Response to Rolen over Frazier

[FrazierFever21]

I'm new to this forum and the first thread I thought would be interesting was from the Old Red Guard. It was asking if Scott Rolen would be an improvement over Frazier in this years lineup but it was kind of sad to see that the topic wasn't taken seriously whatsoever. Most comments and responses were just picking on the original poster and those that might have given a proper discussion on the matter had to stand up for the poster at that point. So I pose the question, would Scott Rolen really be such a downgrade to Frazier? I'm a huge fan of Frazier's work ethic and I love what he brings to the club but I am also a huge fan of the game itself and I will admit that Rolen's leadership and experience outweighs a good personality all day. If you look at Rolen's last couple years with the team, though injury prone, his numbers are most likely not going to be overtaken by Frazier. I would give away Fraziers power edge to Rolen's ability to hit in actual clutch situations and I don't even feel that Rolen's defense compared to Fraziers is worth the discussion. Basically, I'm not seeing a sophomore slump, I'm seeing the kind of player he will be throughout his career. This team might be the best chance for the Reds and I cant see any scenario where a player like Rolen hurts the team.

[Old school 1983]

Wow. I think this could be the first post ever where someone actually agrees with my assessment of Frazier not being quite as good as people think. I honestly think its a super legitimate question. To say fraziers bat has been a disappoint this year would be an understatement. In my personal option I think he has a poor approach at the plate and is very undisciplined. I also think he feasts off of poor pitching and it has inflated his power numbers like homers slugging and ops. When comparing him to rolen you have to give the edge in power at this point to Frazier. But to me the ability to give a tough at bat against anything that is above average pitching, to me has to go to rolen. As well as plate approach and clutch hitting ability. On the defensive end I've taken a lot of grief for saying that Frazier is not as good as people think. I do think he has improved his D and that is a factor of his good work ethic. But there is no way you can compare fraziers D to rolens even at an old age. I wasn't around to see brooks Robinson play, but judging from the highlights I've seen Scott is the closest thing to him in my lifetime. There is also the question of leadership versus personality I have to go with veteran leadership.

So my overall view on the whole thing is that it is a lot closer than people want to think. The dude on ORG had made some assinine threads but this one I think warranted more discussion. My basic opinion with fraziers current performance would be a slight edge in rolens favor. Rolens defense was insane, he could give a tougher at bat against better pitching and bring veteran respected leadership. Frazier has better power and health. So more or less if I coached the reds rolen would get the nod and Frazier would play fill in against lesser pitchers so he could put his superior power to use.

[FanoftheGame34]

Conceding to the idea for the sake of argument that Fraziers offense has the edge over Rolen, when I watch the games Fraziers defense seems suspect. I know I can be quoted stats all day as far as fielding percentage and all that goes but in the end stats only say so much and play speaks for itself. When Rolen would field the ball you knew it would be done properly and I just don't see that in Fraziers play. Another issue that I think people are apprehensive to mention is the lack of confidence it seems the other infielders have in reviving the ball from Frazier. One day Votto might just end up run over when Frazier sails a throw and to me you can see that fear a bit in Votto at first. I'm not ready to do away with Frazier all together. He most definitely as some great intangibles but to say Rolen would have no place and to try and to say that Frazier is some rising star, or even has potential to be anything more than what he has shown, are both thoughts/statements that fall into the category of assenine.

[Johnny Fan]

Rolen was a great player in his prime, right now he isn't anywhere near the value of Frazier. Frazier is a key player on this team and has earned the right to be the everyday starting 3rd basemen for the Reds.

[FanoftheGame34]

I think Fraziers earned playing time but at the same time anybody can put the effort forth to earn a job. But effort alone doesn't mean they can do that job.

[Goose1701]

The topic wasn't taken seriously I would imagine because it shouldn't be taken seriously.

Rolen is 38 years old. His wOBA over his last two years he played were .314 and .294.

Frazier is 27 years old. His wOBA over the last two year's he's played are .312 and .354

[Vottomatic]

I think people expect Frazier to be average at the plate and pretty good defensively. His defense has improved a lot and they praised him on the broadcasts a lot during the Mets series, and deservedly so.

Todd wasn't even that great a hitter in the minors. He was average, which is why many were surprised he has done this well in the majors. Late bloomer? call it what you want.........but he is not horrible or great. He's average.

[Goose1701]

I think people expect Frazier to be average at the plate and pretty good defensively. His defense has improved a lot and they praised him on the broadcasts a lot during the Mets series, and deservedly so.

Todd wasn't even that great a hitter in the minors. He was average, which is why many were surprised he has done this well in the majors. Late bloomer? call it what you want.........but he is not horrible or great. He's average.

Which would be fine. An average hitter with his defense at 3rd is probably what, a 2 win player? I'd take that.

[RedsfaninMO]

Rolen is a washed up has been. Being a good clubhouse leader means nothing unless your club is winning and with Rolen we wouldn't be. Frazier is just off to a slow start, but he'll be one of the top 5 3B in the game by the numbers at the end of the year. Just say no to Rolen and his baggage.

[Old school 1983]

The topic wasn't taken seriously I would imagine because it shouldn't be taken seriously.

Rolen is 38 years old. His wOBA over his last two years he played were .314 and .294.

Frazier is 27 years old. His wOBA over the last two year's he's played are .312 and .354

And fraziers wOBA this year thus far is 315. You can't deny Frazier did well last year but I think 315 is more realistic for Frazier than last years .354. I can think of three hits all year Frazier has had against what could be classified against anything as an above average pitcher. Fraziers at bats are generally undisciplined and of poor quality. Rolen did have the ability last year to bear down and hit any type of pitching last year. I know that's very 1999 pre SABR of me but it is true. As far as defense goes there is no comparison at any age and if anyone tries to argue that they need to watch more baseball and less fan graphs UZR. As Frazier sits right now slight advantage in my mind goes to Scott. If Todd can prove he's really a .354 wOBA guy and not .315 then we can make a better case for Todd. I still say at this point this year Frazier vs last year rolen the advantage goes to Scott.

[Old school 1983]

It confuses me too to why a lot of people think Frazier is just going to take off and be this great top 5 MLB third baseman. He had averagish numbers in the minors. In 2011 he looked like a spare piece. He had a great 2012 and definitely earned a spot on the team and in fans hearts, but so far in 2013 he has looked like 2011 Frazier. Couple that with his plate approach and the fact that most of the data suggests a Frazier closer to 2011 than 2012, and it could really be argued that it'd be equally as logical to think he may stay at or slightly above his current offensive level of production.

I don't want this to be true. I'd love to see him take off. I'm a reds fan. I want all of the guys to do great and the team to win, but to automatically assume that a player will repeat career year type numbers when his minor league numbers and his other major league numbers point to him not being at that level is not sound thinking.

[Old school 1983]

I think people expect Frazier to be average at the plate and pretty good defensively. His defense has improved a lot and they praised him on the broadcasts a lot during the Mets series, and deservedly so.

Todd wasn't even that great a hitter in the minors. He was average, which is why many were surprised he has done this well in the majors. Late bloomer? call it what you want.........but he is not horrible or great. He's average.

I think average is a good description of Todd if he was hitting around 250 to 260 and having a little more plate discipline. I hope he can adjust. When he was off to his torrid start I noticed he was laying off the outside breaking ball better than now. Hopefully he can adjust and stay back and I think he'll be a good piece.

[Vottomatic]

It confuses me too to why a lot of people think Frazier is just going to take off and be this great top 5 MLB third baseman. He had averagish numbers in the minors. In 2011 he looked like a spare piece. He had a great 2012 and definitely earned a spot on the team and in fans hearts, but so far in 2013 he has looked like 2011 Frazier. Couple that with his plate approach and the fact that most of the data suggests a Frazier closer to 2011 than 2012, and it could really be argued that it'd be equally as logical to think he may stay at or slightly above his current offensive level of production.

I don't want this to be true. I'd love to see him take off. I'm a reds fan. I want all of the guys to do great and the team to win, but to automatically assume that a player will repeat career year type numbers when his minor league numbers and his other major league numbers point to him not being at that level is not sound thinking.

Playing devil's advocate..........you've mentioned the idea of trading Frazier in other threads.

If you think Frazier's value is so low and he's not that good.........then why do you think some other team would want him? :confused:

Another way of looking at it from Reds management point of view is that not every player on the field can be a high salary guy. Reds are smaller market and have to mix in young players making closer to the minimum and under control for awhile such as Cozart and Frazier. The idea that they can obtain and pay ..........and nobody has brought this name up.......this is just for argument's sake to prove a point.........but say Hanley Ramirez at SS and maybe Chase Headley or David Wright at 3B, to go with BP, Votto, Bruce, Ludwick, Choo, and a boatload of the pitching staff making big money................there's just not enough money to go around. They have to balance out the payroll more than a lot of teams do.

[Old school 1983]

Playing devil's advocate..........you've mentioned the idea of trading Frazier in other threads.

If you think Frazier's value is so low and he's not that good.........then why do you think some other team would want him? :confused:

Another way of looking at it from Reds management point of view is that not every player on the field can be a high salary guy. Reds are smaller market and have to mix in young players making closer to the minimum and under control for awhile such as Cozart and Frazier. The idea that they can obtain and pay ..........and nobody has brought this name up.......this is just for argument's sake to prove a point.........but say Hanley Ramirez at SS and maybe Chase Headley or David Wright at 3B, to go with BP, Votto, Bruce, Ludwick, Choo, and a boatload of the pitching staff making big money................there's just not enough money to go around. They have to balance out the payroll more than a lot of teams do.

Your reasoning for the reds front office is the exact reasoning another front office would use in acquiring a player like Frazier along with prospects for a higher quality player. Frazier when playing at a better clip than now offers pretty good bang for the buck. Plus they'd get other prospects. I see Frazier as a trade chip not because I think he is horrible (different than overrated by fans like I say he is) but because he does have that bang for the buck value and he is a like a lot of the plsyers the reds have. Feast or famine type hitter. I think the reds need some more disciplined type bats in order to do well in the playoffs, which I'm sure we all can agree on, is a different beast than the regular season. If the reds can get a guy like the ones you mentioned ( I don't like Hanley) I think they could handle a temporary spending bump this year and even things out with a few moves in the offseason.

They would acquire Frazier because he is what I think he is and was with the reds last year. An excellent place holder for a better player. For example if traded in a move for Headley he could be inserted in the padres lineup and still give good quality major league power, while the real heart of the deal would probably be the prospects namely pitchers that's go the other way. Her be a place holder. To offset the budget maybe the reds could dump a ludwick off to the Yankees in the offseason or a chapman for a prospect like I see in many threads here. Maybe they don't bring choo back and go Headley at third and Hamilton in center. There are payroll options. It's just has to do with the amount if risk Walt and co are willing to take.

[RedsBrick]

88, 40, 133, 65, 92

Those are the number of games Rolen played in each of the last five years of his career.

You can't really help a team if you're not actually on the field. Being another year older I wouldn't suspect Rolen's health would miraculously turn around and he'd be this 149 game playing Ironman or something. And let's not forget that his defense hurt this team in the playoffs with a couple of botched plays.

From a 'career' standpoint, obviously Rolen would be the guy. Unfortunately it doesn't work like that.

I, too, like Rolen's leadership and clubhouse presence...but the Reds made the right call going with Frazier.

[Old school 1983]

88, 40, 133, 65, 92

Those are the number of games Rolen played in each of the last five years of his career.

You can't really help a team if you're not actually on the field. Being another year older I wouldn't suspect Rolen's health would miraculously turn around and he'd be this 149 game playing Ironman or something. And let's not forget that his defense hurt this team in the playoffs with a couple of botched plays.

From a 'career' standpoint, obviously Rolen would be the guy. Unfortunately it doesn't work like that.

I, too, like Rolen's leadership and clubhouse presence...but the Reds made the right call going with Frazier.

If you're referring to the play in game three if fraziers out there no one would talk about it. Not because he'd make they but because its not even have been as close as rolen made it.

I didn't expect a miracle healing but I still think the team is better if rolen is around and Frazier fills in against lower level pitchers.

[FanoftheGame34]

Reading through most threads in support of Frazier it seems like youd pretty much need a baseball Rosseta Stone to interpret some of the stats used to justify why he's good for the team. The tactic of constantly reminding someone how nice the person you're setting them up with instead of saying what actually makes them horrible falls short on me. Especially when most times you need to go so far down the baseball stat lines to do so. I can't see Rolen being an everyday player at this point in his career but I can see many ways that he could be a benefit to this Reds team. Frazier deserves a chance to play. Against the teams he can feast off of, but keeping him in the lineup against the better teams is a detriment. When you compare the stats of Frazier from teams you should beat and teams you need to prove you can beat its a case of deception. He's average against the mediocre and down right awful at times when facing higher quality teams. Simply put, his ability against the subpar this far masks his overall poor performance. There is an issue rising up of Fraziers glorification from average to potential star when it just seems like he is an over played backup. Rolen could have been a good fit to go along with another average player but at this point there's just too much of an unrealistic view of Frazier by Reds fans that maybe keeping him around isn't the best option. Frazier will prove to be nothing more than an average "power" hitter who strikes out too much (any comparison to Jay Bruce is laughable) and that's not the kind of average this team needs. Even Choo and Votto have a tendency to strike out at a high clip and they are our teams elite hitters. I'd take a good at bat against ever team over a home run every now and then against a mediocre team all day. By this time the discussion really isn't whether Rolen would be better over Frazier, it's that Frazier,though average, isn't the type of player the team needs. He has good trade value but little or no value as an everyday player, Scott Rolen or no Scott Rolen.

[Old school 1983]

Reading through most threads in support of Frazier it seems like youd pretty much need a baseball Rosseta Stone to interpret some of the stats used to justify why he's good for the team. The tactic of constantly reminding someone how nice the person you're setting them up with instead of saying what actually makes them horrible falls short on me. Especially when most times you need to go so far down the baseball stat lines to do so. I can't see Rolen being an everyday player at this point in his career but I can see many ways that he could be a benefit to this Reds team. Frazier deserves a chance to play. Against the teams he can feast off of, but keeping him in the lineup against the better teams is a detriment. When you compare the stats of Frazier from teams you should beat and teams you need to prove you can beat its a case of deception. He's average against the mediocre and down right awful at times when facing higher quality teams. Simply put, his ability against the subpar this far masks his overall poor performance. There is an issue rising up of Fraziers glorification from average to potential star when it just seems like he is an over played backup. Rolen could have been a good fit to go along with another average player but at this point there's just too much of an unrealistic view of Frazier by Reds fans that maybe keeping him around isn't the best option. Frazier will prove to be nothing more than an average "power" hitter who strikes out too much (any comparison to Jay Bruce is laughable) and that's not the kind of average this team needs. Even Choo and Votto have a tendency to strike out at a high clip and they are our teams elite hitters. I'd take a good at bat against ever team over a home run every now and then against a mediocre team all day. By this time the discussion really isn't whether Rolen would be better over Frazier, it's that Frazier,though average, isn't the type of player the team needs. He has good trade value but little or no value as an everyday player, Scott Rolen or no Scott Rolen.

I agree that a rolen and Frazier mixture would be a better situation for the reds, but you are correct in the fact that really isn't the issue anymore. I see your description of fraziers performance to be pretty accurate. He feasts off of poor teams and isn't the kind of average the team needs. I'd much rather have a batter than can work consistent good at bats. The reds already have too many of the high strike out type of player even in their elite hitters. They need more professional types that work pitchers and give great at bats across the board. Those type of players can be the glue that hold the lineup together, enable a good at bat between elite hitters, and give value in playoff situations in working pitchers and getting pitch counts up.

[Johnny Fan]

And fraziers wOBA this year thus far is 315. You can't deny Frazier did well last year but I think 315 is more realistic for Frazier than last years .354. I can think of three hits all year Frazier has had against what could be classified against anything as an above average pitcher. Fraziers at bats are generally undisciplined and of poor quality. Rolen did have the ability last year to bear down and hit any type of pitching last year. I know that's very 1999 pre SABR of me but it is true. As far as defense goes there is no comparison at any age and if anyone tries to argue that they need to watch more baseball and less fan graphs UZR. As Frazier sits right now slight advantage in my mind goes to Scott. If Todd can prove he's really a .354 wOBA guy and not .315 then we can make a better case for Todd. I still say at this point this year Frazier vs last year rolen the advantage goes to Scott.

Rolen hasn't been "good" since 2010 and even then his numbers were not stunning. I think you view on Scott is kinda clouded, he was a great player in his prime, but with age his skills diminshed...

[Rantly]

Frazier is on pace for 100 RBIs this year, you'd only get that from Rolen if he was able to stay on the field. It would have been nice to have Rolen as a bench player this year however.

[Old school 1983]

Rolen hasn't been "good" since 2010 and even then his numbers were not stunning. I think you view on Scott is kinda clouded, he was a great player in his prime, but with age his skills diminshed...

It's hard to describe fraziers play as good this year as well.

[Old school 1983]

Frazier is on pace for 100 RBIs this year, you'd only get that from Rolen if he was able to stay on the field. It would have been nice to have Rolen as a bench player this year however.

I think that goes along with my line of thinking where rolen gets the nod versus certain teams and pitchers and Todd in others.

[Tom Servo]

If you really cannot figure out why a statement like

"Now it looks like Frazier is turning into the dud that he was initially projected to be, and we have no replacement for him..nor Cozart.

LMAO."

did not go over well and got the OP negative attention, I really don't know what to tell you other than that you are in the wrong place.

[Old school 1983]

If you really cannot figure out why a statement like

"Now it looks like Frazier is turning into the dud that he was initially projected to be, and we have no replacement for him..nor Cozart.

LMAO."

did not go over well and got the OP negative attention, I really don't know what to tell you other than that you are in the wrong place.

Frazier is kinda turning out to be dud based on many posters expectations of him on here. He's gone from being described as one of the best 3rd basemen in the game by some to average at this point. I think sure some of the guys posts were assinine like the DFA cozart one, but he is right Frazier and cozart were expected to perform better and we do not have immediate solutions for them.

And idk what you mean by in the wrong place. If a player who is obviously not performing to his expected level cannot be legitimately crictized based on his plate approach and the up and down nature of his numbers, and the fact that there is evidence that last year may have been a career year then I'm not so sure what is considered legitimate discussion.

[Old school 1983]

Having said that, the guy who started that thread has shown troll like behavior but maybe instead of getting all worked up about it his posts just ought to be ignored. If he really is a troll he's probably getting his jollies on the fact that so many people reacted to him.

On the other hand it seems as if the starter if this thread posed the question in a legitimate way, that coupled with fraziers performance thus far, to me, warrants a discussion of the topic of Frazier v Rolen as well as fraziers performance in general.

[RedsBrick]

Frazier is kinda turning out to be dud based on many posters expectations of him on here. He's gone from being described as one of the best 3rd basemen in the game by some to average at this point. I think sure some of the guys posts were assinine like the DFA cozart one, but he is right Frazier and cozart were expected to perform better and we do not have immediate solutions for them.

And idk what you mean by in the wrong place. If a player who is obviously not performing to his expected level cannot be legitimately crictized based on his plate approach and the up and down nature of his numbers, and the fact that there is evidence that last year may have been a career year then I'm not so sure what is considered legitimate discussion.

Frazier played 41 games in 2011, and 128 last year making this really his second year in the majors, so, I guess by that definition and with only 1 year to judge, you're right.....last year was a career year for his short career so far. I guess that's what you're referring to as 'fact'.

I may at some point decide that Frazier wasn't the player I'd hoped he'd be....but I'm gonna give him some time before making that decision. As for Frazier's glove...the Reds haven't missed a beat there...he's 4th in MLB in fielding % for 3rd basemen having committed only 2 errors.

[Old school 1983]

Frazier played 41 games in 2011, and 128 last year making this really his second year in the majors, so, I guess by that definition and with only 1 year to judge, you're right.....last year was a career year for his short career so far. I guess that's what you're referring to as 'fact'.

I may at some point decide that Frazier wasn't the player I'd hoped he'd be....but I'm gonna give him some time before making that decision. As for Frazier's glove...the Reds haven't missed a beat there...he's 4th in MLB in fielding % for 3rd basemen having committed only 2 errors.

Frazier never was an elite level minor leaguer either and it's pretty clear that his plate approach is sporadic and undisciplined leading to up and down type numbers.

And comparing fraziers defense based on fielding percentages to rolens is like saying that Darwin Barney was the legitimate good glove winner over Phillips last year. Anyone who watches the two play knows better.

[Johnny Fan]

It's hard to describe fraziers play as good this year as well.

I guess we would disagree then, sure he went through a mean slump, what young players don't, but overall, right now he is producing on a nice level for a 2nd year player and is only going to get better.

[Old school 1983]

I guess we would disagree then, sure he went through a mean slump, what young players don't, but overall, right now he is producing on a nice level for a 2nd year player and is only going to get better.

Like I've said all year....not consistent enough of a plate approach to consistently hit good pitching. His numbers may jump up a little bit against averagish to poor teams but will go back down against better competition.

[Old school 1983]

I'll say this. If fraziers numbers increase all year it'll be because dusty uses him in a platoon situation I've called for. Hannahan versus tough righties and Frazier against lefties and soft righties he can exploit.

[RedsBrick]

Frazier never was an elite level minor leaguer either and it's pretty clear that his plate approach is sporadic and undisciplined leading to up and down type numbers.

And comparing fraziers defense based on fielding percentages to rolens is like saying that Darwin Barney was the legitimate good glove winner over Phillips last year. Anyone who watches the two play knows better.

Watch all you want...I'm just looking at results. Frazier has done the job in the field. I'm not making any comparison. Obviously he has a long way to go before I compare him with Scott Rolen's glove. I'm saying he's committed only 2 errors in the field....not bad for a guy who sucks.

It's as simple as this, you've written him off, I haven't. I think the Reds made the right call in going with Frazier, you don't. In the meantime, the Reds had plenty of time to reverse their decision because Rolen didn't sign with anyone else....and still hasn't.

[Don Cameron]

Frazier is a nice player, and more reliable than Rolen, but--Frazier and Cozart will only be 4 to 6 year pieces.

Don Cameron
The voice of reason

[Old school 1983]

Watch all you want...I'm just looking at results. Frazier has done the job in the field. I'm not making any comparison. Obviously he has a long way to go before I compare him with Scott Rolen's glove. I'm saying he's committed only 2 errors in the field....not bad for a guy who sucks.

It's as simple as this, you've written him off, I haven't. I think the Reds made the right call in going with Frazier, you don't. In the meantime, the Reds had plenty of time to reverse their decision because Rolen didn't sign with anyone else....and still hasn't.

Lets look at results then. Well take your view of fraziers D for arguments sake. Average. Doesn't give up runs doesn't save them. It's a zero sum game.

Lets take rolens D. Saved runs. It's a positive gain.

More relevant is hannahan. Above average. Not rolen level but above Frazier. Saves runs. And btw his career obp is just a tick below fraziers in his break out 2012 season.

So lets take this to an October situation. Hiram borgos, John Maine, and an aging Dan haren will not be pitching. Frazier will have to take his undisciplined approach up against number 1 and 2 stud pitchers. All evidence points to him not being able to succeed save luck or a tremendous metamorphosis into a disciplined hitter. He's not going to give you much. It'll be a zero sum game unless luck rears its head. He won't be saving runs and most likely won't create them. At least a guy like rolen or now hannahan could make a run saving impact with the glove. That results in wins. Not zero sum defense and praying to god he gets lucky and parks one.

[Old school 1983]

And to red brick. Sucks is your word to describe his D. My word was below average to average. Sucks is horrible. Below average is above horrible but not average. I never said he sucked. And I never wrote him off. I'd just like him to be used in positions like a platoon situation where his weaknesses aren't shown and his strengths are accentuated. Much like last year.

[RedlegJake]

Hanrahan is NOT the answer. Goodness...his numbers are overall much poorer than Frazier. He is a bit better at third but Frazier is making huge strides there. Remember even in the minors the Reds had him at several positions...they didn't exactly help him with consistent reps at one position. Hanrahan has little to no power. I'm amazed at how much regard you have for him over Frazier. Todd is not this team's problem. I like discussions but the whole Frazier is below average get Headley thing is beat to death. At least find a different target to discuss for a change.

[Johnny Fan]

Lets look at results then. Well take your view of fraziers D for arguments sake. Average. Doesn't give up runs doesn't save them. It's a zero sum game.

Lets take rolens D. Saved runs. It's a positive gain.

More relevant is hannahan. Above average. Not rolen level but above Frazier. Saves runs. And btw his career obp is just a tick below fraziers in his break out 2012 season.

So lets take this to an October situation. Hiram borgos, John Maine, and an aging Dan haren will not be pitching. Frazier will have to take his undisciplined approach up against number 1 and 2 stud pitchers. All evidence points to him not being able to succeed save luck or a tremendous metamorphosis into a disciplined hitter. He's not going to give you much. It'll be a zero sum game unless luck rears its head. He won't be saving runs and most likely won't create them. At least a guy like rolen or now hannahan could make a run saving impact with the glove. That results in wins. Not zero sum defense and praying to god he gets lucky and parks one.

So your belief is a banged, often injuried 38+ year old who can't ever be 100% again is better then Frazier going forward? WOW!!!!!!!:confused:

[FanoftheGame34]

So your belief is a banged, often injuried 38+ year old who can't ever be 100% again is better then Frazier going forward? WOW!!!!!!!:confused:

Good argument. Well, good argument as far as no argument at all and sounding like a scorned lobotomy survivor goes. It's sounds like people are making real points based off of play. I don't think the real issue is that Rolen is the answer it's more relevant that Frazier just isn't. Also, a slight improvement to suck is just another level of suck. I thought there would be interesting debate here for people discuss their love for a team. Seems more like childish insult tactics when there is no real argument left to make. When better is available. Don't bank on the average you already have. Simplicity should be used in the play, the stats, and the arguments for the two. Simplicity should not be a standard for which you set your thinking to.

[Johnny Fan]

Good argument. Well, good argument as far as no argument at all and sounding like a scorned lobotomy survivor goes. It's sounds like people are making real points based off of play. I don't think the real issue is that Rolen is the answer it's more relevant that Frazier just isn't. Also, a slight improvement to suck is just another level of suck. I thought there would be interesting debate here for people discuss their love for a team. Seems more like childish insult tactics when there is no real argument left to make. When better is available. Don't bank on the average you already have. Simplicity should be used in the play, the stats, and the arguments for the two. Simplicity should not be a standard for which you set your thinking to.

A) Fraziers numbers are far from "sucking"
B) I believe the jest of this discussion was based on the idea it would be better now if the Reds had Rolen at third this season over Frazier
C) The idea of replacing Frazier after not even two full seasons is near laughable given the numbers he has produced so far.

[Old school 1983]

Hanrahan is NOT the answer. Goodness...his numbers are overall much poorer than Frazier. He is a bit better at third but Frazier is making huge strides there. Remember even in the minors the Reds had him at several positions...they didn't exactly help him with consistent reps at one position. Hanrahan has little to no power. I'm amazed at how much regard you have for him over Frazier. Todd is not this team's problem. I like discussions but the whole Frazier is below average get Headley thing is beat to death. At least find a different target to discuss for a change.

Its the main one and needs best to death. Do I think hannahan is a major league starter? No way. Not at all. But he'd be a solid platoon partner with a guy who sorely struggles against tough right handed pitching. And it's just not Headley. How about young? Bautista can play third. Getting a left fielder makes the outfield a jumbled mess and leaves choo in center. It may cause more issues than it actually solves unless you dump players.

[Old school 1983]

A) Fraziers numbers are far from "sucking"
B) I believe the jest of this discussion was based on the idea it would be better now if the Reds had Rolen at third this season over Frazier
C) The idea of replacing Frazier after not even two full seasons is near laughable given the numbers he has produced so far.

Frazier is the worst starter the reds have not including left because that's a backup player ATM. Cozart at least brings gold glove D

[Old school 1983]

Hanrahan is NOT the answer. Goodness...his numbers are overall much poorer than Frazier. He is a bit better at third but Frazier is making huge strides there. Remember even in the minors the Reds had him at several positions...they didn't exactly help him with consistent reps at one position. Hanrahan has little to no power. I'm amazed at how much regard you have for him over Frazier. Todd is not this team's problem. I like discussions but the whole Frazier is below average get Headley thing is beat to death. At least find a different target to discuss for a change.

Frazier is you're weakest starter. Our should be starting left fielder atm is playing center, our best prospect who is currently heating up at AAA is a centerfielder with great range and speed and could bat second. All things this team needs. That leaves Frazier to be replaced unless you think you can find a four hole hitting shortstop. Frazier is a 27 year old prospect who played over his head one season. I just wish people would see that. He is no long term solution and probably needs to be part of a platoon now. People talk about him not being a FA until 2018. I doubt hell be in the league by then. If he is it'd be a great shock.

[RedlegJake]

Frazier is you're weakest starter. Our should be starting left fielder atm is playing center, our best prospect who is currently heating up at AAA is a centerfielder with great range and speed and could bat second. All things this team needs. That leaves Frazier to be replaced unless you think you can find a four hole hitting shortstop. Frazier is a 27 year old prospect who played over his head one season. I just wish people would see that. He is no long term solution and probably needs to be part of a platoon now. People talk about him not being a FA until 2018. I doubt hell be in the league by then. If he is it'd be a great shock.

It would shock me if he wasn't. In this "terrible" season his OPS is. 724 while struggling. That's averagish for a 3bman. And he's been in an obvious funk. He is a sophomore which means he faces the biggest adjustment year in a players career when thee league's pitchers and coaches were able to break his game down all winter and prepare a "book" on him. I am not worried. He'll end up between. 750 and. 800, field well and be a factor in winning. You have a bias against Frazier the reverse of that you claim for his supporters. I am not btw a huge Todd fan. I just look at what he brings more realistically than I believe you do.

You are consistent. I will give you that. Almost every post you make includes some referwnce to Frazier being the weak link. After so many posts ranting at the same thing I'm ready to argue something else. Also...I don't say that with any animosity at all. Its more fun to debate and discuss differences of opinion. But by now your position and mine are both well known to Sun Deck. I enjoy crossing "swords" with you though.

[Old school 1983]

It would shock me if he wasn't. In this "terrible" season his OPS is. 724 while struggling. That's averagish for a 3bman. And he's been in an obvious funk. He is a sophomore which means he faces the biggest adjustment year in a players career when thee league's pitchers and coaches were able to break his game down all winter and prepare a "book" on him. I am not worried. He'll end up between. 750 and. 800, field well and be a factor in winning. You have a bias against Frazier the reverse of that you claim for his supporters. I am not btw a huge Todd fan. I just look at what he brings more realistically than I believe you do.

You are consistent. I will give you that. Almost every post you make includes some referwnce to Frazier being the weak link. After so many posts ranting at the same thing I'm ready to argue something else. Also...I don't say that with any animosity at all. Its more fun to debate and discuss differences of opinion. But by now your position and mine are both well known to Sun Deck. I enjoy crossing "swords" with you though.


I really see eye to eye with you on a lot of stuff. I don't think he is terrible. I see as below average to average. And honestly I think he offers a skillset that the reds already have in their lineup and that's a feast or famine player. I think fanof thegame34 made a good point in saying Frazier may be average but he isn't the kind of average we need. I'd like to see a guy who can work a pitcher and give a tough at bat and hit around .250 to .270. I think there are some reasonable veterans out there that can do that.

I don't think he's horrible I see him as a decent trade chip because losing his D at third will not be a major loss unless you get a slug out there. The other feast or famine guys are much better on D at their positions than Frazier is at third. I hope we can agree on that. I also think by getting a third baseman, not just Headley, but any third baseman that could supply an offense and defensive dynamic the reds could use, this leaves the outfield way more open for options this year and next. It's just not an I'm picking on Todd thing. I know he does bring some good things to the table, but a lot of other players on the team bring the same skills and IMO are more important to the team or would be harder to replace defensively. (Bruce and cozart). That's why I'm saying move Todd.

I also am well aware of sophomore slumps. But my overall assesment of him at the plate is a general undisciplined approach. That doesn't generally lead to vast improvements especially with being such an old, prospect wise, player. His skills are engrained. By the time he corrects that stuff he may start to decline unlike a Bruce who corrected such things in his early 20s. If I saw Todd giving a more disciplined at bat and honestly having a more consistent approach, I'd say stick with him. I know I took a ton of crap from my friends saying to stuck with ludwick last year because I saw that his swing was made for great American and knew he would go off playing there.

But my desire to get a third baseman is not just because I don't see Frazier being some late blooming phenom but because I see it as a way to give the reds options in the outfield. If they can get someone at third they can trade for a left fielder, wait for ludwick, move choo to left and use billy if comes on strong or trade for a centerfielder too. It's not all i think Frazier is a bum and he needs to go. I really think he'd do quite well in a platoon where hannahan plays against tough righties.

[Johnny Fan]

Frazier is the worst starter the reds have not including left because that's a backup player ATM. Cozart at least brings gold glove D

Problem with your view...numbers don't support it.

[dwyerbrg]

Frazier is you're weakest starter. Our should be starting left fielder atm is playing center, our best prospect who is currently heating up at AAA is a centerfielder with great range and speed and could bat second. All things this team needs. That leaves Frazier to be replaced unless you think you can find a four hole hitting shortstop. Frazier is a 27 year old prospect who played over his head one season. I just wish people would see that. He is no long term solution and probably needs to be part of a platoon now. People talk about him not being a FA until 2018. I doubt hell be in the league by then. If he is it'd be a great shock.

I'm not saying you're right or saying that you're wrong, but doesn't Frazier at least deserve a full year at 3B before we say "No, he's not the answer" or "Yes, he is"?

Right now he's #3 in the NL in fielding percentage at 3B, only has 2 E's. Baseball Reference shows him as being worth 4 runs above average defensively (using Total Zone Total Fielding Runs Above Avg/projected at 14 for the season) or 3 runs above average (using Defensive Runs Saved from Baseball Info Sources/projected at 10 for the season). Along those same lines, Rolen provided 3 in 2010, 2 in 2011, 2 in 2012 or BIS of 10 in 2010, 10 in 2011, and 0 in 2012.

I just feel like the knee jerk reaction to replace Frazier or move him to LF or whatever is what the old regime would do...give him this season and almost 2 full ML seasons' worth of data before we pass full judgement on him.

[Johnny Fan]

Frazier is you're weakest starter. Our should be starting left fielder atm is playing center, our best prospect who is currently heating up at AAA is a centerfielder with great range and speed and could bat second. All things this team needs. That leaves Frazier to be replaced unless you think you can find a four hole hitting shortstop. Frazier is a 27 year old prospect who played over his head one season. I just wish people would see that. He is no long term solution and probably needs to be part of a platoon now. People talk about him not being a FA until 2018. I doubt hell be in the league by then. If he is it'd be a great shock.

Heating up? You do know his lack of arm strength was one reason he was moved from SS? Having a sub average arm strength for a CF isn't real good also. You are already calling Fraziers first year a "fluke", but ready to heap praise on a untested minor league player who has switched position and not played even a full year of AAA? Your reasoning makes no sense? Frazier has shown he can plan on the ML level at this point, Hamilton has even shown th ability to produce strong numbers on the AAA level yet consistantly.

[Old school 1983]

I'm not saying you're right or saying that you're wrong, but doesn't Frazier at least deserve a full year at 3B before we say "No, he's not the answer" or "Yes, he is"?

Right now he's #3 in the NL in fielding percentage at 3B, only has 2 E's. Baseball Reference shows him as being worth 4 runs above average defensively (using Total Zone Total Fielding Runs Above Avg/projected at 14 for the season) or 3 runs above average (using Defensive Runs Saved from Baseball Info Sources/projected at 10 for the season). Along those same lines, Rolen provided 3 in 2010, 2 in 2011, 2 in 2012 or BIS of 10 in 2010, 10 in 2011, and 0 in 2012.

I just feel like the knee jerk reaction to replace Frazier or move him to LF or whatever is what the old regime would do...give him this season and almost 2 full ML seasons' worth of data before we pass full judgement on him.

If it were a rebuilding type year I'd say give him a chance for sure. But they are not. Honestly I think they could use more hitters that gives a tougher at bat. Defensive stats are nice and all but even fan graphs admits that fielding stats can be misrepresented very easily. And really the only rallying cry most people point to is his OPS which in my opinion is inflated by going off on poor pitching, while looking lost against anything that is above average pitching. If anyone wants stats just look at his gone road slips before this last road trip against average and lollipop teams. On the road we had played very stiff competition and his average was barely in the interstate as far as hitting. Usually I'd say ok small sample size lets give him a full season shot, but his approach at the plate doesn't leand itself to long term success.

I think he is an averagish player that offers skills that a baseball team could like, but those are skills the reds already have in better hitters and players that are better defensively at their position. The reds need more professional type hitters that can grind out at bats and make a pitcher work. These are not elite type players. Joe randa, tood walker, Jeff keppinger, Fernando vina, mark Loretta, kotsay when he was younger are examples. They aren't that hard to come by hell three of them I named were reds during the lost decade.

[Old school 1983]

Problem with your view...numbers don't support it.

I sure am glad baseball is played in the field and not a stat book. There an old saying that goes lies, damn lies, and statistics. More or less statistics lie and can be easily misinterpreted and misrepresented. A baseball players net worth to a team contains more that just his numbers. If you want to watch stats go to fan graphs, ill watch the game.

[Don Cameron]

I am really not sure what the purpose of this thread anymore, to be honest. Rolen was horrible...HORRIBLE for the past year and a half, at least. He had no...NO pop in his bat. When he would run into one, he hit it about ten feet short of the warning track. His range reminded me of Pete Rose's range at third base. He was/is DONE.

Francisco was not your answer. We do not/did not need a left handed bat. We need a strong right handed bat.

Frazier will be a competent, but not overwhelming third baseman for the Reds. Not every player in the line-up has to hit .260 with 20 and 100 rbi.

He is too old to have any IMPACTFUL trade meaning. Let him hit 6 or 7 and play it out.

Don Cameron
Once bitten--twice shy

[Johnny Fan]

I sure am glad baseball is played in the field and not a stat book. There an old saying that goes lies, damn lies, and statistics. More or less statistics lie and can be easily misinterpreted and misrepresented. A baseball players net worth to a team contains more that just his numbers. If you want to watch stats go to fan graphs, ill watch the game.

I agree numbers are not the entire story, but you can't disguard them either. You say Frazier is a defensive liabilty, but the numbers say other wise and I do watch the games and see him cover a ton of ground both to his left and right and at this point only 2 errors on the season. I think with any player in his second season you will have doubts, but to brush him off so easily and hype and unseen, unproven unknown talent in Hamilton doesn't make sense.

[Old school 1983]

I agree numbers are not the entire story, but you can't disguard them either. You say Frazier is a defensive liabilty, but the numbers say other wise and I do watch the games and see him cover a ton of ground both to his left and right and at this point only 2 errors on the season. I think with any player in his second season you will have doubts, but to brush him off so easily and hype and unseen, unproven unknown talent in Hamilton doesn't make sense.

The thing is I don't want to brush him off unless the reds can get a better option at third in a trade. I'd just like to see him be platooned with hannahan would would play versus tough right handed pitching. I don't just want to dump the dude. He obviously is a hard worker and and has some power potential. And really being the weakest starting player on a pretty stacked team like the reds doesn't mean you're horrible, I means you're average-ish.

My main point too is that just looking to trade for a left fielder is a little narrow minded and could cause issues and not leave many options. If that's all the reds can get then ill go with it but I think they should look at third basemen too. Mostly likey Frazier will not be an impact type player at any point, but, in a trade, packaged with good prospects, he would have some value. Get a good right handed hitting guy at third and you aren't dependent on ludwick coming back strong, but if he does, you can play both. If lutz continues to look tough, you can continue to develop him. If Hamilton comes on strong choo can move to left and Hamilton to center. If not you could trade for a rental cf. it leaves many more options than getting a LF would. And also some people seem to think Frazier will be some kind of rising star for the next 5 to 8 years. That's be great, but more realistically hell be around average, and I have no issue giving up average if the right situation occurred where the reds could get a 4 hole type to play third and leave options open in the outfield. I was never saying he sucks a d DFA him or anything like that. That's extremely short sided.

[Johnny Fan]

The thing is I don't want to brush him off unless the reds can get a better option at third in a trade. I'd just like to see him be platooned with hannahan would would play versus tough right handed pitching. I don't just want to dump the dude. He obviously is a hard worker and and has some power potential. And really being the weakest starting player on a pretty stacked team like the reds doesn't mean you're horrible, I means you're average-ish.

My main point too is that just looking to trade for a left fielder is a little narrow minded and could cause issues and not leave many options. If that's all the reds can get then ill go with it but I think they should look at third basemen too. Mostly likey Frazier will not be an impact type player at any point, but, in a trade, packaged with good prospects, he would have some value. Get a good right handed hitting guy at third and you aren't dependent on ludwick coming back strong, but if he does, you can play both. If lutz continues to look tough, you can continue to develop him. If Hamilton comes on strong choo can move to left and Hamilton to center. If not you could trade for a rental cf. it leaves many more options than getting a LF would. And also some people seem to think Frazier will be some kind of rising star for the next 5 to 8 years. That's be great, but more realistically hell be around average, and I have no issue giving up average if the right situation occurred where the reds could get a 4 hole type to play third and leave options open in the outfield. I was never saying he sucks a d DFA him or anything like that. That's extremely short sided.

If I had to grade out position by position from most needed improvment to least, I would go:

LF - Black hole and little chance Ludwich impacts this season
SS - Cozart good but has holes in game exposed by hitting 2nd
Catcher - Unknow future with Mez
CF - What happens after this season, hugh impact on team
3rd - Frazier suffering bit of soph slump, next season key
RF - Great D, strong potential, but lacks consistancy
2nd - Age
1st - body can stay healthy

[Goose1701]

I sure am glad baseball is played in the field and not a stat book. There an old saying that goes lies, damn lies, and statistics. More or less statistics lie and can be easily misinterpreted and misrepresented. A baseball players net worth to a team contains more that just his numbers. If you want to watch stats go to fan graphs, ill watch the game.

Let me guess, damn nerds need to stay in their mother's basement right?

You're the type of guy that with an attitude like that, NOBODY is gonna take ANYTHING you say seriously. It's 2013, time to get with the times.

[westofyou]

I sure am glad baseball is played in the field and not a stat book. There an old saying that goes lies, damn lies, and statistics. More or less statistics lie and can be easily misinterpreted and misrepresented. A baseball players net worth to a team contains more that just his numbers. If you want to watch stats go to fan graphs, ill watch the game.


The game is important and stats are just the recording of the action, but it's enough to tell us that Jeff Francore is crap

Otherwise the league would full of junk like him

[Old school 1983]

Heating up? You do know his lack of arm strength was one reason he was moved from SS? Having a sub average arm strength for a CF isn't real good also. You are already calling Fraziers first year a "fluke", but ready to heap praise on a untested minor league player who has switched position and not played even a full year of AAA? Your reasoning makes no sense? Frazier has shown he can plan on the ML level at this point, Hamilton has even shown th ability to produce strong numbers on the AAA level yet consistantly.

Do you know you're the only person or scouting report that I've seen that says his arm isn't at least average? Also Hamilton offers a skillset that would improve the reds in three areas. Centerfield, team speed, and maybe in the two spot in the batting order. Fraziers skillset helps what? The 6th spot and adds power when he actually does hit it which is 23% of the time. His defense adds no value. It's average good enough not to allow mistakes but not good enough to prevent much. Hamiltons defense is already being classified as above average just based on his speed and range alone. I just don't get why everyone is so down on the guy and would rather get a rental out of house solution. Hamilton doesn't need to be Jose Reyes or Choo or any star lead off hitter. He needs to be billy Hamilton to help this team out. If he gets on base about 30 to 33% of the time, uses his speed in the base paths and plays defense using his range and speed then he could add value to this team whereas Frazier will probably never give it more than it already has.

And just for the record I'd love to be a GM if reds zone ran the front office. I could trade prospects spare parts and maybe one star player for chapman, Hamilton, Hrod, lutz, cingrani, soto, Stephenson, Bruce, leake, Mez, cozart, broxton, and corcino. Hell with those players alone you could almost field a good team and have future depth.

[Old school 1983]

Let me guess, damn nerds need to stay in their mother's basement right?

You're the type of guy that with an attitude like that, NOBODY is gonna take ANYTHING you say seriously. It's 2013, time to get with the times.

No I said nothing about living in their mothers basement. Stats have their place in baseball, but like with stats in anything else they can be misrepresented, misinterpreted and skewed by a variety of factors. You have to take stats and combine them with what you see on the field, and what type of players a team could use to make them better. That's when you get true value out of stats. When you combine them with what is going on on the field, how players play together, how a lineup plays together, and how individual players approach the game. To take stats alone or the eye test alone is just poor evaluation of the game. If you just look at stats and say well this guy must be better than this guy because his ops is higher or strikeouts don't matter in all circumstances, you paint yourself into a corner and can only evaluate what is going on with in baseball through a very narrow filter.

And frankly I don't care if most people here take me seriously. I've been watching baseball pretty much since birth. Amongst my group of friends and family, they have seen me make correct observations, and evaluations for years. Sometimes I'm wrong we all are, but more often than not I'm right and that's all I really care about....if the people in real life know that I know what I'm talking about. If people here want to listen or not or talk to me or not, that's their choice and usually unless its a personal attack, it's no big deal to me.

[Old school 1983]

The game is important and stats are just the recording of the action, but it's enough to tell us that Jeff Francore is crap

Otherwise the league would full of junk like him

Well lets look at it for a minute. Jeff francoeur had two pretty productive seasons with the braves that I'd take over Frazier, who unless we forget, this thread is concerning. The rest of his career he seems to have very similar numbers to Frazier, at least to me, but I'm sure someone will dig down to the bowls of stat hell to pull something out that's different to try to prove me wrong. With the exception of RBI, which we all know can be skewed based upon the lineup you're in, the two seem comparable. So if Francoeur is junk in your estimation because of stats then it seems like you evaluate Frazier who has a similar line, at a lower level than myself, who is getting drilled for it, because I say he is around average.

[Don Cameron]

I don't think he's horrible I see him as a decent trade chip because losing his D at third will not be a major loss unless you get a slug out there.

Why--with all of your stats, do you believe he is a decent trade chip? For what? He is 27. And according to you, a sub defensive third baseman. And, with his numbers, a sub-offensive left fielder. So, why would he be a decent trade chip????

The way I see Frazier is his first two years compare pretty closely to Chris Sabo.

Frazier through May 27
218 career games
.258 BA
94 RUNS
31 HR
113 RBI

Sabo 1st two years
219 Career Games
.267 BA
114 RUNS
17 HR
73 RBI

Sabo, has a 2.74 (compared to a 2.55) third baseman defensive range factor and many MANY more stolen bases than Frazier--BUT IN REALITY--they are extremely close to one another in terms of production.

Don Cameron
A lover of Facts

[Old school 1983]

Why--with all of your stats, do you believe he is a decent trade chip? For what? He is 27. And according to you, a sub defensive third baseman. And, with his numbers, a sub-offensive left fielder. So, why would he be a decent trade chip????

The way I see Frazier is his first two years compare pretty closely to Chris Sabo.

Frazier through May 27
218 career games
.258 BA
94 RUNS
31 HR
113 RBI

Sabo 1st two years
219 Career Games
.267 BA
114 RUNS
17 HR
73 RBI

Sabo, has a 2.74 (compared to a 2.55) third baseman defensive range factor and many MANY more stolen bases than Frazier--BUT IN REALITY--they are extremely close to one another in terms of production.

Don Cameron
A lover of Facts

He'd be a good trade chip when combined with prospects. The heart if the deal would be the prospects. He'd make a decent piece to add to a major league roster of a mon contender because he brings plus power with a cheaper contract. Alone you probably couldn't get much for him, but when combined with good prospects he'd add value to a trade. As far as comparing him to sabo, come on dude, the early numbers are similar but spuds was an excellent defender and had excellent speed and stolen base numbers. Sabo also could hit above average pitching. I think this is a case of similar numbers not equaling similar players.

[Old school 1983]

But looking at sabo v Frazier you have to look at where each played. Fraziers numbers were produced in an era of smaller stadiums with a homefield of great American bandbox. Sabo was playing in an era of spacious all turf fields. Put him in today's parks and I think he's a potential 30 30 guy. Also on defense the surface matters. Playing third on an all turf field requires way faster reflexes and reaction times than playing on all grass. So that has to be taken into consideration as well.

Even if you'd ask who'd be more impactful on this current team I'd say sabo. He adds speed and defense and could easily bat second or maybe even 4th on the reds right now. I just see this as a perfect example of how similar stats don't equal similar production in terms or all around game and skills added to a lineup.