Nick Swisher's Bat Fits Us Like a Glove (Update: Indians sign Swisher)

[Frobby]

I know a lot of people here can't stand the guy, but Nick Swisher's bat fits our needs perfectly. He'd give us the high OBP we desperately need (.361 career OBP) and he's got solid pop (.211 career ISO). He's solid vs. both RHP (.820 career OPS) and LHP (.842).

Defensively, he can play corner OF or 1B. He'd probably be our DH a lot of the time, and spell Davis, Markakis and McLouth.

My guess is we won't pursue him, but it seems the market for him has been soft and if we could pick him up on a 3-4 year deal at $13 mm/year or so, he'd be of interest to me.

[Todd-O]

I agree. He seems like a good fit. His bat would be welcomed and steady... and he could play DH, 1st and LF. He's also young enough that we might get 2-3 years of field time from him and be-able to ride out his twilight years as a DH.

[McNulty]

I totally agree. He costs a pick, so even if his price drops I'd doubt Duquette would get involved, but he's easily the best fit of any free agent (including the ones who have already signed).

[mskrulz]

I totally agree. He costs a pick, so even if his price drops I'd doubt Duquette would get involved, but he's easily the best fit of any free agent (including the ones who have already signed).

Big deal he costs us a pick. So sick of hearing that. We gave been given an extra pick in the competitive balance format and we have the ability to get a player who will really help our team and is there for the taking. These picks are a crap shoot and we need to stop thinking like a scrub team who hasn't had a winning season in 14 years and more like a team coming off a playoff year trying to get better. It's time to get Swisher. He's absolutely what we need!

[Frobby]

I totally agree. He costs a pick, so even if his price drops I'd doubt Duquette would get involved, but he's easily the best fit of any free agent (including the ones who have already signed).

I didn't realize he'd cost us a pick. That makes it a tougher call for me. But I'd still get in on this if his price comes into range. Our lineup would be very strong with him in it, and it gives us flexibility and depth at three positions.

[BrunoCherrytown]

I totally agree. He costs a pick, so even if his price drops I'd doubt Duquette would get involved, but he's easily the best fit of any free agent (including the ones who have already signed).

I'm with you - he's the best bet for us right now.

Plus, I recently read that this years draft was widely considered to be weak. Im guessing much smarter minds than mine on here know whether thats the case. So, if that's true, why do we care if we lose this pick especially considering that we have another one coming up somewhat soon after it. What are the chances a #24 pick in the first round of a weak draft class ever equals the production of say Nick Swisher for the next 3-4 years.

I wasn't on the Swisher train at the beginning of the offseason but at this point he's better than anybody else we're going to get. I'm curious to see what he ends up signing for.

[ChaosLex]

Don't get the hate for Swisher myself. He's no more conceited than most of the players on the MFY's (Granderson not included), IMO.

I'd happily take him.

[russ snyder]

I agree as well. Swisher would be a very good fit for the Orioles. Further, since the market for him has cooled, the Orioles may be able to get him for a reasonable price. I would consider giving up the draft pick as the price of doing business in Swisher's case.

[McNulty]

Big deal he costs us a pick. So sick of hearing that. We gave been given an extra pick in the competitive balance format and we have the ability to get a player who will really help our team and is there for the taking. These picks are a crap shoot and we need to stop thinking like a scrub team who hasn't had a winning season in 14 years and more like a team coming off a playoff year trying to get better. It's time to get Swisher. He's absolutely what we need!

Dude, I didn't say it was a big deal for me. There have been plenty of rumblings about it being a sticking point with the front office in regards to interest in LaRoche. So one would have to assume it applies to all players.

In regards to his douchebag image, I submit this quote from googling "Nick Swisher Affliction". Link

Swisher says he’s learned a lot about style from his better half, and he’s more than willing to take her advice. “Happy wife, happy life,” he says. “She knows best.” That’s why you won’t see Swisher wearing a lot of the clothes he used to rock before he and Garcia got together. “When we met in 2009, I had a plethora of Affliction and Ed Hardy-type stuff,” Swisher says. “Thanks to my wife, I’ve moved on from that phase of my life.”

Re: This draft class. I do believe it is a little down, but its early still. However, the chances of any 24th pick exceeding Swish's value in the next 3 years is HIGHLY unlikely.

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/blog_article/analyzing-the-mlb-draft-using-war/

[Frobby]

Dude, I didn't say it was a big deal for me. There have been plenty of rumblings about it being a sticking point with the front office in regards to interest in LaRoche. So one would have to assume it applies to all players.

For me, it's a deal-killer for LaRoche, but not for Swisher. Just like I'd consider 4 years for Swisher but not for LaRoche.

Swisher: 32 years old, 118 career OPS+, 17.9 rWAR

LaRoche: 33 years old, 114 career OPS+, 10.0 rWAR

Even though I think LaRoche is a better defender at 1B than Swisher is anywhere on the field, I like Swisher's versatility. Swisher's R/L splits are more balanced than LaRoche's (.820/.842 vs .843/.750) and I prefer that.

The differences in their value are pretty subtle but it's enough to tip the balance for me on length of contract and giving up a pick. Now, if Swisher's up in the $16-17 mm/yr range, that's another story altogether.

[mark_beckens]

NO NO NO NO, please no!

[mdbdotcom]

For me, it's a deal-killer for LaRoche, but not for Swisher. Just like I'd consider 4 years for Swisher but not for LaRoche.

Swisher: 32 years old, 118 career OPS+, 17.9 rWAR

LaRoche: 33 years old, 114 career OPS+, 10.0 rWAR

Even though I think LaRoche is a better defender at 1B than Swisher is anywhere on the field, I like Swisher's versatility. Swisher's R/L splits are more balanced than LaRoche's (.820/.842 vs .843/.750) and I prefer that.

The differences in their value are pretty subtle but it's enough to tip the balance for me on length of contract and giving up a pick. Now, if Swisher's up in the $16-17 mm/yr range, that's another story altogether.

If they're going to give up a draft pick to sign one of them, why not sign both? Play Swisher in LF (McClouth to 4th OF) and LaRoche at 1B with Davis DH.

Markakis

Swisher

LaRoche

Jones

Davis

Wieters

Hardy

Machado

2B

We might score some runs for a few years.

[AgentOrange]

Sign. Me. Up.

I hate Swisher, but I love winning

[Tx Oriole]

NO NO NO NO, please no!

Because he played for the Yankees? If that is your reason

for not wanting a player that could help the O's then that

is just being silly. IMO

[Tx Oriole]

If they're going to give up a draft pick to sign one of them, why not sign both? Play Swisher in LF (McClouth to 4th OF) and LaRoche at 1B with Davis DH.

Markakis

Swisher

LaRoche

Jones

Davis

Wieters

Hardy

Machado

2B

We might score some runs for a few years.

Now you know PA would never agree with that. IMO