I totally agree. I'd let Leon be Sale's caddy and start Vaz about 4 out of every 5 games.Originally Posted by sk7326
I totally agree. I'd let Leon be Sale's caddy and start Vaz about 4 out of every 5 games.
Moving Leon or changing the catcher tandem is just an exercise in how to fuck-up a good thing.
That's the type of thing a wife or girlfriend would do. Their hair is really nice and they ask you what you think. "It looks really nice honey".
After disappearing into the bathroom for 20 minutes she comes out looking like she just woke up. "How is my hair now?" "It looks fine darling."
She knows it looks like shit and because you said it is now only "fine" somehow you are to blame.
The moral here is leave well enough alone.
And never tell your woman that she looks "fine".
"Hating the Yankees like it's a religion since 94'" RIP Mike.
"It's also a simple and indisputable fact that WAR isn't the be-all end-all in valuations, especially in real life. Wanna know why? Because an ace in run-prevention for 120 innings means more often than not, a sub-standard pitcher covering for the rest of the IP that pitcher fails to provide. You can't see value in a vacuum when a player does not provide full-time production."
Does Leon work better with Rodriguez?
Honestly, I think Devers at 1B next year makes the most sense for our chances in 2018 and 2019. It might not be whats best for him or the Sox long term goals, but for the immediate future, I'm not sure we can withstand his "learning curve" on defense. That might mean signing Moustakas, instead of JD- who may want to play our west anyways or command too much salary and years for a player his age and with his lack of seasons without injuries.
Sign Moustakas, move Devers to 1B, HRam to DH and then maybe try trading JBJ and prospects for Stanton. Again, this plan would, by itself, put us over the second level or very close, so there'd be no room for a SP'er and back-up 2Bman
That makes some sense to me. Devers might be our 1st baseman of the future. Hanley could be DH unless he can't manage that many games. If need be we can use a utility hitter if his shoulders prove to be cranky.
Put the money in at third for a good fielding/ good hitting Moustakas. I like it.
Trade JBJ plus prospects and get an outfielder like Ozuna or Stanton.
That leaves the potential mess at 2nd and the need for 1 SP. Possibly Chavis is ready to play 2nd? Cheap solution. Trouble is no money for a SP. Could Otani be that SP?
Dig into our reserves for utility players. Travis, Brannen, Lin, Hernandez, Swihart and Marrero.
We need a couple of low cost solutions.
I really wonder what swihart is now after two injury plagued seasons.
Three years ago, he was on my untouchable list. Had a beautiful swing and made lots of hard contact.
Now he is probably a double a player stuck in triple a.
He is a wasted asset. He was never going to be a good defensive catcher and that is where his value lied. Once the Red Sox decided to go with Vasquez as the future catcher, they should have maximized Swihart's value by trading him. It's too lat for that.
The King of TalkSox has Spoken.
Totally agree, and I said it back then, too.
Catchers are always in such high demand. We could have gotten something useful.
Now, he's near valueless, so we might as well hang on and pray.
So when did you think was the exact perfect time to trade Swihart? Please be as specific as possible with the year and time of year.
I would agree. There was no really obvious time to deal Swihart. Especially because Vazquez missed a season with TJ surgery. ..
Last edited by notin; 10-21-2017 at 08:03 AM.
I said it many times before he was called up prematurely when Vaz was injured. Then, I said it after his year in the majors in 2015. I'm not trying to claim I was a genius. There were many of us who felt the same way- maybe 50-50 at the "old site". I always thought Vaz should and would win the job, and Swi would end up at another position, and since his value was higher as a catcher, we should trade him. So many teams are looking for a good catcher. His value elsewhere had to be higher than with us as a projected back-up catcher and 1Bman (which is where I felt he'd end up at the time).
'
In hindsight, probably not, but many wanted him traded before the injury to Vaz, and after the injury, many felt he should be traded as soon as Vaz was deemed ready to go (March 2016?). He still had value when they sent him down. Though trades are hardly made in early April, they could have shopped him around starting then, instead of showing the world they gave up on him as a catcher.
In hindsight, the best time might have been right before the 2016 season, when management obviously felt Vaz was ready. That may or may not have been his peak value moment, but it was much higher then than before his position change in the minors and subsequent injury in LF.
I suspect other teams had some interest in Blake Swihart and that the Red Sox were open to trading the switch-hitting catcher.
The problem was (and perhaps still is) that other teams did not value Swihart as highly as the Red Sox did. Swihart was not the can’t-miss prospect some folks promoted.
It's easy to say I told-you-so's about Swihart, but hard to believe any of them ... but the Red Sox had to see what they had after last year's injury. Swihart was always the team's highest ceiling option at catcher - and trading him after his injury would be a straight dump. It is a shame that things did not work out, but unless the Red Sox wanted to turn him into a cyborg, it's hard to really blame them.
He really wasn't. His defense was 'a work in progress' and he had good on-base skills but very little power.
Want to see Vazquez a second season on Offense. Way too short of a sample for me before I deem him a Offensive threat, in the Majors. His high in the Minors for HRS was 18, all the way back in 2011, never hit Double digits again. 27 years old now, like to see more power for Fenway. Career .266 Minor Leaguer, if he hits this in the Majors, I will be happy.
But I will wait on this next season.
Last edited by OH FOY!; 10-21-2017 at 10:19 AM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote