PDA

View Full Version : BP: Reds Transaction Analysis-Wily Mo Pena, Ross etc.



Larkin411
03-27-2006, 10:39 PM
Here's BP's take on the last few transactions. I've put in bold some parts because they articulate perfectly my feelings about the Pena trade.




Wayne Krivsky's opening weeks as general manager have been nothing if not decisive. He's been more than willing to shake up his 40-man roster, particularly concerning some of the pitchers, and sure enough, nobody else really wants guys like Bong or Standridge or Howington or Basham, the detritus of years of mismanagement. The real question is whether or not that shortage of pitching talent in particular makes for an acceptable motivation to go out and get a merely adequate starting pitcher in exchange for one of the team's few actual commodities. There's no tin badge for finishing fourth in the NL Central, so why Krivsky feels that his team is better off going out and getting a starting pitcher who, on a good team, might rate as a fourth or fifth starter, and giving up one of his coveted quartet of outfielders to do it, defies explanation.

Now, yes, a rotation that has to count on Dave Williams and Eric Milton, one with Aaron Harang as its putative "ace," obviously needs help. Maybe there's something to be said for having people who can give you six innings per outing, quality start or no, because it's going to be a long, hard summer for the Reds' pen. But is Arroyo really going to help? Other than being able to handle a larger workload last year, is he really somebody you want to rely on? His strikeout rate was in the dumper, he's a flyball pitcher with problems against lefties coming into a lefty-friendly power park. All because he's affordable, having been signed to a three-year deal? That's a Minnesota way of seeing things, acquiring cheap players to achieve cheap goals, except unlike the Twins, Pena was something of value, one of the very few players on this roster with a future, and he was also relatively affordable.

Dealing Pena for somebody else's fifth starter doesn't just give you a fifth starter, it may also cripple up your opportunities to swing other possible deals with the outfielders you've got left. Can the Reds afford to move Ken Griffey Jr. now? Even with Pena out of the way, they're not creating an opportunity for Denorfia, they're making it that much easier to give significant playing time to Scott Hatteberg, or perhaps to play Ryan Freel in the outfield a little more often, just to make sure they have Tony Womack in the lineup. As much as Krivsky inherited a weak hand, this was a deal that did nothing to make it any better, with the best possible outcome being that perhaps they'll flip Arroyo to a contender looking for a fifth man in July. Failing that, this is a reconstruction project that will really have to start from scratch, reliant on the draft's slowly-delivered gifts, and without the benefit of adding near-ready prospects from other systems through a needed tear-down.

There might be some head-scratching over the decision to pick up Ross, but even if Jason LaRue's knee wasn't an issue (he might miss a month), it makes sense for the Reds to have a fallback option in case they wanted to shop LaRue for a top prospect later on this spring. And if, instead, they wanted to peddle either Ross or Javier Valentin to somebody who needs a useful backup catcher, and get a second-tier prospect, again, that's a play that the Reds should have on their menu of in-season options. It isn't like Dane Sardinha is useful, and I would like to think his days on the 40-man will be coming to an end.

Finally, while I believe in second chances, and while I believe in the utility of slumming for the occasionally viable retread, there comes a point where you really need to check out what you might be getting yourself into, because if you don't dig up a bit of history, it doesn't repeat itself, it tap-dances on your present and expects you to foot the bill. Alex Sanchez isn't asking for a second chance, he's asking for his fourth or fifth, and there are several reasons for it. Like his hitting, like brainless baserunning, like his Wrongway Corrigan routine in the outfield or his throwing arm, or like his studiously developed reputation for surliness.

Dom Heffner
03-27-2006, 10:41 PM
I just can't believe they got rid of Wily Mo. Still in shock.

Wonder if Foot Locker will refund the jersey.

KronoRed
03-27-2006, 10:42 PM
Maybe you'll get store credit for a Red Sox one

Dom Heffner
03-27-2006, 10:43 PM
Probably with free shipping, as I seem to get that e-mail 4 times a day.

traderumor
03-27-2006, 10:59 PM
BP overvaluing WMP as well.

flyer85
03-27-2006, 11:07 PM
from the Detroit section


So, the real question here is who's going to pick Pena up? The Reds would be a pretty sweet fit, assuming they can get over their mancrush on Scott Hatteberg

Dom Heffner
03-27-2006, 11:10 PM
BP overvaluing WMP as well.

I'd rather do that than undervalue him and get a stiff like Arroyo.

So what- we're going to win 69 games instead of 67?

Krusty
03-27-2006, 11:35 PM
Problem is if Krivsky was hired three years ago instead of O'Brien, this club would be in better shape, IMO. At least Krivsky isn't using the band aid effect when dealing with the major league club like O'Brien did. Rebuilding the farm system will take time.

TC81190
03-27-2006, 11:37 PM
I'd rather do that than undervalue him and get a stiff like Arroyo.

So what- we're going to win 69 games instead of 67?

EXACTLY. :bang:

Aronchis
03-27-2006, 11:37 PM
I'd rather do that than undervalue him and get a stiff like Arroyo.

So what- we're going to win 69 games instead of 67?

Yep and not have to pay WMP's next hammy surgury.

pedro
03-27-2006, 11:46 PM
I think a lot of people here are failing to appreciate the value of a league average pitcher who can throw 200 innings.

power can be replaced. especially when it doesn't get on base or field.

Joseph
03-27-2006, 11:49 PM
I think a lot of people here are failing to appreciate the value of a league average pitcher who can throw 200 innings.

power can be replaced. especially when it doesn't get on base or field.

I tend to agree with you. How many more games would the Reds have won with just league average pitching last year?

Cyclone792
03-27-2006, 11:55 PM
I tend to agree with you. How many more games would the Reds have won with just league average pitching last year?

Runs scored = 820
Runs allowed with average pitching and average defense = ~720

Pyt. winning percentage with 820 runs scored and 720 runs allowed = .565

.565 winning percentage = 91-92 wins

traderumor
03-28-2006, 12:09 AM
I think a lot of people here are failing to appreciate the value of a league average pitcher who can throw 200 innings.



Some really smart person said that somewhere else on this board today ;)

Johnny Footstool
03-28-2006, 12:20 AM
BP overvaluing WMP as well.

Wait a minute...you used the "appeal to authority" technique to defend your support for the Wily Mo deal, citing the opinions of M2, registerthis, and several other RedsZoners. But when an independent, objective, and authoritative resource questions the deal, you brusquely dismiss them as "overvaluing" Pena?

Here's a thought: maybe you're undervaluing him. Maybe years of having below replacement level pitching has led us to overvalue mediocrity on the mound. Maybe witnessing the impotence of DanO has left us so hungry for any action that we're willing to throw support to an unnecessary and disadvantageous deal.

Just a thought.

Johnny Footstool
03-28-2006, 12:23 AM
I tend to agree with you. How many more games would the Reds have won with just league average pitching last year?


That assumes a lot. That assumes that the bullpen and everyone else on the staff will suddenly rise to league average. You also assume that Arroyo will retain his effectiveness despite a scary dropoff in strikeout rate last season.

The Reds didn't acquire "league-average pitching." They acquired one league-average pitcher. And they overpaid to get him.

That's not a recipe for long-term (or even short-term) success.

Sea Ray
03-28-2006, 12:29 AM
BP overvaluing WMP as well.

Excellent point. The bottomline here is Krivsky doesn't think as highly of Wily Mo as this writer does and I'm not so sure very many GMs do either. I think Krivsky thinks of Wily Mo as a Steve Balboni or a Craig Wilson, not a Sammy Sosa.

Golgafrinchan
03-28-2006, 12:52 AM
Ok, maybe I'm overvaluing Pena, too.

Pena's Top 10 most similar batters through age 23. (http://www.baseball-reference.com/p/penawi01.shtml)

A LOT of big time sluggers on that list: Barfield, Colavito, Bobby Bonds, Horton, Killebrew, and Maris. If Wily Mo has a career like ANY of them, he will be -a lot- more valuable than Bronson Arroyo.

The other guys in Pena's list include Kingman, Incaviglia, Montanez, and Billy Conigliaro. Kingman's not bad, while the other three weren't that great.

Averaging those ten guys and adding their age 24-end of career numbers to Wily Mo's results in the following projected career line for Wily Mo: .259/.334/.470, 301 HR, 117 OPS+. Not a superstar, but not bad at all.

PECOTA mostly agrees with baseball-reference.com, pegging Barfield, Willie Stargell, and Incaviglia as Pena's top 3 comparables.

---

Bronson Arroyo's top comparables list (http://www.baseball-reference.com/a/arroybr01.shtml) includes names like Mike Harkey, Kevin Foster, Chad Ogea, Scott Sanders, Ted Lilly, Sean Bergman, and Brett Tomko.

PECOTA's top 3 comparables for Arroyo are Dick Ruthven, Esteban Loaiza, and Danny Darwin. Better than the guys above, but still mediocre: only Darwin had a career ERA+ better than 100.

--

To me, it's pretty obvious that Pena has a much better shot of being a valuable commodity in the future. Or am I also overrating him?

Cyclone792
03-28-2006, 01:00 AM
Ok, maybe I'm overvaluing Pena, too.

Pena's Top 10 most similar batters through age 23. (http://www.baseball-reference.com/p/penawi01.shtml)

A LOT of big time sluggers on that list: Barfield, Colavito, Bobby Bonds, Horton, Killebrew, and Maris. If Wily Mo has a career like ANY of them, he will be -a lot- more valuable than Bronson Arroyo.

The other guys in Pena's list include Kingman, Incaviglia, Montanez, and Billy Conigliaro. Kingman's not bad, while the other three weren't that great.

Averaging those ten guys and adding their age 24-end of career numbers to Wily Mo's results in the following projected career line for Wily Mo: .259/.334/.470, 301 HR, 117 OPS+. Not a superstar, but not bad at all.

PECOTA mostly agrees with baseball-reference.com, pegging Barfield, Willie Stargell, and Incaviglia as Pena's top 3 comparables.

---

Bronson Arroyo's top comparables list (http://www.baseball-reference.com/a/arroybr01.shtml) includes names like Mike Harkey, Kevin Foster, Chad Ogea, Scott Sanders, Ted Lilly, Sean Bergman, and Brett Tomko.

PECOTA's top 3 comparables for Arroyo are Dick Ruthven, Esteban Loaiza, and Danny Darwin. Better than the guys above, but still mediocre: only Darwin had a career ERA+ better than 100.

--

To me, it's pretty obvious that Pena has a much better shot of being a valuable commodity in the future. Or am I also overrating him?

With the exception of Conigliaro, all the rest of those players understood the difference between balls and strikes much better than Pena by that age. And it's safe to say that all of them played during an environment less conducive for offense than the one Pena's currently playing in.

If people want 35-40 home runs mixed with a .315 OBP, have fun, but I want nothing to do with it. Instead, give me the cheap arm, which we need badly.

Caveat Emperor
03-28-2006, 02:37 AM
Here's a thought: maybe you're undervaluing him. Maybe years of having below replacement level pitching has led us to overvalue mediocrity on the mound. Maybe witnessing the impotence of DanO has left us so hungry for any action that we're willing to throw support to an unnecessary and disadvantageous deal.

Just a thought.

Maybe I (along with others) am undervaluing Pena -- but his lifetime .303 OBP scares the bejesus out of me, because I don't see him in possession of the skills required to raise that. Any talk of Pena turning into a superstar or even a highly productive player require him becoming he's not: a hitter capable of showing discpline at the plate, working himself into hitters counts to see better pitches, and increaseing his walk rates. This has been a problem that has plagued Pena throughout his professional career -- yet there are many (on here, and elsewhere) who seemingly expect Pena to wake up tomorrow with this skill set and begin mashing the ball.

The only way his OBP goes up is if he ups his hit rate or his walk rate, and I see no evidence of either one happening. His walk-rates are remarkably unchanged over the past 3 years, and there's nothing to indicate that he's going to start getting more hits either. A potentially troubling "lurking indicator" for Pena is that, although he's a power hitter, he's played his entire career as a ground-ball hitter. For his career, Pena has a 1.44/1 GB/FB ratio. Last season, that number was 1.45, which was higher than any of the top 40 HR hitters in baseball. Most good power hitters lurk around the 1/1 ratio, with most dipping into the more flyball territory of .9/1 and .8/1 (Adam Dunn posting a robust .72/1). So, not only is Pena not making enough contact, he's making the wrong type of contact for the game he has to play.

From where I sit, Pena was highly overrated -- a powerball ticket appealing to someone who doesn't know any better, and the only question for the Reds was whether or not they were going to find someone willing to overrate him enough to pay any sort of ransom to get him. They ended up with Bronson Arroyo, and I'm happy with getting a league-average pitcher back (if he is, indeed, league average for the Reds) for someone I feel had nowhere to go but down in value. Maybe I am drinking the residue of kool-aid from the bottom of the Jimbo glass and maybe I am being too excited about mediocrity, but I'm also acutely aware that even mediocrity would've made last year (and the year before) fun seasons to watch the Reds instead of painful exercises that they became.

Topcat
03-28-2006, 05:31 AM
Has anyone thought that Arroyo maybe flipped for prospects down the line? I have to belief that Bronson could fetch some decent prospect and be shipped back to the AL at the deadline. This could happen and to me that would more than take away any uncertainty about dealing Pena. ps. I loved the trade btw.

traderumor
03-28-2006, 10:08 AM
Wait a minute...you used the "appeal to authority" technique to defend your support for the Wily Mo deal, citing the opinions of M2, registerthis, and several other RedsZoners. But when an independent, objective, and authoritative resource questions the deal, you brusquely dismiss them as "overvaluing" Pena?

Here's a thought: maybe you're undervaluing him. Maybe years of having below replacement level pitching has led us to overvalue mediocrity on the mound. Maybe witnessing the impotence of DanO has left us so hungry for any action that we're willing to throw support to an unnecessary and disadvantageous deal.

Just a thought.
You can throw out the "appeal to authority" argument if you wish, but I simply said that they had reasonable arguments and also have a track record of good calls on projecting future performance, therefore my opinion that it was a good deal would stand. Again, it is only a fallacious appeal if the authorities that one is appealing to have no right to be considered an authority. I think the mentioned parties' track record affords them that status on personnel exchanges such as this. Furthermore, there was no truth claim made to warrant a charge of presenting a fallacious argument. In other words, I never said "these people are right, the rest of you are wrong, case closed." But then, I already pointed that out in the trade thread itself.

As for WMP's value, I think the arguments have been presented and I have nothing to add. Those who read this article will agree or disagree based on that variable, so rehashing seems unprofitable at this point. So how about agreeing to disagree at this point and I'll let you tell us all "I told you so" at WMP's HOF induction ceremony.

Johnny Footstool
03-28-2006, 10:23 AM
You can throw out the "appeal to authority" argument if you wish, but I simply said that they had reasonable arguments and also have a track record of good calls on projecting future performance, therefore my opinion that it was a good deal would stand. Again, it is only a fallacious appeal if the authorities that one is appealing to have no right to be considered an authority. I think the mentioned parties' track record affords them that status on personnel exchanges such as this. Furthermore, there was no truth claim made to warrant a charge of presenting a fallacious argument. In other words, I never said "these people are right, the rest of you are wrong, case closed." But then, I already pointed that out in the trade thread itself.

Even though I do respect the opinions of the authorities you cited, the fact is they're not nearly as authoritative as a group like BP. I just found it funny that when you read the opinions of those who make their living analyzing baseball, you tossed them out like so much trash without even addressing the arguments they made. "They're overvaluing Pena" is not what I'd call a well-constructed rebuttal.

registerthis
03-28-2006, 10:55 AM
"They're overvaluing Pena" is not what I'd call a well-constructed rebuttal.

Johnny, I think plenty of people have put out arguments far beyond that statement to show WHY they believe Pena is overvalued. His lack of plate discipline and inability to judge strikes, his poor defense and his lack of growth as a player over the past several seasons, along with the statistics to back up the assertions, were all presented as evidence. Those of us who choose not to view WMP in the same light as others on this Board aren't doing so merely because we like typing the phrase "Wily Mo Pena is overvalued." It's because we truly believe that he is.

Heath
03-28-2006, 11:11 AM
Runs scored = 820
Runs allowed with average pitching and average defense = ~720

Pyt. winning percentage with 820 runs scored and 720 runs allowed = .565

.565 winning percentage = 91-92 wins

:help: :bang:

Cyclone - let's take it a step further - lets keep Harang & Claussen. We need three more starters on average - who might have been FA's last year. Clement was almost a Red - so add that one. Let's not add Milton. Now we need two starters that were FA's last year. So a Derek Lowe, Jon Lieber, Kevin Millwood, Russ Ortiz, Kris Benson, plus the lower-tiered guys that I have missed could be added.

That's a pennant race.

princeton
03-28-2006, 11:16 AM
I think a lot of people here are failing to appreciate the value of a league average pitcher who can throw 200 innings.

Brogliorroyo is not exactly an automatic 200.

TRF
03-28-2006, 11:19 AM
Maybe I (along with others) am undervaluing Pena -- but his lifetime .303 OBP scares the bejesus out of me, because I don't see him in possession of the skills required to raise that.

By age 28, Sammy Sosa had never topped 45 walks in a season. At age 28 he hit 36 HR's and had a .300 OBP. Next year he exploded into everyones livingroom. Was he juicing? Who knows, but steroids don't get you more walks. Now the fear of power will get you more walks. Pena has that power, and can generate that fear naturally.

I keep hearing how the market is awash with corner power guys. Wanna know how many of the top 20 Power hitting LF's changed teams this year? 1 Coco Crisp. that's it. Of the top 20 power hitting RF's only Reggie Sanders and WMP found new homes. Hardly an oversaturation of the market.

People aren't over valuing power. They are over valuing average to below average pitching.

westofyou
03-28-2006, 11:26 AM
People aren't over valuing power. They are over valuing average to below average pitching.And undervaluing on base percentage and fielding, and hammy injuries and the inablility to hit RH's...

Pong is fun, but your POV isn't infalliable nor is the other side.

TRF
03-28-2006, 11:34 AM
while overvaluing RH's that have trouble with LH hitters, flyball pitchers in a HR park and topping 200 ip once. at age 29.

Never said my opinion was infallible. IMO this arguement will be settled sometime in October. Thing is WMP is likely to still be playing meaningful games. playoff games.

I know WMP has a low OBP. I'm of the opinion that is something he can raise. He's said it was a problem area that he intends to work on, and I think he'll be around .325 this year. And yeah, that is still pretty bad, but he'll SLG over .500. Plus he has a strong Dominican contingent around him, which could help.

Johnny Footstool
03-28-2006, 11:46 AM
Johnny, I think plenty of people have put out arguments far beyond that statement to show WHY they believe Pena is overvalued. His lack of plate discipline and inability to judge strikes, his poor defense and his lack of growth as a player over the past several seasons, along with the statistics to back up the assertions, were all presented as evidence. Those of us who choose not to view WMP in the same light as others on this Board aren't doing so merely because we like typing the phrase "Wily Mo Pena is overvalued." It's because we truly believe that he is.

My problem is with the quick dismissal of a real authority. I suspect the folks at BP know all about WMP's on-base percentage, etc., and factored those things into their opinion. Knowing that, they're still not in favor of the trade.

To simply dismiss their opinion as "overvaluing" WMP is pretty obtuse.

Johnny Footstool
03-28-2006, 11:52 AM
People aren't over valuing power. They are over valuing average to below average pitching.

To paraphrase Eddie Murphy, if someone hands you a cracker, you think, "hey, a cracker" and you eat it, and it's...well, a cracker. But if you're starving and someone hands you a cracker, you think it's the best cracker you've ever had. "That was a good cracker! Was that a Ritz?"

Arroyo is the cracker to the pitching-starved Reds fan.

registerthis
03-28-2006, 11:56 AM
Arroyo is the cracker to the pitching-starved Reds fan.

And Pena was a saltine.

registerthis
03-28-2006, 11:59 AM
To simply dismiss their opinion as "overvaluing" WMP is pretty obtuse.

It's not a simple dismissal, though--that's just it. Those of us who disagree with that opinion have very good reasons for doing so. And I'm not particularly concerned about what perceived authority is stating this or that, if I (or others) disagree, it's because we have evidence which leads us to a different conclusion.

BP is entitled to their opinion about the trade, but their word is not gospel, and they're privy to the same stats and analysis that we all have seen.

TRF
03-28-2006, 12:01 PM
Pena was more like that hamburger you intend to grill. You put it on, but you keep turning off the propane tank for extended periods of time. Eventually, your burger will get cooked, but it might be a little uneven. certainly a little raw.

analogies are fun!

Johnny Footstool
03-28-2006, 12:08 PM
And Pena was a saltine.

Sure. And the Reds should have found a starving man to trade him to.

registerthis
03-28-2006, 12:11 PM
Pena was more like that hamburger you intend to grill. You put it on, but you keep turning off the propane tank for extended periods of time. Eventually, your burger will get cooked, but it might be a little uneven. certainly a little raw.

Or Pena's the burger that looks good coming out of the package, but when you grill it it shrivels in size and never tastes quite right.

What kind of burger is Pena going to be? Who knows. I'm just consistently amused that Mystery Prospect, whoever that could have been, would have made this trade that much more palatable for you. As if Boston throwing in a AA equivalent of Tuffy Rhodes would somehow have balanced this trade out more.

registerthis
03-28-2006, 12:13 PM
Sure. And the Reds should have found a starving man to trade him to.

If Arroyo was worthless and not a much-needed improvement to this club, I might be inclined to agree. As it stands, I'm quite content with the trade--starving man analogies notwithstanding.

pedro
03-28-2006, 12:14 PM
Brogliorroyo is not exactly an automatic 200.


that is true.

westofyou
03-28-2006, 12:14 PM
Never said my opinion was infallible. IMO this arguement will be settled sometime in October. Thing is WMP is likely to still be playing meaningful games. playoff games.

Yeah batting only against RH's and being a role player


I know WMP has a low OBP. I'm of the opinion that is something he can raise. He's said it was a problem area that he intends to work on,

I wish I had a dollar for every ballplayer I've heard that about.

princeton
03-28-2006, 12:22 PM
WMP is a much better risk-- he improved a LOT in 2004 and held at that level in 2005. Reds are betting that he plateaued, but 24-year-olds improve, and 24-year-olds that have already played a lot in the majors often become stars.

Arroyo is much more the risk, because he's not actually coming off a plateau, he's coming off a decline. In his defense, pitchers are pretty unpredictable-- what looks like a decline often turns out to be just a bad year. The declining K's are the big red flag.

WMP has tools that could still be skills. And he has the biggest skill: power.

Arroyo's biggest "skills" are that he might be able to give innings and he has an acceptable contract.

the Reds took on more risk, and the contract made the risk more acceptable. But this has to happen if you actually want to win a few games and don't develop your own pitching. It reminds me of John Hart's Indians deals: Dave Burba, etc.

the real thing to watch is whether a few more wins allows the Reds to draw more fans, to carry a bigger payroll and to be in play for other cost-dependent moves. It's like improving your bathroom-- if you're selling your house and you've got a really bad bathroom, then a better bathroom might more than pay for itself. But it's too bad that the bathroom wasn't already in decent shape.

Doc. Scott
03-28-2006, 12:29 PM
My problem is with the quick dismissal of a real authority. I suspect the folks at BP know all about WMP's on-base percentage, etc., and factored those things into their opinion. Knowing that, they're still not in favor of the trade.

To simply dismiss their opinion as "overvaluing" WMP is pretty obtuse.

Well, BP also has really latched on to Pena because their PECOTA projection system actually called his 2004 breakout at a time when nobody else thought he'd amount to a hill of (rice and) beans because of his contract and awful 2003.

I'm not sure that counts as "overvaluing" on its own, but since their system really favors players who are in the majors at a young age, you could say they "overvalue" any player in Pena's age category who has both major strengths and major holes in his game.

PECOTA isn't unjustified in its love for experienced 24-year-old major leaguers. Most baseball people agree with the general perception.

IslandRed
03-28-2006, 12:32 PM
By age 28, Sammy Sosa had never topped 45 walks in a season. At age 28 he hit 36 HR's and had a .300 OBP. Next year he exploded into everyones livingroom. Was he juicing? Who knows, but steroids don't get you more walks. Now the fear of power will get you more walks. Pena has that power, and can generate that fear naturally.


That works two ways, though. Fear of a hitter's power forces pitchers to pitch more carefully, true. That should lead to more walks. But that presumes a certain level of plate discipline, doesn't it? What if the pitchers are already doing that, and the hitter's chasing and whiffing instead of walking? I argued in a thread a month or so ago that Pena's already being pitched in a manner that could lead to a healthy walk rate, but he's not taking them. Everyone knows he can hit the ball 500 feet, and they also know he'll chase junk. Pitchers aren't going to do anything differently until WMP makes them. But if he'll adjust and make pitchers understand they'll have to come over the plate to get him out, he'll have more chances to launch the ball to the moon.

Power can lead to walks, but in WMP's case, walks will lead to power.

The other thing that affected the situation is that Pena's already into his arbitration years. When or if he breaks out, his price tag will reflect it. Sadly, his days as a source of cheap power are about over. And if he's like Sosa and doesn't have his breakout until his late 20s, what good does that do the Reds if he's already eligible for free agency or about to be?

Hoosier Red
03-28-2006, 12:34 PM
By age 28, Sammy Sosa had never topped 45 walks in a season. At age 28 he hit 36 HR's and had a .300 OBP. Next year he exploded into everyones livingroom. Was he juicing? Who knows, but steroids don't get you more walks. Now the fear of power will get you more walks. Pena has that power, and can generate that fear naturally.

I keep hearing how the market is awash with corner power guys. Wanna know how many of the top 20 Power hitting LF's changed teams this year? 1 Coco Crisp. that's it. Of the top 20 power hitting RF's only Reggie Sanders and WMP found new homes. Hardly an oversaturation of the market.

People aren't over valuing power. They are over valuing average to below average pitching.

I don't believe pinning a guy to Sammy Sosa's "development" will get you very far. For every Sosa, there are 10 guys who just never learned the strike zone.
Will WMP become Sammy or the other 10 guys. Of course we don't know but I wouldn't put money on him becoming Sammy.

TRF
03-28-2006, 12:45 PM
Maybe he isn't Sosa. Mybe he's Ruben Sierra. I prefer Sierra to the next Esteban Loaiza.

And before i hear anything about his 2005 numbers, Loaiza's had exactly 2 good seasons in his 11 year career.

traderumor
03-28-2006, 12:51 PM
Even though I do respect the opinions of the authorities you cited, the fact is they're not nearly as authoritative as a group like BP. I just found it funny that when you read the opinions of those who make their living analyzing baseball, you tossed them out like so much trash without even addressing the arguments they made. "They're overvaluing Pena" is not what I'd call a well-constructed rebuttal.They did not add any new information and there's a multiple page discussion on the issue. What is there left to address?

Spitball
03-28-2006, 01:59 PM
The other thing that affected the situation is that Pena's already into his arbitration years. When or if he breaks out, his price tag will reflect it. Sadly, his days as a source of cheap power are about over. And if he's like Sosa and doesn't have his breakout until his late 20s, what good does that do the Reds if he's already eligible for free agency or about to be?

Good point. The Arroyo trade might not work out in the long run, but it hopefully signifies a change in direction for this franchise. A movement away from building this team around a core of stud outfielders to a team recognizing the need for pitching.

Trading Pena might be a gamble, but a gamble that needed to be made. Dang it, let's not be Dan O'Brien-ish about this, so what if Pena turns into Sammy Sosa? Would you want to invest big bucks to keep the next Sammy Sosa in Cincinnati so the Reds could continue to have chump change left over for pitching? I'd rather invest big bucks on pitching and have chump change left over to pay outfielders.

princeton
03-28-2006, 02:06 PM
so what if Pena turns into Sammy Sosa?

then it was a very bad trade. Especially since he's still pretty cheap.

Falls City Beer
03-28-2006, 02:07 PM
then it was a very bad trade. Especially since he's still pretty cheap.

Not if it takes him four more years to crack his lead pupa.

pedro
03-28-2006, 02:12 PM
Maybe he isn't Sosa. Mybe he's Ruben Sierra. I prefer Sierra to the next Esteban Loaiza.



and maybe he's tony batista without the glove.

princeton
03-28-2006, 02:14 PM
Not if it takes him four more years to crack his lead pupa.

apparently that didn't need to go without saying

Falls City Beer
03-28-2006, 02:21 PM
apparently that didn't need to go without saying

Right. Because you made the qualification that he's cheap for now. In four years you'll be paying him at a Sosa level even if he's producing at his current rate.

I think my qualification is absolutely paramount to the discussion--it's not whether Pena becomes the next Sosa, it's when. Really nothing else matters.

Boston admires him so much, they're platooning him.

KronoRed
03-28-2006, 02:35 PM
and maybe he's tony batista without the glove.
If he could play 3rd we'd have kept him :evil:

princeton
03-28-2006, 02:44 PM
Right. Because you made the qualification that he's cheap for now..


that's why it seemed to go without saying. It was already said

TRF
03-28-2006, 03:04 PM
and maybe he's tony batista without the glove.

Then what is Arroyo? He seems very Haynesish right now. doesn't K anyone, flyball pitcher.

I think Fenway was huge for him. Unless a lefty yanked it down the line he had the advantage. CF will keep balls in the park, and he was good against righties.

GABP offers no such protection.

traderumor
03-28-2006, 03:13 PM
Does a 50/50 split of GO/AO make someone a flyball pitcher?

Cyclone792
03-28-2006, 03:15 PM
I think Fenway was huge for him.

Ummm ...



Arroyo 2003-2005

Fenway IP 198.2
Road IP 202.2

Fenway ERA 4.94
Road ERA 3.48

Fenway K/9 5.35
Road K/9 6.13

Fenway BB/9 2.54
Road BB/9 2.18

Fenway HR/9 1.04
Road HR/9 0.71

westofyou
03-28-2006, 03:18 PM
I think Fenway was huge for him. Unless a lefty yanked it down the line he had the advantage.

How can it be huge for him? Unless you factor in the LH HR rate at Fenway.

If he does worst against LH's it hurt him more.

Fenway against RH since 2003 rates as a 103 RH Hits/ 113 RH HR while LH is 103 LH HIT and 85 LH HR.

He gave up 15 HR's at Fenway in 2005 and 9 in 2004.

Cyclone792
03-28-2006, 03:22 PM
I'll just toss this in for good measure ...

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=909365&postcount=2


He tends to keep the ball in the park fairly well, but he was absolutely destroyed by doubles off the Monstah. His home/road and RHP/LHP are quite normal for a right-handed pitcher, except for his doubles rates. Here are his 2004 splits for doubles:


Home: .078
Road: .048
Right .073
Left: .064

TRF
03-28-2006, 03:23 PM
Because Fenway supresses HR's or at least it did last year, and GABP welcomes them like a mother does a son returning from war. BTW, how was breakfast?

westofyou
03-28-2006, 03:32 PM
Because Fenway supresses HR's or at least it did last year, and GABP welcomes them like a mother does a son returning from war. BTW, how was breakfast?
Fenway suppressed only LH HR's (90 out of 100) for visitors from 2003-2005, the Red Sox themselves scored a 127/100 in those years from the left side, the supressed number looks like it's being generated by the Red Sox pitchers.

The RH was 155 Red Sox and 118 Opponents..

Breakfast was fine, the post office worst and when I got home there was a peacock on my front porch eating cat food.

TRF
03-28-2006, 03:35 PM
a peacock?

well that's something. dunno what, but something.

I hope I am wrong about Arroyo, but I see a lot of Jimmy Haynes in the man.

Cyclone792
03-28-2006, 03:36 PM
Because Fenway supresses HR's or at least it did last year, and GABP welcomes them like a mother does a son returning from war. BTW, how was breakfast?

GABP is a neutral park for run scoring. It's played like a hitter's park once (2005), a pitcher's park once (2004) and a neutral park once (2003). Yes, it gives up home runs, but it's absolutely terrible for ground balls, doubles, singles and triples. The overall run factor is neutral.

Fenway park is hitter's dream, and you're kidding yourself if you think otherwise. It's been a hitter's dream since the 1920s/1930s, and unless this infusion of new parks alters the pendelum quite a bit, it will continue to be a hitter's dream.

Joe Cronin played for the Red Sox from 1935-1945; Fenway Park was a hitter's park in every season for him.
Ted Williams played for the Red Sox from 1939-1960 (excluding war years); Fenway Park was a hitter's park in every season for him (106 career park factor).
Carl Yastrzemski played for the Red Sox from 1961-1983; Fenway Park was a hitter's park in every season for him (107 career park factor).
Jim Rice played for the Red Sox from 1974-1989; Fenway Park was a hitter's park in every season for him (106 career park factor).
Mo Vaughn played for the Red Sox from 1991-1998; Fenway Park was a hitter's park in the vast majority of his seasons, and at worst a neutral park in a handful of seasons (104 career park factor).


On occasion, Fenway will play out a season as a neutral park for run scoring, but it is historically always been an excellent hitter's park. In 2005, Fenway did play as an overall neutral park, however, in both 2003 and 2004 it played as the hitter's park that's it been known to play as historically.

westofyou
03-28-2006, 03:36 PM
a peacock?Yeah the neighborhood has a peacock that works the front porches, it's pretty tame.

TRF
03-28-2006, 03:44 PM
ya know the more i read your posts, the more i want you to write a book. BTW really like your new website.

Johnny Footstool
03-28-2006, 03:45 PM
Yeah the neighborhood has a peacock that works the front porches, it's pretty tame.

That's far more interesting than the game of Arroyo/Pena pong we've been playing.

pedro
03-28-2006, 03:48 PM
Then what is Arroyo? He seems very Haynesish right now. doesn't K anyone, flyball pitcher.

I think Fenway was huge for him. Unless a lefty yanked it down the line he had the advantage. CF will keep balls in the park, and he was good against righties.

GABP offers no such protection.

I don't think you can find evidentiary support for that assumption.

Arroyo has a 3 year hom/away split ERA of 4.91 / 3.48 with a 50/34 break in HR's so I'm not sure how Fenway played as an advantage for him.

Further, while he had a more extreme ratio last year, his career GB/FB numbers are 776 to 792 which doesn't make him an extreme FB pitcher IMO.

Eric Milton OTOH, has a career GB/FB split of 1345 to 2226.

Spitball
03-28-2006, 03:48 PM
then it was a very bad trade. Especially since he's still pretty cheap.

That's the kind of thinking that paralyzed Dan O'Brien. Make a move. The Cubs had lots of bad teams even with Sammy Sosa. The White Sox traded him and didn't fall off the face of the Earth.

If a team has too many outfielders and awful pitching, it doesn't take a chemistry professor to figure that one out. You balance it out by unloading an outfielder, even though outfielders are not going to bring you the kind of pitching a shortstop would bring.

Now, if people were saying he could be the next Miguel Tejada, the Reds would have gotten more than Arrojo.

westofyou
03-28-2006, 03:51 PM
That's far more interesting than the game of Arroyo/Pena pong we've been playing.Yeah, the damn thing will crap on your car and poke it's head out of nowhere to look in the window, the cats follow it all round the house window to window. It used to be paired up with a male that was her baby at one time, he had the full feathers going on and would let loose with the patented peacock yell every now and then. But he also was a little aggressive and dumb, he often attacked his reflection in the paneling of cars, I guess that was an issue and one day there was an article in the paper and a few weeks later he was no longer around.

flyer85
03-28-2006, 03:53 PM
The main thing that worries about Arroyo is that he doesn't miss bats and my biggest concern about the 06 Reds is the defense(not the 05 Sox were anything to write home about).

As much as anything I think the traded for the cost certainty and low injury risk.

princeton
03-28-2006, 04:05 PM
That's the kind of thinking that paralyzed Dan O'Brien. Make a move.

you never want to make a dumb move. FRobby/ Pappas comes to mind



If a team has too many outfielders and awful pitching, it doesn't take a chemistry professor to figure that one out. You balance it out by unloading an outfielder.

you have other OFers and you have other opportunities to trade this one. It's a big gamble without a huge reward. I'm hoping that it turns out better than Brock/Broglio.

TRF
03-28-2006, 04:06 PM
That's the kind of thinking that paralyzed Dan O'Brien. Make a move. The Cubs had lots of bad teams even with Sammy Sosa. The White Sox traded him and didn't fall off the face of the Earth.

If a team has too many outfielders and awful pitching, it doesn't take a chemistry professor to figure that one out. You balance it out by unloading an outfielder, even though outfielders are not going to bring you the kind of pitching a shortstop would bring.

Now, if people were saying he could be the next Miguel Tejada, the Reds would have gotten more than Arrojo.

If you put Aaron Harang and Arroyo on the Red Sox this year, which makes the rotation?

Harang.

Then why get less for WMP than the Reds got for Guillen?

Let's make one thing clear. I was not against moving WMP. Well maybe a little, but I understand the need to acquire good starting pitching, but Arroyo wasn't much different than Dave Williams last year. Does anyone know what kind of park Pittsburgh plays in?

registerthis
03-28-2006, 04:25 PM
If you put Aaron Harang and Arroyo on the Red Sox this year, which makes the rotation?

Likely neither. He might--MIGHT--have unseated Wakefield, but Schilling, Beckett, Wells and Clement are set.

TRF
03-28-2006, 04:34 PM
I doubt he's have knocked Wakefield out, but they were pretty down on Clement. He could have unseated Boomer too.

Falls City Beer
03-28-2006, 06:25 PM
that's why it seemed to go without saying. It was already said

I must have misunderstood. I don't read entire threads, particularly if they're long.

If it's trammeled ground, excuse me.

Spitball
03-28-2006, 06:32 PM
you never want to make a dumb move. FRobby/ Pappas comes to mind
This was a bad trade but the Reds survived. In fact, within four years they were in the World Series and on the verge of becoming one of the greatest teams of all time.


you have other OFers and you have other opportunities to trade this one. It's a big gamble without a huge reward. I'm hoping that it turns out better than Brock/Broglio.
These trades are both 40 or more years old. Besides salary dumps, who has traded an outfielder for a starting pitcher in the last five years?


Originally Posted by TRF
Then why get less for WMP than the Reds got for Guillen?
Harang wasn't a 14 game winner coming off 200 innings pitched. Besides, Wily Mo has not put up the kind of numbers Guillen was putting up that season nor has he played defense like Guillen. Besides, who was offering more than Arroyo? Were else was there a team with a surplus of starting pitchers and needing another outfielder?

reds44
03-28-2006, 06:40 PM
BP overvaluing WMP as well.
I agree.

It seems almost everone is doing that.

TRF
03-28-2006, 06:45 PM
And Guillen was a known headcase and his breakout was screaming 1 year wonder. Anyone could have had him at the beginning of the year for nothing.

this is pong. one side is overvaluing Pena, the other Arroyo.

I guess we'll see in October.

registerthis
03-28-2006, 06:47 PM
this is pong. one side is overvaluing Pena, the other Arroyo.

Which would make the trade even, correct? :D

TRF
03-28-2006, 06:48 PM
I agree.

It seems almost everone is doing that.

Really? I think almost everyone is overvaluing Arroyo.

TRF
03-28-2006, 06:48 PM
Which would make the trade even, correct? :D

I think that would be tic tac toe.

TRF
03-28-2006, 06:50 PM
Didn't St. Louis trade an OF to Atlanta for a starting pitcher a couple of years ago?

Spitball
03-28-2006, 07:25 PM
Didn't St. Louis trade an OF to Atlanta for a starting pitcher a couple of years ago?

Since logging off I started remembering a few examples.
Matt Clement for Mark Kotsay
Woody Williams for Ray Lankford
Jon Leiber for Brant Brown

You're probably thinking of J.D. Drew for Jason Marquis.

I'm not sure I'd take any of these outfielders.

Spitball
03-28-2006, 07:40 PM
And Guillen was a known headcase and his breakout was screaming 1 year wonder. Anyone could have had him at the beginning of the year for nothing.

Wait a minute, you brought this guy's name into the discussion. What is your point? Throw out the "beginning of the season" comment because this was at a point he was putting up good numbers (337/385/629 line, with 23 homers in 315 ABs) which resulted in a rich contract at the end of the season.

Larkin411
03-28-2006, 10:33 PM
I'd just like to point out in fairness to BP that it is just one writer's opinion. BP has a number of writers all of whom probably have slightly different takes on WMP. For instance, despite PECOTA's love for Wily Mo, Nate Silver has never claimed that it proves that PECOTA is perfect or that Wily Mo is destined for greatness. In fact they've taken pains to dissuade people from jumping to any such conclusions.

I would say the general attitude is guarded optimism about Wily Mo. I personally feel the same way and wish we could have found a better trade for him. Plus, I keep imagining scenarios where our offensively potent outfielders are all on the disabled list(Dunn excepted) and really the scenario doesn't take any giant stretch of the imagination on my part.

Spitball
03-29-2006, 11:07 AM
Was Wily Mo Pena in danger of being exposed if he had played full time in Cincinnati?

I'm not sure that Pena wasn't in danger of becoming exposed if he had been placed in full time duty in Cincinnati. A batter's tendencies get around and holes in a swing become common knowledge. His second half line was .290/.401/.691 was not pretty. How much was hamstring and how much was "the book" on Pena?

Pena has obvious holes, and I personally feel the Reds did Pena a huge favor by trading him to a situation where he can continue to develop in a limited role. He hits very well against left handed pitching so being in a platoon situation should help him.

I don't believe it helped Pena's future in Cincy that he chose to play for the Dominican Republic rather than get needed at bats to work on his development. If he had continued to put up numbers like he did in the second half, his value would have fallen badly.

princeton
03-29-2006, 11:09 AM
I must have misunderstood. I don't read entire threads, particularly if they're long.

you don't read the section that you quoted?

princeton
03-29-2006, 11:12 AM
This was a bad trade but the Reds survived. In fact, within four years they were in the World Series and on the verge of becoming one of the greatest teams of all time.

Reds would have won a couple more WS championships without the deal. Mistakes matter.

For the record, I'm happy that WayneK is making the right kinds of moves. This one was coldly logical and courageous, and recent Reds GMs have been either illogical, emotional, or cowardly.

Now that we've got someone who can do what needs to be done, I'm awaiting better execution of what needs to be done.

TRF
03-29-2006, 11:16 AM
Wait a minute, you brought this guy's name into the discussion. What is your point? Throw out the "beginning of the season" comment because this was at a point he was putting up good numbers (337/385/629 line, with 23 homers in 315 ABs) which resulted in a rich contract at the end of the season.

My point is by then, Guillen was what... 26-27? He had subpar years prior, and was released by TB.

WMP is 24, has consistently shown his power potential, and his seasons DWARFED anything Guillen had done prior to being in the middle of his breakout/one year wonder season. Remember at the time, it could have easily been a one year wonder..

Now Guillen does offer a cannon for an arm, I'll give you that. WMP has a pretty good arm too, though he needs to harness it a bit.

My point is WMP had more value than Guillen. He's younger, produced more at a younger age, has no history of attacking walls, and is reputed to have an outstanding work ethic coupled with a willingness to learn.

pedro
03-29-2006, 11:30 AM
I think you are underestimating the boost in value that Guillen got from being a player playing to his ptential (or above it) in the midst of a pennat race.

Guillen got good value because it was a trade for immediate need in a pennant race and because he was viewed as an everyday player.

WMP OTOH, while pehaps having a higher ceiling than Guillen, still is a project and is not viewed as an everyday player by many, including his new employers. (see 3 year OPS split against RH of .740)

traderumor
03-29-2006, 11:46 AM
I think you are underestimating the boost in value that Guillen got from being a player playing to his ptential (or above it) in the midst of a pennat race.

Guillen got good value because it was a trade for immediate need in a pennant race and because he was viewed as an everyday player.

WMP OTOH, while pehaps having a higher ceiling than Guillen, still is a project and is not viewed as an everyday player by many, including his new employers. (see 3 year OPS split against RH of .740)

Good points, Pedro. You show that comparing trades must recognize the market conditions when attempting to assign fair value to a player. The time of year that a player is valued will certainly affect that.

But, one cannot then say that a player's value will always be higher if the attempt to deal is made during a pennant race because one does not know who the contenders will be (and I would not recommend making any suppositions on who might be) and if they will need your most marketable commodities to push their value up. While that was certainly an option Krivsky could have taken here and assumed the risk that WMP value would hold or continue to increase, he decided to cash in on current value, which Arroyo was arguably (not by me, but others make good points) pretty fair shakes.

Falls City Beer
03-29-2006, 12:07 PM
you don't read the section that you quoted?

I really don't feel like explaining my point further. Your post made nothing explicit, or particularly implicit.

The whole Pena/Sosa comparison is absurd anyway--Sosa took a long time to grow into his power. Pena's already there and isn't going to get stronger or bigger. Pitchers already know his power and they know how to pitch to him. It's working.

princeton
03-29-2006, 12:09 PM
I really don't feel like explaining my point further.

apparently, you did ;)

TRF
03-29-2006, 12:22 PM
I think you are underestimating the boost in value that Guillen got from being a player playing to his ptential (or above it) in the midst of a pennat race.

Guillen got good value because it was a trade for immediate need in a pennant race and because he was viewed as an everyday player.

WMP OTOH, while pehaps having a higher ceiling than Guillen, still is a project and is not viewed as an everyday player by many, including his new employers. (see 3 year OPS split against RH of .740)

I buy that, and it's an excellent point. But Boston just lost it's CF to the Yankees. WMP in the right hands he might be ready to explode. Of all the teams not named the Reds, the Red Sox seem like the very best environment for that to happen. Trot Nixon is likely in his last year in Boston, strong D.R. contingent, and the focus won't be on his PT, it'll be on Big Papi and Manny and Schilling etc.

The Red Sox had a desire to fill Damon's shoes, and obviously felt Crisp wasn't enough of an answer. They were ripe to overpay, and there were no other OF's on the market.

TRF
03-29-2006, 12:23 PM
I really don't feel like explaining my point further. Your post made nothing explicit, or particularly implicit.

The whole Pena/Sosa comparison is absurd anyway--Sosa took a long time to grow into his power. Pena's already there and isn't going to get stronger or bigger. Pitchers already know his power and they know how to pitch to him. It's working.

This implies there is no development on Pena's part. I'd say his winter stats coupled with his spring stats indicate he is developing.

Johnny Footstool
03-29-2006, 12:26 PM
Guillen got good value because it was a trade for immediate need in a pennant race and because he was viewed as an everyday player.

Which begs the question: Why trade Pena now? Why not wait until the pennant races heat up and send him to someone *desperate* for offense?

"Because he might not be playing well by the pennant race" is the pat answer. Well, if his current value is so low that he'll only bring Arroyo in a trade, you might as well hang onto him while he's cheap and hope he plays well. If he doesn't, big deal -- his value drops slightly, and his potential loses a bit of sheen. If he does, you can land an Arroyo type plus a prospect or two with decent ceilings.

I know that waiting is an abomination to those of you fed up with DanO's impotence and thirsting for action, action, action. But selling low is a panic move, and you never get the best end of the deal in a panic move.

pedro
03-29-2006, 12:28 PM
I think WMP is going to make a really good platoon partner with Nixon and will help to make up some of the supposed offensive loss from Damon (although I think he's going to drop off quickly and they were lucky he went to yanks) but I highly doubt he ever sees CF in Boston. At least not with Manny in left.

traderumor
03-29-2006, 12:31 PM
I still see this trade as two teams trading from excess to fill an immediate need and future need at the same time. That is not panic, that is why you make trades in the first place.

pedro
03-29-2006, 12:32 PM
Which begs the question: Why trade Pena now? Why not wait until the pennant races heat up and send him to someone *desperate* for offense?

"Because he might not be playing well by the pennant race" is the pat answer. Well, if his current value is so low that he'll only bring Arroyo in a trade, you might as well hang onto him while he's cheap and hope he plays well. If he doesn't, big deal -- his value drops slightly, and his potential loses a bit of sheen. If he does, you can land an Arroyo type plus a prospect or two with decent ceilings.

I know that waiting is an abomination to those of you fed up with DanO's impotence and thirsting for action, action, action. But selling low is a panic move, and you never get the best end of the deal in a panic move.

For the reasons you listed, plus the fact that he doesn't hit RH's well and the little issue with the Reds needing SP NOW.

Like it or not, Arroyo may have been the best pitcher availble to the Reds this year and I think they realized that the needed to add pitching now, not at the all star break. Not that Arroyo will put them over the top, but teh innings he provides will help them not abuse their other pitchers, which might have made them less valuable over time as well.

TRF
03-29-2006, 12:35 PM
I still see this trade as two teams trading from excess to fill an immediate need and future need at the same time. That is not panic, that is why you make trades in the first place.

An excess of #4 starters is not a pool the Reds need to swim in.

You make a trade not to help your trading partner but to better your team. If you help that trading partner, great. That lays a foundation for future dealings. In this case though, Arroyo simply wasn't enough. However, for me at least, Matt Clement would have been enough.

pedro
03-29-2006, 12:37 PM
An excess of #4 starters is not a pool the Reds need to swim in.

You make a trade not to help your trading partner but to better your team. If you help that trading partner, great. That lays a foundation for future dealings. In this case though, Arroyo simply wasn't enough. However, for me at least, Matt Clement would have been enough.


I know Arroyo is no great shakes, but the Reds were in a position where they didn't even have 5 guys to run out there that belonged in the majors. That's not a good position to be in.

Johnny Footstool
03-29-2006, 12:42 PM
For the reasons you listed, plus the fact that he doesn't hit RH's well and the little issue with the Reds needing SP NOW.
...

I know Arroyo is no great shakes, but the Reds were in a position where they didn't even have 5 guys to run out there that belonged in the majors. That's not a good position to be in.


What's the immediacy?

The Reds have been in that position for 5 years. They were a lousy team for those 5 years, and they'll be a lousy team for the next couple of years. Arroyo doesn't really change the situation that much.

pedro
03-29-2006, 12:48 PM
What's the immediacy?

The Reds have been in that position for 5 years. They were a lousy team for those 5 years, and they'll be a lousy team for the next couple of years. Arroyo doesn't really change the situation that much.

b/c being that thin has a ripple effect throughout the whole pitching staff and organization causing overuse and rushing of pitchers which make it hard to improve the staff, even incrementally, over time.

westofyou
03-29-2006, 12:52 PM
What's the immediacy?Three years of declining attendance and the need to reupp the corporate box holders.

traderumor
03-29-2006, 12:57 PM
An excess of #4 starters is not a pool the Reds need to swim in.

You make a trade not to help your trading partner but to better your team. If you help that trading partner, great. That lays a foundation for future dealings. In this case though, Arroyo simply wasn't enough. However, for me at least, Matt Clement would have been enough.
Do you really think Clement would outperform Arroyo enough to warrant the extra money that would have to be doled out? I don't.

Johnny Footstool
03-29-2006, 01:01 PM
Do you really think Clement would outperform Arroyo enough to warrant the extra money that would have to be doled out? I don't.

I do.

And BTW, what's going to happen with the money the Reds saved by acquiring Arroyo?

Krivsky's Twins don't exactly have a track record of signing marquee free agent talent.

traderumor
03-29-2006, 01:06 PM
What's the immediacy?

The Reds have been in that position for 5 years. They were a lousy team for those 5 years, and they'll be a lousy team for the next couple of years. Arroyo doesn't really change the situation that much.By himself, of course not. I cannot think of one pitching acquisition, from Mark Prior to Rick Harden to any other young ace you can name that would accomplish that. But then I don't recall any of the supporters of the move have indicated those expectations. All understand that this has to be one of a series of moves to have a significant impact. With the pitching staff in the shape that it is, incremental improvement will have to take place arm by arm. Arroyo is an incremental improvement in the rotation that was exchanged for a set of skills with megarisk of ever paying off that WMP possesses. I'm still pleased as punch we got as much as we did out of WMP. I figured he'd rot on the tree like an unpicked July peach.

TRF
03-29-2006, 01:06 PM
Yes. Clement will K batters. Arroyo won't.

Arroyo's ripple effect will be similar to Dave Williams ripple effect.

And that just makes me sad.

Johnny Footstool
03-29-2006, 01:06 PM
b/c being that thin has a ripple effect throughout the whole pitching staff and organization causing overuse and rushing of pitchers which make it hard to improve the staff, even incrementally, over time.

Why sell Pena short now to start the rebuilding process a mere couple of months early? Why not wait until the All-Star break and try to get some real building blocks for a foundation instead of just Arroyo?


Three years of declining attendance and the need to reupp the corporate box holders.

Signing Arroyo didn't improve the marketing situation enough to make a difference in those departments. If he pitches to the pinnacle of his ability, he's worth 5 more wins, tops.

westofyou
03-29-2006, 01:07 PM
If he pitches to the pinnacle of his ability, he's worth 5 more wins, tops.Yep, and joe fan wants 5 more wins from the Reds this season too.

TRF
03-29-2006, 01:08 PM
Signing Arroyo didn't improve the marketing situation enough to make a difference in those departments. If he pitches to the pinnacle of his ability, he's worth 5 more wins, tops.

And that's assuming we get no drop off in offensive production by in essence replacing WMP with Hatteberg.

traderumor
03-29-2006, 01:09 PM
I do.

And BTW, what's going to happen with the money the Reds saved by acquiring Arroyo?

Krivsky's Twins don't exactly have a track record of signing marquee free agent talent.There you go again, MOing a guy with a track record shorter than my criminal record . Prejudgment 101.

pedro
03-29-2006, 01:09 PM
Why sell Pena short now to start the rebuilding process a mere couple of months early? Why not wait until the All-Star break and try to get some real building blocks for a foundation instead of just Arroyo?

.

B/C I honestly don't think teams will be looking for players like Wily Mo to put them over top at all star break. He's just too one dimensional.

I think kearns otoh is a good candidate for that argument as he does do many thinsg well.

pedro
03-29-2006, 01:10 PM
And that's assuming we get no drop off in offensive production by in essence replacing WMP with Hatteberg.

not that I want hatteberg to start, but he really is pretty similar offensively to casey.

TRF
03-29-2006, 01:11 PM
B/C I honestly don't think teams will be looking for players like Wily Mo to put them over top at all star break. He's just too one dimensional.

I think kearns otoh is a good candidate for that argument as he does do many thinsg well.

In theory he does. But we haven't seen it since he got sat on.

Either way, a ST trade was too soon for too little. And unless Arroyo brings those K/9 numbers north of 6 this year, we aren't going to see his pinnacle of potential production, we'll see what he was last year, in a park that inflates HR totals.

pedro
03-29-2006, 01:14 PM
In theory he does. But we haven't seen it since he got sat on.

Either way, a ST trade was too soon for too little. And unless Arroyo brings those K/9 numbers north of 6 this year, we aren't going to see his pinnacle of potential production, we'll see what he was last year, in a park that inflates HR totals.

regardless of park factors, I don't think GAPB will be any tougher on Arroyo than Fenway was.

Johnny Footstool
03-29-2006, 01:17 PM
Yep, and joe fan wants 5 more wins from the Reds this season too.

I doubt those 5 wins will make Joe Fan decide to splurge on a significant number of additional tickets.


There you go again, MOing a guy with a track record shorter than my criminal record . Prejudgment 101.

I'm judging him based on the organization he came out of -- the organization he had a hand in running. Based on the (admittedly limited) moves he's made thusfar, he appears to be following that same MO. I'd say it's a fair judgement at this point. Let him prove me wrong.

SteelSD
03-29-2006, 01:19 PM
Signing Arroyo didn't improve the marketing situation enough to make a difference in those departments. If he pitches to the pinnacle of his ability, he's worth 5 more wins, tops.

If the Reds can recoup Pena's offensive value somewhere else to negate the presence of Scott Hatteberg being his de facto offensive replacement, Arroyo would need to be worth at least 50 Runs more than the rotation option he's replacing to be worth 5 additional Wins.

Over 200 Innigns, 50 Runs is the about the difference between a 5.00 ERA and a 2.80 ERA. Yikes.

TRF
03-29-2006, 01:20 PM
regardless of park factors, I don't think GAPB will be any tougher on Arroyo than Fenway was.

I hope you are right, but my feeling is come summertime, the right field stands could be hazardous when he pitches. For him to be effective in Cincinnati, he has got to K more hitters. If he doesn't and he pitches like he did last year, it won't be pretty.

Caveat Emperor
03-29-2006, 01:51 PM
I doubt those 5 wins will make Joe Fan decide to splurge on a significant number of additional tickets.

In the long run, 5 wins is the difference between finishing at 77-85 vs. 72-90, but in the course of a season, 5 wins is the difference (potentially) between being 3 games back from the Wild Card in July (and still, theoretically, in contention) and being 8 games back from the Wild Card in July and firmly in the losers bracket.

Joe Fan will show up for a ballclub he percieves to be in "striking distance" of postseason play. Joe Fan spends his money elsewhere when the team is playing the game for pride only. There's a lot of money to be made from keeping a club just barely in contention before fading hard as opposed to a club that falls flat on it's face out of the gate and leaves no doubt where the train ride is going.

TRF
03-29-2006, 01:59 PM
Arroyo will not be an increase of 5 wins... ripple effect or no, because WMP's production is being replaced with Hatteberg. That has to count too.

It just kills me. We finally get the chance to see both Kearns and WMP play every day. finally it was going to be settled, and IMO those two would still be competing.

Instead we get to see the mighty Hat at bat. yippee.

Johnny Footstool
03-29-2006, 02:11 PM
If the Reds can recoup Pena's offensive value somewhere else to negate the presence of Scott Hatteberg being his de facto offensive replacement, Arroyo would need to be worth at least 50 Runs more than the rotation option he's replacing to be worth 5 additional Wins.

Over 200 Innigns, 50 Runs is the about the difference between a 5.00 ERA and a 2.80 ERA. Yikes.

5 wins is a pipe dream, sure. It assumes the Reds get lucky and beat Pythagoras, and that Arroyo pitches to the absolute pinnacle of his ability (say 210 IPs with an ERA of 3.50). I think a performace like that and the ripple effect through the bullpen could potentially result in a 5 win increase. Of course, there's only about a 1% chance of that happening...


In the long run, 5 wins is the difference between finishing at 77-85 vs. 72-90, but in the course of a season, 5 wins is the difference (potentially) between being 3 games back from the Wild Card in July (and still, theoretically, in contention) and being 8 games back from the Wild Card in July and firmly in the losers bracket.

That's 5 wins max, spread out over the course of the season. We're talking 1 win a month. And that's a big maybe.

It's not going to matter.

traderumor
03-29-2006, 02:16 PM
Hatteberg replaces Casey. Dunn is a no change. Kearns production is the comparison for the impact of Pena's loss. Plus, it is not unreasonable to project more production out of the 3b position than a year ago.

remdog
03-29-2006, 02:19 PM
Joe Fan also spends his money to watch some guys hit prodigious home runs. They take their kids to the game because they think, 'Wow, if this guy ever learns to hit a curve ball he could hit 70 HR's. I want my boy to see that!'

Bottom line: you can rationalize all you want about esoteric things but this trade was still dumb unless you think it put the Reds over the top to wint the division and get to the WS. I respect most of the people that posted here and I know that no was has said they expected that to happen.

Rem

traderumor
03-29-2006, 02:19 PM
5 wins is a pipe dream, sure. It assumes the Reds get lucky and beat Pythagoras, and that Arroyo pitches to the absolute pinnacle of his ability (say 210 IPs with an ERA of 3.50). I think a performace like that and the ripple effect through the bullpen could potentially result in a 5 win increase. Of course, there's only about a 1% chance of that happening...



That's 5 wins max, spread out over the course of the season. We're talking 1 win a month. And that's a big maybe.

It's not going to matter.It would seem if that is all there was to putting together predictions, so many people wouldn't be so wrong when making preseason predictions.

remdog
03-29-2006, 02:22 PM
Hatteberg replaces Casey. Dunn is a no change. Kearns production is the comparison for Pena.

Or, Dunn is a big boost over Casey, Kearns get full-time status and Pena gets full-time status of his own. I like that a lot better than Hatteberg full-time.

Rem

traderumor
03-29-2006, 02:33 PM
Or, Dunn is a big boost over Casey, Kearns get full-time status and Pena gets full-time status of his own. I like that a lot better than Hatteberg full-time.

RemAnd your still sending Harang, Claussen, Milton, Williams, and one of Gosling/Germano out there every fifth day. I don't like that better and can live with HattebergAurilia until a better option emerges.

registerthis
03-29-2006, 02:42 PM
Bottom line: you can rationalize all you want about esoteric things but this trade was still dumb unless you think it put the Reds over the top to wint the division and get to the WS.

There isn't a single poster here who thinks this trade "put the reds over the top", and a number of people also don't think the trade was dumb. Many, myself included, think it made sense.

There's a middle ground between the two extreme positions you mentioned, which has surely been evident in the 40-some pages of posts that have been made about this trade.

westofyou
03-29-2006, 02:55 PM
Joe Fan also spends his money to watch some guys hit prodigious home runs. They take their kids to the game because they think, 'Wow, if this guy ever learns to hit a curve ball he could hit 70 HR's. I want my boy to see that!'
Until they give up 5 runs a game for 3 straight years and have a.447 Winning percentage... then Joe fan stops coming to the games and Corporate Joe stops buying Luxury Boxes.


2001 - Attendance: 1,879,757 (13th out of 16)
2004 - Attendance: 1,855,787 (12th out of 16)
2003 - Attendance: 2,355,259 (8th out of 16)
2004 - Attendance: 2,287,250 (12th out of 16)
2005 - Attendance: 1,943,067 (13th out of 16)


After tiring of the team's losing ways, Castellini did not renew his luxury box at Great American Ball Park after 2003.

"As a Cincinnatian, I found it very aggravating not to see that same passion," he said. "This is a Reds town."

http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060121/SPT04/601210366/1007/col03

pedro
03-29-2006, 03:08 PM
well I was wrong about WMP not playing CF for the sox. he's there today.

remdog
03-29-2006, 03:09 PM
And your still sending Harang, Claussen, Milton, Williams, and one of Gosling/Germano out there every fifth day. I don't like that better and can live with HattebergAurilia until a better option emerges.

You just watched that better option leave for Boston. :evil:

Basically, we are debateing the better way to build a 5th place team 'cause that is the best expectation following this trade. I think that the Reds had a chance to get there as perviously constructed. There's no denying that the supporters of this trade think it's gonna' take a 'Star' like Bronson Arroyo to get over that hump.

I'm afraid it's going to be a long and miserable summer down on the river. (sigh)

Rem

westofyou
03-29-2006, 03:11 PM
There's no denying that the supporters of this trade think it's gonna' take a 'Star' like Bronson Arroyo to get over that hump.

Well I supported the trade, but I certainly never called Arroyo a *Star* in fact he's a middle of the rotation type, in fact if he and Harang become the #3 and #4 guys within 2 years, I'll be happy with the trade.

One thing's for sure, I never would call WMP a *Star* either.


I'm afraid it's going to be a long and miserable summer down on the river. (sigh)
WMP sure would not have changed that prediction.

remdog
03-29-2006, 03:12 PM
After tiring of the team's losing ways, Castellini did not renew his luxury box at Great American Ball Park after 2003.

"As a Cincinnatian, I found it very aggravating not to see that same passion," he said. "This is a Reds town."

Thank goodness for Bronson Arroyo then! I'm sure I can hear the stampede to the box office all the way out here in California. ;)

Rem

KronoRed
03-29-2006, 03:18 PM
I think that's another earthquake ;)

This teade didn't need to result in Hatteberg becoming a starter, Freel could be out in left with Richy at 2nd and the Reds O would be a lot better off.

The Reds made this trade worse by handing a job over to Hattberg and Womack.

remdog
03-29-2006, 03:21 PM
Well I supported the trade, but I certainly never called Arroyo a *Star* in fact he's a middle of the rotation type...


WMP sure would not have changed that prediction.

So you think BA is a 'middle of the rotation type', eh? Maybe on the Reds but...:laugh:

And no, WMP wouldn't have changed that prediction. But if BA is the best I can get I pass and hope that I can either turn him for better in mid-season or that one of the other guys on the team brings back more.

Rem

westofyou
03-29-2006, 03:24 PM
So you think BA is a 'middle of the rotation type', eh? Maybe on the Reds but...

Yeah, those 61 starts in Boston the last 2 years must have been a dream I had.

What do you want for nothing?

Rubber biscuit?

remdog
03-29-2006, 03:24 PM
I think that's another earthquake ;)

This teade didn't need to result in Hatteberg becoming a starter, Freel could be out in left with Richy at 2nd and the Reds O would be a lot better off.

The Reds made this trade worse by handing a job over to Hattberg and Womack.

No argument there.

What the trade did do was give the Reds an excuse to move Dunn off first, where he would be more valuable. From there, the rest is just mismanagement. :bang:

Rem

remdog
03-29-2006, 03:27 PM
Yeah, those 61 starts in Boston the last 2 years must have been a dream I had.

What do you want for nothing?

Rubber biscuit?

As you said, that was two years ago.

Rem

westofyou
03-29-2006, 03:28 PM
As you said, that was two years ago.

Rem
No, I said the "last two years."

But hey it was 2 years ago the WMP hit 26 HR's too.

registerthis
03-29-2006, 03:31 PM
Yeah, those 61 starts in Boston the last 2 years must have been a dream I had.

I believe the thinking is if he is pitching for the Reds, he can't possibly be any good. So just wipe those 61 starts away and start from the idea that Arroyo is crap. Go from there.

westofyou
03-29-2006, 03:33 PM
I believe the thinking is if he is pitching for the Reds, he can't possibly be any good. So just wipe those 61 starts away and start from the idea that Arroyo is crap. Go from there.
That's right I forgot it's the Reds who hold all the trump cards, that's why they have a .488 winning percentage since the 1994 srike.

remdog
03-29-2006, 03:40 PM
No, I'm thinking that his skills are declining which has been detailed elsewhere in this thread.

It truly saddens me to see Reds supporters make excuses for this trade as a good one because they are happy to have a shot at 5th place.

I'm done. Those of you happy with this trade can talk amonst yourselves and continue to tell each other fairytales.

Rem

registerthis
03-29-2006, 03:42 PM
...

Those of you happy with this trade can talk amonst yourselves and continue to tell each other fairytales.


...you mean like "his skills are declining" based off of a one year decline in K totals?

Sure, I'll get right on that. Based on that assessment, Pena's skills are also in decline. Next argument, please.

pedro
03-29-2006, 03:43 PM
Ok, thanks Rem.

westofyou
03-29-2006, 03:47 PM
I'm done. Those of you happy with this trade can talk amonst yourselves and continue to tell each other fairytales.

Nice....:rolleyes:

TRF
03-29-2006, 04:09 PM
It was a sharp decline, much sharper than WMP's drop in OBP.

But project 2004 and 2005 out over 550 AB's. That may not spell star to you woy, but it comes pretty damn close. Now project Arroyo out to a full season of stats.. wait he had full seasons both years. One pretty good in 2004, not so good in 2005.

Sory, but no. I don't trade the guy that projects to hit around 40 HR's for a guy That might get you 5 K's every 5th day and requires you to score more than 4.5 runs to win.

westofyou
03-29-2006, 04:11 PM
But project 2004 and 2005 out over 550 AB's. That may not spell star to you woy, but it comes pretty damn close.

Too bad he has to play both ways, and face RH's 65% of the time.

Frankly I'm not going to hold my breath that he'll get a full season of at bats in Boston.

Cyclone792
03-29-2006, 04:17 PM
It was a sharp decline, much sharper than WMP's drop in OBP.

But project 2004 and 2005 out over 550 AB's. That may not spell star to you woy, but it comes pretty damn close. Now project Arroyo out to a full season of stats.. wait he had full seasons both years. One pretty good in 2004, not so good in 2005.

Sory, but no. I don't trade the guy that projects to hit around 40 HR's for a guy That might get you 5 K's every 5th day and requires you to score more than 4.5 runs to win.

There is no such thing as a star with a .310 OBP in a high powered offensive era like the one we're currently in. In fact, Wily Mo Pena's career relative OBP is 0.89. For a corner outfielder, that's nothing more than a gaping, out-making machine in the lineup in addition to a severe liability in the field defensively.

To put it in perspective how lousy Pena's OBP is, Tony Womack's career OBP is 12 points higher than Wily Mo Pena's, and Womack's relative OBP is also higher at 0.91.

pedro
03-29-2006, 04:20 PM
WMP is what BF thinks Dunn is.

KronoRed
03-29-2006, 04:21 PM
WMP is what BF thinks Dunn is.
But Wily is a "ballplayer"

TRF
03-29-2006, 04:27 PM
WMP is what BF thinks Dunn is.

ok that's just mean.

TRF
03-29-2006, 04:30 PM
There is no such thing as a star with a .310 OBP in a high powered offensive era like the one we're currently in. In fact, Wily Mo Pena's career relative OBP is 0.89. For a corner outfielder, that's nothing more than a gaping, out-making machine in the lineup in addition to a severe liability in the field defensively.

To put it in perspective how lousy Pena's OBP is, Tony Womack's career OBP is 12 points higher than Wily Mo Pena's, and Womack's relative OBP is also higher at 0.91.

Isn't Womack like 36?

Isn't Pena 24?

I'm betting pena will develop. It's the crux of my arguement. I also think we won't see anything more from Arroyo than we will Dave Williams. I might be wrong. I hope I am about Arroyo, but I feel certain I am not about WMP. he had a good winter campaign and he's having an even better ST. My thinking is he's the starter by the AS break at the earliest, and the job is his fulltime next year.

traderumor
03-29-2006, 04:37 PM
Isn't Womack like 36?

Isn't Pena 24?

I'm betting pena will develop. It's the crux of my arguement. I also think we won't see anything more from Arroyo than we will Dave Williams. I might be wrong. I hope I am about Arroyo, but I feel certain I am not about WMP. he had a good winter campaign and he's having an even better ST. My thinking is he's the starter by the AS break at the earliest, and the job is his fulltime next year.With Ramirez in left and Pena in right? Have a hard time seeing Francona running that out there every day.

TRF
03-29-2006, 04:42 PM
All Pena really has to do is get his OBP around .330, and yes, I see that happening this year. And when he does, he'll be the starter in RF or wherever for a decade.

westofyou
03-29-2006, 04:49 PM
All Pena really has to do is get his OBP around .330, and yes, I see that happening this year.
Just like Dmitre Young last year, a whole .007 better than the league in RC/27

Cyclone792
03-29-2006, 04:50 PM
Isn't Womack like 36?

Isn't Pena 24?

I'm betting pena will develop. It's the crux of my arguement. I also think we won't see anything more from Arroyo than we will Dave Williams. I might be wrong. I hope I am about Arroyo, but I feel certain I am not about WMP. he had a good winter campaign and he's having an even better ST. My thinking is he's the starter by the AS break at the earliest, and the job is his fulltime next year.

It's a very poor bet to bet Pena will develop. That's the crux of the other side of the argument. It's absolutely defying a tall, brick wall of odds. If Pena does defy it, congrats to him, but banking on Pena developing into what Pena supporters think he can develop into is as good of a decision as consistently drafting high school pitchers in the first round of amateur drafts.

You're heavily going against the odds. If Pena never defies the odds and fails to take a mighty, abnormal leap in figuring out the strike zone and picking up some plate discipline, he'll turn into the most overrated and overpriced 40 home run corner outfielder in the entire league.

The average player development bell curve for walks has the ratio between 0.75 and 0.80 for a player of Pena's age. What that means is if Pena follows the average career path, he'll have an increase of about one to two walks per a full season of plate appearances for about the next six to seven seasons. That's what, maybe 10 more walks per full season by the time he's 30-years-old? If you think that seems low, then consider that Pena's walk ratios have actually gone down since 2003, not slightly up as natural aging and development would indicate. The guy's been going backwards in the one fundamental skill he needs to develop in order to become a productive major league hitter.

Other than being BABIP hit lucky, Pena just simply will not be much better than he's already shown us unless he dramatically improves his plate discipline and figures out the difference between balls and strikes.

And then we've got this:

Pena's 2003-2005 road line: .234/.287/.462
Pena's 2003-2005 line vs. RHP: .237/.286/.454

Wily Mo Pena is exactly what Theo Epstein traded for: a commodity known to hit LHP since what the Red Sox needed was an outfielder that could have success against LHP. If Pena develops into a monster, then it's just icing on the cake for the Red Sox. Epstein didn't acquire Pena because of upside or potential; he acquired Pena to fill an OF void against LHP. Pena's a productive hitter vs. LHP with an .883 OPS vs. southpaws in the last three seasons, nobody is disputing that, but he'll face righties in 2/3 of his plate appearances if he's ever a regular player. And saying those plate appearances against righties won't be pretty is being pretty nice about it.

registerthis
03-29-2006, 04:51 PM
With Ramirez in left and Pena in right? Have a hard time seeing Francona running that out there every day.

That could be the most atrocious corner defense ever seen.

westofyou
03-29-2006, 04:54 PM
Epstein didn't acquire Pena because of upside or potential; he acquired Pena to fill an OF void against LHP. Yep, and IF he develops he'll do it despite not getting a full season of AB's and IF he doesn't then when his power makes him expensive they'll move him along.

TRF
03-29-2006, 05:42 PM
And IF he does it, and his winter and spring numbers indicate he just might be heading in that direction, you have a player that could be putting up a .260+ .330+ .590+ line.

I'm sorry but a lot of Pena's problem stems from a D.R. way of thinking extended to the ML level due to a bad contract.

that thinking is: "you have to hit your way off the island."

Funny thing is he got to play winter ball and hang around guys like Ortiz. He got to soak up some baseball knowledge from guys that speak his language, And what does he say in one of his first interviews this year? he needs to learn to recognize and lay off pitches he cannot get. He needs to learn to be more patient at the plate. So he knows his flaws now. All he needs is a measure of comfort. I think he'll get that in Boston, and I am sure he would've as the LF for the Reds.

westofyou
03-29-2006, 05:46 PM
And IF he does it, and his winter and spring numbers indicate he just might be heading in that direction, you have a player that could be putting up a .260+ .330+ .590+ line.

That would make him the first to ever have a line like that... except for Matt Williams who did it in the strike shortened 94 season.


RUNS CREATED/GAME YEAR RC/G AVG OBA SLG
1 Matt Williams 1994 6.51 .267 .319 .607

TRF
03-29-2006, 05:57 PM
That would make him the first to ever have a line like that... except for Matt Williams who did it in the strike shortened 94 season.


RUNS CREATED/GAME YEAR RC/G AVG OBA SLG
1 Matt Williams 1994 6.51 .267 .319 .607

He just seems to be that kind of player now. And i think the OBP will rise to an eventual plateau of around .355-.360. while his SLG hovers at .590+

Chip R
03-29-2006, 05:58 PM
And what does he say in one of his first interviews this year? he needs to learn to recognize and lay off pitches he cannot get. He needs to learn to be more patient at the plate. So he knows his flaws now. All he needs is a measure of comfort. I think he'll get that in Boston, and I am sure he would've as the LF for the Reds.

He very well may recognize his flaws and be very sincere about being more patient but when he gets up to the plate for real, all those patient thoughts may go out of his head and instinct takes over.

TRF
03-29-2006, 06:00 PM
He very well may recognize his flaws and be very sincere about being more patient but when he gets up to the plate for real, all those patient thoughts may go out of his head and instinct takes over.

or not. At least he recognizes the flaws unlike a guy like Womack that will never get why he's an awful ballplayer.

traderumor
03-29-2006, 06:04 PM
And IF he does it, and his winter and spring numbers indicate he just might be heading in that direction, you have a player that could be putting up a .260+ .330+ .590+ line.

I'm sorry but a lot of Pena's problem stems from a D.R. way of thinking extended to the ML level due to a bad contract.

that thinking is: "you have to hit your way off the island."

Funny thing is he got to play winter ball and hang around guys like Ortiz. He got to soak up some baseball knowledge from guys that speak his language, And what does he say in one of his first interviews this year? he needs to learn to recognize and lay off pitches he cannot get. He needs to learn to be more patient at the plate. So he knows his flaws now. All he needs is a measure of comfort. I think he'll get that in Boston, and I am sure he would've as the LF for the Reds.

Yea, and I recognize that I should lay off eating a whole large pizza by myself, but that doesn't mean I have the ability to do so. I think this "being around big Papi" thing is being waaaaaaaaaaaaay overplayed. If you wanna play that card, then you also have to watch out for the trump of Manny and his male PMS.

And to think that WMP is gonna get "a measure of comfort" in Beantown when he goes on a whiff binge that could rival any of Tony Montanya's coke snorting binges is really reaching for reasons that WMP will fulfill your expectations.

Cyclone792
03-29-2006, 06:05 PM
And IF he does it, and his winter and spring numbers indicate he just might be heading in that direction, you have a player that could be putting up a .260+ .330+ .590+ line.

I'm sorry but a lot of Pena's problem stems from a D.R. way of thinking extended to the ML level due to a bad contract.

that thinking is: "you have to hit your way off the island."

Funny thing is he got to play winter ball and hang around guys like Ortiz. He got to soak up some baseball knowledge from guys that speak his language, And what does he say in one of his first interviews this year? he needs to learn to recognize and lay off pitches he cannot get. He needs to learn to be more patient at the plate. So he knows his flaws now. All he needs is a measure of comfort. I think he'll get that in Boston, and I am sure he would've as the LF for the Reds.

His winter and spring numbers are a grand total of about 100 plate appearances, many of which are likely against inferior pitching compared to the major league level. The small sample size and level of competition has created a set of statistics that just don't have much stock.

FWIW, guys like Ortiz and Manny Ramirez have always been able to draw a walk ever since they first arrived in the league. They walked once every eight or nine plate appearances upon arrival, compared to Pena who walks once every 16.5 plate appearances. For Pena to throw up a .330 OBP with a .260 BA, he's going to have to walk once every 10.5 plate appearances, and would draw approximately 60 walks in a full season. That's a long, long way from the once every 16 plate appearances he's shown thus far, especially since Pena's shown no improvement whatsoever in his walk rates. It's heavily going against the odds, unless all he faces is LHP.

I do think the chances of Pena developing into this magical player are slightly better in Boston than in Cincinnati because A) Fenway Park, B) Boston's front office philosophy, and C) to a very very small extent, Ortiz and Ramirez may be able to help him. But I still don't think those chances are anything to get excited about, especially considering none of those factors were prevalent had we kept him here.

TRF
03-29-2006, 06:12 PM
Well, I guess we'll have a better view at the AS Break and in October.

Cyclone792
03-29-2006, 06:16 PM
Here's a fun list that Wily Mo Pena makes, HR/BB ratio of 0.80 and higher, including some pitchers:


nameLast nameFirst yr1 yrfin HR BB HR/BB
Richard J.R. 1971 1980 10 4 2.50
Hernandez Livan 1996 2005 7 5 1.40
Valenzuela Fernando 1980 1997 10 8 1.25
Cloninger Tony 1961 1972 11 9 1.22
Greene Todd 1996 2005 69 57 1.21
Schroeder Bill 1983 1990 61 58 1.05
Soriano Alfonso 1999 2005 162 157 1.03
Hancock Garry 1978 1984 12 12 1.00
Meyerle Levi 1871 1884 10 10 1.00
Conley Gene 1952 1963 5 5 1.00
Schneider Pete 1914 1919 5 5 1.00
Show Eric 1981 1991 4 4 1.00
Armas Tony 1976 1989 251 260 0.97
Gonzalez Juan 1989 2005 434 457 0.95
Pena Wily Mo 2002 2005 51 54 0.94
Demeter Don 1956 1967 163 180 0.91
Dean Dizzy 1930 1947 8 9 0.89
Roberts Dave 1969 1981 7 8 0.88
Mora Andres 1976 1980 27 31 0.87
Paquette Craig 1993 2003 99 120 0.83
Batista Tony 1996 2004 214 260 0.82
Garcia Karim 1995 2004 66 81 0.81
Robinson Don 1978 1992 13 16 0.81
Williams Matt 1987 2003 378 469 0.81
Quinn Mark 1999 2002 45 56 0.80
Bell George 1981 1993 265 331 0.80
Cowan Billy 1963 1972 40 50 0.80

traderumor
03-29-2006, 06:17 PM
Well, I guess we'll have a better view at the AS Break and in October.Of course. But the decision maker has to act with foresight and be held accountable for it.

westofyou
03-29-2006, 06:20 PM
He just seems to be that kind of player now. And i think the OBP will rise to an eventual plateau of around .355-.360. while his SLG hovers at .590+

Maybe for 1 season, but something has to give BA, Walks.. guys don't slug that high without OB higher than .360, it's a rarity


SEASON
SLG >= .590
OBA <= .360
AVERAGE displayed only--not a sorting criteria
WALKS displayed only--not a sorting criteria
AGE displayed only--not a sorting criteria

RUNS CREATED/GAME YEAR RC/G SLG OBA AVG BB AGE
1 Andres Galarraga 1996 7.96 .601 .357 .304 40 35
2 Dave Kingman 1979 7.57 .613 .343 .288 45 30
3 Andres Galarraga 1994 7.51 .592 .356 .319 19 33
4 George Bell 1987 7.46 .605 .352 .308 39 27
5 Ernie Banks 1955 7.15 .596 .345 .295 45 24
6 Joe Adcock 1956 6.79 .597 .337 .291 32 28
7 Matt Williams 1994 6.51 .607 .319 .267 33 28


That's 7 players total out of 4253 guys since 1955 when it first happened who got 500 AB's in a season. That's 0.16%.

Lottery ticket players are something I've tried to steer away from, WMP is a whole truck load of scratches and sniffs.

TRF
03-29-2006, 06:44 PM
woy, all of what you say may come to pass, but one thing i have gleaned from your posts over the years is that sometimes you have to look at the player.

WMP is unique in how he was signed coupled with a lack of development in the minors AND limited PT in the bigs. Add to that the "hit your way off the island" mentality that the D.R. produces, and you get a player with NO comps. At least no comps in life experience. Pena is uncharted territory for any club. To say he can't succeed or won't progress ignores what he has done without the PROPER baseball education.

He's a physical marvel, and every advancement in his game is due to his willingness to learn and likely accept that he has holes in his game. recognizing those holes is step one. correcting them is step two.

I remember someone on this board, SC Reds Fan I think, did an interview with EE once. One of the thing EE said he wanted to work on was is OB, OB, OB. He was praised for that. WMP has said much the same thing, but it gets dismissed as likely to never happen. But Pena is still young. So why does his development end now?

Falls City Beer
03-29-2006, 06:51 PM
woy, all of what you say may come to pass, but one thing i have gleaned from your posts over the years is that sometimes you have to look at the player.

WMP is unique in how he was signed coupled with a lack of development in the minors AND limited PT in the bigs. Add to that the "hit your way off the island" mentality that the D.R. produces, and you get a player with NO comps. At least no comps in life experience. Pena is uncharted territory for any club. To say he can't succeed or won't progress ignores what he has done without the PROPER baseball education.

He's a physical marvel, and every advancement in his game is due to his willingness to learn and likely accept that he has holes in his game. recognizing those holes is step one. correcting them is step two.

I remember someone on this board, SC Reds Fan I think, did an interview with EE once. One of the thing EE said he wanted to work on was is OB, OB, OB. He was praised for that. WMP has said much the same thing, but it gets dismissed as likely to never happen. But Pena is still young. So why does his development end now?


In 2004/2005, at ages 22 and 23, here are Pena's BBs to ABs: 42BB/647 ABs

In 2005, at age 22, Encarnacion did this in 211 ABs: 20 BBs.

Obviously that's a pretty dinky sample size for Encarnacion; but couple that with his minor league numbers and you're looking at Encarnacion's apple to Pena's orange, IMO.

Cyclone792
03-29-2006, 07:01 PM
I remember someone on this board, SC Reds Fan I think, did an interview with EE once. One of the thing EE said he wanted to work on was is OB, OB, OB. He was praised for that. WMP has said much the same thing, but it gets dismissed as likely to never happen. But Pena is still young. So why does his development end now?

Encarnacion's career minor league walk ratio = 1 BB per 11.67 PA with a .290 career minor league BA, which helps produce a .353 career minor league OBP
Pena's career minor league walk ratio = 1 BB per 14.93 PA with a .256 career minor league BA, which helps produce a .314 career minor league OBP

In short, 34 point difference in BA + better walk ratio = 39 point difference in OBP.

Encarnacion has shown the ability throughout his entire professional career that he should put up 50+ walks over the course of a full season, and could easily approach 60 walks. When you combine that with with his career .290 minor league BA, it's much more feasible to foresee him putting up some solid OBP numbers.

BTW, in Encarnacion's small major league plate appearances, he's maintained an ability to draw walks at a clip of one walk every 11.7 PA. As I've noted earlier in the thread, Pena's walk ratio in the majors is horrid, and has dropped to one walk every 16.63 plate appearances.

And, let's not forget, Encarnacion is also a year younger than Pena.

westofyou
03-29-2006, 07:05 PM
WMP has said much the same thing, but it gets dismissed as likely to never happen. But Pena is still young. So why does his development end now?

WMP averaged a BB every 17 ab's in MLB and 1/13.5 in ML

EE in ML 1 every 11.

WMP has never hit above .270 at any level, EE's lifetime AAA BA was .314 , AA .278 A .291 and Rookie Ball .288

WMP has way more power, but EE will probably spend more time on base than WMP based on his bat control and his eye.

registerthis
03-29-2006, 07:09 PM
Here's a fun list that Wily Mo Pena makes, HR/BB ratio of 0.80 and higher, including some pitchers:

Fernando Valenzuela was a monster at the plate.

Larkin411
03-29-2006, 08:58 PM
Signed OF-L Terrence Long to a minor league contract; released OF-R Steve Smitherman; reassigned RHP Jake Robbins to their minor league camp. [3/27]

Acquired C-R Ryan Jorgensen for INF Carlos Piste. [3/28]

T-Dog, on top of Alex Sanchez and Quinton McCracken? Apparently the "Bad Fifth Outfielders" traveling exhibit from the Hall of Fame is settling in as part of the permanent landscape in Cincinnati. Some fans might wish this was about adding veteran depth to a moribund farm system, but this doesn't really achieve that, certainly not any better than having Jason Romano and Pedro Swann at Louisville last year. Not to take anything away from Chris Denorfia's defensive prowess in center, but he's going to be hard-pressed covering all of the outfield at Louisville. It would be difficult to find two less instinctual or effective outfielders than Long and Sanchez, and neither seem likely to help the Bats do well in that all-important pennant chase in the International League.

That's the latest transaction analysis, not to distract from the thumbs up/thumbs down Pena-Arroyo discussion :).

SteelSD
03-30-2006, 02:45 AM
woy, all of what you say may come to pass, but one thing i have gleaned from your posts over the years is that sometimes you have to look at the player.

WMP is unique in how he was signed coupled with a lack of development in the minors AND limited PT in the bigs. Add to that the "hit your way off the island" mentality that the D.R. produces, and you get a player with NO comps. At least no comps in life experience. Pena is uncharted territory for any club. To say he can't succeed or won't progress ignores what he has done without the PROPER baseball education.

He's a physical marvel, and every advancement in his game is due to his willingness to learn and likely accept that he has holes in his game. recognizing those holes is step one. correcting them is step two.

And Pena's immense physical skills are why I was one of the few (along with Puffy, Stormy, and a short list of others) who never supported the idea that waiving him was the right option.

Basically, what we're seeing now in the pro-Pena camp is an expectation that a guy with Pena's lack of seasoning and nigh-unprecidented physical tools equals a player with dramatic room to grow beyond a version (the 2004-2005) most folks never even thought he'd be. That comes after a "waive him", "maybe not", "better pick him up for the fantasy team", "we just got a 200 IP MLB SP for him and should be happy" progression from the other side of the fence.

Mind you, that's a reasonable at which to sell short on Pena, particularly if one was calling for Pena's dumping prior to 2004 because at that point the difference between "worthless" and "Bronson Arroyo" is actually huge. Not only do I understand that thought process, but I back it almost to a fault.

But not this time.

He's a bigger, stronger, younger just-as-raw version of Bo Jackson. Most players that comp the least bit with Pena do or did it because of bat speed (Juan Gonzalez, Sosa, Soriano). Pena does it on bat speed plus strength enough to change the trajectory of his swing during the offering and can just push the baseball out of the park.

The last player I've seen nearly as strong is Mark McGwire. The last player I've seen that naturally nearly as strong is no one. But McGwire's power was a product of plate discipline and a shortened stroke that allowed him to utilize his power to "push" the ball out. But that short stroke still didn't allow McGwire to adjust mid-swing. Pena can do that. It's ridiculous that he can do that and still hit with power. Pujols can do it but Pujols is similarly special in that his pitch recognition allows him to hold off on many pitches Pena offers at.

Here's something pretty interesting (to me at least):

Over the past two seasons, Pena's average Isolated Power is .253 IsoP. Here's a list of the players since 2000 who've put up an IsoP of .253 or higher in a season through age 24 (minimum 325 PA):

Mark Teixeira
Albert Pujols (2 seasons)
Troy Glaus

Now, does that mean Pena will produce like any of those three overall? No. In fact, the examples I'm giving aren't at all meant to be true comps for Pena. But it does intrigue me that his IsoP is topped only by three guys in the past six years while I extended the search to include those who posted only 325 PA. The connecting point for all three above is that they had college experience that at least replicated a big portion of Pena's minor league experience while he was rushed.

Pena had discipline problems and hasn't yet figured out how to truly hit RHP. No doubt. But his minor league AB/BB rate was 1 BB for every 13.66 AB. Not so good. Yet his final real minor league season as a 20-year-old in AA (2002) saw his BB rate peak at 1 BB for every 10.78 AB. Pena's last two MLB seasons have seen him produce BB rates of 1 BB/15.27 AB (2004) and 1BB/15.55 AB (200). Those numbers include only one IBB combined. Can that ratio work? Well, Juan Gonzalez produced a hefty MLB career while acquiring a non-Intentional BB rate of 1 BB/16.71 AB after a minor league BB rate of 1 BB/14.23 AB. So yeah, it's possible but improbable for most.

But then, Pena isn't "most". Right now he's starting to figure stuff out. It's all on him. And if he does figure it out (as I suggest he will) this will be a trade to regret. That being said, I completely understand where other folks are coming from and if the player in question wasn't Wily Mo Pena, I'd agree with them.

Falls City Beer
03-30-2006, 09:05 AM
I actually think Pena's tremendous massiness will end up being a liability to his career, not an asset. I suspect it's exactly why he's been so brittle at such a young age.

Johnny Footstool
03-30-2006, 10:30 AM
I actually think Pena's tremendous massiness will end up being a liability to his career, not an asset. I suspect it's exactly why he's been so brittle at such a young age.

Funny, because a lot of players (Eric Davis and Reggie Sanders come to mind) were accused of being brittle because they weren't massive enough.

traderumor
03-30-2006, 10:51 AM
Funny, because a lot of players (Eric Davis and Reggie Sanders come to mind) were accused of being brittle because they weren't massive enough.Perhaps they are all three at extremes, just at different ends of the spectrum.

Red Heeler
03-30-2006, 11:59 AM
E.D. was brittle because he had a habit of regularly running full speed (very fast, in his case) into stationary objects. He was involved in the equivalent of a low speed car crash on a regular basis.

Roy Tucker
03-30-2006, 01:21 PM
The Arroyo-Pena deal and whether its good or bad certainly is one that is debatable.

But I think this move as a bolster-up-the-2005-staff shouldn't be underestimated. The Reds' revenue is very much a gate-driven thing and Reds fans historically are very fickle and fair weather.

If the Reds tank early, the fans will say "ho-hum, when does football start" and go off to Kings Island. This move at least mitigates a flaming disaster of a staff into a garden-variety disaster.

princeton
03-30-2006, 01:45 PM
It would be difficult to find two less instinctual or effective outfielders than Long and Sanchez


it really isn't THAT difficult. We find 'em all the time.

It's our great gift.

Johnny Footstool
03-30-2006, 02:14 PM
Aaron Heilman might be available in a trade now. Omar Minaya seems like the type who might have been interested in WMP. Unfortunately, that ship has sailed.

Spitball
03-30-2006, 02:24 PM
Aaron Heilman might be available in a trade now. Omar Minaya seems like the type who might have been interested in WMP. Unfortunately, that ship has sailed.

No way does New York ever trade Heilman for an outfielder they don't need. If Heilman is traded, I guarantee they receive some pitching in return, not a no field outfielder.

KronoRed
03-30-2006, 03:46 PM
Arryo for Heilman?

Falls City Beer
03-30-2006, 04:38 PM
I'm all for acquiring Heilman...for the bullpen.

Spitball
03-30-2006, 04:43 PM
Arryo for Heilman?

Heilman is less than two years younger and not as polished as Arroyo. Heilman has been great in relief, but struggled as a starter. Arroyo has proven himself as a starterand is signed for three years. What is Heilman's status? And who says he is available??? If he is, there has to be a reason the Mets would move this guy and that would have to be addressed. Pitchers like Heilman usually are not traded unless there is a reason or a need to be filled. The Mets don't have any holes that I'm aware of.

Arroyo pitched a great game today.

Johnny Footstool
03-30-2006, 04:58 PM
Heilman is less than two years younger and not as polished as Arroyo. Heilman has been great in relief, but struggled as a starter. Arroyo has proven himself as a starterand is signed for three years. What is Heilman's status? And who says he is available??? If he is, there has to be a reason the Mets would move this guy and that would have to be addressed. Pitchers like Heilman usually are not traded unless there is a reason or a need to be filled. The Mets don't have any holes that I'm aware of.
Arroyo pitched a great game today.

Heilman can actually strike batters out at a high rate -- that's a great thing when your defense is a bad as the Reds'. God forbid the Reds take a chance on a guy like that when a "Proven Starter" is available (nevermind that the starter has only proven himself to be mediocre at best).

traderumor
03-30-2006, 05:14 PM
Heilman can actually strike batters out at a high rate -- that's a great thing when your defense is a bad as the Reds'. God forbid the Reds take a chance on a guy like that when a "Proven Starter" is available (nevermind that the starter has only proven himself to be mediocre at best).With each post of regret over this trade, I get a glimpse at the paralysis by analysis that plagued the DanO era.

Johnny Footstool
03-30-2006, 05:36 PM
With each post of regret over this trade, I get a glimpse at the paralysis by analysis that plagued the DanO era.

Again, patience is different than impotence.

registerthis
03-30-2006, 05:52 PM
Again, patience is different than impotence.

Just ask Bradon Larson.

Spitball
03-30-2006, 09:22 PM
Again, patience is different than impotence.

Yeh, and I'm sure that's the way DanO would call it, too.

Watching Arroyo pitch today, I was impressed. He was ahead all day. He was locating the zone with that curve and was hitting the inside and outside corners with his fastball. He fearlessly attacked Manny and came out on top. Just a very well pitched game and reason for some hope.

SteelSD
03-31-2006, 12:56 AM
With each post of regret over this trade, I get a glimpse at the paralysis by analysis that plagued the DanO era.

Why would you equate the position of proven performance evaluators to the methodology of an completely incompetent GM?

Obviously, the Pena/Arroyo swap has resulted in two camps of thought and NEITHER has ever backed standing pat for the sake of standing pat. Nor has either camp once forwarded the idea of movement for movement's sake.

Many proponents of this trade are reasonable and credible. It's the reason you gave for glomming onto their position. But many opponents of the trade are just as reasonable and credible yet they're equated with Dan O'Brien-level sensibility?

C'mon. You know better.

traderumor
03-31-2006, 01:02 AM
Why would you equate the position of proven performance evaluators to the methodology of an completely incompetent GM?

Obviously, the Pena/Arroyo swap has resulted in two camps of thought and NEITHER has ever backed standing pat for the sake of standing pat. Nor has either camp once forwarded the idea of movement for movement's sake.

Many proponents of this trade are reasonable and credible. It's the reason you gave for glomming onto their position. But many opponents of the trade are just as reasonable and credible yet they're equated with Dan O'Brien-level sensibility?

C'mon. You know better.

It has to do with the continued trotting out of mythical prospects and now Aaron Heilmann is thrown out there. It is an endless loop of "coulda done better if we'd just waited a little while longer." That's DanO logic for doing nothing while waiting for values to increase or for the perfect deal to fall in his lap. I'll stand by my comparison.

SteelSD
03-31-2006, 01:42 AM
It has to do with the continued trotting out of mythical prospects and now Aaron Heilmann is thrown out there. It is an endless loop of "coulda done better if we'd just waited a little while longer." That's DanO logic for doing nothing while waiting for values to increase or for the perfect deal to fall in his lap. I'll stand by my comparison.

And that's interesting because the vast majority (if not the totality) of the folks you're drawing your opinion from would have waived Pena at least two years ago.

And no one has yet positioned that the "perfect" deal is just going to fall in any lap. The right deal takes work. My impression of Dan O'Brien is that other teams consistently waited to prey on him. And that was the case because he didn't have the evaluation skills to be the predator. Now, do you think I represent prey or predator? That's an easy answer.

The return for every valuable piece right now has to go further to changing the fortunes of the franchise. That's the point of contention. Some thing Arroyo was enough. But then, most of those folks WOULD think Arroyo is enough being that Pena was a valueless player two years ago. What they're supporting now is selling short on Pena. And that is, based on the numbers, a reasonable position.

I understand the reasoning. In most cases, I'd agree with it. I just don't agree with it in this particular case. For tangible reasons you've never been able to counter. And yes, one of those reasons is that- beyond the numbers- I've never been wrong about Wily Mo Pena. Of course, I can't remember being wrong about projecting pitching either so you'll just have to do with that what you wish.

In short, I don't disagree with any opinion that includes the concept that Bronson Arroyo will be a MLB-average pitcher or even a bit better with the right luck. I just disagree with the mentality that Pena was sold for the right value and/or the he won't progress to the point at which more value should be available.

Considering that I've never been wrong about Pena or pitching, I don't really understand how that makes me a Dan O'Brien comp- particularly when I was one of the first to call him out as the defective GM he was.

Johnny Footstool
03-31-2006, 10:36 AM
It has to do with the continued trotting out of mythical prospects and now Aaron Heilmann is thrown out there. It is an endless loop of "coulda done better if we'd just waited a little while longer." That's DanO logic for doing nothing while waiting for values to increase or for the perfect deal to fall in his lap. I'll stand by my comparison.

The "mythical prospects" are no more tiresome that you trotting out the endless loop of "that's DanO thinking."

registerthis
03-31-2006, 11:02 AM
The "mythical prospects" are no more tiresome that you trotting out the endless loop of "that's DanO thinking."

OK, well, I've not accused anyone here of "DanO thinking" (an oxymoron of sorts, really), but I too am getting tired of the mythical throw-in prospect that would have, by some admissions, made this trade more palateable.

I merely think that WMP is being overvalued by some here, nothing more. the power he brought to the table was impressive, but his circuitous routes to fly balls and wild flails at balls nowhere near the strike zone won't be missed.

TRF
03-31-2006, 11:20 AM
People in the "it was a good trade" camp seem to feel it's ok to ignore one simple fact: there is no, or very very few historical comps. to Wily Mo Pena. His development curve has yet to be fully realized. Boston is probably a pretty good fit for him, but Cincinnati was better. He's ready for 500+ AB's.

Arroyo had an OUTSTANDING day yesterday. But that particular type of day hasn't been seen by him in quite a while. I think he lies somewhere inbetween yesterday and his previous start.

And for WMP, that ain't enough. One of the Red Sox better prospect arms should have been included. And for me, had the trade been for Clement, I'd have been ok with a 1-1 swap. Clement misses bats. Arroyo did yesterday, but had not for the previous year. If the pitcher that took the mound for the Reds shows up like that all year, I'll eat crow. happily. But I sincerely doubt anyone in the "pro trade" camp think he will. WMP is hitting .320 since the trade, and is building off a solid winter campaign. Do I think WMP is going to hit .320 all year? nah. But I do think he's going to improve accross the board. I say this not based on his stats alone. I base it on the ballplayer he wants to become, and his actual thoughts on what he needs to improve.

He has nor comp, or very few in regards to his development. so you can't say WMP won't develop, that his OBP won't go up, or that he won't figure out RH pitchers.

Just like I really can't say Arroyo won't rebound from what I feel was an alarmingly bad 2004. His K/9 could rebound. He could start manhandling LH hitters. But I think that time has worked against him in this regard. I'd heve better hope he could do this if he weren't knocking on the door to 30 years old.

westofyou
03-31-2006, 11:29 AM
People in the "it was a good trade" camp seem to feel it's ok to ignore one simple fact: there is no, or very very few historical comps. to Wily Mo Pena.

Then it becomes a longshot bet, with an increasing price tag.

Something teams with limited resources shouldn't use as a tool in an attempt to right a ship. Approachs like that give me Willie Kamm feelings.

Puffy
03-31-2006, 11:30 AM
Then it becomes a longshot bet, with an increasing price tag.

Something teams with limited resources shouldn't use as a tool in an attempt to right a ship. Approachs like that give me Willie Kamm feelings.

I have Willie Kamm on a couple of my Sim League teams - lots of triples.

Johnny Footstool
03-31-2006, 11:37 AM
OK, well, I've not accused anyone here of "DanO thinking" (an oxymoron of sorts, really), but I too am getting tired of the mythical throw-in prospect that would have, by some admissions, made this trade more palateable.

I merely think that WMP is being overvalued by some here, nothing more. the power he brought to the table was impressive, but his circuitous routes to fly balls and wild flails at balls nowhere near the strike zone won't be missed.

Fair enough.

I'm rooting for Arroyo to do well and help the Reds. But please keep in mind that he's got some questions surrounding him, too. Can he get his K/9 back to a decent level? Can he avoid a Miltonesque HR plague in GABP?

Getting a prospect in that deal, especially the one the Reds were interested in (Van Buren) would have helped mitigate those questions. It's my belief that a good negotiator would have been able to swing a deal like that.

westofyou
03-31-2006, 11:39 AM
I have Willie Kamm on a couple of my Sim League teams - lots of triples.
100 Grand Player in the 20's, never amounted to the price tag.

I bet Comiskey was triples park like Redland

TRF
03-31-2006, 11:42 AM
Then it becomes a longshot bet, with an increasing price tag.

Something teams with limited resources shouldn't use as a tool in an attempt to right a ship. Approachs like that give me Willie Kamm feelings.

So Boston can afford it, but the Reds can't.

I'm fine with that thinking. What I am not fine with is not recognizing that since WMP's comps are hard to determine, though BP did a very good job trying to find them, it's ok to just accept a very average pitcher (maybe even below average if he continues pitching like last year.)

BP put some work into their analysis of WMP. I bet Bill James did too. I doubt the Reds did as much. Arroyo was not enough.

westofyou
03-31-2006, 11:45 AM
I doubt the Reds did as much.

The guy was in their organization for quite some time, to think that they didn't form an opinion of him based on data and the day to day is just being silly.

Puffy
03-31-2006, 11:52 AM
100 Grand Player in the 20's, never amounted to the price tag.

I bet Comiskey was triples park like Redland

Kamm was all defense and triples - no power (although not many in his time did have power), decent average, decent walks, good glove, good range at third. Thats about it.

Cyclone792
03-31-2006, 12:14 PM
I don't believe that opting to hang on to Pena for one more season is a Dan O'Brien type thinking, rather the Dan O'Brien type thinking was letting Pena rot on the bench for the past two seasons. I wouldn't have been opposed to hanging on to Pena this season to see how he could further develop by playing regularly, but when given the opportunity to flip him for a pitcher I'd project to be above average at a cost efficient salary, I've gotta pull the trigger, especially with the current state of Reds pitching.

My main concerns with Pena are his ability to control the strike zone, his plate discipline and the possibility of him becoming a highly cost inefficient corner outfielder, especially for the Reds. If Pena goes out and puts up .250/40/105, then he's going to command a pretty decent salary via arbitration. The problem, however, is if he puts up that type up line with rate stats of .250/.305/.500. The two questions become A) what type of salary would he command in arbitration (and ultimately free agency), and B) is that salary cost efficient for the Reds given his actual production value? My beliefs are A) quite a bit, and B) not at all. It's possible that the drastic increase in salary would lower his market value on the trade market, and that equation result wouldn't be optimal for the Reds. Additionally, his defense is well, atrocious, and he adds little to no gain with his glove or via positional adjustments.

I don't doubt that Pena can hit 40 home runs if given 650 plate appearances. What I doubt is if Pena could ever put up even a tolerable OBP that would make a salary that's driven up by 40 home run power remotely cost efficient.

RedsManRick
03-31-2006, 12:15 PM
People in the "it was a good trade" camp seem to feel it's ok to ignore one simple fact: there is no, or very very few historical comps. to Wily Mo Pena. His development curve has yet to be fully realized. Boston is probably a pretty good fit for him, but Cincinnati was better. He's ready for 500+ AB's.

Arroyo had an OUTSTANDING day yesterday. But that particular type of day hasn't been seen by him in quite a while. I think he lies somewhere inbetween yesterday and his previous start.

And for WMP, that ain't enough. One of the Red Sox better prospect arms should have been included. And for me, had the trade been for Clement, I'd have been ok with a 1-1 swap. Clement misses bats. Arroyo did yesterday, but had not for the previous year. If the pitcher that took the mound for the Reds shows up like that all year, I'll eat crow. happily. But I sincerely doubt anyone in the "pro trade" camp think he will. WMP is hitting .320 since the trade, and is building off a solid winter campaign. Do I think WMP is going to hit .320 all year? nah. But I do think he's going to improve accross the board. I say this not based on his stats alone. I base it on the ballplayer he wants to become, and his actual thoughts on what he needs to improve.

He has nor comp, or very few in regards to his development. so you can't say WMP won't develop, that his OBP won't go up, or that he won't figure out RH pitchers.

Just like I really can't say Arroyo won't rebound from what I feel was an alarmingly bad 2004. His K/9 could rebound. He could start manhandling LH hitters. But I think that time has worked against him in this regard. I'd heve better hope he could do this if he weren't knocking on the door to 30 years old.


Given that Wily Mo has essentially no comps, one could argue that the Reds needed not only cost certainty but value certainty. We couldn't afford to have one of our few valuable assets go bust -- and had little historical insight in to whether or not he would blossom or continue to struggle.

I'm not saying he will or won't succeed -- I happen to think that he will have a few great, all-star type years in his late 20's as he develops in skill against righties and then suffer a rapid decline in his early-mid 30's, largely due to injuries and his body type (basically what Sammy would've experienced if he weren't roided up) Low contact rates and slowing wrists as he ages will not treat him well.

However, the Reds needed to do something to get pitching and for reasons already discussed, I think Wily Mo was the right guy to go. If it were possible to get a better deal, I think Wayne would've gotten it. I'm curious why you think Wily Mo merits a proven major league starter AND a top pitching prospect? What comprable deals have occured recent which lead you to believe this is fair value? What other rumors surround his availability the last 2 years have suggest that type of return. I don't disagree that a DelCarmen or similar prospect would've been great. I'm just not sure I understand why it would've been reasonable.

EDIT -- I'll grant the Overbay trade. However, most people agree that the Jays overpaid and Overbay has had a 120 OPS+ the last 2 years and is actually cheaper than Pena.

TRF
03-31-2006, 12:20 PM
The guy was in their organization for quite some time, to think that they didn't form an opinion of him based on data and the day to day is just being silly.

I was referring to analysis of Arroyo, but didn't make that clear.

traderumor
03-31-2006, 01:00 PM
Fair enough.

I'm rooting for Arroyo to do well and help the Reds. But please keep in mind that he's got some questions surrounding him, too. Can he get his K/9 back to a decent level? Can he avoid a Miltonesque HR plague in GABP?

Getting a prospect in that deal, especially the one the Reds were interested in (Van Buren) would have helped mitigate those questions. It's my belief that a good negotiator would have been able to swing a deal like that.The Reds did get a prospect in that deal. His name was Cash. And the Van Buren rumor has never become any more than that.

Johnny Footstool
03-31-2006, 01:32 PM
The Reds did get a prospect in that deal. His name was Cash...

They received that same prospect for Scott Williamson, Aaron Boone, etc. He never made it to the big club.

pedro
03-31-2006, 01:39 PM
They received that same prospect for Scott Williamson, Aaron Boone, etc. He never made it to the big club.

Sure he did. You just never saw him because he likes to hide in pockets.

traderumor
03-31-2006, 02:07 PM
They received that same prospect for Scott Williamson, Aaron Boone, etc. He never made it to the big club.

I know I left that door open for you, but with a new FO, I think cash considerations get a clean slate and the sins of the past are just that.

registerthis
03-31-2006, 03:04 PM
How many scoffing at the $1.5 mil received from the Sox in thsi deal were upset about the reds wasting $1.1 mil on Womack?

KronoRed
03-31-2006, 03:18 PM
There is a diffrence, Womack is a waste of a roster spot.

registerthis
03-31-2006, 03:44 PM
There is a diffrence, Womack is a waste of a roster spot.

I don't disagree.

Just saying that it seems a bit odd to dismiss the $1.5 mill in this deal, but get worked up over $1.1 mill being paid to Womack.

We don't know the value of that $1.5 mill to this team any more than we know the value of Mystery Prospect whom people keep bringing up.

TRF
03-31-2006, 06:02 PM
the difference is we have to pay a waste of a roster spot, and even if the 1.5 mil essentially makes Womack free, well free crap is only slightly more palatble than crap you have to pay for. If they wanted to really make it bad, they could get two of him.

Doc. Scott
03-31-2006, 06:41 PM
That $1.5MM will pay most or all of the bonus paid to a first-round draft pick. Not that John Allen will allow it to be allocated that way, but still. However you want to think of it.

traderumor
03-31-2006, 07:29 PM
That $1.5MM will pay most or all of the bonus paid to a first-round draft pick. Not that John Allen will allow it to be allocated that way, but still. However you want to think of it.I think there's an echo in here ;)

Aronchis
03-31-2006, 07:53 PM
The 1.5 million made it a payroll neutral transaction. That was probably why it was included. Though if the Reds find the bottom line to be a bit looser than expected, maybe it can pay for the new buffet in the clubhouse;)