What should the Sox do with Swihart when Hanigan returns?

[jscola85]

You can absolutely justify keeping one of Swihart or Vazquez in AAA for the start of 2016. Vazquez especially, as he missed an entire season and he was already a sub par hitter. Let him spend 150-200 PAs in Pawtucket to get his timing down and show he can master AAA pitchers.

If at that point Hanigan is expendable then so be it; having a quality catcher to swap midseason could be quite valuable once teams experience injuries or realize guys like Sandy Leon should not be their #2 catcher. Feels better to me given that Hanigan and Vazquez are probably not fetching a premium asset due to age and injury respectively, while this org has already turned down trading Swihart for a frontline starter. The cost of carrying all three is fairly low and provides a lot of protection.

 

[WenZink]

Since his first dozen games in Boston, (where he went 7/44 for a .163 BA; 16K/1BB) Swihart has hit .286.  Yes, there's been little power, and only 8 walks, but his OPS, since mid May is over .700.  That's not bad for a 23 year old catcher rushed to the big leagues after the Sox lost it's top two catchers.  He's had to learn a lot while under the gun, and I can't wait to see him next year, with 6 weeks of spring training, and a year of big league service on his resume.  Swihart hit for more power than Varitek in the minors, and Varitek was 3 years older than Swihart, when he split the catching in 1998.
 
I think this kid is going to be a stud.

 

[Rasputin]

I think this kid is going to be a stud.

So do I and I think we're going to have to get creative to get him and Vazquez on the field at the famed time.

 

[WenZink]

So do I and I think we're going to have to get creative to get him and Vazquez on the field at the famed time.

 
I just see offensive upside in Swihart, and with offense at catcher, that lowers the bar for Jackie Bradley's offense so that he can play center 100+ games per year.  And if Swihart begins to show real power, then he becomes a candidate for 1st, but that is a long way off. 

 

[Rasputin]

 
I just see offensive upside in Swihart, and with offense at catcher, that lowers the bar for Jackie Bradley's offense so that he can play center 100+ games per year.  And if Swihart begins to show real power, then he becomes a candidate for 1st, but that is a long way off. 

Yeah, it's not tomorrow or next year, but maybe when we don't have an everyday DH.

 

[Reverend]

I just see offensive upside in Swihart, and with offense at catcher, that lowers the bar for Jackie Bradley's offense so that he can play center 100+ games per year.  And if Swihart begins to show real power, then he becomes a candidate for 1st, but that is a long way off. 

There hasn't been as much discussion of it since Vazquex went down, but it may well be that Vazquez's skills behind the plate, especially with respect to pitch framing, dwarf whatever Swihart's advantage over him at the plate is.

And that's even bracketing Vazquez's steady improvement at the play over last season.

 

[iayork]

There hasn't been as much discussion of it since Vazquex went down, but it may well be that Vazquez's skills behind the plate, especially with respect to pitch framing, dwarf whatever Swihart's advantage over him at the plate is.

And that's even bracketing Vazquez's steady improvement at the play over last season.

Swihart is almost exactly neutral as a pitch framer so far this year, while Vazquez is (or at least was, last year) elite, adding a couple of extra strikes per game.  According to a 2008 estimate, each switch call is worth about 0.13 runs on average.  That gives Vaz about an extra quarter run a game over Swihart, or over 20 extra runs per year.  The 2008 estimate was that that would be 2-3 extra wins per year; I don't know if that's changed in the present offensive climate.
 
On top of that, I think everyone would agree that Vazquez brings other defensive advantages to the table: He's better at throwing out runners, and probably a better receiver in general.  
 
Swihart's OPS+ this year, and Vazquez's last year, are virtually identical at 72 and 75 respectively. However, that's probably significantly understating Swihart's expected level; if we take out his May, he's closer to a 100 OPS+, and he's just 23; it's very reasonable to expect him to be a well above average (but probably not elite) offensive catcher.   While Vazquez also improved over the course of last year, I think the scouting and his history suggested that a mid-600s OPS (so a 70-80-ish OPS+) is a realistic target.  
 
I'm going to be lazy here -- if someone has the correct numbers to hand please chip in; I need to get my kids ready for school in five minutes -- and just work with outs and estimates.  Let's assume that Swihart ends up with an extra 50 points of OBP over Vazquez, 350 vs 300.  (That's a little unfair to Vaz and it's assuming Swihart picks up his OBP going forward, but again, we're expecting Blake to be a superior offensive player.)  Over 100 games, 400 plate appearances, that gives Vaz about 20 extra outs vs Swihart.  If an out is worth about a quarter of a run (which I think I've seen somewhere) then Swihart would be worth roughly 5 extra runs over Vazquez offensively.  Again, we've estimated that Vazquez contributes an extra 20 run equivalents via framing alone.  
 
There's lots of assumptions here (and quite possibly my math is wrong), but the bottom line is that if Vazquez is an elite defensive  catcher and Swihart is league average, then Swihart needs to be much, much better offensively to make up for it, and it's unlikely that he will be that much better. 
 
The next question is how much improvement can be expected from each on either side of the plate, of course.  Both are young, both are impressively skilled and seem to be hard workers and highly coachable.  

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

 
I just see offensive upside in Swihart, and with offense at catcher, that lowers the bar for Jackie Bradley's offense so that he can play center 100+ games per year.  And if Swihart begins to show real power, then he becomes a candidate for 1st, but that is a long way off. 

 
Given his overall athleticism, and his catcher's arm, I'm thinking in the long run his alternative position might be 3B rather than 1B. I think that might also be more realistic in terms of where his bat would carry him. Of course that be a few years up the road, when his offense is peaking, and a lot would depend on Panda's late-contract deployment as well as the development of Devers, Chavis and possibly even Moncada.

 

[Drek717]

I just don't see Vazquez or Swihart seeing AAA again.  It's not like a time share at catcher can really hurt, since it keeps both of them a lot fresher.  If Swihart's bat comes around then maybe he sees some 1B time at some point in the future.  You don't stash one of them in AAA just because you're worrying about how to keep Hanigan on the roster.
 
I see it more like how Hatteberg and Varitek started off, splitting games.

The worry isn't how to keep Hanigan, it's what you do when someone gets hurt.  Catcher is a high wear and tear position.  Better to hold onto three than willfully go into the season with only two and having no worthwhile backup plan.
 
They'll likely send one of Vaz/Swihart back to AAA to start next season unless someone makes a meaningful offer for Hanigan.  Then they'll have Hanigan as a solid #2 with some potential mid-season trade value while Swihart could work on his defensive chops or Vaz could knock the rust off defensively and tune up offensively, whomever they send down.
 
Then after 2016 Hanigan's deal is done and they're your two catchers with Swihart likely stealing some ABs from the DH, 1B, and maybe the 3B at that time.  He's a switch hitter so he could likely find a nice bit of playing time as the small side of a platoon with Sandoval at 3B for example, while strengthening the club's options should Sandoval fail to get in (relative) shape and return to form.  Or if Ortiz is still the DH in 2017 he could take some LHP ABs from him.  Maybe a combination of both.
 
The long term goal should be to have two good catchers, guarding against injury, while maximizing Swihart's time in the lineup and minimizing the wear and tear of playing catcher every day.  In that regard Swihart and Vazquez are pretty ideal compliments to each other from a long term roster construction standpoint, assuming Swihart can in fact translate his athleticism into solid corner IF and/or OF play.

 

[JimD]

Interesting perspective here from Wieters on recovery from TJ:
 
 

Though Tommy John surgery mainly afflicts pitchers, Wieters got tips from three catchers who had undergone it: Craig Tatum and Taylor Teagarden, who played for the Orioles, and Brian Ward, who played for Baltimore’s Class AAA team. More prominent position players — like St. Louis Cardinals infielder Matt Carpenter, Los Angeles Dodgers outfielder Carl Crawford and the Hall of Fame infielder Paul Molitor — have also come back from the operation.
 
“Everybody I talk to says Year 2 is when you really feel like you’re back to how you felt presurgery,” Wieters said. “No, I don’t feel as good as I did before the surgery, but I feel good enough to make every throw I would possibly make and confident that the arm is going to be able to hold up through a grueling year.”

 
NY Times - For a Catcher Who Had Pitcher's Surgery, Recovery From a Different Angle
 
I think we need to dial back expectations and not throw Vasquez in a situation where he is pushing himself next spring in any aspect of his game.  Having Hanigan on the roster for one more year is perfect - I think it would be prudent to start the season with Christian at Pawtucket and Swihart and Hanigan sharing catching duties in Boston.  Let Vasquez get his game back behind the plate and just as important work on his offense, lest we risk having another superior defender who can't hit a lick on the roster.  More than likely the Sox will be in a position by next summer at the latest to bring Vasquez back up and deal Hanigan if they have a catching surplus. 

 

[jscola85]

Swihart is almost exactly neutral as a pitch framer so far this year, while Vazquez is (or at least was, last year) elite, adding a couple of extra strikes per game.  According to a 2008 estimate, each switch call is worth about 0.13 runs on average.  That gives Vaz about an extra quarter run a game over Swihart, or over 20 extra runs per year.  The 2008 estimate was that that would be 2-3 extra wins per year; I don't know if that's changed in the present offensive climate.
 
On top of that, I think everyone would agree that Vazquez brings other defensive advantages to the table: He's better at throwing out runners, and probably a better receiver in general.  
 
Swihart's OPS+ this year, and Vazquez's last year, are virtually identical at 72 and 75 respectively. However, that's probably significantly understating Swihart's expected level; if we take out his May, he's closer to a 100 OPS+, and he's just 23; it's very reasonable to expect him to be a well above average (but probably not elite) offensive catcher.   While Vazquez also improved over the course of last year, I think the scouting and his history suggested that a mid-600s OPS (so a 70-80-ish OPS+) is a realistic target.  
 
I'm going to be lazy here -- if someone has the correct numbers to hand please chip in; I need to get my kids ready for school in five minutes -- and just work with outs and estimates.  Let's assume that Swihart ends up with an extra 50 points of OBP over Vazquez, 350 vs 300.  (That's a little unfair to Vaz and it's assuming Swihart picks up his OBP going forward, but again, we're expecting Blake to be a superior offensive player.)  Over 100 games, 400 plate appearances, that gives Vaz about 20 extra outs vs Swihart.  If an out is worth about a quarter of a run (which I think I've seen somewhere) then Swihart would be worth roughly 5 extra runs over Vazquez offensively.  Again, we've estimated that Vazquez contributes an extra 20 run equivalents via framing alone.  
 
There's lots of assumptions here (and quite possibly my math is wrong), but the bottom line is that if Vazquez is an elite defensive  catcher and Swihart is league average, then Swihart needs to be much, much better offensively to make up for it, and it's unlikely that he will be that much better. 
 
The next question is how much improvement can be expected from each on either side of the plate, of course.  Both are young, both are impressively skilled and seem to be hard workers and highly coachable.  

 
I understand the point, but isn't the sample size a bit small before determining if Swihart is just an average receiver?  For example, this BP article shows Swihart as a clearly plus receiver in AA:
 
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=25514
 
So I don't think the assumption should be that Swihart is just an average defender.  He is athletic, he has a strong arm, and in the minors he has shown the ability to be a plus pitch framer.
 
On top of that, I think most scouts have agreed there is a pretty significant gap between the two offensively.  I think most folks will be thrilled if Vazquez has an OBP-heavy .700 OPS in his prime, whereas Swihart is probably viewed as an .800+ OPS guy in his prime if things click as expected.  That's roughly the difference between Russell Martin and Derek Norris this year, and over 400 PAs, the gap between those two is about 10 runs of value.  So all Swihart needs to be is ~10 runs above average as a pitch framer, which is not unreasonable - in 2014, 14 catchers topped that mark.
 
I'm not guaranteeing that Swihart is going to be better than Vazquez - clearly what is exciting about Christian is that he is already completely there with one side of the game, and for a catcher that's a huge component, perhaps more than 50% of it.  However, Swihart is a guy with Posey-lite upside - strong defense and a middle of the order bat.  Given that Vazquez is coming off a serious surgery that could cause a lot of rust on an already questionable bat, plus impair some of his defensive value, I'd be hard-pressed to make a call to trade Swihart.
 
Perhaps part of my thinking is that this team is multiple moves from real contention, so trading a crown jewel prospect seems like a bad idea unless the return is an under-27 frontline starter with multiple years of control (ie, a Sonny Gray-caliber pitcher).  Even that is risky, given that pitchers are just so damn volatile and all it takes is one awkward throw to lose them for a year.  Catching prospects are about as prized as any asset in baseball, and the Red Sox need to think long and hard about the benefit of trading one of these guys.  Unless something really strange happens, their trade value is not going to deteriorate considerably in just one year given their age and abilities.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

I just don't see Vazquez or Swihart seeing AAA again.  It's not like a time share at catcher can really hurt, since it keeps both of them a lot fresher.  If Swihart's bat comes around then maybe he sees some 1B time at some point in the future.  You don't stash one of them in AAA just because you're worrying about how to keep Hanigan on the roster.
 
I see it more like how Hatteberg and Varitek started off, splitting games.

You are speaking as if both catchers are established ML players.....they are not. Vazquez was given a look-see down the stretch of a lost year, is 24 with an option and a grand total of 122 games played above the AA level. Catching depth is important (see: Leon,Sandy) and having Vazquez at the bucket to begin the season seems to be almost a certainty. Hanigan is the ideal stop-gap to share the catching duties with Swihart until one or both of the kids mature into everyday catchers. This is probably one of our most simple roster decisions from now until April then evaluate as 2016 gets in the swing. We have cheap depth here......this is Vazquez with zero leverage we are discussing not Victorino, Napoli, Panda, etc under big contracts and big name agents pressuring certain decisions.

 

[grimshaw]

You can absolutely justify keeping one of Swihart or Vazquez in AAA for the start of 2016. Vazquez especially, as he missed an entire season and he was already a sub par hitter. Let him spend 150-200 PAs in Pawtucket to get his timing down and show he can master AAA pitchers.

If at that point Hanigan is expendable then so be it; having a quality catcher to swap midseason could be quite valuable once teams experience injuries or realize guys like Sandy Leon should not be their #2 catcher. Feels better to me given that Hanigan and Vazquez are probably not fetching a premium asset due to age and injury respectively, while this org has already turned down trading Swihart for a frontline starter. The cost of carrying all three is fairly low and provides a lot of protection.

See I disagree.  His absence on defense and mastery behind the plate seemed to be a gaping hole that helped put them in the spot they began.  Pitchers were raving about him in spring training.  That's what was missing.  He couldn't possibly be worse with the bat than Leon, and they really need him sooner than later.  And a time share with Swihart is a perfect way to break him in.
 
I'm fine with an extra 10 games or so if that's needed due to injury rehab. Though I think he'll get plenty of at bats in spring training, since, from what I've read about position players, you can hit after 8 months.  But 150-200 at bats is late May - that's just crazy.
 
What my guess is is that they'll sign a better shuttle guy, since there ought to be more options than when they had to snatch Leon on an emergency basis.
 
As for Swihart - I just don't see it happening with the strides he has made, unless he has a really rough spring training.

 

[Super Nomario]

Since his first dozen games in Boston, (where he went 7/44 for a .163 BA; 16K/1BB) Swihart has hit .286.  Yes, there's been little power, and only 8 walks, but his OPS, since mid May is over .700.  That's not bad for a 23 year old catcher rushed to the big leagues after the Sox lost it's top two catchers.  He's had to learn a lot while under the gun, and I can't wait to see him next year, with 6 weeks of spring training, and a year of big league service on his resume.

That's pretty much all BABIP; he had a .259 BABIP in those first 43 AB and a .356 since. He has just 1 HR in the "after" span and a 7 BB / 32 K ratio. He's been pretty bad with the stick - understandable, since he should be in AAA right now.
 

Swihart hit for more power than Varitek in the minors, and Varitek was 3 years older than Swihart, when he split the catching in 1998.

It depends on what you mean by power. Varitek hit a lot more HR (39 vs 22) in almost the same number of ABs (1240 vs 1223), though as you note he was older, and he had a higher ISO (.152 vs .141). They're really apples and oranges, as Varitek was a star college player who started in AA and Swihart was a high school draftee who spent a fair amount of time at almost every level. I don't think these sorts of comparisons are useful, generally - for virtually every player you can find examples of guys with worse numbers who had great careers and guys with better numbers who washed out, and because it's easier to remember the former it causes people to overrate the likely careers prospects will have.
 

I think this kid is going to be a stud.

He certainly could be, but he's still got a ways to go.

 

[Drek717]

See I disagree.  His absence on defense and mastery behind the plate seemed to be a gaping hole that helped put them in the spot they began.  Pitchers were raving about him in spring training.  That's what was missing.  He couldn't possibly be worse with the bat than Leon, and they really need him sooner than later.  And a time share with Swihart is a perfect way to break him in.
 
I'm fine with an extra 10 games or so if that's needed due to injury rehab. Though I think he'll get plenty of at bats in spring training, since, from what I've read about position players, you can hit after 8 months.  But 150-200 at bats is late May - that's just crazy.
 
What my guess is is that they'll sign a better shuttle guy, since there ought to be more options than when they had to snatch Leon on an emergency basis.
 
As for Swihart - I just don't see it happening with the strides he has made, unless he has a really rough spring training.

They won't find a shuttle guy as good as Hanigan who is also comparatively cheap for what he offers.  Vaz is coming back from a major injury, missed a ton of time as a result, and wasn't exactly a finished/polished product offensively to begin with.  He's a great receiver, but Hanigan is no slouch and Swihart is solid with far more upside in his bat.
 
If the goal is to get back to playing competitive baseball in 2016 the club can't afford to give away layers of cost controlled injury protection at any position, catcher nearly foremost among them (SP and RP obviously being foremost among them).  Say the club gives Hanigan away and Vaz or Swihart gets hurt early, we're right back to the Sandy Leon scenario.  Maybe Weems by then I guess?  Why willingly do that to yourself when it is entirely valid to send Vaz back to AAA given the significance of his injury and the time he missed as a result?
 
Not to mention Vaz earning a year of ML service time from the DL this season, so he's one step closer to arbitration and by proxy FA as a result, reducing the peak years the Red Sox will get from him.  A few months in AAA buys an extra year of control that could be invaluable in determining if they want to extend him.

 

[AB in DC]

 
I'm fine with an extra 10 games or so if that's needed due to injury rehab. 
 

 
How can you possibly say in August just how many games he'll need for injury rehab eight months from now?  This is getting absurd.

 

[grimshaw]

 
How can you possibly say in August just how many games he'll need for injury rehab eight months from now?  This is getting absurd.

That's a stupid nitpick when I was estimating only for the sake of arguing against two months to get his timing down, and adds nothing to the discussion.
 
I am of the opinion that Vazquez earned the starting spot, and Swihart has earned the right to be on the roster as well and will leave it at that.  

 

[WenZink]

That's pretty much all BABIP; he had a .259 BABIP in those first 43 AB and a .356 since. He has just 1 HR in the "after" span and a 7 BB / 32 K ratio. He's been pretty bad with the stick - understandable, since he should be in AAA right now.
 
...[snip]

Citing a BABIP for his first 43 AB, in which he K'd 1 times, is not a very reliably sized sample.  (Indeed his whole year is a small sample)  But in his first 27 AB in which he did not K, he only hit the ball out of the infield 8 times, and got 5 hits.  He hit 4 foul popups, and got two infield hits.  Since then, at least to the eye, he's doing a much better job of hitting the opposite way.  He looks so much improved over my initial impression from May.
 
And while it's not usually a good idea to exclude a hitter's "bad stretch" from his season totals, I make an exception in the case of a 23 year old catcher called up to the big leagues on a day's notice.  Although there's room for improvement, I don't understand how you can say that Swihart has been "pretty bad with the stick."  an OPS above .700 (since his first two weeks) is hardly "pretty bad" for a catcher.

 

[WenZink]

That's a stupid nitpick when I was estimating only for the sake of arguing against two months to get his timing down, and adds nothing to the discussion.
 
I am of the opinion that Vazquez earned the starting spot, and Swihart has earned the right to be on the roster as well and will leave it at that.  

 
But perhaps the most valuable part of Vazquez was his arm and his ability to throw out runners.  None of us have any idea if and when his arm is still the same after TJ surgery.

 

[alwyn96]

 
But perhaps the most valuable part of Vazquez was his arm and his ability to throw out runners.  None of us have any idea if and when his arm is still the same after TJ surgery.

 
I'm not sure it's the most valuable part, but being able to throw out runners is a pretty important part of a catcher's duties. I think Vazquez could still be a plus (if not Molina-level elite) defensive catcher on the strength of his blocking, framing, and game management skills even with an averagish arm. Still, it does remain to be seen how well Vazquez can bounce back from surgery. Missing a bunch of time and having a medical issue can certainly throw a guy off his game for a little bit. 

 

[Drek717]

That's a stupid nitpick when I was estimating only for the sake of arguing against two months to get his timing down, and adds nothing to the discussion.
 
I am of the opinion that Vazquez earned the starting spot, and Swihart has earned the right to be on the roster as well and will leave it at that.  

He earned the starting spot until he needed TJ, Hanigan acquitted himself well, and the organization's top prospect got promoted in his absence.  Situations change.  Loyalty to a guy for what they showed in a small sample over a year earlier at the end of a lost season and in the following ST is more flawed logic than starting Mark Loretta at 1B over Carlos Pena out of veteran loyalty.

 

[alwyn96]

Citing a BABIP for his first 43 AB, in which he K'd 1 times, is not a very reliably sized sample.  (Indeed his whole year is a small sample)  But in his first 27 AB in which he did not K, he only hit the ball out of the infield 8 times, and got 5 hits.  He hit 4 foul popups, and got two infield hits.  Since then, at least to the eye, he's doing a much better job of hitting the opposite way.  He looks so much improved over my initial impression from May.
 
And while it's not usually a good idea to exclude a hitter's "bad stretch" from his season totals, I make an exception in the case of a 23 year old catcher called up to the big leagues on a day's notice.  Although there's room for improvement, I don't understand how you can say that Swihart has been "pretty bad with the stick."  an OPS above .700 (since his first two weeks) is hardly "pretty bad" for a catcher.

 
How are you calculating an OPS over 700 after Swihart's first two weeks? Swihart was called up May 2nd (or at least that's when he debuted. He may have been called up earlier, I don't know). From May 17th to Aug 9th, he's got a 659 OPS, for a 78 wRC+. From his July call-up to today he's got a 653 OPS, 74 wRC+. This year all catchers in MLB have hit to an 87 wRC+. 
 
He's up earlier than anticipated, he's obviously got a ton of potential, and these are tiny samples, but he hasn't had great hitting results this year relative to the rest of the league. And that's ok! We don't have to pretend that he has. He's still young and doesn't have too far to go to be an averagish C with the bat. But he does have some work to do to get there.  

 

[WenZink]

 
How are you calculating an OPS over 700 after Swihart's first two weeks? Swihart was called up May 2nd (or at least that's when he debuted. He may have been called up earlier, I don't know). From May 17th to Aug 9th, he's got a 659 OPS, for a 78 wRC+. From his July call-up to today he's got a 653 OPS, 74 wRC+. This year all catchers in MLB have hit to an 87 wRC+. 
 
He's up earlier than anticipated, he's obviously got a ton of potential, and these are tiny samples, but he hasn't had great hitting results this year relative to the rest of the league. And that's ok! We don't have to pretend that he has. He's still young and doesn't have too far to go to be an averagish C with the bat. But he does have some work to do to get there.  

 
Well, I'll admit that I just did a quick estimate in my head, but looking at in detail, since his first 12 games, I have Swihart with 50 TB in 125 AB for SLG= .370, and  37H+7BB in 142 PA for OBP = 325.  Giving him an OPS of .695.  (I think my original estimate was done before yesterday's stats [0/4] were on baseball-ref.)  Did I screw up any numbers?

 

[Rice4HOF]

FYI, Baseball-reference.com is great to calculate stats starting and ending at certain times and very easy to use. Here are Swihart's stats starting after game 12 to now: http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.cgi?id=swihabl01&t=b&year=2015&share=0.89#13-53-sum:batting_gamelogs

 

[WenZink]

FYI, Baseball-reference.com is great to calculate stats starting and ending at certain times and very easy to use. Here are Swihart's stats starting after game 12 to now: http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.cgi?id=swihabl01&t=b&year=2015&share=0.89#13-53-sum:batting_gamelogs

 I know how it works, but I'm old school.. I actually took college statistics before we were allowed to use calculators.  So when I look at approximately 25% of his PA's came in his first 2 weeks, and yielded an OPS of .414, it's a 5 second estimate.  Take out his 0/4 yesterday, which was not included, and you get around a .700 OPS.  Close enough for 5 seconds of my time. [.25 (.414) + .75(x) = .620; where x - OPS since first 12 games]

 

[AB in DC]

 
But perhaps the most valuable part of Vazquez was his arm and his ability to throw out runners.  None of us have any idea if and when his arm is still the same after TJ surgery.

 
Exactly.  Ligament replacement is a big deal.  Some players can be back to 100% after twelve months, some need eighteen or even twenty-four months.  You just don't know until you get there.
 
[It's the same with football players coming back from ACL surgery, FWIW]

 

[Super Nomario]

Citing a BABIP for his first 43 AB, in which he K'd 1 times, is not a very reliably sized sample.  (Indeed his whole year is a small sample)  But in his first 27 AB in which he did not K, he only hit the ball out of the infield 8 times, and got 5 hits.  He hit 4 foul popups, and got two infield hits.  Since then, at least to the eye, he's doing a much better job of hitting the opposite way.  He looks so much improved over my initial impression from May.

I agree the "bad stretch" is too small to conclude much from; my point is that this "good stretch" is pretty much all BABIP-driven. If he was BABIPing .297 over that span (league average is .294), his slash would be .231/.270/.321. He's not hitting for any power and his BB and K rate are terrible; he's just getting enough singles to fall in to hit in the .270s.
 

 
Well, I'll admit that I just did a quick estimate in my head, but looking at in detail, since his first 12 games, I have Swihart with 50 TB in 125 AB for SLG= .370, and  37H+7BB in 142 PA for OBP = 325.  Giving him an OPS of .695.  (I think my original estimate was done before yesterday's stats [0/4] were on baseball-ref.)  Did I screw up any numbers?

I think you typoed and mean 135 AB (real number is 134). Also 44/142 is .310, not .325 (it's really 141 PA).

 

[iayork]

 
I understand the point, but isn't the sample size a bit small before determining if Swihart is just an average receiver?  

 
Not really.  First, we can determine with quite a bit of confidence that Swihart has been an average framer to date.  I calculate that he lost an average of 0.13 extra strikes per game, compared to the average catcher; stat corner, which uses a similar but not identical approach, estimates a gain of 0.15 strikes per game.  Those are essentially the same number, and the same as zero.  Since those numbers are entirely observational, it's fair to say that he has been an average framer.
 
How predictive are those numbers?  I haven't tried to see yet how many pitches it takes before framing settles down, but having looked at a fair number of catchers, I think this is far enough along in the season that Swihart's numbers are not going to change very much at all.  So again, I think it's fair to say that this is what Swihart is -- an average framer.
 
Does this mean he will remain an average framer for the rest of his career?  That's a very different question.  He's 23, athletic, hard-working, and coachable, so he may be able to improve.  
 
In general, good framing catchers are consistently good, year after year, and bad framers are bad year after year.  But I have seen one dramatic exception to that rule: Jarrod Saltalamacchia, from 2010 to 2011, went from being a poor framer (-0.65 extra strikes per game) to quite a positive one (1.07), tailing off over the next couple years.  I found that very intriguing -- he's the only catcher I've seen with that much improvement, and I wondered if the Sox might have found a way to teach the skill.  Even if not, Swihart is probably more athletic than Salty, may be more open to coaching, and has at least one excellent role model for it in the form of Vaz (and Hanigan, who is a decent though not exceptional framer himself).

 

[The Tax Man]

You guys inspired Iayork and he's reviewed Blake's season offensively and defensively. 
 

Although Swihart hit well for a catcher in the minors, the expectations for catchers are set relatively low. The bar for a 23-year-old rookie catcher called up to the majors at least a year early is even lower still. With that in mind, Swihart’s overall .614 OPS – while not very good – is in line with realistic expectations. More importantly, Swihart has shown some signs of improving as he begins to adapt to major league pitching. Using a rolling 10-game window to look at his OPS compared to his season average (the red line), we can see that after an abysmal couple of weeks at the start of his season, he has at least become consistent, and shown hints of being a fairly good offensive catcher:
 

 
You'll have to click the link for the chart - which I think is one of his best because of its clarity, simplicity, and effectiveness.