PDA

View Full Version : Rotoworld on Freel



flyer85
04-05-2006, 03:44 PM
They got it right on this one


Ryan Freel reached base three times, stole three bases and scored three runs as the Reds' leadoff hitter on Wednesday.
And that's why he should be the Reds' regular second baseman over Tony Womack

registerthis
04-05-2006, 03:49 PM
It shouldn't even be debateable, particularly considering that Womack does not have a defensive upside to Freel. He's worse by every conceivable measure.

traderumor
04-05-2006, 03:51 PM
Until Womack hits himself out of the position, he is probably going to split time with Freel. Narron will take a good OD game and let that influence him for weeks, maybe even months.

registerthis
04-05-2006, 03:54 PM
Until Womack hits himself out of the position, he is probably going to split time with Freel. Narron will take a good OD game and let that influence him for weeks, maybe even months.

But even so, you'd have to think today's outing by Freel would influence him as well.

You'd THINK.

RedsManRick
04-05-2006, 04:03 PM
I agree that it will be MUCH easier to sit Womack with a game like this already under Freel's belt. If he could stay healthy for 600 PA, he could challenge for the NL steals crown.

KronoRed
04-05-2006, 04:59 PM
In the dictionary when you look up lead off hitter you should find Freel.

Not even a contest.

flyer85
04-05-2006, 05:02 PM
In the dictionary when you look up lead off hitter you should find Freel.

Not even a contest.Just to make the point how ludicrous the Womack/Freel argument is.

Freel OBP in 2004 was .371 and 2005 was .370.

Womack's career high OBP is .349 and his career OBP is .317. This is a player in his late 30's in a downward spiral. The thought of platooning them or splitting time is sheer stupidity.

SunDeck
04-05-2006, 05:10 PM
I just wonder how many games Freel would be able to play? Guy throws himself around like a rag doll and doesn't have the durability to show that he can do that AND last an entire season.
Having said that, I'd love to see him hit his way into the 1 spot so that Womack can ride the pine as a backup or as the starter once Ryan plays his legs into the ground in August or gets another DUI or D&D.

flyer85
04-05-2006, 05:12 PM
I just wonder how many games Freel would be able to play? Why does it matter. Aurilia is a capable reserve with the glove and can hit some HRs. Just give Freel a day or two off a week and if he gets hurt then plug-in Aurilia. Not complicated and ther's no reason Womack should even be in the picture.

reds44
04-05-2006, 05:14 PM
Freel is going to get plenty of at-bats. He may not be at second base everyday, but he is going to play alot at different positions. He already is the everyday second baseman against lefties.

KronoRed
04-05-2006, 05:30 PM
I just wonder how many games Freel would be able to play? Guy throws himself around like a rag doll and doesn't have the durability to show that he can do that AND last an entire season.
Having said that, I'd love to see him hit his way into the 1 spot so that Womack can ride the pine as a backup or as the starter once Ryan plays his legs into the ground in August or gets another DUI or D&D.
Why save him? we'll be out of it by June, play him till he drops.

reds44
04-05-2006, 05:32 PM
Why save him? we'll be out of it by June, play him till he drops.
Way to keep the faith Krono.


;)

KronoRed
04-05-2006, 05:34 PM
I said June..not May :D

RedsManRick
04-05-2006, 06:10 PM
Why save him? we'll be out of it by June, play him till he drops.

This is what I don't understand. If you use him as a util guy, he's guarenteed to get only 350-400 PA. If you play him everyday, he might play himself on to the DL and only get 350-400 PA OR he might stay healthy and get 600 PA. However, if you don't play him, there's no way he gets that 600.

And if he does wind up on the DL, at least you can bring up another guy to contribute, rather than have him sitting on the bench b/c he needs to rest.

flyer85
04-05-2006, 07:20 PM
if you play him everyday, he might play himself on to the DL and only get 350-400 PA.couldn't the same be said of Jr?

RedsBaron
04-05-2006, 08:03 PM
Womack's career high OBP is .349 and his career OBP is .317. This is a player in his late 30's in a downward spiral. The thought of platooning them or splitting time is sheer stupidity.
A downward spiral from a not very high point to begin with.

RedsManRick
04-05-2006, 08:49 PM
couldn't the same be said of Jr?

Absolutely. Thank God we're smart enough to play Jr everyday and not just bench him to keep him healthy...

Fact of the matter is that Freel isn't more valuable as a reserve than as a starter. It's that our other reserves suck, so free as a reserve is much better than our other reserves and having a solid backup is a valuable commodity. Narron just doesn't seem to understand that you should sacrifice your starting quality for your reserve quality.

Caveat Emperor
04-05-2006, 09:14 PM
Narron just doesn't seem to understand that you should sacrifice your starting quality for your reserve quality.

Then he should absolutely be overruled by Krivsky, because not playing him hurts the team offensively, defensively, and, potentially, with the fans.

Freel brings an excitement to the product with his play style. He's the kind of guy fans remember after they've left the ballpark, and a guy fans pay to come back and see later -- the guy who goes headfirst into home in a 1 run game to put his team up by 1.

4256 Hits
04-05-2006, 09:42 PM
In the dictionary when you look up lead off hitter you should find Freel.



I just looked at mine and it has a picture Ricky Henderson.:p:

KronoRed
04-05-2006, 09:52 PM
You have an OLD copy :D

Reds1
04-06-2006, 12:40 AM
Why save him? we'll be out of it by June, play him till he drops.

That's positive thinking! :eek:

GAC
04-06-2006, 02:09 AM
But even so, you'd have to think today's outing by Freel would influence him as well.

You'd THINK.

Influence him how? Womack bats LH, and Freel bats RH. For the most part - it's all going to depend on the matchup. That is how Narron is gonna use them thorughout the year. Plus there is the option for either to play the OF on occassion (if needed). Both of these guys can play other positions, and that is a plus.

Womack had a good ST, and in the first game hit a dbl, walked twice, and scored a run. So no one cannot say he came out of the gate bad.

Freel had an excellent game yesterday, and he most likely will get the vast majority of the playing time at 2B.

But it's gonna be a long season for many if they are gonna get all bent out of shape every time they see Tony Womack on the field and think that it's wrong.

It's wrong only if he is not performing.

I don't think Narron, and the rest of the coaching staff, are idiots. Whoever performs the best is gonna get the majority of the playing time. But I again think it's gonna come down to the pitching matchup too.

But players like Womack and Aurilia are the least of our problems on this squad. They are not gonna "make or break" us - our pitching will.

savafan
04-06-2006, 02:15 AM
I have to believe, from all accounts that I've read and heard, that Krivsky is trying to trade Tony Womack, but no one is biting.

I have to believe that Tony Womack is getting playing time in hopes that he will do well enough that some other team will be interested in acquiring him, or he won't play well, and Krivsky can DFA him and not look bad doing it.

I have to believe this.

Caveat Emperor
04-06-2006, 02:26 AM
I just looked at mine and it has a picture Ricky Henderson.:p:

I bought a copy at a garage sale a few years back and it had this photo under "Leadoff Hitter":

http://i.cnn.net/si/2004/magazine/03/29/reds/p1_reds.jpg

I got really confused, until I looked under the front cover and saw this written in black ink:

"To Dad:

Maybe you can use some big words from here to confuse Jim into giving you another year.

Love,
-Aaron"

GAC
04-06-2006, 02:27 AM
It shouldn't even be debateable, particularly considering that Womack does not have a defensive upside to Freel. He's worse by every conceivable measure.

I know people are going to immediately interpret what I am saying, and accuse me of being a Womack defender :lol:

But I am not.

But lets be honest. He is not worse then Freel in every conceivable way.

defensively, at 2B...

Freel (84 games) - FPCT .976 RF 4.96 ZR .796
Womack (509 games) - FPCT .976 RF 5.12 ZR .813

I do not disagree with anyone that Freel should see a vast majority of the playing time at 2B. And that offensively, you gonna get better production out of Ryan.

But I think people are going a little overboard, and beating this Womack thing to death. And after only two games into the season. ;)

SunDeck
04-06-2006, 08:35 AM
Man, I'm out of it...totally forgot about Aurelia.

registerthis
04-06-2006, 09:43 AM
Influence him how? Womack bats LH, and Freel bats RH. For the most part - it's all going to depend on the matchup. That is how Narron is gonna use them thorughout the year. Plus there is the option for either to play the OF on occassion (if needed). Both of these guys can play other positions, and that is a plus.

Freel 2005 Splits
v. LH: .299 AVG .419 OBP .430 SLG .849 OPS
v. RH: .260 AVG .351 OBP .347 SLG .698 OPS

Womack 2005 Splits
v. LH: .254 AVG .286 OBP .254 SLG .540 OPS
v. RH: .248 AVG .274 OBP .286 SLG .560 OPS

There is absolutely no need to play Womack vs. RH's...the numbers between he and Freel aren't even close. I think people sometimes forget how truly anemic Womack is at the plate.


Womack had a good ST, and in the first game hit a dbl, walked twice, and scored a run. So no one cannot say he came out of the gate bad.

As has been posited by many people many times--a good ST and one good game do not erase an entire career. Aside from one good season in 2004, Womack's career has bounced between average and mediocre. There's no reason to think that will change in Cincinnati, with his skills waning.


Freel had an excellent game yesterday, and he most likely will get the vast majority of the playing time at 2B.

If you feel comfortable saying that, it's not due to any information coming from the Reds. Narron has repeatedly stated that Freel will get plenty of "playing time", but has also made it clear that 2B will be a platoon between him, Womack and RA. If you believe what Narron and the crew have been saying, Womack is going to see plenty of time at second.


But it's gonna be a long season for many if they are gonna get all bent out of shape every time they see Tony Womack on the field and think that it's wrong.

It's wrong only if he is not performing.

I don't think Narron, and the rest of the coaching staff, are idiots. Whoever performs the best is gonna get the majority of the playing time. But I again think it's gonna come down to the pitching matchup too.

Why should it come down to the pitching matchup? What in Womack's stats do you see that tells you he should be batting against righties?

And I don't think that the "best performer" necessarily gets the playing time--otherwise Aurilia would be entrenched at first, Freel would be entrenched at second, and Womack would be the sub. I'm not buying Womack's spring--I don't believe that a player in his mid-30s, with practically no track record of success, suddenly finds his groove. He's a mediocre player playing at a position that is better staffed by someone else. That's the long and the short of it.


But players like Womack and Aurilia are the least of our problems on this squad. They are not gonna "make or break" us - our pitching will.

I don't disagree that our pitching is the most critical issue facing the team, but it doesn't mean that you simply ignore other problems. Freel should be starting the majority of games at second--that's really not even open to question. And unlike the pitching situation, this is a problem that is easily resolved. Playing Womack over Freel alone likely won't make or break the Reds season, but it's certainly doing nothing to help us, and this team needs all the help it can get at the moment.

GAC
04-06-2006, 11:18 AM
I was simply responding to your statement....


It shouldn't even be debateable, particularly considering that Womack does not have a defensive upside to Freel. He's worse by every conceivable measure.

Womack is not worse defensively in every conceivable measure (if that is what you're inferring).

I'm not gonna debate offensively because I have already stated that Freel has the definite advantage, while Womack's offensive production, historically speaking, is anemic.

And I believe Freel should be starting at 2B - again, no debate on my part.

What I am laughing at is that simply after 2 games people are going bananas whenever they see Womack in the lineup. :lol:


As has been posited by many people many times--a good ST and one good game do not erase an entire career.

I never said it did. But a player who does everything that is expected of him in ST shouldn't be totally ignored either.


Aside from one good season in 2004, Womack's career has bounced between average and mediocre.

Won't get no argument from me on this. But one could say the very same thing about Freel. At age 30, how many complete seasons has he played? What are his overall stats? Better then Womack's. Sure. But is that the only gauge we are gonna use?... he's better then Womack!

Freel is a fun player to watch, but statistically, over his brief ML career, he is average. But yes, a fun player to watch.

But as I have stated priorly - none of these three are our answer at 2B. ;)

That was like people yesterday complaining because RA was batting 4th. Geez - were they going off! The reason it was done was to break up the lefties. But more importantly - his first A/B he gets a hit and drives in the run. He ends up going 2 fer 4 with 3 RBI's, including a HR. He hits .347 with RISP.

registerthis
04-06-2006, 11:42 AM
IWhat I am laughing at is that simply after 2 games people are going bananas whenever they see Womack in the lineup. :lol:

For the record, I've gone bananas every time he was in the lineup during ST, so my dislike of him is at least consistent.

BRM
04-06-2006, 12:01 PM
Just to make the point how ludicrous the Womack/Freel argument is.

Freel OBP in 2004 was .371 and 2005 was .370.

Womack's career high OBP is .349 and his career OBP is .317. This is a player in his late 30's in a downward spiral. The thought of platooning them or splitting time is sheer stupidity.

C'mon flyer. That was the past. Womack had a great spring, Freel didn't. We need to see if Womack has "turned the corner". ;)

RedsManRick
04-06-2006, 01:03 PM
I never said it did. But a player who does everything that is expected of him in ST shouldn't be totally ignored either.

If I had been at in ST, I would've performed everything expected of me as well (lots of errors and a .000 batting average). Doesn't mean I should be playing 2B for the Reds... :p:

capndees
04-06-2006, 01:28 PM
The answer seems obvious to me, and it has since before Opening Day. Move Dunn to 1B, make Freel the full-time LF, and let Aurilia and Womack split time at 2B.

Cedric
04-06-2006, 01:31 PM
The answer seems obvious to me, and it has since before Opening Day. Move Dunn to 1B, make Freel the full-time LF, and let Aurilia and Womack split time at 2B.

Nah, put Denorfia in Center and Griffey at 1st. I know it won't happen though.

flyer85
04-06-2006, 01:35 PM
Womack had a good ST, and in the first game hit a dbl, walked twice, and scored a run. So no one cannot say he came out of the gate bad.Interestingly enough Womack hit over .400 in ST in 2005 and came out the first 2 games going 4-9 with 2 SBs and we all know where he ended up last year.

capndees
04-06-2006, 01:46 PM
Nah, put Denorfia in Center and Griffey at 1st. I know it won't happen though.

That would work too. Either way. Freel and Kearns at the corners would hide Griffey's limitations. Denorfia in center would hide Dunn's limitations.

Anything but leaving BOTH Griffey and Dunn in the OF, and Freel fighting for playing time at 2B. Freel is a mediocre IFer, he's an awesome OFer, he should be out there every day.

KronoRed
04-06-2006, 01:51 PM
Interestingly enough Womack hit over .400 in ST in 2005 and came out the first 2 games going 4-9 with 2 SBs and we all know where he ended up last year.
Yeah but that was all new yorks fault ;)

GAC
04-06-2006, 02:19 PM
If I had been at in ST, I would've performed everything expected of me as well (lots of errors and a .000 batting average). Doesn't mean I should be playing 2B for the Reds... :p:

If those were your stats, you wouldn't have even been allowed to sell concessions at ST. :p:

But were those Womack's ST stats? I followed the team pretty well during ST, checking stats/performances, and Womack did a good job. Enough to win the starting nod? Of course not! But then look at Freel's ST performance. He struggled and wasn't sending anyone signals that 2B was his. And again - I'm not one who puts much credence in ST stats, unless a hitter is really struggling against what I deem to be pretty inferior pitching.

I just think the Womack bashing is wearing thin with alot of people.

registerthis
04-06-2006, 02:19 PM
Yeah but that was all new yorks fault ;)

...same with everything else.

registerthis
04-06-2006, 02:26 PM
But were those Womack's ST stats? I followed the team pretty well during ST, checking stats/performances, and Womack did a good job.

See Flyer's post. TW's ST stats last year were pretty good too.

I'm just not buying it. I just don't see much room for the worst everyday second baseman on the Reds. But that might just be me.

GAC
04-06-2006, 02:28 PM
The answer seems obvious to me, and it has since before Opening Day. Move Dunn to 1B, make Freel the full-time LF, and let Aurilia and Womack split time at 2B.

But you're really not solving the "problem" at 2B. And personally - if people suspect Dunn's D in the OF, then wait till they see him for a protracted time at 1B.

I've stated this before - it should be Freel a majority of the time at 2B, splitting it with RA. Womack should be a utility player. And there are advantages to having a Womack, who plays multiple positions, and has speed, coming off the bench.

And with this roster, we are going to see all three of these guys playing different positions at times throughout the year for various reasons -days off for starters, pitching matchups, injuries (knock on wood), etc.

My biggest concern going into this new season is on two players right now, and that they don't come out of the gate really struggling - Lopez and EE.

GAC
04-06-2006, 02:57 PM
See Flyer's post. TW's ST stats last year were pretty good too.

I've already seen it before. I don't care! :lol:

Nowhere have I said that his ST performance should make him the everyday 2Bman for this club; but ONLY that he has earned a spot on this roster as a utility man.

All I've said is that when a player comes into ST and performs, while the "competition" (Freel) looks terrible and struggles, and against inferior ST pitching too, then show the justification for simply dumping Womack and handing the job to Freel?



I'm just not buying it. I just don't see much room for the worst everyday second baseman on the Reds. But that might just be me.

Buying what?

You're not going to see him as the everyday 2bman. I don't know why some keep saying that.

Freel is the "lessor of the three evils" IMO at 2B. And I've never argued with that. He has played a grand total of 80+ games in his career, and at age 30, at 2B. Not good IMO.

registerthis
04-06-2006, 03:17 PM
But you're really not solving the "problem" at 2B. And personally - if people suspect Dunn's D in the OF, then wait till they see him for a protracted time at 1B.

I don't have an issue with Dunn's defense, and even though he wouldn't be as solid a first baseman as, say, Casey...first base isn't as critical a position to have a slick fielder as most others on the field. In other words, I don't think the Reds' defense will suffer much from a move of Dunn to 1B. The key is getting Freel into the lineup on as frequent a basis as possible. On that, I believe we're in agreement. If that involves moving Dunn to first--provided that he goes along with the move--his defense there would not prevent me from supporting it.

Also, I believe by virtue of playing there full time his defense would improve somewhat.

registerthis
04-06-2006, 03:26 PM
Nowhere have I said that his ST performance should make him the everyday 2Bman for this club; but ONLY that he has earned a spot on this roster as a utility man.

Utility men generally don't start on Opening Day.


All I've said is that when a player comes into ST and performs, while the "competition" (Freel) looks terrible and struggles, and against inferior ST pitching too, then show the justification for simply dumping Womack and handing the job to Freel?

By virtue of their performances during the regular season. Spring training stats are darn near worthless, as far as I'm concerned. Witness Freel, who essentially had more production in one game than he did for the entire spring training season.

I don't advocate dumping Womack, because I don't believe he ever should have been there to begin with--if we're going to discuss the "worth" of players based on stats, what did Womack do last year to even gain himself consideration for the job? The Reds are averse to penciling Freel into the lineup and allowing him to take root at one position. That I don't understand.


Buying what?

That Womack's spring stats tell the true story of his abilities. His previous 9 seasons tell the story of his abilities, not 4 weeks in Florida playing meaningless games.


You're not going to see him as the everyday 2bman. I don't know why some keep saying that.

First, my quote wasn't in reference to Womack being *our* everyday second baseman, it was with regards to his 2005 season, when he was the Yank's everyday 2B-man.

Secondly, I think by virtue of the fact that management has staunchly refused to give the job to more deserving players (Aurilia or Freel), the fact that Womack had a reasonably good spring, and the fact that Womack started at 2nd on opening day, it's entirely possible that--for the first couple of months anyway--Womack WILL be the everyday second baseman. it's certainly not out of the realm of possibility.


Freel is the "lessor of the three evils" IMO at 2B. And I've never argued with that. He has played a grand total of 80+ games in his career, and at age 30, at 2B. Not good IMO.

...and he has shown himself to be as adept, defensively, as Womack even during his "better" years. And the speed and ability to get on base that he brings to the team makes him far from a "lesser evil", it makes him an essential cog in this lineup.

flyer85
04-06-2006, 04:12 PM
I guess you guys just ought to agree to differ. I think everyone's opinion is pretty well set at this point.

Hijack - OK since I started the thread.

At this point I am far more worried about the state of the pen and lack of arms. KC announcers supposedly talked of Hudson consistently hitting 94-95 yesterday and he didn't walk anyone. German, claimed by FLA, pitched a perfect inning with 2 Ks and he hits 95 and above.

I just don't understand why the Reds don't want to take a couple of chances on guys with plus stuff and marginal control and hope they can mature as pitchers instead of ancient retreads like White and Hammond that have to be pinpoint to get people out. Claiming Turnbow has worked out for the Brewers.

RedsManRick
04-06-2006, 04:35 PM
If those were your stats, you wouldn't have even been allowed to sell concessions at ST. :p:

But were those Womack's ST stats? I followed the team pretty well during ST, checking stats/performances, and Womack did a good job. Enough to win the starting nod? Of course not! But then look at Freel's ST performance. He struggled and wasn't sending anyone signals that 2B was his. And again - I'm not one who puts much credence in ST stats, unless a hitter is really struggling against what I deem to be pretty inferior pitching.

I just think the Womack bashing is wearing thin with alot of people.

ST stats only matter for people without sufficient time in the major from which we can make accurate judgements about their ability. Tony Womack could hit 1.000 in ST and the odds he has an OBP over .350 or a SLG over .400 are still virtually zero. ST showed me that even at his best he's a punch and judy hitter who can't take a walk and is a subpar fielder. The fact is that Freel is better at getting on base, better at stealing bases, and no worse in the field or in the power department. No amount of ST stats change that.

RedsManRick
04-06-2006, 04:36 PM
I guess you guys just ought to agree to differ. I think everyone's opinion is pretty well set at this point.

Hijack - OK since I started the thread.

At this point I am far more worried about the state of the pen and lack of arms. KC announcers supposedly talked of Hudson consistently hitting 94-95 yesterday and he didn't walk anyone. German, claimed by FLA, pitched a perfect inning with 2 Ks and he hits 95 and above.

I just don't understand why the Reds don't want to take a couple of chances on guys with plus stuff and marginal control and hope they can mature as pitchers instead of ancient retreads like White and Hammond that have to be pinpoint to get people out. Claiming Turnbow has worked out for the Brewers.

How many chances? It's not like Hudson wanted for opportunity.

flyer85
04-06-2006, 04:45 PM
How many chances? It's not like Hudson wanted for opportunity.not in the bullpen he didn't. He was not given a chance to see if he could succeed in relief. The last two years he pitched as a starter and since he was never able to develop a useful third pitch(which makes him a relief candidate) he should have been switched to relief.

membengal
04-06-2006, 04:49 PM
Flyer...thanks for the turn toward this question. It's a good one. The one area that WK definitely needs to show a little something at this point is in the 'pen. The giving up on Simpson and Hudson was def curious, in the sense that at the least, they have plus stuff. Any reason they couldn't have worked on their plus stuff in the Reds' farm system? Too much age, and too little apparent help on the way for the Reds' current pen. Obviously, the lack of help coming is not WK's fault, but I hope he is aggressively trying to find a way to add an arm or two to the pen at this point...I wonder what RA could bring in terms of bullpen help? I would think there might be a fit there with a team or two.

GAC
04-06-2006, 07:13 PM
Utility men generally don't start on Opening Day.

Again - it boiled down to pitching matchup. And what did Womack do on Opening Day? ;)




Secondly, I think by virtue of the fact that management has staunchly refused to give the job to more deserving players (Aurilia or Freel), the fact that Womack had a reasonably good spring, and the fact that Womack started at 2nd on opening day, it's entirely possible that--for the first couple of months anyway--Womack WILL be the everyday second baseman. it's certainly not out of the realm of possibility.

I don't think any of the 3 deserve it. None of them have really excelled there. And that is what I have said all along - management has given us two candidates with that "veteran" presence, and one with alot of inexperience, at 2B - and then crosses their fingers hoping one of them excels.

It's alot like what they did last year with the catching position, and the overall results we got with LaRue and Valentin. They are hoping the same with the other three at 2B in this 2b "by committee" philosophy. They're doing the same with the closer role.

Throw bodies out there and see what happens.

Cedric
04-07-2006, 12:51 AM
Again - it boiled down to pitching matchup. And what did Womack do on Opening Day? ;)





I don't think any of the 3 deserve it. None of them have really excelled there. And that is what I have said all along - management has given us two candidates with that "veteran" presence, and one with alot of inexperience, at 2B - and then crosses their fingers hoping one of them excels.

It's alot like what they did last year with the catching position, and the overall results we got with LaRue and Valentin. They are hoping the same with the other three at 2B in this 2b "by committee" philosophy. They're doing the same with the closer role.

Throw bodies out there and see what happens.


Freel is one of the best leadoff hitters in the game of baseball. He would need to be Soriono bad before he should sit.

registerthis
04-07-2006, 11:22 AM
I don't think any of the 3 deserve it. None of them have really excelled there. And that is what I have said all along - management has given us two candidates with that "veteran" presence, and one with alot of inexperience, at 2B - and then crosses their fingers hoping one of them excels.

You're looking only at defense, GAC. Second base is the one position where there isn't a clear-cut defensive wizard, so no one who plays there for the Reds is going to win a Gold Glove. So throw the "defense" portion out, and what are you left with? Offense...and in that regard, there *is* a clear-cut leader: Freel.

Freel *deserves* to be in the lineup every day, and since there are established players at every other position he can play--the three OF spots and third--second base is where he should be, where ther is no--or shouldn't be, at least--an established player.

GAC
04-07-2006, 03:07 PM
Freel is one of the best leadoff hitters in the game of baseball.

You base this on what?

KronoRed
04-07-2006, 03:11 PM
He gets on base, steals bases and causes trouble on the basepaths, that's the definition of a leadoff hitter :D

GAC
04-07-2006, 03:36 PM
He gets on base, steals bases and causes trouble on the basepaths, that's the definition of a leadoff hitter :D

For guy who prides himself on stats, especially in evaluating other players, that's a really solid answer! :lol:

GAC
04-07-2006, 03:36 PM
You're looking only at defense, GAC. Second base is the one position where there isn't a clear-cut defensive wizard, so no one who plays there for the Reds is going to win a Gold Glove. So throw the "defense" portion out, and what are you left with? Offense...and in that regard, there *is* a clear-cut leader: Freel.

Freel *deserves* to be in the lineup every day, and since there are established players at every other position he can play--the three OF spots and third--second base is where he should be, where ther is no--or shouldn't be, at least--an established player.

And IMO - Freel is not an "established" player. Show where this guy, now age 30, has established/solidified himself anywhere prior to coming to the Reds? He's never even had a full season of baseball as a starter anywhere (the closest he got was '04 with the Reds). And you're telling me that means squat?

You see - I'm not comparing Freel to Aurilia or Womack. That's one ridiculous gauge to try and use to measure someone's worth.

You seem to be missing the point that it's not about who should get the vast majority of the playing time at 2B. At least not with me anyway.

I'm saying that if you look over Freel's career stats and the amount of time he has even spent at 2B, he is not our answer there. And yet you're going to try and convince me that this 30 yr old, with limited playing time there, is our best shot. Maybe so. I'm just not convinced that he is.

How does he measure up against al the other 2Bman (and leadoff guys) in the majors? As a leadoff (A/B-wise), you're probably gonna to have to base your assessment on a pretty small "window" with Freel.

That is the ranking I am concerned with... and we all, as Red fans, should want. Not that he's better then the other two. Big deal!

registerthis
04-07-2006, 03:50 PM
How does he measure up against al the other 2Bman (and leadoff guys) in the majors? As a leadoff (A/B-wise), you're probably gonna to have to base your assessment on a pretty small "window" with Freel.

That is the ranking I am concerned with... and we all, as Red fans, should want. Not that he's better then the other two. Big deal!

Freel scores high makrs in OBP and speed--the two critical components to a lead-off hitter. Compared with Aurilia and Womack, he excels.

As far as comparisons go, I'm not sure what comps to other teams' players have to do with this. We're not having this discussion as part of some "who's the best leadoff hitter in baseball?" type of thread, the question is--of the players available to play second base, who is the one most deserving of a bulk of the playing time? I say Freel, due in large part to the offensive numbers he has produced the past two seasons. The knock on him is that he's brittle, but he's also never been given a regular starting spot at any one position. I say, give him a majority of starts at second, and see what he can do. if he breaks down, he breaks down...but fear of an injury should never stop you from putting your best players on the field.

If you're arguing that Freel isn't among the league elite at second or in the leadoff spot, that's one argument. But if you're arguing that Freel doesn't *deserve* the second base spot on the Reds, then I would ask you to put forth evidence of whom on the Reds you believe *does*. And, for the record, the three player platoon is not a viable solution, so I'll need something more than "none of them."

TC81190
04-07-2006, 04:14 PM
Freel is the "lessor of the three evils" IMO at 2B.

I'm not sure I agree with this at all. For the largest part of last season, before he was injured, he was out OPSing a fellow MIFer by the name of Derek Jeter.

GAC
04-07-2006, 05:01 PM
Freel scores high makrs in OBP and speed--the two critical components to a lead-off hitter. Compared with Aurilia and Womack, he excels.

Again you're using RA and Womack as the measuring stick. :lol:

Lets end this discussion over the comparison between him and the two, and who should get the majority of the playing time. I've never said he shouldn't.



As far as comparisons go, I'm not sure what comps to other teams' players have to do with this. We're not having this discussion as part of some "who's the best leadoff hitter in baseball?" type of thread

I was simply responding to Cedric's contention that Freel is one of the best leadoff guys in today's game. Respectfully, I think that is a stretch, and I simply wanted statistical proof that confirms that assertion - other then people saying he's fast and gets on base. ;)


The knock on him is that he's brittle, but he's also never been given a regular starting spot at any one position. I say, give him a majority of starts at second, and see what he can do. if he breaks down, he breaks down...but fear of an injury should never stop you from putting your best players on the field.

I've never said that his "brittleness" should cause anyone to be fearful, or be used as reasoning not to play him. But it does make me wary as to whether he can satisfactorily fill the role.


If you're arguing that Freel isn't among the league elite at second or in the leadoff spot, that's one argument. But if you're arguing that Freel doesn't *deserve* the second base spot on the Reds, then I would ask you to put forth evidence of whom on the Reds you believe *does*.

I've never said anywhere, nor has it been my contention, that Freel does not deserve to be at 2B. I said that when looking over his career performance, age, and what positions he has played, his lack of playing time at 2B overall, I believe he is not a surety there IMO.

But that does not mean he shouldn't be starting there.... or the other two should be getting more playing time.

But hey! We just picked up Brandon Phillips from the Indians.

Now we got 4 guys fighting for 2B! :lol:

registerthis
04-07-2006, 05:18 PM
OK, we may be arguing different things. I don't think Freel is the be all-end all, but certainly is the best candidate of the three-headed second base monster.

Brandon Phillips now...I have to assume there's something more going on here. Because this stockpiling of mediocre middle infielder talent is just baffling to me.

GAC
04-07-2006, 09:23 PM
OK, we may be arguing different things.

We're arguing? ;)


I don't think Freel is the be all-end all, but certainly is the best candidate of the three-headed second base monster.

I agreed with that 6 pages ago.


Brandon Phillips now...I have to assume there's something more going on here. Because this stockpiling of mediocre middle infielder talent is just baffling to me.

It really complicates things and sends mixed signals to these guys that they have really no faith in any of them. It's basically up for grabs.

But how are you going to give these 4 guys enough A/B's to prove themselves?

It's messed up IMO.

KronoRed
04-07-2006, 09:28 PM
Freel has proven himself, Womack and Rich need to be happy with being backups consider the Reds were the only team that wanted them.

Phillips, that's a quandary, he's got a nice glove.

GAC
04-08-2006, 07:08 AM
Freel has proven himself, Womack and Rich need to be happy with being backups consider the Reds were the only team that wanted them.

I don't think he has really "proven" himself per say. But he definitely has shown enough to have earned the start at 2B to see what he can do on a consistent basis, and as an everyday player, that is for sure.



Phillips, that's a quandary, he's got a nice glove.

OK Reuben - if his glove turns up missing, then we know where to look, ;)

Hey Jerry. We've noticed that you have seemed to have made a decision about who is gonna play 2B full time. It seems to be Freel.

Jerry: The other guy's gloves have turned up missing.

KronoRed
04-08-2006, 02:04 PM
I don't know anything about it ;)