Catching Controversy

Starter?


  • Total voters
    156
  • Poll closed .

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
what a disaster that was. what a pointless waste of a once promising young talent.
Are you implying it was a waste because we didn't trade him and get anything in return for him or that the Sox are somehow to blame for him failing? Sometimes top prospects fail. We've been really lucky lately with Mookie, JBJ, Xander, Benintendi, and even guys like Margot succeeding. Seems the last bust we had was Will Middlebrooks and Swihart kinda fits the Will Middlebrooks profile. Same ages in A, A+, AA. They both improved every year and took a big step in their age 22 seasons in Portland. Both were rushed to the bigs despite only having a handful of AAA PA (151 for Swihart, 160 for Middlebrooks) and despite only having 1 real season where they hit the ball well.

Looking back at both their minor league careers and you can't help but think both were overrated.

edit: JBJ probably fits the rushed to the bigs and overrated as a prospect profile more than the Mookie/Benintendi/Xander profile. It took him a year to figure it out before performing as projected. Maybe Swihart will be more JBJ than WMB. Although WMB is slashing .253/.335/.588 in AAA for Texas this year. 206 PA, 18 HRs, 21bb/54k. Wonder if he'll get a call up anytime soon.
 
Last edited:

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
It's not too late for Blake yet - he's 25. He's worth more to the Sox farm than in any trade, so he will be given another year to recover from his surgery before writing him off.
This is true too. If his recent performance is mostly injury related and he happens to come back healthy and continue on the projection he was on, Swihart should have the bat to play in the OF or 3b.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,105
It would be awesome if someone could photoshop in Beltre ramming into every LFer we have.

The thing I never really understood about Swihart was that they started him last year at the beginning of the season and then demoted him, like, a handful of games into the season. And IIRC he didn't look too bad with the bat or the glove.

I get the sense that DD—or someone who reports to him—was not a fan.

People here are going to be complaining about the Trey Ball pick for the next 20 years, but the real sin of this era was screwing up Blake Swihart. Called up too early and then needlessly moved off of catcher.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,101
If John Farrell was going to turn Swihart into a LFer as soon as Vazquez got healthy last season, they should have traded Swihart in the winter of 2016 when he was at peak value. I made that argument all last spring and again all this winter.

Two years ago, he could have been the centerpiece of a trade for Cole Hamels. Now he's floundering AAA and they'd be lucky to get an injured middle reliever in a trade. Though Dombrowski seems to have a knack for getting teams to part with those coveted assets, I still think he should have either gotten way more than 6 games last April or traded at peak value as a catcher.

And none of that means they should give up on Swihart now that he's at the nadir of his value. No need to sell low. Hopefully, it's just a random slow start and he rebuilds a bunch of value going forward.
Let me clarify with a brief history lesson, as I would not expect P91 to be able to provide the full context (although he seems to have awfully good knowledge of how the Sox organization works internally).

The Sox went into 2016 with Ryan Hanigan and Swihart as their catchers to start the year, with Vazquez starting the year on the DL with some soreness on his surgically repaired elbow, and Sandy Leon in AAA. When Vazquez was deemed healthy, the Sox had a roster decision to make. Swihart had minor league options; neither Hanigan nor Vazquez did at the time. Rather than cut bait on Hanigan and throw away a guy who showed he could be at least a serviceable veteran backup catcher at the time, the Sox decided to send Swihart down, a decision that had near unanimous support on this board, as it was widely felt that Swihart needed further seasoning (he had all of 80 career plate appearances in AAA at that point).

After Blake's demotion, the organization decided to maximize their flexibility and split the catching duties between Swihart and Sandy Leon. The Sox organization (not Farrell) decided to maximize Swihart's at bats by having him play LF on days Leon was catching. When Blake was promoted, he was placed in LF, a team need at the time. And he was actually serviceable and appeared to be improving when he suffered his totally fluke injury, one that likely had nothing to do with the fact he was playing in a new position (although we cannot say for sure).

The good news is that he's still 25 and catchers sometimes start later. Varitek was 27 when he assumed the catching duties full time. In that respect, I agree with the quoted poster's final paragraph.
 

PaulinMyrBch

Don't touch his dog food
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 10, 2003
8,316
MYRTLE BEACH!!!!
The majors isn't the place to "learn" how to catch. Blame Ryan Hannibal for exposing his throwing hand to foul tips if you want, but the whole called up too soon and then moved off catcher makes sense when you consider who was injured when he was called up and who is catching now. I admittedly don't look to develop a player to max his value for a trade. I look at development for the system he's in. If someone like Blake can provide value to us at a different position than one he's spent the majority of time at in the minors, I have not problem moving him to do that. I do find it funny that the same posts that scream about Blake and the OF injury also advocate moving the other kids all over the place despite the fact they've never played those positions. I guess its an acceptable move provided you don't get injured.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,680
This is true too. If his recent performance is mostly injury related and he happens to come back healthy and continue on the projection he was on, Swihart should have the bat to play in the OF or 3b.
If they're looking at him as a super utility player there are worse things in the world than a guy that can play 3B, OF, 1B, while also being a third string catcher. That would be a really valuable player.
 

The Gray Eagle

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2001
16,725
My only point, which I made repeatedly since they both reached AAA the first time, is that they should have picked one as the starter and traded the other one. Swihart will never have more value than he did in the winter of 2015-2016 unless he becomes the starting catcher again. This was completely mismanaged.
Never mind, covered above.
 

AB in DC

OG Football Writing
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2002
13,633
Springfield, VA
With Devers in AAA, it makes zero sense to give Swihart any reps there. The odds of him being promoted to Boston, as a 3B, before Devers is somewhere between slim and none.

In any case, given his injury situation, the goal for Swihart has to be 2018, not 2017. And there's a big hole at 1B in the projected Sox 2018 roster with Moreland going to FA and Hanley likely to be on a PA limit (to avoid triggering the option year). If Swihart can fill a C/1B role next year that would give the Sox a lot of flexibility in filling out the 25-man roster.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,680
Yeah, I'd think with the lingering ankle injury that 2017 is likely a wash at this point.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
Let me clarify with a brief history lesson, as I would not expect P91 to be able to provide the full context (although he seems to have awfully good knowledge of how the Sox organization works internally).

The Sox went into 2016 with Ryan Hanigan and Swihart as their catchers to start the year, with Vazquez starting the year on the DL with some soreness on his surgically repaired elbow, and Sandy Leon in AAA. When Vazquez was deemed healthy, the Sox had a roster decision to make. Swihart had minor league options; neither Hanigan nor Vazquez did at the time
Boy, when you're insulting another poster, it's usually best to check your own facts first.

Vazquez most certainly did have an option left, one the Red Sox exercised on July 4, 2016 after we fans endured a half season of complete ineptness at the plate.

Thus either Vazquez or Swihart could have been sent to AAA in April 2016 and remained available to the organization. Any well functioning organization would this delegate the decision to the person closest to the ramifications of that decision. So, John Farrell had a decision to make 6 games into the 2016 season. He decided that Vazquez was a better option at catcher than Swihart. Once the manager had made his preference at catcher known, the organization then too steps to salvage remaining value out of Swihart. The subsequent injury while unfortunate and a source of consternation to those of us who saw the foolish enfatuation with Vazquez's half season pitch framing numbers to the exclusion of his inability to hit major league pitching, but ultimately immaterial to the judgement of whether the correct move was made in April.

None of what you wrote changes the calculus. Blake Swiharts value as a left fielder or a utility player is/was a fraction of Blake Swihart's value as an everyday catcher. If the Red Sox weren't going to use him as an everyday catcher, the value maximizing thing to do was to trade him to a team that would. And, the real value maximizing time to do that is before you've announced to the world that you think Vazquez is better.

Mismanaged from the front office to the manager and back again.
 

CurtieLeskanic

New Member
Apr 28, 2014
47
Swihart is out of the catcher equation. Short and long term. It's tragic and stupid as we've covered above.

Love the idea of getting Alex Avila and Justin Wilson for a package centering around Chavis and Ockimey. Avila's value will be ballooned because of his great year offensively but JW is the real prize. Arb eligible next year.

Catcher is the key on offense. Stay afloat at 3B with the current platoon until late August for Devers.
 

effectivelywild

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
466
I'm sorry Leskanic, but where is this Avila/Wilson trade coming from? Is there a report or discussion earlier that I missed or is this just wishcasting?
 

Hank Scorpio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 1, 2013
6,923
Salem, NH
Any trade, here or not, involving Alex Avila would be interesting. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think it would be difficult for a father (Tigers GM, Al Avila) to trade his son away to another team. Not that it couldn't happen, but I have to wonder if sentiment skews the decision making process, affects the asking price, etc...
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,678
Maine
I think any talk of the Red Sox acquiring a catcher is simple fan wishcasting. Vazquez and Leon aren't tearing the cover off the ball and shouldn't be expected to, but a .662 collective OPS is good enough considering what they bring on the other side of the ball. I mean, we can't really ignore that they're doing a very good job handling the pitching staff. Why upset the balance of things just for a few more hits out of the position?
 

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
10,961
The team with the best pitching in the AL isn't going to mess with their catching situation.

Should really be a non-starter. This team is built on pitching and defense and both catchers are doing an excellent job on that front.
 

CurtieLeskanic

New Member
Apr 28, 2014
47
I'm sorry Leskanic, but where is this Avila/Wilson trade coming from? Is there a report or discussion earlier that I missed or is this just wishcasting?
Not wishcasting re: Justin Wilson
Jon Morosi and others have us in the thick of the Justin Wilson sweepstakes. Avila will be mentioned as a part of any deal but as I said JW is the real prize/target

I understand the theory behind keeping catchers who have great rep with a great rotation, but where I played we had 2 catchers that split time. If I came in from the pen I didn't get my main guy. It felt different but my favorite catcher is and will always be the one that scores some runs for me.
 

shaggydog2000

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2007
11,483
Not wishcasting re: Justin Wilson
Jon Morosi and others have us in the thick of the Justin Wilson sweepstakes. Avila will be mentioned as a part of any deal but as I said JW is the real prize/target

I understand the theory behind keeping catchers who have great rep with a great rotation, but where I played we had 2 catchers that split time. If I came in from the pen I didn't get my main guy. It felt different but my favorite catcher is and will always be the one that scores some runs for me.
So you played in the MLB?
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,678
Maine
Of course the Red Sox are in the thick of talks about Justin Wilson. No one denies that. There is no doubt that the wishcasting (particularly since this is the catching thread) was about Avila.

Avila may be traded by the Tigers in the next two weeks and he may not, but there's no way the Red Sox are asking for him in a Justin Wilson trade or on his own. Barring injury, they're not in the market for a catcher at all. Your wishcasting won't change that.
 

shaggydog2000

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2007
11,483
31st pick in the 40th round of the 2016 MLB draft after my graduation.

Not sure we were watching the same ALDS when Sandy went 1-10. I simply have a hard time trusting that platoon in October.
You should send Leon an e-mail telling him how they used to practice hitting when you played.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,678
Maine
Not sure we were watching the same ALDS when Sandy went 1-10. I simply have a hard time trusting that platoon in October.
JBJ 1 for 10
Mookie 2 for 10, 2 BB
Pedroia 2 for 12, 2 BB
Hanley 3 for 12
Ortiz 1 for 9, 2 BB
Bogaerts 3 for 12
Benintendi 3 for 9
Holt 4 for 10

Nobody was really tearing the cover off the ball in those 3 games, but yeah, let's judge one player based on his performance in that series.
 

CurtieLeskanic

New Member
Apr 28, 2014
47
I think it was a joke too clever to be funny.
Often the case.

The point is too much is made of catcher's being the glue that holds rotations together. Especially one (looking mainly at Leon) that doesn't catch 5 games a week. A platoon upgrade is wholly different than the Indians/Rangers going out last year and getting Lucroy. I think the Red Sox would be remiss not to explore upgrades at C while prioritizing RP.
 

pokey_reese

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 25, 2008
16,253
Boston, MA
I think any talk of the Red Sox acquiring a catcher is simple fan wishcasting. Vazquez and Leon aren't tearing the cover off the ball and shouldn't be expected to, but a .662 collective OPS is good enough considering what they bring on the other side of the ball. I mean, we can't really ignore that they're doing a very good job handling the pitching staff. Why upset the balance of things just for a few more hits out of the position?
I mean, it's definitely fun to watch them throw, and Vaz has been pretty good defensively over all, but neither one of them is an excellent framer by most metrics I've seen, and Leon is an overall average-ish defensive catcher. When combined with the fact that they are one of the worst hitting catcher units in the majors, I think there is definitely an argument to be made that it's an opportunity to improve the team by more than 'a few hits.' Obviously 3B is a slightly greater need, but there is also more hope of an internal solution on the horizon there, while a trade for a good catcher could buy us a year or two.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
I mean, it's definitely fun to watch them throw, and Vaz has been pretty good defensively over all, but neither one of them is an excellent framer by most metrics I've seen, and Leon is an overall average-ish defensive catcher. When combined with the fact that they are one of the worst hitting catcher units in the majors, I think there is definitely an argument to be made that it's an opportunity to improve the team by more than 'a few hits.' Obviously 3B is a slightly greater need, but there is also more hope of an internal solution on the horizon there, while a trade for a good catcher could buy us a year or two.
It was noted upthread that Vazquez was 5th in framing and Leon was about average - though Leon also has the best catcher ERA in the AL and is tied for 7th in MLB (with Vazquez) in caught stealing percentage.

Avila's realistically the only offensive upgrade out there and he is poor defensively this year anyhow (13th in CS%, 74th in framing and a 4.91 catcher ERA). In the offseason, I'd think about upgrades but it really is risky to potentially disrupt what the pitchers have going with who they are already used to.
 
Last edited:

AB in DC

OG Football Writing
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2002
13,633
Springfield, VA
Catcher ERA is pretty much meaningless here when the guy is primarily catching the most talented pitcher in the league and last year's Cy Young award winner.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,220
Portland
You're right that it is tough to glean much out of that stat since there are so many factors involved. By other metrics Avila is enough of a step down that it's not worth it to me to look into an offensive upgrade.
 
Last edited:

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
If they're making a move with Detroit centered on Wilson, I'd rather see an effort to add Castellanos than Avila. Catcher is a sink hole but it's not killing us and Castellanos has some versatility and some right handed pop.
 

uk_sox_fan

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 11, 2006
1,273
London, England
Catcher ERA is pretty much meaningless here when the guy is primarily catching the most talented pitcher in the league and last year's Cy Young award winner.
Are you seriously dismissing the theory that the REASON Sale is the best pitcher in the league this year and that Porcello won the CYA last year was because Sandy's been catching them?
 

CurtieLeskanic

New Member
Apr 28, 2014
47
If they're making a move with Detroit centered on Wilson, I'd rather see an effort to add Castellanos than Avila. Catcher is a sink hole but it's not killing us and Castellanos has some versatility and some right handed pop.
The reason why I think C > 3B in terms of trade priority is because of Devers. We have a potential ace in the hole at 3B waiting it out in Pawtucket. We have no future potential stars at C until Flores is ready, and that'll be in 3-4 years at least.
Castellanos would be an upgrade but he would cost us too much (Free agent in 2020) and his strikeout problem has yet to be fixed.
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
15,672
Not wishcasting re: Justin Wilson
Jon Morosi and others have us in the thick of the Justin Wilson sweepstakes. Avila will be mentioned as a part of any deal but as I said JW is the real prize/target

I understand the theory behind keeping catchers who have great rep with a great rotation, but where I played we had 2 catchers that split time. If I came in from the pen I didn't get my main guy. It felt different but my favorite catcher is and will always be the one that scores some runs for me.
Of course John Farrell benched his run-scoring catcher in favor of his defensive catcher in the middle of the World Series so he may have his own way of looking at that position.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Another question is just how big of an upgrade offensively is Avila? His career stats are all over the place.
 

AB in DC

OG Football Writing
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2002
13,633
Springfield, VA
Are you seriously dismissing the theory that the REASON Sale is the best pitcher in the league this year and that Porcello won the CYA last year was because Sandy's been catching them?
Are you serious discounting the idea that Chris Sale was one of the best pitchers in the league before he started pitching to Leon?

If Leon has caused an incremental improvement in Sale's numbers compared to his history, cERA is not the way to measure it.
 

Rudy's Curve

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2006
2,333
If they're making a move with Detroit centered on Wilson, I'd rather see an effort to add Castellanos than Avila. Catcher is a sink hole but it's not killing us and Castellanos has some versatility and some right handed pop.
What versatility does Castellanos have? The 39 innings he played in LF four years ago? He's obviously better than what they have, but he's not much of a hitter against RHP (which they're lacking) and is a horrible defender (-13 career UZR/150) to boot. He's also pretty worthless beyond this year once Devers is ready. Avila is going to cost less and is a much better fit.
 

Papelbon's Poutine

Homeland Security
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2005
19,615
Portsmouth, NH
He played almost 180 games over two seasons in the OF in the minors when he was getting close to Detroit and Miggy was still at 3B. Plus I would make the assumption he could sport a 1B mitt, though that can be argued. Is he perfect? No but neither is Avila and adding him means losing one of Vaz or Leon as they both lack options. Then C becomes a need for next season. The biggest weakness on the team is offense at 3B, if they're going to spend assets I'd rather they do that than try to upgrade at C where they're perfectly fine. I'm also not convinced Avila keeps this up as he's hit this well once in his career, six years ago. Castellanos is a 1.0-1.5 WAR player, that's more than enough upgrade for what he would cost.

I'm not even arguing they should trade for him, I'm just saying if it's between spending more assets on Avila or NC, I take NC. Speculation aside, I think price difference is negligible and we have bigger needs than C.
 

Byrdbrain

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
8,588
Are you serious discounting the idea that Chris Sale was one of the best pitchers in the league before he started pitching to Leon?

If Leon has caused an incremental improvement in Sale's numbers compared to his history, cERA is not the way to measure it.
Pretty sure that was sarcasm.

They aren't trading for a catcher, it would be nice if those guys could hit a little bit but they are playing good D and the pitching has been good to excellent.
 

Rudy's Curve

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2006
2,333
He played almost 180 games over two seasons in the OF in the minors when he was getting close to Detroit and Miggy was still at 3B. Plus I would make the assumption he could sport a 1B mitt, though that can be argued. Is he perfect? No but neither is Avila and adding him means losing one of Vaz or Leon as they both lack options. Then C becomes a need for next season. The biggest weakness on the team is offense at 3B, if they're going to spend assets I'd rather they do that than try to upgrade at C where they're perfectly fine. I'm also not convinced Avila keeps this up as he's hit this well once in his career, six years ago. Castellanos is a 1.0-1.5 WAR player, that's more than enough upgrade for what he would cost.

I'm not even arguing they should trade for him, I'm just saying if it's between spending more assets on Avila or NC, I take NC. Speculation aside, I think price difference is negligible and we have bigger needs than C.
The OF versatility isn't worth that much with three everyday starters entrenched and considering he hasn't played it in four years and is a bad 3B, I bet he's not very good out there anyways. He could probably play 1B, but I'm not sure how necessary that is anyways now with Hanley able to do it at least against LHP.

After his hot start last year, Leon has put up a 59 wRC+ in 310 PA since August 22nd. He's a career 79 wRC+ hitter and 72 (65 this year) against RHP, which is where Avila would be a big upgrade since Vazquez can't hit RHP either. I'm aware Leon catches Sale, but Sale was good long before him and will be good long after him. Active Red Sox (pitchers excluded) have a 94 wRC+ against RHP this year - that's tied for second-worst in the AL. It does include Hernandez's 56 in 43 PA for some reason, but I doubt removing that would make them good. Avila's at 159 this year - obviously that's an outlier, but he's still at 119 for his career. Castellanos is also going to cost more since he's cost-controlled for the next two years while Avila is a FA, except the Red Sox don't have a need for him beyond this year.

Even if they couldn't acquire another 3B, I'd much rather have Avila/Vazquez and Holt-Lin/Marrero platoons than play Castellanos everyday (and give up more assets) with the current catching situation.
 

CurtieLeskanic

New Member
Apr 28, 2014
47
Even if they couldn't acquire another 3B, I'd much rather have Avila/Vazquez and Holt-Lin/Marrero platoons than play Castellanos everyday (and give up more assets) with the current catching situation.
Yeah that's exactly how I feel. Catcher is going to be a need going into 2018 no matter what we do this TD. I can stand the current platoon at 3B because of the talent waiting in the wings, but the platoon at C is more easily upgradable without sacrificing Devers development down the line.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
Yeah that's exactly how I feel. Catcher is going to be a need going into 2018 no matter what we do this TD line.
It really is too bad the Red Sox didn't have any other options at catcher. Imigine the difference if they'd had, say, the #1 catching prospect in all of baseball a couple years ago, and had let him develop along with Betts and Bogaerts and Bradley.

Oh, wait, they did. What a squander.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
It really is too bad the Red Sox didn't have any other options at catcher. Imigine the difference if they'd had, say, the #1 catching prospect in all of baseball a couple years ago, and had let him develop along with Betts and Bogaerts and Bradley.

Oh, wait, they did. What a squander.
Do you actually believe this? You can make the argument they should have traded him when his value was high, but do you think they are directly responsible for his failure to develop as a player? We get caught up in prospect hoopla sometimes. Swihart did end up in the top 20 on 3 lists after 1 great season but that's all it was. He falls into the category of WMB/JBJ in that the results didn't really match the hype. He was ranked higher than the other 2 but mostly because he played C. The guys best season to date is an .810 OPS during his age 22 season. He wasn't some world beater.

If Swihart is that mentally fragile that a move to the OF or being sent down in 2016 broke his spirit, he was never going to survive in the big show anyway. Plus people seem to forget his catching ability was already in question to begin with. He's not exactly Ryan Lavarnway but he isn't Vazquez either. Prospects bust all the time, sometimes even after great rookie seasons.

If anything derailed him, it was injuries. Crying about the OF experiment is stupid since players literally move to new positions all the time without a hitch. Sometimes injuries happen. I know you follow the minor league system at least in passing. I know you followed it much more closely in the past. You know how often players move positions so I hope that isn't your gripe.
 

jk333

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 26, 2009
4,323
Boston
The guys best season to date is an .810 OPS during his age 22 season. He wasn't some world beater.

If Swihart is that mentally fragile that a move to the OF or being sent down in 2016 broke his spirit, he was never going to survive in the big show anyway. Plus people seem to forget his catching ability was already in question to begin with. He's not exactly Ryan Lavarnway but he isn't Vazquez either. Prospects bust all the time, sometimes even after great rookie seasons.

If anything derailed him, it was injuries. Crying about the OF experiment is stupid since players literally move to new positions all the time without a hitch. Sometimes injuries happen. I know you follow the minor league system at least in passing. I know you followed it much more closely in the past. You know how often players move positions so I hope that isn't your gripe.
1) A 710 OPS for a highly regarded rookie catcher, is really good. Combined with the previous season you mention showed a lot promise. Now looking back, the k/bb rates should have been more alarming but those two seasons were very good.
2) As a prospect his catching abilities were highly regarded at times. It was not until he reached MLB that his receiving skills became questioned. This is important in terms of evaluating his value.
https://www.google.com/amp/www.baseballamerica.com/majors/expect-red-sox-c-blake-swihart/?amphtml=1

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/blake-swihart-gets-the-call-in-boston/

3) What top prospects moved position after coming up and producing? It happens but I don't think it's common at the MLB level.

The moves with Swihart make sense but they are debatable. I mostly agree with Plympton91 that overall it was an error that didn't maximize his value as the games top rated catching prospect.

My other thought is that the Sox are fine at catcher. The price to improve won't be worth the cost; especially when improvement from Vazquez or Leon is also possible.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
3) What top prospects moved position after coming up and producing? It happens but I don't think it's common at the MLB level.

The moves with Swihart make sense but they are debatable. I mostly agree with Plympton91 that overall it was an error that didn't maximize his value as the games top rated catching prospect.

My other thought is that the Sox are fine at catcher. The price to improve won't be worth the cost; especially when improvement from Vazquez or Leon is also possible.
Albert Pujols comes to mind. And arguing the sox failed to maximize value on Swihart is not the same thing as saying the Sox system failed to develop Swihart. Seems like P91 was suggesting with proper development, Swihart should have been the Redsox catcher of the future. The Redsox ability to develop positional players really shouldn't be in doubt. Pitchers, sure.

edit: I'm also dubious of defensive scouting reports on minor league catchers. I'm dubious on minor league scouting reports on defense in general. I remember Jacoby Ellsbury was supposed to save us 50+ runs in CF. Ryan Lavarnway winning Defensive POY. Will Middlebrooks being a perennial GGer. Meh.
 
Last edited:

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
Do you actually believe this? You can make the argument they should have traded him when his value was high, but do you think they are directly responsible for his failure to develop as a player? We get caught up in prospect hoopla sometimes. Swihart did end up in the top 20 on 3 lists after 1 great season but that's all it was. He falls into the category of WMB/JBJ in that the results didn't really match the hype. He was ranked higher than the other 2 but mostly because he played C. The guys best season to date is an .810 OPS during his age 22 season. He wasn't some world beater.

If Swihart is that mentally fragile that a move to the OF or being sent down in 2016 broke his spirit, he was never going to survive in the big show anyway. Plus people seem to forget his catching ability was already in question to begin with. He's not exactly Ryan Lavarnway but he isn't Vazquez either. Prospects bust all the time, sometimes even after great rookie seasons.

If anything derailed him, it was injuries. Crying about the OF experiment is stupid since players literally move to new positions all the time without a hitch. Sometimes injuries happen. I know you follow the minor league system at least in passing. I know you followed it much more closely in the past. You know how often players move positions so I hope that isn't your gripe.
No, the thing that derailed Swihart most was Farrell not giving him a real opportunity in 2016. DDski appears to have been a believer in Swihart's bat, which best explains why the position switch happened. But Farrell -- likely with the support of some starters on the pitching staff -- wouldn't play him behind the plate once Vazquez got healthy. And it's true, he wasn't as good a defensive catcher, even though his offensive potential was off the charts higher.

Comparing Swihart to JBJ is actually highly appropriate, because if DDski hadn't been hired as already a huge booster who had tried to acquire him for Detroit, JBJ would also have kept the "bust" label and probably would have gotten traded for a middle reliever, instead of continuing to develop into a 3+ WAR regular CF on an MLB team with championship aspirations. As a reminder, Farrell played Victorino as well as Craig, de Aza, and Castillo in RF over giving Bradley an extended call up from AAA.

However, Swihart didn't get the chance to catch to develop at the MLB level the way JBJ did. He was bounced after earning the starter's job with his good rookie performance in 2015, then got hurt. Now, as I feared when I first saw the ankle injury, he isn't a viable catching prospect, even if given an opportunity.

Which at root, was the problem about converting him to begin with. Not because he might, and did, get hurt; but because the whole stupid experiment took away from him developing as a catcher. Now, predictably, it's too late to salvage the potential that was exhibited when he was 23 and learning to hit at the MLB level as well as to catch.
 

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
58,909
San Andreas Fault
Buzz, re:

But Farrell -- likely with the support of some starters on the pitching staff -- wouldn't play him behind the plate once Vazquez got healthy.

Unless a catcher is really lousy or shows up drunk or high, would today's pitchers tell their manager they don't want "that guy" catching when they pitch? I know some pitchers come around to their own "personal" catchers but I would hope that's more "Vaz and I really work well together...same page", all that, instead of "I really prefer that guy not catch me." Maybe it's too close to the same thing. I hope Swihart can get it all going again. It would be nice to have a catcher someday that can hit and run as well as catch (last such for the Sox was probably Carlton Fisk, who stole 61 bases for us in 11 years, and could he ever hit). Rare breed, Biggio was another until he moved positions.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Buzz, re:

But Farrell -- likely with the support of some starters on the pitching staff -- wouldn't play him behind the plate once Vazquez got healthy.

Unless a catcher is really lousy or shows up drunk or high, would today's pitchers tell their manager they don't want "that guy" catching when they pitch? I know some pitchers come around to their own "personal" catchers but I would hope that's more "Vaz and I really work well together...same page", all that, instead of "I really prefer that guy not catch me." Maybe it's too close to the same thing. I hope Swihart can get it all going again. It would be nice to have a catcher someday that can hit and run as well as catch (last such for the Sox was probably Carlton Fisk, who stole 61 bases for us in 11 years, and could he ever hit). Rare breed, Biggio was another until he moved positions.
Jason Kendall until he fell off the map at a very young age.
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
Buzz, re:

But Farrell -- likely with the support of some starters on the pitching staff -- wouldn't play him behind the plate once Vazquez got healthy.

Unless a catcher is really lousy or shows up drunk or high, would today's pitchers tell their manager they don't want "that guy" catching when they pitch? I know some pitchers come around to their own "personal" catchers but I would hope that's more "Vaz and I really work well together...same page", all that, instead of "I really prefer that guy not catch me." Maybe it's too close to the same thing. I hope Swihart can get it all going again. It would be nice to have a catcher someday that can hit and run as well as catch (last such for the Sox was probably Carlton Fisk, who stole 61 bases for us in 11 years, and could he ever hit). Rare breed, Biggio was another until he moved positions.
Scuttlbutt surrounding Swihart's demotion was that Buchholz, in particular, didn't like how Swihart caught him.

That may have been motivated by framing, or pitch-calling, or ability to control the running game. Because for all of those things, Vazquez was a much better catch-and-throw option. Where Swihart had more promise was on the offense side, but it was hoped he would be average on defense, too.

It's too bad things turned out the way they did.
 

geoduck no quahog

not particularly consistent
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 8, 2002
13,024
Seattle, WA
I'm way out in left field in this conversation, but I thought the plan was Swihart in 2018 splitting time with Vazquez. Am I way off base?
 

HriniakPosterChild

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 6, 2006
14,841
500 feet above Lake Sammammish
Unless a catcher is really lousy or shows up drunk or high, would today's pitchers tell their manager they don't want "that guy" catching when they pitch? I
A few years ago, Jarrod Washburn sort of hung his catcher out to dry in the press:

Asked about some apparent situations during his start Saturday when he and catcher Kenji Johjima weren’t in concert, Washburn didn’t deny it.

“There’s times when you’re not always on the same page,” he said. “It happens.”

Washburn was asked if there was any more of it than normal.

“With Kenji? No,” he said. “Read into that what you want.”
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/23238-seattle-mariners-a-fans-take-on-jarrod-washburn