Tommy John Surgery for Christian Vasquez

[cp176]

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.

 

Knowing that you are more than solid behind the plate is comforting. Finally a guy that could actually throw runners out as well. But, losing him is more of a loss for him than for the Sox. Is he replaceable, I think so. Much more so than Fisk.

[a700hitter]

Knowing that you are more than solid behind the plate is comforting. Finally a guy that could actually throw runners out as well. But, losing him is more of a loss for him than for the Sox. Is he replaceable, I think so. Much more so than Fisk.

I agree. I just thought it was interesting that the same people who touted him as the next Yadier Molina are now saying that losing him is not a big deal. If the Cards had lost Yadier, that would have been a huge deal for them, even before he had learned to hit.

[Palodios]

I agree. I just thought it was interesting that the same people who touted him as the next Yadier Molina are now saying that losing him is not a big deal. If the Cards had lost Yadier, that would have been a huge deal for them, even before he had learned to hit.

 

The Red Sox replaced Vasquez with someone who is a worse defender, and a worse hitter. We all know that. The reason most of us aren't concerned is that Leon is known to be solid defensively, and Swihart will probably replace him By June anyway.

 

It is far harder to replace a 2 WAR catcher than it would be to replace someone like Ortiz or Porcello.

[Dojji]

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.

 

And there's absolutely no difference between Alex Gonzalez (pretty darn good d-first SS comparing roughly to Leon and Hanigan) and the Wizard of Oz (all time stupendous defensive SS)

 

Right?

 

Right?

 

What? They're both defensive specialists who live on their glove, there's clearly no difference between the two, right? Who's with me on this one?

 

The best defensive catcher in the world right now is yadier Molina. He's won 6 straight gold gloves, he's probably going to win more, he's an all world defender, one of the best of all time. Vazquez is exactly the same type of catcher. Exactly. Defensively he can do everything Yadier Molina does, all he lacks is the experience and polish Yadi has. Offensively he's not going to be a middle of the lineup guy but he's probably going to hit well enough to avoid negative oWAR. Losing that guy and bringing in an everyday defensive specialist or glove scrub is not replacing an apple with an apple. It's replacing an apple with a pomegranate seed. Don't be fool enough to convince yourself otherwise.

 

I'm glad we have Sandy Leon. He's worth a look, and we aren't likely to find a better replacement until Swihart anyway. but don't make a mistake, even if Leon works out reasonably well, we're less effective than we would have been with a full year of Christian Vazquez behind the plate. That is not a matter of debate, that is a matter of 100% steelclad fact.

Edited March 31, 2015 by Dojji

[Dojji]

"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.

 

Umm no, they didn't bring in Haningan "because he was around Vazquez' level defensively," that's nonsense of the kind you'd be more likely to see in one of my posts, and if you think that's me trying to insult you, then well done, have a cookie.

 

They brought in Hanigan because they had a young starting catcher who was still learning the ropes and wanted a defensively solid veteran backup that wasn't quite as washed up as David Ross, who they could go to for a few years and help ease the young starting catcher in. also because if God forbid something happened to the young starter they'd have someone who could stand in for a few weeks to a couple months if needed, which Ross couldn't do anymore.

 

Basically they wanted to be able to lean harder on their backup than they could expect to be able to lean on Ross, ergo Hanigan. The fact that Hanigan is also a defensively focused catcher didn't hurt certainly, but they didn't bring him in to be Vazquez by any means. They brought him in to be Ryan Hanigan, a very good backup catcher who they could get some mileage out of as a short term starting solution if they had to.

 

Good thing too, imagine if our tandem was Leon and Ross. Doesn't really bear thinking about. But no, the only thing Vazquez had to do with the Hanigan signing was his age and relative inexperience making a somewhat more broadly dependable backup desirable.

Edited March 31, 2015 by Dojji

[Spudboy]

I wanted Ross back for sentimental reasons. I admit it.

 

I will also admit that I was pleasantly surprised and pleased that Hannigan was acquired. He is what a back up catcher should be. Hopefully he hits closer to his career averages than he has recently. The BABIP data seems to suggest he may do just that.

 

I still like the fat old guy, Quintana. He seems serviceable. And he smiles a lot which makes me think that he enjoys what he is doing.

[mvp 78]

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.

 

It's almost as if different people have different opinions from one another!?! Amazing!!!

[Kimmi]

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 don't know if you're referring to me as one of these people, but I will say again that I think losing Vazquez is going to hurt. He is known as an elite pitch framer and he seems to handle the pitching staff very well. Pitchers have raved about him. Honestly, while the CS% is nice, CS% is not that big of a deal to me.

 

That said, I have also expressed my happiness about having Hanigan on the team since he was signed. In fact, I really wanted him signed last year over AJ or any other catcher. Really, really wanted him instead of AJ.

 

The point being, with Vazquez injured, I think the Sox have about the best case reasonable replacements available. I like things even better now that the Vazquez Clone has been signed.

 

That's not to say that losing Vazquez is no big deal. IMO, it is a bigger deal than most people think. This is a pitching staff that would have benefitted a great deal from Vazquez' skills. My posts yesterday were mainly in response to your false claim that Hanigan/Leon would not be a good defensive tandem. They will be very good, but they will not be as good as Vazquez/Hanigan would have been.

[Kimmi]

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.

 

 

Vazquez typically saves a team 2 wins just in pitch framing numbers over an average catcher. That does not take into consideration any indirect effects of that pitch framing skill.

[bostopz]

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.

 

This tells me (the bold) that we'll never agree on this subject. We can agree to disagree.

 

A major point we differ is that you are suggesting / implying that most of what "we" are lamenting on- is-- his potential. That's very very little. I and a few others here believe we SAW incredible defensive performance. If it was just me okay - a poster or two- okay. But even the link I provided someone else believes they SAW it. What we don't believe is your statement "not his demonstrated past performance." We could never prove this. Just a different belief in what we believed we saw.

 

I posted before he got hurt that I was hopeful that we could get a year out of him and trade him -- because I expect like everyone else Swihart to come up. I was hopeful we could package Vasquez and get something really good for him. A position of need.

 

And as far as some of the posters that simply say -- "good now we can just bring up Swihart quicker." I didn't think front office wanted to do it. They wanted him in the minors one more year. I suspect because they thought it would do him real good. So for those that suggest it is good - I'm skeptical.

Edited April 1, 2015 by bostopz

[a700hitter]

 

That's not to say that losing Vazquez is no big deal. IMO, it is a bigger deal than most people think. This is a pitching staff that would have benefitted a great deal from Vazquez' skills. My posts yesterday were mainly in response to your false claim that Hanigan/Leon would not be a good defensive tandem. They will be very good, but they will not be as good as Vazquez/Hanigan would have been.

I know nothing about Leon except he was discarded like tissue paper, so it is pretty safe to assume that he is not at Vasquez's level behind the plate. I'll stand by that. I'll also stand by my opinion that Hanigan is a 80-90 game catcher at best. He is aging and there are signs of decline. I did not trash the defense of either of them, but did not signs of decline by Hanigan. It happens to catchers around their mid-30's.

 

Losing Vaquez is a blow to this team's run prevention ability. On that we both agree. That was the point that I made. Apparently, you didn't like the way I referred to Hanigan and Leon, but the 2015 Red Sox will are not be as good defensively as they would have be with Vasquez catching 120 games and Hanigan catch 30 or 40. I think you have been arguing about style instead of substance as we agree that this is not a good development for team defense.

[User Name]

And there's absolutely no difference between Alex Gonzalez (pretty darn good d-first SS comparing roughly to Leon and Hanigan) and the Wizard of Oz (all time stupendous defensive SS)

 

Right?

 

Right?

 

What? They're both defensive specialists who live on their glove, there's clearly no difference between the two, right? Who's with me on this one?

 

The best defensive catcher in the world right now is yadier Molina. He's won 6 straight gold gloves, he's probably going to win more, he's an all world defender, one of the best of all time. Vazquez is exactly the same type of catcher. Exactly. Defensively he can do everything Yadier Molina does, all he lacks is the experience and polish Yadi has. Offensively he's not going to be a middle of the lineup guy but he's probably going to hit well enough to avoid negative oWAR. Losing that guy and bringing in an everyday defensive specialist or glove scrub is not replacing an apple with an apple. It's replacing an apple with a pomegranate seed. Don't be fool enough to convince yourself otherwise.

 

I'm glad we have Sandy Leon. He's worth a look, and we aren't likely to find a better replacement until Swihart anyway. but don't make a mistake, even if Leon works out reasonably well, we're less effective than we would have been with a full year of Christian Vazquez behind the plate. That is not a matter of debate, that is a matter of 100% steelclad fact.

 

Umm no, they didn't bring in Haningan "because he was around Vazquez' level defensively," that's nonsense of the kind you'd be more likely to see in one of my posts, and if you think that's me trying to insult you, then well done, have a cookie.

 

They brought in Hanigan because they had a young starting catcher who was still learning the ropes and wanted a defensively solid veteran backup that wasn't quite as washed up as David Ross, who they could go to for a few years and help ease the young starting catcher in. also because if God forbid something happened to the young starter they'd have someone who could stand in for a few weeks to a couple months if needed, which Ross couldn't do anymore.

 

Basically they wanted to be able to lean harder on their backup than they could expect to be able to lean on Ross, ergo Hanigan. The fact that Hanigan is also a defensively focused catcher didn't hurt certainly, but they didn't bring him in to be Vazquez by any means. They brought him in to be Ryan Hanigan, a very good backup catcher who they could get some mileage out of as a short term starting solution if they had to.

 

Good thing too, imagine if our tandem was Leon and Ross. Doesn't really bear thinking about. But no, the only thing Vazquez had to do with the Hanigan signing was his age and relative inexperience making a somewhat more broadly dependable backup desirable.

 

Dojji, let me put it quite simply for you: These two posts are a whole lot of nothing. While defensive ability mostly translates almost perfectly to the ML level, this point stands and it's undisputable: Vasquez had proven nothing at the MLB level. This is the very important point you're conveniently glossing over. "He's compared to this, he's compared to that" means nothing until it's proven in actual games. And that's why most of this stuff is nonsense. Not that we'll know this year anyways.

 

For this year specifically, you are expecting a seamless transition to the MLB level had he been healthy, and it almost never works like that. This is stuff you know, and you're just flinging ideas at the wall here.

Edited April 1, 2015 by User Name?

[Thunder]

I wanted Ross back for sentimental reasons. I admit it.

 

I will also admit that I was pleasantly surprised and pleased that Hannigan was acquired. He is what a back up catcher should be. Hopefully he hits closer to his career averages than he has recently. The BABIP data seems to suggest he may do just that.

 

I still like the fat old guy, Quintana. He seems serviceable. And he smiles a lot which makes me think that he enjoys what he is doing.

 

I miss Ross as well, but rather than Quintana, I would like to see Jose Molina instead of Leon. In terms, of skills, Leon is probably a tad better, but Molina always makes me laugh because he looks like he's terrifies when he comes to bad. I call him Scared Guy.

[Kimmi]

I know nothing about Leon except he was discarded like tissue paper, so it is pretty safe to assume that he is not at Vasquez's level behind the plate. I'll stand by that. I'll also stand by my opinion that Hanigan is a 80-90 game catcher at best. He is aging and there are signs of decline. I did not trash the defense of either of them, but did not signs of decline by Hanigan. It happens to catchers around their mid-30's.

 

Losing Vaquez is a blow to this team's run prevention ability. On that we both agree. That was the point that I made. Apparently, you didn't like the way I referred to Hanigan and Leon, but the 2015 Red Sox will are not be as good defensively as they would have be with Vasquez catching 120 games and Hanigan catch 30 or 40. I think you have been arguing about style instead of substance as we agree that this is not a good development for team defense.

 

 

The Nats have two major league catchers already on their roster in Wilson Ramos and Jose Lobaton. I think Lobaton is known as a pretty good pitch framer. Regardless, the Nats were going to have to DFA Leon because he had no options. Good for the Sox. We picked him up for almost nothing. Leon has shown nothing yet at the major league level, but in the minors, he and Vazquez were virtual clones defensively. In fact, I was just reading that he and Vazquez are good friends, and that their careers have more or less paralleled each other. Believe it or not.

 

As far as Hanigan goes, I agree that he is not a full time catcher. He and Leon (or Quintero) need to be able to hold things down for a couple of months.

[bostopz]

Dojji, let me put it quite simply for you: These two posts are a whole lot of nothing. While defensive ability mostly translates almost perfectly to the ML level, this point stands and it's undisputable: Vasquez had proven nothing at the MLB level. This is the very important point you're conveniently glossing over. "He's compared to this, he's compared to that" means nothing until it's proven in actual games. And that's why most of this stuff is nonsense. Not that we'll know this year anyways.

 

For this year specifically, you are expecting a seamless transition to the MLB level had he been healthy, and it almost never works like that. This is stuff you know, and you're just flinging ideas at the wall here.

 

What does "prove" mean to you?

 

Per the article from Dan and from what some of us have seen we beleive he certainly HAS proved he is/was a tremendous defensive catcher.

 

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

[bostopz]

The Nats have two major league catchers already on their roster in Wilson Ramos and Jose Lobaton. I think Lobaton is known as a pretty good pitch framer. Regardless, the Nats were going to have to DFA Leon because he had no options. Good for the Sox. We picked him up for almost nothing. Leon has shown nothing yet at the major league level, but in the minors, he and Vazquez were virtual clones defensively. In fact, I was just reading that he and Vazquez are good friends, and that their careers have more or less paralleled each other. Believe it or not.

 

As far as Hanigan goes, I agree that he is not a full time catcher. He and Leon (or Quintero) need to be able to hold things down for a couple of months.

 

Leon is a .156 hitter. You hit .156 -- that "ain't good."

[User Name]

What does "prove" mean to you?

 

Per the article from Dan and from what some of us have seen we beleive he certainly HAS proved he is/was a tremendous defensive catcher.

 

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

 

He's also a rookie. Rookies tend to have uneven first seasons as they adjust to the Majors. This is not even arguable. Some of the best players in the game today struggled offensively/defensively (or with their control/command for pitchers) upon reaching The Show full time for the first time. I understand and agree that Vasquez is a big loss, but it's foolish to think he wasn't just keeping a seat warm for Siwhart, and considering his offensive skills, that may have happened this year anyways even without his injury. It is what it is.

[bostopz]

He's also a rookie. Rookies tend to have uneven first seasons as they adjust to the Majors. This is not even arguable. Some of the best players in the game today struggled offensively/defensively (or with their control/command for pitchers) upon reaching The Show full time for the first time. I understand and agree that Vasquez is a big loss, but it's foolish to think he wasn't just keeping a seat warm for Siwhart, and considering his offensive skills, that may have happened this year anyways even without his injury. It is what it is.

 

Sure they do. However a defensive catcher --most of his uneven season will come from offense. So your point IS ARGUABLE. Some of the best player's in the game have NOT struggled defensively when they 1st entered the league. Some do and some don't.

 

And again - I said I would have traded Vasquez the very next season -- but that is beside the point. Fact is - Vasquez is/was a stud defensively. In this subject of Vasquez (not Swihart) - it is a loss because we've SEEN what he can do and believe he can continue to do what he showed last year.

[a700hitter]

The Nats have two major league catchers already on their roster in Wilson Ramos and Jose Lobaton. I think Lobaton is known as a pretty good pitch framer. Regardless, the Nats were going to have to DFA Leon because he had no options. Good for the Sox. We picked him up for almost nothing. Leon has shown nothing yet at the major league level, but in the minors, he and Vazquez were virtual clones defensively. In fact, I was just reading that he and Vazquez are good friends, and that their careers have more or less paralleled each other. Believe it or not.

 

As far as Hanigan goes, I agree that he is not a full time catcher. He and Leon (or Quintero) need to be able to hold things down for a couple of months.

There you go again with that "clone" thing. So, in your opinion, is Vasquez a special defensive talent or do several teams have guys that play defense like Vasquez for which they have no room on their 40 man rosters? If these clone guys are around to be scooped up for carfare, why would you think that there would be a negative impact on our defense from losing Vasquez? It seems to me that you are speaking out of both sides of your mouth.

[User Name]

Sure they do. However a defensive catcher --most of his uneven season will come from offense. So your point IS ARGUABLE. Some of the best player's in the game have NOT struggled defensively when they 1st entered the league. Some do and some don't.

 

And again - I said I would have traded Vasquez the very next season -- but that is beside the point. Fact is - Vasquez is/was a stud defensively. In this subject of Vasquez (not Swihart) - it is a loss because we've SEEN what he can do and believe he can continue to do what he showed last year.

 

The point was that there's a chance that, as a rookie, he was going to struggle. That point isn't arguable. Defense translates almost perfectly to The Show, as I have pointed out before, but the grind and the responsibility isn't the same. Guys take time to adjust.

[bostopz]

The point was that there's a chance that, as a rookie, he was going to struggle. That point isn't arguable. Defense translates almost perfectly to The Show, as I have pointed out before, but the grind and the responsibility isn't the same. Guys take time to adjust.

 

In one breath you say "there is a chance that."

 

Then in your 2nd breath you assume that everyone as a rookie will falter in all parts of the game.

 

I don't agree with how you look at this. And while you think you can give an example to back up yours - I can easily do with mine too.

[User Name]

In one breath you say "there is a chance that."

 

Then in your 2nd breath you assume that everyone as a rookie will falter in all parts of the game.

 

I don't agree with how you look at this. And while you think you can give an example to back up yours - I can easily do with mine too.

 

I said "there is a good chance" or "it's likely" in both posts. There is no discrepancy.

 

I't's ok that you don't agree with the way I see things obviously. I just don't think the Vasquez injury is going to be that big of a loss in the grand scheme of things, since Swihart should be up for good by midseason, and he's the better overall player.

[Dojji]

I don't think we know that at all. We do know that Swihart has a much better offensive ceiling than Vazquez, but until he hits in the big leagues that's still a question mark, and defensively he's still an unfinished product as well -- talent is there to be a solid defensive catcher, but that's all we know right now. And defense is so important at catcher that even if Swihart matches very good offense with above average D, which is very possible, if Vazquez lives up to the hype defensively and can even just kind of hang in there at the plate (~.330 OBP or so) which package is a better fit is almost a matter of style and taste.

 

Having to choose between a guy with Buster Posey upside and one with Yadier Molina upside is a good problem to have, but it's also a tough call with advantages either way. You can go the distance with either kind of catcher depending on how you structure the rest of your team.

Edited April 1, 2015 by Dojji

[User Name]

Do you understand what "overall" means though?

 

Elite defense plus Mcnoodlebat offense is not better than above-average defense and above average offense. My post, of course, implied that both guys reach their ceiling, which could happen, or they could both be busts, or one could reach his ceiling while the other doesn't.

 

I am in agreement though, that it's a pretty good problem to have.

[Dojji]

Yes I know exactly what overall means. And I'm saying that until we know how well Swihart hits big league pitching and whether there's any holes in his big league defensive game we can't possibly know who the better overall player is leaving the whole question down to personal preference (and personal prejudices).

 

And stylistically, I prefer a catcher with all world defensive potential and adequate offense, over an all-world hitter with adequate defense. This is one of the two positions where having all world defense is worth making that level of offensive sacrifice, the other obviously being SS.

 

If that's all we know about the two players, the decision isn't nearly as clear cut as you're making it out to be.

Edited April 1, 2015 by Dojji

[sk7326]

Vasquez is probably a 70 or 80 glove. His replacements are more like 60 or 70. Swihart if he comes up scouts as a 60 or 70 glove too. That could cost the sox a win or two tops. That is a drop off but might be more than offset by say us replacing our 2014 third baseman with an actual breathing human.

[User Name]

Yes I know exactly what overall means. And I'm saying that until we know how well Swihart hits big league pitching and whether there's any holes in his big league defensive game we can't possibly know who the better overall player is leaving the whole question down to personal preference (and personal prejudices).

 

And stylistically, I prefer a catcher with all world defensive potential and adequate offense, over an all-world hitter with adequate defense. This is one of the two positions where having all world defense is worth making that level of offensive sacrifice, the other obviously being SS.

 

If that's all we know about the two players, the decision isn't nearly as clear cut as you're making it out to be.

 

Except that that's not all we know. Swihart is a much better hitter right now than Vasquez is likely to ever be. And again, while defense tends to translate almost perfectly to the Majors, Vasquez has to actually translate it to in-game performance before we anoint the next Yadier Molina. I am cautiously optimistic about Vasquez' defensive ability, but I've watched enough baseball to know what usually happens when a guy's ability in any context is hyped that much.

 

BTW, what happened to your usual "He only likes that guy because he's a Latino" retort you've used oh so many times regarding my prospect evaluations?

[User Name]

Vasquez is probably a 70 or 80 glove. His replacements are more like 60 or 70. Swihart if he comes up scouts as a 60 or 70 glove too. That could cost the sox a win or two tops. That is a drop off but might be more than offset by say us replacing our 2014 third baseman with an actual breathing human.

 

Or Swihart actually being able to get on base at a league-average clip.

[Dojji]

Except that that's not all we know. Swihart is a much better hitter right now than Vasquez is likely to ever be. And again, while defense tends to translate almost perfectly to the Majors, Vasquez has to actually translate it to in-game performance before we anoint the next Yadier Molina. I am cautiously optimistic about Vasquez' defensive ability, but I've watched enough baseball to know what usually happens when a guy's ability in any context is hyped that much.

 

BTW, what happened to your usual "He only likes that guy because he's a Latino" retort you've used oh so many times regarding my prospect evaluations?

 

We've thought that about players before who came up to the big leagues and did a grand total of nothing. Ryan Lavarnway probably the most recently example. Vazquez is an acceptable starting catcher right now, or would be if his elbow was healthy. He was on pace for about 3-3.5 WAR over a full season based on his performance last year, that's not just acceptable, that's excellent. Let's let Swihart catch up to that level before starting to label him as superior.

 

It's true of no position more than catching that hitting is NOT everything there is to the position. And even if Swihart hits, if Vazquez is contributing the same number of wins in another area while not actively costing his team wins with his bat, which is quite possible considering the significance of catching defense, it's still a wash despite the fact that Vazquez is a lower third hitter and Swihart has the *ceiling* to be a middle of the rotation hitter.

Edited April 1, 2015 by Dojji

[gojohn99]

Yes just look at Bogaerts and Bradley last year...

 

He's also a rookie. Rookies tend to have uneven first seasons as they adjust to the Majors. This is not even arguable. Some of the best players in the game today struggled offensively/defensively (or with their control/command for pitchers) upon reaching The Show full time for the first time. I understand and agree that Vasquez is a big loss, but it's foolish to think he wasn't just keeping a seat warm for Siwhart, and considering his offensive skills, that may have happened this year anyways even without his injury. It is what it is.