PDA

View Full Version : Scott Hatteberg - Better Than Casey



registerthis
07-20-2006, 10:37 AM
At the beginning of the season, Krivsky and Narron took a lot of heat--some from myself--for making Hatteberg the everyday first baseman, rather than moving Dunn or playing Aurilia there. But as the season has unfolded, I think Scott has proven that he does indeed deserve the first base job, and is actually the type of player many of us had asked the Reds to acquire to replace Sean Casey and his monstrous salary.

Consider, he's putting up offensive numbers better than all but two of Casey's seasons here. His current .900 OPS is over 100 points higher than Casey's last year, he's on pace to finish with more home runs and an equal batting average to 2005 Casey, is getting on base more frequently, and has played all-around superior defense. But the real killer is this: $7,750,000. That's how much MORE Casey is beling paid to ply his trade in Pittsburgh than hatteberg is in Cincinnati. That's almost unfathomable. (Granted, the Reds are picking up part of Casey's salary, but the point remains.)

Since 2004, many Reds fans opined that Casey's talents could be replaced at a mere fraction of the cost of his salary. And the Reds have, essentially, done that and more. I know that some on this board are waiting for the floor to collapse under Hatteberg's shoes, but I think that--nearly 4 months into the season--we can start to assume that he is, in fact, having the best offensive season of his career. And, in doing so, he has become that player that so many of us knew the reds could acquire to replace Casey.

At the beginning of the season, who'd have thought that Hatteberg and Aurilia would have become two of the most consistent performers on this team?

Jpup
07-20-2006, 10:42 AM
Scott Hatteberg, on-base machine.:p:

RBA
07-20-2006, 10:49 AM
Scott Hatteberg for Mayor. ;)

registerthis
07-20-2006, 11:01 AM
Scott Hatteberg for Mayor. ;)

Does he talk enough??

captainmorgan07
07-20-2006, 11:04 AM
krivsky should sign this man up for next year to the way he's going now

LincolnparkRed
07-20-2006, 11:17 AM
krivsky should sign this man up for next year to the way he's going now

At least until they establish an eta for Votto or can get Griffey or Dunn to play first.

Steve4192
07-20-2006, 11:20 AM
Does he talk enough??
Yes, but he comes up woefully short in the hugs department.

Steve4192
07-20-2006, 11:23 AM
krivsky should sign this man up for next year to the way he's going now
No!!!

Take a look at Hatteberg's performance in odd versus even numbered years since the turn of the century. He just can't seem to string together two good seasons in a row. Let Scott pursue a big payday elsewhere in 2007.

Cyclone792
07-20-2006, 11:44 AM
Great post, register.

I had no qualms at all with the Hatteberg signing. In fact, I liked it from the beginning, though I did assume when he signed it'd be more for a spot starter/pinch hitter role off the bench. But he's been starting, and he's been producing very well for us, and nobody can complain about that.

Players with above average production at only slightly more than replacement level cost are guys that can really help you win, and that's what Hatteberg's giving us so far this season.

BRM
07-20-2006, 11:53 AM
krivsky should sign this man up for next year to the way he's going now

Hatteberg has been an "every other year" player since 2000. Odds are against a repeat performance next year but you never know.

BuckeyeRedleg
07-20-2006, 12:07 PM
Even though Pittsburgh dumped Williams on us, they are looking pretty stupid, right now, for taking on Sean Casey and his contract.

Actually, they looked stupid then, as well.

Big Klu
07-20-2006, 12:49 PM
There were a lot of people on RedsZone who were very critical of Hatteberg when he was acquired, and instead were calling for the Reds to acquire Carlos Peña or Hee Seop Choi. How do Scott's numbers compare to those two players?

wolfboy
07-20-2006, 01:29 PM
There were a lot of people on RedsZone who were very critical of Hatteberg when he was acquired, and instead were calling for the Reds to acquire Carlos Peņa or Hee Seop Choi. How do Scott's numbers compare to those two players?

I applaud Hatteberg for having such a productive year. I still think that Choi could be extremely productive in this ballpark. I'd love to see what he could do.

edabbs44
07-20-2006, 01:56 PM
I don't think he is better than Casey, but this year he has definitely been a better value than Casey. Maybe the title should be changed to reflect that, as that seems to be essential to the conversation.

WVRed
07-20-2006, 02:12 PM
Even though Pittsburgh dumped Williams on us, they are looking pretty stupid, right now, for taking on Sean Casey and his contract.

Actually, they looked stupid then, as well.

Not really, Casey is going to probably fetch the Pirates a prospect come the trade deadline.

That prospect has a better chance of panning out than Dave Williams.

backbencher
07-20-2006, 02:37 PM
How much of Hatte's rate gain is due to the pretty stricy lefty/righty platoon?

(Not that I am complaining, mind you.)

KronoRed
07-20-2006, 03:55 PM
That prospect has a better chance of panning out than Dave Williams.
Heath has a better chance then Dave Williams :evil:

BuckeyeRedleg
07-20-2006, 04:02 PM
Not really, Casey is going to probably fetch the Pirates a prospect come the trade deadline.

That prospect has a better chance of panning out than Dave Williams.

Well, then if that happens, that team would be stupid. I highly doubt the Pirates traded for Casey with the intention of trading him.

Regardless, I honestly can't imagine a team giving away prospects to pay Sean Casey big bucks to hit singles.

Johnny Footstool
07-20-2006, 04:05 PM
For Hatteberg to have a career year at his age is extremely, EXTREMELY rare. The Reds played roulette, bet on double-zeros, and managed to hit it.

Get what you can for him now and let some other team play the game next season.

registerthis
07-20-2006, 04:42 PM
I don't think he is better than Casey

This year he is.

registerthis
07-20-2006, 04:47 PM
Get what you can for him now and let some other team play the game next season.

I have to disagree. I think the value you would get by keeping Hatteberg through the remainder of the season outweights whatever middling prospects a team may be willing to give up for him. Particularly with no other first baseman waiting in the wings, I think Hatteberg's a red through the rest of the season.

As to the "career year" stuff, I could buy the arguments that his season was a fluke in June, but here we are in late July and he's playing as good, if not better, than he was then. As rare as it may be, it appears that he's doing it, and the Reds are the benefactors. I wouldn't be quick to give that up, unless a team approaches krivsky with an amazing deal.

edabbs44
07-20-2006, 04:53 PM
This year he is.
Casey got injured...but Casey's stats would look very similar if they were pro-rated. So again, Hatte isn't better than Casey, he is a much better value.

Johnny Footstool
07-20-2006, 05:07 PM
I have to disagree. I think the value you would get by keeping Hatteberg through the remainder of the season outweights whatever middling prospects a team may be willing to give up for him. Particularly with no other first baseman waiting in the wings, I think Hatteberg's a red through the rest of the season.

As to the "career year" stuff, I could buy the arguments that his season was a fluke in June, but here we are in late July and he's playing as good, if not better, than he was then. As rare as it may be, it appears that he's doing it, and the Reds are the benefactors. I wouldn't be quick to give that up, unless a team approaches krivsky with an amazing deal.

I think if the Reds keep Hatteberg around for the rest of the season, the chances of them signing him to a two-year deal increase. That would be economically unsound, IMO. His value will never be higher than it is right now.

WVRed
07-20-2006, 05:34 PM
Well, then if that happens, that team would be stupid. I highly doubt the Pirates traded for Casey with the intention of trading him.

Regardless, I honestly can't imagine a team giving away prospects to pay Sean Casey big bucks to hit singles.

I agree with you, but some teams have holes at 1B(namely San Fran and Oakland). I could see both teams parting with a marginal prospect or two come the trade deadline.

BuckeyeRedleg
07-20-2006, 05:37 PM
WV, maybe SF, but Sean Casey is the most un-Moneyball player in the game.

I don't think Billy would even consider him.

I still think it's a mistake if anyone bails Pittsburgh out of their mistake.

TOBTTReds
07-20-2006, 05:38 PM
At the beginning of the season, Krivsky and Narron took a lot of heat--some from myself--for making Hatteberg the everyday first baseman, rather than moving Dunn or playing Aurilia there. But as the season has unfolded, I think Scott has proven that he does indeed deserve the first base job, and is actually the type of player many of us had asked the Reds to acquire to replace Sean Casey and his monstrous salary.

Consider, he's putting up offensive numbers better than all but two of Casey's seasons here. His current .900 OPS is over 100 points higher than Casey's last year, he's on pace to finish with more home runs and an equal batting average to 2005 Casey, is getting on base more frequently, and has played all-around superior defense. But the real killer is this: $7,750,000. That's how much MORE Casey is beling paid to ply his trade in Pittsburgh than hatteberg is in Cincinnati. That's almost unfathomable. (Granted, the Reds are picking up part of Casey's salary, but the point remains.)

Since 2004, many Reds fans opined that Casey's talents could be replaced at a mere fraction of the cost of his salary. And the Reds have, essentially, done that and more. I know that some on this board are waiting for the floor to collapse under Hatteberg's shoes, but I think that--nearly 4 months into the season--we can start to assume that he is, in fact, having the best offensive season of his career. And, in doing so, he has become that player that so many of us knew the reds could acquire to replace Casey.

At the beginning of the season, who'd have thought that Hatteberg and Aurilia would have become two of the most consistent performers on this team?

Remember how Casey consistantly batted 3rd no matter who was pitching, and no matter how bad his OBP or double plays were?

Managers manage with their heart so much it makes me sick. Why doesn't Hatteberg play more often when Casey would play 150 games with worse numbers?

edabbs44
07-20-2006, 05:39 PM
I think if the Reds keep Hatteberg around for the rest of the season, the chances of them signing him to a two-year deal increase. That would be economically unsound, IMO. His value will never be higher than it is right now.
The way Narron is managing, Hatteberg will be the starter no matter who comes up from the minors. So forget Votto for a while if Hatte gets an extension.

BuckeyeRedleg
07-20-2006, 05:41 PM
I have to disagree. I think the value you would get by keeping Hatteberg through the remainder of the season outweights whatever middling prospects a team may be willing to give up for him. Particularly with no other first baseman waiting in the wings, I think Hatteberg's a red through the rest of the season.

As to the "career year" stuff, I could buy the arguments that his season was a fluke in June, but here we are in late July and he's playing as good, if not better, than he was then. As rare as it may be, it appears that he's doing it, and the Reds are the benefactors. I wouldn't be quick to give that up, unless a team approaches krivsky with an amazing deal.

Especially considering we are paying him pennies.

He's a big-time bargain right now.

I wouldn't mind them re-signing him next year, even as a back-up to Votto, if he's ready.

edabbs44
07-20-2006, 05:46 PM
Remember how Casey consistantly batted 3rd no matter who was pitching, and no matter how bad his OBP or double plays were?

Managers manage with their heart so much it makes me sick. Why doesn't Hatteberg play more often when Casey would play 150 games with worse numbers?
BTW, let's not get crazy. Hatte is on pace for .317/.412/.489 with 13 HRs, 49 RBI and 68 runs in 446 ABs.

2005: Casey had .312/.371/.423 with 9 HRs and 58 RBI with 75 runs in 529 ABs.

2004 Casey had .324/.381/.534 with 24 HRs, 99 RBI and 101 runs in 571 ABs.

I'm going to have to say that Hatteberg's 2006 "career" year isn't really better than what Casey can do.

$$$ situation is a different story.

edabbs44
07-20-2006, 05:47 PM
Especially considering we are paying him pennies.

He's a big-time bargain right now.

I wouldn't mind them re-signing him next year, even as a back-up to Votto, if he's ready.
He won't back up Votto if he is re-signed.

M2
07-20-2006, 05:59 PM
Even though Pittsburgh dumped Williams on us, they are looking pretty stupid, right now, for taking on Sean Casey and his contract.

Actually, they looked stupid then, as well.

If only every GM was so stupid as to trade a worthless arm for a solid hitter. Casey has helped improve the Bucs' offense. I'd take a player that helps in exchange for a piece of detritus anyday of the week.

As for re-signing Hatteberg, I like him and had no problem with signing him this year, but his M.O. is to have hot and cold running seasons. He's due to go cold next year. I'd be looking for the next Hatteberg on the market instead of trying to rekindle this year's magic with the Hatteberg you've got.

Doc. Scott
07-20-2006, 06:02 PM
I have to disagree. I think the value you would get by keeping Hatteberg through the remainder of the season outweights whatever middling prospects a team may be willing to give up for him. Particularly with no other first baseman waiting in the wings, I think Hatteberg's a red through the rest of the season.

As to the "career year" stuff, I could buy the arguments that his season was a fluke in June, but here we are in late July and he's playing as good, if not better, than he was then. As rare as it may be, it appears that he's doing it, and the Reds are the benefactors. I wouldn't be quick to give that up, unless a team approaches krivsky with an amazing deal.

I agree with this. I think if you got a Germano-Chick Cash Explosion Double Play scratch-off ticket for Hatteberg, it would be a coup. He'd likely only command one B/B- pitching prospect. And we don't have much to replace him, unless you want to bet on Jesse Gutierrez or Andy Abad or rush Joey Votto.

BuckeyeRedleg
07-20-2006, 06:38 PM
If only every GM was so stupid as to trade a worthless arm for a solid hitter. Casey has helped improve the Bucs' offense. I'd take a player that helps in exchange for a piece of detritus anyday of the week.

As for re-signing Hatteberg, I like him and had no problem with signing him this year, but his M.O. is to have hot and cold running seasons. He's due to go cold next year. I'd be looking for the next Hatteberg on the market instead of trying to rekindle this year's magic with the Hatteberg you've got.


I never really viewed the Casey trade as anything more than a salary dump.

That's was why I was not too upset with getting Williams.

Obviously compared to Dave Williams, Sean Casey looks like a steal in the trade, but when factors such as salary are concerned, the dumping of Casey is okay in my book. As stated in this thread, Hatteberg has been just as productive as Casey (actually more so due to health), at a fraction of the cost. Pittsburgh, with their miniscule payroll, would have been better off signing someone like a Hatteberg and staying away from Casey all together. But, Pittsburgh took on Casey and he takes up a large chunk of an already low payroll.


And how much has he really been helping their offense? He has 3 HR and 26 RBI in 187 AB's (.811 OPS).

Over his last 716 AB's, he has 12 HR, 84 RBI, with a .800 OPS.

In no way could I justify taking on that contract for that production if I'm Pittsburgh.

M2
07-20-2006, 06:57 PM
I never really viewed the Casey trade as anything more than a salary dump.

That's was why I was not too upset with getting Williams.

Obviously compared to Dave Williams, Sean Casey looks like a steal in the trade, but when factors such as salary are concerned, the dumping of Casey is okay in my book. As stated in this thread, Hatteberg has been just as productive as Casey (actually more so due to health), at a fraction of the cost. Pittsburgh, with their miniscule payroll, would have been better off signing someone like a Hatteberg and staying away from Casey all together. But, Pittsburgh took on Casey and he takes up a large chunk of an already low payroll.


And how much has he really been helping their offense? He has 3 HR and 26 RBI in 187 AB's (.811 OPS).

Over his last 716 AB's, he has 12 HR, 84 RBI, with a .800 OPS.

In no way could I justify taking on that contract for that production if I'm Pittsburgh.

Pretty easy to justify if you ask me. The Bucs can afford Casey and he makes their team better when he's on the field. A 6.29 RC/27 ain't a bad thing to have, especially for a team that only scored 4.2 runs a game in 2005.

I was upset with getting Dave Williams because he was an awful pitcher and it's almost always a loser's bet to dump a solid player for money reasons. Good teams are the ones that trade for something. Wily Mo for Arroyo was the kind of trade the Reds needed to be making. Casey for Williams was a simple case of taking a talent asset and wasting it.

BuckeyeRedleg
07-20-2006, 08:18 PM
Pretty easy to justify if you ask me. The Bucs can afford Casey and he makes their team better when he's on the field. A 6.29 RC/27 ain't a bad thing to have, especially for a team that only scored 4.2 runs a game in 2005.

I was upset with getting Dave Williams because he was an awful pitcher and it's almost always a loser's bet to dump a solid player for money reasons. Good teams are the ones that trade for something. Wily Mo for Arroyo was the kind of trade the Reds needed to be making. Casey for Williams was a simple case of taking a talent asset and wasting it.


Not nearly to the degree of Lopez-Kearns to Washington, but I agree, we probably could have gotten more.

I just don't think Sean Casey makes any sense for a low payroll team that is trying to rebuild with youth.

And if you need a first-basemen with an .800 OPS to get you a little more production, they can be found all over the place for a heckuva lot cheaper. I mean, just today, a guy like Shea Hillenbrand could be had for much cheaper than Casey and he'll provide about the same pop.

Patrick Bateman
07-20-2006, 08:57 PM
Not really, Casey is going to probably fetch the Pirates a prospect come the trade deadline.

That prospect has a better chance of panning out than Dave Williams.
He better be. The Pirates paid about $5M for that prospect.

Jpup
07-21-2006, 03:09 AM
I'll say what a lot of people on here were saying last season. Sean Casey should have been moved due to his salary.

It was a very good move IMO. Many, many people here would have given him away, what the Reds did, if they could have. It's funny how people change their stories after Dave Williams was acquired for him. Sean Casey was one of my favorite players, but he was grossly over paid and should have been dumped. I would rather lose the talent than pay Casey the 7 or 8 million dollars he was owed.

M2
07-21-2006, 09:05 AM
I'll say what a lot of people on here were saying last season. Sean Casey should have been moved due to his salary.

It was a very good move IMO. Many, many people here would have given him away, what the Reds did, if they could have. It's funny how people change their stories after Dave Williams was acquired for him. Sean Casey was one of my favorite players, but he was grossly over paid and should have been dumped. I would rather lose the talent than pay Casey the 7 or 8 million dollars he was owed.

Worrying more about money than talent is a loser's bet.

Plus, in the grand scheme of things, the Reds didn't save much money on Casey. I could buy into dumping a contract that saves you tens of millions over the course of multiple years. That frees up the flexibility to move in a dramatically different direction. The $5 million or so saved on Casey is neglible. Don't trade for a Tony Womack or sign a Chris Hammond. Big deal.

GAC
07-21-2006, 09:37 AM
krivsky should sign this man up for next year to the way he's going now

I am hoping for this BIG TIME! And as backup for Dunn at 1B. ;)

He is one vet I want to see them keep.

Some of the others should be given their AARP cards.

And we could ship out Valentin and make Hat the 3rd string catcher. ;)

registerthis
07-21-2006, 09:49 AM
Casey got injured...but Casey's stats would look very similar if they were pro-rated. So again, Hatte isn't better than Casey, he is a much better value.

Well, let's compare Casey's 2005 vs. Hatte's 2006 then, because I'm not seeing any metric whereby Casey could be deemed the "better player." He may have been at one time, but that is no longer the case:

OPS:
Casey '05: .794
Hatte '06: .894

SLG:
Casey '05: .423
Hatte '06: .485

OBP
Casey '05: .371
Hatte '06: .409

AB/HR:
Casey '05: 58.8
Hatte '06: 33.0

IsoP:
Casey '05: .112
Hatte '06: .170

ZR:
Casey '05: .886
Hatte '06: .913

GAC
07-21-2006, 09:53 AM
And Hatteberg's faster!

Like comparing a turtle to a snail. :lol:

redsrule2500
07-21-2006, 01:53 PM
I hope casey is back next year - it's possible

KronoRed
07-21-2006, 03:55 PM
Rich will be back, let him have 1st till the Votto is ready :)

WVRed
07-22-2006, 06:16 AM
Well, scratch Casey to SF. They traded for Shea Hillenbrand.

BuckeyeRedleg
07-22-2006, 09:08 AM
Well, scratch Casey to SF. They traded for Shea Hillenbrand.

I just knew the Hillenbrand DFA would kill the Pirates chance to deal him.