PDA

View Full Version : End the 1B Platoon



Guacarock
05-27-2006, 06:54 AM
Narron might be pleased by the results he's seen from the 1B platoon of Hatteberg and Aurilia. But I can't say I share his confidence.

With the season now roughly one-third gone, the 1B platoon has collected 22 RBI and 25 runs. Those are substandard results from an offensive position, especially coupled with Hatteberg and Aurilia not being plus-defenders at 1B.

I'm not out to pillory these two players. The front office, both the O'Brien and Krivsky incarnations, must shoulder the lion's share of the blame for jettisoning Casey without bringing on board a decent replacement.

From all appearances, Dano intended to move Dunn to fill the gap, while Krivsky negated that decision. Both might have been right for their own reasons, but the chaotic management transition has left 1B dangling. It's not quite the same boondoogle as the bullpen, but it's a fluid, unresolved position that will have to get settled sometime this off-season, if not this summer.

Just to demonstrate how far 1B has fallen off the offensive map, here are the RBI and Run totals for the '06 Reds, by position, so far this summer.

RBI
2B = 37
LF = 30
RF = 30
CF = 30
3B = 30
1B = 22
C = 21
SS = 17

Runs Scored

LF = 36
SS = 35
RF = 32
2B = 31
3B = 29
1B = 25
CF = 20
C = 17

In both RBI and runs scored, what we're seeing is 1B reduced to the same levels of production as traditional defensive-oriented positions -- C, SS, CF-- and far trailing the production we're getting from RF, LF, 3B, even 2B. Doesn't cut it, in my book.

I'm not lamenting the Casey trade -- only the platoon that has arisen in his absence. Also, to repeat, I have no particular axe to grind against Aurilia or Hatteberg. They both bring certain qualities to the table that make them great reserves for the Reds -- Aurilia's IF versatility and power against LH pitchers; Hatteberg's patience and OBP.

But this 1B platoon should not be held too sacred or last too much longer or puffed up too much by Narron. Having erased Dano's plan covering the successor issue for Casey, it's time for Krivsky to reveal his own long-term answer, a palatable and productive answer, a true solution and not just a stopgap.

GAC
05-27-2006, 10:36 AM
At the end of May last year, Casey had 22 RBI's.

Casey also, thru last May, had a - .369 OB% .430 SLG% = .799 OPS

This year at 1B...

Aurilia - .381 OB% .655 SLG% = 1.036 OPS
Hatteberg - .407 OB% .429 SLG% = .836 OPS

So collectively, as a 1Bman - .394 OB% .542 SLG% = .936 OPS

And they are far, far cheaper then Mr "GIDP" Casey. ;)

So No, I don't mind the platoon at all.

Redhook
05-27-2006, 10:47 AM
I usually don't like platoons, but this year I don't mind much. We're getting Sean Casey like numbers for alot less. I do think Wayne will address this and hopefully we'll have long-term everyday first baseman next year. I do think Aurilia needs to be in the lineup everyday. If not first, then wherever around the infield. We need him in the cleanup spot every night. He makes the lineup more balanced.

RedlegJake
05-27-2006, 10:49 AM
Also, remember these guys are time fillers. Votto is working his way up, the classic power hitting type first baseman. For this season I'm alright with what the Reds are getting at first base.

REDREAD
05-27-2006, 11:15 AM
I think Wayne will address this in the offseason. When he came on board, his first priority was to address pitching (as it should've been). At the time, Hattenberg was the best available. I know some people wanted Carlos Pena, but I don't think he's doing that well (as is the guy that traded to the A's as part of the lopez deal, the name escapes me). Also, both those guys only came available after Hattenberg was signed (although I guess we could've done without 3 catchers).

TeamBoone
05-27-2006, 11:32 AM
I'm really not too concerned about the offensive production... it's pretty much a wash, except it takes two roster spots to get equivalent results. Is the trade off on salary worth the extra roster spot? I don't know; maybe.

Anyway, my bigger concern is the defensive loss. No matter what anyone says about Casey, he could scoop with the best of them and more often than not, he'd have snagged those errant wide throws that I believe have cost the Reds two games already.

alexad
05-27-2006, 11:55 AM
I'm really not too concerned about the offensive production... it's pretty much a wash, except it takes two roster spots to get equivalent results. Is the trade off on salary worth the extra roster spot? I don't know; maybe.

Anyway, my bigger concern is the defensive loss. No matter what anyone says about Casey, he could scoop with the best of them and more often than not, he'd have snagged those errant wide throws that I believe have cost the Reds two games already.

I am not worried about the roster spot. When one of them are sitting the bench, they become the best pinch hitter on the bench which is far better than Cruz was last year. Both has the ability to hit the long ball and also have bat control for a base hit. So I am happy with it.

I am just glad Rich resigned with us this year.

Highlifeman21
05-27-2006, 11:58 AM
The platoon is a 1 season cheap alternative.

By trading Casey, we were able to sign Dunn to his LTC, and if the stars align, and if the moon is full, we just might see him @ 1B next year, but perhaps that's wishful thinking.

Hatteberg's approach at the plate justifies the platoon, and Aurillia is tolerable over there, if nothing else. I don't know that I'd want WK going out and throwing money around the league for an everyday 1B when I keep clinging to the hope that in 2007, #44 will be there.

TeamBoone
05-27-2006, 12:02 PM
I am not worried about the roster spot. When one of them are sitting the bench, they become the best pinch hitter on the bench which is far better than Cruz was last year. Both has the ability to hit the long ball and also have bat control for a base hit. So I am happy with it.

Wasn't Cruz the best pinch hitter in the league last year? Are either RA or SH better? Or are they again using two roster spots to get the same results supplied by one guy last year?

RedFanAlways1966
05-27-2006, 01:17 PM
We must remember that Aurilia offers more than 1st base w/ his spot. He can play the other three infield spots as well. 1st base was not really his "primary spot" before this year, but has become that with Encarnacion/Lopez/Phillips manning the other positions. Hatteberg is definitely a 1st baseman, but Aurilia's roster spot offers more than that in this regard.

Matt700wlw
05-27-2006, 01:26 PM
The 1B platoon is the least of this teams problems right now.

alexad
05-27-2006, 02:53 PM
The 1B platoon is the least of this teams problems right now.


What is amazing is the fact going into the season we had the sticks to win and the bullpen to keep it close for the sticks. We were all worried about the starting pitching.

Well heading into June, the hitting is not super strong and can not win games when we need a run, the bullpen is a bunch of aging souls who at one time were considered decent. The starting pitching is starting to look pretty dang good. How many games have the starters given up 1 run or less and we can not score runs. Milton deserved a win last night, BA has had a great game with no runs, In fact Williams pitched great for 8 innings and the runs were not there.

It seems when the starters give a ton of runs, the offense comes to play. In tight games, the offense has been lost in the crowd eating hotdogs and apple pie........

captainmorgan07
05-27-2006, 03:09 PM
i personally don't mind the platoon rich maybe needs to get a few more starts than hatte beacuse of the way he evens out our lineup but anythin'gs better than casey

reds44
05-27-2006, 03:32 PM
They both can't field wortha lick, and the Hat hasn't been driving in any runs.

I am not worried per say about they plantoon, but it isn't very good.

KronoRed
05-27-2006, 04:39 PM
Combine them, get the 6 million dollar man people on the line.

We could use an extra roster spot.

Guacarock
05-27-2006, 06:12 PM
At the end of May last year, Casey had 22 RBI's.

Casey also, thru last May, had a - .369 OB% .430 SLG% = .799 OPS

This year at 1B...

Aurilia - .381 OB% .655 SLG% = 1.036 OPS
Hatteberg - .407 OB% .429 SLG% = .836 OPS

So collectively, as a 1Bman - .394 OB% .542 SLG% = .936 OPS

And they are far, far cheaper then Mr "GIDP" Casey. ;)

So No, I don't mind the platoon at all.

Nice try, but you have forgotten these salient facts.

1. Casey was no iron man. He did not man 1B solo in 2005. Dunn backed him up. So, looking at Casey and Dunn's combined 1B stats in April-May 2005 vs. those for Aurilia-Hatteberg, we have experienced significant offensive slippage at the position. The Casey-Dunn combo scored 31 runs (vs. the 25 by Aurilia-Hatteberg), and collected 25 RBI (vs. 22 by Aurilia-Hatteberg).

2. Magnifying the slippage: Narron is often batting Aurilia at cleanup, Hatteberg in wheelhouse slots like 5 or 6. But Casey didn't hit 4, 5 or 6 that much last year. He was usually hitting 2 or 3. In other words, he was perceived more as a table setter than as a RBI producer. With the season one-third over, we have a cumulative 22 RBI from Aurilia and Hatteberg, while manning 1B. Extrapolating over a full season, that would be 66 RBI for the year. Perfectly acceptable production from someone batting 2, maybe even 3, but certainly not from someone hitting 4, 5 or 6.

3. The reason the team traded Casey was because they were disappointed in his production, not only in relationship to his salary, but also in terms of what might be expected from 1B. The Aurilia-Hatteberg platoon is producing just fine in relationship to their salaries, but still below league averages for 1B, and certainly below what we're getting out of all the other offensive-oriented positions including 3B, LF, RF, even as I mentioned, CF and 2B.

4. I'd like to echo TeamBoone's smart observations on defense. Neither Aurilia or Hatteberg is doing us any favors with their play at 1B, and also not providing much aid to Lopez and Encarnacion. A fairly high percentage of the errors charged to our young SS and 3B have been throwing errors. If we had a better 1B, some of their errors could have been averted.

5. Finally, here is the other problem I have with the platoon. We have a lot of young players who still are bit weak when it comes to clutch hitting -- by that, I mean hitting with RISP or in close games or key late-inning situations. You count on your veterans to pick up the slack. Griffey is doing it. Aurilia was, too, for a couple of weeks in April. But he has been AWOL since coming off the DL, and Hatteberg has been pretty much a non-factor all season in terms of clutch hitting. With only 9 RBI for two entire months, that suggests to me he should never be hitting 5 or 6, but rather 7 or 8. That's Ok, for awhile, as a stopgap. But long-term, for this team to win, you expect more from your 1B.

GAC
05-27-2006, 06:22 PM
They both can't field wortha lick, and the Hat hasn't been driving in any runs.

I am not worried per say about they plantoon, but it isn't very good.

I've seen both (especially Hat) turn in some darn good gems at 1B this year. And they weren't balls hit right at them either.

No - they aren't GGers; but to say they can't field a lick is a little exaggerated IMO.

TeamBoone
05-27-2006, 06:50 PM
The Casey-Dunn combo scored 31 runs (vs. the 25 by Aurilia-Hatteberg), and collected 25 RBI (vs. 22 by Aurilia-Hatteberg).

Adam Dunn only played 33 games at first last year (he started in 27 of them); I wouldn't exactly consider that a combo.

Highlifeman21
05-27-2006, 06:58 PM
Nice try, but you have forgotten these salient facts.

1. Casey was no iron man. He did not man 1B solo in 2005. Dunn backed him up. So, looking at Casey and Dunn's combined 1B stats in April-May 2005 vs. those for Aurilia-Hatteberg, we have experienced significant offensive slippage at the position. The Casey-Dunn combo scored 31 runs (vs. the 25 by Aurilia-Hatteberg), and collected 25 RBI (vs. 22 by Aurilia-Hatteberg).

2. Magnifying the slippage: Narron is often batting Aurilia at cleanup, Hatteberg in wheelhouse slots like 5 or 6. But Casey didn't hit 4, 5 or 6 that much last year. He was usually hitting 2 or 3. In other words, he was perceived more as a table setter than as a RBI producer. With the season one-third over, we have a cumulative 22 RBI from Aurilia and Hatteberg, while manning 1B. Extrapolating over a full season, that would be 66 RBI for the year. Perfectly acceptable production from someone batting 2, maybe even 3, but certainly not from someone hitting 4, 5 or 6.

3. The reason the team traded Casey was because they were disappointed in his production, not only in relationship to his salary, but also in terms of what might be expected from 1B. The Aurilia-Hatteberg platoon is producing just fine in relationship to their salaries, but still below league averages for 1B, and certainly below what we're getting out of all the other offensive-oriented positions including 3B, LF, RF, even as I mentioned, CF and 2B.

4. I'd like to echo TeamBoone's smart observations on defense. Neither Aurilia or Hatteberg is doing us any favors with their play at 1B, and also not providing much aid to Lopez and Encarnacion. A fairly high percentage of the errors charged to our young SS and 3B have been throwing errors. If we had a better 1B, some of their errors could have been averted.

5. Finally, here is the other problem I have with the platoon. We have a lot of young players who still are bit weak when it comes to clutch hitting -- by that, I mean hitting with RISP or in close games or key late-inning situations. You count on your veterans to pick up the slack. Griffey is doing it. Aurilia was, too, for a couple of weeks in April. But he has been AWOL since coming off the DL, and Hatteberg has been pretty much a non-factor all season in terms of clutch hitting. With only 9 RBI for two entire months, that suggests to me he should never be hitting 5 or 6, but rather 7 or 8. That's Ok, for awhile, as a stopgap. But long-term, for this team to win, you expect more from your 1B.

And we're back to AVG w/ RISP....

I never did understand how that 1 stat defined "clutch".

Guacarock
05-27-2006, 08:47 PM
Adam Dunn only played 33 games at first last year (he started in 27 of them); I wouldn't exactly consider that a combo.

Semantics.

Whether you call them a platoon, a combo or Casey and mini-Casey (Dunn), the point I wanted to make is this: Our 2006 1B platoon of Aurilia-Hatteberg is not as productive on offense as the guys who held down 1B for us last year. We have suffered some decline, and it's a measurable decline.

To wit, with one-third of the season over, Aurilia-Hatteberg have 25 runs scored and 22 RBI. Extend that out over a season and you get 75 runs scored and 66 RBI.

But last year, our 1B batters scored 93 runs (Casey 74, Dunn 18, Valentin 0 and Cruz 1) and collected 71 RBI (58 Casey, 11 Dunn, 1 Valentin, 1 Cruz).

So the 2006 platoon is on pace to post a steep 19 percent decline in runs scored, and a more modest 7 percent dropoff in RBI. You can argue that's an acceptable level of production, considering the small salaries we pay Hatteberg and Aurilia.

But no way, no how can anyone say we're getting as much offense from 1B this year as last year. T'aint so.

Raisor
05-27-2006, 09:37 PM
But no way, no how can anyone say we're getting as much offense from 1B this year as last year. T'aint so.


I can say it.

2005:
13.35 Runs Created per 100 TPA

2006:
16.67 Runs Created per 100 TPA

savafan
05-27-2006, 10:14 PM
How many rallies has Hatterilia killed by hitting into a double play?

reds44
05-27-2006, 10:33 PM
How many rallies has Hatterilia killed by hitting into a double play?
Hatteberg brings nothing to the table besides getting on base.

He is liek a poor man's Casey, and that isn't a compliment.

savafan
05-27-2006, 10:42 PM
Hatteberg brings nothing to the table besides getting on base.



And hotwings

KronoRed
05-27-2006, 10:45 PM
And a cool name

The Hat

savafan
05-27-2006, 10:46 PM
And a cool name

The Hat

Not bad, but I think it should be The Mad Hatteburg. Or the Hatteburgular. :D

Guacarock
05-27-2006, 11:40 PM
I can say it.

2005:
13.35 Runs Created per 100 TPA

2006:
16.67 Runs Created per 100 TPA

Cite your sources.The online Baseball Reference gives the following run created figures for Casey and Dunn in 2005:

Casey, 5.66 RC/27
Dunn, 7.15 RC/27

Those numbers don't begin to jive with your 13.35 RC per 100 TPA figure. My hunch, Dunn surpasses 13.35 RC per 100 TPA on home runs alone!

Guacarock
05-28-2006, 12:16 AM
The 1B platoon is the least of this teams problems right now.

I'll concede -- in isolation, it's a lesser problem than these three other glaring issues:

1. Bullpen
2. Horrible defense
3. Overall streaky, hit-or-miss caliber of the offense.

However, I would submit:

The 1B platoon is not a miniscule problem. With the platoon's RBI totals running below those of our 2B, LF, RF, CF and 3B, the platoon mates have to considered among the leading poster boys for the weak, sputtering offense that has already caused us 6 losses by shutouts.

Also, the platoon is the easiest defensive element to fix. We're going to have to pry Griffey out of CF with a crowbar. We can't quickly, miraculously switch Phillips to SS, Lopez to 2B. And with Encarnacion, I suspect we'll have to bear the defensive growing pains, if we want the ultimate prize -- a young, potential All-Star third baseman.

But Hatteberg and Aurilia are not going to improve. They are vets at the end of their careers. Neither is a natural 1B, neither is great at reaching down and digging out bad throws.

Do we want a stronger defense, and more dependable offense? I say scrap the platoon, and go out and get a real, stud 1B. Bingo. We would see immediate gains on both fronts.

And I'm not talking about paying a ransom to a free-agent 1B, either. We can use one of our spare catchers (Valentin/Larue, for instance) or our underused OF (Freel, Denorfia) to get a hot 1B prospect like Shealy, Kotchman or McPherson. If Votto proves he's ready in 2007, fine. We'll have some competition and some great trading chits.

Some might argue we need to hold all of our trading chits in reserve to acquire relief pitchers come July. At the rate we are spiraling downward, we might not need such rental relievers. Who cares if the bullpen stinks to high heaven when we can't even score a run for two straight games? Pitiful.

marcshoe
05-28-2006, 12:19 AM
Not bad, but I think it should be The Mad Hatteburg. Or the Hatteburgular. :D

I usually call him Mississippi. Like in that old John Wayne movie with James Caan.

Cyclone792
05-28-2006, 03:38 AM
Semantics.

Whether you call them a platoon, a combo or Casey and mini-Casey (Dunn), the point I wanted to make is this: Our 2006 1B platoon of Aurilia-Hatteberg is not as productive on offense as the guys who held down 1B for us last year. We have suffered some decline, and it's a measurable decline.

To wit, with one-third of the season over, Aurilia-Hatteberg have 25 runs scored and 22 RBI. Extend that out over a season and you get 75 runs scored and 66 RBI.

But last year, our 1B batters scored 93 runs (Casey 74, Dunn 18, Valentin 0 and Cruz 1) and collected 71 RBI (58 Casey, 11 Dunn, 1 Valentin, 1 Cruz).

So the 2006 platoon is on pace to post a steep 19 percent decline in runs scored, and a more modest 7 percent dropoff in RBI. You can argue that's an acceptable level of production, considering the small salaries we pay Hatteberg and Aurilia.

But no way, no how can anyone say we're getting as much offense from 1B this year as last year. T'aint so.

Using runs scored and RBI to evaluate offense is such an incredibly flawed way to measure run production. Frankly, attacking the 1B platoon is hugely misguided as it's been one of the last things we should fret about.

Here, let's make this simple:

2005 First Base RC/27 = 5.39
2006 Aurilia + Hatteberg RC/27 = 6.39

2005 First Base OBP = .367
2006 Aurilia + Hatteberg OBP = .373

2005 First Base SLG = .431
2006 Aurilia + Hatteberg SLG = .475

What I'm seeing is a .798 OPS and 5.39 RC/27 in 2005 compared to a .848 OPS and 6.39 RC/27 in 2006 out of Hatteberg and Aurilia combined so far. I'd say they're giving us much more than expected and so far have been doing quite a stellar job.

And Raisor? He's right on, like I figured he would be.

Caveat Emperor
05-28-2006, 04:11 AM
Cite your sources.

ESPN.com good for you?

Here's the numbers ESPN has for the 1B production this year (over 48 games) and last year. The numbers take into account production of players ONLY when they're playing 1B -- so Adam Dunn's 2005 numbers are sliced into only the 33 games he played at 1B:

NAME G AB RC RC27 BB/PA BB/K IsoP SecA P/PA XBH TPA AB/HR BA OBP SLG OPS
'06 48 179 36.0 7.26 .153 1.57 .196 .391 3.88 21 216 25.6 .291 .398 .486 .884
'05 163 641 96.5 5.35 .098 0.84 .137 .251 3.64 54 723 37.7 .293 .367 .431 .797

Note the increased walk rate compensating for the missing singles and resulting in a net gain in both OBP and SLG.

The 1B platoon is fine. The only criticism I can level is that I still feel it should probably be Dunn's job fulltime.

Guacarock
05-28-2006, 05:02 AM
You guys have convinced me the platoon isn't as bad as I thought, but you haven't changed my opinion one iota about batting Aurilia and Hatteberg 4-6.

Hatteberg draws walks. We all know that. If he had speed, perhaps you could hit him up top of the order, like Freel.

But Hatteberg's as slow as a turtle. So he can't hit 1-3, and lacking power, you're asking for trouble to hit him 4-6. At best, he should hit 7, as a second-tier leadoff man with a high OBP but no pop, no speed.

Aurilia, by contrast, has some pop, but doesn't draw walks, can't steal and can't hit for a high average these days. Again, he belongs 7th in the batting order.

Put the two of them there, and I'll drop my qualms about the platoon. But keep batting them 4-6, and we'll keep seeing perplexing declines in our offense, especially in clutch situations.

If push came to shove, who would you bat 4-6? Pujols? Or Hatteberg-Aurilia?

We don't have Pujols. But we do have Griffey, Dunn, Kearns, Encarnacion, Lopez. Any and all of them belong in our wheelhouse ahead of Aurilia and Hatteberg.

My proof? You go on the open market and try to land Willis, Kazmir, Webb or any other stud SP we covet. If we offered Griffey, Dunn, Kearns, Encarnacion, Lopez, we might not score a deal, but the opposing GM would listen. Offer them Hatteberg or Aurilia and see how long before they hang up the phone owing to obvious static.

I don't really care which set of stats you prefer -- the old primitive measures like RBI and runs scored, or the newfangled Moneyball inventions. At some point, common sense should prevail.

GAC
05-28-2006, 07:55 AM
Hatteberg brings nothing to the table besides getting on base.

And this is a bad thing?

Raisor
05-28-2006, 09:55 AM
You guys have convinced me the platoon isn't as bad as I thought, but you haven't changed my opinion one iota about batting Aurilia and Hatteberg 4-6.




Has anyone tried to change your mind about batting them that high?

Ltlabner
05-28-2006, 09:59 AM
Hatteberg brings nothing to the table besides getting on base.

Yea, and next thing you know he'll start hitting the dreaded solo home run's too.

KronoRed
05-28-2006, 05:30 PM
Yea, and next thing you know he'll start hitting the dreaded solo home run's too.
Hey.. apparently (according so some here) HR's with nobody on base aren't good ones ;)

dougflynn23
05-28-2006, 06:37 PM
By trading Casey, we were able to sign Dunn to his LTC, and if the stars align, and if the moon is full, we just might see him @ 1B next year, but perhaps that's wishful thinking.

:( It is wishful thinking. An individual who was at the time inside of the Reds baseball operations department (left on his own accord in April) told me that Adam Dunn's willingness to avoid arbitration and do a LTC was based on the Reds making a "gentleman's agreement" to not move him to 1B on anything other than an occassional basis. Mr. Castellini himself agreed to that. If that had been me, I'd have said "see you in the arbitrator's room" and might have incorporated it into my case. This would be a better team with Dunn at 1B, Denorfia in CF, and Junior in LF.

tripleaaaron
05-30-2006, 03:32 AM
2. Magnifying the slippage: Narron is often batting Aurilia at cleanup, Hatteberg in wheelhouse slots like 5 or 6. But Casey didn't hit 4, 5 or 6 that much last year. He was usually hitting 2 or 3. In other words, he was perceived more as a table setter than as a RBI producer. With the season one-third over, we have a cumulative 22 RBI from Aurilia and Hatteberg, while manning 1B. Extrapolating over a full season, that would be 66 RBI for the year. Perfectly acceptable production from someone batting 2, maybe even 3, but certainly not from someone hitting 4, 5 or 6.

5. Finally, here is the other problem I have with the platoon. We have a lot of young players who still are bit weak when it comes to clutch hitting -- by that, I mean hitting with RISP or in close games or key late-inning situations. You count on your veterans to pick up the slack. Griffey is doing it. Aurilia was, too, for a couple of weeks in April. But he has been AWOL since coming off the DL, and Hatteberg has been pretty much a non-factor all season in terms of clutch hitting. With only 9 RBI for two entire months, that suggests to me he should never be hitting 5 or 6, but rather 7 or 8. That's Ok, for awhile, as a stopgap. But long-term, for this team to win, you expect more from your 1B.
So in other words you dont have much of a problem w/ the platoon than you do in the way the roster is being managed. It is still again as stated before, better than casey their for much cheaper.

Guacarock
05-30-2006, 01:44 PM
First off, Hatteberg hasn't proven himself as a good option hitting 5th or 6th in the lineup. He's a table-setter, not someone who clears the tables. He has a high OBP fueled by taking walks, but with a total of 11 RBI this late in the season, he's not getting the job done as a multi-dimensional offensive player. I'd hit him 7th.

Likewise, Aurilia ought never to be used as a cleanup batter. There's just too many holes in his swing. I wouldn't mind him hitting 5th or 6th, or he could hit 7th, same as Hatteberg, without any great loss to the team.

For now, the platoon is our best option at 1B, seeing as how Dunn has seemingly sworn off the position and management has gone along with that preference. But I hope this platoon is viewed for what it is, a stopgap, and isn't perceived as a long-term fixture. I would much rather see the team acquire a young 1B prospect who could grow alongside Phillips, Lopez, Encarnacion, Kearns, Dunn, Ross, etc., forming the core of the future Reds.

The Angels' Kotchman or Rockies' Sealy would work for me. If Votto can continue to improve, and challenge for a ML starting role in another year or two, fine. Then, we'll have a choice to make, and can trade from excess at the position.

Let's say the Reds are so worried about pitching that we can't spare trading stock to acquire Kotchman, Sealy or a comparable stud. Then I guess we're stuck with the platoon until Votto is ready, or some reasonably priced free-agent comes along that's more well-rounded than either Hatteberg or Aurilia in tandem.

Yes, the platoon is cheaper than Casey. Better? Depends on what you expect from 1B. Personally, I would like to see more RBI out of the position. It rankles me for our 1B platoon to be hovering near the NL cellar in that category, just a notch above the Cubs. They have Lee on the DL. What's our excuse?

tripleaaaron
05-30-2006, 02:18 PM
and Casey had so many RBI's, I wonder the ratio of his RBI's to how many, potential RBI's destroyed by the Double play ball

flyer85
05-30-2006, 02:29 PM
If you really want to play Hatty he would probably fit best in #2 hole where his OBP is an advantage. Down in the order the OBP doesn't help all that much and his lack of SLG% works against him as well. The Reds have a couple of hitters made to order to hit in the 7 spot and that is Aurilia and Phillips as they both slug well and their OBPs are lower than normal and are BA driven.

It is as simple as you want the guys that get on base a lot to bat at the top of the lineup. Spreading them around does nothing but give the opposing pitcher potential ways to wiggle out of jams by targeting individuals to pitch to and others to pitch around. With both Dunn and Jr doing well off of LH pitching the breaking up the LH hitters doesn't make much sense because it aids the starter pitcher at the expense of a late game sitiuation that may not ever happen.

Guacarock
05-30-2006, 04:49 PM
If you really want to play Hatty he would probably fit best in #2 hole where his OBP is an advantage. Down in the order the OBP doesn't help all that much and his lack of SLG% works against him as well. The Reds have a couple of hitters made to order to hit in the 7 spot and that is Aurilia and Phillips as they both slug well and their OBPs are lower than normal and are BA driven.

It is as simple as you want the guys that get on base a lot to bat at the top of the lineup. Spreading them around does nothing but give the opposing pitcher potential ways to wiggle out of jams by targeting individuals to pitch to and others to pitch around. With both Dunn and Jr doing well off of LH pitching the breaking up the LH hitters doesn't make much sense because it aids the starter pitcher at the expense of a late game sitiuation that may not ever happen.

I could live with Hatteberg hitting #2, but if you ask me, this is the better Reds lineup:

#1 Freel, Phillips 2B (speed demons. Streaky but there are two of them, so we can always play the hot hand)
#2 Lopez SS (speed, power, average, walks, all-around batter. Switch-hitter to boot)
#3 Dunn LF (power, high OBP, little bit of speed, too. Could benefit from consistently hitting ahead of Griffey).
#4 Griffey CF (power, clutch performer who doesn't wilt in the spotlight. But speed waning, as well as willingness to draw walks. Not hitting for a high average this season, either).
#5 Kearns RF (Could just as easily bat #3 or #4, depending on who's hot, who's not. All-around hitter, but a little less power than Dunn/Griffey).
#6 Encarnacion 3B (Some power, some clutch offense, but younger and streakier than Kearns, so he shouldn't occupy the 3-5 slots too often).
#7 Hatteberg/Aurilia 1B (Aurilia rightfully belongs here. Hatteberg could hit here or #2, but I place him here, wanting to take advantage of Freel and Phillips' speed up top of the order)
#8 Catcher

kheidg-
05-31-2006, 04:19 AM
2. Magnifying the slippage: Narron is often batting Aurilia at cleanup, Hatteberg in wheelhouse slots like 5 or 6. But Casey didn't hit 4, 5 or 6 that much last year. He was usually hitting 2 or 3. In other words, he was perceived more as a table setter than as a RBI producer.


Casey actually had only 4 AB's batting second in 2004 and 2005 combined. He usually batted either 3rd or 5th, and usually just 3rd with Junior out.

Guacarock
05-31-2006, 05:31 AM
Casey actually had only 4 AB's batting second in 2004 and 2005 combined. He usually batted either 3rd or 5th, and usually just 3rd with Junior out.

Thanks for clarifying that. As folks evaluate our current 1B platoon, it's best if they have a complete, accurate understanding of what role Casey played for the Reds vs. the different role now assigned to the platoon.

At the same time, I have to admit, I didn't launch this thread with the intent of measuring the platoon -- apples to apples, oranges to oranges -- against Casey. That's difficult, if not impossible, to do fairly, and it's water under the bridge, regardless.

My chief motive: To debate openly whether we're getting what we need on offense from the 1B platoon in '06, and whether Aurilia and Hatteberg, combined or separately, are contributing something lacking from our everyday players like Lopez, Kearns, Dunn, Griffey, not to mention the up-and-coming youth squad of Encarnacion and Phillips.

The relevant side issues: 1. Where should these platoon guys bat? 2. How long should the arrangement continue? 3. Is the idea of Dunn playing 1B deader than a doorknob? 4. Should we add a young stud 1b to our Christmas wish list, and if so, who and how do we get him? 5. Finally, would the arrival of such a stud mean we have to sever ties with Aurilia and Hatteberg, or could they fill other vital bench roles with the team?

Jpup
05-31-2006, 07:03 AM
Thanks for clarifying that. As folks evaluate our current 1B platoon, it's best if they have a complete, accurate understanding of what role Casey played for the Reds vs. the different role now assigned to the platoon.

At the same time, I have to admit, I didn't launch this thread with the intent of measuring the platoon -- apples to apples, oranges to oranges -- against Casey. That's difficult, if not impossible, to do fairly, and it's water under the bridge, regardless.

My chief motive: To debate openly whether we're getting what we need on offense from the 1B platoon in '06, and whether Aurilia and Hatteberg, combined or separately, are contributing something lacking from our everyday players like Lopez, Kearns, Dunn, Griffey, not to mention the up-and-coming youth squad of Encarnacion and Phillips.

The relevant side issues: 1. Where should these platoon guys bat? 2. How long should the arrangement continue? 3. Is the idea of Dunn playing 1B deader than a doorknob? 4. Should we add a young stud 1b to our Christmas wish list, and if so, who and how do we get him? 5. Finally, would the arrival of such a stud mean we have to sever ties with Aurilia and Hatteberg, or could they fill other vital bench roles with the team?

when you base your argument on RBIs, you can't be expected to be taken seriously. my 2 cents.:devil:

My answer would be to move EdE to first base and leave him there, for the next 10 years, since Dunner isn't moving from left field anytime soon. You could also put Jr. at first, Freel or Denorfia in center and leave the left side like it is, but Ede has got to work on his decision making. If I see him throw another ball away, I going to break something. I know he's young, but he makes poor decisions and it's not good for my nerves.

You could also try putting the Reds best outfielder in the infield...again. :help:

TeamBoone
05-31-2006, 11:55 AM
My answer would be to move EdE to first base and leave him there, for the next 10 years, since Dunner isn't moving from left field anytime soon.

And who do you suggest be on third during those ten years?

Ed E is loaded with talent and range at third... extremely hard to come by at that position these days. The mental game, which IMHO affects his errant throws because he often rushes when he doesn't need to, will come with experience. Plus, his throwing accuracy will improve after he's knocked down a ball or three that would get by most others in that position. Again, experience.

He's going to be a great third baseman.