2016 Starting Rotation

[FredLynn]

You wouldn't have had to get rid of anyone. Kelly could have moved to the BP, Wright could have been moved to the BP. I argued for that move all offseason, so this is not a hindsight issue, but it was easy to see that the Sox lacked depth at MLB SP, and that depth is being tested right now.

 

I could have lived with that.

[Dojji]

I actually like Wright, but you are doing your best to make me dislike the guy by talking about him non-stop, all day, every day. We get it, you like Wright and he's an awesome story, but goddamn.

 

When someone else in the rotation becomes a pleasant surprise I'll talk about them. I like to accentuate the positive, right now other than possibly Rick Porcello, Wright's the only positive in the rotation.

[User Name]

When someone else in the rotation becomes a pleasant surprise I'll talk about them. I like to accentuate the positive, right now other than possibly Rick Porcello, Wright's the only positive in the rotation.

 

No you don't. You've been as whiny and complain-y as the rest of us the past couple of months. What you are is obsessive over certain players.

 

On Porcello: He's tied for 21st in K's in the majors, and sports a WHIP under 1.00, so he has that going for him, which is nice.

[Northern Star]

but it was easy to see that the Sox lacked depth at MLB SP, and that depth is being tested right now.

 

I don't get you. You say this on one hand, then the next minute you're saying the Sox don't need a good #2. For what we have to be consistent isn't enough in my opinion. The quality/depth is still lacking from Ben's TNT ("I'm dynamite!") job. Bucholz is too unreliable, the wrong side of 30 and never thrown 200 IP. I want him off the team and replace with a bona fide #2 innings eater.

[moonslav59]

Sorry for joining the conversation late and maybe not getting what has already been said or argued, but my opinion is that our biggest need right now is for a solid #2 SP'er. Even after getting Price, I felt like our biggest need was a number two. On another site, I argued that the Kimbrel package should have been expanded (Devers, Owens, Johnson and or Kopech...) to make a big push for a solid number two (Cleveland had a couple SP'ers on the block) or possibly even another ace like Sale. Who knows what it would have taken to get Carrasco or Sale, and who knows how hard we tried. I'm just saying, I think that was our biggest need.

 

Next winter, our pen may be our highest need area as Uehara and Tazawa's contracts expire.

[mvp 78]

Most of us wanted a second pitcher in the offseason too.

[User Name]

I don't get you. You say this on one hand, then the next minute you're saying the Sox don't need a good #2. For what we have to be consistent isn't enough in my opinion. The quality/depth is still lacking from Ben's TNT ("I'm dynamite!") job. Bucholz is too unreliable, the wrong side of 30 and never thrown 200 IP. I want him off the team and replace with a bona fide #2 innings eater.

 

No, I'm saying they need another consistent pitcher. It doesn't have to be a great pitcher, it has to be a pitcher that can absorb innings and doesn't s*** all over himself like Buch and Kelly. Consistency does not beget excellence, but it begets quality. We don't need Carlos Carrasco, but we sure could Wei-Yin Chen.

[mvp 78]

Chen would have cost a #1?

[User Name]

Chen would have cost a #1?

 

It's a comparison. We weren't/aren't getting either of those pitchers.

[moonslav59]

Rebuilding a rotation from the middle or bottom is doomed to failure. In other words, looking to upgrade our number 4 of 5 SP'er slightly is not going to make a significant impact. When you add an ace or solid number two, every one else gets knocked down a notch and improves every lower slot by attrition. It would also slide the number 5 into the long relief role this team lacks.

 

The other idea would be to include someone like Kelly in the deal. The big question would be, what can we get for...

 

Kelly, Swihart, Devers, and any two from Owens, Kopech or Johnson?

[FredLynn]

It's a comparison. We weren't/aren't getting either of those pitchers.

 

Fact is, we are stuck with our current rotation now, at least until the trade deadline. Hopefully they will improve enough for us to start winning more consistently.

[cp176]

Rebuilding a rotation from the middle or bottom is doomed to failure. In other words, looking to upgrade our number 4 of 5 SP'er slightly is not going to make a significant impact. When you add an ace or solid number two, every one else gets knocked down a notch and improves every lower slot by attrition. It would also slide the number 5 into the long relief role this team lacks.

 

The other idea would be to include someone like Kelly in the deal. The big question would be, what can we get for...

 

Kelly, Swihart, Devers, and any two from Owens, Kopech or Johnson?

 

Interesting - For a young upward trending guy that has proven himself just a bit I would be ok with this package for sure. You would meet a lot of resistance from posters here who are willing to wait for the upside of all of these guys. Sadly, in some of these cases it might have already have been reached. Personally - as much as I love JBJ in the field, for the right player he would be gone in a heartbeat. His talent as well as his potential is replaceable. Once again, it is about the pitching.

[User Name]

I wouldn't trade Devers or Swihart, and Kopech is radioactive right now.

[cp176]

touch and go here with Swihart and Devers for me. I know how how much you like Swihart. I like him to , just not as much. I like Devers too but I think that you could also make a case for Chavis. I agree with you about Kopech. If he develops, I think that it will be with us. I also think that Moncada could wind up at third base as well with Shaw moving back to first. I do think that DD is going to make a trade here eventually that is going to be upsetting to some - but I think that it will be for pitching! I will be ok with that for sure.

[FredLynn]

Wonder who we could get for the #7 overall pick in 2013

[moonslav59]

I love Swihart, and I'm not for handing him away.

 

Not many teams have two young catchers like Vazquez and Swihart along with a capable back-up like Hanigan. As much as I hate to do it, to get top talent, you have to trade top talent. With Vazquez and Hanigan, trading Swihart makes sense. With Shaw, Sandoval, Holt, Rutledge at 3B and the possibility of Moncada ending up at 3B, trading Devers makes sense. Again, this is not because I don't like him as much as anyone here, but we need a top quality SP'er and it will take giving up guys like Swihart and Devers to get one.

[Spudboy]

I love Swihart, and I'm not for handing him away.

 

Not many teams have two young catchers like Vazquez and Swihart along with a capable back-up like Hanigan. As much as I hate to do it, to get top talent, you have to trade top talent. With Vazquez and Hanigan, trading Swihart makes sense. With Shaw, Sandoval, Holt, Rutledge at 3B and the possibility of Moncada ending up at 3B, trading Devers makes sense. Again, this is not because I don't like him as much as anyone here, but we need a top quality SP'er and it will take giving up guys like Swihart and Devers to get one.

 

Makes sense to me.

 

Although I would hate to lose Swihart. I think he will be a special hitter and with his speed will become an impact player.

[Kingface]

I would HATE to get rid of Devera, Moncada, Espinoza or Betti for anybody.......problem is.....no team would give up a young TOR #2 starter for any of the rest of our players. We would have to give up 2/TWO of that list to get a #2 young TOR starter....PLUS Swihart. Not sure I'd do that. Sure we could give up 6 minor league players that includes Swihart and one from that list......but most teams that give up a young pitcher wants major league talent in return. Unfortunately for the Sox....all of our top prospects are playing A ball or lower. That's why it will take Swihart and TWO from that list above in my opinion. Not sure I would do that.

 

For some reason......I'm thinking Swihart becomes another Cecchini. Many people thought Cecchini was the best new thing years ago. He was a top 50 prospect and climbing. He had a solid debut....many called him untouchable......I said 3 years ago to 'trade him and trade him now' and strike when the iron is hot!. He wasn't great defensively and seemed destined to be a .275, 13HR, 60RBI guy....not horrible...but not 'top prospect material' like he just about was. ......for some reason Swihart reminded me of him and I said a year ago to trade him. His stock was HUGE. I'm thinking we missed the window..... I hope I'm wrong.

[cp176]

I would HATE to get rid of Devera, Moncada, Espinoza or Betti for anybody.......problem is.....no team would give up a young TOR #2 starter for any of the rest of our players. We would have to give up 2/TWO of that list to get a #2 young TOR starter....PLUS Swihart. Not sure I'd do that. Sure we could give up 6 minor league players that includes Swihart and one from that list......but most teams that give up a young pitcher wants major league talent in return. Unfortunately for the Sox....all of our top prospects are playing A ball or lower. That's why it will take Swihart and TWO from that list above in my opinion. Not sure I would do that.

 

For some reason......I'm thinking Swihart becomes another Cecchini. Many people thought Cecchini was the best new thing years ago. He was a top 50 prospect and climbing. He had a solid debut....many called him untouchable......I said 3 years ago to 'trade him and trade him now' and strike when the iron is hot!. He wasn't great defensively and seemed destined to be a .275, 13HR, 60RBI guy....not horrible...but not 'top prospect material' like he just about was. ......for some reason Swihart reminded me of him and I said a year ago to trade him. His stock was HUGE. I'm thinking we missed the window..... I hope I'm wrong.

 

I am going to bet on Swihart being a better bet than Cecchini. i don't think that his bat will lay over all other prospects to warrant him moving from behind the plate though. He quite possibly with time becomes an adequate defensive catcher just not adequate enough to move him ahead of Vazquez. All of us who share this belief hope that we are wrong. good kid and good athlete.

[Bellhorn04]

What an awful start for the rotation. How many times has a starter given us 7 innings? Porcello did it once and I think that's it. He and Wright are the only 2 that have made it through 6 innings each start. Our bullpen will be hamburger if the situation doesn't improve.

[mvp 78]

I am going to bet on Swihart being a better bet than Cecchini. i don't think that his bat will lay over all other prospects to warrant him moving from behind the plate though. He quite possibly with time becomes an adequate defensive catcher just not adequate enough to move him ahead of Vazquez. All of us who share this belief hope that we are wrong. good kid and good athlete.

 

Well, Swihart has produced at the MLB level, so he's already shown more than Cecchini ever did.

[Dojji]

Vazquez seems to have been the making of Rick Porcello. Ever since he's taken over the catching duties, Porcello has been much much better.

[jacksonianmarch]

Porcello is a sinker baller. When you trust your catcher to block your sinker, it makes it more effective. I also think Vasquez is an elite defensive catcher in mind as well as skill. He seems to be a take charge catcher who doesn't f*** around. Someone with a wimpy demeanor like Porcello needs that

[a700hitter]

Porcello is a sinker baller. When you trust your catcher to block your sinker, it makes it more effective. I also think Vasquez is an elite defensive catcher in mind as well as skill. He seems to be a take charge catcher who doesn't f*** around. Someone with a wimpy demeanor like Porcello needs that

I don't know if Porcello is wimpy. He did bodyslam a charging Youkilis.

[Dojji]

He can't say anything nice without dropping 2 insults. It's a laundry thing.

[Kingface]

Well, Swihart has produced at the MLB level, so he's already shown more than Cecchini ever did.

 

Yet neither of them are on an MLB team............ But yes, you're right....Swihart has had a much better MLB career than Cecchini....and probably will. My point is that Swihart should have been traded when his stock was SKY HIGH. Now.....it's going down........... I'll say it once....I'll say it again.....everyone LOVES a good catching prospect. The Sox seem to produce great catching prospects.......TRADE THEM WHEN THE STOCK IS HIGH!!!!!!

[SoxHop]

Yet neither of them are on an MLB team............ But yes, you're right....Swihart has had a much better MLB career than Cecchini....and probably will. My point is that Swihart should have been traded when his stock was SKY HIGH. Now.....it's going down........... I'll say it once....I'll say it again.....everyone LOVES a good catching prospect. The Sox seem to produce great catching prospects.......TRADE THEM WHEN THE STOCK IS HIGH!!!!!!

 

His stock may even be higher when he has some time in AAA learning to be a catcher, which he didn't have last year after moving pretty much straight from AA to the roster.

[Dojji]

I don't think Swihart's stock was ever thast high. He had the worst defensive numbers of any catcher in baseball last year. Everyone knows he has a ton of potential but he wasn't ready to prove it last year, and anyone would be trading for him knowing they were getting a work in progress, not an MLB ready guy. That has a big effect on value.

 

If he'd cleaned up offensively while he was up it'd be another matter, but the bat is a work in progress too. Very high ceiling for a catcher on both offense and defense, but he hasn't reached it yet.

[Kingface]

His stock may even be higher when he has some time in AAA learning to be a catcher, which he didn't have last year after moving pretty much straight from AA to the roster.

 

Swihart was a top 20 prospect in all of baseball a year ago. He was also lauded by his HUGE defensive gains during that time. There is ZERO WAY he will reach that stock again after showing at the ML level that he CAN't handle defensive duties (like he was thought he could do). When you're a catching prospect the first thing they really care abut is how they can call a game and pla behind the plate. He did neither.....Vaz does both....and very well. Offense is second. His upside is at the plate........which is why we should have traded him. He was the NUMBER ONE catching prospect n all of MLB!!!! We didn't need that.....whay didn't we strike when the iron was hot?!?!?!?!??!?!?!

[SoxHop]

Swihart was a top 20 prospect in all of baseball a year ago. He was also lauded by his HUGE defensive gains during that time. There is ZERO WAY he will reach that stock again after showing at the ML level that he CAN't handle defensive duties (like he was thought he could do). When you're a catching prospect the first thing they really care abut is how they can call a game and pla behind the plate. He did neither.....Vaz does both....and very well. Offense is second. His upside is at the plate........which is why we should have traded him. He was the NUMBER ONE catching prospect n all of MLB!!!! We didn't need that.....whay didn't we strike when the iron was hot?!?!?!?!??!?!?!

 

So we trade Swihart when we don't know if Vasquez can come back from the injury. What if V was done, then what do we do?

 

Swihart has a higher ceiling projected as a catcher as there are hopes that he can sure up his defense. And figuring he's only been a catcher for I think 4 years, there's a lot he can learn. Swihart pretty much skipped AAA due to injuries. And if...... if Vasquez can hold down the catching duties while displaying some offense, then Swihart has much time to learn the position in AAA. Then it's a decision between two good options.

 

Don't rush the kid......

 

Swihart was in the top 20 prospects of all of baseball last year as an AA reassigned catcher. That doesn't sound right to me..... I could be wrong...