Tommy John Surgery for Christian Vasquez

[a700hitter]

You asked what we had to counter with in terms of Hanigan and Leon being a good defensive tandem, so I countered. Now you're going to change your argument?

 

I already had been convinced.

[a700hitter]

The minor league throwaway is a virtual clone of Vazquez. Over the past 5 years, Leon has thrown out 49% of baserunners in the minors and majors.

 

I wonder who was the only catcher in the minors in 2013 who was a better pitch framer than Vazquez was?

 

Oh, that would be Sandy Leon! He saved his team 21.4 runs in pitch framing.

it sure sounds like you are downplaying the loss of Vasquez if we were able to replace him by picking through the junk piles of other teams. If Leon is a Vasquez clone, the Red Sox should save themselves the cost of the operation and subsequent rehab. Why bother-- just put the money toward developing pitching.

[bostopz]

You're kinda overstating the overall impact Vasquez was going to have on this team in 2015. And let's face it, no matter how much anyone likes the guy, he was likely keeping the seat warm for Swihart either way.

 

No I'm not overstating it. I'm in agreement with the article. I think others are understating the difference between a good defensive catcher and a great one. Also the difference between a .150 hitter and a .230 hitter. I'm more aligned to the following article:

 

 

https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/03/28/christian-vazquez-injury-worst-development-red-sox-spring-training/wOmAlYAcJ84AZA4eiNQHAI/story.html

 

"Watching Vazquez behind the plate in the second half of 2014 was like watching Freddie Lynn in center field in the first half of 1975. The kid was phenomenal. You could tell he belonged from Day One. Defensively, he showed you something new and better every day."

 

"Vazquez is never going to be the kind of MVP hitter Lynn was, but behind the plate he looked a little like a young Pudge Rodriguez."

 

". The Globe’s Peter Abraham warns that the loss of Vazquez could be “season-altering.’’"

 

I happen to agree with these type of comments. I don't know how anyone can dispute these points - maybe point 1:

 

1--- There is probably little difference between 2nd and 4th.

 

2--- Vasquez was a sensational defensive catcher. Others suggest "he is good just like many others." I don't agree. Vasquez's defense was superior to 99%.

 

3--- Vasquez is a .230 hitter. Not a .150 hitter. There is a difference. There is a difference There is a difference between .150 and .230. A big difference.

 

4--- Vasquez is a major league everyday catcher when healthy. The guys we have now aren't.

Edited March 31, 2015 by bostopz

[a700hitter]

Morning, all! Long time visitor, decided to get posting.

 

A bit of foreshadowing here that we were all afraid of....

 

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2015/03/red-sox-to-acquire-sandy-leon-from-nationals.html

 

This likely confirms that Vasquez is at least out for a signficant period of time, but I like the move since Leon has always had a good track record of being a very good defensive catcher. A similar type of replacement, and will allow us to get Swihart some more seasoning in the minors and not rush him up. I am pretty sure Leon is out of options, so unless we try to sneak him through waivers to place in AAA, it's likely he breaks camp as the backup for Hannigan.

 

Welcome to TalkSox. Would you like to participate in TalkSox Fantasy Baseball?

[SoxnCycles]

No. But they'll change their approach to a .150 hitter. Tell me if you were batting against major league pitching at the 9 spot. Do you think they would pitch to the .280 hitters above you? WHy? Because you are an automatic out. If you hit .230 you aren't an automatic out.

 

 

Yeah, that's going to make such a difference over the course of 80 or so games.

Please...

If it's going to be such a disaster, who would you get to catch instead?

 

Swihart, before he's ready?

[bostopz]

Yeah, that's going to make such a difference over the course of 80 or so games.

Please...

If it's going to be such a disaster, who would you get to catch instead?

 

Swihart, before he's ready?

 

This is why I disagree with you. You think .150 and .230 is the same.

 

Secondly, I said we'll be hurting without Vasquez. I didn't say bring up Swihart. I said as of this moment we are a 4th place team. Give us a stud starter and if we can get or have a legit closer then we could live with lousy catching.

Edited March 31, 2015 by bostopz

[Kimmi]

No. But they'll change their approach to a .150 hitter. Tell me if you were batting against major league pitching at the 9 spot. Do you think they would pitch to the .280 hitters above you? WHy? Because you are an automatic out. If you hit .230 you aren't an automatic out.

 

 

The thing about pitching around the 7 and 8 hitters to get to the light hitting #9 hitter is that every move has a counter effect that mostly offsets the original move. It's almost a no brainer for an NL manager to pitch around guys to get to the pitcher in some situations. Most of the time it works out according to plan. What people don't realize is that the secondary effects of this move, such as turning the line up over and starting the next inning with the top of the order instead of the #9 hitter, offsets much of the gain from the previous inning.

[Kimmi]

it sure sounds like you are downplaying the loss of Vasquez if we were able to replace him by picking through the junk piles of other teams. If Leon is a Vasquez clone, the Red Sox should save themselves the cost of the operation and subsequent rehab. Why bother-- just put the money toward developing pitching.

 

 

No, I'm not downplaying it, and if you read my first posts from yesterday regarding the loss of Vazquez you will see how concerned I am. I was just trying to make the point that Hanigan and Leon will be a good defensive tandem. I am less concerned today, with the signing of Leon, than I was yesterday.

 

One of the reasons that the Sox were likely able to get Leon for virtually nothing is that Leon is out of options. Or maybe the Nats don't value defense and pitch framing like the Sox do.

 

And, it's not like Vazquez is costing the Sox a ton of money.

[Kimmi]

Welcome to TalkSox. Would you like to participate in TalkSox Fantasy Baseball?

 

 

I am deeply, deeply hurt that I didn't get a personal invite to play in your league. Not that I have the time to play, since I am already committed to two leagues, but I am deeply hurt nonetheless.

[a700hitter]

No, I'm not downplaying it, and if you read my first posts from yesterday regarding the loss of Vazquez you will see how concerned I am. I was just trying to make the point that Hanigan and Leon will be a good defensive tandem. I am less concerned today, with the signing of Leon, than I was yesterday.

 

One of the reasons that the Sox were likely able to get Leon for virtually nothing is that Leon is out of options. Or maybe the Nats don't value defense and pitch framing like the Sox do.

 

And, it's not like Vazquez is costing the Sox a ton of money.

 

Calling Leon a virtual clone of Vasquez may have been the silliest thing that you have posted here.

[User Name]

This is why I disagree with you. You think .150 and .230 is the same.

 

Secondly, I said we'll be hurting without Vasquez. I didn't say bring up Swihart. I said as of this moment we are a 4th place team. Give us a stud starter and if we can get or have a legit closer then we could live with lousy catching.

 

No one here is saying .150 and .230 are the same. And Hanigan is a .256 career hitter, mind you. The problem is that you're vastly overstating just how important the difference between "suck" and "more suck" is from the 9-hole.

 

Also, Hanigan is a fantastic defensive catcher in his own right.

[a700hitter]

I am deeply, deeply hurt that I didn't get a personal invite to play in your league. Not that I have the time to play, since I am already committed to two leagues, but I am deeply hurt nonetheless.

 

I gave a blanket invitation to all TalkSox members. I will send you an invitation link to your pm inbox if you should decide that you have the fortitude and skills to take on me, Pal, iortiz and UN among others.

[bostopz]

No one here is saying .150 and .230 are the same. And Hanigan is a .256 career hitter, mind you. The problem is that you're vastly overstating just how important the difference between "suck" and "more suck" is from the 9-hole.

 

Also, Hanigan is a fantastic defensive catcher in his own right.

 

1--- I don't agree with you when you say no one is saying .150 is the same as .230. The poster that said below in italics sure sound like he is exactly saying that when he replied to my posts. .

 

Do you really think pitchers will change their approach because the mighty Vazquez is on deck?

I don't see it.

 

Yeah, that's going to make such a difference over the course of 80 or so games.

Please...

 

2-- And while I hope you are right about Hanigan -- I seriously doubt you are. I'd love to say - I was wrong but I think the fact that you are deliberately looking at Hanigan's career batting and not paying much attention to his last two years god-awful hitting tells me you may be looking with red-sox bright-red rose colored glasses. Even his cs% is dramatically down. I hope you aren't but I think you are. As a follow-up to this- his last two years imo would be more indicative of a 34yo journeyman catcher. Not the .250 hitter you just mentioned. Again - I hope you're right.

[User Name]

1--- I don't agree with you when you say no one is saying .150 is the same as .230. The poster that said below in italics sure sound like he is exactly saying that when he replied to my posts. .

 

Do you really think pitchers will change their approach because the mighty Vazquez is on deck?

I don't see it.

 

Yeah, that's going to make such a difference over the course of 80 or so games.

Please...

 

2-- And while I hope you are right about Hanigan -- I seriously doubt you are. I'd love to say - I was wrong but I think the fact that you are deliberately looking at Hanigan's career batting and not paying much attention to his last two years god-awful hitting tells me you may be looking with red-sox bright-red rose colored glasses. Even his cs% is dramatically down. I hope you aren't but I think you are. As a follow-up to this- his last two years imo would be more indicative of a 34yo journeyman catcher. Not the .250 hitter you just mentioned. Again - I hope you're right.

 

1,320 PA's are a way better indicator of actual talent/performance level than the less than half those PA's he has seen the last two years, and don't even get me started on his terrible BABIP luck even though he's been pretty good at hitting line drives. That is an anomaly.

 

And CS% numbers tend to vary wildly from year to year, so that's not really a big concern unless it actually happens during the season IMO. It has a lot to do with pitching staff philosophy as well. The Rays has a young staff last year that was not very adept at holding the running game, with Hellickson and Archer being particularly terrible if I recall correctly. Not that the Sox staff will help very much in that regard mind you.

[bostopz]

The thing about pitching around the 7 and 8 hitters to get to the light hitting #9 hitter is that every move has a counter effect that mostly offsets the original move. It's almost a no brainer for an NL manager to pitch around guys to get to the pitcher in some situations. Most of the time it works out according to plan. What people don't realize is that the secondary effects of this move, such as turning the line up over and starting the next inning with the top of the order instead of the #9 hitter, offsets much of the gain from the previous inning.

 

The thing about having a .230 hitter in your nine hole vs having a .150 hitter in your 9 hole is that the dude hitting .230 is getting close to one hit per game. Quite a few games during the season we hear "the bottom of the order came through picking up the top of the order." If your 6 or 7 hitter goes into a bad slump you then you'll get a cluster of many games in which you get less-than-crap from the bottom of the order thus putting a ton of pressure on the top to produce while we continue to throw out sub-par pitching.

[bostopz]

1,320 PA's are a way better indicator of actual talent/performance level than the less than half those PA's he has seen the last two years, and don't even get me started on his terrible BABIP luck even though he's been pretty good at hitting line drives. That is an anomaly.

 

And CS% numbers tend to vary wildly from year to year, so that's not really a big concern unless it actually happens during the season IMO. It has a lot to do with pitching staff philosophy as well. The Rays has a young staff last year that was not very adept at holding the running game, with Hellickson and Archer being particularly terrible if I recall correctly. Not that the Sox staff will help very much in that regard mind you.

 

Care to make something fun of this-- I'm saying his ba wont go above .205. You say it will?

[a700hitter]

Care to make something fun of this-- I'm saying his ba wont go above .205. You say it will?

That is a pretty low bar. Not taking that bet would be a huge nonconfidence vote.

[bostopz]

That is a pretty low bar. Not taking that bet would be a huge nonconfidence vote.

 

With my luck hell get hurt in the 1st month, career will end and wind up batting .206.

[User Name]

Care to make something fun of this-- I'm saying his ba wont go above .205. You say it will?

 

Not that I lend any credence to batting average (getting on base is way more important) but it's nearly impossible to maintain a BA that low while hitting so many line drives. Easy over.

[bostopz]

Not that I lend any credence to batting average (getting on base is way more important) but it's nearly impossible to maintain a BA that low while hitting so many line drives. Easy over.

 

I think obp is important but I lend more to ba in terms of ability to drive in runs. But OBP important. If you can't drive in runs - you're pretty useless at the plate unless you're speed demon.

 

What's our fun? I just see this guy as a downward spiral - and the last two much more indicative than his career.

[sk7326]

I think obp is important but I lend more to ba in terms of ability to drive in runs. But OBP important. If you can't drive in runs - you're pretty useless at the plate unless you're speed demon.

 

What's our fun? I just see this guy as a downward spiral - and the last two much more indicative than his career.

 

Without runners to drive in, alas ... the idea that clogging the bases is an actual problem is ummm ... not right

[a700hitter]

Before Spring Training, people were comparing Vasquez's defense to Pudge Rodriguez and Yadier Molina. Now that he is injured for the season and beyond, People are posting that his loss is no big deal and that he can be replaced with a defensive clone from the waiver wir or another team's junk pile. Not too many guys in the history of the game have played D like Pudge or Yadier. Fickle fans.

[sk7326]

1,320 PA's are a way better indicator of actual talent/performance level than the less than half those PA's he has seen the last two years, and don't even get me started on his terrible BABIP luck even though he's been pretty good at hitting line drives. That is an anomaly.

 

And CS% numbers tend to vary wildly from year to year, so that's not really a big concern unless it actually happens during the season IMO. It has a lot to do with pitching staff philosophy as well. The Rays has a young staff last year that was not very adept at holding the running game, with Hellickson and Archer being particularly terrible if I recall correctly. Not that the Sox staff will help very much in that regard mind you.

 

Here is the thing too - and I know this makes it sound like sour grapes - but we are lamenting the loss of Vasquez' potential, not his demonstrated past performance. There is little to say that we are losing a ton offensively or defensively. It sucks to lose a starter, but it would be like lamenting the loss of Bogaerts at the beginning of last season because you were sad about losing a 20 HR shortstop.

[a700hitter]

Here is the thing too - and I know this makes it sound like sour grapes - but we are lamenting the loss of Vasquez' potential, not his demonstrated past performance. There is little to say that we are losing a ton offensively or defensively. It sucks to lose a starter, but it would be like lamenting the loss of Bogaerts at the beginning of last season because you were sad about losing a 20 HR shortstop.

And we would have been lamenting his loss if the replacement was a guy off the waiver wire with little to no big league experience, because even though XB hasn't accomplished much yet, he is much better than waiver wire dregs. Also, we would be lamenting the loss of a major asset. Whether or not he is our SS, the guy has big value.

[Bellhorn04]

Before Spring Training, people were comparing Vasquez's defense to Pudge Rodriguez and Yadier Molina. Now that he is injured for the season and beyond, People are posting that his loss is no big deal and that he can be replaced with a defensive clone from the waiver wir or another team's junk pile. Not too many guys in the history of the game have played D like Pudge or Yadier. Fickle fans.

 

I think there is some merit in your point, but I think you might also be overplaying it a bit.

 

The impact of a great defensive catcher is still a hard thing to measure.

[sk7326]

From a perspective of major league value, we should be ok in the short term ... i feel worse for him than I do for the Sox 2015 chances necessarily

[User Name]

I think there is some merit in your point, but I think you might also be overplaying it a bit.

 

The impact of a great defensive catcher is still a hard thing to measure.

 

"Overplaying" is putting it lightly. Hanigan is essentially Vasquez without upside. They acquired him specifically because he was around Vasquez' level defensively, that is a fact. a700 loves to create an argument (usually flawed mind you) out of thin air.

[a700hitter]

I think there is some merit in your point, but I think you might also be overplaying it a bit.

 

The impact of a great defensive catcher is still a hard thing to measure.

But many overplayed his importance and value prior to the injury. That is the point I am making. Many of those very same people who cooed about his arm and pitch framing are the ones now saying that his loss is no biggie. I didn't overplay his importance before his injury.

[Bellhorn04]

It's not inconceivable that the loss of Vazquez will cost us a couple of wins over the season. The difference may be in the pitchers' numbers rather than any catching metrics.

[User Name]

That depends on how Hanigan holds up. He is a backup catcher for a reason. He's not a regular.