PDA

View Full Version : Harang hurt his thumb last night...



Matt700wlw
08-05-2006, 01:54 PM
...word from the ballpark. Apparantely not broken, and hopefully he can go Wed vs the Cards.


That is all.

KalDanielsfan
08-05-2006, 02:07 PM
again, thanks Krivsky, for trying to get another starter for us...

TDHND
08-05-2006, 02:07 PM
I see so you have to point out the negatives instead of the positives,lol...

jimbo
08-05-2006, 02:09 PM
again, thanks Krivsky, for trying to get another starter for us...

How do you know he didn't try? There were very few quality pitchers that were moved before the trading deadline and there were a lot of teams looking. I'm guessing he tried a lot harder than you are giving him credit for.

wojo1025
08-05-2006, 02:11 PM
How do you know he didn't try? There were very few quality pitchers that were moved before the trading deadline and there were a lot of teams looking. I'm guessing he tried a lot harder than you are giving him credit for.


No No No, don't you know, all Wayne had to do was call any team in MLB and say "hey, we need a starting pitcher, give us yours" and it's done. Jeez

:mooner:

keeganbrick
08-05-2006, 02:16 PM
Hey maybe we can still pick up Livan!

KalDanielsfan
08-05-2006, 02:16 PM
How do you know he didn't try? There were very few quality pitchers that were moved before the trading deadline and there were a lot of teams looking. I'm guessing he tried a lot harder than you are giving him credit for.

My complete UN-wavering opinion about the trades is this:

Lopez/Kearns and a a prospect could have gotten us a #3 or #4 quality starter instead of some above average middle relievers.

Here is my logic (once again): What good is middle relief pitching when you have a a weaker offense to start off in the first 7 innings? or if your starting sub-par pitcher already has you in the hole 6-0? Combine mediocre starting pitching with a weak offense means it doesnt matter how good your bullpen is. There is nothing to "relieve."

You might argue, well if we're down, the bullpen can keep us in the ballgame...sure, but with what offense are we gonna come back with????

bullpen is the least of any teams concerns. believe me. a great bullpen helps, but its at the bottom of the baseball totem pole.

keeganbrick
08-05-2006, 02:17 PM
My complete UN-wavering opinion about the trades is this:

Lopez/Kearns and a a prospect could have gotten us a #3 or #4 quality starter instead of some above average middle relievers.

Here is my logic (once again): What good is middle relief pitching when you have a a weaker offense to start off in the first 7 innings? or if your starting sub-par pitcher already has you in the hole 6-0? Combine mediocre starting pitching with a weak offense means it doesnt matter how good your bullpen is. There is nothing to "relieve."

You might argue, well if we're down, the bullpen can keep us in the ballgame...sure, but with what offense are we gonna come back with????

bullpen is the least of any teams concerns. believe me. a great bullpen helps, but its at the bottom of the baseball totem pole.
Wow .

westofyou
08-05-2006, 02:20 PM
bullpen is the least of any teams concerns. believe me. a great bullpen helps, but its at the bottom of the baseball totem pole.

I don't believe you at all, and the 1999 Reds prove that theory completely wrong.

Matt700wlw
08-05-2006, 02:23 PM
bullpen is the least of any teams concerns. believe me. a great bullpen helps, but its at the bottom of the baseball totem pole.


Tell that to Sparky Anderson...

jimbo
08-05-2006, 02:24 PM
bullpen is the least of any teams concerns. believe me. a great bullpen helps, but its at the bottom of the baseball totem pole.

Forgive me, but I'm not going to believe you.

I think you are living in the past. With starting pitchers not going as deep into games as they used to, relief pitching is at it's all-time highest value. You now have specialized relievers such as closers, left-handed specialists, setup relievers, long-relief relievers. It is obvious, with the fact that about every team is looking for relief help, that today's bullpen is of big concern.

The Reds have had some great offenses for several years now and have never won with them? Why? Because their pitching sucked. Krivsky has demonstrated that this team is going in a new direction that is centered around good defense and pitching, and that includes the bullpen.

KalDanielsfan
08-05-2006, 02:25 PM
Does my logic not make any sense? How helpful is a great bullpen when you are already down 9-3 by the 7th inning? seriously explain that to me. I'd love to hear how starting pitching and offense and defense isn't more important than a bullpen.

Matt700wlw
08-05-2006, 02:26 PM
Does my logic not make any sense? How helpful is a great bullpen when you are already down 9-3 by the 7th inning? seriously explain that to me. I'd love to hear how starting pitching and offense and defense isn't more important than a bullpen.


They're not usually down 9-3 in the 7th inning....if that were a trend, I'd imagine the main focus of Wayne Krivsky would have been starting pitching

KalDanielsfan
08-05-2006, 02:27 PM
I don't believe you at all, and the 1999 Reds prove that theory completely wrong.

Yeah,

Harnisch, Steve Parris, Villone, and steve avery in the rotation was gonna carry us to the World Series that year:laugh:

jimbo
08-05-2006, 02:29 PM
How helpful is a great bullpen when you are already down 9-3 by the 7th inning? seriously explain that to me.

How many times this season has that actually happened? I just skimmed through this month and July and I didn't see one game where the Reds starting pitching gave up 9 runs in 7 innings.

KalDanielsfan
08-05-2006, 02:31 PM
They're not usually down 9-3 in the 7th inning....if that were a trend, I'd imagine the main focus of Wayne Krivsky would have been starting pitching

you havent seen the trend of starting pitching ERA going up, while runs scored is going down since the ASB?

Arroyo is struggling BAD, Milton is inconsistent (as always--how ironic), E ramirez has a national league era of over 4??, and now harang might be banged up....

this is a NLCS rotation? cmon man..i love the reds as much as anybody here but im being honest.

westofyou
08-05-2006, 02:31 PM
Yeah,

Harnisch, Steve Parris, Villone, and steve avery in the rotation was gonna carry us to the World Series that year:laugh:
That's why the bullpen was important for that team, according to you it's the least of a teams worries. But in 1999 the Reds didn't think that, they had a average offense and great defense, and they had 2 starters with over 150 IP.

They knew they sucked in the starting ranks, so they made the BP a more important part of the team, they used it more and they leveraged it in more situations.

With out that part of the Totem Pole the rest all tumbles on itself.

jimbo
08-05-2006, 02:31 PM
Yeah,

Harnisch, Steve Parris, Villone, and steve avery in the rotation was gonna carry us to the World Series that year:laugh:

They were 5 wins away from doing just that. Why? Because of a great bullpen. :bang:

KalDanielsfan
08-05-2006, 02:32 PM
How many times this season has that actually happened? I just skimmed through this month and July and I didn't see one game where the Reds starting pitching gave up 9 runs in 7 innings.


it was a hypothetical statement speakng generally about baseball and the need for a good bullpen..not just the REds in particular

KalDanielsfan
08-05-2006, 02:32 PM
They were 5 wins away from doing just that. :bang:

because of the OFFENSE ( the best Reds roster of bats i've seen since 1990--maybe even better than 1990's), and had they had the starting pitching, they would have won the world series that year.

westofyou
08-05-2006, 02:35 PM
because of the OFFENSE ( the best Reds roster of bats i've seen since 1990--maybe even better than 1990's)
10 runs above league average in one of the biggest hitting years in decades, look around the league, everyone was doing it.

jimbo
08-05-2006, 02:38 PM
because of the OFFENSE ( the best Reds roster of bats i've seen since 1990--maybe even better than 1990's), and had they had the starting pitching, they would have won the world series that year.

Man, you're digging yourself a hole that is deeper and deeper. The 1999 team won on pitching. Try checking the stats.

The Reds pitchers in 1999 put up a 3.99 overall ERA and a 96-67 record. Their five main relievers in the bullpen had an ERA of 3.34. The 1999 offense was not as potent as many of the offenses the Reds have had since then. The difference by far was the pitching.

KalDanielsfan
08-05-2006, 02:51 PM
Man, you're digging yourself a hole that is deeper and deeper. The 1999 team won on pitching. Try checking the stats.

The Reds pitchers in 1999 put up a 3.99 overall ERA and a 96-67 record. Their five main relievers in the bullpen had an ERA of 3.34. The 1999 offense was not as potent as many of the offenses the Reds have had since then. The difference by far was the pitching.

not as potent? I would take that team over this years team any day in terms of batting lineup.

Taubensee 311 / 21 / 87
Casey 332 / 25 / 99
Reese 285 / 10 / 52 / 38 SB
A Boone 280 / 14 / 72
Larkin 293 / 12 / 75 / 30 SB
Vaughn 245 / 45 / 118
Cameron 256 / 21 / 66 / 38 SB
Young 300 / 14 / 56

Off the bench:
Hammonds 279 / 17 / 41

those are W.S. team type numbers.

what Roster was better overall than that since then?

westofyou
08-05-2006, 02:57 PM
those are W.S. team type numbers.Those are counting stats in a big offensive year. Both 2005 and 1995 were better offensive years for the Reds vs the rest of the league. Then 1999.

tts1stros
08-05-2006, 03:01 PM
Does my logic not make any sense? How helpful is a great bullpen when you are already down 9-3 by the 7th inning? seriously explain that to me. I'd love to hear how starting pitching and offense and defense isn't more important than a bullpen.

Because teams generally aren't down 9-3 by the 7th inning. It's far more common to be in a 1 or 2 run game at that point. Then, your bullpen is crucial.

I've seen too many teams with average/good starting pitching and a lockdown pen. Having a good bullpen is very, very important to a contender.

KalDanielsfan
08-05-2006, 03:05 PM
Because teams generally aren't down 9-3 by the 7th inning. It's far more common to be in a 1 or 2 run game at that point. Then, your bullpen is crucial.

I've seen too many teams with average/good starting pitching and a lockdown pen. Having a good bullpen is very, very important to a contender.

I THINK everyone is misunderstanding my point. of course a good bullpen is necessary. all aspects of a good baseball team are important. Im just saying it could never be more important than SP and Offense.

im not crazy folks LOL

believe me, 1990 would not have happened without the nasty boys but they wouldnt have anything to save unless it was for Rijo, Browning, Danny Jackson, and Armstrong along with Davis, hatcher, Sabo, Oneill, Hal morris and Larkin

jimbo
08-05-2006, 03:06 PM
not as potent? I would take that team over this years team any day in terms of batting lineup.


My point is that in 1999, Reds pitching was 4th overall in ERA and with the exception of 2000, they haven't come close to that since then. The 1999 offense was good, but it was the pitching that put them over the top.

The 2005 Astros are a prime example that you don't necessarily have to have a great offense to get to the World Series.

Sea Ray
08-05-2006, 05:48 PM
...word from the ballpark. Apparantely not broken, and hopefully he can go Wed vs the Cards.


That is all.

How'd he hurt it? What's the diagnosis? Sprain? Jam?

If he's only going to miss one start that's hardly a reason to go shopping for a Livan Hernandez...

Heck, call up Dumatrait for a start if need be.

Matt700wlw
08-05-2006, 05:49 PM
How'd he hurt it? What's the diagnosis? Sprain? Jam?

If he's only going to miss one start that's hardly a reason to go shopping for a Livan Hernandez...

Heck, call up Dumatrait for a start if need be.

It's probably no big deal. I don't even think it came up on the broadcast today.

fearofpopvol1
08-05-2006, 06:05 PM
Bullpen seemed to do the job today (even with TC's BS).

redsfanfalcon
08-05-2006, 06:20 PM
A good starting rotation can help the bullpen look better over the course of a year, due to the fact the bullpen doesn't get used as much. Hitters don't see the bullpen quite as often, and the bullpen can stay "fresh".

Redeye fly
08-05-2006, 06:46 PM
I THINK everyone is misunderstanding my point. of course a good bullpen is necessary. all aspects of a good baseball team are important. Im just saying it could never be more important than SP and Offense.

im not crazy folks LOL

believe me, 1990 would not have happened without the nasty boys but they wouldnt have anything to save unless it was for Rijo, Browning, Danny Jackson, and Armstrong along with Davis, hatcher, Sabo, Oneill, Hal morris and Larkin

Fine, let's say that Krivsky would have traded Kearns, Lopez, and a prospect for a decent #3 or #4 starter. You lose some punch in your lineup either way, whether it's the trade Krivsky made or the trade you think he should have made.So therefore you may not score as many runs. The decent # 3 or #4 guy comes in and does his job. Let's say he hypothetically goes 6 and a third innings and gives up 3 runs... not great but not bad either. When he leaves you're ahead 4-3. When the mess that was the Reds bullpen comes in, they give up 3 runs before the inning ends and now you're down 6-4. Yeah, your decent #3 or #4 starter gave you a decent outing, but it was all for naught. He gets a no decision at best in a game he could have won with a decent pen to support him, and the Reds perhaps go on to lose a game they could have won if they had a decent bullpen. That was the theme of the season up until the trade. The starters by and large were at least keeping us in the game, with the exception of guys like Dave Williams and Joe Mays. As bad as he is, even Milton has kept us in a fair share of games this year. Then the bullpen proceeded to come in and make small deficits large ones, or cough up leads.

I seem to remember one or two Mariners teams that Lou Pinella had that could have went farther had they had a decent pen. Yeah good starting pitching is vital, but if your bullpen is horrid, as the Reds pen was, it's not going to matter much unless your starters are tossing complete games almost every time out.

Maybe you'd like to see Mike Burns in the bullpen again and other guys pressed into roles they're not suited for, but personally I would not.

pedro
08-05-2006, 06:50 PM
I don't believe you at all, and the 1999 Reds prove that theory completely wrong.

1990 too.

DoogMinAmo
08-05-2006, 08:44 PM
1990 too.

i wasn't that impressed with the 1992 team :evil:

MaineRed
08-05-2006, 08:49 PM
It's probably no big deal. I don't even think it came up on the broadcast today.

No, but they had a story on how Harrang gave the bat rack a beating while screaming, "wake up!" at some point during the game. It was actually a direct quote from Harang that I heard.

But as you said, no mention of an injury due to that, or anything else.

Did anyone catch this when it happened?

91OSUAlum
08-05-2006, 10:59 PM
Kal,

I like your observations but they are misplaced. Run the numbers. Our offense has done pretty much what we did before. We lost two middle of the road players who had a lazy work ethic and got players for the bullpen. The bullpen is now better. For you to state that the bullpen is not important, considering the number of potential trades for relievers, you were in the minority.

The shine was off of Lopez(lazy) and Kearns(lazy). The Padres turned down a Kearns for Linebrink trade straight up. Heck, even the Cubs, who had always coveted Kearns did not want him. Trust me on this one.

Kearns is a middle of the road player.

redsmetz
08-06-2006, 08:04 AM
Here is my logic (once again): What good is middle relief pitching when you have a a weaker offense to start off in the first 7 innings? or if your starting sub-par pitcher already has you in the hole 6-0? Combine mediocre starting pitching with a weak offense means it doesnt matter how good your bullpen is. There is nothing to "relieve."

I've said this several times over the last few days about the offense. Immediately past the All Star Break, this club went 7-2 scoring more six or more runs FIVE times in those wins. Someone else added (but I can't find it now) that they had two or three other games with that many runs still a few more after that (in wins). That showed this club could produce offense without Kearns and Lopez.

Our starting pitching is looking a bit raggy in the Dog Days, but a closer look shows it to be slightly better than most people are giving it credit. Arroyo is in one of those streaks where he's having no luck (although not every start has been a quality start). Harrang has been his same old good self, so this little injury certainly is worrisome. Ramierez is 23 (24?) years old - that's a baby in MLB - and he's shown himself to be a fairly astute pitcher for his age (not perfect, but showing some smarts and some decent stuff). Milton v.06, if used right and watched closely (which he hasn't been) has been considerably better than Milton v.05. Someone commented here that if the Reds were to yank Milton anytime from the 7th on when a baserunner reaches, he probably has several more quality starts instead of meltdowns. Particularly now that the BP has been improved.

Back to my initial point, I know the runs per game has declined, but much of it is due to the week, week and a half, collective slump this team was in prior to Atlanta showing up. If the bats come back around, we're winning a few more ballgames this summer.

Reds1
08-06-2006, 10:15 AM
My complete UN-wavering opinion about the trades is this:

Lopez/Kearns and a a prospect could have gotten us a #3 or #4 quality starter instead of some above average middle relievers.

Here is my logic (once again): What good is middle relief pitching when you have a a weaker offense to start off in the first 7 innings? or if your starting sub-par pitcher already has you in the hole 6-0? Combine mediocre starting pitching with a weak offense means it doesnt matter how good your bullpen is. There is nothing to "relieve."

You might argue, well if we're down, the bullpen can keep us in the ballgame...sure, but with what offense are we gonna come back with????

bullpen is the least of any teams concerns. believe me. a great bullpen helps, but its at the bottom of the baseball totem pole.


I don't know if I agree. Our starters have been ok. I think 5th best ERA since the break. Yesterday was a great example. Coffey who was here blows Arroyo's lead and chance for 10th win immediately. You can't have 1 without the other and win in this league. Our pen was the worst in baseball. Something had to be done. Yes, we overpaid. I don't like the deal, but at least I think that Bray could be our closer. If he becomes a lights out closer then it will be a great trade as I think we have other people in the organization who can play OF. Now, SS I'm not sure unless they move BP, but that's another story. Saying all that though I would have liked to seen another arm, but then again Claussen is probably as good as many out there and we didn't have to lose more prospects.

Jr's Boy
08-06-2006, 04:38 PM
If you don't believe in a good bullpen see last year when the Reds were blowing out the Cards only to have Danny Graves come in and get shellacked and give the Cards the game.That has got to be the most pitiful relief effort I have ever seen.

Danny Serafini
08-07-2006, 02:14 PM
Sorry to drag this thread back on topic, but has anyone heard any more about Harang's thumb?

redsfan30
08-07-2006, 02:22 PM
As I mentioned in the Franklin thread, I really hope that move isn't indicative of Harang's injury.

TeamBoone
08-07-2006, 03:16 PM
There has been nothing said about his thumb, except right here in this thread.

Handofdeath
08-07-2006, 03:47 PM
How'd he hurt it?

Sticking it in Majewski's eye probably.