Swihart To Undergo Ankle Surgery

[OH FOY]

To me all 3 Catchers are Question Marks. Not enough Major League starts to really evaluate. None have gone as a #1 for a full season. If I were another GM, I wouldn't offer much for any of them. We shouldn't use any as a throw in. Patience is the key with all 3.

[mvp 78]

Swihart needs to spend a full season at Pawtucket working behind the plate. Putting him up in Boston would be a disservice to his development.

[southpaw777]

To take them one at a time, Leon vs. Vazquez: I've always been a big proponent of defense, especially up the middle, and IMO Vaz is currently a better catcher at blocking balls and throwing runners out than is Leon. I wouldn't pretend to get into the area of which pitchers like which catchers better because that's all speculation. Offensively I think that Leon has gone back to being the Leon of old, a catcher who will be around the Mendoza line, which I see as the floor for Vazquez. Hence, Vaz over Leon.

 

Now Leon vs. Swihart: I see Swihart to improve to be at least as good defensively as Leon due to his athleticism, and I don't think many of us would disagree that Swihart may be the best hitter of the three. Hence, Swihart over Leon.

 

And let me say that this isn't a knock on Leon as a catcher. I wouldn't be disappointed to see him be our catcher on opening day - as long as the other two remain in the system someplace. It's just that IMO going forward I'd rather take my chances with Vaz and Swi than either of them + Leon. In a nutshell, I think Leon is what he is and the other two will improve.

 

But what do I know? I'm not overly a stats guy. I just try to blend stats with the eyeball test. Sometimes I'm right and sometimes I'm wrong. Fortunately what I think has no bearing on what DD does.

 

Seriously, swihart is light years behind Vaz and Leon defensively...his athleticism will take him only so far as a catcher...hes not a natural catcher like the other two and it really shows...his hitting is better for sure, but he will give up a lot of runs behind the plate right now. Hes not going to get that good in one offseason, no way...to get to the level defensively of the other two will take a few years.

I think he will improve, but I dont have very high expectations for him defensively right now...I guess we will see how he progresses with hopefully a full year in AAA. I think hes still trade bait though

Edited November 20, 2016 by southpaw777

[Kimmi]

Seriously, swihart is light years behind Vaz and Leon defensively...his athleticism will take him only so far as a catcher...hes not a natural catcher like the other two and it really shows...his hitting is better for sure, but he will give up a lot of runs behind the plate right now. Hes not going to get that good in one offseason, no way...to get to the level defensively of the other two will take a few years.

I think he will improve, but I dont have very high expectations for him defensively right now...I guess we will see how he progresses with hopefully a full year in AAA. I think hes still trade bait though

 

I really hope they don't trade Swihart or any of their catchers until at least midseason, until we have a better feel for what kind of production we might get from Leon and Vazquez. I also hope they keep Swihart in AAA until at least then and preferably longer. He needs to have a full season in AAA to focus on his catching skills and nothing else.

[moonslav59]

I really hope they don't trade Swihart or any of their catchers until at least midseason, until we have a better feel for what kind of production we might get from Leon and Vazquez. I also hope they keep Swihart in AAA until at least then and preferably longer. He needs to have a full season in AAA to focus on his catching skills and nothing else.

 

I don't disagree, but we run the risk of stock falling, if a catcher shows no progress or regresses.

 

I'm with southpaw. I don't think Swihart will ever significantly close the defense gap, so trading him while he still has some stock as a catcher- a super high need area-m ay be the better choice.

[southpaw777]

I really hope they don't trade Swihart or any of their catchers until at least midseason, until we have a better feel for what kind of production we might get from Leon and Vazquez. I also hope they keep Swihart in AAA until at least then and preferably longer. He needs to have a full season in AAA to focus on his catching skills and nothing else.

 

Fully agree and I dont think there will be a big Splash move this winter anyway. He does need a full year at AAA and hes a safety net in case Vaz or Leon have issues. All bets are off come July though as He should get a rise in his stock by mid season.

Ultimately I think he should, and will be used in a trade at some point.

Edited November 22, 2016 by southpaw777

[notin]

I don't disagree, but we run the risk of stock falling, if a catcher shows no progress or regresses.

 

I'm with southpaw. I don't think Swihart will ever significantly close the defense gap, so trading him while he still has some stock as a catcher- a super high need area-m ay be the better choice.

 

I think Swihart can close the gap, but not bridge it.

 

If I traded any catcher, it would be Leon, who is basically Christian Vazquez with BABIP luck. While it is a sell high opportunity, I do have my doubts about exactly how high. If I know he was getting by on unsustainable numbers, certainly every GM and their uncles do as well.

 

But we all know how this will play out. The Sox will keep all three and put Swihart (the only one with any options left) in Pawtucket. At some point, there may be a roster crunch, but that won't be dealt with until it becomes an issue. And if, say Leon, is batting .180 in mid-May, then the solution has presented itself...

[moonslav59]

I think Swihart can close the gap, but not bridge it.

 

If I traded any catcher, it would be Leon, who is basically Christian Vazquez with BABIP luck. While it is a sell high opportunity, I do have my doubts about exactly how high. If I know he was getting by on unsustainable numbers, certainly every GM and their uncles do as well.

 

But we all know how this will play out. The Sox will keep all three and put Swihart (the only one with any options left) in Pawtucket. At some point, there may be a roster crunch, but that won't be dealt with until it becomes an issue. And if, say Leon, is batting .180 in mid-May, then the solution has presented itself...

 

I'm fine with trading Leon over Swihart.

 

If we assume Vaz will be one of the two catchers on the ML roster, Swihart hits RHPs better than Leon, so he may match up better, assuming he can become a decent defender.

 

Id to think a catcher will be traded by the deadline.

 

Probably one of Moncada or Devers might be traded as well.

[notin]

I'm fine with trading Leon over Swihart.

 

If we assume Vaz will be one of the two catchers on the ML roster, Swihart hits RHPs better than Leon, so he may match up better, assuming he can become a decent defender.

 

Id to think a catcher will be traded by the deadline.

 

Probably one of Moncada or Devers might be traded as well.

 

Given Dombrowski's history, I'm surprised we still have both Moncada and Devers...

[Spudboy]

Given Dombrowski's history, I'm surprised we still have both Moncada and Devers...

 

Did he really deplete the Tiger's system?

 

I keep hearing that idea and of course that he does not know how to build a pen.

 

I wonder how much legitimacy there is with both ideas.

 

Not being a dick here. I just don't know.

[jacksonianmarch]

You guys have a window where the core is cheap. Now is the time to build on that and go for a title.

[Kimmi]

Did he really deplete the Tiger's system?

 

I keep hearing that idea and of course that he does not know how to build a pen.

 

I wonder how much legitimacy there is with both ideas.

 

Not being a dick here. I just don't know.

 

Yes, he really did. The Tigers' farm system has not been good for a while, though it might finally be trending upward.

[moonslav59]

You guys have a window where the core is cheap. Now is the time to build on that and go for a title.

 

I can see your point, but I plan on being a Sox fan for many more years to come.

 

Our core is cheap, but they are also great. Trust in our farm is what kept them from being traded for the here and now 3-7 years ago.

[jacksonianmarch]

Moon, your farm is not only there to grow your core but to also supplement what your big league team lacks. You have literally no upper level starting pitching prospects. Hence, the rotation you have now is the rotation you're stuck with for 2017. Say a Chris Sale actually comes available this offseason and you could get him without touching your big league club. If it's that one piece to win a title, is it worth dealing away a potential star to win that title?

 

Look at the Cubs for example. They dealt a future star in Torres for a half season rental who was instrumental in winning a World Series. If Gleyber turns into a perennial MVP candidate, do you think for one second that Cubs fans would regret that deal? If the Sox won the WS the year they dealt Bagwell for Larry Anderson, do you think anyone would care? You play to win a title. If your team is close, then anyone not on the team has to be available to improve your chances to win it all

[moonslav59]

Moon, your farm is not only there to grow your core but to also supplement what your big league team lacks. You have literally no upper level starting pitching prospects. Hence, the rotation you have now is the rotation you're stuck with for 2017. Say a Chris Sale actually comes available this offseason and you could get him without touching your big league club. If it's that one piece to win a title, is it worth dealing away a potential star to win that title?

 

1) I'm not against trading top prospects. In fact, I suggest a couple hundred prospect trades every winter.

2) Trading our highest ranked pitching prospect is not the way to solve the problem of never having pitchers come up through the system.

 

Look at the Cubs for example. They dealt a future star in Torres for a half season rental who was instrumental in winning a World Series. If Gleyber turns into a perennial MVP candidate, do you think for one second that Cubs fans would regret that deal? If the Sox won the WS the year they dealt Bagwell for Larry Anderson, do you think anyone would care? You play to win a title. If your team is close, then anyone not on the team has to be available to improve your chances to win it all

 

I don't think Pomeranz is that big of a difference maker to trade away so much upside potential, but I understand why they did it.

[jacksonianmarch]

The Pomeranz trade didn't make sense. I am talking about dealing Devers and Moncada for someone who can front your rotation

[moonslav59]

The Pomeranz trade didn't make sense. I am talking about dealing Devers and Moncada for someone who can front your rotation

 

If we still had Espi, we might get an ace with Moncada and Espi combined.

 

I'm fine with trading Espi, but not for a number 3-4 slot starter for 2.3 years of control.

 

We weref inally gaining some ground in our pitching prospect pool: Espi, Kopech and Groome.

[jacksonianmarch]

I still am scratching my head about Pom unless the sox had serious misgivings about Espi. You had Price, Wright and Porcello at the time of the deal. Wright was dealing and Porcello on his way to CY status. Price had started to turn it around then too. Why deal a top 20 prospect for a 4th starter especially when SP depth was thin in the system. I get the Iglesias move from years ago because you had Bogaerts. But Espi was your best pitching prospect by a mile and he goes 1 for 1 for a 4th starter who pitched well in SD with a major history of poor performance and injury. DD couldn't expect Pom to continue in Boston as a sub 3ERA guy. Heck, they had to effectively shut him down due to innings limitations as the yr went on.

[moonslav59]

I still am scratching my head about Pom unless the sox had serious misgivings about Espi. You had Price, Wright and Porcello at the time of the deal. Wright was dealing and Porcello on his way to CY status. Price had started to turn it around then too. Why deal a top 20 prospect for a 4th starter especially when SP depth was thin in the system. I get the Iglesias move from years ago because you had Bogaerts. But Espi was your best pitching prospect by a mile and he goes 1 for 1 for a 4th starter who pitched well in SD with a major history of poor performance and injury. DD couldn't expect Pom to continue in Boston as a sub 3ERA guy. Heck, they had to effectively shut him down due to innings limitations as the yr went on.

 

Good to see an unbiased baseball guy see things the way I do.

[Bellhorn04]

I still am scratching my head about Pom unless the sox had serious misgivings about Espi. You had Price, Wright and Porcello at the time of the deal. Wright was dealing and Porcello on his way to CY status. Price had started to turn it around then too. Why deal a top 20 prospect for a 4th starter especially when SP depth was thin in the system. I get the Iglesias move from years ago because you had Bogaerts. But Espi was your best pitching prospect by a mile and he goes 1 for 1 for a 4th starter who pitched well in SD with a major history of poor performance and injury. DD couldn't expect Pom to continue in Boston as a sub 3ERA guy. Heck, they had to effectively shut him down due to innings limitations as the yr went on.

 

Wright was a big question mark at the time of the trade for Pomeranz. He'd had 3 rough starts in a row, and we're talking about a 31-year old who hadn't exceeded 72 innings in an MLB season. There was plenty of reason to be concerned he was about to turn into a pumpkin.

 

And beyond that we had nothing. E-Rod was struggling, Buch looked like toast, Kelly, Owens, Johnson, Elias, O' Sullivan - our starting depth was ugly. Most of us were hoping we'd acquire another starter at the time, that's for sure.

Edited November 23, 2016 by Bellhorn04

[Nick]

we had just finished dead last for two years, three of last 4 years, we went out and spent a good deal of money/prospects acquiring Price and Kimbrel, Ortiz is having a great year on his farewell tour, Pedey is healthy playing well, B boys are having a great year.....

 

We needed another starter. We got another starter. Now everyone here wants to be a Monday f***ing morning quarterback. Still whinning about Espy.

 

Lets rehash the Babe Ruth trade. Isn't time to put your big boy boxers on and look ahead to 2017?

[Bellhorn04]

The Pomeranz trade had a lot in common with the Peavy trade. If you want to say we gave up too much, fine. But don't say it wasn't a need we had at the time, because it certainly was.

[cp176]

we had just finished dead last for two years, three of last 4 years, we went out and spent a good deal of money/prospects acquiring Price and Kimbrel, Ortiz is having a great year on his farewell tour, Pedey is healthy playing well, B boys are having a great year.....

 

We needed another starter. We got another starter. Now everyone here wants to be a Monday f***ing morning quarterback. Still whinning about Espy.

 

Lets rehash the Babe Ruth trade. Isn't time to put your big boy boxers on and look ahead to 2017?

 

Common sense strikes again. No one really gives a s*** what we as individuals think of this trade right now. It made sense! Whether it seems like it makes sense in 2-3-4-5 years, remains to be seen. On to 2017!!!

[Hugh2]

The Pomeranz trade had a lot in common with the Peavy trade. If you want to say we gave up too much, fine. But don't say it wasn't a need we had at the time, because it certainly was.

 

Not that I completely disagree but we traded from a position of strength to get a need. We had Bogaerts at the time who was the #4 prospect in baseball looking like he was MLB ready. In this case, we traded for a position of need with a pitcher for a pitcher, with that pitcher being arguably the top pitching prospect in all of baseball. Also Peavy was a proven a starter, not as dominant as he once was but you were confident he'd give you innings and pitch like a #3. Pomeranz was generally unproven as a starter and his history and recent track record screamed fatigue or injury which we saw materialize.

 

Again, in a sense we traded for a need both times and to varying degrees succeeded, but I think the price we paid for Pomeranz at the very least has a chance to be much higher.

[moonslav59]

I tried to change the subject.

 

It's not Dewey or I keeping the debate going.

[Bellhorn04]

I tried to change the subject.

 

It's not Dewey or I keeping the debate going.

 

This time was all Jacko's fault!

[Dojji]

I said at the time of the trade that bringing in an ace would have been overkill and I stand by that. We needed a #3 to extend the depth of our rotation, not a front man. And a #3 is pretty much exactly what we got, with Pomeranz providing exactly average (100 ERA+) innings for us and making all but 1 of his scheduled starts. That's a #3 starter right there, it's what we wanted, what we needed, and what we paid a fair price for, especially considering the 2 additional years of cost control we have on Pomeranz.

 

Considering that our guy won the CYA, it's pretty clear that I was bang on the money, an ace was not required, but the mess at the bottom of the rotation made the decision to acquire a good mid rotation guy obvious. Dealing an 18 year old lottery ticket for rotation depth when you're fighting for the playoffs is a perfectly understandable move, especially when it adds control beyond that one year. Nothing mysterious about it.

[jacksonianmarch]

You paid the headliner price for a #1 or #2 and you got a #4

[Dojji]

No we didn't. Anderson Espinosa was a fine prospect, but one top 5 prospect who's at least 4 years from the majors isn't nearly the price any team would ask for an ace type starter in a market this short on supply and this long on demand. You know that just as well as I do, so stop spewing BS you don't even believe yourself.

 

If we had a real chance to bring down a Sale, Quintana, Kluber, etc, right now, and we still had Anderson Espinosa you would be the first one telling us how unproven he was and how many other assets it would really take to bring in that kind of talent. You know it and I know it. You are fooling nobody.

Edited November 23, 2016 by Dojji

[Spudboy]

I said at the time of the trade that bringing in an ace would have been overkill and I stand by that. We needed a #3 to extend the depth of our rotation, not a front man. And a #3 is pretty much exactly what we got, with Pomeranz providing exactly average (100 ERA+) innings for us and making all but 1 of his scheduled starts. That's a #3 starter right there, it's what we wanted, what we needed, and what we paid a fair price for, especially considering the 2 additional years of cost control we have on Pomeranz.

 

Considering that our guy won the CYA, it's pretty clear that I was bang on the money, an ace was not required, but the mess at the bottom of the rotation made the decision to acquire a good mid rotation guy obvious. Dealing an 18 year old lottery ticket for rotation depth when you're fighting for the playoffs is a perfectly understandable move, especially when it adds control beyond that one year. Nothing mysterious about it.

 

That pretty much sums it up.

 

People can debate the price paid but the Sox made the best move they felt that they could make and it was completely appropriate.