There is no doubt in my mind that if Torey Lovullo had remained manager of the Red Sox in 2016, Blake Swihart would have remained the starting catcher. The choice of Vazquez was all on Farrell. He screwed it up, and what's happened since is unfortunate. The injury to Swihart's ankle obviously was extremely serious, and still bothering him. Thus, any performance metrics post-injury are completely irrelevant to what could have been.
Catching Controversy
- Thread starter Sprowl
- Start date
And he certainly may not have remained, despite some random message board poster's lack of doubt.
I hadn't realised how much Farrell screwed up this guy. Just think, if he hadn't put him in the outfield we'd have the second coming of Carlton Fisk in the middle of the lineup.
Thank God the performance metrics are completely irrelevent though or else we'd have doubters post stats and stuff to refute this.
The bar for catcher offense is low but Red Sox catchers now have a 58 wRC+ against RHP. That's second worst in the AL and tied for fifth worst in all of baseball. The most likely ALDS opponent in Cleveland has an all-RHP rotation. Houston only has one lefty. This team could use Avila in the worst way and he shouldn't cost much as an impending FA.
What are the relevant performance metrics? How many of them measure anything relevant after Swihart turned 24 years old?
Don't forget that any trade for Avila would be executed by his father. There's probably an added tax there if he's making his son pick up and move for a half season.
Or it goes the other way with Dad doing kid a favor. So it probably means it will be just like every trade ever.
Avila chose not to re-sign his own kid in free agency back in 2015, so it's not like they haven't faced this before. Plus they've already likely had father-son baseball moments like few can imagine, but by the truckload.
Refusing a good deal to send him to the Red Sox to contend would basically be child abuse.
Refusing a good deal to send him to the Red Sox to contend would basically be child abuse.
Per @redsoxstats
Since April 15th Red Sox catchers are batting .233/.282/.321, 45% worse than league average, ranking 29th in MLB.
Since April 15th Red Sox catchers are batting .233/.282/.321, 45% worse than league average, ranking 29th in MLB.
What is the point of the 4/15 cutoff? That's cutting out, what, two weeks of the season? Oh, it happens to be the best two weeks of production out of the position all year, which when it's included jumps them up a few points and up the rankings a few spots (.245/.293/.351 for the whole year...AL average at C: .237/.304/.395, MLB average at C: .246/.312/.407)
Not going to argue that the Vazquez/Leon pairing is world class or anything, but that "stat" is the definition of cherry picking to push a narrative.
I don't know, it's not like it's really cherry picking out 2 random weeks there either though.
I took it more as "beyond the extreme SSS fluke start to the season, this is what we've gotten since".
I wouldn't call that cherry picking stats, especially when if you were to include those first two weeks of the season, Red Sox catching ranks 26th instead of 28th. Still does not excuse the fact that they are a terrible platoon.
That just proves his point that by excluding the first two weeks, you were cherrypicking
He said that by cherry picking these stats, it was pushing a narrative. The narrative that our catchers are terrible at hitting? That narrative doesn't need any pushing, it's simply a fact.
Vasquez has been an automatic out for the last month sporting a .161 BA
Sandy: .200 BA.
Wouldn't call excluding the first two weeks in favor for the three plus months since cherry picking.
Just because a thing is true doesn't mean that the statistics used to support it are not cherry picked.
In this case, the sample is artificially altered without a legitimate statistical reason offered for doing so. That's bad statistical work and, within the idioms of the field, a form of cherry picking--we don't really need an etymological discussion of the visual metaphor, do we?
In this case, the sample is artificially altered without a legitimate statistical reason offered for doing so. That's bad statistical work and, within the idioms of the field, a form of cherry picking--we don't really need an etymological discussion of the visual metaphor, do we?
So through that definition, all stats are cherry picked because all stats used to support something are thus "picked".
Come on.
Vasquez had 3 starts before 4/15 compared to Sandy's 8. I think that maybe has something to do with picking 4/15 instead of 4/3. After 4/15 the catching duties become much more of a platoon between the two.
27th in wRC+ and 26th in wOBA. Two much more important offensive categories.
Thanks Rev, but I think I'm gonna stick around here a little while longer.
A lot of that is due to Vaz's good April and May. He's been, how to put it, really anemic in June and July. Sandy had a good May/June sandwiched between anemic April and July. So, both anemic right now. I miss Varitek.
Currently 2/2 in today's game, that's 5 straight games with at least 2 hits for Vazquez and a 6 game hitting streak. That includes 3 doubles, a triple and a HR. It's a lot of BAbip luck but nice to see anyway. His slash line is eerily similar to Xander's.
Ignoring any sample that may help improve the estimation and predictive power of a metric is foolhardy without independent justification. Throwing out data because you dont like the result is the very definition of picking cherries.
Just because the first two weeks were great, doesnt mean you can ignore them because the last three months were not. One must look at the whole record.
If you claim that sandy is a better hitter than vasquez, show it by comparing the two to each other directly. Don't argue it using roundabout approaches.
The whole record still sucks which makes your cherry picking even more puzzling.
http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=c&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=0&type=8&season=2017&month=0&season1=2017&ind=0&team=0,ts&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=16,d
According to the link at fangraphs, the Red Sox collective catching is 18th in wRC+, which is more consistent with joe dokes' numbers for BA and runs scored.
More important than the rank is the actual value relative to the average MLB team. With a 79 wRC+, the red sox is a whopping 3 points below the median.
In other words, Red Sox catchers have basically hit the same as an average MLB catcher could be expected to hit.
That was just about perfect--I needed that laugh.It's almost like the sample is too small to be reliable, or something
Had me wondering though: Are there studies on whether or not "streakiness" affects the overall value of a player? Like, are more consistent hitters more valuable than streaky hitters of similar stats--sorta like studies on whether or not batting order matters.
I haven't seen any, but perhaps I will look.
How about clutch hits? Not trying to be a dick.... but damn. Leon... Vazquez??? When we need a hit they deliver. Not to mention the fact that catching also helps out with the head case pitching staff.
I took a look at the Clutch stats for Leon and Vaz on baseballreference which lists a number of "clutch" stats like "RISP - 2 outs" and "close and late". Sandy's clutch stats are pretty good this year, while Christian's clutch stats are a mixed bag.
To be clear, I'm not interpreting these stats as being predictive in any way going forward, but it's not crazy to say that Leon has been clutch for the Sox this year so far.
I had the sense the Marrero had been "clutch" this year despite his overall hitting badness, but like Vaz the results are mixed.
To be clear, I'm not interpreting these stats as being predictive in any way going forward, but it's not crazy to say that Leon has been clutch for the Sox this year so far.
I had the sense the Marrero had been "clutch" this year despite his overall hitting badness, but like Vaz the results are mixed.
Simply not the case. Sandy Leon and Christian Vasquez began their official platooning on April 16th this year. That's exactly why I used the numbers since then. Before that, Vazquez had only 3 starts compared to Sandy's 8.
My desire to get Avila here was to have him take Sandy's share because of the L/R splits, not CV's. Christian has not been good offensively save for this amazing run and a few multi-hit games in the beginning of the year, but he has good contact rates and doesn't strike out too often.
Not what you are saying, but one of EV's hypotheses seemed to be that a hot streak might be predictive of an ability to maintain a higher level of performance at some future point. I'm not sure he or anyone else has proved that, but one of the things that very much excited him was a hot streak.
Sorry but the bolded is bull. What is the line of demarcation to determine when they began "officially" platooning versus not? The initial division of labor was Leon catching Porcello, Sale and Wright while Vazquez caught Pomeranz and Rodriguez. This is the pattern they followed the entire month of April, and when Wright was DLed in early May, the division of labor switched to Vazquez getting 3 out of 5 starts (catching Kendrick, Velazquez, and eventually Price in that 5th spot).
The only seeming discrepancy in the 11 game sample you have chosen to exclude from the "official platoon" is that they skipped Pomeranz's first turn through the rotation thanks to off-days. If they hadn't done that, then the division in those 11 games would have been 7-4 rather than 8-3 and there would be nothing to distinguish them from the rest of the month.
It's a random and meaningless starting point.
You should really stop posting when you're six feet under; then hang up, listen and digest. I guess you haven't realized it yet though.
Maybe I misunderstood the point here, but I thought you were arguing that our catching situation is generally bottom 5. If you want to switch your point to claim that the Vasquez/Leon L/R platoon is suboptimal then no matter. Your new point is equally incomprehensible.
First, you are splitting small sample sizes into miniscule ones, rendering this argument asinine. However, even if we were to accept the splits as reliable, I fail to see your argument. Vasquez, this year, has been hitting righties better than lefties. Leon this year is hitting lefties (98 wRC+) better than Aviles has his lefties for his entire career (73 wRC+ on career; he's even worse at 53 this year). Therefore, even according to your EV-like logic, the optimal L/R platoon would be Leon/Aviles. Aviles/Vazquez would be one of the worst platoons possible (flipping it would be better).
Alex Speier @alexspeier 45m45 minutes ago
Blake Swihart made his first pro appearance at first base today in the Rookie Level GCL. He also went 1-for-3 with a double.
Blake Swihart made his first pro appearance at first base today in the Rookie Level GCL. He also went 1-for-3 with a double.
I don't think it's a position shift. I think they're getting him PA while his ankle heals enough for him to resume catching.
At this point, might they be looking to turn him into a corner utility player? Is there any value in someone who can back up C, 1b, LF, maybe 3b? How good offensively and how close to average defensively would he have to get to have a use in the setup? If he was competent, him and Holt could theoretically be the whole bench, allowing the team to use it's other spots for more specific uses (positionless power-hitting pinch hitter, pinch runner with no bat, etc.)
Sent from my SM-N920V using SoSH mobile app
Sent from my SM-N920V using SoSH mobile app
Wouldn't they just DH him?
I hate what they've done with him, and that's without assigning them an extra blame for the initial injury in LF. I'd rather defend the Pablo signing.
Why DH him when he is healthy enough to learn a new position that we might have a real need for next year?
If Swihart ever bounces back from that bad ankle injury and starts hitting again, he might be able to become a BJ Surhoff-style of multi-position player who can catch. That would be pretty valuable.
If Swihart ever bounces back from that bad ankle injury and starts hitting again, he might be able to become a BJ Surhoff-style of multi-position player who can catch. That would be pretty valuable.
His ceiling as a bat was considered Buster Posey-lite which he only flashed in Portland .300/.353/.487. and a sub.700 OPS since. It seems like scouting was well ahead of his performance, since he was considered to be very good defensively too.
Nothing since then has shown he can hit well enough to be an asset at anywhere other than catcher, and he'll be 26 opening day next year.
The one thing going for him is that he just doesn't have a ton of at bats over the past few years, so he could still be a late bloomer if he stays on the field.
Nothing since then has shown he can hit well enough to be an asset at anywhere other than catcher, and he'll be 26 opening day next year.
The one thing going for him is that he just doesn't have a ton of at bats over the past few years, so he could still be a late bloomer if he stays on the field.
Last edited:
He's very athletic, one of the more athletic guys I've ever seen at catcher. I think trying to make steer him in this multi-position direction would be very interesting. Of course, if he doesn't hit, nothing else matters.
He could be like Steve Young, i.e., didn't get much wear and tear on the body in the early 20s and play at a high level longer because of it. Just somehow avoid the concussions.
This is one of the biggest squanders of value the Red Sox have ever made in my 40 years of following the team. Sometimes the worst trades are the ones you don't make. They could have traded Swihart two years ago for a superstar. Now he's on the verge of being out of options and riding the pine or released.
Unfrickenbelievable.
Unfrickenbelievable.
I seem to recall, on this board, probably in an evaluation of JBJ last year, that streakiness is more valuable than consistency, when they both yield the same end results.