PDA

View Full Version : Reds are moving in right direction



Jefferson24
08-31-2006, 12:46 PM
Last year we finished with 73 wins. If we finish at .500 this year we hill have 81. If we can continue that level of improvement we would be looking at 89 wins in 2007.

I'm disappointed that we haven't finished this year as strong as we started the year. However, after last year the thought of a .500 year for 2006 seemed to be something I would be happy with. Hopefully if continue improving at the same rate and we can expect to be contenders next year.

It is sad though that in such a down year for the NL we couldn't have played a little better and been contenders this year. I guess this year isn't actually over yet but it sure feels that way after this past week. I still think were moving in the right direction and I'm optimistic about our future.

I wouldn't mind a 10 game winning steak starting Friday night, either.

guttle11
08-31-2006, 12:55 PM
This year isn't over. We can still make the playoffs. That has to be kept on the front burner.

But taking a step back, you're completely right. Trading Pena, Kearns, and Lopez, along with a few good acquisitions, gave this team a clear, young nucleus to build around: Dunn, Edwin, Harang, Arroyo, Phillips, Freel and Ross. Throw in guys like Bailey, Votto, Bray, Harris, and Denorfia, who all have potential to make contributions in the next couple of years, and you have quite a bit of young talent.

The future does indeed look bright, but the present doesn't look so bad either.

flyer85
08-31-2006, 01:23 PM
is the improvement real or has randomness just produced a slightly better outcome?

Just because the Reds win a few more games doesn't necessarily mean real progress has been made(it doesn't mean that is hasn't either). Looking at overall win totals doesn't tell the entire story.

redsmetz
08-31-2006, 01:33 PM
I just took a look at the 1990 Reds as well as the 1988 and 1989 team. The changes in 1990 were not dramatic. Marianno Duncan, a mid season pickup in '89 had a one of his best years. The Billy Hatcher pickup right at the start of the season was huge. Other players were coming into their own or continuing their good play from earlier years.

Clearly the bullpen coalesced although much of the pitching staff was the same as the previous year.

I think if you look at other Reds championship years, the change from one year to another was not dramatic (save perhaps 1972 with the acquisition of Joe Morgan et al). I'm also sure there are team historians here who know this far better than I do.

Certainly this team needs work, but we have the nucleus of a good team here. Let's build on it.

Jefferson24
08-31-2006, 01:41 PM
is the improvement real or has randomness just produced a slightly better outcome?

Just because the Reds win a few more games doesn't necessarily mean real progress has been made(it doesn't mean that is hasn't either). Looking at overall win totals doesn't tell the entire story.

Time is the test. If it's only randomness then next year we revert back to the sub .500 record and probably attribute this year's improvement to the weak condition of the NL. If we have indeed improved then we should expect to see an equal or better record next year.

I'm not a stats guy but I would guess this year’s team numbers are better than last years. The true test is how we do next year.

flyer85
08-31-2006, 01:46 PM
Time is the test. If it's only randomness then next year we revert back to the sub .500 record and probably attribute this year's improvement to the weak condition of the NL. not necessarily. Just dig further.
How is the overall talent level? Is it getting better?
How many had subpar years?
How about career years?
Who is likely to continue to improve?
Who is likely to decline?
Is there a major league ready talent in the minors?

dfs
08-31-2006, 01:46 PM
is the improvement real or has randomness just produced a slightly better outcome?

Boy that's an interesting question isn't it?

For all the carping about Jerry Narron, since ditching Dave Miley the reds have gone from a terrible team to a 500 team. Wayne Krivski has turned over more than half the roster and....
they still don't have a bullpen they can count on.
they still play terrible defensive baseball, as bad as Bob Boone's teams.

I think the truth is that the reds were not as bad as they played under Miley and Boone, but also not as good as their early season record (and a weak league) made them look a week and a half ago.

Krivski inherited a collection of talent that he's trying to turn into a baseball team. He still has a ways to go.

They have the pieces of an effective bullpen. They need to figure out how to make it work.
They have the pieces of a starting rotation. They need to figure out how to make it work.
They need a shortstop. One guy for the position.
They need to figure out what to do with Junior. He needs to be out of centerfield. He can't cut it out there.
They need somebody to stabilize Encarnacion and Dunn defensively. Both those guys win games with their bats, but they also make our pitchers work too hard by extending too many innings.

I know how I would solve most of those problems. The reds need to figure out how THEY will solve them. They aren't going to be better than 500, till they do solve them.

dfs
08-31-2006, 01:49 PM
I just took a look at the 1990 Reds as well as the 1988 and 1989 team.

Well, yeah, but the 85 through 88 teams were second place teams that folks all over baseball thought should be competing for the divisional title. Nobody thought that about this crew. The 89 team was the same team, but the season got destroyed because of the investigation into the manager's gambling problems.

The biggest change from the 89 team to the 90 team was who the manager was. Lou made a few tweaks and took Pete's team to win the series. That's not to belittle either man, just the way of things.

UK Reds Fan
08-31-2006, 03:04 PM
is the improvement real or has randomness just produced a slightly better outcome?

Just because the Reds win a few more games doesn't necessarily mean real progress has been made(it doesn't mean that is hasn't either). Looking at overall win totals doesn't tell the entire story.

I would tend to agree with your sentiment.

Assuming the Cubs get some of their pitching injuries addressed by other arms, Milwaukee with their farm system appears to be looking to improve next year, etc... The Reds need to continue overhauling our issues to truly improve.

Unfortunately, one of our main issues IMO are in the heart of our lineup....Griffey and Dunn. 2 below average defenders, Dunn appears to have no ability to improve but instead is plateauing, Griff gives you less and less hope as the years go by that he is a viable middle of order hitter.

Outside of EdE, I don't see any middle of order guys that give you great confidence. Instead we'll be relying on a total lineup to give above average production which basically hopes and prays that Phillips, Ross and Hateburg and duplicate their offensive performance. And that the SS (or 2b if Phillips were to switch to SS) spot can be filled with a solid hitter next year.

I think their is a greater likelihood that we stay the same or digress as opposed to actually improving in 2007.

HumnHilghtFreel
08-31-2006, 03:13 PM
Like others have said, this season isn't over yet.

But I do agree that we are a team on the rise. Nobody thought prior to the season we'd be in a position to make the post-season, even in a weak NL. That's a testament to our team.

I'm honestly excited for this offseason to see what kind of noise we make in the free agent market. The Kearns/Lopez trade freed up a big chunk of change for us on top of new ownership that says they're willing to pony up some cash to put out a winner. Adding some key pieces in the offseason to the core we already have in place is really exciting to me.

Obviously I'll be dissappointed if we miss the playoffs this year, but the fact that we have a team that fought its way out of obscurity to be relevant this late in the year is really encouraging for the coming seasons.

redsmetz
08-31-2006, 03:22 PM
I would tend to agree with your sentiment.

Assuming the Cubs get some of their pitching injuries addressed by other arms, Milwaukee with their farm system appears to be looking to improve next year, etc... The Reds need to continue overhauling our issues to truly improve.

Unfortunately, one of our main issues IMO are in the heart of our lineup....Griffey and Dunn. 2 below average defenders, Dunn appears to have no ability to improve but instead is plateauing, Griff gives you less and less hope as the years go by that he is a viable middle of order hitter.

Outside of EdE, I don't see any middle of order guys that give you great confidence. Instead we'll be relying on a total lineup to give above average production which basically hopes and prays that Phillips, Ross and Hateburg and duplicate their offensive performance. And that the SS (or 2b if Phillips were to switch to SS) spot can be filled with a solid hitter next year.

I think their is a greater likelihood that we stay the same or digress as opposed to actually improving in 2007.

Sometimes RedsZone is maddening (what do I mean sometimes?)!

On one hand you talk about Dunn and Griffey and defense and suggest they are plateuing or diminising. Griffey is an open question. The clock certainly is ticking. Whether he should switch positions is, IMO, a legitimate question. All the clamoring that Dunn has missed his peak gives me pause. I disagree and I think if the Reds let him go, Reds fans will rue that day.

I think Phillips is coming into his own and I think he may well slide over to shortstop NEXT year. Ross is a question mark, but there's no reason he cannot continue like he has this year. It is NOT a given that his hitting will diminish to the BS "career norms". We could easily be witnessing the period in his career that adjusts those norms (after all you can NEVER know career norms or even a career year until after the fact).

No one suggests that Hatteberg is a long term solution. Like the Valentin extension, having him next year gives much needed depth to a position and if he's anywhere near his career norm (yes, at his age, you can at least allude to it), he's a good cog. I agree with those who suggest he may be sharing time with a developing Votto or perhaps some other player who comes along.

The maddening thing is the gloomy gusses who just assume the sky will fall. Do you folks go through you whole lives assuming the worst?

Johnny Footstool
08-31-2006, 03:53 PM
Career norms aren't BS. They are what they are -- the normal production of a player based on his previous production. That's not saying players can't improve, have career years, or figure something out and suddenly reach a higher plateau. But in general, they tend to stay near their norms.

westofyou
08-31-2006, 04:02 PM
Dunn appears to have no ability to improve but instead is plateauing,If the plateau is 40 HRs 100 Runs 100 RBI then sign me up to that type of plateau.


ALL LEAGUES & TEAMS
ALL YEARS
ALL POSITIONS
HOMERUNS >= 40
RUNS >= 100
RBI >= 100


1 Babe Ruth 11
T2 Barry Bonds 7
T2 Alex Rodriguez 7
T4 Willie Mays 6
T4 Ken Griffey Jr. 6
T6 Hank Aaron 5
T6 Jimmie Foxx 5
T6 Sammy Sosa 5
T6 Ralph Kiner 5
T6 Lou Gehrig 5
T11 Jim Thome 4
T11 Frank Thomas 4
T11 Duke Snider 4
T11 Manny Ramirez 4
T15 Eddie Mathews 3
T15 Albert Pujols 3
T15 Albert Belle 3
T15 Hank Greenberg 3
T15 Johnny Mize 3
T15 Mark McGwire 3
T15 Shawn Green 3
T15 Mike Schmidt 3
T15 Carlos Delgado 3
T15 Jeff Bagwell 3
T15 Andres Galarraga 3

dfs
08-31-2006, 04:06 PM
If the plateau is 40 HRs 100 Runs 100 RBI then sign me up to that type of plateau.

I'll take the second on that motion.

In an optimal world Dunn would be a DH on an American League team, but, if I'm the reds GM, you're going to have to offer me some serious bait to even open the discussion.

Dunn doesn't have to get better to be a great player, but I would appreciate it if he could somehow even out his defence.

remdog
08-31-2006, 04:06 PM
Sometimes RedsZone is maddening (what do I mean sometimes?)!

On one hand you talk about Dunn and Griffey and defense and suggest they are plateuing or diminising. Griffey is an open question. The clock certainly is ticking. Whether he should switch positions is, IMO, a legitimate question. All the clamoring that Dunn has missed his peak gives me pause. I disagree and I think if the Reds let him go, Reds fans will rue that day.

I think Phillips is coming into his own and I think he may well slide over to shortstop NEXT year. Ross is a question mark, but there's no reason he cannot continue like he has this year. It is NOT a given that his hitting will diminish to the BS "career norms". We could easily be witnessing the period in his career that adjusts those norms (after all you can NEVER know career norms or even a career year until after the fact).

No one suggests that Hatteberg is a long term solution. Like the Valentin extension, having him next year gives much needed depth to a position and if he's anywhere near his career norm (yes, at his age, you can at least allude to it), he's a good cog. I agree with those who suggest he may be sharing time with a developing Votto or perhaps some other player who comes along.

The maddening thing is the gloomy gusses who just assume the sky will fall. Do you folks go through you whole lives assuming the worst?

Sometimes? Come back after 6 years and tell me about it. :laugh:

The Reds need someone that has the 'nads to tell Jr. that it's time to switch positions---either a corner slot or first base. (That guy is obviously not Narron.) Likewise, the Reds need that same person to tell Dunn that it's time to switch to first base if Jr. wants left field. I would not let him go easily if I could get someone that would be a #1 starter with a future ahead of himself.

There is every reason to think that Ross will become this years' Jason LaRue and vise versa. It's called his career. He never showed much potential in the minors and even less in the majors. Maybe it was the Skyline Chilli that gave him a boost. It's the only thing I can think of outside of 'career year' or that stuff that Barry Bonds liked.

Phillips is the only player mentioned above who had the potential in the minors to justify his play this year so I think there's a chance that he could be a solid Major Leaguer long-term.

Hatteberg was brought in to be bench strength and the fact that he has started so much just points out the fact that the Reds starting eight has big holes. Another 'career year' player, I think Hat could be that solid bench guy we need next year but I certainly wouldn't want to bank on him as my starter at first and have to hope he duplicates this years' numbers.

Rem

redsmetz
08-31-2006, 04:18 PM
Career norms aren't BS. They are what they are -- the normal production of a player based on his previous production. That's not saying players can't improve, have career years, or figure something out and suddenly reach a higher plateau. But in general, they tend to stay near their norms.

But the way most folks use them around here, they rigidly determinative, never locking a player in as if predestined from above. Too Calvinist for my taste.

redsmetz
08-31-2006, 04:22 PM
Rem wrote: Hatteberg was brought in to be bench strength and the fact that he has started so much just points out the fact that the Reds starting eight has big holes. Another 'career year' player, I think Hat could be that solid bench guy we need next year but I certainly wouldn't want to bank on him as my starter at first and have to hope he duplicates this years' numbers.

I don't expect Hatteberg to be the full-time 1st baseman next year either. I really expect him to fill the slot you indicate (and what was alleged plan this year). This year is a huge bonus and I don't think management expects the same from him next year. I think they expect the usual good at bat from Scott and let the hits and productivity fall where they will.

Ltlabner
08-31-2006, 04:22 PM
But the way most folks use them around here, they rigidly determinative, never locking a player in as if predestined from above. Too Calvinist for my taste.

Yet if they "project well" or have that mysterious aura of "potential" it's as if they are predestined to be super-stars.

Most people are reasonable about the carear norm and projection of players abilities (and they are VERY usefull tools) but you are right Redsmetz, some do act as if it's carved in stone.

dabvu2498
08-31-2006, 04:25 PM
Phillips is the only player mentioned above who had the potential in the minors to justify his play this year so I think there's a chance that he could be a solid Major Leaguer long-term.


Not so sure about this one.

Phillips was .333/.415/.748 in almost 2800 minor league ABs. Coming into this year, Phillips had OPSed .556 in 424 MLB ABs.

By comparison, Ross was .347/.431/.778 in about 1500 minor league ABs. In 424 previous major league ABs, Ross OPSed .694.

The real difference in their "potential" is age-based (4 years difference).

flyer85
08-31-2006, 04:26 PM
The real difference in their "potential" is age-based.isn't it always?

dabvu2498
08-31-2006, 04:28 PM
isn't it always?

Not when the discussion is about "career norms."

flyer85
08-31-2006, 04:30 PM
I would feel confident the Reds were moving in the right direction if they would address their problems.

The most important would involve moving Dunn to 1b and Jr to LF. The Reds cannot continue to play them side by side in the OF. It is a must. If they don't do something then they really aren't addressing anything and they won't be improving. When I see this happen I will know they are serious about fixing what is wrong and that other steps will follow. While the OF issue is not the biggest problem it is by far the most important issue to address because of the players involved.

redsmetz
08-31-2006, 04:38 PM
Yet if they "project well" or have that mysterious aura of "potential" it's as if they are predestined to be super-stars.

Most people are reasonable about the carear norm and projection of players abilities (and they are VERY usefull tools) but you are right Redsmetz, some do act as if it's carved in stone.

BS is too harsh a word, but I do tire of the "carved in stone" talk some folks used. I think some have pointed out that it's hard to use "Career Norms" on someone like EE or, for that matter, Brandon Phillips because they're establishing those norms now.

Folks might be right about Ross, it's hard to say. Is LaRue shot? I don't think he is, but he may well be on the downside. Hatteberg probably is having his career year, and I'm glad he's having it here. I expect more like his standard next year, as I've said often here.

Even career norms though aren't immune to the human element of catching lightning in a bottle; that something special someone comes up with out of the blue and for one year, it's sweet. You can't build a ballclub around that, but it's nice when it happens to you.

BRM
08-31-2006, 04:42 PM
I would feel confident the Reds were moving in the right direction if they would address their problems.

The most important would involve moving Dunn to 1b and Jr to LF. The Reds cannot continue to play them side by side in the OF. It is a must. If they don't do something then they really aren't addressing anything and they won't be improving. When I see this happen I will know they are serious about fixing what is wrong and that other steps will follow. While the OF issue is not the biggest problem it is by far the most important issue to address because of the players involved.

Wouldn't moving Junior to RF and getting a legit centerfielder address the problem? I'd rather move to Dunn to 1B and Junior to LF as well but I just don't see the Reds moving Dunn from LF. They could have done it this year if they really wanted to.

flyer85
08-31-2006, 04:48 PM
They could have done it this year if they really wanted to.The new regime gave Dunn a year. It is time to make a decision. I didn't see any improvement in the OF play from Dunn and a decision needs to be made about at what position is his long term future. It seems to me the answer is clearly first base. Without a doubt Dunn has the athletic ability to easily make the transition. The question is how hard would he want to work at it.

I honestly think the odds are very high that Dunn will be traded in the off season.

BRM
08-31-2006, 04:51 PM
I honestly think the odds are very high that Dunn will be traded in the off season.

I think so too. He'll end up at 1B or DH with a new team next season.

jimbo
08-31-2006, 04:54 PM
I honestly think the odds are very high that Dunn will be traded in the off season.

I disagree. Dunn puts up the type of offensive numbers that you build a team around, not trade away. I don't think he's going anywhere.

BRM
08-31-2006, 04:56 PM
I disagree. Dunn puts up the type of offensive numbers that you build a team around, not trade away. I don't think he's going anywhere.

Krivsky supposedly covets pitching and defense. I think he'd be willing to sacrifice Dunn's offense if it lands him a #1 starter.

flyer85
08-31-2006, 05:00 PM
I disagree. Dunn puts up the type of offensive numbers that you build a team around, not trade away. I wont argue with that statement.

However, I have a pretty good idea what Krivsky percieves to be the important in building a winner. Dunns lack of defense and high K total make him a good trade candidate.

In addition, the fact that he would probably bring value in return make him a candidate to be traded.

flyer85
08-31-2006, 05:02 PM
Krivsky supposedly covets pitching and defense. I think he'd be willing to sacrifice Dunn's offense if it lands him a #1 starter.I think he will deal him for a lot less than that. I think it would take a potential SS and an OF to get it done.

Ltlabner
08-31-2006, 05:04 PM
I wont argue with your statement.

However, I have a pretty good idea what Krivsky percieves to be the important in building a winner. Dunns lack of defense and high K total make him a good trade candidate.

In addition, the fact that he would probably bring value in return make him a candidate to be traded.

If he would be traded because of his D why wasn't he moved before the trade deadline while Kriv was talking to the entire planet looking for pitching help? Surely someone would have expressed interest in Dunn. And his defenseive performance on opening day, let alone horrendous gaffes throughout the 1/2 half would rate as "poor D".

For that matter, why wasn't EE shipped out....? He's the model of poor D yet he's with the club.

I'm not saying he wouldn't be traded, but I think it would be more for your second statment (his value towards getting us serrious starting pitching) than just because "Kriv wants D" and he doesn't value Dunn.

flyer85
08-31-2006, 05:12 PM
If he would be traded because of his D why wasn't he moved before the trade deadline while Kriv was talking to the entire planet looking for pitching help?
1) Krivsky answered that when he wasasked about trading Dunn for pitching, Wayne said they he couldn't replace his offense. He obviously felt they could in the case of Kearns/Lopez.
2) Trading a big time player and getting value is much better accomplished in the off-season.

It hindsight it certainly looks like the Reds sold short when they dealt Kearns/Lopez.

Ltlabner
08-31-2006, 05:16 PM
Krivsky answered that when he wasasked about trading Dunn for pitching, Wayne said they he couldn't replace his offense.

If they couldn't replace his offense then, why would they suddenly trade him over the off-season? (Barring a different trade that brings a different big stick to town)?

I guess I got the vibe from your comments that Kriv would trade Dunn because Kriv doesn't value him, Kriv's a dolt, etc etc.

flyer85
08-31-2006, 05:19 PM
If they couldn't replace his offense then, why would they suddenly trade him over the off-season?
because you have the capability to do a lot more things in the off-season than during the season to remake your club. His statement was simply acknowledging that a GM is limited in what they can do to transform their club in-season.

flyer85
08-31-2006, 05:22 PM
I guess I got the vibe from your comments that Kriv would trade Dunn because Kriv doesn't value him, Kriv's a dolt, etc etc.I don't think WK undervalues Dunn's offense, I think he sees him as a fine offensive player with flaws. My guess is that Dunn may not be the kind of player WK wants to build around for the future.

If he trades him I don't think he even has to acquire pitching, if he doesn't he better come back with a SS and an OF.

jimbo
08-31-2006, 05:27 PM
I wont argue with that statement.

However, I have a pretty good idea what Krivsky percieves to be the important in building a winner. Dunns lack of defense and high K total make him a good trade candidate.

In addition, the fact that he would probably bring value in return make him a candidate to be traded.

And I can't argue with your comments because I think you are right for the most part. I just think Dunn's bat makes him the exception to the rule. I agree that Krivsky wants to build a winner around pitching and defense, but they will look past Dunn's defense, or lack thereof, because of what he can bring to the table with his offense. Without Dunn and with Griffey's bat not being what it used to be, EE would be the only serious offensive weapon in the lineup. It's just too difficult to replace Dunn's bat.

Falls City Beer
08-31-2006, 05:44 PM
The Reds can be a whole lot better next season. They still have talent; but it's going to take some cash and some smart shuffling to put this team in the playoffs with any kind of consistency, and I'm just not sure Wayne is the guy to do that at all.

He's been running the ball into the opponent's endzone since July.

I would really like to see the team move in a different direction next season, both in terms of players and management.

Ltlabner
08-31-2006, 05:48 PM
The Reds can a whole lot better next season. They still have talent; but it's going to take some cash and some smart shuffling to put this team in the playoffs with any kind of consistency, and I'm just not sure Wayne is the guy to do that at all.

He's been running the ball into the opponent's endzone since July.

I would really like to see the team move in a different direction next season, both in terms of players and management.

So after poor performance, in your opinion, since July you think Kriv's a dud and it's time for a change ?

Falls City Beer
08-31-2006, 05:50 PM
So after poor performance, in your opinion, since July you think Kriv's a dud and it's time for a change ?

Yes. I think he's showing himself as a GM in the Bowden mold. Wily, but lacking vision.

Ltlabner
08-31-2006, 05:54 PM
Yes. I think he's showing himself as a GM in the Bowden mold. Wily, but lacking vision.

You are a tough cookie my friend. If all it takes is 2 months of "poor performance" by a GM, to render him "without vision" and worthy of firing then I doubt you'll ever be satisfied.

mth123
09-01-2006, 05:45 AM
Besides the obvious pitching issues this teams top priority has got to be getting Griffey out of CF.

Dunn in left field is ok. He isn't great out there but most LF aren't. I would rather have him in left than at 1B where he has to be in on more plays. He isn't a good defender so why make him be in on 10 to 15 plays per game when he can stay in left and be in on less than 5? Leave him in LF and let him be the Offensive centerpiece to this team (batting 3rd). Just get a good CF that can cover the gap.

Griffey in Right batting 5th is an answer until Jay Bruce is ready.

Phillips at SS with some combination of Freel, Harris and maybe Aurelia covering 2B.

If Griffey would move out of CF to make way for Freel (I don't think he ever would) then get a 2B or SS that plays good defense and helps the offense (no black holes on either "O" or "D"). If you need to get a star caliber player to get Griffey to move (which is what I think is needed) then they need to do it and move Freel back to the IF (even with his excellent OF play). I give up Freel's excellent OF play if it helps to get Griffey out of CF!

Hatte and Aurelia at 1B until Votto is ready.

EdE at 3B and batting number 4 for the next 10 years.

Keep two of the three catchers and trade one for the best you can get. If you can add a player that can help, trade Ross. If not, trade Larue for payflex and a bag of balls. I trade Ross before just cutting Larue and eating the contract though. I only eat the contract if it gets talent in return.

Then get a reliable starter (an Ace if you can) and a closer.

Its really only three pieces but it still seems like a lot is needed.

A star CF, an Ace Pitcher and a closer. That's a lot of jack.