Maxbialystock

I'm not sure of this, but my guess is the Sox have never had hitting this good early in the season and with so many contributors at age 26 and under. 1967 had some youngsters--Tony C, Petrocelli, Reggie Smith--but they didn't hit as well as these guys (at least, so far).

For anyone who says it's still May with plenty of time for the bubble to burst, I can only say, "sure, but right now it's so great it's unprecedented. The Sox lead MLB in scoring and OPS and our lineup is blessed with more than our share of solid young players--Betts, Bogaerts, JBJ, and Shaw--and that ignores the catcher Vazquez who looks pretty darn good behind the plate." I don't expect the bubble to burst, but do expect some of those lofty OPS's to drop back a little.

Well, maybe not the roses, but surely the Sox. Last night I checked espn.com's MLB stats for individuals batting and discover that the Sox have six players--Betts, Bogaerts, Ortiz, Shaw, JBJ, and Pedroia--in the top 23 WAR (wins above replacement) ratings for all of MLB, not just the AL. Think about that. With 30 MLB teams, every team theoretically should have 1 in the top 30 or the top 23 for that matter. But the Sox have six. Missing in action, I hasten to add, is Hanley Ramirez who wasn't even in the top 50 despite having an OPS over .800 and showing himself to be a very capable fielding first baseman. Right now his overall WAR is .8, a huge improvement over last year and one that ranks him (WAR-wise) as the 5th best firstbaseman in the AL. And he ain't part of our "big six" or whatever you want to call them. The downside of the six (or seven--HanRam bats 5th, after all) is sometimes on game treads we get mad at the other two slots--such was my reaction when JBJ was walked intentionally his first two times in order to bring Hannigan to the plate.

Meh. So far it looks like he is a better leftfielder than a catcher. My strong impression is that he was moved to Pawtucket because management--Farrell, Lovullo, the pitching coach, and the front office--agreed that as a catcher he was hurting the pitching staff. He did not grow up as a catcher but as an infielder/outfielder thru high school. I'm sure he caught a lot in the minors and last year caught around 84 games at Boston. What he is getting now is another chance to show he can hit, especially from the left side. It is almost a truism in MLB that, if you can hit, you can play.

Completely agree. He usually left a starter in for 7 runs or 100 pitches. But then I learned other managers usually use the same rule. This year Farrell has not generally used that rule, but he also has had 8 guys in the bullpen rather than the usual 7. I never thought the 7 run rule had anything to do with loyalty toward his starters. Far from it. I thought Francona used it to keep from overworking his bullpen. If anything, it was punitive to the starters, but it also gave them an opportunity to right the ship before getting the hook at 7 runs.

I would just like to point out that Hannigan, who is probably a better catcher than Swihart, is 11 years older--35 vs. 24--and can't hit as well. Long term, I sure would want to hang onto Swihart, especially if he can also play the outfield. If he is traded, it should be for a good starter. .

I'm not sure "chance after chance after chance" is the right take on Buchholz. He has had several good years, including last year. His problem is durability, including last year. Given how hard it is to get a good starter for less than a king's ransom, it made sense to bring him back another year if only because he wasn't bad last year (ERA of 3.26). His best season, albeit a short one, was just 3 years ago, 2013, when he was 12-1 with an ERA of 1.74 while starting 16 games. Last year he started 18 games. He turns 32 in August. I am not any great Buchholz defender because he drives me nuts too. But at this point I don't think it's unreasonable to keep him around if only because the Sox are not knee deep in good starters. We think/hope Price has turned it around. Wright has been great, but is also a knuckleballer. Porcello has been good. After those three, not a lot to choose from, including Buchholz.

Francoma was convenient for the carping critics, but was not based on "a long established tendency to prefer to stay the course . . . and was sometimes slow with the hook." When you are too quick with the hook, you put the bullpen at risk.

Castillo can't catch. With Swihart the Sox have a third catcher if needed, which came handy when Hannigan got that HBP on his left hand. My guess is they don't give Castillo a shot until someone is hurt and/or he starts hitting in AAA. In any case, it's hard to argue with the way they have stuck with these players--the ones how are leading MLB in runs scored, OPS, etc. In other words, who needs Castillo?

Ellsbury is happy as a clam with those $24M/year for 5 more years when he can retire.

Ah, the trade wars are back. With all due respect to moonslav, I am an almost total nonbeliever. Why? Because whoever is available via trade probably isn't worth what we would have to give up. One of the best trades recently was in 2012 when the Sox gave up A-Gon, Beckett, and Crawford--three guys the Sox had previously gone after in trades or via free agency. Yes, the Sox need pitching, but the price is almost always too high and the good too suspect.

If trading Swihart meant getting a reliable starter, make the deal. Otherwise, don't.

Rainy yesterday and again today in Fairfax County, VA. Steady drizzle. I notice Bradley has moved up to 6th with Shaw, this time, getting to bat in front of the catcher, this time Vazquez. Bradley missed two at bats yesterday, his first two, because he was walked twice intentionally although the second walk involved throwing pitches near the strike zone. The usual suspects batting 1 thru 5 and our new leftfielder batting 9th. I see no report on Hannigan, so assume he isn't on the DL but maybe can't play for awhile. Another reason to have Swihart in Boston.

Might as well use this thread as a dump. Not many, it seems, were interested in the game.

Is that JOba Chamberlain in there? The same guy who as a rookie Yankee twice threw behind Youk's head?

With Hanigan out, the Sox still have a spare catcher in leftfielder Swihart.

Where is everyone and why is this such a dead thread with so much going on in this game? Kelly pitched a great game despite huge control issues. With Hanigan following him, JBJ almost wasn't going to get a real at bat, but he did and singled. Some good fielding plays, but I really like the one when Hanigan had to find the plate with his foot--just in time.

Right now only the Cubs have won more games than the Sox, and to me that's the measure of a manager. Yes, absolutely, the players deserve the lion's share of the credit. Give some as well to the hitting coach and maybe to the FO. But Farrell gets the blame and the credit when the team under performs whether or not it is his fault. Funny thing, but I think he easiest part of his job is making up the lineup card that has very few, if any, holes. Trickier, however, is dealing with an inconsistent rotation, especially when that involves a lot of innings for the bullpen.

Interesting. In April Swihart had 18 at bats and 3 K's and 4 BB's. In April and May Holt had 113 at bats, 21 K's,and 12 BB's. Holt's OPS right now is .664. Swihart's was .669 in April. However, in those 18 at bats Swihart was great against lefty pitchers and terrible against righties--the exact opposite of Holt.

Lineup tonight: Betts, Pedroia, Bogaerts, Ortiz, Ramirez, Shaw, Bradley, Vazquez, and Swihart.

This season has been one surprise after another--not all of them good, but even the bad surprises have had a certain fascination and at least given us a chance to vent. Tonight I suspect we will see Swihart in LF. At the same time, JBJ is near an OPS of 1.000, which tells me Farrell might be tempted to shift things around in the lineup. On the other hand, JBJ has batted in a ton of runs, which says maybe he should stay down around 7th. Shaw, we should note, bats 6th most of the time and also has an OPS over .900. Pedroia and HanRam have OPS's around .820 (below the team average) and bat 2d and 5th. Another chance to see if Buchholz can turn things around the way Price seems to have done. Cleveland this year has good hitting--2d to us in runs--and decent pitching, a little better than ours. They have won 4 in a row. We split with them in April in the cold. The splits on their starter say he pitches better on the road, at night, and against righties.

20-20 hindsight on the "rushed to the Majors" notion. He in fact followed the exact same timeline that Pedroia followed in 2007. Both played 30+ games in Boston in their 23d year and came up as starters in their 24th year. I think you make a solid point that just maybe the exposure in 2014 helped JBJ in the long run. In 2014 I was completely in favor of JBJ as the starting centerfielder because Ellsbury would have been way over-priced. By the end of 2014 I was happy to see Betts in CF and JBJ back at AAA. Last year I was still happy with Betts in CF, but I also thought it made sense to give giving JBJ another shot, which finally took in August. No way, no how did I expect him to have an OPS over .800, let alone over 1.000 which he now threatens to do. His OPS right now--granted, still very early in the season--is better than Ellsbury's in his career year of 2011. Now ain't that a hoot? All in all, a lot of surprises this year, especially among the hitters.

Paul Swydon is an idiot. I have no objection to giving Swihart another shot in Boston, but one certainty at this point is that the Sox don't need his bat at all. They lead MLB in runs and OPS. He had an entire year last year and spring training and a few games, not many, to show he could catch and handle pitchers. I think he was moved to Pawtucket because the collective opinion by Farrell and the FO and the bench coach and the pitching coach was that Swihart was actually bad for the pitching staff. That would also explain why they are giving him LF time in Pawtucket and apparently are calling him back up to replace Holt as the lefty bat in LF (Young being the righty bat) for a few days. He is also catching some games in Pawtucket, so clearly the Sox haven't given up on Swihart as a catcher. At some point it is possible that Swihart could be both a LF and a C in Boston, but meanwhile here is a chance to see him in LF right now. The Bogaerts complaint is spurious. In 2013 the Sox had three SS's--Iglesias, Drew, and Bogaerts. They dumped Iglesias for a pitcher--a clear sign that their long term SS was going to be Bogaerts--and kept Drew at SS and got Bogaerts some at bats at 3B. The next year they did bring Drew back, briefly, and that was obviously very temporary. Drew was, let us also acknowledge, a better fielding SS in 2013 and 2014 than Bogaerts. Last year Bogaerts stayed at SS and clearly improved his fielding over 2013 and 2014, so clearly he was none the worse for his games at 3B. All in all, I think it's obvious the Sox have brought Bogaerts along beautifully.

I have to say, contrarian that I am, that it is astounding to see this thread still on the first page. Why? Because what this team badly needs is pitching, not hitting. The current Sox hitters, without Trout, lead MLB in runs scored and OPS. Why fix something that ain't broke? The rotation, on the other hand, clearly does need help. My guess is that this thread lives because people love fantasy baseball and discussing trades just to discuss them. Thus the term "fantasy."

It occurs to me there might be another reason for giving Swihart time in LF. Assume he is brought up and catches 30% of games as the backup catcher. If he can play LF, he can start or sub there and still be available as the backup catcher. There is still a risk he would get injured in LF and not be available that game to back up the catcher. I agree with everyone that the Sox have had a good look at his catching and found him wanting. However, the scouting report says he can be a good one. Are the Sox scouts stupid?