PDA

View Full Version : Has Womack earned the opening day 2B slot?



realreds1
03-21-2006, 10:31 PM
Ok, Redzoners, I was looking over a few of his numbers this spring.

T Womack


G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI TB BB SO SB CS OBP SLG AVG
12 34 3 13 1 0 0 2 14 2 1 2 2 .432 .412 .382


Has he earned the opening day nod with these numbers?

penantboundreds
03-21-2006, 10:44 PM
one stolen base....two caught stealing

he makes things happen

KronoRed
03-21-2006, 10:48 PM
No.

TheBigLebowski
03-21-2006, 11:02 PM
People hate Womack here.....vitriol.

Count me in as one who thinks he will actually contribute. I don't think he needs to be an everyday starter, but he's a useful utility guy with some speed. I might be blackballed for saying this but, I'm glad we have him.

Heath
03-21-2006, 11:07 PM
I think his good spring makes him trade bait.

If that doesn't work, I hope he goes 2-40 in April, prompting Narron to bench him.

flyer85
03-21-2006, 11:10 PM
Has he earned the opening day nod with these numbers?Why not, I say ignore seasons of ineptitude and believe that Womack has achieved a new level of performance in his late 30s based on a few spring training ABs. Makes perfect sense to me.

Crash Davis
03-21-2006, 11:23 PM
How can you earn something in 30 at bats?

And his 2B defense is laughable. Freel is shaky at 2B, but at least he gets to a few balls instead of falling down after they've gone by.

Cedric
03-21-2006, 11:30 PM
Only the Reds would let 30 at bats override 5000 at bats. I'm thinking they will do it again.

captainmorgan07
03-21-2006, 11:30 PM
i plaed the 5th on this one

kyred14
03-21-2006, 11:39 PM
No.

I second this motion.

OldRightHander
03-21-2006, 11:47 PM
What has Freel done over the last couple seasons to not earn a better shot at it than a guy who has had 30 ST at bats?

StillFunkyB
03-22-2006, 12:15 AM
I think his good spring makes him trade bait.

If that doesn't work, I hope he goes 2-40 in April, prompting Narron to bench him.

Now why would you hope for a player on your favorite team to do poorly?

I don't think he will, but I definitely don't hope for him to do bad.

I hope he does well, and nets the Reds a prospect in a trade. :thumbup:

Marc D
03-22-2006, 12:16 AM
B Claussen has a 2.25 ERA in spring training.

EE has a 1.500 OPS with a .468 BA

D Wise has an OPS over 1.000 as well


Somethings should be taken at face value. Others should not.

Patrick Bateman
03-22-2006, 12:18 AM
Now why would you hope for a player on your favorite team to do poorly?

I don't think he will, but I definitely don't hope for him to do bad.

I hope he does well, and nets the Reds a prospect in a trade. :thumbup:

Well I usually would never hope against a Red, but when it comes down to it, Womack is very unlikely to contribute at a decent level. He will probably be the worst starting position player this year if he is given the role.

The sooner the management sees that Womack is not the answer the sooner they will get rid of him. However I wont really hope against him, but rather hope that Narron comes to his sense regardless of Womack's playing level.

StillFunkyB
03-22-2006, 12:21 AM
Well I usually would never hope against a Red, but when it comes down to it, Womack is very unlikely to contribute at a decent level. He will probably be the worst starting position player this year if he is given the role.

The sooner the management sees that Womack is not the answer the sooner they will get rid of him. However I wont really hope against him, but rather hope that Narron comes to his sense regardless of Womack's playing level.

But why hope he does poorly? This hurts the team. He's already here, might as well hope he does well and helps the team out, no?

Patrick Bateman
03-22-2006, 12:29 AM
But why hope he does poorly? This hurts the team. He's already here, might as well hope he does well and helps the team out, no?

Because I don't really see any conceivable way of him doing well. He will hurt the team regarldless, I just hope that we can limit it by shipping out more quickly.

reds44
03-22-2006, 12:33 AM
Yes he has, and he will be.

deltachi8
03-22-2006, 12:47 AM
What has Freel done over the last couple seasons to not earn a better shot at it than a guy who has had 30 ST at bats?

You, I and most of RedsZone wonder the same thing....only real baseball guys must know...

919191
03-22-2006, 02:26 AM
Only the Reds would let 30 at bats override 5000 at bats. I'm thinking they will do it again.


Well, if they are 30 professional at bats.;)

Heath
03-22-2006, 10:06 AM
But why hope he does poorly? This hurts the team. He's already here, might as well hope he does well and helps the team out, no?

Because this offense could actually stand a 2-40 start by Womack and probably find itself in pretty good position offensively. This team will have no problem scoring runs.

It's the pitching & defense that will doom this club to 90 losses. After a few bad errors and some poor hitting, Mr. Womack will be John Vuckovich-ed and sent away.

Well, that's the hope anyway.

Johnny Footstool
03-22-2006, 10:37 AM
How can you earn something in 30 at bats?

Ah, but in Narron's mind, Womack "earned" a starting position because of his performance in 1998-2003. Proven Veterans (TM) have earned their keep.

Strikes Out Looking
03-22-2006, 10:42 AM
Forget his at bats, his defense has been horrible and that is why I wouldn't give him 2b on opening day.

bigredmachine1976
03-22-2006, 10:52 AM
Sounds like what you do in Spring training doesn't really matter. The Reds have no incumbent at the 4 spot so I'd have to think that the Spring Stats will play into who gets the job. I'd think career stats matter as well but if that were a concern for the Reds I guess they would not have brought Womack in to begin with. I think the real problem here might be that he only has one strikeout, get those K numbers up and he'd be much more popular around here.

BRM
03-22-2006, 11:04 AM
Sounds like what you do in Spring training doesn't really matter. The Reds have no incumbent at the 4 spot so I'd have to think that the Spring Stats will play into who gets the job. I'd think career stats matter as well but if that were a concern for the Reds I guess they would not have brought Womack in to begin with. I think the real problem here might be that he only has one strikeout, get those K numbers up and he'd be much more popular around here.

Only if those K numbers were accompanied by a dramatic increase in SLG%. It continues to baffle me how people will ignore the nine previous seasons in which Womack proved to be less than useless in favor of a handful of spring training at-bats.

RedsBaron
03-22-2006, 11:11 AM
No. Spring training at bats do not erase a career.

bigredmachine1976
03-22-2006, 11:11 AM
Did you read my whole post or just the part you wanted to jump on. I said that career stats do matter but that if the Reds were concerned with career stats Womack would not be here to begin with. So in that situation Spring Stats are at least worth looking at. They keep them for some reason.

BRM
03-22-2006, 11:14 AM
I was more jumping on your K numbers crack. Spring stats are worth looking at for younger players because they don't have the career numbers to gauge performance. Veterans like Womack, not so much. You know what you are going to get with Womack, regardless of what his spring stats look like.

bigredmachine1976
03-22-2006, 11:33 AM
The K crack was just that a crack/joke. My point is that if the the Reds give him the job they are either judging him on his spring stats which seems reasonable even for a veteran or they like his career stats. So in their eyes he would have earned the spot.

BRM
03-22-2006, 11:36 AM
I can't deny that. He probably has earned the spot in Narron's eyes.

M2
03-22-2006, 11:43 AM
There shouldn't be a competition. Ryan Freel has been so wildly superior over the last two years to anything Tony Womack has ever delivered that the entire notion that there's a competition is absurd.

Chip R
03-22-2006, 11:52 AM
B Claussen has a 2.25 ERA in spring training.

EE has a 1.500 OPS with a .468 BA

D Wise has an OPS over 1.000 as well


Somethings should be taken at face value. Others should not.

That's true. However which things should and which things shouldn't?

bigredmachine1976
03-22-2006, 12:00 PM
That's true. However which things should and which things shouldn't?

My guess is that most people use the ones that support their position. There's not an excess of rational thought around here.

Chip R
03-22-2006, 12:04 PM
My guess is that most people use the ones that support their position.
I'd say you're correct. But it still begs the question.

Roy Tucker
03-22-2006, 12:05 PM
I think, according to Narron's rules, he has. But it was a rigged and pre-determined game played with loaded dice to start with.

I'm just afraid Narron is going to play a goofy shell game with the IF starting the season. If I read the tea leaves correctly, the IF depth chart is:

1B - Hatteberg, Aurilia
2B - Womack, Aurilia, Freel
SS - FeLo, Aurilia
3B - EE, Aurilia, Freel

I'm afraid that there are a lot of permutations that Narron is going to put on the field that are less than sub-optimal.

In a perfect world, Freel would be a super-sub. But the problem is, the Reds' depth is kiddy-pool shallow. You want to start the 8 best guys as much as you possibly can. And so Freel has to start at 2B. He may kill himself or someone else, but he is the best player to put there, hands down. Heck, I'd take Aurilia playing there before Womack.

I actually hope that Womack plays well and all of this is a tempest in a teapot. But I have fundemental doubts he will. My second wish is that he plays so awfully that he gets DFA'ed within the first couple months of the season. But any way you look at it, Womack is going to have to play himself off the roster.

registerthis
03-22-2006, 12:32 PM
There shouldn't be a competition. Ryan Freel has been so wildly superior over the last two years to anything Tony Womack has ever delivered that the entire notion that there's a competition is absurd.

Yep. it's like engaging in a discussion about whether or not the moon rotates around the earth.

M2
03-22-2006, 12:35 PM
Yep. it's like engaging in a discussion about whether or not the moon rotates around the earth.

Perfect analogy.

registerthis
03-22-2006, 12:35 PM
But any way you look at it, Womack is going to have to play himself off the roster.

And I think it will be Krivsky, not Narron, who ultimately makes that decision. IMO, Womack has already played himself off of the roster, in fact he never should have been on it to begin with. Aurilia, at least, brings his offense to the table, which is respectable. I simply can't understand the motivation to start Womack--certainly Narron has to be seeing the same level of play that we all see. It's not as if we've all somehow unlocked the secret passcode and have been blessed with information that tell us Womack is sub-par. It's right there for all to see, yet he most likely will be leading off come Opening Day. I don't get it.

KearnsyEars
03-22-2006, 12:42 PM
Man I hate to see Freel on the bench, but we know the little Jack-of-all-trades will definitely be in action and starting every day by may.

KronoRed
03-22-2006, 01:54 PM
I can't deny that. He probably has earned the spot in Narron's eyes.
He earned it by having more birthdays then Freel

Johnny Footstool
03-22-2006, 01:59 PM
There shouldn't be a competition. Ryan Freel has been so wildly superior over the last two years to anything Tony Womack has ever delivered that the entire notion that there's a competition is absurd.

Old baseball men often lean towards absurdity.

TRF
03-22-2006, 04:23 PM
Yes in the same way Elvis earned that Black Belt.

RedsBaron
03-23-2006, 10:53 AM
He earned it by having more birthdays then Freel
Other than Junior, the guys with a lot more birthdays generally shouldn't be starting, period. Aurilia, Womack, Hatteberg, et al should at most be backups while younger players such as Freel, Encarnacion and Denorfia get most of the playing time. Play the guys who might help the Reds win something in 2007 and 2008 rather than the guys whose best days, such as they were, are behind them.

dsmith421
03-23-2006, 11:49 AM
Old baseball men often lean towards absurdity.

If the Reds hired a manager who never stepped on a baseball field after high school and lacked all the stupid prejudices of 'Baseball Guys,' I suspect the team would immediately improve by at least 5 games. And that's before any personnel changes were made.

Spitball
03-23-2006, 04:22 PM
By Tim Kurkjian
ESPN The Magazine
Archive

Spring training has been more competitive than usual thanks to the World Baseball Classic, and thanks to so many battles for positions on major-league teams.

Here are several position battles, not including spots in the back end of rotations. Otherwise, there would be many more.

Second base, Reds: Rich Aurilia, Ryan Freel, Tony Womack, Frank Menechino and Matt Kata are all battling for this spot. But in reality, this likely is going to be a nightly mix-and-match for manager Jerry Narron. Don't expect any Reds second baseman to play 140 games this year.

Aurilia will likely play the most games, but he's also the fallback plan at third base if rookie Edwin Encarnacion labors defensively. Freel can back up at third, and can play three outfield positions, where he'll be needed after the Reds traded Wily Mo Pena to the Red Sox Monday. Womack has been made available, if any team wants to make a trade for him.

Hopefully...

Red Leader
03-23-2006, 04:49 PM
With the news of Womack being available, I'm wondering if they've given him buttloads of playing time with the "A" squad to showcase him for a potential trade. If that's the case, it appears to be working as Tony has (according to his standards) hit quite well this spring. Haven't kept track of how he's been in the field, although it's tough to imagine he's pulled any wool over people's eyes there.

OldXOhio
03-23-2006, 06:45 PM
a .432 obp in the spring and he still can't be shopped quick enough by the new Reds brass.

wheels
03-23-2006, 07:23 PM
Womack told Scott Priestle of the Columbus Dispatch that he's a starer. Period.

He didn't come to Cincinnati to sit the bench.

Sound familiar?

With Womack and Aurilia battling each other for playing time, expect to see lots of useless drama.

KronoRed
03-23-2006, 07:26 PM
Maybe they can fight it out and both go on the DL

Team Clark
03-23-2006, 07:30 PM
Because this offense could actually stand a 2-40 start by Womack and probably find itself in pretty good position offensively. This team will have no problem scoring runs.

It's the pitching & defense that will doom this club to 90 losses. After a few bad errors and some poor hitting, Mr. Womack will be John Vuckovich-ed and sent away.

Well, that's the hope anyway.

You are right. See Jimenez, D'Angelo...

wheels
03-23-2006, 07:53 PM
Womack makes Jimenez look like Orlando Hudson.

GAC
03-23-2006, 09:29 PM
They will soon find out that, within the first month of the season, that we still have a "hole to fill" at 2B. ;)

I'd have rather had the defense there in either Olmedo or (gulp) Bergolla. At least with these younger players we can say we have hope. There is no hope with Womack.

REDREAD
03-24-2006, 09:46 AM
People hate Womack here.....vitriol.

Count me in as one who thinks he will actually contribute. I don't think he needs to be an everyday starter, but he's a useful utility guy with some speed. I might be blackballed for saying this but, I'm glad we have him.

Yes, it's Aurillia all over again. Even if Womack posted a .400 OBP and stole 80 out of 90 bases this year, people would still hate him. They'd say that DanO just got lucky, and it was still a stupid move, etc.

I agree that Womack is a fading player who was never a star to begin with. But I'm willing to give him a chance. He's relatively inexpensive, and maybe we'll get decent value out of him this year (just as we did with Aurillia).

The bottom line is that this team has a serious talent deficit, so we're going to have to keep plugging holes with vets like Aurillia, Hattenberg, and Womack until we get the farm system rolling again. I can see at least another 3 years of this (Thanks to Bowden, DanO and John Allen).

pedro
03-24-2006, 11:39 AM
Ryan Freel should be playing second if he's not playing CF.

In my world Freel is playing CF, KG in LF, Dunn 1B and then I guess I'd suck it up and let RA play 2B for the time being.

M2
03-24-2006, 11:57 AM
Even if Womack posted a .400 OBP and stole 80 out of 90 bases this year, people would still hate him.

No, folks would dig that. Problem is, nothing remotely like that is going to happen with Womack. He can't get on base, he's got no power and he can't field. Meanwhile the Reds happen to have a guy named Ryan Freel in town and he's a much better player.

BRM
03-24-2006, 12:06 PM
Folks seem to think that Redszone will find one or two players every year to hate on and no matter how said player performs, the Redszone crew will hate him anyway. I just don't see that at all. One only has to take a look at the back of Tony Womack's baseball card to see why such venom is spewed his way around here. He is and always has been a horrible baseball player. Most of us are not going to be fooled by a handful of spring training at-bats. However, I think all of us would be thrilled if Tony does what he hasn't done his entire career and puts up solid numbers, plays good defense and helps the Reds win games. Is it possible? I suppose. Is it likely? No way.

That said, the venom wouldn't be nearly as poisonous if the Reds didn't have a manager hell-bent on playing him regularly and batting him at the top of the lineup. This was the reason for the anger at RA last year. Folks hated on him due to his taking PT away from Lopez even though the guy had three consecutive horrible seasons prior to last year. That blame should have fallen on Miley first and foremost but RA took the brunt of it. His horrible performance in April had alot to do with it as well.

From where I sit, Redszone typically has very good reason to hammer the selected few it chooses annually.

westofyou
03-24-2006, 12:17 PM
Yes, it's Aurillia all over again. Even if Womack posted a .400 OBP and stole 80 out of 90 bases this year, people would still hate him. They'd say that DanO just got lucky, and it was still a stupid move, etc.
Why would we hate on Joe Morgan or Eddie Collins? That's what he'd be if he did that.

Shoot, there are TONS of Barry Bond's fans, because he's an amazing player, not because his head looks like a peanut on a parade blimp.

As for Aurilia, it's noted you like his pop, so at least note that others don't like his ball park splits, questibnable on base skills, his lack of range and base speed nor his disruptive attitude regarding his starting position on a team that was already circling the drain. He, like Womack was never intended to be anything that would push this team over the top, both are stop-gap vets aquired to place-hold positions and soothe the fans with their "savvy vet game knowledge" as the team slowly builds from within.

The Reds of the 30's wrote the book on that method, a zillion ex-stars and bobo's limped into camp every spring to the tune of "The Reds are going to be more aggressive this year."

It's tiresome and the sign of a team thats image has been shattered.

I don't expect both to be here next season and possibly by the end of this season.

KronoRed
03-24-2006, 03:41 PM
The Reds of the 30's wrote the book on that method, a zillion ex-stars and bobo's limped into camp every spring to the tune of "The Reds are going to be more aggressive this year."

So we're going to win in 2010?

WOO :D

REDREAD
03-24-2006, 05:57 PM
No, folks would dig that. Problem is, nothing remotely like that is going to happen with Womack. He can't get on base, he's got no power and he can't field. Meanwhile the Reds happen to have a guy named Ryan Freel in town and he's a much better player.

Sure, I fully expect Womack to be below average. My point is that Aurillia produced very well for what he was paid last year and was abused heavily on the board. Every quote he made was twisted into him being a bad egg.

Womack hasn't even played a regular season game yet, and people are already framing him as a trouble maker.

Womack could potentially produce enough to warrant a 1-1.5 million salary the Reds are paying him this year. It's not a slam dunk (obviously), but that's a pretty low bar to clear, IMO.

Ever since Wily Mo was traded, some people are starting to hate Hattenberg too.. I don't understand this.. Be mad at Narron for playing these guys, but why blame Hattenberg, Womack, and Aurillia for signing contracts that were freely offered to them by MLB? I just don't understand the need to try to ruin their reputations by twisting quotes to portray them as demanding to be starters, etc.

REDREAD
03-24-2006, 06:02 PM
Why would we hate on Joe Morgan or Eddie Collins? That's what he'd be if he did that.


Because Aurillia produced great for the 700k that he made last year, but was still hated.

Obviously, I was exaggerating on the .400 OBP/80 steals, but if Womack earns his salary this year (he's only getting paid 1-1.5 million by the Reds), I expect the venom to continue to flow. There's a decent chance he'll be worth a million next year. It's not going to be too hard to be 650K better than Machado/Olmedo (who would be here if Womack wasn't, or insert your own replacement).

Probably on Hattenberg too.

Be mad at DanO, Wayne, or Narron. I can understand that. But I don't see why one should hate Womack. It's not as if he was asked to be traded here. It's not as if he writes the lineup cards. And I don't care if he tells some reporter that he expects to start.. Wily Mo and Kearns did the same thing, and they got a free pass (for the most part). I want every guy on the team to want to play every day.

TRF
03-24-2006, 06:15 PM
Or because he groused to the media about his PT, blocked the development of a superior SS in one FeLo, and on a team that was going nowhere, and therefore should have been playing prospects to see what they had, all he was concerned with was himself.

Puffy may have loathed the Randa signing first, but I had dibs on RA.

westofyou
03-24-2006, 06:45 PM
Because Aurillia produced great for the 700k that he made last year, but was still hated.

What's great? His road numbers were pitiful and he got too many starts at SS for my taste.

Man's trash is another's treasure, like I said you like him because of his pop, I don't care for him for a myriad of reasons.

As for Womack, I haven't liked his game ever, so I don't care if he's in Red or Blue this summer I'd still see him as a waste of any cash.

TC81190
03-24-2006, 06:50 PM
What's great? His road numbers were pitiful and he got too many starts at SS for my taste.

Man's trash is another's treasure, like I said you like him because of his pop, I don't care for him for a myriad of reasons.

As for Womack, I haven't liked his game ever, so I don't care if he's in Red or Blue this summer I'd still see him as a waste of any cash.

So what if you only play him at home and at 2B then?

westofyou
03-24-2006, 06:57 PM
So what if you only play him at home and at 2B then?
Against LH's?

Sure, why not?

Aside from the fact that Freel had a a .299/.419/.430 line against LH's last year

RA had a .272/.350/.416

Looks like a no brainer to me, if Freel isn't available.

TC81190
03-24-2006, 06:59 PM
Against LH's?

Sure, why not?

Aside from the fact that Freel had a a .299/.419/.430 line against LH's last year

RA had a .272/.350/.416

Looks like a no brainer to me, if Freel isn't available.

FTR, what was Rich's line against rightys?

GAC
03-25-2006, 05:28 AM
Or because he groused to the media about his PT, blocked the development of a superior SS in one FeLo

Then rail on the coaching staff and management. That is not RA's fault that they played him. ;).

And while I was not very high on some of the things he said about his playing time, I fully understand a player wanting to be in there and playing. All players are selfish to a point when it comes to their playing time

Did people give Ears or Pena grief when they did it? Was it being selfish?

And I'm with you on your last year assessment of Aurilia RedRead. ;)

GAC
03-25-2006, 05:50 AM
What's great? His road numbers were pitiful and he got too many starts at SS for my taste.

So you solely base one's overall evaluation on road numbers? Respectfully - it sounds to me like we are "picking and choosing" various stats on players we have a very strong distaste for in order to buoy our argument. Couldn't we do that with a majority of players (find holes/weaknesses)?

I agree wholeheartedly woy on most of what you, and others, are saying on here about RA. Any of us that supported RA last year are not saying he is our "savior", nor an answer in the INF. And I wholeheartedly agree with you on the SS playing time.

But this guys struggled the first month of last year with a mild groin pull that put him on the DL through the most of May (the prior year he played with a hairline fracture to his wrist). And when he came back, this guy contributed from June through September (.860 OPS, 11 Hrs, 56 RBIs). He finished overall with a .282 B/A 14 HRs 68 RBI's.

Yes, he had a sub-800 OPS overall (.621 away, but a .941 at GAB).

Aurilia is not our problem, and I optimistically look forward to the day when we do find the answer, or at least firm up, our INF question marks (especially at 2B). I don't think Freel is the answer at 2B either.

But I can understand why RA has become the "whipping boy" on here. ;)

westofyou
03-25-2006, 10:51 AM
So you solely base one's overall evaluation on road numbers? Respectfully - it sounds to me like we are "picking and choosing" various stats on players we have a very strong distaste for in order to buoy our argument. Couldn't we do that with a majority of players (find holes/weaknesses)?

No, I also noted his lack of range, his BA driven OB% and his horrible base speed.

westofyou
03-25-2006, 10:55 AM
Yes, he had a sub-800 OPS overall (.621 away, but a .941 at GAB).

212 at bats on that away line, 100 points difference in batting average from the home line, so RA has to hit .330 to bring in a decent line, if he hit's .230.

.612 is Luis Quinones without the glove.

KronoRed
03-25-2006, 04:22 PM
I don't think Freel is the answer at 2B either.

I don't understand why people keep saying Freel is not the answer, what more does he have to do to prove that he deserves a job everyday and that the 2B job is a good place to start?

Bad D? same for Aurilia and Womack. he'll wear himself out? big deal! then he does and we play others, what are we saving him for? we'll be 20 games out in June.

Also, the word hate keeps getting thrown around here and it's wrong, nobody hates these guys, we don't like the fact they get playing time over better options...nothing personal.

Eric_Davis
03-26-2006, 06:24 PM
NO!

He hasn't evened earned a minor-league roster spot.

GAC
03-26-2006, 09:43 PM
I don't understand why people keep saying Freel is not the answer, what more does he have to do to prove that he deserves a job everyday and that the 2B job is a good place to start?

I like Freel. He's scrappy. ;)

But this is a guy, now 30 yrs old, who has spent the majority of his baseball career in the minors and bouncing around from team to team. Show me where he has ever played a full major league season/schedule? The closest he ever came was in '04 (143 games). What were his stats?.... .277 B/A .375 O/B .368 SLG% .743 OPS.

In fact, his career stats are nothing to get excited about either. It's funny how we will go after Aurilia by nailing him (and justifiably) by examining his stats; but very little is said about Freel's. Why? Because he's a fun player to watch.

He is an outfielder by trade, and IMO, is, and shall always be, an excellent utility player because of the fact he can play multiple positions. But he has yet to prove to anyone that he can handle the rigors of a 162 game schedule, and put up the numbers to justify it.

That is why I say he is not our answer at 2B, just as much as Aurilia or Womack. None of them are. ;)

KronoRed
03-26-2006, 10:29 PM
Freel is the best of the 3, and will get on base, sure he won't slug, but who needs slugging with superior scrappyness? :D

No other lead off hitter on the team.

RedsManRick
03-26-2006, 10:42 PM
And yet that .743 OPS is 190 points higher than what Womack put up last year. That's like the difference between Aurilia and Dunn...

GAC
03-27-2006, 09:56 AM
And yet that .743 OPS is 190 points higher than what Womack put up last year.

Whose talking Womack? I'm not. He is not even in the equation with me. Terrible acquisition IMO.

But that .743 OPS is also 40 pts lower then what RA did last year, who also provided us with some pop (14 Hrs, to Freels 4), and 68 RBIs (to Freel's 21).

Freel strole 36 bases last year. Don't know too many sabr guys who will be on here bragging on about stat much. ;)

As far as defense/fielding goes, neither of these guys are defensive specialists. Pretty similar in fact, career-wise at 2B....

Freel (81 games) - .976 FPCT 4.96 RF .796 ZR 8 Errors
Aurilia (86 games) - .981 FPCT 4.88 RF .825 ZR 7 Errors

The fact of the matter is - we are arguing about three castaways who wouldn't be starting on most any other team. That's why they ended up in Cincy.

It all depends on what you want out of your 2Bman? You want a slightly higher OB%, and a guy who will steal? Then Freel is your man. You want someone who will give you some pop and drive in more runs? Then go with Aurilia.

So pick your poison or the lesser of three evils. But anyway you want to look at it - and I still stand my ground - we have a problem at 2B and none of these guys are the answer. And it's sad that this organization feels they can run a combo of these three out there and get by.

SteelSD
03-27-2006, 01:08 PM
Whose talking Womack? I'm not. He is not even in the equation with me. Terrible acquisition IMO.

But that .743 OPS is also 40 pts lower then what RA did last year, who also provided us with some pop (14 Hrs, to Freels 4), and 68 RBIs (to Freel's 21).

Freel strole 36 bases last year. Don't know too many sabr guys who will be on here bragging on about stat much. ;)

As far as defense/fielding goes, neither of these guys are defensive specialists. Pretty similar in fact, career-wise at 2B....

Freel (81 games) - .976 FPCT 4.96 RF .796 ZR 8 Errors
Aurilia (86 games) - .981 FPCT 4.88 RF .825 ZR 7 Errors

The fact of the matter is - we are arguing about three castaways who wouldn't be starting on most any other team. That's why they ended up in Cincy.

It all depends on what you want out of your 2Bman? You want a slightly higher OB%, and a guy who will steal? Then Freel is your man. You want someone who will give you some pop and drive in more runs? Then go with Aurilia.

So pick your poison or the lesser of three evils. But anyway you want to look at it - and I still stand my ground - we have a problem at 2B and none of these guys are the answer. And it's sad that this organization feels they can run a combo of these three out there and get by.

I posted this last month, GAC:

<Begin cut-and-paste>

What I've done to compare is used my "tweak" on OPS (Speed Adjusted OPS) to give us a relative idea of how the two players <Freel v Aurilia> match up.

Freel- .371 OBP, .371 SLG, .742 OPS
Freel- .345 SAOBP, .442 SASLG, .787 SAOPS

Freel's CS numbers turns his OBP into something more like a .345 OBP hitter. His successful SB, however, allow him to appoximate a .442 SLG. It's as if he's trading 26 points of OBP for an additional 71 points of Slugging Percentage with the bases empty. In short, Freel plays like a mid-level OBP Doubles hitter. But also note that his SAOPS is more of an approximation because we're not exactly sure how many bases Freel's CS are worth so each CS counts in the formula as a single-base erasure to his SLG.

Aurilia- .338 OBP, .444 SLG, .782 OPS
Aurilia- .338 SAOBP, .448 SASLG, .786 SAOPS

Unlike Freel, what you see is what you get with Aurilia. He added 4 SASLG points with two SB and no CS leaves his SAOBP the same with no SLG hit from base acquisition erasure. Without factoring anything else in, they seem as if they were virtually the same player in 2005. But, of course, there's always more to factor in...

Aurilia's SLG is "natural"- meaning that he was more likely to move Runners ahead of him further than Freel. That's about the only advantage that goes to Aurilia, but it's there so we might as well note it.

Freel has the speed advantage offensively, meaning that he's more likely to advance further on events occurring behind him which negates at some of Aurilia's "natural" SLG advantage. He gets on base slightly more often intially, which has the subsequent effect of making hitters behind him better more often (prior to SB attempts) than Aurilia does. Also hitters are likely to see a few more fastballs with Freel standing on a base and that's a good thing as long as they don't get distracted by Freel flashing through their field of vision or caught up in trying to "protect" the runner by swinging at bad balls.

But it doesn't stop there...

Freel sees more pitches than does Aurilia (4.06 P/PA vs. 3.74 P/PA). That might not seem like a big deal, but over the course of a season, it can be huge. Project out to 650 PA and you've got Freel working pitchers for about 200 more pitches than Aurilia. That's about two SP games worth of pitches. That's less time in the game for SP's and more time in the game for middle relief. Take a guy like Freel, put him in front of Kearns (3.97 P/PA) and Dunn (4.24 P/PA) and that's just murder on opposing hurlers. In 2005, nine teams saw 3.80 or more Pitches per Plate Appearance. Six of those teams finished in the top 10 in MLB team Runs Scored.

And then there's the fact that, of the two, Freel is the least likely to be affected by performance volatility due to age.

<End cut-and-paste>

And then this about the defensive comparison (from 3/10/06):

<Begin cut-and-paste>

Freel's ZR for 2005 (the only sample in which he pulled more than 10 Games Started at the position) at 2B was .837. His career ZR at 2B is negatively affected by small sample size inclusions from 2002 (6 GS) and 2003 (10 GS). In 2004 he put up a .870 ZR in 10 GS but just like 2002-2003, that's not the real Freel either. That being said, the real Freel IS rangier than the real Aurilia out there at 2B.

<End cut-and-paste>

Now, all that being said, we also have to take a look at which player's offensive game is more environment-neutral. And that's a pretty easy answer- Ryan Freel. His game is OBP-driven rather than power driven and that's just going to play better over the long haul at 2B given the additional benefits he provides over an option like Aurilia. And make no mistake- if Freel had acquired enough PA to qualify for the batting title last year, he'd have been the seventh most productive offensive 2B in the National League and the 12th most productive offensive 2B in Major League Baseball. He's a better-defense, little less pop, more disciplined Chone Figgins.

Freel is a starting 2B option. He's a starting 2B option at home and on the road. He's better than anything else the Reds have and he's better than what the majority of MLB teams are running out there at 2B.

Cooper
03-27-2006, 07:30 PM
The only advantage RA may have --emphasis on may --is his ability to turn the double play...just saying.

GAC
03-27-2006, 09:46 PM
I posted this last month, GAC:

<Begin cut-and-paste>

What I've done to compare is used my "tweak" on OPS (Speed Adjusted OPS) to give us a relative idea of how the two players <Freel v Aurilia> match up.

Freel- .371 OBP, .371 SLG, .742 OPS
Freel- .345 SAOBP, .442 SASLG, .787 SAOPS

Freel's CS numbers turns his OBP into something more like a .345 OBP hitter. His successful SB, however, allow him to appoximate a .442 SLG. It's as if he's trading 26 points of OBP for an additional 71 points of Slugging Percentage with the bases empty. In short, Freel plays like a mid-level OBP Doubles hitter. But also note that his SAOPS is more of an approximation because we're not exactly sure how many bases Freel's CS are worth so each CS counts in the formula as a single-base erasure to his SLG.

Aurilia- .338 OBP, .444 SLG, .782 OPS
Aurilia- .338 SAOBP, .448 SASLG, .786 SAOPS

Unlike Freel, what you see is what you get with Aurilia. He added 4 SASLG points with two SB and no CS leaves his SAOBP the same with no SLG hit from base acquisition erasure. Without factoring anything else in, they seem as if they were virtually the same player in 2005. But, of course, there's always more to factor in...

Aurilia's SLG is "natural"- meaning that he was more likely to move Runners ahead of him further than Freel. That's about the only advantage that goes to Aurilia, but it's there so we might as well note it.

Freel has the speed advantage offensively, meaning that he's more likely to advance further on events occurring behind him which negates at some of Aurilia's "natural" SLG advantage. He gets on base slightly more often intially, which has the subsequent effect of making hitters behind him better more often (prior to SB attempts) than Aurilia does. Also hitters are likely to see a few more fastballs with Freel standing on a base and that's a good thing as long as they don't get distracted by Freel flashing through their field of vision or caught up in trying to "protect" the runner by swinging at bad balls.

But it doesn't stop there...

Freel sees more pitches than does Aurilia (4.06 P/PA vs. 3.74 P/PA). That might not seem like a big deal, but over the course of a season, it can be huge. Project out to 650 PA and you've got Freel working pitchers for about 200 more pitches than Aurilia. That's about two SP games worth of pitches. That's less time in the game for SP's and more time in the game for middle relief. Take a guy like Freel, put him in front of Kearns (3.97 P/PA) and Dunn (4.24 P/PA) and that's just murder on opposing hurlers. In 2005, nine teams saw 3.80 or more Pitches per Plate Appearance. Six of those teams finished in the top 10 in MLB team Runs Scored.

And then there's the fact that, of the two, Freel is the least likely to be affected by performance volatility due to age.

<End cut-and-paste>

And then this about the defensive comparison (from 3/10/06):

<Begin cut-and-paste>

Freel's ZR for 2005 (the only sample in which he pulled more than 10 Games Started at the position) at 2B was .837. His career ZR at 2B is negatively affected by small sample size inclusions from 2002 (6 GS) and 2003 (10 GS). In 2004 he put up a .870 ZR in 10 GS but just like 2002-2003, that's not the real Freel either. That being said, the real Freel IS rangier than the real Aurilia out there at 2B.

<End cut-and-paste>

Now, all that being said, we also have to take a look at which player's offensive game is more environment-neutral. And that's a pretty easy answer- Ryan Freel. His game is OBP-driven rather than power driven and that's just going to play better over the long haul at 2B given the additional benefits he provides over an option like Aurilia. And make no mistake- if Freel had acquired enough PA to qualify for the batting title last year, he'd have been the seventh most productive offensive 2B in the National League and the 12th most productive offensive 2B in Major League Baseball. He's a better-defense, little less pop, more disciplined Chone Figgins.

Freel is a starting 2B option. He's a starting 2B option at home and on the road. He's better than anything else the Reds have and he's better than what the majority of MLB teams are running out there at 2B.

What the heck is a "speed adjusted OPS"? A player on amphetamines? :lol:

But I agree with you overall Kori. As I said - Freel is the "lesser of the three evils", but still, IMO, not the answer we are looking for at 2B. And looking at his current ST numbers, he better be showing us something more. Because the way he has been playing, he is just "cementing" this tripod rotation at 2B in Narron's mind.

CrackerJack
03-27-2006, 09:56 PM
Imagine that. A 4 page thread on the finer points of Rich Aurillia and Tony Womack's games on Redszone.

SteelSD
03-28-2006, 03:14 AM
What the heck is a "speed adjusted OPS"? A player on amphetamines? :lol:

But I agree with you overall Kori. As I said - Freel is the "lesser of the three evils", but still, IMO, not the answer we are looking for at 2B. And looking at his current ST numbers, he better be showing us something more. Because the way he has been playing, he is just "cementing" this tripod rotation at 2B in Narron's mind.

Speed Adjusted OPS is my way of "equalizing" low-SLG folks who acquire bases via the steal. Please note that I like successful Stolen Bases as long as the CS rate is reasonable (i.e. below 25%).

And yes, Freel is the lesser of three evils, and I'd love to have a Jose Vidro in his prime to play that position. And no, Freel's ST numbers mean nothing to me. If Narron and Krivsky are making lineup and playing time choices using Sping Training numbers, then we're doomed.

KronoRed
03-28-2006, 03:20 AM
Womack hit .410 last spring, didn't really translate into much of anything did it? :D

Eric_Davis
03-28-2006, 08:05 PM
Only the Reds would let 30 at bats override 5000 at bats. I'm thinking they will do it again.

Couldn't be a more accurate statement on why Womack would get to start (or even be on the roster).

GAC
03-28-2006, 09:41 PM
And no, Freel's ST numbers mean nothing to me. If Narron and Krivsky are making lineup and playing time choices using Sping Training numbers, then we're doomed.

I don't think they are doing that. Though one cannot totally discount ST performances. But it seems we "credit" ST numbers when a player is doing well.... and discount them when they are struggling, and say they don't mean anything. We seem to like it both ways.

And IMO, I think the hitters have an advantage, or are farther along, then pitchers during ST.

But I agree overall - I don't put too much stock in ST performances. But to see Freel struggle like he has does "cement" players like Aurilia and Womack, and leave the 2B position up in the air.