Christian Vazquez

[cp176]

I'm not sure that I totally agree but I would say that if the best you can do is a great catcher who can't hit .220 is the best you can do then what you are coming up with in your system is piss poor.

[Jack Flap]

I'm not sure that I totally agree but I would say that if the best you can do is a great catcher who can't hit .220 is the best you can do then what you are coming up with in your system is piss poor.

 

I doubt very many teams have two young catchers better than Vazquez and Swihart in their system, recent struggles and injury aside.

[illinoisredsox]

I'm not sure that I totally agree but I would say that if the best you can do is a great catcher who can't hit .220 is the best you can do then what you are coming up with in your system is piss poor.

 

So would you have gotten rid of this guy?

 

BA/OBP/SLG/OPS .171/.236/.237/.473

 

How about this one?

 

.199/.283/.256/.539

 

If you are a baseball fan, you have heard of both of them and neither played in the deadball era. Both these seasons happened early in these players' careers. Combined, they would play 30 years in the big leagues and play in 6 all-star games (3 each). They would win 14 gold gloves between them (6 and 8 respectively).

 

Vazquez missed all of last year. Couldn't pick up a bat. I think we can cut him some slack.

[moonslav59]

I'm not sure that I totally agree but I would say that if the best you can do is a great catcher who can't hit .220 is the best you can do then what you are coming up with in your system is piss poor.

 

I think you may be undervaluing great catcher defense and how they handle the pitching staff.

 

The difference between a .260 hitter and a .220 hitter over 450 ABs is just 18 hits. Surely a great pitch-framer, WP blocker, CS expert and CERA related plus catcher can more than make up 18 hits with stellar defense.

[moonslav59]

Ridiculous.

 

No MLB team can stand to have an every day player in the line up with a sub .200 BA.

 

Well, not many teams can put 7 guys in their line-up with an .790+ OPS, so it's not so "ridiculous" to think this offense can't absorb a .199 hitter.

 

Let me ask you this, do you think a team can have 4 positions bat under .230 and only one over .275 and still make the playoffs?

 

That Astros did last year. (Note: they also had their starting 1Bman (Chris Carter) bat .199 last year, so there goes that theory. They not only made the playoffs with a .199 hitter, they also had a catcher batting .211, a 3Bman batting .224, a CF'er batting .236 and two other guys under .245 in the same line-up.

 

Look at this year's Sox team. Our catchers are hitting .230, which includes Sandy Leon's unlikely 5 for 6. Take away his ABs, and our catchers have hit .212. Do you really think, if we took away another 4 hits to bring us under .200, we'd be out of it?

 

[Maxbialystock]

Tagging onto moonslav's points above, I would say the following. The Sox offense is clearly the best in MLB right now. They score more runs than anyone else and have the highest OPS by a good margin. If there is any team in MLB than can afford to have a weak-hitting catcher, it's the Sox.

 

At the same time, we have a weak pitching staff that could use a good defensive catcher. Vazquez appears to be that guy. Heck, he's even the only guy who seems to be able to catch our best pitcher, Wright, because Hannigan sure can't.

 

I am not a huge Vazquez fan, but to me keeping him as our primary catcher right now is a no-brainer. He is the polar opposite of Saltalamacchia.

[moonslav59]

I think Vazquez's bat will come around, but I do not think it needs to for us to be strong title contenders.

We need a solid, dependable SP'er and maybe a good pen arm, if Kelly doesn't work out well there.

[TheBabeStrikesBack]

Well, not many teams can put 7 guys in their line-up with an .790+ OPS, so it's not so "ridiculous" to think this offense can't absorb a .199 hitter.

 

Let me ask you this, do you think a team can have 4 positions bat under .230 and only one over .275 and still make the playoffs?

 

That Astros did last year. (Note: they also had their starting 1Bman (Chris Carter) bat .199 last year, so there goes that theory. They not only made the playoffs with a .199 hitter, they also had a catcher batting .211, a 3Bman batting .224, a CF'er batting .236 and two other guys under .245 in the same line-up.

 

Look at this year's Sox team. Our catchers are hitting .230, which includes Sandy Leon's unlikely 5 for 6. Take away his ABs, and our catchers have hit .212. Do you really think, if we took away another 4 hits to bring us under .200, we'd be out of it?

 

 

Geez, obviously there's exceptions to every rule.

 

And if his skills behind the dish are so great to make up for the lack of hitting, why is the staff's ERA so poor?

 

Que CERA, CERA.........

[User Name]

Because no matter how good a catcher is, if a staff sucks, it sucks. It's common sense.

[cp176]

Because no matter how good a catcher is, if a staff sucks, it sucks. It's common sense.

 

I agree with this. All things being equal, we might have been better off with a healthy Swihart behind the plate.

[cp176]

I think you may be undervaluing great catcher defense and how they handle the pitching staff.

 

The difference between a .260 hitter and a .220 hitter over 450 ABs is just 18 hits. Surely a great pitch-framer, WP blocker, CS expert and CERA related plus catcher can more than make up 18 hits with stellar defense.

 

Trust me, i do not and would not undervalue the importance of a great defensive catcher. I basically responded here to create some conversation. I'm actually happy with Vazquez. You are obviously into statistical analysis to a great extent. How is Vazquez doing compared to the 'elites' of the league? What are the numbers telling you? Is he making our pitching staff better? I think that it remains to be seen whether or not he becomes the great defensive catcher that we all want to see. Hope he does but I'm not convinced of it just yet. If he is good but not great and can't hit .220, thanks - I'll pass.

[moonslav59]

Geez, obviously there's exceptions to every rule.

 

And if his skills behind the dish are so great to make up for the lack of hitting, why is the staff's ERA so poor?

 

Que CERA, CERA.........

 

Then maybe word your statements like "Almost nobody can win with a hitter below .200, instead of saying "No team can win..."

 

On the staff ERA, with Smith out and the Sox about to use their 9th SP'er by mid June, I'd say Vazquez and other catchers on the Sox have done an amazing job to help place the Sox 10th in ERA- at 94. We're 6th in the AL, but only 1 behind being 4th and 2 behind being tied for 3rd best in the AL. Id' say that's miraculous.

 

Our staff also places ...

8th in WHIP at 1.26

10th in K-BB% at 14.3%

12th in xFIP- at 98

13th in SIERA at 3.94

 

Besides, I said "CERA related" to indicate there's more to measuring how getting the most out of the pitchers you catch that their ERA. CERA is an extremely limited use stat, and is more often than not used incorrectly.

 

Here's a look at the tiny sample sizes of 2016 so far, in terms of OPS against by our pitchers with various catchers:

 

OPS against/PA (under 50 PAs not listed= N/A, except for Swihart)

 

.......Vaz----- Han---- Swi

 

Price:.694/331---- N/A-- .646/48

Wright: N/A---- .561/264--.625/27

Porc: .673/314--- N/A -- .835/27

Buch: .775/206-- N/A -- 1.005/45

Kelly: N/A ---- .924/92

Barn: .459/56-- .796/60

Owen: N/A --- 1.049/59

O'Sull: N/A --- .901/50

Ueha: .869/53-- N/A ---

Hemb: .402/51-- N/A ---

 

As you can see, with so many Sox starters having personal caddies, it's hard to use CERA to judge Sox catchers vs each other, which is the only way CERA should be used when possible.

 

 

 

 

[Maxbialystock]

Geez, obviously there's exceptions to every rule.

 

And if his skills behind the dish are so great to make up for the lack of hitting, why is the staff's ERA so poor?

 

Que CERA, CERA.........

 

Your delight in baiting continues to ignore what was said. Fact one: even with Vazquez weak hitting, the Sox offense right now is the absolute best in MLB. They don't need a good-hitting catcher to ensure they can score runs. Fact two: the Sox pitching is weak and would benefit from a good defensive catcher, which Vazquez certainly is. This does not mean that, with him behind the plate, the team ERA will suddenly lop of a run or two. Maybe half a run, which I think is what happened after Swihart went back to Pawtucket.

 

I am not, as I said earlier, a big Vazquez fan, nor would I claim he is now suddenly a great MLB catcher. But the evidence says he is the best choice right now if Hannigan and Swihart were both healthy. Heck, he even did a better job catching Wright than Hannigan had been doing.

[moonslav59]

Trust me, i do not and would not undervalue the importance of a great defensive catcher. I basically responded here to create some conversation. I'm actually happy with Vazquez. You are obviously into statistical analysis to a great extent. How is Vazquez doing compared to the 'elites' of the league? What are the numbers telling you? Is he making our pitching staff better? I think that it remains to be seen whether or not he becomes the great defensive catcher that we all want to see. Hope he does but I'm not convinced of it just yet. If he is good but not great and can't hit .220, thanks - I'll pass.

 

It's extremely difficult to measure catcher defense. Then, i's even harder to compare catchers from around the league, because everyone catches a different staff. As you can see from above, even catchers on the same team catch vastly different percentages of each pitcher on the staff. Then, there's park factors, strength of opponent's offenses, and the time factor allowing a catcher to get in sinc with each particular catcher on his staff.

 

There are better measurements than before, such as pitch-framing ability, and I'm not sure how Vaz rates there in terms of other MLB catchers, but I seem to recall reading he was excellent in that area. Over his career, he's been great at CS rates, although I think that stat is over-rated due to it being just about the only catcher defensive stat measurable for years and years.

 

One can look at a lot of different things. One is comparing our ERA- to recent Sox seasons. If you go back to 2003, when new management arrived, the top 3 ERA- seasons were, not surprisingly, our 3 championship seasons. Anyone who tells you pitching is not extremely important need only look no farther than this stat:

 

2007 83

2013 87

2007 88

2008 89

2009 91

2016 94

2010 96

2011 97

2014 98

2003 99

2006 100

2015 103

2005 105

2012 111

 

Not surprisingly, our worst 3 records since 2003 were in 2012, 2014 and 2015-- 3 of the worst 6 ERA- seasons.

 

We had some pretty good names on our staff in the seasons below 2016 on the ERA- chart above. Once VTek retired, we had difficulty getting the best out of our staff.

 

 

Fangraphs has us rated 3rd on one page and 18th on another in team catcher defense. We are listed 3rd best on Inside Edge Defense, but I'm not sure how good that system is as they have Salty rated 20th just behind Hanigan and Leon and Vazquez 46th and Swihart 57th out of 79 catchers. Out of the 25 catchers with 300+ innings, Vaz ranks 13th.

 

My gut and eyes say Vaz is already a top 10 defensive catcher and may become top 3 within a year or two.

 

[Dojji]

nmy gut and eyes says Vazquez is still learning. All the talent in the world, but is still gaining proficiency and learning how to best use that talent at the big league level. Not to suggest he's raw or unskilled, but there's still some distance to go, if you take my meaning.

[Kimmi]

Trust me, i do not and would not undervalue the importance of a great defensive catcher. I basically responded here to create some conversation. I'm actually happy with Vazquez. You are obviously into statistical analysis to a great extent. How is Vazquez doing compared to the 'elites' of the league? What are the numbers telling you? Is he making our pitching staff better? I think that it remains to be seen whether or not he becomes the great defensive catcher that we all want to see. Hope he does but I'm not convinced of it just yet. If he is good but not great and can't hit .220, thanks - I'll pass.

 

Statistical analysis aside, I think you have to put a lot of stock into how the pitchers praise Vazquez' work behind the plate. If nothing else, they feel comfortable and confident in throwing to him, and that, intangible as it may be, has to count for something.

[Kimmi]

As far as pitch framing stats go, from StatCorner, Vazquez currently ranks 30th out of 82 catchers listed with .21 Plus calls per game. Montero is the leader with 2.29 per game. The other Sox catchers numbers are Swihart with -.29, Leon with -.33, and Hanigan with -1.29.

 

None of our catchers are doing particularly well in the area of pitch framing right now, which is surprising given their reputations (besides Swihart) for this skill.

[cp176]

Statistical analysis aside, I think you have to put a lot of stock into how the pitchers praise Vazquez' work behind the plate. If nothing else, they feel comfortable and confident in throwing to him, and that, intangible as it may be, has to count for something.

 

I totally agree. I really do just think that his greatest value will be as we go forward if he stays in Boston.

[illinoisredsox]

So would you have gotten rid of this guy?

 

BA/OBP/SLG/OPS .171/.236/.237/.473

 

How about this one?

 

.199/.283/.256/.539

 

If you are a baseball fan, you have heard of both of them and neither played in the deadball era. Both these seasons happened early in these players' careers. Combined, they would play 30 years in the big leagues and play in 6 all-star games (3 each). They would win 14 gold gloves between them (6 and 8 respectively).

 

Vazquez missed all of last year. Couldn't pick up a bat. I think we can cut him some slack.

 

For those wondering, the first player was the Boomer, George Scott. Those numbers are from his 3rd year in 1968.

 

Player number 2 was long-time Rangers catcher Jim Sundberg, who posted those numbers in his second year, 1975

Edited June 16, 2016 by illinoisredsox

[moonslav59]

As far as pitch framing stats go, from StatCorner, Vazquez currently ranks 30th out of 82 catchers listed with .21 Plus calls per game. Montero is the leader with 2.29 per game. The other Sox catchers numbers are Swihart with -.29, Leon with -.33, and Hanigan with -1.29.

 

None of our catchers are doing particularly well in the area of pitch framing right now, which is surprising given their reputations (besides Swihart) for this skill.

 

What were his pitch-framing numbers in 2014?

[moonslav59]

Let's not put stats totally aside for now. Let's look at Christian's perceived greatest weakness: hitting.

 

I'm not in any way trying to glorify his .547 OPS of 2016 or his career .587 OPS, but some context needs to be added. The state of catcher offense in MLB is very low right now.

 

There are currently three teams with a catcher OPS below .547 and 5 teams with an OPS below Christian's career OPS. It's almost 5 as the Dodgers catcher OPS is .590.

 

There are 12 teams with a catcher OPS below .630. That's over a third of all ML teams!

 

Almost two thirds (19/30) of all MLB teams have a catcher OPS of .691 or lower!

 

I don't see it as a glaring weakness to have a catcher with an OPS just below .600, but I also don't expect Vazquez to be there for too much longer.

[Kimmi]

What were his pitch-framing numbers in 2014?

 

According to StatCorner, he was 3rd in Plus calls per game with 1.8, behind Hank Conger (2.21) and Jose Molina (1.81). He was worth 12.2 runs above average in pitch framing. Much better than this year so far.

[Kimmi]

I have no problem with Vazquez' offense, or lack thereof. We can hide him in the 9 hole easily enough if the rest of the team continues to hit. I think he is more valuable to the pitching staff than some people give him credit for.

[cp176]

He looked good catching wright - no small task. It is just nice to see a guy back there who can catch the ball consistently, keep the ball in the dirt in front of him and occasionally throw out a potential base stealer.

[moonslav59]

He looked good catching wright - no small task. It is just nice to see a guy back there who can catch the ball consistently, keep the ball in the dirt in front of him and occasionally throw out a potential base stealer.

 

Career 46% CS% is the best we;ve seen from a Sox catcher in I don't know how long.

 

Let's hope he returns to form after his surgery. I think he was at 38% in the minors.

[Kimmi]

Matthew Kory wrote a not so flattering article about Vazquez yesterday, but he made a valid point. Vazquez' weak bat could be tolerated if he is the elite defender that he's been touted to be. So far this season, Vazquez has been good defensively, but certainly not elite. Being merely good defensively is not going to be enough to cover the weak bat. He has to regain that elite level.

 

That said, I think we will see an improvement from him on both sides of the ball. Pitch framing skills don't just disappear. As far as the CS% and the offense are concerned, we have to remember that he sat out an entire year. Give it some time.

[cp176]

Matthew Kory wrote a not so flattering article about Vazquez yesterday, but he made a valid point. Vazquez' weak bat could be tolerated if he is the elite defender that he's been touted to be. So far this season, Vazquez has been good defensively, but certainly not elite. Being merely good defensively is not going to be enough to cover the weak bat. He has to regain that elite level.

 

That said, I think we will see an improvement from him on both sides of the ball. Pitch framing skills don't just disappear. As far as the CS% and the offense are concerned, we have to remember that he sat out an entire year. Give it some time.

 

In my mind, I have been thinking what Kory wrote. I think that he is absolutely right. I also think that Vazquez needs more .time.

[Eddy Ballgame]

Matthew Kory wrote a not so flattering article about Vazquez yesterday, but he made a valid point. Vazquez' weak bat could be tolerated if he is the elite defender that he's been touted to be. So far this season, Vazquez has been good defensively, but certainly not elite. Being merely good defensively is not going to be enough to cover the weak bat. He has to regain that elite level.

 

That said, I think we will see an improvement from him on both sides of the ball. Pitch framing skills don't just disappear. As far as the CS% and the offense are concerned, we have to remember that he sat out an entire year. Give it some time.

 

Vasquez is still very young and he should have a long career as a backup in a worst case scenario, but I don't think Swihart is as available in a trade as many others do. Certainly not for what starting pitchers seem to be available at this point.

[moonslav59]

Swihart would be the headliner on a package, in theory, to get a solid pitcher.

 

I have contended that Blake's value as a starting catcher on another team is more than his value as a platoon LF'er/3rd string catcher for the Sox. Please do not take this to mean I value Swihart less than any of you do. I still think he is a great young talent with high value.

 

My second major piece would be Devers. I realize that Shaw is still not a sure bet at 3B, and with HanRam possibly being our DH next year, trading Devers could be viewed as risky. However, I think Moncada's ultimate landing spot might be 3B, 1B or DH (with LF as another choice). We also have Sam Travis and Pablo Sandoval in the mix at 3B/1B next year, if Shaw falters. I think these facts essentially mean Devers is all but blocked. Again, this does not mean I devalue Devers. I just see his value as being greater for another team, and that is a foundation for making a trade offer.

 

So, my choice for making a serious offer for a solid #2 type SP'er would start with Swihart and Devers. To improve our chances at getting the best (non rental) SP'er out there for this portion of a package, we could do one or more of the following:

 

1) Take on a high salary pitcher or add another high salary player as a salary dump (like Mike Lowell was in the Beckett deal).

2) Offer someone like Castillo or Pablo with just about all their salary paid, assuming the other team wants one.

3) Widen the package with a vet or two, if the team is looking to seriously compete next year (such as Holt or Kelly/Buchholz/Barnes/Elias/Layne)

4) Widen the package with mid-level prospects such as...

Kopech, Owens, Johnson, Lakins, Light, TBall, Stanki/ K Martin/C Acosta

Marrero, Hernandez, Dubon, Chavis, Longhi, Ockimey or maybe even Travis

Basabe or Yoan Aybar

5) Offer cash

 

I'd try hard to do any of the above, before I part with Moncada, Benintendi or Espinoza.

 

Note: just because a guy like Sam Travis is ranked 5th in our system, doesn't mean his value is equal to other teams' #5 prospect. Not many teams have 4 top prospects like ours.

 

[FredLynn]

Swihart would be the headliner on a package, in theory, to get a solid pitcher.

 

I have contended that Blake's value as a starting catcher on another team is more than his value as a platoon LF'er/3rd string catcher for the Sox. Please do not take this to mean I value Swihart less than any of you do. I still think he is a great young talent with high value.

 

My second major piece would be Devers. I realize that Shaw is still not a sure bet at 3B, and with HanRam possibly being our DH next year, trading Devers could be viewed as risky. However, I think Moncada's ultimate landing spot might be 3B, 1B or DH (with LF as another choice). We also have Sam Travis and Pablo Sandoval in the mix at 3B/1B next year, if Shaw falters. I think these facts essentially mean Devers is all but blocked. Again, this does not mean I devalue Devers. I just see his value as being greater for another team, and that is a foundation for making a trade offer.

 

So, my choice for making a serious offer for a solid #2 type SP'er would start with Swihart and Devers. To improve our chances at getting the best (non rental) SP'er out there for this portion of a package, we could do one or more of the following:

 

1) Take on a high salary pitcher or add another high salary player as a salary dump (like Mike Lowell was in the Beckett deal).

2) Offer someone like Castillo or Pablo with just about all their salary paid, assuming the other team wants one.

3) Widen the package with a vet or two, if the team is looking to seriously compete next year (such as Holt or Kelly/Buchholz/Barnes/Elias/Layne)

4) Widen the package with mid-level prospects such as...

Kopech, Owens, Johnson, Lakins, Light, TBall, Stanki/ K Martin/C Acosta

Marrero, Hernandez, Dubon, Chavis, Longhi, Ockimey or maybe even Travis

Basabe or Yoan Aybar

5) Offer cash

 

I'd try hard to do any of the above, before I part with Moncada, Benintendi or Espinoza.

 

Note: just because a guy like Sam Travis is ranked 5th in our system, doesn't mean his value is equal to other teams' #5 prospect. Not many teams have 4 top prospects like ours.

 

 

I think the question is with so many bad pitchers on the team, is this season even salvageable? I posted this on the game thread too:

 

Elias's ERA is now 15.88. Sean O' Sullivan is at 7.94. ERod is at 6.97. Kelly: 8.46. And Buchholz as a starter: 6.35.

 

Those are your #4-5 SPs. They are more like #7 SPs. Should we empty the farm (and thats probably what it would take) to get TWO (not one) very good SPs and a bullpen arm. Mid-level SPs are not going to solve our problem. Its a difficult decision. This team's pitching is very full of holes.