Keith Law's Prospect Stuff on Sawx

[Spudboy]

Tug was a classic Mark Tehan was another one I remember him crushing on hard. I like it tho cause he usually brings in some good info on guys that don't get a lot of the spotlight. Nava is by far is his Championship belt lol

 

That's the guy I was referring to!!!!

 

Yeah I seem to remember Dojji suggesting Nap as a catcher, and part time 1st baseman and DH.

 

But Tehan!!!!!!!! AGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!1!!!!!

[Spudboy]

Tug was a classic Mark Tehan was another one I remember him crushing on hard. I like it tho cause he usually brings in some good info on guys that don't get a lot of the spotlight. Nava is by far is his Championship belt lol

 

Yup. This is what I was trying to say.

[sk7326]

And I think that's why the industry is whiffing on a lot of these kids. There's still no way to scout the head tool. Until there is, I'll keep looking for prospects who don't grab the national spotlight but have been quietly getting the job done. That's one of the things Billy Beane got famous for in the first place.

 

Incidentally, could we stow the futility talk when half of my "guys" never even get the chance to test the waters one way or another? Poor Dan Butler still has the makings of a very solid big league backup if he can win through on the Nats. A lot of the guys I pull for wind up like that, maybe they could have done something, maybe not, but the team won't even give them a look. Coyle could easily wind up like that as well, stuck behind better players, but I think that if the stars line up and he gets a decent chance he has the ability to impress someone.

 

The industry whiffs a lot on kids because they are kids. Full stop.

 

The Beane story is funny. In Moneyball you see the emphasis on stats and the eschewing of high school kids because performance was harder to measure. But the weird result of going in on that thinking is that Oakland (and Toronto under Ricciardi)'s system started to sag because there were no stars. And so Oakland is back going to high schools and looking at kids with superior tools and whatnot. After all if a franchise has a high percentage hit rate for its prospects, but those prospects are Deven Merrero and Dan Butler, that is still a 60ish win team.

[Dojji]

Yeah but Dojji was hyping Napoli as a catcher, and that was everyone's big problem with the idea.

 

Before he got hurt, Napoli was an excellent catcher. Adequate defensively and the stick was as good as it always was, only at a premium defensive position. He moved off the catching position because of a degenerative hip condition no one knew about at the time, not because he didn't have good catching skills.

 

I wish he'd been healthy enough to do part time catching duties, if only because that would have increased his value, but that's clearly never going to happen again, and since we're so sick with great catching prospects that we can't even give our low tier guys a decent look (like Lavarnway and Butler) it's not a great need. Very satisfied with Napoli's performance as our starting 1B, just like everyone else. We got like 80% of my hopeful scenario with the guy, very pleased about that.

Edited February 10, 2015 by Dojji

[jacksonianmarch]

That's a bold faced lie Dojji. He was so bad as a catcher that Mike Scoscia was starting the no offense Jeff Mathis over him in Anaheim. Napoli was a butcher behind the dish

[Dojji]

Baseball reference defensive metrics have him at exactly a run per year below average defensively. Basically Napoli was an average defensive catcher with more than enough bat to make it work.

 

Scoscia used Mathis as the catcher so he could get an excellent glove behind the dish instead of an average one, and DH Napoli to keep his bat in the lineup. Since he didn't have a better DH at the time it was a viable strategey, and one the Rangers used extensively as well. If we get our wish with both Vazquez and Swihart it's a strategy I could see the team using frequently after Papi retires

[Kimmi]

Baseball reference defensive metrics have him at exactly a run per year below average defensively. Basically Napoli was an average defensive catcher with more than enough bat to make it work.

 

Scoscia used Mathis as the catcher so he could get an excellent glove behind the dish instead of an average one, and DH Napoli to keep his bat in the lineup. Since he didn't have a better DH at the time it was a viable strategey, and one the Rangers used extensively as well. If we get our wish with both Vazquez and Swihart it's a strategy I could see the team using frequently after Papi retires

 

 

I wouldn't say that Napoli was an average defensive catcher. He was below average in blocking pitches, below average in throwing out runners, below average in DRS, and below average in pitch framing runs.

 

I remember thinking that he was going to hurt us defensively at 1B because he was not a strong defensive catcher. I am presently surprised with how good his 1B defense has been.

[Dojji]

He was barely below average at any of those things, and was well capable of an above average year at any one of them.

 

He was an offensive catcher and had a good enough glove to be an offensive catcher. What stopped him was his hip condition, not his poor defensive play.

[seabeachfred]

He was barely below average at any of those things, and was well capable of an above average year at any one of them.

 

He was an offensive catcher and had a good enough glove to be an offensive catcher. What stopped him was his hip condition, not his poor defensive play.

 

IU never understood why Scioscia was stubborn about keeping Mathis behind the plate and panning Napoli's defense. He was no Johnny Bench but he was a much better defensive catcher than Mathis was as a hitter, and I think it might have cost the Angels a pennant or two for all the time Mike was benched by the manager.

[User Name]

He was barely below average at any of those things, and was well capable of an above average year at any one of them.

 

He was an offensive catcher and had a good enough glove to be an offensive catcher. What stopped him was his hip condition, not his poor defensive play.

 

You're word-playing to mask the fact that you were wrong. He wasn't "barely below average", he was below average, full stop.

[sk7326]

IU never understood why Scioscia was stubborn about keeping Mathis behind the plate and panning Napoli's defense. He was no Johnny Bench but he was a much better defensive catcher than Mathis was as a hitter, and I think it might have cost the Angels a pennant or two for all the time Mike was benched by the manager.

 

Scioscia is an ex-catcher who probably was personally offended at the idea of playing a somewhere between "horrendous" and "barely adequate" catcher to keep his bat in the lineup. If you view catcher as a defensive position, that is how you are wired. He is the sort of guy who would have made a similar call with Mike Piazza probably. His affection for Mathis was short sighted as he was not an acceptable offensive player, even with the rock bottom replacement threshhold for catchers.

 

Napoli's hip condition was caught with the Sox' medicals on him - that's why it took so long for the deal to settle, remember? Now, Ron Washington was willing to live with him behind the plate in the World Series to keep his bat in the lineup, and since Napoli would have won the World Series MVP if it wasn't for the miracle in Game 6, that makes sense. BTW: I do share that opinion that a bat can be worth it - it was why Lavarnway as a catcher was exciting. Alas, his hit tool did not justify the poor glove, and when he tried to catch, the hitting suffered.

[Dojji]

So in other words he's the sort of guy who would be perfectly happy with Vazquez behind the plate and not so much worried about Swihart until Swihart forces the team to find a place to put him.

 

Oh and for the record, since we are talking about prospects, I haven't given up on Garin Cecchini just yet. The power implosion he suffered last year is troubling because it's exactly what happened to onetime stud prospect Lars Anderson, among an uncounted horde of others, but he's still young enough that it's too early to throw in the towel on Cecchini. The offseason moves by the organization to overload the team with third basemen from free agency suggests that he's got a long steep road to climb though.

Edited February 13, 2015 by Dojji

[Palodios]

Oh and for the record, since we are talking about prospects, I haven't given up on Garin Cecchini just yet. The power implosion he suffered last year is troubling because it's exactly what happened to onetime stud prospect Lars Anderson, among an uncounted horde of others, but he's still young enough that it's too early to throw in the towel on Cecchini. The offseason moves by the organization to overload the team with third basemen from free agency suggests that he's got a long steep road to climb though.

 

GC was never a power prospect, was he? He is a patient contact hitter who stopped making contact in 2014 -- that's the big concern with him.

[jacksonianmarch]

Cecchini went up from AA and saw his K rate rise and his walk rate get cut in half. He's a corner IFer without any power to speak of who was tearing up the lower levels due to solid plate discipline and a reasonable hit skill. His sudden loss of contact skills and sudden drop in walks is a big concern, especially since he's almost 24. He's not a child anymore. I think he's gonna end up a tweener. His prospect status got tied to a rock and dropped in the ocean.

 

On to Scoscia. Swihart is considered to be an average to above average catcher on the defensive end. If Napoli was an average to above average catcher defensively, they would have had him starting regularly. Catcher is one of the most important defensive positions in baseball. If the guy behind the dish blows ass defensively, it's going to get noticed. Especially by a former big league catcher

[sk7326]

So in other words he's the sort of guy who would be perfectly happy with Vazquez behind the plate and not so much worried about Swihart until Swihart forces the team to find a place to put him.

 

Oh and for the record, since we are talking about prospects, I haven't given up on Garin Cecchini just yet. The power implosion he suffered last year is troubling because it's exactly what happened to onetime stud prospect Lars Anderson, among an uncounted horde of others, but he's still young enough that it's too early to throw in the towel on Cecchini. The offseason moves by the organization to overload the team with third basemen from free agency suggests that he's got a long steep road to climb though.

 

Scioscia actively cost his teams wins with that decision btw, since there were potted plants who offered more offensive promise than Mathis.

 

Swihart tracks to be - not an adequate defender - but a good to very good defender who might be athletically overqualified to catch. That is a different kettle of fish. I like both guys btw, but if you have two quality young starting catchers, hoarding them is not the best way to make your team better.

 

Book on Cecchini is not written yet, but the move to AAA definitely slowed his momentum. If he is the best 3B prospect in the org, it's because he is close to the bigs. He can probably be a solid 3B for somebody, but he has very much moved (if he was not there already) into the "trade currency" bucket.

[cp176]

So in other words he's the sort of guy who would be perfectly happy with Vazquez behind the plate and not so much worried about Swihart until Swihart forces the team to find a place to put him.

 

Oh and for the record, since we are talking about prospects, I haven't given up on Garin Cecchini just yet. The power implosion he suffered last year is troubling because it's exactly what happened to onetime stud prospect Lars Anderson, among an uncounted horde of others, but he's still young enough that it's too early to throw in the towel on Cecchini. The offseason moves by the organization to overload the team with third basemen from free agency suggests that he's got a long steep road to climb though.

 

Swihart is a catcher. i think that he will remain a catcher. Pretty soon there will be an issue there. It will be a good problem to have if they both continue to develop as expected. Glad I won't have to solve it. I don't see him being moved from behind the plate.

[Spudboy]

Scioscia actively cost his teams wins with that decision btw, since there were potted plants who offered more offensive promise than Mathis.

 

Swihart tracks to be - not an adequate defender - but a good to very good defender who might be athletically overqualified to catch. That is a different kettle of fish. I like both guys btw, but if you have two quality young starting catchers, hoarding them is not the best way to make your team better.

 

Book on Cecchini is not written yet, but the move to AAA definitely slowed his momentum. If he is the best 3B prospect in the org, it's because he is close to the bigs. He can probably be a solid 3B for somebody, but he has very much moved (if he was not there already) into the "trade currency" bucket.

 

This is why I have suggested that he be tried at another position with the Sox. Maybe 1st base? Or the outfield? He is said to have the athleticism to play other positions.

 

With Nap a possible goner soon it may make sense. Although I doubt that Swihart will be totally ready when Nap exits.

 

Still, moving him to another position could be a win-win.

[sk7326]

This is why I have suggested that he be tried at another position with the Sox. Maybe 1st base? Or the outfield? He is said to have the athleticism to play other positions.

 

With Nap a possible goner soon it may make sense. Although I doubt that Swihart will be totally ready when Nap exits.

 

Still, moving him to another position could be a win-win.

 

I am not sure if his bat plays - at least as well as other replacements. Swihart makes sense starting at C like Posey and Mauer - you play him at C first because of how incredibly valuable a guy like that can be given the steaming pile that represents normal catcher production. The position change makes sense to keep his bat in the lineup and prevent injury - but no need to do it early.

[Spudboy]

I am not sure if his bat plays - at least as well as other replacements. Swihart makes sense starting at C like Posey and Mauer - you play him at C first because of how incredibly valuable a guy like that can be given the steaming pile that represents normal catcher production. The position change makes sense to keep his bat in the lineup and prevent injury - but no need to do it early.

 

I guess that I'd rather that Swilhart's offense play for the Sox at another position than to trade him as a catcher. Even if his value to other teams is greatest at catcher.

[cp176]

I guess that I'd rather that Swilhart's offense play for the Sox at another position than to trade him as a catcher. Even if his value to other teams is greatest at catcher.

 

Believe it or not, it could be Vasquez who winds up getting moved ultimately.

[Kimmi]

I guess that I'd rather that Swilhart's offense play for the Sox at another position than to trade him as a catcher. Even if his value to other teams is greatest at catcher.

 

 

I feel the same way, but his value really seems to be as a catcher, not only for his bat, but also for his strong defense as well. If he's as good as he projects to be, then the team would be doing itself a disservice by moving him to another position.

[Kimmi]

Believe it or not, it could be Vasquez who winds up getting moved ultimately.

 

 

I know that that is a possbility, but I'm still having a hard time believing it. That would break my heart.

 

I still haven't gotten over the loss of Varitek. LOL

[Palodios]

I think there is room for both. Vazquez can catch 100 games. Swihart can catch 60 games, and play 80 games at either 1B or DH. It keeps them both fresh.

 

Vazquez's splits show him as a better hitter against lefties, so maybe he can get relieved against tough righties by Swihart, and then someone with good splits against RHP takes over Swihart's other position. Maybe it could be a Nava/Swihart platoon at 1B -- Nava's career split against RHP is excellent .293/.385/.428/.813.

[Spudboy]

I'll try again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

I'd rather have both Swilhart AND Vasquez playing for the Sox than to trade one in favor of keeping just one of them.

[cp176]

I know that that is a possbility, but I'm still having a hard time believing it. That would break my heart.

 

I still haven't gotten over the loss of Varitek. LOL

 

I agree with you entirely. We know what Vasquez appears to be capable of. Swihart, as far as I am concerned is still a prospect. That being said- if he is as good as they say he could be Fisk might have to move aside. Better to wait and see on this one. No rush to judgement. Too early and too sign. I would go so far as to say that if Vasquez hits .260, Swihart will very likely get moved for that "special piece".

[Kimmi]

I think there is room for both. Vazquez can catch 100 games. Swihart can catch 60 games, and play 80 games at either 1B or DH. It keeps them both fresh.

 

Vazquez's splits show him as a better hitter against lefties, so maybe he can get relieved against tough righties by Swihart, and then someone with good splits against RHP takes over Swihart's other position. Maybe it could be a Nava/Swihart platoon at 1B -- Nava's career split against RHP is excellent .293/.385/.428/.813.

 

 

I like it. Sounds like a feasible plan.

 

Whatever ends up happening, it's nice that the Sox have the flexibility to consider several options. It will be interesting to see what happens with both Vazquez and Swihart.

[Kimmi]

I'll try again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

I'd rather have both Swilhart AND Vasquez playing for the Sox than to trade one in favor of keeping just one of them.

 

 

LOL Spud. Don't go all Fred on me.

 

I understood what you were saying.

[Kimmi]

I agree with you entirely. We know what Vasquez appears to be capable of. Swihart, as far as I am concerned is still a prospect. That being said- if he is as good as they say he could be Fisk might have to move aside. Better to wait and see on this one. No rush to judgement. Too early and too sign. I would go so far as to say that if Vasquez hits .260, Swihart will very likely get moved for that "special piece".

 

I wholeheartedly agree that there is no need to rush in making the decision. To me, catching is a defense first position, and Vazquez seems to be elite in that category. Any offense he gives us is gravy, especially if the rest of the offense performs like they should.

[cp176]

I'll try again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

I'd rather have both Swilhart AND Vasquez playing for the Sox than to trade one in favor of keeping just one of them.

 

 

I am not disagreeing with you but I would find it highly unlikely that they both wind up playing together. We would all like to keep the best ones but sometimes it just doesn't work. If they both prove capable in the field and at the plate, my guess is that one will be moved to help get a very special player as in a young potentially great pitcher. It is just a personal thing I guess but I don't see that special pitcher in our system. Some would suggest that it is Owens - I don't agree. They have a number of potentially solid middle to back of the rotation guys coming along. Rodriguez maybe a little better but it is an area that I think they have the trading chios to improve at.

[Spudboy]

LOL Spud. Don't go all Fred on me.

 

I understood what you were saying.

 

I was not responding to you or to anyone specifically.

 

I was not making myself clear.

 

I promise to never go all Fred on you.