PDA

View Full Version : Hatteberg signed



Redny
02-12-2006, 01:38 PM
Busy day per Marc

http://frontier.cincinnati.com/blogs/spring/

Joseph
02-12-2006, 01:42 PM
Interesting signing. As Marc said, that certainly changes the bench a little bit. Hurts Cruz, hurt Stratton possibly. I'll have to look up his stats as a PH.

Krusty
02-12-2006, 01:43 PM
Krivsky has made more moves in one week than O'Brien did in one year.

I like the Hatteberg signing. Gives us another lefthanded hitter with some pop for the bench while backing up Dunn at lst base.

Joseph
02-12-2006, 01:43 PM
# First baseman Scott Hatteberg has agreed to a one-year major league contract. A corresponding roster move will be announced tomorrow. Don't imagine that bodes too well for Jacob Cruz's chances of making the team out of camp.

# Johnny Almaraz, formerly the director of international scouting, is the Reds' new director of player development and international scouting.

# Tim Naehring, who had held the farm director's job for more than five years, replaces the fired Bob Miscik as minor league field coordinator.

# Bob Miller has been named director of baseball administration. He spent the past seven seasons with the Diamondbacks as director of major league operations and later assistant GM. Sounds like he'll be filling Brad Kullman's shoes.

# Scott Nethery has been named special assistant to the GM for player personnel. He was with the Mets last year and the Braves for 13 years prior to that, most of it in scouting.

KronoRed
02-12-2006, 01:43 PM
There's your backup 1st baseman.
Almaraz and Naehring stick around = Boo.

Joseph
02-12-2006, 01:44 PM
Am I reading correctly that Almaraz is replacing Naehring, or is Naehring's role not yet filled?

Krusty
02-12-2006, 01:46 PM
There's your backup 1st baseman.
Almaraz and Naehring stick around = Boo.

I think bumping up Amaraz up the organizational ladder is good. He knows talent. Naehring's gets a bump down the ladder but still plays an important role as coordinator.

Krusty
02-12-2006, 01:46 PM
Interesting signing. As Marc said, that certainly changes the bench a little bit. Hurts Cruz, hurt Stratton possibly. I'll have to look up his stats as a PH.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?playerId=3353

I like this signing because it improves the strength of our bench.

reds44
02-12-2006, 01:50 PM
Solid move. Sures up the backup 1st baseman spot, and he has the ability to start if (god forbid) one of the outfielders go down and Dunn shifts back to the outfielder.

Joseph
02-12-2006, 01:50 PM
Don't suppose it hurts to have a serviceable backup at first base rather than Valentin or Cruz being the choice.

KronoRed
02-12-2006, 01:52 PM
Surprised Hatterberg signed on to be a backup, he won't (hopefully) get 450 at bats with us

M2
02-12-2006, 01:56 PM
Hatteberg instantly replaces Casey's "good guy" factor in the clubhouse.

Interesting that Almaraz keeps international scouting to go with farm director. Not sure how I feel about that. Almaraz clearly had an eye for talent once upon a time, but he's been shooting blanks most of this century. I'm concerned that he got institutionalized.

So Naehring's the haircut monitor?

Miller and, especially, Nethery are interesting additions.

pedro
02-12-2006, 02:07 PM
Not a bad signing. The Reds needed a back up first baseman IMO. I wasn't really comfortable with the idea of using Valentin or Cruz there.

Redny
02-12-2006, 02:11 PM
A good signing, improves the bench and provides some insurance in the unlikely :eek: event one of the starting OF'rs gets injured (or dealt) and Dunn has to go back out there.

cincinnati chili
02-12-2006, 02:20 PM
A good signing, improves the bench and provides some insurance in the unlikely :eek: event one of the starting OF'rs gets injured (or dealt) and Dunn has to go back out there.

You're an optimist. :)

Scott's agent will probably look wise to direct him to the Reds. I would be very surprised if Griffey stays healthy all year AND nobody gets traded. One of the two will happen, almost certainly, and if it does happen, Scott should get 400 plate appearances.

I don't know what to think of the signing. Certainly if last year is all he has left, then this is kinda a waste.

The bigger story is Naehring's demotion. And yes, it's absolutely a demotion.

MartyFan
02-12-2006, 02:35 PM
Good move...Wonder if this could mean that Dunn is not coming to First Base? Wonder if it means that Dunn or Junior could be movin to another team...especially Dunn.

RFS62
02-12-2006, 02:41 PM
Good move...Wonder if this could mean that Dunn is not coming to First Base? Wonder if it means that Dunn or Junior could be movin to another team...especially Dunn.


Yeah, that's what I was wondering too. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see either Pena or Kearns moved.

reds44
02-12-2006, 02:41 PM
Good move...Wonder if this could mean that Dunn is not coming to First Base? Wonder if it means that Dunn or Junior could be movin to another team...especially Dunn.
You are reading too much into this move.

membengal
02-12-2006, 02:46 PM
At this time, I choose to read this move this way:

Krivsky: "Good lord! Is that what O'Brien thought would pass for a bench?"

Leftover underling: "Yeah. No good?"

Krivsky: "No it's no good! It's terrible! Get me Hatteberg's agent on the phone. He at least has a memory of once having a pulse."

Leftover underling: "What? We're actually going to be proactive?" (Head explodes)

Krivsky: "Great, now one more position to fill."

RedsManRick
02-12-2006, 02:51 PM
Hatteberg can also serve as the emergency third catcher, which is good to have. Of course, this also gives a reasonable option to play first if Dunn is traded -- a little leverage if you will.

I'm also glad that we're finally looking at backups who are legitimate major leaguers rather than guys like Cruz who are the absolute definition of replacement level.

Tommyjohn25
02-12-2006, 02:56 PM
I see no reason to NOT like this move. Good job Krivsky, keep it going!

Henry Clay
02-12-2006, 03:01 PM
I like this signing as long as Hatteberg is viewed as a backup. He gets on base at a decent rate (.356 career), but his GiDP numbers last year were Casey-like (22) and his power is in decline (also Casey-like). If he sits on the bench to spell Dunn and the occasional outfielder or to pinch hit, I like what he brings to the bench. If he is viewed as an insurance player at 1B that will allow a later trade of an OF'er or Dunn, I like the signing a lot less.

WVRedsFan
02-12-2006, 03:10 PM
Hatteberg can also serve as the emergency third catcher, which is good to have. Of course, this also gives a reasonable option to play first if Dunn is traded -- a little leverage if you will.

I'm also glad that we're finally looking at backups who are legitimate major leaguers rather than guys like Cruz who are the absolute definition of replacement level.

That says it all. How long has it been that we actually signed a backup player that just might contribute? I know, Joe Randa, but he was temporary from the get-go and put up huge numbers against his career statistics while he was here. If this is the kind of backup player our new GM is after, this is quite a change. And for the better. Instead of hoping Jacob Cruz can backup whoever, we have a guy who's played the position and pretty well. A real major leaguer.

As for trading Kearns, pena, or Dunn, I don't know. It seems to state a doubt that all three of the outfielders will be healthy all season. If that happens, you move Dunn to the OF and plug in Hatteburg at first and off you go. That kind of thinking didn't exist under O'Brien.

I'm pleased.

BrooklynRedz
02-12-2006, 03:18 PM
Hatteberg instantly replaces Casey's "good guy" factor in the clubhouse.

Interesting that Almaraz keeps international scouting to go with farm director. Not sure how I feel about that. Almaraz clearly had an eye for talent once upon a time, but he's been shooting blanks most of this century. I'm concerned that he got institutionalized.

So Naehring's the haircut monitor?

Miller and, especially, Nethery are interesting additions.

Technically, Almarez's title is director of player development/international operations. Not international scouting.

MikeS21
02-12-2006, 03:25 PM
# First baseman Scott Hatteberg has agreed to a one-year major league contract. A corresponding roster move will be announced tomorrow. Don't imagine that bodes too well for Jacob Cruz's chances of making the team out of camp.

# Johnny Almaraz, formerly the director of international scouting, is the Reds' new director of player development and international scouting.

# Tim Naehring, who had held the farm director's job for more than five years, replaces the fired Bob Miscik as minor league field coordinator.

# Bob Miller has been named director of baseball administration. He spent the past seven seasons with the Diamondbacks as director of major league operations and later assistant GM. Sounds like he'll be filling Brad Kullman's shoes.

# Scott Nethery has been named special assistant to the GM for player personnel. He was with the Mets last year and the Braves for 13 years prior to that, most of it in scouting.
So who is going to head up the statistical analysis department that will keep all these tools scouts in check?

MartyFan
02-12-2006, 03:31 PM
You are reading too much into this move.

Maybe...maybe not...I am just throwing stuff out to discuss...the biggest need in this organization begins and ends with pitching...check that, quality pitching...you are going to get very little of that if you move Pena or Kearns at this point...move Dunn? You get some good pitching in return.

Danny Serafini
02-12-2006, 03:35 PM
If I'm Jacob Cruz I'm very, very scared right now. His life just got a lot more difficult.

If an OF gets hurt or traded I'd imagine Freel goes into the OF instead of Dunn. With the work of trying to transform him into a 1B I doubt they'll jack him around and toss him back into the OF when they've got someone else capable of the job.

westofyou
02-12-2006, 03:41 PM
With the work of trying to transform him into a 1B I doubt they'll jack him around and toss him back into the OF when they've got someone else capable of the job.

I don't know I'm betting that he gets at least 20 games in the OF, Dunn played first all the way until ML ball so the transition isn't going to be as rough as we think.

But I'm imagining that the days of a PH only like Cruz isn't going to cut it anymore and playing part of the field and having some skills at working the count can be important from 23-25 on the roster too.

Henry Clay
02-12-2006, 03:54 PM
For what it's worth, here is the Rotoworld assessment:


Reds signed first baseman Scott Hatteberg, who had been with the Athletics, to a one-year, $750,000 contract.
Not very impressed with this, especially since it's a major league deal and Cincinnati already had a full 40-man roster. Hatteberg isn't even of a lot of use as a defensive replacement. He could be a fine pinch-hitter, but the Reds already have one of those in Jacob Cruz, and unlike Cruz, Hatteberg isn't an option in the outfield. He's not someone who should be guaranteed a job at this point of his career. Feb. 12 - 1:48 pm et

I tend to view this move in a more positive light. The 40 man roster isn't exactly chock-full of All-Stars, especially on the fringes where the corresponding move will occur (Ahem, Mr. Womack?). Hatteberg may not be able to play in the outfield, but he can back up at 1B, PH, and serve as the emergency catcher if Narron decides to use Valentin to pinch hit. He can still get on base at a decent clip and can generate a SF, if needed (4th in the AL in that category in 2004). I'd rather he signed a minor league deal, as well, but I don't mind a $750K major league deal either if the guy is going to be used in a backup role.

westofyou
02-12-2006, 04:05 PM
(4th in the AL in that category in 2004)
And only had 2 last year in 535 PA's and in fact never has had more than 3 in a year but that one... no offense but SF is the iffyest stat ever produced to make anyone look good, especially considering that the Reds record is held by Johnny Temple and even Junior Kennedy had 8 in 1980.

Falls City Beer
02-12-2006, 04:09 PM
Ballast.

The Return of the Curse of Bowden's Ghost.

Come on, Wayne, bring home the next Jimmy Haynes.

westofyou
02-12-2006, 04:12 PM
Do other teams worry about ballast as much as the Reds, and after 5 years of mud pies is it going to really hurt to try something that is slightly different than the last 5 years?

Falls City Beer
02-12-2006, 04:14 PM
Do other teams worry about ballast as much as the Reds, and after 5 years of mud pies is it going to really hurt to try something that is slightly different than the last 5 years?

No, but it's not going to help.

And I'd submit both Joe Randa and Jon Vanderwal as exhibit A & B in the ballast continuity project. Dirtpile sifting. And not particularly good sifting.

westofyou
02-12-2006, 04:17 PM
And I'd submit both Joe Randa and Jon Vanderwal as exhibit A & B in the ballast continuity project. Dirtpile sifting. And not particularly good sifting.

And I'll submit 2003 Freel and 2001 Brady Clark as positive sifting.

Falls City Beer
02-12-2006, 04:19 PM
And I'll submit 2003 Freel and 2001 Brady Clark as positive sifting.

Sure. There is such as a thing as good sifting. I'm not saying that--I'm saying this is bad sifting--guy at the end of his string sifting, a la DanO.

Are they looking to build a VFW Hall or make a bench?

LvJ
02-12-2006, 04:24 PM
Ohhh, this is a signing that I rly like. Good job. :dancingco

westofyou
02-12-2006, 04:25 PM
Sure. There is such as a thing as good sifting. I'm not saying that--I'm saying this is bad sifting--guy at the end of his string sifting, a la DanO.

Are they looking to build a VFW Hall or make a bench?

Well considering that the majority of the starters are under 30 then I don't see the big problem right now, in fact I'd say it's safe to say that most of the bench ballast being picked up over the past 5 years over the age of 35 has been more for other things aside from hitting.

Womack, Aurilia, Griffey and now Hattenberg are the only Reds over the age of 32.. not really a VFW hall just yet.



NATIONAL LEAGUE
SEASON
2001-2005
Non P
AGE >= 35
AT BATS < 200
AGE displayed only--not a sorting criteria

OPS YEAR DIFF PLAYER LEAGUE AB AGE
1 Fred McGriff 2001 .162 .942 .780 170 37
2 Todd Pratt 2003 .093 .864 .771 125 36
3 Andres Galarraga 2001 .084 .863 .780 156 40
4 Julio Franco 2003 .053 .824 .771 197 44
5 Ron Gant 2001 .033 .813 .780 171 36
6 Jeff Cirillo 2005 .033 .800 .767 185 35
7 Shawon Dunston 2001 .024 .804 .780 186 38
8 Lenny Harris 2002 .004 .766 .763 197 37
9 Kenny Lofton 2002 -.004 .758 .763 180 35
10 Eric Young 2005 -.030 .737 .767 142 38
11 Barry Larkin 2001 -.035 .745 .780 156 37
12 Todd Pratt 2005 -.041 .726 .767 175 38
13 Matt Williams 2003 -.041 .730 .771 134 37
14 Chad Kreuter 2001 -.048 .732 .780 191 36
15 Robin Ventura 2004 -.079 .699 .778 152 36
16 Orlando Palmeiro 2004 -.088 .690 .778 133 35
17 Ken Caminiti 2001 -.094 .686 .780 171 38
18 Carlos Baerga 2005 -.113 .653 .767 158 36
19 Jose Vizcaino 2003 -.125 .646 .771 189 35
20 Jose Vizcaino 2005 -.131 .636 .767 187 37
21 Bobby Bonilla 2001 -.133 .647 .780 174 38
22 Eddie Perez 2004 -.139 .639 .778 170 36
23 Eric Davis 2001 -.145 .634 .780 156 39
24 Darryl Hamilton 2001 -.148 .632 .780 126 36
25 Jose Valentin 2005 -.175 .591 .767 147 35

captainmorgan07
02-12-2006, 04:28 PM
gets us a backup first basemen left handed bat and bench guy as was stated alerady good clubhouse guy good signing

Falls City Beer
02-12-2006, 04:32 PM
gets us a backup first basemen left handed bat and bench guy as was stated alerady good clubhouse guy good signing

This team needed a backup firstbaseman like I need a mercury milkshake.

KronoRed
02-12-2006, 04:33 PM
Hmm..Mercury

Reds Nd2
02-12-2006, 04:49 PM
Maybe it's just me, but I find it hard to get excited over signing a guy who was worth -3.6 above replacement level last season.

Betterread
02-12-2006, 04:49 PM
I like Hatteberg as a PH and 1b backup more than Cruz and $750,000 isn't much to pay him.

westofyou
02-12-2006, 05:00 PM
This team needed a backup firstbaseman like I need a mercury milkshake.
Really?

I think a b/u 1st baseman this season isn't a bad idea, it ain't sexy and there ain't any blood to satisify the masses, but it's not as cut and dried as you paint it either.

RFS62
02-12-2006, 05:03 PM
Gives him some flexibility to move one of the outfielders too, without having to worry about a quick fix at first.

traderumor
02-12-2006, 05:04 PM
Really?

I think a b/u 1st baseman this season isn't a bad idea, it ain't sexy and there ain't any blood to satisify the masses, but it's not as cut and dried as you paint it either.
This is a signing if viewed in isolation would seem to be a bleh move, but my first thought is that this move is anticipating some turnover in the outfield that will move the first baseman back to the outfield.

Falls City Beer
02-12-2006, 05:06 PM
Gives him some flexibility to move one of the outfielders too, without having to worry about a quick fix at first.

One of the outfielders who isn't going to get moved (Dunn) can play first and one of the outfielders who can't get moved (Griffey) can play it in a pinch. My guess is that's a move based on a belief that Hatteberg can help our bench. I disagree.

westofyou
02-12-2006, 05:08 PM
This is a signing if viewed in isolation would seem to be a bleh move, but my first thought is that this move is anticipating some turnover in the outfield that will move the first baseman back to the outfield.
Yes it's a flexibilty move and another thing everone misses is that SH has a great road OB% the past 3 years, the Colisium is death to hitters at times and last year it dragged him down mightly as well.

BTW Cruz has this line over the last 2 seasons, is it really that special?

.230/.321/.372/.693 - 271 at bats

pedro
02-12-2006, 05:09 PM
One of the outfielders who isn't going to get moved (Dunn) can play first and one of the outfielders who can't get moved (Griffey) can play it in a pinch. My guess is that's a move based on a belief that Hatteberg can help our bench. I disagree.

I'd rather have Hatteberg than Jacob Cruz as long as Hatteburg doesn't end up starting.

If this is a precursor to moving an OF and playing Hatteburg as the everyday first baseman, then I won't be too happy about it.

RFS62
02-12-2006, 05:09 PM
One of the outfielders who isn't going to get moved (Dunn) can play first and one of the outfielders who can't get moved (Griffey) can play it in a pinch. My guess is that's a move based on a belief that Hatteberg can help our bench. I disagree.


How do you know Dunn won't be moved? Or any of the others, for that matter?

Not that I know that they will be, but this shores up the bench and makes us more flexible if the right deal comes along.

Falls City Beer
02-12-2006, 05:11 PM
I'd rather have Hatteberg than Jacob Cruz as long as Hatteburg doesn't end up starting.

If this is a precursor to moving an OF and playing Hatteburg as the everyday first baseman, then I won't be too happy about it.

At least Cruz can field a couple of positions, without much dropoff in effectiveness. Obviously Cruz is no great shakes, but why add more of the same, but less versatile?

Falls City Beer
02-12-2006, 05:16 PM
How do you know Dunn won't be moved? Or any of the others, for that matter?

Not that I know that they will be, but this shores up the bench and makes us more flexible if the right deal comes along.

Let me just put it this way. If Dunn is moved, and Cy Young doesn't return in his place, I could field first base for the Reds and it wouldn't make a damn bit of difference at that point. So at the very least, they could save $750,000. I'd rather just pray they find a way to keep Dunn than to entertain the thought of this crew trading him.

westofyou
02-12-2006, 05:16 PM
At least Cruz can field a couple of positions, without much dropoff in effectiveness. Obviously Cruz is no great shakes, but why add more of the same, but less versatile?

SH is a better first baseman than Cruz, who also is a BUTCHER in the oF, I don't know what your definition of field well is but it differs than mine when comparing the two.

Plus SH can work the count much better than Cruz

pedro
02-12-2006, 05:17 PM
At least Cruz can field a couple of positions, without much dropoff in effectiveness. Obviously Cruz is no great shakes, but why add more of the same, but less versatile?

Well, I'm not sold on Cruz as a fielder and any position really. As it stands right now, the Reds have enough depth that Cruz should NEVER get a start in the OF anyway. I know Hatteburg has almost no pop but I think he has better OBP skills than Cruz, so I believe it's an upgrade.

Danny Serafini
02-12-2006, 05:20 PM
At least Cruz can field a couple of positions, without much dropoff in effectiveness.

If that were true Cruz wouldn't have been the last player on an Opening Day roster last year to start a game in the field. The fact that he appeared in 110 games last year and only appeared as a fielder in 25 tells you what the Reds think of his fielding ability.

Reds Nd2
02-12-2006, 05:20 PM
BTW Cruz has this line over the last 2 seasons, is it really that special?

.230/.321/.372/.693 - 271 at bats

Is it really that much worse than the .265/.349/.384/.733 line Hatteberg's put up the last three seasons?

RFS62
02-12-2006, 05:22 PM
Let me just put it this way. If Dunn is moved, and Cy Young doesn't return in his place, I could field first base for the Reds and it wouldn't make a damn bit of difference at that point. So at the very least, they could save $750,000. I'd rather just pray they find a way to keep Dunn than to entertain the thought of this crew trading him.


If we can't get Dunn to agree to a long term contract, we're going to have to trade him eventually. He may have already decided not to stay here.

Also, if we can move Wily Mo (my preference) for pitching, Dunn can immediately move back to left. If SH is a bust at first, we've got time to replace him. If he's adequate given the new mixture with whatever trade is made, all the better.

More flexible, stronger bench.

Falls City Beer
02-12-2006, 05:22 PM
Well, I'm not sold on Cruz as a fielder and any position really. As it stands right now, the Reds have enough depth that Cruz should NEVER get a start in the OF anyway. I know Hatteburg has almost no pop but I think he has better OBP skills than Cruz, so I believe it's an upgrade.

Yeah, I know I want to add a player who has to armwrestle with Jacob Cruz over who has the most to bring to a club. As I said, Cruz is no great shakes, so why another brutal defender who is just as slow as Cruz, but who has marginally better OBP? Just seems like a monumental waste of time, to me. Considering the real heavy-lifting this team needs to do. I'd just dig through the minor league free agents and find me a backup for 1st instead of pissing away money a la VanderWal.

westofyou
02-12-2006, 05:25 PM
Is it really that much worse than the .265/.349/.384/.733 line Hatteberg's put up the last three seasons?

Yes it is.

First off SH plays in an extreme pitchers park and got probably more AB's than he needed, plus his Road OB was damn good last year.

On a team that just had the 25th most EBH's in the history of the game I don't think slugging is the problem the bench is trying to fix.

Falls City Beer
02-12-2006, 05:26 PM
Y
On a team that just had the 25th most EBH's in the history of the game I don't think slugging is the problem the bench is trying to fix.

Then what IS it trying to fix? And I'm sorry, veteran presence doesn't count. What *tangibly* is a move like this trying to fix?

westofyou
02-12-2006, 05:30 PM
Then what IS it trying to fix? And I'm sorry, veteran presence doesn't count. What *tangibly* is a move like this trying to fix?

OB% off the bench, being able to work the count, experience on winning teams, competent b/u defense at 1st.

All the crap I'm told I shouldn't care about.

BTW I just remembered my friends mom works for Scott in Seattle, now I'm going to have to work him for some tickets down in SF this august.

RedsManRick
02-12-2006, 05:41 PM
Why would anybody want Cruz over Hatterberg? His wonderful OF defense? His great contact ability or eye at the plate (.241/.331/.377)? His speed (4/12 on sb - career)?

Cruz is like Jose Macias. He doesn't do anything well, but he won't embarass you and can play a few positions. He's the kind of guy who adds zero value to a roster, but makes managers more comfortable.

In Dunn, Freel, Denorfia, we'll have 3 backup OFs already who are better than Cruz. We don't need another guy who is an average at best corner OF. Hatteberg can give us an adequate bat and glove at 1B while Dunn slides back to LF on the occasion somebody gets hurt or needs a day off -- without needing to take Freel off 2B.

Am I really happy? Of course not. But it improves the club, which is good.

Krusty
02-12-2006, 05:47 PM
It will be nice to have a pinch hitter coming up late in the game to face closers like Brad Lidge with a chance of knocking in the winning run.

I think even Hatteberg knows playing everyday is not an option.

traderumor
02-12-2006, 05:51 PM
Yeah, I know I want to add a player who has to armwrestle with Jacob Cruz over who has the most to bring to a club. As I said, Cruz is no great shakes, so why another brutal defender who is just as slow as Cruz, but who has marginally better OBP? Just seems like a monumental waste of time, to me. Considering the real heavy-lifting this team needs to do. I'd just dig through the minor league free agents and find me a backup for 1st instead of pissing away money a la VanderWal.
I think you're the only one making the case that it is arm-wrestling with Jacob Cruz. Hatteberg had three serviceable seasons as an everday 1bman with the A's and has the positive attributes WOY has already pointed out. Cruz is one-dimensional (lefty PHer off the bench) that is really a 26th man. He's so valuable he signed a minor league contract the last two years and had to make the team out of spring training.

red-in-la
02-12-2006, 05:55 PM
I thought Cruz was one of the best PH in the league....am I thinking of somebody else?

I hate a move like this....just gives either Krivsky an excuse to trade an OF for a bunch of junk or it gives Neahring the excuse to futz with the line up night after night.

Now we will hear that WMP sits so that Neahring can get LH bats into the line up.....so Adam Dunn plays ping pong ball again for another year.

If you guys want Dunn to stay, allowing the manager to play him a different position every night is not a good thing. Let Adam get a chance to be the All-star 1B in a Reds uni and maybe he will learn to like it here.

IslandRed
02-12-2006, 06:05 PM
I'm OK with it. If Jacob Cruz wasn't Krivsky's answer to "who's the backup at first" and "who's the primary lefty pinch-hitter," then a move like this was coming, be it Hatteberg or someone else. Hatteberg may be only a little better than Cruz at this stage of his career, but he's better, and little upgrades help too. (As long as they come at little cost.)

acredsfan
02-12-2006, 06:08 PM
I thought Cruz was one of the best PH in the league....am I thinking of somebody else?

I hate a move like this....just gives either Krivsky an excuse to trade an OF for a bunch of junk or it gives Neahring the excuse to futz with the line up night after night.

Now we will hear that WMP sits so that Neahring can get LH bats into the line up.....so Adam Dunn plays ping pong ball again for another year.

If you guys want Dunn to stay, allowing the manager to play him a different position every night is not a good thing. Let Adam get a chance to be the All-star 1B in a Reds uni and maybe he will learn to like it here.First, if naehring is the one messing with the line up there is something wrong. second, yeah, Cruz was one of the best PH in the league, but in my opinion he was not a very good backup player, so that is what is called a weakness, SH strengthens up the bench because he can fill in if needed, not just walk up to the plate once a night to hopefully get a hit. By good PH you are saying that cruz got 20 pinch hits last year, did that help us get to .500? No. Will losing a few hits by this move make us lose 10 more games. I doubt it. Are you just looking for something to be mad about or what, this move has very few implications on this season, we had the most runs in the league last year, where did that get us? If anything, like was stated before, it gives us flexibility to trade an OF, and that doesn't mean Dunn would have to move to the outfield, we also have Freel to move out there.

Falls City Beer
02-12-2006, 06:11 PM
I think you're the only one making the case that it is arm-wrestling with Jacob Cruz. Hatteberg had three serviceable seasons as an everday 1bman with the A's and has the positive attributes WOY has already pointed out. Cruz is one-dimensional (lefty PHer off the bench) that is really a 26th man. He's so valuable he signed a minor league contract the last two years and had to make the team out of spring training.

No. You're all wrong. I wasn't the one to bring up Cruz in the first place. Check the thread.

Personally, I think the Casey for Williams trade blows this acquisition out of the water--and I thought that trade was, well, a salary dump.

I wonder how anyone can genuinely distinguish this kind of acquisition from DanO's pickups of Randa, VanderWal, or Aurilia.

What if DanO were still here and he were the one who made the move? Would there be similar enthusiasm for the move? You can put a urinal in an art museum, but it's still a urinal.

lollipopcurve
02-12-2006, 06:19 PM
He's better than Cruz, is more versatile than Cruz, isn't an institution on a losing team as Cruz has been.

Keep shaking, Wayne.

Falls City Beer
02-12-2006, 06:22 PM
He's better than Cruz, is more versatile than Cruz, isn't an institution on a losing team as Cruz has been.

Keep shaking, Wayne.

Wow, you know it's so funny how this argument has been warped and twisted into me saying "Cruz=good; Hatteberg=bad."

Wrong. Completely false. Cruz was used as a point of comparison to Hatteberg. Personally, I want neither on my team--not both.

Blow it up. Make it dull.

TeamBoone
02-12-2006, 06:28 PM
One of the outfielders who isn't going to get moved (Dunn) can play first and one of the outfielders who can't get moved (Griffey) can play it in a pinch.

Dunn IS playing first. Griffey won't be playing first any time soon, not even in a pinch. It's been reported several times why he physically can't.

RedRoser
02-12-2006, 06:35 PM
At least Cruz can field a couple of positions, without much dropoff in effectiveness. Obviously Cruz is no great shakes, but why add more of the same, but less versatile?

My thoughts (and hopes!) exactly, '52! Wonder if my parents or yours actually had twins? :confused:

---rSquared

westofyou
02-12-2006, 06:47 PM
Blow it up. Make it dull.

Well, this late in the off season you can pee on any fire they start.

Can't have change without change.

M2
02-12-2006, 06:48 PM
OB% off the bench, being able to work the count, experience on winning teams, competent b/u defense at 1st.

All the crap I'm told I shouldn't care about.

I'll back that up. He gives the Reds what Hal Morris did in the late '90s.

Hopefully he bumps a no-hit IF off the 25-man roster, preferably Tony Womack.

Falls City Beer
02-12-2006, 06:56 PM
Well, this late in the off season you can pee on any fire they start.

Can't have change without change.


You still haven't described how this move substantively differs from DanO's acquisition of VanderWal a few years ago. Actually VanderWal was a much better expenditure of $750,000.

schroomytunes
02-12-2006, 06:58 PM
Everybody keeps saying that Cruz had more PH than anyone in the majors last year, big deal that's all he did. He ph like 80+ times and only got 20 hits thats not all that great stat wise, plus he K"s like 33% of the time. He is also one dimensional something this team dosn't need. Hatteberg gives us for starters more bench depth, a solid backup 1b, and insurance for a trade later on involving one of our outfielder's. I'll be willing to bet that if Kearns or Pena get hot then Krivy wont be hesitent to pull a deal netting us a top flight gun slinger. :thumbup:

MWM
02-12-2006, 07:02 PM
I view this about the same as i did Randa. I don't care either way. It's not a move generating any emotion either way.

However, I disagree completely with the argument that it gives them flexibility to trade one of the outfielders or Dunn. A significant decision to trade or not trade one of these assets, or even what makes an acceptabble return, should not AT ALL hinge on how it affects the 2006 season. I think it's clear to most that this is a transition season at best and they have no chance of contending. I understand that you don't want to go out and lose 100 games, but any decision that will have long-term implications for the franchise (such as trading a Dunn or Kearns), should be made 100% independently of how it affects the 2006 roster, IMO. Making a move like signing Hatteberg, if done for the purpose of "allowing you trade" someone like Kearns or Dunn is poor business, IMO. If the right deal comes along, take it. If the right one doesn't come along, keep them. I'd hate to think that having or not having a Scott Hatteberg was a difference in these kinds of decisions.

Falls City Beer
02-12-2006, 07:05 PM
I view this about the same as i did Randa. I don't care either way. It's not a move generating any emotion either way.

However, I disagree completely with the argument that it gives them flexibility to trade one of the outfielders or Dunn. A significant decision to trade or not trade one of these assets, or even what makes an acceptabble return, should not AT ALL hinge on how it affects the 2006 season. I think it's clear to most that this is a transition season at best and they have no chance of contending. I understand that you don't want to go out and lose 100 games, but any decision that will have long-term implications for the franchise (such as trading a Dunn or Kearns), should be made 100% independently of how it affects the 2006 roster, IMO. Making a move like signing Hatteberg, if done for the purpose of "allowing you trade" someone like Kearns or Dunn is poor business, IMO. If the right deal comes along, take it. If the right one doesn't come along, keep them. I'd hate to think that having or not having a Scott Hatteberg was a difference in these kinds of decisions.


Great post. Thanks for the objectivity.

pedro
02-12-2006, 07:11 PM
You still haven't described how this move substantively differs from DanO's acquisition of VanderWal a few years ago. Actually VanderWal was a much better expenditure of $750,000.

Except Vanderwal was hurt when we signed him IIRC. Plus at that point the Reds had Casey and Dunn to play first.

I do agree with what MWM had to say though.

RFS62
02-12-2006, 07:12 PM
Nobody said the only reason, or even the main reason we signed him was so we could trade an outfielder.

It's just one of several positives. Nobody is making a big deal out of this acquisition other than it's detractors.

KronoRed
02-12-2006, 07:13 PM
Trading an OF and making Hatterberg a starter doesn't sound positive to me ;)

Hope this guy is just bench guy 3.

MWM
02-12-2006, 07:15 PM
Nobody said the only reason, or even the main reason we signed him was so we could trade an outfielder.

What I'm suggesting is if that it shouldn't factor in AT ALL. The signing doesn't bother me at all. But if influences, to any degree, any decision with long-term implications, that's a BAD thing. I don't think that's what they were thinking. I'm just responding to what some here have suggested. I don't see that as a positive at all, or a negative for that matter. One doesn't have to do with the other, IMO.

Falls City Beer
02-12-2006, 07:15 PM
Except Vanderwal was hurt when we signed him IIRC. Plus at that point the Reds had Casey and Dunn to play first.

I do agree with what MWM had to say though.

No. He got hurt after the signing.

RFS62
02-12-2006, 07:16 PM
What I'm suggesting is if that it shouldn't factor in AT ALL. The signing doesn't bother me at all. But if influences, to any degree, any decision with long-term implications, that's a BAD thing. I don't think that's what they were thinking. I'm just responding to what some here have suggested. I don't see that as a positive at all, or a negative for that matter. One doesn't have to do with the other, IMO.


The only thing I can see is that it would make it easier in the short term to move one of them without worrying about first base IMMEDIATELY, if Dunn moved back to the outfield.

KronoRed
02-12-2006, 07:17 PM
Just for fun..how bout this lineup :evil:

2B Womack
SS Lopez
3B Aurilia
1B Hatterberg
RF Kearns
LF Pena
CF Deno
C Valentin

RFS62
02-12-2006, 07:19 PM
Stop that, Krono.

westofyou
02-12-2006, 07:19 PM
This deal reminds me of the Charlie Brown Thanksgiving special, Peppermint Patty invites herself to Thanksgiving and in a pinch "Chuck" has to make do with popcorn and toast.

Boy was PP peeved, not realizing that her expectations were far beyond what was possible with the time and resources available.

In the end they all got in the back of the car and headed off into a future unknown.

Falls City Beer
02-12-2006, 07:22 PM
Nobody is making a big deal out of this acquisition other than it's detractors.

No, you're right. It isn't a big deal. That's part of the problem.

It does nothing to change the fortunes of the club in any capacity. I'm only asking for there to be some tempering of enthusiasm for the deal--and well, a whole bunch of people were cheering the acquisition before I showed up, so it's not as though I was the first one to be making a big deal out of it. I'm not, like you, saying there's "several negatives" (as you claim with your "several positives") to this move. I take issue with the belief that it brings several positives. If that makes it a big deal, then I'm Odd Lots. :party:

cincinnati chili
02-12-2006, 07:23 PM
You still haven't described how this move substantively differs from DanO's acquisition of VanderWal a few years ago.


Unless Hatteberg broke his collarbone shoveling his driveway today, the two moves can't be compared.

I loved the Vanderwal signing, but they never got him healthy enough to help.

westofyou
02-12-2006, 07:24 PM
It does nothing to change the fortunes of the club in any capacity.

That's your opinion, you have discounted his experience, his on base skills and his ability to translate those skills at the cost of 750K.

What to you want for nothing a week into the job?

red-in-la
02-12-2006, 07:37 PM
First, if naehring is the one messing with the line up there is something wrong. second, yeah, Cruz was one of the best PH in the league, but in my opinion he was not a very good backup player, so that is what is called a weakness, SH strengthens up the bench because he can fill in if needed, not just walk up to the plate once a night to hopefully get a hit. By good PH you are saying that cruz got 20 pinch hits last year, did that help us get to .500? No. Will losing a few hits by this move make us lose 10 more games. I doubt it. Are you just looking for something to be mad about or what, this move has very few implications on this season, we had the most runs in the league last year, where did that get us? If anything, like was stated before, it gives us flexibility to trade an OF, and that doesn't mean Dunn would have to move to the outfield, we also have Freel to move out there.

So sorry, insert Narron for Nearhing.....taking this stuff for vertigo and the brain farts are coming faster than I can type. Sorry again.

RFS62
02-12-2006, 07:39 PM
So sorry, insert Narron for Nearhing.....taking this stuff for vertigo and the brain farts are coming faster than I can type. Sorry again.


Makes you management material in my world.

membengal
02-12-2006, 07:47 PM
That's your opinion, you have discounted his experience, his on base skills and his ability to translate those skills at the cost of 750K.

What to you want for nothing a week into the job?

Thank you woy.

The main complaint so far seems to be: "What? That's all? That won't change the fortunes of this team in any meaningful way!"

To which, everyone might reply...duh. Of course it won't. But for a lot of us, this is an upgrade, albeit a small one, over what was here. And that's not a bad start. For once, I would like a series of moves that actually make this club better, and Hatteberg instead of Cruz does that as far as I am concerned.

As for the bigger picture, nothing is likely to happen to be that big splash some seem to be yearning for. Which is good. No one should be dealt just to assuage people in the short term. If the best deals don't crop up until July, then the Reds should wait.

Nice strawman you have set up there, FCB, but I don't recall anyone opining this makes the club a playoff contender, just that it makes them in a small way better. Which it does.

lollipopcurve
02-12-2006, 07:53 PM
The main complaint so far seems to be: "What? That's all? That won't change the fortunes of this team in any meaningful way!"

To which, everyone might reply...duh. Of course it won't. But for a lot of us, this is an upgrade, albeit a small one, over what was here. And that's not a bad start. For once, I would like a series of moves that actually make this club better, and Hatteberg instead of Cruz does that as far as I am concerned.

As for the bigger picture, nothing is likely to happen to be that big splash some seem to be yearning for. Which is good. No one should be dealt just to assuage people in the short term. If the best deals don't crop up until July, then the Reds should wait.

Nice strawman you have set up there, FCB, but I don't recall anyone opining this makes the club a playoff contender, just that it makes them in a small way better. Which it does.

Excellent post, membengal.

Heath
02-12-2006, 07:55 PM
Just for fun..how bout this lineup :evil:

2B Womack
SS Lopez
3B Aurilia
1B Hatterberg
RF Kearns
LF Pena
CF Deno
C Valentin

Coming to a get-away day lineup near you!

If Rotoworld's against it, then I'm for it! :D

westofyou
02-12-2006, 07:56 PM
750K mistakes are the kind I want my GM to make.

pedro
02-12-2006, 07:58 PM
750K mistakes are the kind I want my GM to make.

I'm looking to make a few .473 Liter mistakes. That hockey game almost over?

Falls City Beer
02-12-2006, 08:00 PM
Nice strawman you have set up there, FCB, but I don't recall anyone opining this makes the club a playoff contender, just that it makes them in a small way better. Which it does.

Strawman? That's just what you've done. Never once did I characterize the other sides' argument as positing that this acquisition makes the Reds a "playoff contender." I said that it doesn't change things. Nothing more, nothing less.

But people see what they want to see in things.

To show you that I'm trying to objectively look at things: I think Kullman's acquisition of White was a waste of time and resources, too.

red-in-la
02-12-2006, 08:05 PM
Excellent post, membengal.

I think this signing can be harmful.....it seems to me that the Reds have a guy already who has proven to be a good PH and bench player and can play BOTH OF and 1B (Mr Cruz). So he ain't Mickey Mantle, but he has been useful.

Now you sign a guy who has NOT played the backup role all that much and he is slow and can't play the OF at all and according to seems to be bad a 1B too.

One of these guys doesn't make the team......so you cut Cruz, then Hatteburg turns out to NOT be a good bench guy or PH.

As much as this might be called a little thing in MAYBE helping, it could also be a little thing in HURTING also.

So let's NOT portray it as oh well, can't hurt.

M2
02-12-2006, 08:08 PM
Hatteberg plays 1B at least as well as Sean Casey. And I'm guessing he could still catch in a bind.

Anyway, I don't see why the Reds can't carry Cruz and Hatteberg, though if I could only carry one it would be Hatteberg.

westofyou
02-12-2006, 08:18 PM
I'm looking to make a few .473 Liter mistakes. That hockey game almost over?
Be there in 25 minutes

red-in-la
02-12-2006, 08:25 PM
So they keep Denorfia, Cruz AND Hatteburg? Then it is OK with me....but I don't see that. I cannot recall hearing a team keep a backup 1B that was only that. 1B is usually backed up by almost any other position.....but a guy who can ONLY backup 1B?

I don't get it. I do like having an emergency 3ed catcher but ONLY if Narron acts like he has one. If Valetin rots in the late innings because he is considered the only backup, then Hatteburg doesn't count as a catcher in my book.

IslandRed
02-12-2006, 08:26 PM
No, you're right. It isn't a big deal. That's part of the problem.

It does nothing to change the fortunes of the club in any capacity.

No, it doesn't, but not every deal has to be about reshaping the Reds Of The Future. We're not going to the postseason this year, but we still have to play the games, and if we can improve the lot of the 2006 Reds even a little bit without damaging the 2007+ Reds, fine with me. Hatteberg is neither a solution nor a problem. He's a bench player on a one-year contract. That's all.

westofyou
02-12-2006, 08:28 PM
I cannot recall hearing a team keep a backup 1B that was only that. 1B is usually backed up by almost any other position.....but a guy who can ONLY backup 1B?

Hal Morris 1999-2000

red-in-la
02-12-2006, 08:38 PM
Thanks WOY, my favorite player.....

I do not recall Hal being a backup for very long....also (as much as I was not a Morris fan) Hatteburg is no Hal Morris. At the time, Morris was a young man in search of a batting title. Morris was only a backup until he could beat out Todd Bensinger for the permanent job.

BTW, at the time that Hal was first called up, 1999-2000, he also played some outfield.

Patrick Bateman
02-12-2006, 08:49 PM
The thing I like about this signing is that when one of Dunn, Kearns, Pena, Griffey injures themselves Hatteberg can start and be a decent player. He could replace them and play decently. I don't feel nearly as comfortable with Cruz in that role since the only time he gets hits is as a ph.

Also he will probably steal at-bats from Womack.

Puffy
02-12-2006, 08:53 PM
Thanks WOY, my favorite player.....

I do not recall Hal being a backup for very long....also (as much as I was not a Morris fan) Hatteburg is no Hal Morris. At the time, Morris was a young man in search of a batting title. Morris was only a backup until he could beat out Todd Bensinger for the permanent job.

BTW, at the time that Hal was first called up, 1999-2000, he also played some outfield.

Hal Morris was called up in the late 80's, and played for the Reds championship team in 1990.

By 1999 he was, basically, washed up and only could be a backup

oneupper
02-12-2006, 09:05 PM
22 GIDP in 2005 (464 AB). Looks like Casey's replacement has been found!

Falls City Beer
02-12-2006, 09:07 PM
22 GIDP in 2005 (464 AB). Looks like Casey's replacement has been found!

:laugh:

traderumor
02-12-2006, 09:14 PM
I view this about the same as i did Randa. I don't care either way. It's not a move generating any emotion either way.

However, I disagree completely with the argument that it gives them flexibility to trade one of the outfielders or Dunn. A significant decision to trade or not trade one of these assets, or even what makes an acceptabble return, should not AT ALL hinge on how it affects the 2006 season. I think it's clear to most that this is a transition season at best and they have no chance of contending. I understand that you don't want to go out and lose 100 games, but any decision that will have long-term implications for the franchise (such as trading a Dunn or Kearns), should be made 100% independently of how it affects the 2006 roster, IMO. Making a move like signing Hatteberg, if done for the purpose of "allowing you trade" someone like Kearns or Dunn is poor business, IMO. If the right deal comes along, take it. If the right one doesn't come along, keep them. I'd hate to think that having or not having a Scott Hatteberg was a difference in these kinds of decisions.

Strawman. All that was argued is that in the event of moving an outfielder, this signing adds depth at an affected position, not that it should trigger a move.

Krusty
02-12-2006, 09:19 PM
Hatteberg is a bench player. I doubt very much it has any bearing on whether Krivisky trades an outfielder for pitching. He will still be a bench player while backing up lst base and be a third string catcher along with being the top lefthanded pinch hitter off the bench.

MWM
02-12-2006, 09:20 PM
People sure like to use the term "strawman" on this site. I'm wondering how many people actually know what it means because it's used incorrectly A LOT!

traderumor
02-12-2006, 09:59 PM
People sure like to use the term "strawman" on this site. I'm wondering how many people actually know what it means because it's used incorrectly A LOT!
Ah, glad to see you posting MWM. You always keep me humble with the backhands.

Strawman, presenting a flawed argument that is not actually made during a discussion but presenting it as if it was and then defeating the argument that was not actually made. In other words, defeating one's own flawed argument.

BTW, folks use a lot of strawman arguments on this board, hence the identification of such :)

Kc61
02-12-2006, 10:02 PM
Signing is not surprising. Dunn is new at first base. It makes sense that one of the bench players will be, primarily, a first baseman. Not that Hatteberg is a defensive whiz, but first has been his main position over a lengthy career.

Also, Hatteberg is a low strikeout hitter. Since the Reds lineup is filled with high strikeout guys (particularly since Casey is now gone), Hatteberg seems a good choice, assuming he has anything left in the tank.

Have to assume Cruz will be gone. Reds have plenty of outfield depth since Freel, Womack, and Denorfia all play or can play outfield.

Crash Davis
02-12-2006, 11:07 PM
Rotoworld also mentioned the Reds as one of three teams interested in Richard Hidalgo. Hidalgo (& Hatteberg) could make some sense if one of Kearns, Dunn, Griffey or Wily Mo are on their way out.

It will be interesting to see if Castellini & Krivsky are as attached to Junior as Lindner et al. were as a hometown attraction. Not saying whether they should or shouldn't be, but there could be a lot less hesitation to move him with a new sheriff in town.

reds44
02-12-2006, 11:08 PM
Rotoworld also mentioned the Reds as one of three teams interested in Richard Hidalgo. Hidalgo (& Hatteberg) could make some sense if one of Kearns, Dunn, Griffey or Wily Mo are on their way out.

It will be interesting to see if Castellini & Krivsky are as attached to Junior as Lindner et al. were as a hometown attraction. Not saying whether they should or shouldn't be, but there could be a lot less hesitation to move him with a new sheriff in town.
Wow. Yes it appears that on of them will be on the way out then.

Interesting.

KronoRed
02-12-2006, 11:32 PM
I doubt JR is going anywhere, his 10-5 rights would probably scuttle most deals.

pedro
02-12-2006, 11:45 PM
Thanks WOY, my favorite player.....

I do not recall Hal being a backup for very long....also (as much as I was not a Morris fan) Hatteburg is no Hal Morris. At the time, Morris was a young man in search of a batting title. Morris was only a backup until he could beat out Todd Bensinger for the permanent job.

BTW, at the time that Hal was first called up, 1999-2000, he also played some outfield.

Interesting. I looked it up b/c that's how I remember it too. Hal played 9 games in outfield for the Yankees, 7 for the Reds, and 39 for the Royals in 1998. Then when he came back to the Reds in 1999-2000 he played 5 more games in the OF. he played 1 for Detroit in 2000 as well.

REDREAD
02-13-2006, 12:42 AM
OB% off the bench, being able to work the count, experience on winning teams, competent b/u defense at 1st.

All the crap I'm told I shouldn't care about.
.

I agree with you WOY. I like this move. It's not going to turn the club around, but for only 750k (and this late in the season), it helps.

Hattenberg also gives us flexiblity to trade Dunn or one of the OF.. Yes, I know Hattenberg isn't an ideal starting player, but if the team decides to rebuild, they'll need some bodies to field a team.

Hattenberg gives the team some depth, and is an upgrade from Cruz, good move, IMo.

cincyinco
02-13-2006, 01:37 AM
Its certainly a better signing than Frank Meninchino..

isn't it?

RedsManRick
02-13-2006, 01:47 AM
Cruz had a .236/.324/.409 line last year in 127 ABs. I don't care how many pinch hits he got, that's not good.

Hatteberg had a .256/.334/.343 line last year as a starter. That's also not good.

However, Jacob Cruz would be the 7th guy on the team who could play OF, 8th if you count Womack (I don't). He does not play it that well -- ie. he wouldn't be a late game sub, just a pinch hitter. Hatteberg, given his career and last few years, is a better defensive 1B and more likely to get on base. Neither guy is a power threat. I can't believe such a minor move has gotten so much discussion, but I see no argument on why Cruz would be a better option. This says nothing about Hatteberg's ability to catch in a pinch.

Caveat Emperor
02-13-2006, 03:38 AM
With just over 3 days until the team reports to camp, this is about the only kind of free agent acquisition you can do.

You sign a player like Hatteberg, hope he contributes and (in a perfect world) contributes enough to make him worth a prospect at the deadline. Otherwise, he's a warm body that can fill a bench spot on a team that at least needs to field a squad for 162 contests this season, even if many many losses are already in the cards.

It's not a great move, it's not a bad move...it's just some roster churning. At worst, it at least guarantees that the team is not just handing Jacob Cruz a roster spot because he still has all his jerseys from last season. He plays middling defense, and somehow I think that just isn't going to cut it on a team run by a former Twins exec.

Krusty
02-13-2006, 08:57 AM
Unless the Reds have a change of heart and sign Jeff Weaver to a one-year deal.

KearnsyEars
02-13-2006, 09:01 AM
I have a feeling that he'll get alot of playing time and once again cause a platoon in the outfield. I don't like it at the moment.

Jpup
02-13-2006, 09:01 AM
Unless the Reds have a change of heart and sign Jeff Weaver to a one-year deal.

The Angels want an answer from Weaver by Wednesday. We should know where he goes by then.

TRF
02-13-2006, 11:00 AM
I think if anything, this signing is most similar to the RA signing last year. Pray that isn't so.

Hope that Kriv knows what dead weight Tony Womack is. Hope he knows what SH's role should be: pinch hitter, backup 1B, #3 catcher.

And if that is the case, then I'm ok with it. If DanO had signed him, I'd be concerned. We know his track record there.

But if this is the minor move that it appears to be, then we drop the weakest member of the 25 man roster to make room for him. And that weak link is Womack.

Chip R
02-13-2006, 11:17 AM
I think if anything, this signing is most similar to the RA signing last year. Pray that isn't so.
There's a big difference between the Aurilia signing and the Hatteberg signing. Aurilia was competing with Lopez for a starting job. Hatteberg is not competing with anyone for a starting job.


Hope that Kriv knows what dead weight Tony Womack is. Hope he knows what SH's role should be: pinch hitter, backup 1B, #3 catcher.

And if that is the case, then I'm ok with it. If DanO had signed him, I'd be concerned. We know his track record there.

But if this is the minor move that it appears to be, then we drop the weakest member of the 25 man roster to make room for him. And that weak link is Womack.

I think Womack should be on the next bus out of town but I think someone else will get the boot before he does and I think the most likely candidate is the Bonger.

redsandrails
02-13-2006, 11:35 AM
What's up with Durazo? I'd take him over Hatteburg.... Maybe he wants to start. I could see him signing with a team like the O's but he would have been a better pickup.

KronoRed
02-13-2006, 12:14 PM
He can't play D..of any sort ;)

KronoRed
02-13-2006, 12:14 PM
Its certainly a better signing than Frank Meninchino..

isn't it?
Maybe, but we don't get to hear Marty try and say that name ;)

TRF
02-13-2006, 01:23 PM
There's a big difference between the Aurilia signing and the Hatteberg signing. Aurilia was competing with Lopez for a starting job. Hatteberg is not competing with anyone for a starting job.


No, when RA was signed it was as a backup. Aurilia made it clear he was competing for the SS position, and expected to have it. Miley handed him the job despite the fact he was outplayed by a younger, better player.

Now I doubt SH could supplant Dunn, but he could knock AK or WMP out of a starting OF position, and move Dunn back to LF.

And yeah, I do think that is possible.

KronoRed
02-13-2006, 01:38 PM
And yeah, I do think that is possible.
That would be horrible.

Pena and Kearns need to play everyday even if sucking wind because we need to know what we have in them.

This team won't be winning anything, play the kids.

WMR
02-13-2006, 01:40 PM
No, when RA was signed it was as a backup. Aurilia made it clear he was competing for the SS position, and expected to have it. Miley handed him the job despite the fact he was outplayed by a younger, better player.

Now I doubt SH could supplant Dunn, but he could knock AK or WMP out of a starting OF position, and move Dunn back to LF.

And yeah, I do think that is possible.

There's no way that's going to happen. AK and WMP will play every day (or just about). This is the season they'll either show what they've got or fall on their face.

Red Leader
02-13-2006, 01:42 PM
I'm convinced that AK will be given every chance to play everyday and show what he's got. I'm not as sure on WMP. I think if a good deal presents itself, they'd be willing to move on that to sacrifice his power for an upgrade to the pitching.

Chip R
02-13-2006, 01:42 PM
No, when RA was signed it was as a backup. Aurilia made it clear he was competing for the SS position, and expected to have it. Miley handed him the job despite the fact he was outplayed by a younger, better player.

Now I doubt SH could supplant Dunn, but he could knock AK or WMP out of a starting OF position, and move Dunn back to LF.

And yeah, I do think that is possible.
Nevertheless there was a competition for the job.

And if you think Hatteberg can knock WMP or Kearns out of a starting OF position, you need to take off the tinfoil hat. If one of them are traded I could see Dunn moving back to the OF and Hatteberg playing 1st on a regular basis but not even in DanO and Miley's world is Hatteberg going to start if Pena, Kearns, Jr and Dunn are all healthy.

flyer85
02-13-2006, 01:47 PM
And if you think Hatteberg can knock WMP or Kearns out of a starting OF position, you need to take off the tinfoil hat.Doesn't really matter. This team badly needs an upgrade in CF. Trading WMP and moving Dunn back to LF really doesn't solve anything.

Red Leader
02-13-2006, 01:48 PM
How about this scenario:

The Reds are still negotiating with Dunn on a contract. He has stated that he prefers to play the OF. Maybe that's one of the hangups to signing him long term. The Reds bring in Hatteberg to play 1B, and tell Adam he will move back to the OF for the duration of his new contract. Hatteberg is signed to 1 year because he's the only 1B option worth a crap out there right now. That gives the Reds 1 year to find a long term replacement. Maybe the LA deal with Milton and WMP for Choi and Perez is actually being discussed with Choi being one option for Krivsky long term?

Chip R
02-13-2006, 01:51 PM
Doesn't really matter. This team badly needs an upgrade in CF. Trading WMP and moving Dunn back to LF really doesn't solve anything.
Unless you get some pitching in return.

TRF
02-13-2006, 01:53 PM
sigh. Chip, how quickly you forget.

FeLo's numbers dwarfed RA's out of ST. He out hit, out defended, flat out played RA.

Who was the starting SS on opening day again?

I think both Kearns and Pena left enough questions in the minds of the Reds FO that SH could force one of them to the bench. I'm not saying it will happen, just that it has.

Randa was brought in when there was no need. Freel could have manned 3B until EE was ready. RA was brought in to BACKUP the SS position. He ended up starting.

I'm just saying AK and Pena better have a good ST this year.

WMR
02-13-2006, 01:55 PM
Barring a trade, I think that WMP and AK have to play every day even if they have a horrible spring b/c if they do bomb in spring training then that's an even bigger reason why you've to give them every opportunity to pull it together, even if just to increase their trade value which, right now, is probably just about as low as it has ever been.

KronoRed
02-13-2006, 02:04 PM
I'm just saying AK and Pena better have a good ST this year.
If we come out of ST with Kearns and Pena on the bench and Hatteberg starting then the Reds are the dumbest team on the planet. :bang:

westofyou
02-13-2006, 02:07 PM
If we come out of ST with Kearns and Pena on the bench and Hatteberg starting then the Reds are the dumbest team on the planet. :bang:
But then you're just ignoring the fact that WK is banking on Kearns and said he talked to him yestreday and they both agree it's time for him to shine.

But then that would be too non grassy knoll for some ya'll.

TRF
02-13-2006, 02:07 PM
If we come out of ST with Kearns and Pena on the bench and Hatteberg starting then the Reds are the dumbest team on the planet. :bang:

And your point is....?

TRF
02-13-2006, 02:08 PM
But then you're just ignoring the fact that WK is banking on Kearns and said he talked to him yestreday and they both agree it's time for him to shine.

But then that would be too non grassy knoll for some ya'll.

But he didn't speak to WMP did he? DID HE!.

heh. heh. grassy knoll.

KronoRed
02-13-2006, 02:08 PM
But then you're just ignoring the fact that WK is banking on Kearns and said he talked to him yestreday and they both agree it's time for him to shine.

But then that would be too non grassy knoll for some ya'll.
I don't think it will happen

No team is that dumb

Right? ;)

KronoRed
02-13-2006, 02:09 PM
http://www.hawaii.edu/tours/arena/grassy.knoll.jpeg

M2
02-13-2006, 02:35 PM
But then you're just ignoring the fact that WK is banking on Kearns and said he talked to him yestreday and they both agree it's time for him to shine.

I think everyone agrees it's time for him to shine. Whether he will and whether he's with the Reds all that long either way are the real questions.

gm
02-13-2006, 03:00 PM
Yet another WK quote


Wayne Krivsky, former Twins assistant general manager, was interested in Hatteberg even before he was hired as the Reds' general manager Wednesday.

"We wanted to add to our depth," Krivsky said. "This guy's a true professional, somebody I've had my eye on in the offseason here in the event I did get this job. The playing time will take care of itself."


http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/sports/13857700.htm

ochre
02-13-2006, 03:04 PM
Yet another WK quote




http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/sports/13857700.htm
Thus Hatteberg is Krivsky's Machado?

TeamBoone
02-13-2006, 05:08 PM
You sign a player like Hatteberg, hope he contributes and (in a perfect world) contributes enough to make him worth a prospect at the deadline.

Speaking of that, who did the Reds get for Joe Randa last year? I'm drawing a blank.

traderumor
02-13-2006, 05:12 PM
Speaking of that, who did the Reds get for Joe Randa last year? I'm drawing a blank.Justin Germano and Travis Chick

Matt700wlw
02-13-2006, 05:12 PM
Don't forget he provides veteran leadership and knows how to win. :D

KronoRed
02-13-2006, 06:39 PM
Thus Hatteberg is Krivsky's Machado?
More the Aurilia, and only if he orders Narron to play him

CrackerJack
02-13-2006, 06:57 PM
More the Aurilia, and only if he orders Narron to play him

Yet Hatteberg isn't coming here demanding a starting position, nor affecting the development of a young middle infielder with more upside, that's finally "getting it" as a player. (not to state the obvious)

I realize there's some tongues in cheeks, but take comfort in the fact that all of Redzone may one day this season (or more depending) get too watch Tony Womack, Scott Hatteburg, and Rich Aurillia bat in the same lineup on the same day...if you're lucky Timo will be added to that Sunday Special.

gm
02-14-2006, 12:44 AM
FWIW, Hatteberg will be wearing Casey's old number


"He beefs up our roster," said Krivsky. "He is a real pro, a quality person with a great clubhouse presence. And he'll give us great at-bats. And he is going to feel some pressure because he is going to wear Sean Casey's number 21."

http://www.daytondailynews.com/sports/content/sports/reds/daily/0213reds.html

TeamBoone
02-14-2006, 12:46 AM
Why do they give away the numbers of popular players so quickly?

KronoRed
02-14-2006, 12:48 AM
Don't like that.

I'm not saying retire 21, but don't give it to a backup the very next year.

Jpup
02-14-2006, 02:53 AM
Why do they give away the numbers of popular players so quickly?

not many numbers left.:)

Topcat
02-14-2006, 03:33 AM
Hattenburg can't hurt but wow! The very fact this actually has got as many responses to his signing, speaks volumes of how bored Red's fans are or how desperate we are to catch lightning in a bottle. I personally have resolved myself to a new 5 year plan. Cheer yes, pray yes even more. But most of all i beg for a reason for optimism.

Ron Madden
02-14-2006, 03:58 AM
I see nothing wrong with this signing. It could and should upgrade the bench.

What scares the hell outta me is Jerry and his judgement.

I'm growing tired of old past thier prime vet's that know how to win and do "the little things" take playing time away from younger players that deserve a fair chance.

Caveat Emperor
02-14-2006, 06:24 AM
Why do they give away the numbers of popular players so quickly?

2005
Sean Casey: 27 GIDP
Scott Hatteberg: 22 GIDP

Slap #21 on Hatteberg and your average Reds fan won't even know Casey is gone.

KronoRed
02-14-2006, 11:17 AM
That's just cold dude ;)

westofyou
02-14-2006, 11:29 AM
2005
Sean Casey: 27 GIDP
Scott Hatteberg: 22 GIDP

Slap #21 on Hatteberg and your average Reds fan won't even know Casey is gone.

Especially since prior to Casey local fave Paul O'Neil had it the longest.

WVRedsFan
02-14-2006, 12:04 PM
Don't like that.

I'm not saying retire 21, but don't give it to a backup the very next year.

A number is a number and that's all. It's not Sean Casey's number until it's retired. And it won't be.

How many wore the revered #20 (Frank Robinson) in the past? I can't remember a time when a player left that someone wasn't assigned his number.

westofyou
02-14-2006, 12:39 PM
How many wore the revered #20 (Frank Robinson) in the past? I can't remember a time when a player left that someone wasn't assigned his number.Dick Simpson got it the year after he left, Stynes and Branson were the last to wear it and the most famous since he left was Geronimo.

Deion wore 21 before Casey.

Caveat Emperor
02-14-2006, 02:14 PM
I can't remember a time when a player left that someone wasn't assigned his number.

Oh, I dunno...it's been awhile since I've seen someone take the field in #14 for the Reds. ;)

westofyou
02-14-2006, 02:24 PM
Oh, I dunno...it's been awhile since I've seen someone take the field in #14 for the Reds. ;)
Pete Rose Jr in 1997

Only numbers retired and never worn by any Reds again are Hutchinson's #1, Bench #5 and Perez #24 (and he only wore it again as a Manager)

Did anyone wear 11 last year?

If not that's the one that will probably be never worn.

TRF
02-14-2006, 02:53 PM
Somebody has Davey's 13? Who?

M2
02-14-2006, 03:09 PM
Just noticed that Hatteberg's a classic yo-yo guy.

2000 - .802 OPS
2001 - .677
2002 - .807
2003 - .725
2004 - .787
2005 - .677

So he should be back up around an .800 OPS in 2006.

westofyou
02-14-2006, 03:22 PM
Somebody has Davey's 13? Who?
Nope that's another one that no one has touched. But in a way that's normal, 313 is in this culture "bad luck" howveer in other cultures not so much, example the russian players in teh NHL have no problem wearing #13, they seek it out often enough.

My guess is #13 will be retired some day, don't be surprised if it's with Larkin in a duel event.

If Barry had .03 more win shares in the field then he and Davey woul have made the Reds with the only team in MLB history with 2 SS with 100 or more Win Shares in the field.

KronoRed
02-14-2006, 03:41 PM
Deion wore 21 before Casey.
Talk about opposites

TRF
02-14-2006, 03:48 PM
Did anyone have Morgan's #8?

I know Sadler had #15, and Junior wore #30.

westofyou
02-14-2006, 04:00 PM
Did anyone have Morgan's #8?

I know Sadler had #15, and Junior wore #30.A mess of guys including Terry McGriff, Landesoy, Bob Boone, Damon Berryhill and Bo Diaz and Alex Trevino.

Berryhill was the last and it was retired in 98.

deltachi8
02-14-2006, 04:13 PM
A mess of guys including Terry McGriff, Landesoy, Bob Boone, Damon Berryhill and Bo Diaz and Alex Trevino.

Berryhill was the last and it was retired in 98.

I believe Juan Samuel wore it as well.

westofyou
02-14-2006, 04:15 PM
I believe Juan Samuel wore it as well.

yes.. he wore it well as Rod would say.

SandyD
02-14-2006, 08:43 PM
My guess is #13 will be retired some day, don't be surprised if it's with Larkin in a duel event.

:duel:

This left me with a funny image.

Really tho, I think that would be pretty cool.