Red Sox Mailbag: What Could Boston Have Done Differently Last Offseason?

[protected-iframe id=”74503b1accb1188a661af2658a5a3a60-38215605-37431026″ info=”http://www.springboardplatform.com/mediaplayer/springboard/video/nesn039/899/1535273/” width=”640″ height=”360″ class=”SpringboardPlayer”]
The Boston Red Sox still haven’t blown things up.

While it was reasonable to wonder whether the Red Sox would make wholesale changes Monday if things continued to trend downward, if only because off days are a good time for self-reflection, Boston made a bit of a statement over the weekend by taking two of three from the Kansas City Royals.

The solid performance against the defending American League champions, especially Sunday’s 13-2 shellacking, suppressed the fan base’s panic a teeny, tiny bit. But plenty of questions still flooded this week’s Red Sox mailbag, so enough screwing around. Let’s swing from the heels.

What happens to Blake Swihart/Sandy Leon when Ryan Hanigan comes back? Does Swihart just become a backup?
— Ahaan Rungta

Swihart is going to remain a starter. Relegating the 23-year-old to a backup role makes no sense at this stage of his development. It’s just a question of whether he remains a starter with the Red Sox or returns to Triple-A Pawtucket. And the next week or so could be a factor in determining his fate.

Three things could prevent Swihart from sticking in the majors when Hanigan returns:

1. Leon is out of minor league options, meaning the Red Sox can’t simply demote the 26-year-old without designating him for assignment and running the risk of losing him.

2. Leon has a great rapport with Clay Buchholz. The Red Sox probably would like to preserve that, given that Buchholz has pitched well for most of this season. Buchholz’s FIP (Fielder Independent Pitching) and xFIP (Expected Fielder Independent Pitching) — two good barometers of how a pitcher actually is performing based on factors he can control — actually are in line with his 2013 marks.

3. Swihart hasn’t set the world on fire. He’s been steady, but it was clear from the beginning he needed more seasoning. If the Red Sox still feel like they can contend this season, Hanigan gives them the best chance to do so based on his experience and defensive aptitude.

The next week is important because Swihart could go on a tear, making it difficult to justify sending him down, or the Red Sox could fall out of contention completely, in which case Boston could decide it’s better off having Swihart develop as a starter at the major league level while Hanigan assumes a backup role.

…More like, what happens to Swihart when Christian Vazquez comes back?
— Dan Howard

There’s an even more intriguing question. While it’s possible one of the two young catchers could be dealt before next season, the uncertainty surrounding Vazquez’s return from Tommy John surgery — do we really know how the injury is going to affect him? — and Swihart’s development the rest of this season makes it a situation that’s almost impossible to predict right now.

I suspect they’ll keep both and see how things play out once Vazquez is fully healthy and back on the field, but so much could change before then with regard to Swihart’s progress, other roster moves, etc.

The best-case scenario: The Red Sox end up with two game-changing catchers at their disposal, one of which they can use as a piece to address other needs.

The worst-case scenario: Vazquez isn’t the same guy and the Red Sox miss out on an opportunity to trade Swihart at a point of optimum value (which might have been this past offseason).

It’s a wide spectrum. But let it be known I love everything Vazquez brings as a catcher when healthy, and that’s nothing against Swihart. Both players are unique and both could be special.

Why did the Red Sox claim catcher Erik Kratz? DL for Swihart? Unhappy about Leon? It all seems very vague, especially with Hanigan returning soon.
— Devi Seijkens

Just covering their bases.

Swihart is expected to be fine, but there still was some uncertainty surrounding his injury status at the time of the move. It’s better to be safe than sorry.

Don’t read too much into it as anything other than a depth acquisition.

Can we trade all of our players to the Phillies for all of theirs?
— William Michael Pray

Well, that seems counterproductive.

In hindsight, which of the Red Sox’s offseason moves would you change? I still think Hanley Ramirez and Pablo Sandoval will do better, but I don’t like the trade for Rick Porcello and the signing of Justin Masterson.
— Chad Rosander

This is a difficult question, if only for the number of variables involved.

Personally, I wasn’t 100 percent sold on either Ramirez or Sandoval. I thought the Red Sox should have strongly considered signing Chase Headley (signed a four-year, $52 million with the New York Yankees) over Sandoval to play third base. And there were plenty of red flags surrounding Ramirez.

Admittedly, I was higher on Ramirez’s deal after knowing the dollar amount (fairly reasonable in comparison to some projections) and that he would play left field as opposed to third base. I, like most, didn’t foresee Ramirez’s transition to left field being so problematic, and I thought he had the potential to be an offensive upgrade over Yoenis Cespedes. (So yes, I liked the Cespedes-Porcello trade in conjunction with the Ramirez signing.)

As for signing Masterson, I had no issue there, other than the Red Sox maybe expecting too much of him. He was a nice buy-low option given his track record and his career ground-ball rate, which figured to play well at Fenway Park, where fly balls can kill you. But there were other signs — velocity, in particular — that suggested he might flop and ultimately become a $9.5 million reliever.

My biggest issue with the Red Sox’s offseason was that they invested too much in Ramirez and Sandoval without allocating enough resources to bolster their rotation. They essentially needed to replace Jon Lester (perhaps with the man himself) and John Lackey, yet they failed to address that deficiency.

Does Ben Cherington feel dumb for not signing Max Scherzer, now that the right-hander is proving to be the best damn pitcher in the world?
— Brian Kennedy

As this tweet suggests, I love Scherzer. To me, he’s everything you want in a No. 1 starter. Serious cojones.

[tweet https://twitter.com/TheRickyDoyle/status/612386122287742976 align=’center’]

But, in Cherington’s defense, the issue wasn’t with the first year of Scherzer’s contract. Everyone knew he was going to be good — maybe not historically good, but good — in the first year of his deal. The turnoff was the back end of the deal, which has the potential, like any contract of that magnitude, to be ugly.

Yes, the Red Sox needed need a legitimate No. 1 starter. Lester, Cole Hamels, Jordan Zimmermann and Johnny Cueto all should have been serious considerations, with Scherzer’s $210 million price tag looking a bit scary, especially at the time.

Why is baseball so boring?
— Jordan Nett

Someone show this guy out.

With Brock Holt playing All-Star-caliber baseball and Sandoval making errors what seems like every game, why wouldn’t you put Holt at third base for a stretch?
— Elliott Peabody

Sandoval is hitting .391 (18-for-46) with a homer, six doubles, a triple and six RBIs over his last 12 games. He’s swinging the bat as well as he has all season. So while defense definitely has been an issue, Panda still needs to be in the lineup on a consistent basis, especially when you consider he has a track record of being a pretty good defensive third baseman and could turn things around in that area.

Plus, it’s not like Holt isn’t playing. A few others asked some variation of, “Why isn’t Brock Holt a starter?” He pretty much is. He has started Boston’s last 16 games, albeit at six different positons.

Pigeon-holing Holt into one position doesn’t make much sense. His versatility is a huge part of what makes him so valuable to the Red Sox. Why eliminate that aspect of his game?

Who’s untouchable on the Red Sox with the trade deadline just over a month away?
— Jeremy Travis Fernald

I don’t really agree with the whole “untouchable” label, simply because you’re always going to pull the trigger if someone blows you away with an offer, thus negating the whole “untouchable” concept.

Semantics aside, I’d venture to say, of the players currently on the Red Sox’s major league roster, they’d be disinclined to trade Swihart, Mookie Betts, Xander Bogaerts and Eduardo Rodriguez.

Dustin Pedroia and David Ortiz also aren’t going anywhere, though they’re well-established. And Holt is more valuable to the Red Sox than what he’d likely fetch in return, so I’d keep him around.

Thumbnail photo via Nick Turchiaro/USA TODAY Sports Images