Register now to remove this ad

Page 2 of 23 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 334

Thread: Swihart requests a trade

  1. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by a700hitter View Post
    He has no options left. I don’t see him sticking at the MLB level with anyone. He has no defensive position, and he doesn’t hit enough to be a DH. Eventually, he will have to accept an assignment to the minors.

    I think all of this is pretty clear at this point, he really doesn't have anything to offer the Sox or any other big league team. He had his chances, he didn't earn more playing time.

  2. #17
    Legend
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    5,427
    Blake Swihart is entirely justified in seeking a trade for an opportunity to succeed or fail as an MLB player. I have little confidence in Swihart but I hope he proves me wrong.

    In terms of Swihart's trade value, I posted this recently:

    Blake Swihart is a year older now than Jarrod Saltalmacchia was in June 2010 when the Texas Rangers traded the switch-hitting catcher to the Red Sox for Chris McGuiness, Roman Mendez, Michael Thomas and cash. SoxProspects has never ranked the three prospects among the Top 20 in the organization. McGuiness and Thomas apparently are out of organized baseball while Mendez is a 27-year-old toiling at Double A.

    Saltalamacchia peaked at No. 18 on Baseball America's Top 100 prospect list while Swihart peaked at No. 17.

    At the time of the 2010 trade Saltalamacchia was back down at Triple A, much as Swihart had spent much of his age 25 season at Triple A after being a starter at the MLB level.

    With Saltalamacchia as his optimistic ceiling, Swihart has limited trade value.

    https://www.talksox.com/forum/thread...78#post1140378

  3. #18
    Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    6,291
    Quote Originally Posted by mvp 78 View Post
    If he was good enough, he’d be getting playing time.
    One the other hand, if he was given playing time maybe he would prove that he was good enough....maybe not, of course. Point is, he was never really given a chance behind the plate. I don't blame him for wanting out.

  4. #19
    Deity moonslav59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Sugar Land, Texas
    Posts
    80,052
    Quote Originally Posted by FredLynn View Post
    One the other hand, if he was given playing time maybe he would prove that he was good enough....maybe not, of course. Point is, he was never really given a chance behind the plate. I don't blame him for wanting out.
    He looked okay when rushed into duty a few years back, but he really has not done anything in the minors to show he deserves another long look. Apparently, his defense does not look good to Sox management, so he really needed to show a big plus bat over the last couple years. He did not.

  5. #20
    Deity
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    21,880
    With the few spots left for bench players on the modern 25 man, moving Swihart would be a favor to us as well as him. With so few bench players available you simply can't have a guy on the bench that you won't use. How do you think we ended up with Wright pinch running? How did that work out for us?

  6. #21
    TalkSox Ascended Master mvp 78's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    65,943
    Quote Originally Posted by jung View Post
    With the few spots left for bench players on the modern 25 man, moving Swihart would be a favor to us as well as him. With so few bench players available you simply can't have a guy on the bench that you won't use. How do you think we ended up with Wright pinch running? How did that work out for us?
    The pinch running was a management mistake, not an issue with roster size.
    Quote Originally Posted by moonslav59 View Post
    ( I won't say the "C word.")

  7. #22
    Deity
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    41,330
    Quote Originally Posted by mvp 78 View Post
    The pinch running was a management mistake, not an issue with roster size.
    Also a common NL strategy, and it was in an Interleague game.

    If Farrell wanted to use a pitcher as a pinch runner, he had Pomeranz available who had done the exact same role earlier in the season with San Diego...

  8. #23
    Legend
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    5,427
    The Red Sox have known for at least a year that the club had a logjam at catcher. I suspect the Sox have been shopping the catchers for a long time but have declined multiple offers. Perhaps the Sox need to lower their sights in what a trade will return.

  9. #24
    Deity
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    41,330
    Quote Originally Posted by harmony View Post
    The Red Sox have known for at least a year that the club had a logjam at catcher. I suspect the Sox have been shopping the catchers for a long time but have declined multiple offers. Perhaps the Sox need to lower their sights in what a trade will return.
    You're assuming they think of Swihart as a catcher. And that anyone else does...

  10. #25
    Pedroia will be back shortly. Then a roster move will be made. We have enough utility guys , and we don't need three catchers. Either Swihart or Leon has to go. Cora seems to prefer Leon. There is no sense keeping Swihart if you are not going to use him. Trade him for whatever you can get. Of course , this could be rued because Swihart has a chance to be better , while Leon will never be more than what he is. But that's how it goes. I'm sure Dombrowski understands this.

  11. #26
    I think the sox moved on from him as a catcher just as soon as they started to improve. A team with high aspirations cannot be bringing along a catcher who is still being taught the position. I think Swihart gets snapped up by a team like SD or TB and moves right back behind the dish
    Hal sucks

  12. #27
    Legend
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    5,427
    Quote Originally Posted by notin View Post
    You're assuming they think of Swihart as a catcher. And that anyone else does...
    I question the market for a non-catcher whom ZiPS, Steamer and FanGraphs Depth Charts project with rest-of-season wRC+ of 58, 68 and 63.

    https://www.fangraphs.com/statss.asp...176&position=C

  13. #28
    Deity
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    41,330
    Quote Originally Posted by harmony View Post
    I question the market for a non-catcher whom ZiPS, Steamer and FanGraphs Depth Charts project with rest-of-season wRC+ of 58, 68 and 63.

    https://www.fangraphs.com/statss.asp...176&position=C
    I believe most accept it is somewhat limited. Like I saidm his salary and versatility, limited as it is, are his selling points.

    Likely the Sox get back a salary dump or an aging or oft-injured minor leaguer who has also moved from "prospect" to "suspect"...

  14. #29
    Deity
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    41,330
    Quote Originally Posted by dgalehouse View Post
    Pedroia will be back shortly. Then a roster move will be made. We have enough utility guys , and we don't need three catchers. Either Swihart or Leon has to go. Cora seems to prefer Leon. There is no sense keeping Swihart if you are not going to use him. Trade him for whatever you can get. Of course , this could be rued because Swihart has a chance to be better , while Leon will never be more than what he is. But that's how it goes. I'm sure Dombrowski understands this.
    But will the improved version of Swihart ever be even as good as Leon is now?

  15. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by notin View Post
    But will the improved version of Swihart ever be even as good as Leon is now?
    Swihart is younger , faster , more athletic. Switch hitter. Very possible that he turns out to be better than Leon. I am sure some team will be willing to find out.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •