team for him to start learning Major League hitters and getting more familiar with the Sox pitching staff earlier rather than later.
This team doesn't have Manny / Ortiz in the middle of the order anymore. Well, OK, we still have Ortiz, but he's 38 now. The Red Sox need 1-9 production since the middle-of-the-order bats aren't anything special anymore.Eck'sSneakyCheese said:Citing Vazquezs offense as a reason to keep him down seems silly. If no one else on the team is hitting his production isn't going to matter. If everyone on the team starts to hit his production isn't going to matter. He's Iglesian behind the plate. He adds an element to the defense that Sox haven't had since early years Tek.
We still need a back up C next season as well. I doubt Martin will agree to that and Suzuki may be playing himself back into a starting gig, but it's something to note.KillerBs said:Sign me up for some Russell Martin or Kurt Suzuki, but I have my doubts that either one will be interested in a 1 year mentoring gig and anything more than I would shy away from.
Likely this doesn't amount to much, as it looks like Swihart is certainly on tap for a June 2015 arrival. I agree Vazquez does need to get substantial major league time before the end of the year.
But they're not getting 1-9 production now. Its not like Vazquez is going to make it worse. Can it get worse?Super Nomario said:This team doesn't have Manny / Ortiz in the middle of the order anymore. Well, OK, we still have Ortiz, but he's 38 now. The Red Sox need 1-9 production since the middle-of-the-order bats aren't anything special anymore.
Eck'sSneakyCheese said:Citing Vazquezs offense as a reason to keep him down seems silly. If no one else on the team is hitting his production isn't going to matter. If everyone on the team starts to hit his production isn't going to matter. He's Iglesian behind the plate. He adds an element to the defense that Sox haven't had since early years Tek.
Looking at his minor league numbers he seems like the type of player that gets better offensively the more time he has at any level. He's done it through every promotion. He starts slow but by the next year he's hitting at an acceptable rate. I'd rather get that clock started at the major league level now so by next year he will be better acclimated to this level.Savin Hillbilly said:I can't speak for others, but I wasn't citing his offense as a reason to keep him down in the sense that I think it's going to matter much for the 2014 Sox how well he hits. I pretty much agree with you on that. My concern is that exposure to ML pitching at this point might be counterproductive developmentally. If there's any chance at all of that, they should let him ripen a little more on the farm.
Oh, it can always get worse.Eck'sSneakyCheese said:But they're not getting 1-9 production now. Its not like Vazquez is going to make it worse. Can it get worse?
That's one interpretation - you could easily read those patterns as suggesting the Sox should be more conservative with his MLB promotion if they want his bat to be readier. And they haven't promoted him after so few games at a level or so little success since they jumped him out of the NYPL at age 18.Eck'sSneakyCheese said:Looking at his minor league numbers he seems like the type of player that gets better offensively the more time he has at any level. He's done it through every promotion. He starts slow but by the next year he's hitting at an acceptable rate. I'd rather get that clock started at the major league level now so by next year he will be better acclimated to this level.
Years too, right? I think the Sox really didn't want to go past one year, given the prospects in the system, and there are very few players of any consequence available at that position on a one-year deal. Even a two year deal (e.g. for Salty) is a way bigger problem given Vazquez' readiness.moondog80 said:
I think money is a big part of the equation here. But even if we do dismiss it, McCann is 223/284/360, AJ is 250/280/357. And while Salty is a much better 246/348/409, WAR doesn't like his defense so he's only 0.2, compared to 0.1 for both McCann and AJ.
chrisfont9 said:Years too, right? I think the Sox really didn't want to go past one year, given the prospects in the system, and there are very few players of any consequence available at that position on a one-year deal. Even a two year deal (e.g. for Salty) is a way bigger problem given Vazquez' readiness.
InsideTheParker said:How can you trust a man who doesn't realize that "none" is a contraction for "no one" and requires the singular verb?
Rudy Pemberton said:Isn't there at least a chance that Salty didn't want to go back to the team that benched him for David Ross in the World Series? Or that the team that didn't want to play Salty in the biggest games of the year might not want him long term? Salty had a nice year last year, but having him instead of Perzynski really doesn't change this team much.
not one/ no one Either requires the singular verb. But you got me on that missing "t."JohntheBaptist said:
This is not correct. So that's how you can trust him.
Super Nomario said:Oh, it can always get worse.
For 2014, it probably doesn't matter, since the team appears to be going nowhere fast. I'm just skeptical of penciling in Vazquez as a 2015 starter given his 2014 performance to date, unless they're planning to drastically improve some of the other lineup spots.
InsideTheParker said:not one/ no one Either requires the singular verb. But you got me on that missing "t."
Yes, I expect usage may have changed. But as an older person who used to teach, I find this trend regrettable. Pet peeve.JohntheBaptist said:
No, it doesn't. That this is a grammatical universal is a misconception. Many--if not most--I've encountered say otherwise. I'd link but I'm sure you have Google too.
Rasputin said:I don't really see the point of ditching Pierzynski unless you A) get a phenomenal deal or B) get someone else in some other deal who can start for the rest of this year and maybe next.
I love Vazquez' arm as much as anyone, but he's a guy who has taken a long time to adjust to new levels, isn't likely to produce at the plate, and other than his arm, we don't know that his defense is a great improvement over AJ. Sure, the arm is a pretty big thing, but it's not enough to make the change based on hating Pierzynski.
Yeah, that's just silly. We're a month away from the trade deadline. Determining that the season is over now just doesn't make sense.Papelbon's Poutine said:The point would be that this season is over. So the pointless part would be to keep AJP around when you can either dump him for nothing and save $; or get a prospect lottery ticket for him. Whether you bring up Vasquez, Butler or shit even let Lavarnway catch the rest of the year it can only be a positive.
And he's been described as getting lazy behind the plate because his arm is so good.Eck'sSneakyCheese said:
Actually we do. He's also been praised for his preparation and game calling. He's not just an arm. He's the whole package behind the dish.
Rasputin said:And he's been described as getting lazy behind the plate because his arm is so good.
geoduck no quahog said:Notice I use the words "seems", "impression", "appeared" a lot - which means this post is based totally in non fact.
This piece is bullish on his overall D, particularly his pitch framing:Rasputin said:And he's been described as getting lazy behind the plate because his arm is so good.
I am so tired of this nonsense. It doesn't take magic and I never said it should be counted on.Papelbon's Poutine said:The word you're looking for is 'realistic'.
What's silly is the insistence of some people that this team is going to magically turn it around, play .600 ball and rise from being the third worst team to one of the five best. And that we should spend time, money or assets - or hold onto assets that serve no other purpose but to try for that goal - when the 5% best cases scenario is a one game playoff.
This isn't about a couple stars being injured and on their way back or being one trade piece away from turning it around. This team has a horrid offense and the starting rotation has been boom or bust. That they are even as "not shitty" as they are is only because the bullpen has been lights out all year.
Please explain to me where the improvement will come that will turn this team around and give a reasonable explanation as to why it should be counted on.
No, no, I got it. I don't think anyone didn't get it.StuckOnYouk said:
Holy Grail (Monty Python)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yp_l5ntikaU&feature=kp
Bradley starts hitting to his MLE, Nava starts hitting righties to his career averages, Pyrzinski starts hitting like he did last season, and Buchholz has fixed his mechanics.Papelbon's Poutine said:.
Please explain to me where the improvement will come that will turn this team around and give a reasonable explanation as to why it should be counted on.
.KillerBs said:It might be an uncompetitive 2nd half but it won't be pointless. Good chance we will be watching Vazquez, Bogaerts, Bradley, Betts, Middlebrooks, Delarosa, Workman, Ranaudo and Webster, if not Cecchini, Wright and Swihart too. Should be fun to watch even if they are losing more than winning.
Plympton91 said:Bradley starts hitting to his MLE, Nava starts hitting righties to his career averages, Pyrzinski starts hitting like he did last season, and Buchholz has fixed his mechanics.
All the arguments for bringing up Vazquez are even weaker than the arguments for handing CF to JBJ this season, and all the arguments for dumping AJP and not even considering him for next year contradict the rationale for signing him in the first place.
Glad so many people have come around to my position on Salty though. To bad it, along with its sister decisions of not having veteran depth at CF or the left side of the infield, helped create this nearly unwatchable disaster of a half season and likely uncompetitive and pointless second half.
Plympton91 said:.
If I want to watch minor league baseball, I go to a local ballpark and sit outside under the stars. I don't see the need to pay MLB TV rates for the privilege.
As opposed to a 37 year old catcher in obvious decline being something that should have been considered for this year?Eck'sSneakyCheese said:
What? A 38 yr old catcher in obvious decline is something they should be considering for next year?
I don't watch minor league baseball everyday, and when I do, I watch it live. That's the point. I'm not interested in watching the Pawtucket Sea Dogs attempt to play major league teams.Eck'sSneakyCheese said:Wouldn't it be more expensive than MLBTV to go to a minor league baseball game everyday?
I understand this point, I really do. But personally I am frustrated with watching a listless team. I'm not faulting effort (in all cases), but they are playing without any sustained energy. If bringing up a bunch of the kids provides energy - then I'm inclined to watch that more than the product that is on the field thus far in 2014.Plympton91 said:-- snip --
I don't watch minor league baseball everyday, and when I do, I watch it live. That's the point. I'm not interested in watching the Pawtucket Sea Dogs attempt to play major league teams.
Why do you doubt he'd be a black hole? He has a .322 OBP and a .367 in AAA and is leading the IL in GIDP. How does that line project to MLB? It's got to be pretty bad (unfortunately I can't find the MLE calculator any more).Eck'sSneakyCheese said:
He has a decent average and his OPS is low due to his lack of power. He gets on base at a decent clip considering he doesn't walk much. I think he's performed pretty well for his first year in AAA. I understand the skepticism, but I doubt he's going to be a blackhole and he would have to be to make his glove not worth it.
He's had 3 months in AAA and one was bad (May.) Are we really going to condemn him on such a SSS? He's been at least average for most of his minor league career and has been hitting much better recently.Super Nomario said:Why do you doubt he'd be a black hole? He has a .322 OBP and a .367 in AAA and is leading the IL in GIDP. How does that line project to MLB? It's got to be pretty bad (unfortunately I can't find the MLE calculator any more).
Papelbon's Poutine said:Does it matter if he's a black hole when he'd be replacing a black hole?
Get the kid some run, let him get his feet wet and spend some time with Ross and whatever Tek does on a daily basis these days. He will be better off for it.
Yes it matters. The kid is on a developmental path. If bringing him up before he has demonstrated that he's ready is going to mean the difference between winning and losing, you do it. If not, why would you mess with him?Papelbon's Poutine said:Does it matter if he's a black hole when he'd be replacing a black hole?
Get the kid some run, let him get his feet wet and spend some time with Ross and whatever Tek does on a daily basis these days. He will be better off for it.
Ross and crew are better than what's in the minors. The Red Sox have talent in their minor league system. But for every Pedroia there are three dozen Lars Andersens.KillerBs said:What if some of the players on the Portland SeaDogs are better than the players on the Boston Red Sox?
You really prefer to watch Ross, Herrera, Drew, Peavy, Mujica, Breslow, Peavy...you think they are better than options on the farm?
It depends on what we're talking about. Overall as a prospect, there are plenty of reasons to be optimistic. If we're talking about how we'd expect him to hit at the major league level for the rest of 2014 and for 2015, it's probably going to be bad.Eck'sSneakyCheese said:He's had 3 months in AAA and one was bad (May.) Are we really going to condemn him on such a SSS? He's been at least average for most of his minor league career and has been hitting much better recently.
Eck'sSneakyCheese said:He's had 3 months in AAA and one was bad (May.) Are we really going to condemn him on such a SSS? He's been at least average for most of his minor league career and has been hitting much better recently.
There's a big difference between a 23 yr old making his way into the game and a 37 yr old fading out of it.NDame616 said:Why not? We are condemning AJP for a bad stretch that was smaller (3 weeks) than a bad month, On May 30th he was batting ,288 and his OPS as .735. If that was his line at the end of the season everyone here would be talking about how he was a brilliant bridge year catcher while we try to get the kids ready.
Yeah, but the difference doesn't have anything to do with a cherry picked three week stretch in a season.Eck'sSneakyCheese said:There's a big difference between a 23 yr old making his way into the game and a 37 yr old fading out of it.