PDA

View Full Version : Alex Gonzalez to the Reds



Pages : [1] 2

Az. Reds Fan
11-16-2006, 11:40 PM
Sorry if this has been posted...


Alex Gonzalez-SS-Red Sox Nov. 16 - 8:32 pm et


Free agent Alex Gonzalez reportedly has a three-year, $15 million offer on the table, likely from either the White Sox or the Reds.

The Blue Jays have also been talking to Gonzalez, but they didn't make the offer. If Gonzalez can get this kind of deal, Julio Lugo at four years and $32 million would look very attractive. Of course, if it's the White Sox that sign Gonzalez, the same teams that are considering Gonzalez right now would likely covet Juan Uribe. Uribe is about as good defensively and has more offensive potential. Should the Reds get Gonzalez, Brandon Phillips would stay at second base. It'd make the decision to re-sign Juan Castro look awfully redundant.

Yuck, let's hope it's the Sox who want him.

TOBTTReds
11-16-2006, 11:54 PM
I would cry if this is what Krivsky thinks is a good option.

PLEASE be the White Sox!!

His 06 numbers:

.255 .299 .397 .696

3 years...15 mil!!!! this is ridiculous. I hope it is a lie that he has that just so he can try to drive the price up.

Patrick Bateman
11-16-2006, 11:59 PM
I would cry if this is what Krivsky thinks is a good option.

PLEASE be the White Sox!!

His 06 numbers:

.255 .299 .397 .696

3 years...15 mil!!!! this is ridiculous. I hope it is a lie that he has that just so he can try to drive the price up.

Yes his hitting is poor, but he also offers some of the best defense at SS in all of baseball. Based on the alternatives currently available, I think this would be okay.

He would provide a good boost to the pitching, especially when paired with Phillips, we would have one of the best DP combos in baseball.

Kc61
11-17-2006, 12:10 AM
I would cry if this is what Krivsky thinks is a good option.

PLEASE be the White Sox!!

His 06 numbers:

.255 .299 .397 .696

3 years...15 mil!!!! this is ridiculous. I hope it is a lie that he has that just so he can try to drive the price up.


Honus Wagner and Ozzie Smith are unavailable this year. Three years and 15 million for a great fielding shortstop who can hit .250 is fine with me. Reds will have to add offense at other positions but this would be a huge upgrade in the infield. If they sign Gonzalez, how about some ground ball type pitchers so he has something to field.

TOBTTReds
11-17-2006, 12:39 AM
Honus Wagner and Ozzie Smith are unavailable this year. Three years and 15 million for a great fielding shortstop who can hit .250 is fine with me. Reds will have to add offense at other positions but this would be a huge upgrade in the infield. If they sign Gonzalez, how about some ground ball type pitchers so he has something to field.

I see what you are saying, and I guess this move is ok IF! we add a ton of offense elsewhere. There is a lot of talk about trading Dunn. We can't be trading him without getting some O in return.

But let's get realistic with some of those comparisons. His D is not Ozzie Smith or Honus Wagner like. His range factor was IDENTICAL to Royce Clayton's this year via the Bill James Handbook. He was the 15th ranked SS in the majors. In 2006. I'll pass.

RedLegSuperStar
11-17-2006, 07:59 AM
I'm down with that. 5 mil per.. not to shabby for a slick fielding SS. Put him in GABP and who knows.. that average could rise.

MrCinatit
11-17-2006, 08:37 AM
I wouldn't be mad if we got him. Stellar shortstops don't seem to be populationg the market this year - and having someone who can actually catch and throw the ball could be a nice relief.
As long as it is the one from the Redsox, and not the one from the Phillies.

Matt700wlw
11-17-2006, 09:15 AM
Would you rather have Clatyon?


I'd be fine with this move. DEFENSE

Strikes Out Looking
11-17-2006, 09:18 AM
An above average fielding ss that can hit .250 improves the Reds.

1. He fills the defensive void at SS.
2. He helps fill the defensive void at 2b by keeping Phillips there.
3. The improved up the middle defense helps the pitching staff--think of all those dp's that didn't happen before big things did happen last season.

And 5 milion a year isn't that much in today's dollars--heck the Reds paid an aging Barry Larking more than that to play about 120 games a year three years ago.

EKURed
11-17-2006, 09:30 AM
Absolutely. I would take him in a heartbeat. How many errors did he make last year? A double play combo of Gonzalez and Phillips would be REALLY good.

oneupper
11-17-2006, 10:06 AM
I would add some positives to this posible move:

1. AG has some power, good for GABP
2. His profile make him a good fit for the #8 spot, so Narron will (hopefully) bat him there.
3. This takes late inning ABs away from Juan Castro and might even make JC available for a trade.

Johnny Footstool
11-17-2006, 10:16 AM
I guess Bowden wanted too much for Christian Guzman. :D

Seriously, Gonzalez is a good, but not great fielder That said, I'd rather see the Reds spend $5 million on a guy like Gonzalez than $8 million on a guy like Julio Lugo.

paulrichjr
11-17-2006, 10:16 AM
I would add some positives to this posible move:

1. AG has some power, good for GABP
2. His profile make him a good fit for the #8 spot, so Narron will (hopefully) bat him there.
3. This takes late inning ABs away from Juan Castro and might even make JC available for a trade.


Let's just hope that he isn't leading off. With the mangers the Reds have had over the past few years one never knows who will be leading off.

Puffy
11-17-2006, 10:23 AM
If the choices are Gonzalez for 5 million per or Lugo for 7 million per then I take Lugo every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Lugo at 8 million per, well there's the dilemna - might be at the cost analysis point where Gonzalez makes more sense, but an OBP of less than .300 - blah. Thats Rey Ordonez territory.

Krusty
11-17-2006, 10:35 AM
I believed Gonzalez only made 9 errors with the Red Sox last season. He has more range than Lopez and Clayton. Five million a season might seem excessive for a gold glove type of player but with so many teams awash with cash, prices for players will be inflated.

registerthis
11-17-2006, 10:35 AM
I guess Bowden wanted too much for Christian Guzman. :D

Seriously, Gonzalez is a good, but not great fielder That said, I'd rather see the Reds spend $5 million on a guy like Gonzalez than $8 million on a guy like Julio Lugo.

Yes, absolutely. Gonzalez would be a serious upgrade over anything else the Reds might throw out there.

Falls City Beer
11-17-2006, 10:37 AM
If the choices are Gonzalez for 5 million per or Lugo for 7 million per then I take Lugo every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Lugo at 8 million per, well there's the dilemna - might be at the cost analysis point where Gonzalez makes more sense, but an OBP of less than .300 - blah. Thats Rey Ordonez territory.

And how.

This team is lousy with no stick judy hitters.

All things considered, I want neither Lugo nor Gonzalez; but if a gun is held to my head, I'll take Lugo.

dfs
11-17-2006, 10:39 AM
Again, the two big questions on the roster are who fills the non-Brandon Phillips middle infield position and how do they get Junior out of centerfield.

Bringing in Gonzales at what amounts to a reasonable free agent price answers the first question. Yeah, I want more o out of my shortstop than that, but he'll likely outproduce Castro and the reds don't have better in house options.

dabvu2498
11-17-2006, 10:41 AM
But let's get realistic with some of those comparisons. His D is not Ozzie Smith or Honus Wagner like. His range factor was IDENTICAL to Royce Clayton's this year via the Bill James Handbook. He was the 15th ranked SS in the majors. In 2006. I'll pass.


http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/files/dialed_in/discussion/2006_american_league_gold_gloves_as_i_see_it/

"Dialed in" had Gonzales ranked 3rd in the AL with 14 Runs Saved vs. average SS/150. Clayton was -7.

Johnny Footstool
11-17-2006, 10:44 AM
And how.

This team is lousy with no stick judy hitters.

All things considered, I want neither Lugo nor Gonzalez; but if a gun is held to my head, I'll take Lugo.

Meh. Lugo is a pretty bad fielder, and you know that if the Reds signed him, he and his .330 OBP would be hitting second. At least Gonzalez will be doing all his damage from the #8 spot.

Red Leader
11-17-2006, 10:45 AM
Aren't there two Alex Gonzalez's. For that price, I hope we're getting both...

Falls City Beer
11-17-2006, 10:46 AM
Meh. Lugo is a pretty bad fielder, and you know that if the Reds signed him, he and his .330 OBP would be hitting second. At least Gonzalez will be doing all his damage from the #8 spot.

Like I said, I want neither one on the Reds, but I'd rather be dead than watch Gonzalez hit second for 500 ABs.

No way Krivsky signs Gonzalez for 5 mill a year to stow him in the eight spot. That'll be held down by a Bowden or an O'Brien leftover; Big K will want to showcase his blockbuster.

Johnny Footstool
11-17-2006, 10:52 AM
Like I said, I want neither one on the Reds, but I'd rather be dead than watch Gonzalez hit second for 500 ABs.

Gonzalez won't hit second, because he's got a reputation as a "glove man". Narron wouldn't dare cast him against type.

If you believe in Win Shares, Lugo only put up 3 more total Win Shares (offense + defense) than Gonzalez last season. $3 million is a lot for 3 measley Win Shares.

NJReds
11-17-2006, 10:56 AM
$5M/year is too much. This FA market is out of control. There has to be a slick fielding SS somewhere that'll come cheaper. Perhaps through Rule 5.

I can't see dropping $15M for three years. I don't care how good a glove he has.

Finding a better hitting, decent glove at 2B (and shifting Phillips to SS) is a better option then this rumored deal.

M2
11-17-2006, 11:00 AM
My worry about Gonzalez is that he's going to be 30 before next season. He's all glove. I don't mind that, but if that glove goes downhill in his 30s, as gloves often do, then you're talking about adding an anchor to your team.

My take is Gonzalez would be fine on a one-year deal like what he had with the Red Sox. That way you're not married to him if the one thing he does well diminishes. Gonzalez needs to be the type of player you can walk away from on a moment's notice. Plus, if you lose him after a year, it's not like he's difficult to replace.

Anyway, if the Reds get an all-glove SS like Gonzalez, they'd better understand that the other seven position players need to produce like gangbusters in order to cover for him. If the Reds sign Gonzalez and then deal Dunn away, ultimately winding up with an offensive downgrade in the OF, then you're talking about a scary bad offense.

RedsManRick
11-17-2006, 11:03 AM
I'd love to have Gonzalez instead of Castro - but neither of them deserves 500 AB. I've given up on the money side of things -- this market is crazy. I just don't want a sub .700 OPS guy getting that many AB regardless of how good his defense is.

Heath
11-17-2006, 11:03 AM
My worry about Gonzalez is that he's going to be 30 before next season. He's all glove. I don't mind that, but if that glove goes downhill in his 30s, as gloves often do, then you're talking about adding an anchor to your team.

My take is Gonzalez would be fine on a one-year deal like what he had with the Red Sox. That way you're not married to him if the one thing he does well diminishes. Gonzalez needs to be the type of player you can walk away from on a moment's notice. Plus, if you lose him after a year, it's not like he's difficult to replace.

Anyway, if the Reds get an all-glove SS like Gonzalez, they'd better understand that the other seven position players need to produce like gangbusters in order to cover for him. If the Reds sign Gonzalez and then deal Dunn away, ultimately winding up with an offensive downgrade in the OF, then you're talking about a scary bad offense.


Including a scary bad offense is the unknown of pitching.

It wouldn't be pretty in these parts - almost Kansas City-Like.

NJReds
11-17-2006, 11:03 AM
You could probably get Loretta cheaper, he plays solid defense at 2B and has some idea about what to do with a bat.

Unless Wayne is really against BP at SS?

Krusty
11-17-2006, 11:06 AM
Problem is there aren't too many shortstops available either by free agency or trade that have the range and glove that Gonzalez has. And do you think you'll be able to sign either Adam Kennedy or Belliard for less than 5 million a season, while shifting Phillips to shortstop?

GAC
11-17-2006, 11:07 AM
I would cry if this is what Krivsky thinks is a good option.

PLEASE be the White Sox!!

His 06 numbers:

.255 .299 .397 .696

What are those numbers in comparison to the league average for SS's?

I know they are somewhat low, but would it be a solid improvement to our middle INF defense? Is that a plus that should be factored into the equation other then looking at a player's OPS?

Why is that always the first thing many seem to look at on a player?

OPS alone is not the most reliable and dependable stat for getting a total evaluation of a player. IMHO, it's not a "tell-all" stat.

But I also agree with M2. If the offense is there around a player like Gonzalez, and can make up for that "lack", then I see nothing wrong when that player has a solid glove.

I just wouldn't commit to him long term.

Johnny Footstool
11-17-2006, 11:12 AM
My worry about Gonzalez is that he's going to be 30 before next season. He's all glove. I don't mind that, but if that glove goes downhill in his 30s, as gloves often do, then you're talking about adding an anchor to your team.

My take is Gonzalez would be fine on a one-year deal like what he had with the Red Sox. That way you're not married to him if the one thing he does well diminishes. Gonzalez needs to be the type of player you can walk away from on a moment's notice. Plus, if you lose him after a year, it's not like he's difficult to replace.

Anyway, if the Reds get an all-glove SS like Gonzalez, they'd better understand that the other seven position players need to produce like gangbusters in order to cover for him. If the Reds sign Gonzalez and then deal Dunn away, ultimately winding up with an offensive downgrade in the OF, then you're talking about a scary bad offense.

I agree that three years is not a great deal, but Gonzalez at ages 30-32 probably won't decline as much as Gonzalez at ages 33-35.

I'm just glad the Reds are trying to use cash instead of trading away talent to shore up the defense.

PuffyPig
11-17-2006, 11:15 AM
OPS alone is not the most reliable and dependable stat for getting a total evaluation of a player. IMHO, it's not a "tell-all" stat.



I'm not disagreeing with your assessment of Gonzalez, but what stat "alone" is more reliable for getting a total evaluation of a player?

I'd argue that no stat "alone" gives a complete evaluation of a player, but OPS as a sole stat comes closest.

Heath
11-17-2006, 11:24 AM
Wow, if the ChiSox want to get Gonzalez, Juan Uribe really is being investigated. So, when the ChiSox dump him, he's found innocent, the Reds can pick him up for pennies on the dollar.

membengal
11-17-2006, 11:24 AM
Would you rather have Clatyon?

Is that the only other option?

I would prefer they explore other options...

registerthis
11-17-2006, 11:25 AM
Meh. Lugo is a pretty bad fielder, and you know that if the Reds signed him, he and his .330 OBP would be hitting second. At least Gonzalez will be doing all his damage from the #8 spot.

..and save the Reds several million $$$ a year in salary. Shore up the infield defense without breaking the bank, then go find yourself a dependable groundball-inducing starter.

registerthis
11-17-2006, 11:26 AM
I'd love to have Gonzalez instead of Castro - but neither of them deserves 500 AB. I've given up on the money side of things -- this market is crazy. I just don't want a sub .700 OPS guy getting that many AB regardless of how good his defense is.

Problem is, your options are somewhat limited here. Even ignoring the realities of budget constraints, there aren't that many .800 OPS-hitting middle infielders available on the market.

M2
11-17-2006, 11:28 AM
Wow, if the ChiSox want to get Gonzalez, Juan Uribe really is being investigated. So, when the ChiSox dump him, he's found innocent, the Reds can pick him up for pennies on the dollar.

I like that plan a lot better.

flyer85
11-17-2006, 11:34 AM
I like that plan a lot better.... as long as he leaves the gun at home.

Matt700wlw
11-17-2006, 11:36 AM
Is that the only other option?

I would prefer they explore other options...


No....but it's a frightening thought :D

Johnny Footstool
11-17-2006, 11:38 AM
... as long as he leaves the gun at home.

Chances are, his new "home" will be a 6x6 cell.

westofyou
11-17-2006, 11:39 AM
Throw a glove at the position and see what happens, Reds fans are spoiled to think every position should hit. However 3 years could bite you in the butt, but sometimes you have to lease the car too.

A.G. is a classic 60's SS, can't get on base and can smack a double or HR.

flyer85
11-17-2006, 11:41 AM
I can't see the Sox going for Gonzo unless they know Uribe won't be back.

Wheelhouse
11-17-2006, 11:41 AM
I find it odd to be on this side of the arguement, but don't we have a slick fielding, .250 hitting SS in Juan Castro? Or at least, is the upgrade of Gonzalez over Castro worth $5MM? And does not the dearth of middle infielders with stick make it worth signing Aurilia, even if it is to trade him? At this point I'd seriously consider Aurilia for 2B and moving Philips--or, even considering giving Castro a shot at SS (he hit .280 plus last year after coming to Cincy)--spend money where there are no alternatives but to spend. And there are plenty of those areas for the Reds. I have a feeling there are going to be some real needs in the marketplace come the middle of spring training....

flyer85
11-17-2006, 11:41 AM
A.G. is a classic 60's SS, can't get on base and can smack a double or HR.... same is true of Uribe as well.

Kc61
11-17-2006, 11:43 AM
$5M/year is too much. This FA market is out of control. There has to be a slick fielding SS somewhere that'll come cheaper. Perhaps through Rule 5.

I can't see dropping $15M for three years. I don't care how good a glove he has.

Finding a better hitting, decent glove at 2B (and shifting Phillips to SS) is a better option then this rumored deal.

Rule 5? Best result there is guy gets hurt, you send him out for rehab, and win the AA championship.

westofyou
11-17-2006, 11:43 AM
Keep Castro and get rid of Dunn.....

Kill me now.

NJReds
11-17-2006, 11:45 AM
Rule 5? Best result there is guy gets hurt, you send him out for rehab, and win the AA championship.


I'd rather do nothing than spend $15M on Alex Gonzalez. I'd rather play Freel at 2B and Phillips at SS.

I don't mind Alex Gonzalez. But at something closer to 2 yrs, $6M.

flyer85
11-17-2006, 11:46 AM
I find it odd to be on this side of the arguement, but don't we have a slick fielding, .250 hitting SS in Juan Castro? .There seems to be some sentiment(not worth much to me) and quite a bit of data to suggest that while Castro may be "slick fielding", he is not a good defensive SS due to a lack of range at the position.

The question is if Castro is put at SS and $5M saved on Gonzo would that money be put to better use elsewhere? The one difference in Gonzo vs Castro is that Gonzo is younger and has decidedly more pop.

registerthis
11-17-2006, 11:49 AM
The question is if Castro is put at SS and $5M saved on Gonzo would that money be put to better use elsewhere? The one difference in Gonzo vs Castro is that Gonzo is younger and has decidedly more pop.

If Castro is the answer, I don't want to know the question.

Wheelhouse
11-17-2006, 11:51 AM
Keep Castro and get rid of Dunn.....

Kill me now.

I didn't know Dunn was an element of the Shorstop discussion...oh, wait, you're commenting on your dislike for the poster and not the post--typical. Maybe you should change your callname to westofthetopic ...

lollipopcurve
11-17-2006, 11:52 AM
Salaries are skyrocketing. An assured good glove (with EBH power) for 3 years at 5MM seems smart to me. I don't think I want WK chasing shortstops every year.
Who knows, maybe he then packages Dunn, Gonzalez and Freel to the Os for Tejada and a pitcher...

westofyou
11-17-2006, 12:00 PM
typical

All over this thread it is yes.

RFS62
11-17-2006, 12:04 PM
If it's true that we're after him, it doesn't surprise me.

I think he'll make marginal improvements whenever he can and remake a lot of the team.

Heath
11-17-2006, 12:06 PM
I didn't know Dunn was an element of the Shorstop discussion...oh, wait, you're commenting on your dislike for the poster and not the post--typical. Maybe you should change your callname to westofthetopic ...

woy was summing up the last few pages in jest, then you call him out in ridiculing his "nickname" after you said that he did the same to someone else.

It's a little snarky in here. Cabin Fever anyone?

flyer85
11-17-2006, 12:07 PM
I think he'll make marginal improvements whenever he can and remake a lot of the team.I honstly have no clue what he might/might not do. His 2006 performance was a mixed bad played with a losing hand. He did some good things when he was bottom feeding but when he made "the trade" he way overpaid for marginal talent. It is most likely his performance this off-season that will define his tenure with the Reds.

Mario-Rijo
11-17-2006, 12:11 PM
Originally posted by NJReds
Finding a better hitting, decent glove at 2B (and shifting Phillips to SS) is a better option then this rumored deal.


Indians: In light of a so-so season from shortstop Jhonny Peralta, the Indians are looking for protection up the middle and the Plain Dealer reported that the club has talked with Alex Gonzalez and Craig Counsell. But a couple of sticking points: Gonzalez wants a four-year deal and Counsell wants a full-time job. GM Mark Shapiro told the paper the Indians might have to make a trade to find a suitable backup for Peralta.




What does everyone think about Craig Counsell? From the above article this guy is just asking for an everyday job, is he considered an everyday player at this point? And if that's what he's asking for he would likely be a shorter term and cheaper player than Gonzales. Lord knows he's got a reputation for an outstanding situational hitter which makes him an excellent choice for a #2hitter which we badly need, except his splits suggest he doesn't hit LHP at all. Could he platoon at 2B with Freel and then Freel could play the OF vs. RHP. He might be worth a look see. At any rate I'm not sure he could play SS any more effectively than Castro at this point but he would likely want to play SS.

ramp101
11-17-2006, 12:14 PM
Alex Gonzalez is an unbelievable fielder, but he'll leave you shaking your head alot at the plate. Sometimes in a good way!

redsmetz
11-17-2006, 12:14 PM
Throw a glove at the position and see what happens, Reds fans are spoiled to think every position should hit. However 3 years could bite you in the butt, but sometimes you have to lease the car too.

A.G. is a classic 60's SS, can't get on base and can smack a double or HR.

This is what I'm thinking. SS used to almost always be a light hitting position with some rare exceptions (most of whom are in the HOF). Someone else mentioned Gonzalez ranked 15th in the MLB - that's middle of the pack. If that means a fairly sure glove (and maybe it doesn't - I'm stat lazy, frankly), then it's an upgrade. And that occasional extra base hit helps out from time to time (as long as it doesn't come on the first pitch in an AB - wait, that's a different argument!).

flyer85
11-17-2006, 12:16 PM
It could be worse, he could be waiting for the Nats to release ex-Twin Guzman. :D

redsmetz
11-17-2006, 12:16 PM
If Castro is the answer, I don't want to know the question.

The question is Who has been the ruler of Cuba since the late 1950's?

marcshoe
11-17-2006, 12:18 PM
As I mentioned on the other thread, a week or so ago, I heard someone involved with defensive metrics on XM say that Alex was the best shortstop in the A.L. (I can't remember who it was or where they were from). A couple of other people have posted that not all metrics agree that he's that good. Does anyone have access to any measurements? What's the deal?

Kc61
11-17-2006, 12:27 PM
I'd rather do nothing than spend $15M on Alex Gonzalez. I'd rather play Freel at 2B and Phillips at SS.

I don't mind Alex Gonzalez. But at something closer to 2 yrs, $6M.


$5 million a year for a starting player is just not a big deal in today's baseball. The Reds would be fortunate to get him for 3 years $15 million. Nor does his age bother me. He is still in his prime and will be for a couple of years.

Folks -- including ownership -- had better adjust to today's prices or they will be in the (bargain) basement for a long time.

M2
11-17-2006, 12:27 PM
It seems pretty clear that the Reds are balking at drinking their own swill in regards to Castro. Understanding the difference between the reality of good defense (Gonzalez) and an empty reputation (Castro) is a step in the right direction. No way the Reds are pursuing Gonzalez if they think Castro is all that and a bag of chips in the field.

Like WOY, I don't have a problem with putting an elite glove at SS, I'd just like to see the team limit its liability while doing so. A two-year deal on Gonzalez would work for me. Maybe you offer him two with a team option for the third. Gonzalez has been playing for his next contract the past two seasons and hasn't set the world on fire, so I wouldn't want to make him too comfortable.

RedsManRick
11-17-2006, 12:35 PM
Here's a question: Let's assume that a given SS is a "perfect" fielder -- he never makes an error and gets to every ball hit in his zone. Exactly how much does that add in terms of offense?

That is, overall, which player contributes more: a "perfect" fielding SS who OPSes .675 or a decent fielding SS who OPSes .775? Where's the balance point? I know there are many ways to look at it with some saber stats -- I just don't have the time at the moment.

Kc61
11-17-2006, 12:35 PM
It seems pretty clear that the Reds are balking at drinking their own swill in regards to Castro. Understanding the difference between the reality of good defense (Gonzalez) and an empty reputation (Castro) is a step in the right direction. No way the Reds are pursuing Gonzalez if they think Castro is all that and a bag of chips in the field.

Like WOY, I don't have a problem with putting an elite glove at SS, I'd just like to see the team limit its liability while doing so. A two-year deal on Gonzalez would work for me. Maybe you offer him two with a team option for the third. Gonzalez has been playing for his next contract the past two seasons and hasn't set the world on fire, so I wouldn't want to make him too comfortable.

I think Castro is there more to back up EE than anyone else. The Reds just don't have confidence yet that EE will make the routine play in the late innings. Castro can play also play some shortstop with sure hands, but clearly doesn't cover ground like a Gonzalez can.

I would be very happy if the Reds got AG. I think we would see a remarkable difference in the field with AG/BP at short and second. Defensively, the Reds would then need to focus on centerfield.

I'm afraid that offense is taking a back seat. After all these years, I'm willing to give it a try. Less offense but better defense and pitching.

membengal
11-17-2006, 12:36 PM
Why don't the Reds move Felipe to 2b and Phillips to SS? Better defensive positions for both of them. Then, they can deal Kearns in an effort to address their starting pitching needs.

Oh, wait.

Kc61
11-17-2006, 12:37 PM
Why don't the Reds move Felipe to 2b and Phillips to SS? Better defensive positions for both of them. Then, they can deal Kearns in an effort to address their starting pitching needs.

Oh, wait.

You cannot compare Lopez and Gonzalez as defensive players, regardless of position. Give Krivsky some credit. He wants a first class defensive team. Lopez could be part of a first class offensive team, but that's not Krivsky's emphasis.

membengal
11-17-2006, 12:39 PM
No, but Lopez may have been solid at 2b, more so than SS, and was actually, ya know, dangerous with the stick.

I don't know why you can't have both offense AND defense. It seems a lot of people are buying into some sort of Kriv cult that defense defense defense is where its at. I agree, need some of that, but not at the entire expense of offense...

Danny Serafini
11-17-2006, 12:41 PM
Juan Castro really has nothing to do with signing Alex Gonzalez. Castro's here as a backup, period. Having a good fielding starting SS doesn't mean you don't need your backup to be able to field. One move has no effect on the other.

TOBTTReds
11-17-2006, 12:45 PM
As I mentioned on the other thread, a week or so ago, I heard someone involved with defensive metrics on XM say that Alex S. was the best shortstop in the A.L. (I can't remember who it was or where they were from). A couple of other people have posted that not all metrics agree that he's that good. Does anyone have access to any measurements? What's the deal?

I posted before:


His D is not Ozzie Smith or Honus Wagner like. His range factor was IDENTICAL to Royce Clayton's this year via the Bill James Handbook. He was the 15th ranked SS in the majors.

I'd rather have a minor leaguer that can field well and not hit, pay him 375,000 for the year, than pay a ML'er $5 mil to field well and not hit.

Kc61
11-17-2006, 12:50 PM
No, but Lopez may have been solid at 2b, more so than SS, and was actually, ya know, dangerous with the stick.

I don't know why you can't have both offense AND defense. It seems a lot of people are buying into some sort of Kriv cult that defense defense defense is where its at. I agree, need some of that, but not at the entire expense of offense...


Top fielding shortstops who can hit are extremely rare and extremely expensive. If you want Miguel Tejada, start with an offer of Adam Dunn and probably add to it.

Also folks have to keep in mind that shortstop is such a key position that many GMs don't want to "move" guys there; they want "pure" shortstops.

Gonzalez doesn't seem like a terrible hitter, just a terrible OBP guy. He will get some extra base hits, but won't take walks. Not a top of the order hitter. I think the Reds can live with this if Phillips hits at second base. If Phillips doesn't hit, and both positions are strictly defensive, then it becomes a concern.

Falls City Beer
11-17-2006, 12:51 PM
It seems pretty clear that the Reds are balking at drinking their own swill in regards to Castro. Understanding the difference between the reality of good defense (Gonzalez) and an empty reputation (Castro) is a step in the right direction. No way the Reds are pursuing Gonzalez if they think Castro is all that and a bag of chips in the field.

Like WOY, I don't have a problem with putting an elite glove at SS, I'd just like to see the team limit its liability while doing so. A two-year deal on Gonzalez would work for me. Maybe you offer him two with a team option for the third. Gonzalez has been playing for his next contract the past two seasons and hasn't set the world on fire, so I wouldn't want to make him too comfortable.

A big part of the problem is that the team isn't a "judy hitter here; a judy hitter there," the team is slowly becoming overrun with weak sticks. They need some serious thunder in the lineup. It now becomes incumbent to really track down a first baseman who thumps or a right fielder who mashes if they sign Gonzalez. Putting Jr. in right or Hatteberg at first with guys like Phillips and Deno and Gonzalez in the lineup, and all of the sudden you're scoring 600 runs next year, also known as the Pittsburgh Redux.

westofyou
11-17-2006, 12:52 PM
They need some serious thunder in the lineup. Alex has pop, he's topped 50 EBH in a season. It's the getting on base part of the game that eludes him.

Spitball
11-17-2006, 12:56 PM
I posted this yesterday on the "Live" board before this thread was started. I haven't seen this posted over here, but I haven't read every page, yet.

This interview appeared last winter after the Red Sox signed Gonzalez, and I thought it was very interesting. This was not a manager pulling a Sparky Anderson-type gushfest over one of his present players, but a manager reflecting on past players.



Gonzalez is McKeon's Pick
By Gordon Edes | February 5, 2006

Boston.com
Jack McKeon has had Ozzie Smith early in his career, Garry Templeton, Barry Larkin, and Pokey Reese, among others, play shortstop for him.

''Alex González is the best I've ever had," said McKeon, insisting he's not just blowing a cloud of cigar smoke about the free agent the Red Sox just signed last week. ''Definitely the best I've ever had, defensively.

''He's the whole package, man. He and [second baseman] Luis Castillo were together for over four years, and he was the greatest guy I've ever seen on the pivot, just spectacular.

''People say, 'Oh, this guy can't replace [Edgar] Renteria. For my money, he can. Yeah, Edgar might hit 20 points higher, but he ain't going to field with this guy. This guy is special.

http://www.boston.com/sports/basebal..._mckeons_pick/

M2
11-17-2006, 12:58 PM
Juan Castro really has nothing to do with signing Alex Gonzalez. Castro's here as a backup, period. Having a good fielding starting SS doesn't mean you don't need your backup to be able to field. One move has no effect on the other.

I'd suggest he's a backup because the Reds don't really think he's all that good with the glove when push comes to shove. I think Kc's right that Castro's probably seen more as a 3B defensive replacement than a SS by the organization.

Because if the Reds really thought he was a quality defensive SS then Gonzalez would be redundant. In other words, Castro's deficits have plenty of effect on why the team would pursue a guy like Gonzalez. He'd be brought in to do what Castro can't, give the team some top tier defense at SS.

RMR, I assume the balance point is where the positive of your fielding runs above average exceeds the negative of your runs created below position. From what I can tell, Gonzalez's glove has done more good than his bat has harm in recent years, making him a net positive. Though I think the Reds might also be well-served to look at a move like this from a holistic team standpoint. The club has played particularly poor defense in recent years and getting a high quality SS and CF are the two quickest ways to address that condition.

Falls City Beer
11-17-2006, 12:58 PM
Alex has pop, he's topped 50 EBH in a season. It's the getting on base part of the game that eludes him.


He better hope those EXBH leave the park because GAB supresses doubles pretty well.

pedro
11-17-2006, 01:05 PM
He better hope those EXBH leave the park because GAB supresses doubles pretty well.

I really wonder if GAB really suppresses doubles or that's just indicative of the types of picthers and hitters the Reds have had over past few years.

15fan
11-17-2006, 01:06 PM
He sounds like Bret Boone, ca 1996-1998.

M2
11-17-2006, 01:07 PM
A big part of the problem is that the team isn't a "judy hitter here; a judy hitter there," the team is slowly becoming overrun with weak sticks. They need some serious thunder in the lineup. It now becomes incumbent to really track down a first baseman who thumps or a right fielder who mashes if they sign Gonzalez. Putting Jr. in right or Hatteberg at first with guys like Phillips and Deno and Gonzalez in the lineup, and all of the sudden you're scoring 600 runs next year, also known as the Pittsburgh Redux.

I agree with that for the most part. I certainly agree that 1B looms as a potential problem and I'd add that you'll probably need more with the stick in RF than Jr. (and more specifically the folks who play when Jr.'s injured) can deliver. If the Reds pursue this model. Phillips and Deno have to provide solid production and the corners have to deliver big.

In other words, I figure the team, given the current mix, can survive carrying one pure Judy hitter. An elite defensive SS would be the spot to do it and if it goes in that direction then some offensive upgrades on the corners need to be pursued.

Spitball
11-17-2006, 01:12 PM
The club has played particularly poor defense in recent years and getting a high quality SS and CF are the two quickest ways to address that condition.

And, if the Reds ever start acquiring groundball inducing pitchers, it would be nice to have players in place who are capable of picking up those groundballs.

westofyou
11-17-2006, 01:12 PM
He better hope those EXBH leave the park because GAB supresses doubles pretty well.

Is he playing half his games on the road too?

Danny Serafini
11-17-2006, 01:20 PM
I'd suggest he's a backup because the Reds don't really think he's all that good with the glove when push comes to shove. I think Kc's right that Castro's probably seen more as a 3B defensive replacement than a SS by the organization.

Because if the Reds really thought he was a quality defensive SS then Gonzalez would be redundant. In other words, Castro's deficits have plenty of effect on why the team would pursue a guy like Gonzalez. He'd be brought in to do what Castro can't, give the team some top tier defense at SS.

I'd say Castro's a backup because he can't hit his way out of a wet paper bag. He wasn't a starter when they traded for him, and he isn't now. Castro has no effect on whether the team goes after a Gonzalez or a slugging type who doesn't field as well.

M2
11-17-2006, 01:24 PM
Does the GAB suppress doubles? It might, though the Reds have surrendered so many in recent years (due in no small part to a certain CF named after his father) that it seems like a doubles palace. Kind of scary to think that in another park, this team could have surrendered more doubles.

M2
11-17-2006, 01:33 PM
I'd say Castro's a backup because he can't hit his way out of a wet paper bag. He wasn't a starter when they traded for him, and he isn't now. Castro has no effect on whether the team goes after a Gonzalez or a slugging type who doesn't field as well.

Gonzalez is trapped inside the same wet paper bag. He's not as awful a hitter as Castro, almost no one in baseball history is, but he's still plenty bad. If the Reds are signing Gonzalez for his stick, then they're hopelessly confused. I choose to believe they aren't hopelessly confused so why would you pursue an all-glove/no-stick SS when you already already have an all-glove/no-stick SS?

The only answer I can come up with is the team doesn't for a second believe the bogus hype about Castro's defense. Gonzalez isn't going to hit, at least not enough to make a positive difference. No one's signing that guy for his bat. His calling card is his defense and if the Reds are signing him, then it's a pretty clear signal they covet his defense and that they don't think Castro can provide it.

RedsManRick
11-17-2006, 01:36 PM
RMR, I assume the balance point is where the positive of your fielding runs above average exceeds the negative of your runs created below position. From what I can tell, Gonzalez's glove has done more good than his bat has harm in recent years, making him a net positive.

A net positive? Sure. But how positive? I think there's probably a lack of understanding regarding the relative value scales of offense and defense. Often, I think defense and offense are discussed as if they were on the same ordinal scale.

Intollerable (-3)
Very Bad (-2)
Bad (-1)
Average (0)
Good (1)
Very Good (2)
Amazing (3)

Thus, the thinking is that if you have a "Bad" (-1) offensive player who is "Very Good" (+2) defensively, it's a net +1 and he's therefore a good player. I think this is the thinking you tend to get from the old school 'stats don't tell you what really matters' crowd.

However, I think the better way to look at it is a scale which measures actual contributions. There are a number of stats out there which do just this -- standardizing offensive & defense contributions to a single variable, such as runs. When you do that, you find that offensive contributions are much more important in the big picture. Even if a guy is perfect defensively, he could be less valuable than a guy who is merely average defensively and above average offensively.

A related topic however is the concept of diminishing returns on defense/offense on the team level. This was approached by Cyclone at the macro level when he did his analysis on team balance. Looking at the game by game level, every run you score contributes just a little bit less than the run before it in terms of your chance of winning the game. So if you don't score very many runs at all, a modest increase in your offense will have a major impact. Of course, this is also true with run prevention. If you are horrible at preventing runs, a modest increase in run prevention will have a major impact.

I'm worried however, that in Krivsky's mind, we're still at the top end of run production and the bottom end of run prevention. He thinks that the gains we'll see in run prevention by adding a top flight defensive SS will outweigh the loss of run creation. If we were still scoring 830 runs and allowing 880, I'd agree with the premise. However, at this point we're a pretty balanced team. Arguably we're not good enough at either run creation or prevention. However, given that, and the earlier point about the relative values of offense and defense, I'm not sure how wise a move it is to invest 15MM in a defense only guy.

I know the options are limited and everything is expensive. I'm just worried that our real defensive problems are in the OF. Poor OF defense costs you extra base hits. Poor IF defense costs you singles and double plays. While our IF defense has been sub-par, our OF has been historically poor. We could do more improve our run prevention with a defensive reallignment (Junior to RF, Freel to 2B, Phillips to SS) and investing 15MM towards one of those 2nd tier starters such as Randy Wolf, Gil Meche, or Vincente Padilla.

westofyou
11-17-2006, 01:43 PM
The only answer I can come up with is the team doesn't for a second believe the bogus hype about Castro's defense. Gonzalez isn't going to hit, at least not enough to make a positive difference. No one's signing that guy for his bat. His calling card is his defense and if the Reds are signing him, then it's a pretty clear signal they covet his defense and that they don't think Castro can provide it.

My belief has been that Castro was never going to get more then 150 ab's, he's more a mentor, but we've covered that already.

5 million for the SS a million each for the 3rd baseman and the 2nd baseman and then throw in Hattebergs low salary and there's your pickin' infield with range, speed and some EBH pop for about what Milton makes.

M2
11-17-2006, 01:47 PM
I believe, dependent on what runs equation you use, Gonzalez came out between 6-10 runs above his position last year.

Though, let me be clear, I think three years guaranteed for Gonzalez is a mistake. I don't mind him on a more limited deal and I'm not overly concerned about the $5 million amount. Yes, I think it's more than he's worth, more than the Reds need to pay that type of player and that it could potentially limit the team's options in other areas. Yet, I hold out some hope that Castellini will be willing to spend for the right big move and I also think we all need to readjust our thinking in terms of how much teams can spend these days. It looks like there's a rising tide.

GAC
11-17-2006, 02:03 PM
I'm not disagreeing with your assessment of Gonzalez, but what stat "alone" is more reliable for getting a total evaluation of a player?

I'd argue that no stat "alone" gives a complete evaluation of a player, but OPS as a sole stat comes closest.

My point is that every time a player is mentioned, OPS is immediately utilized to quantify whether the player is worth it, or simply fodder.

I'm not disagreeing that OPS isn't a "quick reference" to give a basic feel about a player. Only that when evaluating a player, looking at OB% and SLG% only is not giving a complete picture when evaluating a player and/or what they might contribute.

What about defense? If this guy can bring a solid upgrade, at a reasonable price, to this middle INF, is that of any value and/or should be considered?

Concepcion played 19 season with a sub-700 OPS. ;)

How many games did our defense lose for us last year? Would Gonzalez possibly help to improve on that?

And what other viable alternatives are out there and available right now as far as SS/2B?

Cyclone792
11-17-2006, 02:33 PM
Based on career averages, Alex Gonzalez's offensive worth is ~-6 runs created above position per 150 games. His stick is awful, but most shortstop sticks are awful so it lessens the impact of Gonzalez's awful stick relative to most other shortstops throughout the league.

Then tack on his defensive value, which IMO is pretty good. If he puts up an average offensive season and is worth +6 runs defensively over the average shortstop, then his overall run value relative to his position is neutral. Dial's defensive system put Gonzalez at +14 per 150 games, which means his overall contribution given an average offensive season would be +8 runs.

I'd be tolerable of this signing, though there'd likely be better ways to spend the money. An up-the-middle defense consisting of Gonzalez at shortstop, Phillips at second base and Denorfia in center field may arguably be the best up-the-middle defense in all of baseball. I'm most definitely with M2, however, in that three years guaranteed is too long. Defense declines earlier, and sometimes quicker, than offense, and I'd be much more comfortable with only a two year deal. The return on investment in overall run value for that final season could be ugly if Gonzalez's defense starts to suffer its decline.

FWIW, the defensive systems I've seen differ on their opinion of Gonzalez. Dial's system ranked him very highly in 2006, and zone rating liked him in 2006 as well (though Dial likes the zone system so I'm not surprised his system spit out similar results that we see with straight ZR). BP's fielding runs above average believes Gonzalez is actually a slightly below average defensive shortstop. Pinto's PMR, in 2005*, pinned Gonzalez as roughly average defensively.

* Pinto appears to be in the midst of rolling out his 2006 PMR rankings, and they should be very interesting to see, especially if Gonzalez is signed and/or remains a rumored option for the Reds. While his system had Gonzalez as roughly average in 2005, I'm curious what he has for Gonzalez in 2006 and how that compares to Dial's system.

Also, in 2006 the Reds were pretty lousy defensively according to PMR, which shouldn't come as a surprise to many people as most already felt the Reds were below average defensively anyway. Overall in DER vs. predicted DER, they ranked third last ahead of only the Pirates and Nationals. In fielding air balls, the Reds were middle of the pack and right about league average. In fielding ground balls, the Reds were awful, ranking third last ahead of only the Indians and Nationals.

Here's Pinto's PMR Archives (http://www.baseballmusings.com/archives/cat_probabilistic_model_of_range.php), which should be updated quite frequently in the next one to two months with 2006 PMR rankings.

lollipopcurve
11-17-2006, 02:54 PM
I'd be much more comfortable with only a two year deal.

Sure. But what if 2 years doesn't get it done? It's been reported Gonzalez wants four years. Do you really walk away over that third year and enter a cycle of scavenging for Counsells and Guzmans every winter?

Cyclone792
11-17-2006, 03:07 PM
Sure. But what if 2 years doesn't get it done? It's been reported Gonzalez wants four years. Do you really walk away over that third year and enter a cycle of scavenging for Counsells and Guzmans every winter?

I'd tolerate three years. I wouldn't be happy about it, but I'd tolerate it.

Now if Gonzalez wants four years, some other team can have him. One thing the Reds must avoid is creating a situation where Alex Gonzalez's name ends up on the same list as Eric Milton's, aka the list of bad contracts. Four years of Alex Gonzalez at presumably $5 million per year enters the realm of qualifying as a bad contract. The odds of Gonzalez being an overall positive contributor in 2007 and 2008 are decent, but those odds start to collapse when stretching into 2009 and especially 2010.

There's no need to scrounge around for the Craig Counsells and Cristian Guzmans of the world. The Reds already have a serviceable in-house solution, which involves moving Phillips to shortstop and allowing Ryan Freel and Brendan Harris to split time at second base. Sure, the defensive value is worse this season and next than it'd be if we signed Gonzalez, but the offensive value is better. I'd be very much satisfied with that in-house solution if the only other option is Alex Gonzalez at four years.

lollipopcurve
11-17-2006, 03:11 PM
Now if Gonzalez wants four years, some other team can have him.

Agreed. By that time, if nothing else, you maybe have a solution from within the farm system.

Ltlabner
11-17-2006, 03:11 PM
The Reds already have a serviceable in-house solution, which involves moving Phillips to shortstop and allowing Ryan Freel and Brendan Harris to split time at second base. Sure, the defensive value is worse this season and next than it'd be if we signed Gonzalez, but the offensive value is better. I'd be very much satisfied with that in-house solution if the only other option is Alex Gonzalez at four years.

How does Brendan Harris factor into all of this, if at all? Ever sense the trade there hasn't been much talk of him factoring into long term plans. Would he project to be anything more than sericable at 2B? He kinda got glossed over in all the trade discussions and rehashings.

westofyou
11-17-2006, 03:23 PM
How does Brendan Harris factor into all of this, if at all? Ever sense the trade there hasn't been much talk of him factoring into long term plans. Would he project to be anything more than sericable at 2B? He kinda got glossed over in all the trade discussions and rehashings.

Brendan Harris is hopefully going to give the Reds a Freel like player with less speed and better infield defense and lower cost, he's known as an intense player and well that plays well in seven hills country. I'm of the opinion that the Reds prefer Freel out of the middle of the infield, so any hope of him starting at second is very likely to be just that, hope.

Cyclone792
11-17-2006, 03:27 PM
How does Brendan Harris factor into all of this, if at all? Ever sense the trade there hasn't been much talk of him factoring into long term plans. Would he project to be anything more than sericable at 2B? He kinda got glossed over in all the trade discussions and rehashings.

He tore it up in Louisville after coming over in the trade. What the Reds need to do is distinguish whether or not that was a fluke or if Harris at least moved himself up to the serviceable level.

No matter which side people are on in the "Freel playing every day" debate, I think two things can easily be predicted in regards to Ryan Freel even if he is slotted to play second base this season (which I don't think is likely, honestly). 1) He's probably only going to play in 130 games, and 2) some of those games will be in the outfield when Griffey decides he wants to make a DL visit. Considering those two caveats and what Harris did last season, I'm fine with Harris getting time at second base if it prevents the Reds from handing out a bad contract.

What the Reds actually will do, who really knows. I'll just be a bit perplexed and annoyed if the Reds decide to spend some money on up-the-middle defense for shortstop and then follow that move up with sending ole #3 out to center field again this season.

Scratch that, I'll be annoyed period if the Reds send ole #3 out to center field again this season.

lollipopcurve
11-17-2006, 03:32 PM
Brendan Harris is hopefully going to give the Reds a Freel like player with less speed and better infield defense and lower cost, he's known as an intense player and well that plays well in seven hills country.

I don't see Harris as part of any solution, at least not yet. I know it was a miniscule sample size and he was covered in rust by the time Narron used him, but he didn't impress me much, either in the field or at bat. I was especially disappointed in his defense at 2nd -- he looked awkward. With EdE ensconced, I really wonder what they'll do with Harris. Could be AAAA, through and through.

M2
11-17-2006, 03:33 PM
Sure. But what if 2 years doesn't get it done? It's been reported Gonzalez wants four years. Do you really walk away over that third year and enter a cycle of scavenging for Counsells and Guzmans every winter?

I'd walk. For me Gonzalez is already a form of scavenging. If you can't get him on your terms, then look elsewhere. Three years guaranteed would be a deal-breaker for me.

top6
11-17-2006, 03:35 PM
I see a lot of talk of stats here, but does any know if Gonzalez plays the game the right way? Is he a winner? Does he have experience on a winning post season team? These are the questions we need to be answering - not silly questions like "how many runs will he generate" or "how many runs will his defense save."

westofyou
11-17-2006, 03:35 PM
Could be AAAA, through and through.True, he might get Chris Woodwarded too, squeeze himself out of the IF and into a not quite good enough for prime time player.

RedsManRick
11-17-2006, 03:44 PM
I see a lot of talk of stats here, but does any know if Gonzalez plays the game the right way? Is he a winner? Does he have experience on a winning post season team? These are the questions we need to be answering - not silly questions like "how many runs will he generate" or "how many runs will his defense save."

:beerme: I hear he's scrappy and a good presence in the clubhouse....

WVRedsFan
11-17-2006, 03:49 PM
Does anyone else see the pattern here? I haven't read all the thread, but look at the kind of player Krivsky covets. Alex Gonzalez fits right into that mold. Good glove and offense is secondary--ony to be used to move the runner over so they can score on another, inevitable ground ball to the right side. A bonus is if he plays the game the right way and knows what to do with the ball. That's why you have Juan Castro on board and why you had Royce Clayton instead of FeLo.

Get prepared to see a lot of Alex Gonzalez-type players on the Reds in the future. Many have faith in Krivsky, but the tank on that is just about empty for me. Every name that pops up that Wayne is interested in just leaves me cold. It's going to be a long winter and an even longer summer.

westofyou
11-17-2006, 03:56 PM
Does anyone else see the pattern here? I haven't read all the thread, but look at the kind of player Krivsky covets. Alex Gonzalez fits right into that mold. Good glove and offense is secondary--ony to be used to move the runner over so they can score on another, inevitable ground ball to the right side. A bonus is if he plays the game the right way and knows what to do with the ball. That's why you have Juan Castro on board and why you had Royce Clayton instead of FeLo.

Get prepared to see a lot of Alex Gonzalez-type players on the Reds in the future. Many have faith in Krivsky, but the tank on that is just about empty for me. Every name that pops up that Wayne is interested in just leaves me cold. It's going to be a long winter and an even longer summer.

He is a SS, where is the market for the most important position on the field and a guy that hits like Larkin did?

Nowhere would be the quick answer.

18% of the outs made on a diamond are made by the SS, that's the most by any position on the diamond, Reds fans are spoiled to think that that position should be looked at from hitting and then outwards. That type of player is not falling out of the trees when you give it a shake.

harangatang
11-17-2006, 03:59 PM
He is a SS, where is the market for the most important position on the field and a guy that hits like Larkin did?

Nowhere would be the quick answer.

18% of the outs made on a diamond are made by the SS, that's the most by any position on the diamond, Reds fans are spoiled to think that that position should be looked at from hitting and then outwards. That type of player is not falling out of the trees when you give it a shake.Exactly, I think you can push that farther as well in saying that applies to the catcher position. Not every catcher is Johnny Bench and if the Reds don't have a caliber catcher like Bench, then they aren't good enough.

Ltlabner
11-17-2006, 04:03 PM
Does anyone else see the pattern here? I haven't read all the thread, but look at the kind of player Krivsky covets. Alex Gonzalez fits right into that mold. Good glove and offense is secondary--ony to be used to move the runner over so they can score on another, inevitable ground ball to the right side.

How does David Ross fit into your plans then? His defense is pretty weak, while his offensive was strong in 2006.

Or that EE was kept over Lopez? EE had just as many errors but he wasn't traded.

Or that Dunn is still in LF? Dunn was defensive disaster in 2006 yet he hasn't been shipped out as yet.

Or that ways were found to keep RA in the line up dispite his range being minimal because his bat was hot?

It seems like all of your complaints go back to the trade. At least, many of your posts use the trade as the basis of your dislike of Kriv.

Cyclone792
11-17-2006, 04:58 PM
FYI, I just looked up Gonzalez's defensive win shares for the last three seasons just to get an idea how yet another defensive system ranks him.

In 3,405.1 innings from 2004-2006, Gonzalez has 19.6 fielding win shares. Convert that into a rate stat, and we see that Gonzalez has 5.76 fielding win shares per 1,000 defensive innings at shortstop. Bill James created a fielding win shares scale at each position and assigned players letter grades based on their fielding win shares per 1,000 innings. Here's the shortstop fielding win shares letter grade scale:

A Level = 5.80+ win shares per 1,000 innings
B Level = 5.00-5.79 win shares per 1,000 innings
C Level = 4.20-4.99 win shares per 1,000 innings
D Level = 3.40-4.21 win shares per 1,000 innings
F Level = Under 3.4 win shares per 1,000 innings

Based on fielding win shares, Gonzalez is just under the A level, or would probably be ranked as an A- defensive shortstop. For comparison purposes, Davey Concepcion was ranked as an A+, and Barry Larkin was ranked as an A.

TOBTTReds
11-17-2006, 05:25 PM
How does David Ross fit into your plans then? His defense is pretty weak, while his offensive was strong in 2006.

Or that Dunn is still in LF? Dunn was defensive disaster in 2006 yet he hasn't been shipped out as yet.



Just wait for Dunn. I have no faith he will be with the Reds in 07. I think Kriv wants the Cincinnati Twins. He is going to try to build a good defense and pitching staff and have offense last. I am worried about that.

WVRedsFan
11-17-2006, 05:40 PM
It seems like all of your complaints go back to the trade. At least, many of your posts use the trade as the basis of your dislike of Kriv.

Not really, but it's a good starting point. Do we ignore the trade? Pretned it didn't happen? If we really look at the record, Krivsky has obtained a good starting pitcher, second baseman (who's really a shortstop), offensive catcher, and maybe a short-time closer. Not bad. Trouble was Ross had an abnormal offensive year which kept him in the lineup--he didn't know that (I would guess--I'm sure someone will jump on that). Same with Phillips--he was obtained because of his defense and his cheapness.

And I've said all along, he can redeem him self from that, if you really consider he needs to be redeemed, with some good moves. I don't consider AG as a good move, but maybe I'm washed up on that too.

It really hasn't been long enough to judge WK, but Ithought I saw a pattern. And I have a problem moving this team from an offensive one to a defensive one without punch in GAB where you know the other teams are going to score bunches of runs (unless we get a No 1 and No. 2 starter, new bullpen and a closer).

But that's just me.

Ltlabner
11-17-2006, 05:48 PM
Do we ignore the trade? Pretned it didn't happen?

It really hasn't been long enough to judge WK, but Ithought I saw a pattern. And I have a problem moving this team from an offensive one to a defensive one without punch in GAB where you know the other teams are going to score bunches of runs (unless we get a No 1 and No. 2 starter, new bullpen and a closer).

No you don't ignore the trade, but it isn't the sum total of his moves. You adressed some of his other moves nicely, but when the chorus is always "the trade" it does make you wonder. Much like when people harp on Dunn's September are reminded that it's the whole season is the measure, Kriv should be evalutated in the same manner.

You are right, I don't mind a defence and pitching team, so long as we get both parts of that equation. If that is truely what Kriv is going after it's going to be hard to do quickly because of all the holes on the pitching staff, bad contracts, etc.

Rojo
11-17-2006, 05:52 PM
He is a SS, where is the market for the most important position on the field and a guy that hits like Larkin did?

Nowhere would be the quick answer.


I'll add that low-error, high-range shortstops aren't as common as many might think.

Falls City Beer
11-17-2006, 05:57 PM
I'm fine with Gonzalez (because as Johnny F. says, it doesn't eat up a trading chip), but if his acquisition is an offseason centerpiece then this team is screwed.

They've got at bottom 5 or 6 more-pressing priorities.

But if they sign Gonzalez, does that mean we fans then have to listen to complaining by the FO about the cost of acquiring pitching?

reds44
11-17-2006, 05:57 PM
First of all, lets get the good out of the way.

I like Seabass, and I actually wouldn't mind seeing the Reds sign him. He and BP could make a GREAT defensive infield, and he could help EE out.

However, that is too much money.

reds44
11-17-2006, 05:58 PM
I'm fine with Gonzalez but if his acquisition is an offseason centerpiece then this team is screwed.


I concour.

Matt700wlw
11-17-2006, 06:00 PM
First of all, lets get the good out of the way.

I like Seabass, and I actually wouldn't mind seeing the Reds sign him. He and BP could make a GREAT defensive infield, and he could help EE out.

However, that is too much money.

Have you seen the market? EVERYBODY is going to cost too much money. It's insane.

reds44
11-17-2006, 06:09 PM
Have you seen the market? EVERYBODY is going to cost too much money. It's insane.
The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of signing him. Seriously, who knows what GABP will do to his offensive numbers.

Look at what it did to Aurilia.

In 02 he posted a .718 OPS.
In 03 a .735.
In 04 with SF .735
With Seattle .715


Then his two years with the Reds he posted a .782 and .867 OPS.

Gonzalez isn't a slap hitter. He has pop in his bat, so getting him to GABP should inflate his offensive numbers, the question is how much. His defense is great, no arguing that.

Patrick Bateman
11-17-2006, 06:14 PM
but if his acquisition is an offseason centerpiece then this team is screwed.


Yeah that's my main worry.

The goal of the offseason is to find a decent starter to go with Harang and Arroyo. Without that, I don't think we have a prayer.

The Gonzalez move would be fine assuming it's not "the" move.

M2
11-17-2006, 06:38 PM
Gonzalez isn't a slap hitter. He has pop in his bat, so getting him to GABP should inflate his offensive numbers, the question is how much.

Except Fenway Park is one of the best BA/OB parks on the planet and Gonzalez came off of that with a .255/.299 effort. What you could expect from Gonzalez with the Reds is probably a ton of outs and the occasional big hit.

PuffyPig
11-17-2006, 06:44 PM
Just wait for Dunn. I have no faith he will be with the Reds in 07. I think Kriv wants the Cincinnati Twins. He is going to try to build a good defense and pitching staff and have offense last. I am worried about that.

If you want to look at small market teams that have had their fair share of success, start with the Minnesota Twins.

Pitching and defense wins. And every small market team that has won did it with pitching and defense.

PuffyPig
11-17-2006, 06:49 PM
Except Fenway Park is one of the best BA/OB parks on the planet and Gonzalez came off of that with a .255/.299 effort. What you could expect from Gonzalez with the Reds is probably a ton of outs and the occasional big hit.

Gonzalez has had 179 AB's in Fenway last year. He's played in Florida (a pitchers park) his whole career. It's not impossible that he could get an Aurilia/Randa boost moving to Cincy, as he's a similiar type hitter (occasional power) as those 2.

Falls City Beer
11-17-2006, 06:51 PM
If you want to look at small market teams that have had their fair share of success, start with the Minnesota Twins.

Pitching and defense wins. And every small market team that has won did it with pitching and defense.

Ignore offense at your peril.

On a side note, though, I don't think Wayne Krivsky's shown any kind of ability to emulate the Ryan-constructed Twins in Cincinnati so far. Krivsky has virtually no eye for pitching, as the lion's share of his trades for pitching have been total disasters and his draft of pitchers was one of the worst in recent memory.

Strangely, what Krivsky's shown he CAN do is find offense.

Spitball
11-17-2006, 06:55 PM
Yeah that's my main worry.

The goal of the offseason is to find a decent starter to go with Harang and Arroyo. Without that, I don't think we have a prayer.

The Gonzalez move would be fine assuming it's not "the" move.

I think you have to fix the defense before you can bring a pitcher, and hopefully a groundball inducing pitcher, onto the team. Plus, middle infield defense will be important if there is any hope of attracting a free agent pitcher to Cincinnati.

vaticanplum
11-17-2006, 07:23 PM
This move would bake my cookies. Love it. It's not a bad price either in my opinion.

Given their current defense situation, their pitching, and the park in which they play, the Reds are in need of a top-flight defensive shortstop as much as about any team in baseball. Jump all over me for this if you want, but I don't really give a crap about the offensive prowess of a shortstop if he's that good defensively. It's the position where I care about defense the most apart from center field and maybe catcher. This would be a very good step towards improving the team.

Now, of course the Reds have a separate offense problem to deal with, but that's the case regardless of whether they go after Gonzalez or not. Frankly I just don't think this is the place on the field to fix that. A good defensive guy at that position in that park is an absolute necessity, and to find a guy who's that PLUS a real offensive gem at a good price is going to be pretty much impossible. Getting a good defensive player at shortstop frees up the Reds a bit to focus on the pitching and offense. I also think that a move like this would be further indication that Dunn is staying put.

paulrichjr
11-17-2006, 07:28 PM
Sure. But what if 2 years doesn't get it done? It's been reported Gonzalez wants four years. Do you really walk away over that third year and enter a cycle of scavenging for Counsells and Guzmans every winter?

I think everyone needs to realize that teams have a lot of money and $5 million ain't what it used to be. I think signing him for 2 years as the regular SS for $5 million and then using him as the "Juan Castro" his last year would be fine. I just hope (and no one has said this) that Krivs doesn't cave in and give him $17-$20 million for 3 years or something to make this deal happen.


By the way, I hear Barry Larkin is in real good shape and might consider a come back. (JK) I think we have been spoiled by that guy for a long time...

deltachi8
11-17-2006, 07:35 PM
As stated above, as long as it's not "THE" move, I'm fine with it. Though I think Phillips would be a very good SS, the pair will make a very nice defensive tandem.

redsandrails
11-17-2006, 07:37 PM
FCB, you are right about how Wayne is good at finding bargain basement offense (Ross, Phillips, Hatteburg, etc.) but I mean his treatment of starting pitching has not been bad either (Arroyo, Lohse). Lohse is not a bad player but just a solid #4-5 option and considering the market this past deadline, not really all too horrible.

Obviously relief pitching is his fatal flaw, but even so it has been a collection of injuries that hurt him (Guardado, Majewski). S.S. was a great pickup and Bray was not bad at times and a solid optino down the road. Ryan Franklin was not a good pickup but hey, he was just misused by Narron. Cormier was ineffective but there really weren't too many other options at the time.

gm
11-17-2006, 08:13 PM
I find it odd to be on this side of the arguement, but don't we have a slick fielding, .250 hitting SS in Juan Castro? --or, even considering giving Castro a shot at SS (he hit .280 plus last year after coming to Cincy)

Castro would never stay healthy enough to be the regular SS. Juan's back wouldn't take the daily pounding.

Falls City Beer
11-17-2006, 10:37 PM
FCB, you are right about how Wayne is good at finding bargain basement offense (Ross, Phillips, Hatteburg, etc.) but I mean his treatment of starting pitching has not been bad either (Arroyo, Lohse). Lohse is not a bad player but just a solid #4-5 option and considering the market this past deadline, not really all too horrible.
.

I'll be nice: Lohse is awful. He's a poor man's Brett Tomko.

But Arroyo was certainly and obviously a good pickup.

mth123
11-17-2006, 10:38 PM
A big part of the problem is that the team isn't a "judy hitter here; a judy hitter there," the team is slowly becoming overrun with weak sticks. They need some serious thunder in the lineup. It now becomes incumbent to really track down a first baseman who thumps or a right fielder who mashes if they sign Gonzalez. Putting Jr. in right or Hatteberg at first with guys like Phillips and Deno and Gonzalez in the lineup, and all of the sudden you're scoring 600 runs next year, also known as the Pittsburgh Redux.

AMEN. What makes every option available to the Reds undesirable is Scott Hatteberg's lack of power at 1B. A player with some power there would allow, as Cyclone put it, "the best defensive up the middle in the league of Gonzalez, Phillips and Deno" to be a strength rather than the liability we see it as. We're unimpressed now because we fear the lack of offensive production. The slick fielding middle of the diamond players shouldn't have to make-up for the lack of offense of the lesser fielders at the corners. Corner players are paid to be offensive players. The Reds haven't had a true power player at 1b since Tony Perez. Larkin and Lopez had enough pop from SS to cover for the problem. The Reds don't have that luxury anymore.

A 1B with power would make it all work acceptably. I say sign Gonzalez and get a stop gap 1B with pop until Votto is ready. Trade Freel for that #3 starter.

RedsManRick
11-17-2006, 10:56 PM
Gonzalez has had 179 AB's in Fenway last year. He's played in Florida (a pitchers park) his whole career. It's not impossible that he could get an Aurilia/Randa boost moving to Cincy, as he's a similiar type hitter (occasional power) as those 2.

Twins had pitching and defense, yes. But look at how many runs they scored... and how well they did went they didn't score as much.

vaticanplum
11-17-2006, 11:01 PM
How much power can we expect Phillips and Encarnacion to have on their best days? (note: this is bereft of snark, I'm genuinely trying to gauge what we'll be working with here.) What, if anything, can we expect a good hitting coach to coax out of them? Is it possible for the Reds of all teams to end up as an overall good hitting team without a lot of power? I'm just thinking aloud here, because I think that's a good point about Hatteberg, but he's not going anywhere, so I'm trying to think of clever ways this offense could be built. Though I've had a few drinks so I'm sorry if these are rambling questions.

mth123
11-17-2006, 11:18 PM
How much power can we expect Phillips and Encarnacion to have on their best days? (note: this is bereft of snark, I'm genuinely trying to gauge what we'll be working with here.) What, if anything, can we expect a good hitting coach to coax out of them? Is it possible for the Reds of all teams to end up as an overall good hitting team without a lot of power? I'm just thinking aloud here, because I think that's a good point about Hatteberg, but he's not going anywhere, so I'm trying to think of clever ways this offense could be built. Though I've had a few drinks so I'm sorry if these are rambling questions.

I guess I think that to have a good offense you need at least 4 guys who are locks to slug .450 (just my observation, not some great baseball axiom passed down from the mountain). For the prototypical team these players play 1B, 3B, LF and RF. This team has Dunn, EE and if he stays healthy Griffey to do that. I also think its certain that Phillips, Hat and whoever plays SS won't. The catching tandem may do it, but I wouldn't count on it when fitting together my team. If Freel is the other OF he surely won't and Deno would need to prove it before saying he would. That leaves the Reds a slugger short IMO.

IslandRed
11-17-2006, 11:20 PM
A 1B with power would make it all work acceptably. I say sign Gonzalez and get a stop gap 1B with pop until Votto is ready. Trade Freel for that #3 starter.

I'd feel a lot better about Hatteberg as the stopgap if we found a lefty-killer to platoon with him and keep him fresh, much as we used Aurilia in that role last season. I don't think it's a coincidence that when Aurilia start logging a lot of late-season starts at other positions and Hatteberg had to play every day, his production tailed off dramatically.

mth123
11-17-2006, 11:25 PM
I'd feel a lot better about Hatteberg as the stopgap if we found a lefty-killer to platoon with him and keep him fresh, much as we used Aurilia in that role last season. I don't think it's a coincidence that when Aurilia start logging a lot of late-season starts at other positions and Hatteberg had to play every day, his production tailed off dramatically.

Agree. Lacking a complete upgrade, a RH hitter with a little pop who hits lefties is a must. Eduardo Perez would be my choice.

edabbs44
11-18-2006, 12:41 AM
Agree. Lacking a complete upgrade, a RH hitter with a little pop who hits lefties is a must. Eduardo Perez would be my choice.

I wanted Eduardo last spring to go with Dunn @ 1st. I would still take him this year. A guy who hits LHPs well is extremely valuable when:

1) You have a LH 1st baseman
2) You are an NL team, b/c of all the subs.

WK, please sign him.

reds44
11-18-2006, 12:47 AM
Ignore offense at your peril.

On a side note, though, I don't think Wayne Krivsky's shown any kind of ability to emulate the Ryan-constructed Twins in Cincinnati so far. Krivsky has virtually no eye for pitching, as the lion's share of his trades for pitching have been total disasters and his draft of pitchers was one of the worst in recent memory.

Strangely, what Krivsky's shown he CAN do is find offense.

Then there is Bronson Arroyo.

reds44
11-18-2006, 12:49 AM
I guess I think that to have a good offense you need at least 4 guys who are locks to slug .450 (just my observation, not some great baseball axiom passed down from the mountain). For the prototypical team these players play 1B, 3B, LF and RF. This team has Dunn, EE and if he stays healthy Griffey to do that. I also think its certain that Phillips, Hat and whoever plays SS won't. The catching tandem may do it, but I wouldn't count on it when fitting together my team. If Freel is the other OF he surely won't and Deno would need to prove it before saying he would. That leaves the Reds a slugger short IMO.
If EE plays everyday he'll drive in more then 100 runs.

I would like to see EE and Dunn has the 3-4 hitters. You'll get over 200 RBI from them. If Griffey can play 120 games, there is 70 more from your 5 hitter.

Patrick Bateman
11-18-2006, 12:56 AM
If EE plays everyday he'll drive in mkore then 100 yards.



That's a pretty bad opening drive. With EE's potential, I'm hoping he can at least hit 250+ yards.

reds44
11-18-2006, 01:21 AM
That's a pretty bad opening drive. With EE's potential, I'm hoping he can at least hit 250+ yards.
My bad.

I am in football mode.

GAC
11-18-2006, 05:43 AM
Ignore offense at your peril.

On a side note, though, I don't think Wayne Krivsky's shown any kind of ability to emulate the Ryan-constructed Twins in Cincinnati so far. Krivsky has virtually no eye for pitching, as the lion's share of his trades for pitching have been total disasters and his draft of pitchers was one of the worst in recent memory.

That's a very small window IMO to be judging a guy on. Also throw in a very tight pitching market.

No eye for pitching?

What about his acquisitions of Arroyo, Guardado, Cormier, Schoeneweis? And I think the verdict is still out on young (and inexpensive) arms like Balfour, Majewski, and Bray.

He didn't give out any Milton contracts. The trades/acquisitions he made were low risk/investment IMO. I don't see where they have hamstrung and/or set this organization back.

Face it FCB.... you never wanted Krivsky as our GM in the first place (and that is fine), and your "bias" against him would never allow you to give him any credit/due for anything he has done/accomplished. :lol:

And some on here, for whatever reason, are worried and scared to death that Krivsky is going to try and replicate the Twin's system here. More power to him. It would be a far cry better then the Bowden/Dano system.

The guy has been on the job for less than a year, and came into it late to begin with, and some expect him to be a miracle worker.

And I believe that simply stems and is motivated by deep ideological differences with Krivsky and the system he mentored under.

I'm sure Wayne learned a few things under Terry Ryan. ;)

GAC
11-18-2006, 05:51 AM
AMEN. What makes every option available to the Reds undesirable is Scott Hatteberg's lack of power at 1B. A player with some power there would allow, as Cyclone put it, "the best defensive up the middle in the league of Gonzalez, Phillips and Deno" to be a strength rather than the liability we see it as. We're unimpressed now because we fear the lack of offensive production. The slick fielding middle of the diamond players shouldn't have to make-up for the lack of offense of the lesser fielders at the corners. Corner players are paid to be offensive players. The Reds haven't had a true power player at 1b since Tony Perez. Larkin and Lopez had enough pop from SS to cover for the problem. The Reds don't have that luxury anymore.

A 1B with power would make it all work acceptably. I say sign Gonzalez and get a stop gap 1B with pop until Votto is ready. Trade Freel for that #3 starter.

But do you think Wayne signed Hatteberg, which is a bargain/very trade able contract IMO, simply as a "stopgap"?

There is going to be some huge shaking up on this team over the next couple of years IMHO. You have the Milton and Jr contracts coming to an end. You also have an issue with Dunn's contract.

I don't think this team will look anything like it currently does.

But in 2 years time, where will we be with kids like Bailey, Votto, and even Bruce?

Are players like Hatteberg simply inexpensive stopgap measures?

And why a player like Aurilia is no longer here? Wayne got the most out of him, yet knew when to say NO.

Ron Madden
11-18-2006, 06:16 AM
Gonzalez won't hit second, because he's got a reputation as a "glove man". Narron wouldn't dare cast him against type.

If you believe in Win Shares, Lugo only put up 3 more total Win Shares (offense + defense) than Gonzalez last season. $3 million is a lot for 3 measley Win Shares.


Didn't Narron start Castro and hit him second a few times last season?

Ron Madden
11-18-2006, 06:31 AM
I'd rather do nothing than spend $15M on Alex Gonzalez. I'd rather play Freel at 2B and Phillips at SS.

I don't mind Alex Gonzalez. But at something closer to 2 yrs, $6M.


I tend to agree with NJ here.

GAC
11-18-2006, 06:41 AM
Agree. Lacking a complete upgrade, a RH hitter with a little pop who hits lefties is a must. Eduardo Perez would be my choice.

At first I wanted to agree with you, but at age 37 and 1.75 Mil, I don't know if Perez would be a worthwhile risk. Yeah, he has a .800+ OPS versus LHers, but the guy had better never see the light of day versus RHers. :lol:

Could we do better with that 1.75 Mil?

EKURed
11-18-2006, 06:44 AM
I'm in the corner of signing Gonzalez. I think the Reds would have one of the best defensive middle infields in all of baseball. I think that good teams are solid up the middle, and this signing would go a long way in establishing that.

GAC
11-18-2006, 06:47 AM
Gonzalez is having preliminary talks with the Blue Jays, who are very interested.

The guy made 2.7 Mil last year. I could tolerate a 3 year 10 Mil contract. That isn't gonna break this organization.

And I would love to see Alex at SS, with Phillips at 2B.

I'm not thrilled at the prospect of Freel, who is an OFer by trade, manning 2B at all.

mth123
11-18-2006, 07:27 AM
But do you think Wayne signed Hatteberg, which is a bargain/very trade able contract IMO, simply as a "stopgap"?

There is going to be some huge shaking up on this team over the next couple of years IMHO. You have the Milton and Jr contracts coming to an end. You also have an issue with Dunn's contract.

I don't think this team will look anything like it currently does.

But in 2 years time, where will we be with kids like Bailey, Votto, and even Bruce?

Are players like Hatteberg simply inexpensive stopgap measures?

And why a player like Aurilia is no longer here? Wayne got the most out of him, yet knew when to say NO.


No question Hatte is a stopgap. But for 2007 he is not a guy the rest of the team will be able to carry. Going into 2006 with Kearns and Lopez adding the missing power punch, carrying Hat (or Casey or Hal Morris or Todd Benzinger or Pete Rose) at 1B was not a huge disaster. Now if this team has three gloves with questionable bats up the middle it needs a 1B that can carry them.

mth123
11-18-2006, 07:44 AM
At first I wanted to agree with you, but at age 37 and 1.75 Mil, I don't know if Perez would be a worthwhile risk. Yeah, he has a .800+ OPS versus LHers, but the guy had better never see the light of day versus RHers. :lol:

Could we do better with that 1.75 Mil?

Not sure in this market. There were a couple minor league free agents that I kind of liked for this role but I think most are gone w/o a sniff from the Reds. JR House (Orioles) and Josh Phelps (Tigers) to name 2.

GAC
11-18-2006, 07:54 AM
As Jack Nicholson once said.... "What this team needs is an enema!" :lol:

edabbs44
11-18-2006, 09:47 AM
God I hope Ken Rosenthal is wrong. If this is true, I think WK needs to take a step back and look at the big picture. $5 million per could be used as a nice piece of what it takes to get a decent pitcher.

A new shortstop in Cincinnati?
Free-agent shortstop Alex Gonzalez is believed to be close to signing a three-year contract with the Reds.

Gonzalez's agent, Eric Goldschmidt, said he expects to complete a deal by the start of next week, but would not specify with which club.

The White Sox, a team speculated to be involved with Gonzalez, have not contacted Goldschmidt, according to a major-league source.

The Blue Jays also have shown interest in Gonzalez, but a second source said they would balk at the rumored price — three years, $15 million.

Gonzalez, 28, is one of the game's top defensive shortstops, but his .179 batting average with runners in scoring position last season was the lowest in the majors.

The Red Sox are pursuing free-agent shortstop Julio Lugo, who would be a significant offensive upgrade over Gonzalez.


http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/6182658

Falls City Beer
11-18-2006, 09:50 AM
Will Wayne next sign "the little things" for three years, $30 million?

Heath
11-18-2006, 09:59 AM
For a guy who thinks he needs team defense - Alex Gonzalez is the guy.

But, it is Ken Rosenthal, and that man has more holes in his stories than Swiss Cheese.

RedLegSuperStar
11-18-2006, 11:07 AM
God I hope Ken Rosenthal is wrong. If this is true, I think WK needs to take a step back and look at the big picture. $5 million per could be used as a nice piece of what it takes to get a decent pitcher.

A new shortstop in Cincinnati?
Free-agent shortstop Alex Gonzalez is believed to be close to signing a three-year contract with the Reds.

Gonzalez's agent, Eric Goldschmidt, said he expects to complete a deal by the start of next week, but would not specify with which club.

The White Sox, a team speculated to be involved with Gonzalez, have not contacted Goldschmidt, according to a major-league source.

The Blue Jays also have shown interest in Gonzalez, but a second source said they would balk at the rumored price — three years, $15 million.

Gonzalez, 28, is one of the game's top defensive shortstops, but his .179 batting average with runners in scoring position last season was the lowest in the majors.

The Red Sox are pursuing free-agent shortstop Julio Lugo, who would be a significant offensive upgrade over Gonzalez.


http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/6182658

Adding to this..from RotoWorld.com:


Alex Gonzalez is believed to be close to signing a three-year contract with the Reds, FOXSports.com's Ken Rosenthal reports.

It sounds like Rosenthal is just going off Thursday's Boston Globe report, but with the added knowledge that the White Sox aren't currently in the running for Gonzalez. The Globe reported that Gonzalez had a three-year, $15 million offer on the table, likely from the Reds or the White Sox. If the Reds sign him, they'll have perhaps the best middle-infield defense in the NL. However, it'll be another blow to an offense that GM Wayne Krivsky has taken a lot away from since his July deal with the Nationals.

Spring~Fields
11-18-2006, 11:12 AM
That's a very small window IMO to be judging a guy on. Also throw in a very tight pitching market.

No eye for pitching?

What about his acquisitions of Arroyo, Guardado, Cormier, Schoeneweis? And I think the verdict is still out on young (and inexpensive) arms like Balfour, Majewski, and Bray.

He didn't give out any Milton contracts. The trades/acquisitions he made were low risk/investment IMO. I don't see where they have hamstrung and/or set this organization back.

Face it FCB.... you never wanted Krivsky as our GM in the first place (and that is fine), and your "bias" against him would never allow you to give him any credit/due for anything he has done/accomplished. :lol:

And some on here, for whatever reason, are worried and scared to death that Krivsky is going to try and replicate the Twin's system here. More power to him. It would be a far cry better then the Bowden/Dano system.

The guy has been on the job for less than a year, and came into it late to begin with, and some expect him to be a miracle worker.

And I believe that simply stems and is motivated by deep ideological differences with Krivsky and the system he mentored under.

I'm sure Wayne learned a few things under Terry Ryan. ;)

Appears that Mr. K is thinking along the same lines as you GAC.


Though Krivsky said he believes the Reds will have the financial resources to be competitive in a free-agent market destined to spiral out of control, remaking the team through trades seems just as likely.

The GM meetings were the first significant step in feeling out the wants and needs of other teams, and the process will continue through baseball's winter meetings, which run Dec. 4-7 in Orlando. It's only just begun, and Krivsky said he doesn't feel compelled to leap into the fray immediately.

"I'm not interested in doing things quickly just to say I did something," he said. "I'm more interested in doing things that are well thought-out and make sense for the team and are responsible and will result in more wins next year.

comments on Gonzalez rumors and other:

http://news.cincypost.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061118/SPT05/611180388/1027


http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061118/SPT04/611180455/1071&GID=WoK3gub+BqZmGtnY1tE50rPDy1TMWtShe7xbOSUEhJ8%3D

edabbs44
11-18-2006, 11:33 AM
Though Krivsky said he believes the Reds will have the financial resources to be competitive in a free-agent market destined to spiral out of control, remaking the team through trades seems just as likely.

The GM meetings were the first significant step in feeling out the wants and needs of other teams, and the process will continue through baseball's winter meetings, which run Dec. 4-7 in Orlando. It's only just begun, and Krivsky said he doesn't feel compelled to leap into the fray immediately.

"I'm not interested in doing things quickly just to say I did something," he said. "I'm more interested in doing things that are well thought-out and make sense for the team and are responsible and will result in more wins next year.

Confirming my worst fears, this is a nice way of saying that Wayne will be waiting by the side of the table for the scraps to fall from the GM meetings table.

How long will it take Wayne to think about bringing back Rick White and Mr. Burns?

Cedric
11-18-2006, 11:39 AM
Confirming my worst fears, this is a nice way of saying that Wayne will be waiting by the side of the table for the scraps to fall from the GM meetings table.

How long will it take Wayne to think about bringing back Rick White and Mr. Burns?

Confirming your worst fears is not throwing out mad cash in this insane market? Weird.

deltachi8
11-18-2006, 12:12 PM
Confirming your worst fears is not throwing out mad cash in this insane market? Weird.

Had the same thought Ced...

jimbo
11-18-2006, 12:34 PM
Confirming your worst fears is not throwing out mad cash in this insane market? Weird.

Exactly. So much talk about how the Reds need to spend spend spend in order to compete, but so much complaining about the Reds spending $5 mil a year on a great SS glove. I really don't think that $5 mil is going to break the bank and I seriously doubt it's the last move Krivsky makes. Instead of judging the offseason in November, let's wait until we have a bigger picture.

GAC
11-18-2006, 12:40 PM
If true, then there is one piece.

Still a few other pieces to go after.

There is not much money committed there to Gonzalez (if true).

They need a pitcher and run producing OFer.

GAC
11-18-2006, 12:42 PM
Exactly. So much talk about how the Reds need to spend spend spend in order to compete, but so much complaining about the Reds spending $5 mil a year on a great SS glove. I really don't think that $5 mil is going to break the bank and I seriously doubt it's the last move Krivsky makes. Instead of judging the offseason in November, let's wait until we have a bigger picture.

My sentiments exactly.

GAC
11-18-2006, 12:47 PM
Confirming my worst fears, this is a nice way of saying that Wayne will be waiting by the side of the table for the scraps to fall from the GM meetings table.

I don't see it that way at all. Every year it goes the same way with practically everyone waiting for the BIG NAMES to be moved and for someone to open up the gates (so to speak).

When it comes to SS.... what is out there and available, and why would you consider AG "table scraps"?

I sure don't.

It fills a very dire need on this team in the form of defense in a critical position.

I agree that WK still has his work cut out for him, as far as replacing some of the lost run production; but he can do that in other areas. Unless you decide to really spend BIG TIME and acquire a Jeter or ARod type who combine both (O & D), then a majority of your today's SS's that are defensive specialists are typical weak hitters. And those that can hit, can't field.

membengal
11-18-2006, 12:49 PM
Serious question, didn't Brandon Phillips come up as a SS? Doesn't he have the range and arm to be awfully solid over there? Why not Phillips to SS? Has anyone with the Reds addressed that question and answered it? (If so, I missed it, sorry)

redsmetz
11-18-2006, 12:51 PM
Serious question, didn't Brandon Phillips come up as a SS? Doesn't he have the range and arm to be awfully solid over there? Why not Phillips to SS? Has anyone with the Reds addressed that question and answered it? (If so, I missed it, sorry)

IMO, the Reds approach to this offseason viz. 2B and SS and Phillips is to see what the market brings either through trade or free agency and put Phillips in the other slot. I don't think they've ruled out Phillips at short (although I think they prefer to keep him at 2nd - just my opinion), but I think they want to see what they can find. I think it's savvy, frankly.

Cedric
11-18-2006, 12:58 PM
Serious question, didn't Brandon Phillips come up as a SS? Doesn't he have the range and arm to be awfully solid over there? Why not Phillips to SS? Has anyone with the Reds addressed that question and answered it? (If so, I missed it, sorry)

After watching Phillips at 2b this season I'm not sure he has the footwork and mechanics required to be an above average SS. I'd rather play him at 2b and take advantage of his athletic ability and not have to worry about his footwork and mechanics.

GAC
11-18-2006, 01:01 PM
After watching Phillips at 2b this season I'm not sure he has the footwork and mechanics required to be an above average SS. I'd rather play him at 2b and take advantage of his athletic ability and not have to worry about his footwork and mechanics.

I agree. If it ain't broke then don't try and fix it.

mth123
11-18-2006, 01:06 PM
After watching Phillips at 2b this season I'm not sure he has the footwork and mechanics required to be an above average SS. I'd rather play him at 2b and take advantage of his athletic ability and not have to worry about his footwork and mechanics.

This seems backwards to me. It seems you need better footwork at 2B to turn the DP where SS is more about speed, agility and arm strength. No pivot at SS.

I actually agree about his footwork and its exactly why I think he'd be better at SS than 2B. I'm not certain about his arm though. Not that I think its bad, I just honestly don't know. Playing 2B last year, we never really saw his arm challenged much.

Cedric
11-18-2006, 01:13 PM
This seems backwards to me. It seems you need better footwork at 2B to turn the DP where SS is more about speed, agility and arm strength. No pivot at SS.

I actually agree about his footwork and its exactly why I think he'd be better at SS than 2B. I'm not certain about his arm though. Not that I think its bad, I just honestly don't know. Playing 2B last year, we never really saw his arm challenged much.

The best SS have the best feet and hands. Brandon can sometimes get his feet out of whack and with longer throws that leads to problems. It's a major problem for Felipe also.

mth123
11-18-2006, 01:18 PM
The best SS have the best feet and hands.

Sure they do. The best defenders at any position have the best feet and hands. I just think poor footwork is more a detriment at 2B than SS if the player has the arm strength to compensate.

jimbo
11-18-2006, 01:23 PM
This seems backwards to me. It seems you need better footwork at 2B to turn the DP where SS is more about speed, agility and arm strength. No pivot at SS.


Doesn't the pivot used at 2B to turn a DP come more from leg strength than anything else?

GAC
11-18-2006, 01:31 PM
Sure they do. The best defenders at any position have the best feet and hands. I just think poor footwork is more a detriment at 2B than SS if the player has the arm strength to compensate.

Footwork (planting and throwing) was the problem they were working on with EE last year.

Playing INF, I always saw your legs as your compass.

Cedric
11-18-2006, 02:03 PM
Sure they do. The best defenders at any position have the best feet and hands. I just think poor footwork is more a detriment at 2B than SS if the player has the arm strength to compensate.

And he doesn't have the best footwork and mechanics. Why put him at the most important position?

Matt700wlw
11-18-2006, 02:09 PM
Ok numbers people.....here's some food


- 2006: .255avg, 9hrs, 55rbis
- 7 errors in 111 games
- '06 Fielding % of .985 would have tied for 4th in majors if he had enough games to qualify -- Felipe Lopez' was .954
- '06 Range factor of 4.36 was better than Jeter, Renteria, Vizquel, Rollins...but equal to Clayton -- Lopez' was 3.88
- '06 Zone Rating was .863, Lopez was .788
- Has hit with pop.....seasons of 18,23 homers......but just 5,9 last two years. Consistently hits 30 doubles
- K's a ton...years of 106 and 126
- .299 OBP last year, .292 for career
- .239 with runners in scoring position last three years
- career high in sb's is 7, career success rate just 59%


(Lance's blog)

GAC
11-18-2006, 02:18 PM
Ok numbers people.....here's some numbers

- 2006: .255avg, 9hrs, 55rbis
- 7 errors in 111 games
- '06 Fielding % of .985 would have tied for 4th in majors if he had enough games to qualify -- Felipe Lopez' was .954
- '06 Range factor of 4.36 was better than Jeter, Renteria, Vizquel, Rollins...but equal to Clayton -- Lopez' was 3.88
- '06 Zone Rating was .863, Lopez was .788
- Has hit with pop.....seasons of 18,23 homers......but just 5,9 last two years. Consistently hits 30 doubles
- K's a ton...years of 106 and 126
- .299 OBP last year, .292 for career
- .239 with runners in scoring position last three years
- career high in sb's is 7, career success rate just 59%


(Lance's blog)

Just bat him 8th! :lol:

If the team does sign him, his defense will be a plus for sure.

But Krivsky IS going to have to upgrade in some other area for run production/runs allowed.

I still maintain that the tasks he needs to confront cannot be addressed and accomplished in this off-season alone. It's too big of a task.

It has to be done smartly and incrementally.

mth123
11-18-2006, 02:19 PM
And he doesn't have the best footwork and mechanics. Why put him at the most important position?

I'm probably taking a stronger position than I should because I'm not really convinced that he should move either. I'm just wondering if his footwork would be less of a detriment at SS. I've always thought that to be a good 2B the footwork needs to be impeccable where a SS can get away with it if he has the other tools. The throw from 2B is so short the other tools are really wasted there. Not only does the arm need less strength, but there is also time to knock a ball down and recover and get the runner that SS generally doesn't have so hands aren't quite as important either (although I wouldn't want a guy there with poor hands). If he could play an average SS, I think the Reds could get a better defender at 2B who could also help the offense. It certainly opens a lot of options that are closed right now. And I think Phillips is poor at turning the DP and you may improve both positions by moving him. His real talent is his range and hands and those both would be more valuable at SS than at 2B. If his weakness is less a problem at SS than 2B, moving him may make sense. But if he doesn't have the arm, then it won't work. I suspect he doesn't or the Reds would be going this direction IMO, but as I said, I really don't know how good his arm is considered.

reds44
11-18-2006, 02:23 PM
Serious question, didn't Brandon Phillips come up as a SS? Doesn't he have the range and arm to be awfully solid over there? Why not Phillips to SS? Has anyone with the Reds addressed that question and answered it? (If so, I missed it, sorry)
Look at the guys available, not alot to choose from. We KNOW Phillips can play GG caliber D at 2B, so if we can get another GG cailber SS why not just leave BP at 2nd?

We need to get another MIF, and Seabass is one of the best available.

reds44
11-18-2006, 02:24 PM
Just bat him 8th! :lol:

If the team does sign him, his defense will be a plus for sure.

But Krivsky IS going to have to upgrade in some other area for run production/runs allowed.

I still maintain that the tasks he needs to confront cannot be addressed and accomplished in this off-season alone. It's too big of a task.

It has to be done smartly and incrementally.
From the sound of Krvisky's comments, that is what he appears to be doing.

mth123
11-18-2006, 02:30 PM
We KNOW Phillips can play GG caliber D at 2B

This is the part I'm not convinced of. He looks good because we've suffered through Walker, DeLo, Richie and even a little Womack the last few years. Freel looked better than all of them as well, but I know he really isn't that good there. Is BP really that good? He seemed to blow a lot of DP chances last year, but that could be from poor feeds from the other players. I haven't looked at any stats and am basing this on what I saw which I know is very dangerous ground so I could be very wrong.

GAC
11-18-2006, 02:54 PM
From the sound of Krvisky's comments, that is what he appears to be doing.

You also have to factor in - at least keep in the back of your mind, while scanning the FA market and what needs you have to fill - what young, developing players do you have in-house that could be ready this year and a couple years away.

Knowing I have Bailey almost ready, and who could get a late season call up, is not going to keep me from entering the FA market; but it is going to affect who I go after and how much I want to spend/invest.

Then you have a player like Votto, and in a couple years (when Jr is gone), you may have a Jay Bruce.

It's gotta be done incrementally, identifying the needs, and picking up the pieces here and there over the next couple of years.

I know some may not like hearing that, but that is what I believe it's going to take.

Big splash this winter? I guess it depends on how you define "big splash".

edabbs44
11-18-2006, 03:10 PM
Exactly. So much talk about how the Reds need to spend spend spend in order to compete, but so much complaining about the Reds spending $5 mil a year on a great SS glove. I really don't think that $5 mil is going to break the bank and I seriously doubt it's the last move Krivsky makes. Instead of judging the offseason in November, let's wait until we have a bigger picture.

No. My two issues are as follows:

1) For a team that does not have $ to burn, this signing doesn't make much sense. They have many issues relating to pitching, yet are willing to spend $5 mil per year on a guy who can't hit? Fielding isn't going to help much with the current staff in place unless AGon is positioned by the Pepsi stacks. And $5 million is a lot of money when they guy isn't good. I'd rather try Phillips at SS and Freel at 2nd with that extra cash to put towards pitching.

2) If I knew for sure that there was still $25 million per year to be spent after this, I would feel more comfortable. But with deficiencies in two other areas which, IMO, are a little more important than fielding (hitting and pitching), I think $5 million is a little steep for someone who doesn't help those areas. Alex Gonzalez is Royce Clayton with a little more pop and a better glove.

Remember this when the Reds are struggling to score and stop the other team from scoring. I would be interested if there is any other team actually considering paying him $ like this. Or is Wayne creating his own market like he did with Maj and Bray. At the press conference, he'll say something like "This shows you how tight the market is for slick fielding SSs who have problems hitting."

Prediction: This contract will be viewed as mini-Milton by August 1st.

edabbs44
11-18-2006, 03:12 PM
I don't see it that way at all. Every year it goes the same way with practically everyone waiting for the BIG NAMES to be moved and for someone to open up the gates (so to speak).

When it comes to SS.... what is out there and available, and why would you consider AG "table scraps"?

I sure don't.

It fills a very dire need on this team in the form of defense in a critical position.

I agree that WK still has his work cut out for him, as far as replacing some of the lost run production; but he can do that in other areas. Unless you decide to really spend BIG TIME and acquire a Jeter or ARod type who combine both (O & D), then a majority of your today's SS's that are defensive specialists are typical weak hitters. And those that can hit, can't field.

The table scraps comment wasn't directed towards AG. It was directed towards WK's quote about waiting it out and not rushing into anything.

vaticanplum
11-18-2006, 03:45 PM
No. My two issues are as follows:

1) For a team that does not have $ to burn, this signing doesn't make much sense. They have many issues relating to pitching, yet are willing to spend $5 mil per year on a guy who can't hit? Fielding isn't going to help much with the current staff in place unless AGon is positioned by the Pepsi stacks.

2) If I knew for sure that there was still $25 million per year to be spent after this, I would feel more comfortable. But with deficiencies in two other areas which, IMO, are a little more important than fielding (hitting and pitching), I think $5 million is a little steep for someone who doesn't help those areas.

Shortstop is the one non-pitching position on this team that desperately needs to be filled and cannot be done so internally. And good fielding is always going to help, particularly when it could, as other have noted, back up groundball pitchers, which is something that everyone's been screaming that the Reds need since GABP opened. Of course I agree that the Reds need to address their pitching problem. But I don't think that one off-season=addressing a single deficiency, and we're a whopping three or four weeks into the offseason with the winter meetings still to come.

Fixing the shortstop problem would take care of a lot defensively in one sweeping move, not only because it gives you a crucial good glove there, but because it solidifies Phillips at second and Freel in the outfield (where I think he belongs). If the Reds were to throw a GG-type at first or left field, I'd think they still have a lot of work to do defensively, and they'd likely still have an offense problem too. Throw in a good glove at shortstop, and I think they're pretty much set defensively (apart from moving Griffey over, but that's still an internal issue). Yes, I'd like the Reds to have more power. But if the defense problem is taken care of, they can work on that and bring in any kind of bat they want without worrying too much about what he does on defense.

And I personally don't think anyone will end up comparing Gonzalez or his contract to Clayton or Milton.

vaticanplum
11-18-2006, 04:07 PM
Reports coming in from ESPN that the Red have signed him.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2667193

Tornon
11-18-2006, 04:08 PM
Yea, just saw it on bottomline that Peter Gammons is reporting this as a done deal

OnBaseMachine
11-18-2006, 04:09 PM
This organization just continues to get dumber and dumber. Just when you thought it couldn't get worse, it does. .299 OBP last year for Gonzalez. Awful. And you just know Narron will bat him second.

Wayne Krivsky has managed to turn this team from a offensive juggernaut to one of the worst hitting teams in baseball in less than a year. Impressive.

GAC
11-18-2006, 04:09 PM
The table scraps comment wasn't directed towards AG. It was directed towards WK's quote about waiting it out and not rushing into anything.

No problem.

I look at these winter meetings, and they start out the same every year, as a bunch of kids standing around the pool, dangling their feet to test the waters, and waiting to see who is gonna be the first to jump in.

What are the Cincinnati Reds DIRE needs.... and does this current FA market have those pieces available?

I don't really see it in the FA market so much, and that is where these GM have to sit down across from one another, lok at trade propositions, and try to screw each other. :lol:

OnBaseMachine
11-18-2006, 04:10 PM
Maybe we can sign Luis Gonzalez to a 5-yr, 45 million dollar deal now. Might as well grab all the guys who know how to win.

OnBaseMachine
11-18-2006, 04:13 PM
RF Ryan Freel
SS Alex Gonzalez
CF Ken Griffey Jr.
3B Edwin Encarnacion
1B Scott Hatteberg
C David Ross
2B Brandon Phillips
LF Chris Denorfia

That lineup will be lucky to score 600 runs.

vaticanplum
11-18-2006, 04:15 PM
RF Ryan Freel
SS Alex Gonzalez
CF Ken Griffey Jr.
3B Edwin Encarnacion
1B Scott Hatteberg
C David Ross
2B Brandon Phillips
LF Chris Denorfia

That lineup will be lucky to score 600 runs.

:confused: I may be way off-base here, but this signing indicates to me that Dunn is very likely not to be traded.

Matt700wlw
11-18-2006, 04:18 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2667193

Matt700wlw
11-18-2006, 04:20 PM
I like this move....

Improving the defense is good....yes, the offense needs upgrades.

I feel pretty good in saying this is probably the first of several offseason moves.

Matt700wlw
11-18-2006, 04:21 PM
RF Ryan Freel
SS Alex Gonzalez
CF Ken Griffey Jr.
3B Edwin Encarnacion
1B Scott Hatteberg
C David Ross
2B Brandon Phillips
LF Chris Denorfia

That lineup will be lucky to score 600 runs.

That lineup...yes.

But it's 1 move in November...let's not mark this lineup in stone yet.

mth123
11-18-2006, 04:30 PM
Shortstop is the one non-pitching position on this team that desperately needs to be filled and cannot be done so internally. And good fielding is always going to help, particularly when it could, as other have noted, back up groundball pitchers, which is something that everyone's been screaming that the Reds need since GABP opened. Of course I agree that the Reds need to address their pitching problem. But I don't think that one off-season=addressing a single deficiency, and we're a whopping three or four weeks into the offseason with the winter meetings still to come.

Fixing the shortstop problem would take care of a lot defensively in one sweeping move, not only because it gives you a crucial good glove there, but because it solidifies Phillips at second and Freel in the outfield (where I think he belongs). If the Reds were to throw a GG-type at first or left field, I'd think they still have a lot of work to do defensively, and they'd likely still have an offense problem too. Throw in a good glove at shortstop, and I think they're pretty much set defensively (apart from moving Griffey over, but that's still an internal issue). Yes, I'd like the Reds to have more power. But if the defense problem is taken care of, they can work on that and bring in any kind of bat they want without worrying too much about what he does on defense.

And I personally don't think anyone will end up comparing Gonzalez or his contract to Clayton or Milton.


Good post. I'm on the fence here and here are a few varied thoughts about this move. Not sure I believe them all, but I undersatnd them all.

- If the school of thought is that salary is largely dependent on supply and demand then isn't the reason that Jeff Suppan is going to make $8 Million or so this year the same reason that Alex Gonzalez should not make $5 Million? Good defenders who can't hit are fairly easy to find. I wonder if Jerry Gil or even Paul Janisch (both known as plus defenders) were given the job for the minimum how much difference we'd see? The Reds could always get a good field no hit SS as a throw-in in a trade. I think Ronny Cedeno would be available now.

- Relegating Freel to the OF really depletes his value to the Reds IMO. His versatility is his main asset and as an OF he really doesn't have enough bat IMO (especially now with no plus offensive players in the MI to help offset). I think this move makes him the Reds main trade bait for a pitcher. Lots of teams looking for cheap CF. The Reds may be able to get a couple diamonds in the rough for him that could help the rotation and the bullpen. I'd throw in a prospect if needed. Deno is just as good if not better than Freel. What set Freel apart was his ability to be used everywhere. On this team the 4th OF is going to get much of his PT subbing for Griffey and maybe Dunn will rest more. Not enough Pop if Freel is the sub. I'd sign a 4th OF with more pop as insurance for Deno and Griffey. (I'd make a play for Jay Payton and guarantee him 400 ABs).

- You're right about the defense. If Deno plays CF the Reds defense is fixed for the most part. Dunn's defense in LF is possibly the most overblown issue on here. EE will be better to.

- I hope if this is a three year deal as rumored that the salary is front loaded with a smaller base in the 3rd year. This can't be the end to the search for a long term solution. Lower salary later will help the Reds reload again if they need to deal Gonzalez. They are more in need now. Pay more now.

- Who hits 8th now? Gonzalez should, but I like the catchers there. And Phillips should hit no higher than 7th. Given the current roster I'd go Deno, Dunn, EE, Griffey, the catchers, Hat, Phillips and Gonzalez. That line-up is only 4 players deep and two of those are very iffy. The 2nd inning should be pretty easy for opposing starters and if none of the top 3 get on in the first the 3rd will be as well. Opposing pitchers will be happy to see a line-up of Javy, Hat, Phillips, Gonzalez and the pitcher. Hat may have to hit 2nd just to get more help in the bottom half. The problem is that Griffey won't hit lower than 4th (he should) and Dunn will be the one dropped. Dunn will be in a no win situation with those guys behind him. He'll either walk every time (and half the board will complain he doesn't swing enough) or he'll start chasing and have another down year.

Aronchis
11-18-2006, 04:33 PM
Krivsky won't be GM long with these types of moves. Overpaying marginal players isn't cutting it.

Matt700wlw
11-18-2006, 04:35 PM
Wayne Krivsky just told us he cannot confirm nor deny the signing...

:lol:

cincinnati chili
11-18-2006, 04:38 PM
Without having done the math, I suspect that Gonzalez is a good enough fielder to be a net-positive. He'll prevent more runs with his glove than he'll fail to produce below the bat of a normal shortstop.

I agree that his at-bats should be minimized, and also agree that the Reds haven't been smart enough to do stuff like that.

EKURed
11-18-2006, 04:39 PM
This organization just continues to get dumber and dumber. Just when you thought it couldn't get worse, it does. .299 OBP last year for Gonzalez. Awful. And you just know Narron will bat him second.

Wayne Krivsky has managed to turn this team from a offensive juggernaut to one of the worst hitting teams in baseball in less than a year. Impressive.

Baseball is more than just offense and OBP. Like me, I am sure you watched or listened to almost every game last year and you know how pathetic the defense was. A middle infield of Gonzalez and Phillips gives the Reds easily one of the best middle infields in the National League. And, it's only November. Let's see how the rest of off season plays out.

Count me as a Reds fan who really likes this move.

flyer85
11-18-2006, 04:42 PM
I'm ambivalent.

is addressing SS defense a huge concern that so much that this team needed to give a marginal player a 3 year deal?

I don't know but if it wasn't as big a problem as people thought the deal for AG could be another anchor that this team can't seem to avoid.

I'll wait and see.

Aronchis
11-18-2006, 04:53 PM
I'm ambivalent.

is addressing SS defense a huge concern that so much that this team needed to give a marginal player a 3 year deal?

I don't know but if it wasn't as big a problem as people thought the deal for AG could be another anchor that this team can't seem to avoid.

I'll wait and see.

If he gets a GAP power lift, then it becomes better, maybe much better, but his lack of OBP and little power right now means they just wanted to get rid of the position, but they gave little effort to do so.

Gallen5862
11-18-2006, 04:54 PM
I like this move. 3 years 14 Million is not a bad contract. This helps improve the defense at Shortstop and leaves Phillips at 2b.

Kc61
11-18-2006, 05:00 PM
RF Ryan Freel
SS Alex Gonzalez
CF Ken Griffey Jr.
3B Edwin Encarnacion
1B Scott Hatteberg
C David Ross
2B Brandon Phillips
LF Chris Denorfia

That lineup will be lucky to score 600 runs.

Dunn was traded? No offensive player came in his trade? Reds didn't sign any offense this winter? Freel and Denorfia are both starters?

harangatang
11-18-2006, 05:23 PM
Can someone please change the thread title, some people actually get their news here.

deltachi8
11-18-2006, 05:23 PM
I agree. If it ain't broke then don't try and fix it.

No offense GAC, but i dislike that saying. How about "If it ain't broke, whats wrong with making it better?"

Back to the point on Phillips, he came up as a SS and a darn good one. I saw him play a few time in Buffalo and he is quite good there.

I'm not against the AG signing as long as his glove at ss outweighs what a 2b with a better stick could have brought in (with Phillips at ss).

Falls City Beer
11-18-2006, 05:38 PM
This is the part I'm not convinced of. He looks good because we've suffered through Walker, DeLo, Richie and even a little Womack the last few years. Freel looked better than all of them as well, but I know he really isn't that good there. Is BP really that good? He seemed to blow a lot of DP chances last year, but that could be from poor feeds from the other players. I haven't looked at any stats and am basing this on what I saw which I know is very dangerous ground so I could be very wrong.

I jumped all over Phillips' offensive game last year when they first acquired him, but just one look at the guy in the field told me he was not simply an upgrade over the bad that we've seen. He's a solidly above average 2nd baseman, IMO.

He's young, and like EdE, will only continue to improve on what his impressive natural skills allow him to reach and accomplish.

Topcat
11-18-2006, 05:47 PM
I jumped all over Phillips' offensive game last year when they first acquired him, but just one look at the guy in the field told me he was not simply an upgrade over the bad that we've seen. He's a solidly above average 2nd baseman, IMO.

He's young, and like EdE, will only continue to improve on what his impressive natural skills allow him to reach and accomplish.

Good for you FCB I so remember how you slammed him and to see you own up to it, and pull for this kid. :beerme:

RedsManRick
11-18-2006, 05:47 PM
If we wanted to defensive wiz with pop but can't get on base to save his life, why not just play Jerry Gil?

Falls City Beer
11-18-2006, 05:51 PM
The Reds' infield next season could be one of the absolute worst in Reds' history viz. offense (when you factor the almost-certain collapses of Hatteberg/Ross and the almost-certain jettisoning of Aurilia).

That's an incredibly real and exigent circumstance. (I'm not saying it won't be dealt with, but if it's not dealt with, this team will absolutely positively have a losing season next year).

Falls City Beer
11-18-2006, 05:52 PM
Good for you FCB I so remember how you slammed him and to see you own up to it, and pull for this kid. :beerme:

I call it like I see it. The kid's got real defensive skill.

IslandRed
11-18-2006, 05:53 PM
I'm ambivalent.

is addressing SS defense a huge concern that so much that this team needed to give a marginal player a 3 year deal?

I don't know but if it wasn't as big a problem as people thought the deal for AG could be another anchor that this team can't seem to avoid.

I'll wait and see.

I'm basically in wait-and-see mode also, but I don't expect to either love or hate this deal down the road, really. Gonzalez strikes me as one of those "he is what he is" guys, a plus version of the good-field poor-hit shortstop.

On the general subject of what we should want in a shortstop, I'm a bit old-school in that I want a genuinely good defender and will sacrifice some offense to get it. A team can't claim to take defense seriously while treating shortstop as an offense-first position, in my opinion. That doesn't mean I want every position to be defense-first. But shortstop, I do.

flyer85
11-18-2006, 06:01 PM
I'm basically in wait-and-see mode also, but I don't expect to either love or hate this deal down the road, really. Gonzalez strikes me as one of those "he is what he is" guys, a plus version of the good-field poor-hit shortstop.

On the general subject of what we should want in a shortstop, I'm a bit old-school in that I want a genuinely good defender and will sacrifice some offense to get it. A team can't claim to take defense seriously while treating shortstop as an offense-first position, in my opinion. That doesn't mean I want every position to be defense-first. But shortstop, I do.The remaining issue is that with a fly ball pitching the biggest defensive issue is CF and as I near as I can tell it has not been addressed.

RFS62
11-18-2006, 06:02 PM
The Reds' infield next season could be one of the absolute worst in Reds' history viz. offense (when you factor the almost-certain collapses of Hatteberg/Ross and the almost-certain jettisoning of Aurilia).

That's an incredibly real and exigent circumstance. (I'm not saying it won't be dealt with, but if it's not dealt with, this team will absolutely positively have a losing season next year).



Who did you think we were going to play at shortstop? How much are you willing to spend and what would you need to see in return to avoid this tragedy?

Falls City Beer
11-18-2006, 06:07 PM
Who did you think we were going to play at shortstop? How much are you willing to spend and what would you need to see in return to avoid this tragedy?

It has nothing to do per se with the signing of Gonzalez, but the onus is on the Reds now to bolster the offense at other positions because they've "locked in" a poor hitter at shortstop. That's all I'm saying.

The Reds now have to find a way to replace runs at positions that will see massive declines in runscoring ability (e.g. 1st base, catcher). It's not impossible, obviously, but they have created another chore for themselves by guaranteeing a spot for a bad hitter.

Matt700wlw
11-18-2006, 06:09 PM
His numbers (power numbers) may go up a bit in the Cincinnati sandbox as well...

It's possible, but this move was made for defense more than anything

Cyclone792
11-18-2006, 06:12 PM
As I said wayyy back on Page 5, I'd have definitely preferred two years instead of three years, and while I'm not happy about a three year deal, I can tolerate it. I'm confident that Gonzalez's glove assets will outweigh his liability with the bat, and I'd put his overall net run value relative to other shortstops at about 5-10 runs in the plus range per season. Shortstop is one of the few positions where I'm willing to sacrifice some offensive punch for exceptional defense.

Of course, that comes with the caveat that the traditional offense-heavy positions are just that, offense-heavy ...

First, it is absolutely imperative that #3 is moved out of center field next season. A defensive trio of Gonzalez at shortstop, Phillips at second base, and Denorfia in center field could post as high as a +25 net run value defensively per season over the average defensive performers. That trio has the capability to be a massive asset collectively for up-the-middle defense, and that part of the field would be known as the place where hits go to die.

However, if Griffey is in center field, the trio of Gonzalez at shortstop, Phillips at second base, and Griffey in center field would collectively be below average defensively.

Yes, Ken Griffey, Jr. is that bad defensively as a center fielder.

Second, assume that Griffey is moved out of center field and Denorfia is inserted for his glove. Now while the trio of Gonzo-Phillips-Denorfia would likely be among the best, if not the best, up-the-middle gloves in all of baseball, their collective offensive punch would likely be below average relative to their positions. Denorfia projects to be average, Gonzalez below average, and while people may be high on Brandon Phillips offensively, that .287 post All-Star Break on-base percentage and his complete inability to take a walk means that we absolutely cannot rely on him for anything more than average production offensively relative to other second basemen. In short, all that means that the traditional offense-heavy positions of 1B, 3B, LF, and RF need to produce with the bat, otherwise the team just simply won't score enough runs throughout the season to go anywhere.

Dunn will produce in left field, and Encarnacion should be a sure-fire bet to produce at third base. Griffey in right field, due to both his decline and injury potential, is a massive question mark. Hatteberg at first base on a full-time basis projects to be nothing less than a massive liability offensively. As was discussed last night, the Reds are a slugger short of being able to score enough runs. We need four sluggers, but really only have two-and-a-half (Griffey counts as the half due to age/injuries).

If the team can find a stopgap slugger to play first base in place of Hatteberg until Votto is ready - or a corner outfielder and bump Dunn or Griffey to first base until Votto is ready - then we'd have a nice combination of offense and fielding defense spread out through our regular position players.

Unfortunately, without that additional slugger, I fear the offensive punch of this team just won't accomplish the job.

reds44
11-18-2006, 06:22 PM
I like it. This team needed to get better defensively, and it just did. Hopefully we move Deno to CF and Griffey to RF, if not sign an OF bat.

GABP will inflate Sea Bass' offensive numbers.

We now have the best defensive MIF in baseball.

edabbs44
11-18-2006, 06:26 PM
Shortstop is the one non-pitching position on this team that desperately needs to be filled and cannot be done so internally. And good fielding is always going to help, particularly when it could, as other have noted, back up groundball pitchers, which is something that everyone's been screaming that the Reds need since GABP opened. Of course I agree that the Reds need to address their pitching problem. But I don't think that one off-season=addressing a single deficiency, and we're a whopping three or four weeks into the offseason with the winter meetings still to come.

Fixing the shortstop problem would take care of a lot defensively in one sweeping move, not only because it gives you a crucial good glove there, but because it solidifies Phillips at second and Freel in the outfield (where I think he belongs). If the Reds were to throw a GG-type at first or left field, I'd think they still have a lot of work to do defensively, and they'd likely still have an offense problem too. Throw in a good glove at shortstop, and I think they're pretty much set defensively (apart from moving Griffey over, but that's still an internal issue). Yes, I'd like the Reds to have more power. But if the defense problem is taken care of, they can work on that and bring in any kind of bat they want without worrying too much about what he does on defense.

And I personally don't think anyone will end up comparing Gonzalez or his contract to Clayton or Milton.

SS definitely needs to be addressed, but this team is not a SS away. I think this solidifies the new era in Cincy: Defense, defense, defense. Between the Stubbs #1 pick of last year and now throwing $5 mil per at a guy who struggles at the plate, say goodbye to the hitting days of yesteryear. But a good defensive SS will not make this pitching staff that much better. Especially in GABP.

Personally, I think the new FO has been extremely short sighted in it's almost year long tenure. Some of the questions I have are as follows:

1) First and foremost, if this team believes they can contend in the extremely near future, then they need to spend a lot of money. Fast. At least two good starting pitchers and one or two more arms in the bullpen. Add in a power bat in the OF. If they aren't ready to do this in the next year or so, then what is the point of some of these signings?

2) Here's the part that kills me. While reading the latest BA, they had noted that "It's zero coincidence that the two teams having the best drafts in 2006 are the two richest teams: Boston and the NYY." They noted numerous players who dropped in the draft b/c of bonus demands and were scooped up and signed by either team in the later rounds. Examples are Lars Anderson, Ty Weeden and Dellin Betances. Now my problem is as follows: Players like Alex Gonzalez and Hatteberg aren't guys who help a team make a leap...they fill in a last remaining one or two holes for teams who has the other positions filled. Think about this...would you rather have Votto as the incoming starting 1st baseman and Betances (taken in the 7th or 8th round for $1 million) or Hatteberg starting this year? Or trying out BP at SS and having an extra $5 million a year for the next 3 years to use on either other positions or in the draft?

WK needs to spend his money a little more wisely. Believe me, no one, and I mean NO ONE, will like this contract some the summer. Especially this board. He had an OBP under .300 last year. That is flat out pathetic. This will be an albatross of the likes of LaRue and Milton. Quote me.

RFS62
11-18-2006, 06:26 PM
As I said wayyy back on Page 5, I'd have definitely preferred two years instead of three years, and while I'm not happy about a three year deal, I can tolerate it. I'm confident that Gonzalez's glove assets will outweigh his liability with the bat, and I'd put his overall net run value relative to other shortstops at about 5-10 runs in the plus range. Shortstop is one of the few positions where I'm willing to sacrifice some offensive punch for exceptional defense.

Of course, that comes with the caveat that the traditional offense-heavy positions are just that, offense-heavy ...

First, it is absolutely imperative that #3 is moved out of center field next season. A defensive trio of Gonzalez at shortstop, Phillips at second base, and Denorfia in center field could post as high as a +25 net run value defensively over the average defensive performers. That trio has the capability to be a massive asset collectively for up-the-middle defense, and that part of the field would be known as the place where hits go to die.

However, if Griffey is in center field, the trio of Gonzalez at shortstop, Phillips at second base, and Griffey in center field would collectively be below average defensively.

Yes, Ken Griffey, Jr. is that bad defensively as a center fielder.

Second, assume that Griffey is moved out of center field and Denorfia is inserted for his glove. Now while the trio of Gonzo-Phillips-Denorfia would likely be among the best, if not the best, up-the-middle gloves in all of baseball, their collective offensive punch would likely be below average relative to their positions. Denorfia projects to be average, Gonzalez below average, and while people may be high on Brandon Phillips offensively, that .287 post All-Star Break on-base percentage and his complete inability to take a walk means that we absolutely cannot rely on him for anything more than average production offensively relative to other second basemen. In short, all that means that the traditional offense-heavy positions of 1B, 3B, LF, and RF need to produce with the bat, otherwise the team just simply won't score enough runs throughout the season to go anywhere.

Dunn will produce in left field, and Encarnacion should be a sure-fire bet to produce at third base. Griffey in right field, due to both his decline and injury potential, is a massive question mark. Hatteberg at first base on a full-time basis projects to be nothing less than a massive liability offensively. As was discussed last night, the Reds are a slugger short of being able to score enough runs. We need four sluggers, but really only have two-and-a-half (Griffey counts as the half due to age/injuries).

If the team can found a stopgap slugger to play first base in place of Hatteberg until Votto is ready - or a corner outfielder and bump Dunn or Griffey to first base until Votto is ready - then we'd have a nice combination of offense and fielding defense spread out through our regular position players.

Unfortunately, without that additional slugger, I fear the offensive punch of this team just won't accomplish the job.


I think this is a pretty fair assessment. I'd still make a move to strengthen shortstop defense if I'm rebuilding.

Cincinnati has a history of great shortstops. Looks like all we're getting this time is the great defense, but this is filling a big need and he'll make an excellent cornerstone.

None of the offseason moves are made in a vacuum. You can't get the complete picture until the roster is set and the team heads north after spring training.

schroomytunes
11-18-2006, 06:26 PM
Cyclone I agree with you 100%, I think with this signing you will see us try to acquire a guy that can play 1b/of to platoon with Griffey and Hatteberg. I think guys that fit into that current category are in order of prefrence are:
1)Craig Wilson
2)Kevin Millar
3)Eduardo Perez

These guys would provide a little more pop at the corner positions in a platoon role, and would still allow us to acquire pitching help.

TRF
11-18-2006, 06:28 PM
I'm not thrilled with this.

Now I'm not dumb enough to not realize the incredible defensive suckitude from the SS position, but you have to look at the larger picture here.

Jerry Narron is still the manager. The same man that hit Dunn anywhere from 2nd to 6th. The man with an unhealthy infatuation towards Ryan Franklin. Narron is a factor, and Gonzales has some speed. We will see him hit second at some point. maybe even lead off.

oy.

This regime seems intent at throwing as many possible combinations of players at positions as possible. I think it's because they have no clue as to how to evaluate talent.

And this signing tells me Kyle Lohse is still in the rotation.

double oy.

This is off the wall, but I wonder if Pokey Reese's bank account is getting low? From a purely talent standpoint, he'd have been cheaper than Gonzales, and off equal defensive ability.

vaticanplum
11-18-2006, 06:53 PM
First, it is absolutely imperative that #3 is moved out of center field next season. A defensive trio of Gonzalez at shortstop, Phillips at second base, and Denorfia in center field could post as high as a +25 net run value defensively per season over the average defensive performers. That trio has the capability to be a massive asset collectively for up-the-middle defense, and that part of the field would be known as the place where hits go to die.

Oh my god, that just made me dizzy.

Do the right thing, Wayne (and Junior). Right field is supersexy! Come on!!!

Kc61
11-18-2006, 06:55 PM
I don't think you can draw many conclusions from this concerning other moves. We have folks predicting the entire off-season based on this one move. I don't think anyone knows what else Krivsky will do.

If you want to speculate, however, it seems Krivsky is entirely focused on the defensive side of things. This is why he traded Lopez in the first place. He didn't want him in the infield.

So we can guess that he won't let Griffey be the centerfielder next year. And we can speculate that he will add pitching.

If Krivsky goes this route, the Reds will be short on offense. They will eventually have to beef up first base (Votto or better) and, if Dunn or Griffey don't get back on track, replace them with offensive guys. But under Kriv, my guess is that shortstop, second base and centerfield are defensive territory.

Aronchis
11-18-2006, 06:57 PM
Sounds like the offenses potential hinges on Joey Votto..............

Kc61
11-18-2006, 07:06 PM
Sounds like the offenses potential hinges on Joey Votto..............

Actually, if you look at the corners as the offensive positions, some restructuring is in order. Dunn, Votto and Griff hit lefty. Only EE is righty. Right now, the Reds seriously need another right handed hitter. Ross/Phillips/Gonzo are not middle order hitters.

Possibly, the Reds will add a centerfielder who hits righty but it is hard to believe they will spend enough to get a top bat/top glove guy in that spot. More likely a defensive type or the Deno/Freel duo will man centerfield.

So even with Votto (even with Bruce, another lefty) the Reds at some point will have to add a strong righty hitter.

No doubt, the team is still a long way from being a balanced, solid team. But I do believe the Reds' model of home run hitters and little else had to be scrapped since it wasn't producing wins.

WMR
11-18-2006, 07:10 PM
As I said wayyy back on Page 5, I'd have definitely preferred two years instead of three years, and while I'm not happy about a three year deal, I can tolerate it. I'm confident that Gonzalez's glove assets will outweigh his liability with the bat, and I'd put his overall net run value relative to other shortstops at about 5-10 runs in the plus range per season. Shortstop is one of the few positions where I'm willing to sacrifice some offensive punch for exceptional defense.

Of course, that comes with the caveat that the traditional offense-heavy positions are just that, offense-heavy ...

First, it is absolutely imperative that #3 is moved out of center field next season. A defensive trio of Gonzalez at shortstop, Phillips at second base, and Denorfia in center field could post as high as a +25 net run value defensively per season over the average defensive performers. That trio has the capability to be a massive asset collectively for up-the-middle defense, and that part of the field would be known as the place where hits go to die.

However, if Griffey is in center field, the trio of Gonzalez at shortstop, Phillips at second base, and Griffey in center field would collectively be below average defensively.

Yes, Ken Griffey, Jr. is that bad defensively as a center fielder.

Second, assume that Griffey is moved out of center field and Denorfia is inserted for his glove. Now while the trio of Gonzo-Phillips-Denorfia would likely be among the best, if not the best, up-the-middle gloves in all of baseball, their collective offensive punch would likely be below average relative to their positions. Denorfia projects to be average, Gonzalez below average, and while people may be high on Brandon Phillips offensively, that .287 post All-Star Break on-base percentage and his complete inability to take a walk means that we absolutely cannot rely on him for anything more than average production offensively relative to other second basemen. In short, all that means that the traditional offense-heavy positions of 1B, 3B, LF, and RF need to produce with the bat, otherwise the team just simply won't score enough runs throughout the season to go anywhere.

Dunn will produce in left field, and Encarnacion should be a sure-fire bet to produce at third base. Griffey in right field, due to both his decline and injury potential, is a massive question mark. Hatteberg at first base on a full-time basis projects to be nothing less than a massive liability offensively. As was discussed last night, the Reds are a slugger short of being able to score enough runs. We need four sluggers, but really only have two-and-a-half (Griffey counts as the half due to age/injuries).

If the team can find a stopgap slugger to play first base in place of Hatteberg until Votto is ready - or a corner outfielder and bump Dunn or Griffey to first base until Votto is ready - then we'd have a nice combination of offense and fielding defense spread out through our regular position players.

Unfortunately, without that additional slugger, I fear the offensive punch of this team just won't accomplish the job.

Junior in RF... Junior in RF... Junior in RF... Junior in RF... (my new mantra)

Kc61
11-18-2006, 07:18 PM
One further point. Offensively Gonzo is a fly ball hitter. He once hit 23 homers in a year for Florida. His OBP and BA numbers are quite poor, probably because he hits the ball in the air so much. There is a chance he could hit a fair share of extra base hits in GABP.

WMR
11-18-2006, 07:19 PM
Dunn Deno Griffey

EdE Gonzo B. Phill Hatte

Can Deno's .OBP justify batting lead-off? (obviously, whenever Freel's not playing)

I really don't see who else can possibly contend for the spot in that line-up...

but then again, this is JN we're talking about.

Deno
EdE
Dunn
Jr
Hatte
Ross
B.Phill
Gonzo

reds44
11-18-2006, 07:20 PM
Sounds like the offenses potential hinges on Joey Votto..............
I would say Votto, the health of Junior, and GABP helping out Sea Bass' numbers.

I wasn't aware he once hit 23 homers in Flordia. He may be able to bring some power.

Kc61
11-18-2006, 07:24 PM
I would say Votto, the health of Junior, and GABP helping out Sea Bass' numbers.

I wasn't aware he once hit 23 homers in Flordia. He may be able to bring some power.

Also hit 18 another Fla year. Had over 70 ribbies twice. But poor OBPs. Hit far fewer homers for Boston last couple of years.

reds44
11-18-2006, 07:28 PM
Also hit 18 another Fla year. Had over 70 ribbies twice. But poor OBPs. Hit far fewer homers for Boston last couple of years.
He's not going to walk alot, we know that.

However if you can get 20 homers (and 70 RBIs) from your 8th hitter, along with GG defense, I'll take that 7 days a week and twice on Sundays.

paulrichjr
11-18-2006, 07:30 PM
I would say Votto, the health of Junior, and GABP helping out Sea Bass' numbers.

I wasn't aware he once hit 23 homers in Flordia. He may be able to bring some power.

I think that was before testing...:D

flyer85
11-18-2006, 07:31 PM
He's not going to walk alot, we know that.
if he's an 8th place hitter it isn't as big a deal

vaticanplum
11-18-2006, 07:32 PM
SS definitely needs to be addressed, but this team is not a SS away. I think this solidifies the new era in Cincy: Defense, defense, defense. Between the Stubbs #1 pick of last year and now throwing $5 mil per at a guy who struggles at the plate, say goodbye to the hitting days of yesteryear.

I'm using this quote as an example of something I've seen a lot around here lately, edabbs; what I'm about to say is not directed right at you.

The Cincinnati Reds have almost entirely different owners, managers, and coaches than they did a year and a half ago. At this point, Jerry Narron is the representative of the "old regime" and he's been manager for a season and a half. It would stand to reason that the Reds of the future will not be the Reds of Lindner's tenure. Given the qualilty of Lindner's Reds, I'm hard-pressed to understand why this is a problem, but I understand that change can be difficult, especially when offense was the Reds' greatest (only?) strength during that time.

This team is going to be unrecognizable in a couple of years, perhaps sooner. That's not by happenstance; I've no doubt that that was the very point. It's probably a big reason why Krivsky was hired, particularly over Kullman. The Reds were looking for somebody who came in for the GM interview and said your team sucks and I have no sentimental connection to it, I see no reason to keep this team as it is. This is what I believe, this is what I will do, this is how I will completely overhaul this team. This team was begging for a complete overhaul. And the guy who presented the best plan to do it happened to be a guy who values pitching and defense. That's not a bad thing in general, and it's particularly not a bad thing for this team. The Reds of 2003 did not bother to adjust to their new ballpark. Good pitching and defense are crucial to that park. And while every team needs a good dose of power, a top-to-bottom power-hitting lineup is not crucial in this ballpark. I believe they are trying to make these adjustments right now. They've made it three years harder on themselves, because the ballpark has had time to live up to its worst points, making it difficult to attract good pitchers, and they've had a few years of questionable drafting as well. But they are starting now, and at least they're starting.

A fire sale wouldn't have worked with this team. It had just enough going for it that it wasn't quite to that point. Dunn is an asset to this team, and contrary to the beliefs of many I still believe that Krivsky is going to keep him. Griffey is an asset in some ways, a liability in others, but in any case probably not going to be worth trading in terms of return value. So the overhaul is likely to be as big as it can be without being a fire sale. There will be mistakes along the way and there has already been one major one. But I am willing to put it aside for the time being and wait to see what happens next, because I do respect that the front office appears to have a specific plan and a specific model for a team in mind, and more importantly, it is a model which I think is good for this team. I like all the home runs I saw for the last few years. But I am willing to let them go for a better team.

I expect a lot of moves to be made right away; I think the team will be unrecognizable pretty soon. The problem is that I don't think that the effects will be seen right away, because a) a pitching-and-defense-centric team needs more time to gel than a bunch of collected sluggers, and b) a lot of the hitting parts of this team are still in developmental stages. And yes, we need to address the offensive holes soon. But this is a direction, and I approve of it, and I can be a little patient in waiting for the effects of it to make a difference.

I've been hearing speculation about Wayne's philosophy and his expected moves for a while now and I've been skeptical a lot of it. Sometimes I feel that people have subconsciously made up their mind about what he is going to do and base their opinions of him, either positive or negative, on things that he hasn't really proved yet through his own actions. For me, this signing is really the first move that, when considered with the others, shows a real direction that intends to take this team. How it pans out remains to be seen, and he must prove to me through other moves that he is addressing it correctly (starting pitching and shoring up the offense comes next). But I can say at this point that I do at least approve of the idea of the direction. And unless he makes some crackhead move that goes against it during the rest of this offseason, I will also give him a little more time on it, because it's a direction that requires time and patience to work.

Falls City Beer
11-18-2006, 07:40 PM
For me, this signing is really the first move that, when considered with the others, shows a real direction that intends to take this team.

Why do you say this?

vaticanplum
11-18-2006, 07:54 PM
Why do you say this?

Because there are both offensive and defensive holes on this team, and Krivsky zeroed in on a traditional defense position to address the latter problem. It's a very clear move with a very clear intention. It's also a move that has a high probability of panning out exactly as it was intended. Gonzalez's defense is going to be good; he's not at an age or a position where it is likely to significantly deteriorate over the next few years. And he's not going to give you a great bat. If his hitting stats improve in GABP, great; if not, no surprise. The sureness of the move, meaning that you are likely to get what you expected, makes it worth the money to me. Such was not the case with all those relief pitchers we brought in.

It's another reason why I think Dunn is likely to stay. Left field can be an "offensive" position. And EdE now seems firmly ensconsed at third and I expect him to improve there.

A lot of Krivsky's moves during the season led a lot of people to believe that he was going to be defense-centric, but I wasn't sold on it yet. Ross, for one; further, the other "defensive" moves were just not as clear (ie. Gary Majewski is not a surefire relief pitcher). Now it seems a little clearer to me. I don't think he was clearing out the offense in order to get rid of the offense on this team. I think he was clearing out certain players to build the team the way he wants to. I don't think that he intends to ignore the offense, but I do suspect he believes it can be gotten more cheaply and easily than defense, and I do suspect that offense to him may mean less power than "hitting" (which is not a bad idea given the Reds' younger players. As long as we keep dunn of course.)

That a very long answer which is usually what happens when I feel I'm not expressing my thoughts clearly, so I hope that makes sense.

reds44
11-18-2006, 07:55 PM
if he's an 8th place hitter it isn't as big a deal
Yep I agree, especially in the NL.

mth123
11-18-2006, 08:36 PM
I jumped all over Phillips' offensive game last year when they first acquired him, but just one look at the guy in the field told me he was not simply an upgrade over the bad that we've seen. He's a solidly above average 2nd baseman, IMO.


I'm not saying he's not good. I'm saying he has a lot of skills that would be just as good on the other side of the bag. The one skill he lacks is the one unique to 2B and that is turning the DP. Yet 2B is where he'll play while $15 Million was spent on an offensive downgrade for where he could have been.

Its a moot point now. The defense will be good and I'm happy about that and it does all hinge on Votto. 2008 should be a decent year. Dunn, Griffey, EE and Votto will provide offense at the corners and Phillips, Gonzalez and Deno provide defense up the middle, while Bailey replaces Milton to give the Reds a dominant starter to go with Arroyo and Harang. 2007 would be a surprise IMO.

The next order of business should be trading Freel as the central figure in a package for an undervalued (if that's possible anymore) number 3 starter and signing a 4th OF with some punch.

westofyou
11-18-2006, 08:44 PM
Glove man at a glove position... the horror.... the horror.

The game swings back and forth.

BTW: he can hit crappy pitching, he's .294/.324.449 in 136 ab's against the Reds in his career.

Cyclone792
11-18-2006, 08:51 PM
Just another FYI with Gonzalez's career batting splits ...


Alex Gonzalez Career Splits

Home: .241/.288/.387 (500 games)
Away: .251/.296/.396 (507 games)

Fenway: .274/.303/.391 (63 games)
Pro Player: .236/.285/.382 (446 games)
GABP: .353/.389/.588 (9 games)

vs. LHP: .248/.295/.408
vs. RHP: .245/.291/.387

Pre-All Star: .259/.304/.408
Post-All Star: .225/.273/.367

April: .250/.308/.397
May: .249/.290/.383
June: .275/.316/.436
July: .267/.300/.422
August: .209/.261/.349
September: .229/.277/.377

Don't get overly excited about the GABP line as it's only nine games, 36 total plate appearances, and they were against awful Reds pitching from 2003-2005.

The good news is his road batting stats are slightly better than his home batting stats, though not by much, and most of that is a reflection that Pro Player Stadium is a pitcher's ball park. Gonzalez was a regular for the Marlins from 1999-2005, and his home park factors each of those seasons was 89, 92, 92, 94, 86, 95, and 89. At Fenway Park last season, which is a hitter's park, he performed slightly better at the plate than he had during his time with the Marlins in Pro Player Stadium.

Historically, his two best months offensively have been June and July, and his two worst months offensively have been August and September.

Falls City Beer
11-18-2006, 08:52 PM
Glove man at a glove position... the horror.... the horror.

The game swings back and forth.

BTW: he can hit crappy pitching, he's .294/.324.449 in 136 ab's against the Reds in his career.

I could be mistaken, but I don't think anyone's called this move "bad."

oneupper
11-18-2006, 08:54 PM
Does this mean Clayton's not coming back? :D :D

Would it be unreasonable to think we can get .720 OPS out of AG?

What would Felipe Lopez have costed?

I like Alex Gonzalez, but I can't be too objective. He's a Venezuelan (as am I) and his name is Alex (yep).

While this signing might signal that Krivsky overvalues defense, it also shows that strikeout don't turn him off THAT much. Alex can K with the best of them.

Patrick Bateman
11-18-2006, 09:00 PM
I could be mistaken, but I don't think anyone's called this move "bad."

You'd be mistaken.

Falls City Beer
11-18-2006, 09:02 PM
You'd be mistaken.

It's not a great move. But provided he hits 8th it's not a bad move. It's unexciting.

Patrick Bateman
11-18-2006, 09:02 PM
Would it be unreasonable to think we can get .720 OPS out of AG?


I think that's fairly realistic OPS of Gonzo. With the GABP factored in for 81 games, somewhere around that level is pretty fair.

Patrick Bateman
11-18-2006, 09:03 PM
It's not a great move. But provided he hits 8th it's not a bad move. It's unexciting.

I'm just saying, there has been a fair share of "negative nellies" in this thread. :laugh:

Falls City Beer
11-18-2006, 09:13 PM
Face it FCB.... you never wanted Krivsky as our GM in the first place (and that is fine), and your "bias" against him would never allow you to give him any credit/due for anything he has done/accomplished. :lol:


I hear this a lot. But it doesn't become any less false the more it's repeated.

Patrick Bateman
11-18-2006, 09:19 PM
I hear this a lot. But it doesn't become any less false the more it's repeated.

I agree. You gave Krivsky full credit for Arroyo and Phillips. It's not a matter of a personal bias, you just for the most part disagree with the moves he makes, and sometimes I don't blame you.

traderumor
11-18-2006, 09:24 PM
The Reds' infield next season could be one of the absolute worst in Reds' history viz. offense (when you factor the almost-certain collapses of Hatteberg/Ross and the almost-certain jettisoning of Aurilia).

That's an incredibly real and exigent circumstance. (I'm not saying it won't be dealt with, but if it's not dealt with, this team will absolutely positively have a losing season next year).EE and Phillips? Maybe you can be wrong about Hatteberg two years running?

edabbs44
11-18-2006, 09:24 PM
I'm just saying, there has been a fair share of "negative nellies" in this thread. :laugh:

http://www.mrhall.org/rules/studenthand.gif

Aronchis
11-18-2006, 09:33 PM
The problem with Hatt is, he is old and hasn't put together 2 decent years running. He is also probably going to be injury prone. Griffey is injury prone to and a move to RF won't change that. They need another stick with pop in it and Votto can provide that, thus he is such a huge key. Lineup construction may be important, but so is power.

Considering the Reds still are looking for another starter and a closer, not much money is left for the bats. Votto probably is a key player in Krivsky's mind if the current offseason progression continues and Krivsky did say he was "impressed" with Votto's raw power................

mth123
11-18-2006, 09:35 PM
EE and Phillips? Maybe you can be wrong about Hatteberg two years running?

The problem that I see is that even if Hat repeats he doesn't give the offense what it needs. BTW Hat's slugging starting in 1998:

.446, .375, .435, .345, .433, .383, .420, .343, .436.

I can't say the pattern really means anything, but my expectations fit the pattern. Maybe a stat guru has an explanation.

westofyou
11-18-2006, 09:44 PM
Originally Posted by Falls City Beer View Post
The Reds' infield next season could be one of the absolute worst in Reds' history viz. offense (when you factor the almost-certain collapses of Hatteberg/Ross and the almost-certain jettisoning of Aurilia).

I could grab a mess of worst ones, I'll start with 1936, 50 years later was no great shakes either


PLAYER G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO SB CS AVG SLG OBA OPS
Lew Riggs 141 538 69 138 20 12 6 57 38 33 5 0 .257 .372 .314 .686
Les Scarsella 115 485 63 152 21 9 3 65 14 36 6 0 .313 .412 .335 .748
Alex Kampouris 122 355 43 85 10 4 5 46 24 46 3 0 .239 .332 .289 .622
Billy Myers 98 323 45 87 9 6 6 27 28 56 6 0 .269 .390 .328 .718



PLAYER G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO SB CS AVG SLG OBA OPS
Buddy Bell 155 568 89 158 29 3 20 75 73 49 2 8 .278 .445 .362 .807
Ron Oester 153 523 52 135 23 2 8 44 52 84 9 2 .258 .356 .325 .680
Nick Esasky 102 330 35 76 17 2 12 41 47 97 0 2 .230 .403 .325 .728
Dave Concepcion 90 311 42 81 13 2 3 30 26 43 13 2 .260 .344 .314 .658
Kurt Stillwell 104 279 31 64 6 1 0 26 30 47 6 2 .229 .258 .309 .567
Pete Rose 72 237 15 52 8 2 0 25 30 31 3 0 .219 .270 .316 .586
Barry Larkin 41 159 27 45 4 3 3 19 9 21 8 0 .283 .403 .320 .722

Cyclone792
11-18-2006, 09:45 PM
Some comments from SOSH posters since the Red Sox had Gonzalez last season and know all about him. From the comments I've read in the thread pasted below - and the comments I read in the Gold Glove thread when Jeter won it over Gonzalez - most Red Sox fans seemed to love Gonzalez's defensive abilities while hating his offensive game, and none of that is too terribly surprising given what we already know about Gonzalez.

BTW, Gonzalez was a Type B free agent and Boston will receive a sandwich draft pick in compensation. The signing will not cost the Reds a draft pick.

http://sonsofsamhorn.net/index.php?showtopic=12999&st=0


Fact is, Gonzo is perfect for the National League and although I will miss his defense, I won't that hole in the lineup.


There goes the best defensive shortstop (and by extention, the best defensive infield) the Sox have ever had.

Can't wait to hear the howls of outrage when Lugo's reprising Renteria at SS next summer.

Godspeed, Gonzo. Arroyo will benefit from your glove, and I hope you can help push the Reds into the playoff race.


Although Gonzo was the best fielder I have seen the Sox trot out to SS, I would not have been in favor of topping 3/14. That's a rather hefty chunk of change for a player with a career .684 OPS. Good luck in Cinci Gonzo. It was a pleasure watching your D for a season.


I don't know if Gonzo was worth $15 mil over 3 years but I will miss his defense. They should have signed him to a year or two extension during last season. Perdroia is not a full time shortstop and Lowrie is a year or two away. And that's if Lowrie can handle being a shortstop.


How can you not be ambivalent about the guy? Yes he has great hands. Great great hands. But his range isn't much better than average. He's a poor hitter. I think his VORP, value over a replacement player as a hitter was practically zero this last year. And his games played the last 3 years have gone like this. 159 in 2004, 130 in 2005 and 111 in 2006. Would you want to pay for the next number in that progression?


AGon is a solid player, but I hated his approach at the plate and his demeanor. The guy never looked happy on the field.

flyer85
11-18-2006, 09:47 PM
he filled a hole with a plug, that sums it up for me.