PDA

View Full Version : Strengthening the bench - Klesko?



TStuck
10-31-2006, 12:13 AM
Saw today that the Padres declined their option on Ryan Klesko for next year. He was hurt most of this year and is 35yo.

If healthy, I think this is the kind of guy I'd love to bring in. A power lefty bat off the bench and spot starter. He also has good plate discipline with career OBP of .372. I would think he would be an upgrade over Hollandsworth.

Again, if healthy, is 3-4 mil per year for 1-2 years a legit offer? Or do you think he will be in greater demand, therefore driving up the cost?:dunno:

Redsnake
10-31-2006, 09:17 AM
I like the idea of him being a Red. Just not at that price. I'm thinking on the same lines of Frank Thomas deal with the A's. Wasn't it like 500K or 1 million?
Maybe 2 years deal 1.5 first year and 2 million in year 2.

Will M
10-31-2006, 09:34 AM
no

If Votto progresses he will take over 1B ~7/1/07 pushing Hatteberg to the bench. If we also had Klesko that would give us two old lefties off the bench who can only play 1B ( Klesko is bad in the outfield )

dfs
10-31-2006, 11:15 AM
Why would we need another lefthanded hitter that runs like a Rhino?

I mean...I'm all for value and getting good players to sign cheap contracts, but as configured right now, Ryan Klesko doesn't fit a single need on this roster.

Team Clark
10-31-2006, 12:15 PM
Klesko would be an upgrade from the Hollandsworth types...

vaticanplum
10-31-2006, 12:17 PM
I can't believe that Klesko is ONLY 35 years old. I feel like he's been around my entire life.

I've always had a soft spot for him. No idea why. He might be a good pickup for the bench if he could be gotten cheaply, but I'm willing to be some organization will sign him to a more lucrative one-year deal.

fewfirstchoice
10-31-2006, 12:40 PM
I would be open to Mr. K bringing in Klesko.I would offer him a 1 year deal at about 1.5 mil. with a option for 2.5 mil. in 08.

M2
10-31-2006, 12:56 PM
IMO, Klesko would at least be an even money bet to be better than Hatteberg next season. The Reds might very well need some more muscle out of 1B in 2007.

As for Votto, if he turns out to be the greatest thing since sliced bread, the Reds can happily adjust for that. In the meantime he's a kid who's probably at least a year away, possibly two (because it's a long way from AA to being a plus hitter in the majors). Banking on a kid who's been up and down in his minor league career isn't the sort of thing the Reds need to be engaging in. The offense crumbled at the end of last season and the club would be well-advised to find a few good deals on some bats.

lollipopcurve
10-31-2006, 01:10 PM
As for Votto, if he turns out to be the greatest thing since sliced bread, the Reds can happily adjust for that. In the meantime he's a kid who's probably at least a year away, possibly two (because it's a long way from AA to being a plus hitter in the majors). Banking on a kid who's been up and down in his minor league career isn't the sort of thing the Reds need to be engaging in.

I think you underestimate Votto. He's a baseball rat who wants to be great and is willing to put in the time to get there. Note that last offseason he was playing for Canada (in addition to spending time in the AFL), and this year he's down in the Dominican. He's only had one "down" span in the minors, and that was while he was toiling under the take-a-strike edict in the hitter-unfriendly FSL. Check his career -- every other season has been outstanding -- it's nothing close to the yo-yo you suggest. Plate discipline, average, power, it's all there. Add in the reports that he's improved a lot on defense and on the basepaths (20+ steals), and you have a nearly finished product, in my opinion. Keep in mind, too, that being from Canada he didn't play baseball wall-to-wall as a kid. There is a lot to like about Votto, both on paper and off -- and I put him right there alongside Bruce as a prospect. Hatteberg is all the babysitting the Reds need at 1B -- I wouldn't go spending any more money there.

flyer85
10-31-2006, 01:32 PM
hard to figure out what the Reds may/can do until they come to terms with what to do with Jr.

M2
10-31-2006, 01:33 PM
I think you underestimate Votto. He's a baseball rat who wants to be great and is willing to put in the time to get there. Note that last offseason he was playing for Canada (in addition to spending time in the AFL), and this year he's down in the Dominican. He's only had one "down" span in the minors, and that was while he was toiling under the take-a-strike edict in the hitter-unfriendly FSL. Check his career -- every other season has been outstanding -- it's nothing close to the yo-yo you suggest. Plate discipline, average, power, it's all there. Add in the reports that he's improved a lot on defense and on the basepaths (20+ steals), and you have a nearly finished product, in my opinion. Keep in mind, too, that being from Canada he didn't play baseball wall-to-wall as a kid. There is a lot to like about Votto, both on paper and off -- and I put him right there alongside Bruce as a prospect. Hatteberg is all the babysitting the Reds need at 1B -- I wouldn't go spending any more money there.

Hatteberg might not get the job done next year and, though I like Votto as a prospect, I draw a thick line between liking a guy and assuming he's going to seamlessly make the leap from AA to the majors. It's an extreme rarity. Joey Thurston was supposedly a can't-miss baseball rat. Toss Casey Kotchman into that can't-miss baseball rat pile too.

We don't know how much babysitting first base will need. We all want the same thing, zero babysitting. Yet, and it's hard to stress this enough, just because we want it doesn't make it so. Most kids in AA need at least a year in AAA before they can beat on major league pitching. I hope Votto's an exception to the rule, but no way, no how am I assuming it.

flyer85
10-31-2006, 01:41 PM
Toss Casey Kotchman into that can't-miss baseball rat pile too. Kotchman was one of those overrated prospects(like Aybar) whose minor leauge offensive numbers just made you wonder what the scouts at looking at. Kotchman showed no power in the minors and all I heard was, "it will come as he develops". Well it hasn't and he can't stay healty either.

At least Votto has shown power and patience at the minor league level, very good predictors for future success. he may not be ready in 2007 but I have a feeling that Hatty is not going to come close to repeating 2006.

flyer85
10-31-2006, 01:42 PM
if the answer is bringing in a poor defender, the Reds are likely better off giving the job to Freel.

M2
10-31-2006, 01:50 PM
At least Votto has shown power and patience at the minor league level, very good predictors for future success. he may not be ready in 2007 but I have a feeling that Hatty is not going to come close to repeating 2006.

I like Votto as a prospect. I'm not sure where recognizing that the Reds probably have to wait for a good prospect to arrive translates to not liking a kid, but apparently that's the way folks take it.

I'd separate out first basemen without power (Kotchman, Loney) from middle infielders. Guys like Jose Reyes and Hanley Ramirez have demonstrated in recent years just how far tools can take you at the SS position.

I share your feeling on Hatteberg. I've noted before that his career year in 2006 produced an .825 OPS. If he drops down to his career .767 career mark, then the Reds have a decidedly underpowered 1B.

ED44
10-31-2006, 08:25 PM
I wouldn't mind adding a Padre to our bench...but, I would much rather it be Dave Roberts. It sounds like the Rockies are going to go after him hard though, according to an article I read on foxsports.

mth123
10-31-2006, 09:32 PM
I like Votto as a prospect. I'm not sure where recognizing that the Reds probably have to wait for a good prospect to arrive translates to not liking a kid, but apparently that's the way folks take it.

I'd separate out first basemen without power (Kotchman, Loney) from middle infielders. Guys like Jose Reyes and Hanley Ramirez have demonstrated in recent years just how far tools can take you at the SS position.

I share your feeling on Hatteberg. I've noted before that his career year in 2006 produced an .825 OPS. If he drops down to his career .767 career mark, then the Reds have a decidedly underpowered 1B.

I think it would be a shock if Hat didn't drop to that level (I'm thinking .265/.360/.385) Not sure of Klesko's health, but if he seems OK, I get him cheap and let him push for the job. At worst case he's a power bat on the bench. Or he may be the missing pop for the 6 hole. Deno, Phillips and SS du jour (sp?) look better with power at 1B.

Rojo
11-02-2006, 06:35 PM
I'd bet on Klesko to outpace Hatte next year, but Hatte's signed, making Klesko superflous. I'd go with Craig Wilson. He's a back up option at first and a platoon candidate with Jr.

mth123
11-02-2006, 09:32 PM
I'd bet on Klesko to outpace Hatte next year, but Hatte's signed, making Klesko superflous.

Put Hat in Hollandsworth role as a LH off the bench. He's paid like a bench player so grabbing a starter who enhances the line-up is still reasonable.

Rojo
11-02-2006, 09:39 PM
I don't like lefties on the bench. Pass.

BigRed
11-02-2006, 10:18 PM
Someone will take a flyer on Klesko for more money to DH or something. I agree that we need to look for someone more athletic and more versatile for the bench.

Heath
11-02-2006, 10:21 PM
Klesko would be an upgrade from the Hollandsworth types...

That's like walking into a Chevy dealer with a '79 Vega and walking out with an '84 Caprice.

There's better options on the lot...and with less miles and age.

M2
11-03-2006, 01:58 AM
Klesko's been a damn fine for a long time and, as noted above, he's not all that old.

He's 18 months younger than Hatteberg. At the very least, he'd be a capable PH and spot starter. It sure beats sending Juan Castro up to pinch hit in a key situation. As a general rule, I'm all for maxing out the roster with capable hitters.

Rojo
11-03-2006, 03:40 AM
Klesko's been a damn fine for a long time and, as noted above, he's not all that old.

Which is why he'll get more than bench money.

Heath
11-03-2006, 05:19 AM
Which is why he'll get more than bench money.

Someone will give Klesko the opportunity to play everyday. That place, since Hatte's here, is not Cincinnati.

BTW - I just had to post at 4:19 AM. I don't know how Ron Madden and Krono do it.

scounts22
11-03-2006, 08:47 AM
I can't believe that Klesko is ONLY 35 years old. I feel like he's been around my entire life.

I've always had a soft spot for him. No idea why. He might be a good pickup for the bench if he could be gotten cheaply, but I'm willing to be some organization will sign him to a more lucrative one-year deal.

Me too, I had an enormous crush on him when I was like 12. I've always liked him...I think it's because he looks like a badass. ;)

Cooper
11-03-2006, 07:15 PM
You can't have enough bats. It's a good hedge if Hatteburg falls to pieces.

That said, i'd rather have a RH bat to platoon with (as mth mentioned). Klesco used to run pretty well for a 1st baseman.

What was his injury? That would fill in some blanks.

Lastly, is he not a pretty good comp for Adam Dunn.

Big....check.
LH....check.
Played out of position way longer than he should've.....check.
Can/could surprisingly steal a base....check.

This guy is a decent comp for Dunn. Never thought of him as being so.
It brings to mind how silly it is that folks get allover Dunn for being a bad left fielder. People this size can't play it....they shouldn't be expected to, but yet they were run out there to help the team get another bat into the lineup and they never complained about having to play out of position, yet both were ridiculed beyond belief. Only difference is Bobby Cox protected Klescko and his reputation. He appreciated the sacrifice he made for the team.

It'd be nice if Narron or Wayne K. said some things along the same lines re: Dunn....let's put it this way -how'd you think Scott Hatteburg would do in LF? It'd be ugly, but i betcha everybody and their brother would talk about how he made a sacrifice to try to play the position--the platitudes would never stop. Just seems odd to me.