PDA

View Full Version : Per Marc's Blog...LaRue to Royals



NJReds
11-20-2006, 03:54 PM
link (http://frontier.cincinnati.com/blogs/spring/)


LaRue on the move

According to a baseball source, the Reds are on the verge of trading catcher Jason LaRue to the Kansas City Royals. The Reds will receive a player to be named later. I imagine they'll be sending some cash Kansas City's way, as well.

More when I get it.

Krusty
11-20-2006, 03:58 PM
Just getting out of his salary will be a relief.

NJReds
11-20-2006, 03:59 PM
The Hudson-LaRue battery is reunited!

Heath
11-20-2006, 04:01 PM
Just getting out of his salary will be a relief.

Might want to check the other part of the board for the answer to the above.

(By the way, I agree with you.)

redsmetz
11-20-2006, 04:08 PM
I guess Wayne will turn all "Chatty Cathy" on us at 4:30 when they've called a news conference to "announce" the Gonzalez and Stanton signings.

TOBTTReds
11-20-2006, 04:10 PM
This was also in there.


In addition, the Reds have added OF Chris Dickerson, RHP Calvin Medlock and RHP David Shafer to their 40-man roster.

RedLegSuperStar
11-20-2006, 04:53 PM
Updated from Marc...

LaRue on the move

According to a baseball source, the Reds are on the verge of trading catcher Jason LaRue to the Kansas City Royals. The Reds will receive a player to be named later. No cash involved in the deal.

In addition, the Reds have added OF Chris Dickerson, RHP Calvin Medlock and RHP David Shafer to their 40-man roster.

paintmered
11-20-2006, 04:53 PM
I guess Wayne will turn all "Chatty Cathy" on us at 4:30 when they've called a news conference to "announce" the Gonzalez and Stanton signings.

Yes, but he's no DanO in chattiness.

klw
11-20-2006, 04:55 PM
The Hudson-LaRue battery is reunited!

Unless Luke is the PTBNL:)

Falls City Beer
11-20-2006, 05:56 PM
Unless Luke is the PTBNL:)

Nah. Too young for Wayne.

TheBigLebowski
11-20-2006, 06:19 PM
This move pleases me.

MartyFan
11-20-2006, 06:20 PM
Now that Alou has signed with the Mets....does this open up more room to deal Junior or Dunn to the A's?

RBA
11-20-2006, 06:23 PM
Do the Royals have a over payed player they are trying to dump?

MrCinatit
11-20-2006, 06:27 PM
Wow, the Royals were willing to take on LaRue's contract?
This is a very good move, if this is true, IMHO.

Thanks for the memories, Jason.

Jr's Boy
11-20-2006, 06:28 PM
We need to snag Greinke if possible.

RedsManRick
11-20-2006, 06:36 PM
Now that Alou has signed with the Mets....does this open up more room to deal Junior or Dunn to the A's?

Not until Barroids lands somewhere. I think there's a decent shot he winds up in Oakland. That said, Griffey has full 10-5, so I'm not sure he'll go anywhere on the West coast, especially to a place that would DH him.

redsandrails
11-20-2006, 06:36 PM
Very nice move! This gives us a PTBNL (I'm not expecting much but could be something decent) and also covers all the salary by the Gonzalez signing and then some. So basically unless we get someone like R. Sanders or O. Perez in return then we will have almost a clean slate with offseason spending.

vaticanplum
11-20-2006, 06:41 PM
:(

I feel the same way about this as I did about the Casey trade. I know it needs to happen. But it still makes me quite a sad little Reds fan.

pedro
11-20-2006, 07:09 PM
Jason was one of my favorite Reds. I hope he does well for the Royals.

Chip R
11-20-2006, 07:43 PM
I think we're going to miss Jason a little more than we think. I don't think I really appreciated his defense till this season when I saw Ross fail to hang on to several throws on plays at the plate. The man may have been a streaky hitter but he had a gun and hung on to the throws even if he got creamed by the runner. You may not have liked how he called a game but Bench would have problems with the stiffs we had pitching for the last 5 years. I wish Jason nothing but the best in K.C. or elsewhere.

Wheelhouse
11-20-2006, 07:48 PM
BTW per Marc's blog--he amended it to say there IS cash involved. No #'s though.

flyer85
11-20-2006, 07:52 PM
BTW per Marc's blog--he amended it to say there IS cash involved. No #'s though.not a surprise. Hope WK gets a useful player back.

remdog
11-20-2006, 07:56 PM
Krivsky continues to disapoint me. Tradeing Ross was the move that made more sense---he's at peak value now but I don't expect him to match it next year. Valentin is simply a waste of roster space.

Trade LaRue and you lose your best defensive catcher (the only way to improve either of the other two is to roll the batting practice cage behind them during the game). We get nothing of value from the Royals (as if they had anything to give) and we sent cash also. Geez! :barf:

Rem

GAC
11-20-2006, 07:59 PM
Do the Royals have a over payed player they are trying to dump?

They do now! :lol:

On a more serious note: I wish Jason well.

OnBaseMachine
11-20-2006, 08:11 PM
I will miss you Jason - one of my favorite Reds of all-time. Krivsky better get something of value in return.

edabbs44
11-20-2006, 09:06 PM
I will miss you Jason - one of my favorite Reds of all-time. Krivsky better get something of value in return.

It all depends on the money...but PTBNLs aren't usually that great.

Mario-Rijo
11-20-2006, 09:52 PM
I read somewhere recently they were attempting to deal both Reggie Sanders and Emil Brown. I don't see Reggie as being disrespected enough to be a PTBNL but perhaps Emil Brown is.

flyer85
11-20-2006, 10:01 PM
I read somewhere recently they were attempting to deal both Reggie Sanders and Emil Brown. I don't see Reggie as being disrespected enough to be a PTBNL but perhaps Emil Brown is.could be but why would either one be a PTBNL?

MWM
11-20-2006, 10:05 PM
Jason was one of my favorite Reds. I hope he does well for the Royals.

Here here! Next to Barry, he's been my favorite Red in the last decade. He gave his heart and soul to this baseball team and was underappreciated by the masses in Cincinnati. There was never any doubt whether or not you were getting his best effort.

So long to a hell of a baseball player, a great clubhouse leader, and an even better guy. You'll be missed by this Reds fan.

Mario-Rijo
11-20-2006, 10:09 PM
11/20/2006 7:50 PM ET
Reds get player to be named for LaRue
Veteran backstop traded after difficult season in Cincinnati
By Mark Sheldon / MLB.com

Catcher Jason LaRue batted .260 with 14 homers and 60 RBIs for the Reds in 2005.

CINCINNATI -- Not surprisingly, catcher Jason LaRue's most trying season in Cincinnati was his final one.
Their longest-tenured player on the roster until Monday, the Reds traded LaRue to the Royals for a player to be named.

LaRue, who debuted with the Reds in 1999, batted .194 with eight home runs and 21 RBIs in 72 games in 2006. The 32-year-old backstop began the season on the disabled list after having arthroscopic surgery in March to repair torn cartilage in his right knee, and never got going offensively after he was activated.

By June, LaRue had lost his starting spot to David Ross, who had a breakout season. All of that contributed to why LaRue looked forward to his new start in Kansas City, and not back on the end of his career in Cincinnati.

"I think it's great," LaRue said from his home in Texas. "I'm happy that it happened."

Near the end of the season, LaRue made it clear he did not want to return to the Reds if he was going to be a backup. He will compete with incumbent John Buck for regular catching duties with the Royals, Kansas City general manager Dayton Moore said.

"I'm not a backup catcher at this point of my career," LaRue said. "I'm just not accepting that. I think it was their decision to play Ross and this is a great thing for me. Hopefully, it's great for the Reds too."

Under previous general manager Dan O'Brien, LaRue avoided arbitration when he signed a two-year, $9.1 million contract. Since he was dealt after Oct. 15, his deal calls for his 2007 salary to jump from $5.2 million to $5.45 million.

The Reds were successful at clearing LaRue's hefty salary off the books, but sent an undisclosed amount of cash to the Royals in the deal.

"The financial component is the piece that helps us out a little bit next year for [the] budget," Reds general manager Wayne Krivsky said.

Ross, who hit 21 homers this past season, and Javier Valentin will be the Reds' catchers in 2007.

"We're comfortable with that," Krivsky said.

A career .239 hitter, LaRue had one of his best offensive seasons in 2005 when he batted .260 with 14 homers and 60 RBIs. Over his eight-season career, he's thrown out 37 percent of attempted basestealers.

"I thanked him for all of his contributions on the field, as well as off the field," Krivsky said. "He did a lot of work in the community, was very accessible and accommodating to our marketing people. I wished him well and I hope it works out for him in Kansas City."

LaRue did not want to throw stones on the way out and did not complain about how he was handled.

"It's over and done with. It doesn't really matter anymore," LaRue said. "I won't bash people and I'll keep opinions to myself. I'm just excited to be going where I'm going."



He's not a backup, yet he is competing for a starting job with a young guy with a lot of upside?

Falls City Beer
11-20-2006, 10:11 PM
Here here! Next to Barry, he's been my favorite Red in the last decade. He gave his heart and soul to this baseball team and was underappreciated by the masses in Cincinnati. There was never any doubt whether or not you were getting his best effort.

So long to a hell of a baseball player, a great clubhouse leader, and an even better guy. You'll be missed by this Reds fan.

I don't put a ton of faith in intangibles, but whatever they are, Jason Larue's got 'em.

Mario-Rijo
11-20-2006, 10:12 PM
Originally posted by flyer85
could be but why would either one be a PTBNL?

My only possible guess would be that Dayton Moore agreed to hold on to said player until after the Rule V Draft. That's a longshot IMO but it's possible, maybe we agreed to give a few more bucks in the deal if they agreed to it. Like I said not likely but possible.

OldXOhio
11-20-2006, 10:40 PM
Here here! Next to Barry, he's been my favorite Red in the last decade. He gave his heart and soul to this baseball team and was underappreciated by the masses in Cincinnati. There was never any doubt whether or not you were getting his best effort.

So long to a hell of a baseball player, a great clubhouse leader, and an even better guy. You'll be missed by this Reds fan.

By this one as well. Nice post.

CougarQuest
11-20-2006, 10:47 PM
As rough as LaRue had it this year, I expect him to have a very good year next year.

I don't think he was worth $5.45 million ... well he might be in this goofy off-season but thats another horror story.

Personally, I'll miss him. I wish him all the luck in his future "home". I appreciated his hard-nosed style of play. And thats not taking anything away from Ross.

The "PTBNL" and how much money given to KC worries me. But its a long off-season with a lot more deals to go for Krivsky.

reds44
11-20-2006, 11:02 PM
Soliid move by Wayne.

Falls City Beer
11-20-2006, 11:02 PM
Soliid move by Wayne.

So you like the PTBNL?

reds44
11-20-2006, 11:04 PM
So you like the PTBNL?
I like getting rid of LaRue.

Falls City Beer
11-20-2006, 11:04 PM
I like getting rid of LaRue.

But you like keeping Griffey around (if I'm reading your sig correctly)?

reds44
11-20-2006, 11:06 PM
But you like keeping Griffey around (if I'm reading your sig correctly)?
No, I don't.

If we could trade Griffey, then I would do it in a heartbeat. At this point, I have a better chance if beung traded then Griffey.

vaticanplum
11-20-2006, 11:08 PM
At this point, I have a better chance if beung traded then Griffey.

We keep you around for the crack(s).

Jpup
11-21-2006, 06:40 AM
I don't like it.

Heath
11-21-2006, 07:02 AM
No, I don't.

If we could trade Griffey, then I would do it in a heartbeat. At this point, I have a better chance if beung traded then Griffey.

Nah, you young pups can get offered arbitration. :D

I wish there was no cash tossed in. I'd feel better about the deal. But, the contract's gone.

cincinnati chili
11-21-2006, 07:30 AM
I didn't hold LaRue in the same high regard as some of our leading posters here. He certainly had negative financial value last year, and I'm not surprised we had to pay somebody to take him off our hands.

Depending on the amount of cash, I almost certainly favor this move.

Moosie52
11-21-2006, 07:32 AM
Here here! Next to Barry, he's been my favorite Red in the last decade. He gave his heart and soul to this baseball team and was underappreciated by the masses in Cincinnati. There was never any doubt whether or not you were getting his best effort.

So long to a hell of a baseball player, a great clubhouse leader, and an even better guy. You'll be missed by this Reds fan.


Amen to that.

RFS62
11-21-2006, 07:47 AM
I didn't hold LaRue in the same high regard as some of our leading posters here. He certainly had negative financial value last year, and I'm not surprised we had to pay somebody to take him off our hands.

Depending on the amount of cash, I almost certainly favor this move.


Me either. I've never understood it, in fact.

Effort level, above reproach. Outside of his throwing game, the rest of his defense is pretty rough, IMO.

Caveat Emperor
11-21-2006, 08:37 AM
Me either. I've never understood it, in fact.

Effort level, above reproach. Outside of his throwing game, the rest of his defense is pretty rough, IMO.

He was a streaky player who could look among the best and the worst for weeks at a stretch. That kind of production doesn't play well in the court of public opinion, especially with a jury full of "what-have-you-done-for-me-lately" types like we have here in town.

Overall, LaRue was a good Red that put up better than league-average numbers for a catcher -- but I certainly won't shed much of a tear for his departure. The only part of this transaction that bothers me is the fact that it appears the Reds might be counting on Dave Ross now to replicate a career year. I don't put good odds on that happening.

NJReds
11-21-2006, 08:38 AM
FWIW, stolen base #'s vs. our catchers last year:

Ross: caught 14 of 31
Larue: caught 13 of 36
Valentin: caught 8 of 18

BuckWoody
11-21-2006, 08:48 AM
Mrs. Woody is not happy.

I agree that this one is similar to the Casey trade last year...the most important aspect is the loss of his salary, not what we might be getting in return. I admit to being a little confused about the ptbnl in the off-season, though.

RANDY IN INDY
11-21-2006, 09:24 AM
Me either. I've never understood it, in fact.

Effort level, above reproach. Outside of his throwing game, the rest of his defense is pretty rough, IMO.

Without a doubt. It is interesting how some players get no respect for intangibles while others are praised. To each his own. Although I liked the move better when no cash was involved, I applaud the move.

Heath
11-21-2006, 09:24 AM
Mrs. Woody is not happy.

So are the first 20,000 fans on July 2 who got a Jason LaRue John Deere hat.

RANDY IN INDY
11-21-2006, 09:26 AM
FWIW, stolen base #'s vs. our catchers last year:

Ross: caught 14 of 31
Larue: caught 13 of 36
Valentin: caught 8 of 18

If those numbers are accurate, that is eye opening.

registerthis
11-21-2006, 10:07 AM
If those numbers are accurate, that is eye opening.

Career CS%:

Jason laRue: 38.9% (145 of 401)
Javier Valentin: 33.7% (70 of 208)
David Ross: 39.7% (52 of 131)

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 10:14 AM
Career CS%:

Jason laRue: 38.9% (145 of 401)
Javier Valentin: 33.7% (70 of 208)
David Ross: 39.7% (52 of 131)

What I glean from that is that people attempt to steal on Ross more.

RedsManRick
11-21-2006, 10:19 AM
LaRue's reputation of having a cannon was borne out a few good years in '01 and '02. He's been pretty average since then, certainly not worth the extension unless matches his .260/.355/.452 line from 2005. Fact is that none of our catchers are defensive stars.

oneupper
11-21-2006, 10:23 AM
Don't know what it was, but I never felt good with LaRue coming up to hit in critical situations.
I feel exactly the opposite about Javy, and so-so about Ross.

dabvu2498
11-21-2006, 10:32 AM
What I glean from that is that people attempt to steal on Ross more.

It's real close to the same.

Ross = 131 attempts in 228 games behind the plate = .57 steal attempts per game, 1716.33 innings, 131 attempts = an attempt every 13.1 innings.

LaRue = 401 attempts in 680 games = .59 steal attempts per game, 5315.67 innings, 401 attempts = an attempt every 13.3 innings.

westofyou
11-21-2006, 10:35 AM
It's real close to the same.

Ross = 131 attempts in 228 games behind the plate = .57 steal attempts per game, 1716.33 innings, 131 attempts = an attempt every 13.1 innings.

LaRue = 401 attempts in 680 games = .59 steal attempts per game, 5315.67 innings, 401 attempts = an attempt every 13.3 innings.

Also factor in that they both caught 1 guy exclusively, both guys don't make it easy for the catcher, Harang's large and has mechanics that don't give him a quick delivery t the plate and Arroyo has the high leg kick and a litany of off speed stuff, not exactly the balls you want in your hand when the running is streaking to second.

RFS62
11-21-2006, 10:38 AM
Also factor in that they both caught 1 guy exclusively, both guys don't make it easy for the catcher, Harang's large and has mechanics that don't give him a quick delivery t the plate and Arroyo has the high leg kick and a litany of off speed stuff, not exactly the balls you want in your hand when the running is streaking to second.


True. I'd like to know their times to the plate, too, as well as Jason and Ross' release times.

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 10:38 AM
It's real close to the same.

Ross = 131 attempts in 228 games behind the plate = .57 steal attempts per game, 1716.33 innings, 131 attempts = an attempt every 13.1 innings.

LaRue = 401 attempts in 680 games = .59 steal attempts per game, 5315.67 innings, 401 attempts = an attempt every 13.3 innings.

Interesting.

Sea Ray
11-21-2006, 10:47 AM
As rough as LaRue had it this year, I expect him to have a very good year next year.



I doubt he'll have a good year. At best he'll play because the team is so devoid of talent. So he's not a backup? Well let's see if he can start on the 29th best team in the majors. If he does then it's like Jon Kitna starting for the Detroit Lions.

Take this as a challenge Jason. Prove me wrong.

RANDY IN INDY
11-21-2006, 10:57 AM
The running game is not nearly as prevalent as it once was, and while having a great arm as a catcher is a wonderful thing, it is not nearly as important as it was in years past. Just my opinion.

Heath
11-21-2006, 11:01 AM
The running game is not nearly as prevalent as it once was, and while having a great arm as a catcher is a wonderful thing, it is not nearly as important as it was in years past. Just my opinion.

Good call Randy, the new prime directive of the catcher is to make sure he can read the signs from the bench coach and make sure the ball doesn't go to the wall.

It's not the position it was 10 years ago.

westofyou
11-21-2006, 11:02 AM
The running game is not nearly as prevalent as it once was, and while having a great arm as a catcher is a wonderful thing, it is not nearly as important as it was in years past. Just my opinion.

Exactly, look at the catcher from the 50's same story, they could hit but no one was running so that wasn't a big part of their game.

A good example of a guy who got caught in the change to the running game was Ed Baily, he good hit and his arm was average. Once was traded his arm vanished and with Maury Wills down the coast the Giants could not afford to start him anymore.

Patrick Bateman
11-21-2006, 11:58 AM
From the Kansas City Star: http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/sports/16062708.htm

"The Royals are picking up roughly $2.5 million of LaRue’s $5.45 million salary for 2006. He is completing a two-year deal signed last December for $9.1 million that included a $250,000 bonus if traded."

So we are basically paying 3M of LaRue's salary. To me LaRue is worth about 4M on the open market for 1 season, so we better get some kind of decent PTBNL for this trade to be worth dealing LaRue. Otherwise, we're just underselling him.

Cedric
11-21-2006, 11:59 AM
From the Kansas City Star: http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/sports/16062708.htm

"The Royals are picking up roughly $2.5 million of LaRueís $5.45 million salary for 2006. He is completing a two-year deal signed last December for $9.1 million that included a $250,000 bonus if traded."

So we are basically paying 3M of LaRue's salary. To me LaRue is worth about 4M on the open market for 1 season, so we better get some kind of decent PTBNL for this trade to be worth dealing LaRue. Otherwise, we're just underselling him.

I heard Wayne on an interview and I could have sworn he said 3.5 million to KC. Not much difference though.

BRM
11-21-2006, 12:01 PM
So, the Reds are only $2M to $2.5M richer after the deal. Ho-hum.

Ltlabner
11-21-2006, 12:01 PM
I don't think LaRue really has much value as a +30 catcher and his other issues. But in this market I would have like to have seen the Royals pick up far more of the tab. I don't have a specific number in mind other than "more". At the very least, more than what the Reds are paying.

Cedric
11-21-2006, 12:04 PM
I don't think LaRue really has much value as a +30 catcher and his other issues. But in this market I would have like to have seen the Royals pick up far more of the tab. I don't have a specific number in mind other than "more". At the very least, more than what the Reds are paying.

I thought it would be a miracle if anyone picked up ANY of his salary. Jason is 33 years old and coming off a disastrous season. He couldn't have had much value.

I don't think Krivsky had much of a choice in this deal. I bet Larue and his agent let it be known that there was no way he wasn't going to cause a stink this year.

I can't blame them, his career is almost over.

LoganBuck
11-21-2006, 12:06 PM
Ouch, that trade looks even worse with that pile of cash. They better get at least a useful prospect.

remdog
11-21-2006, 12:42 PM
By Cedric: "I bet Larue and his agent let it be known that there was no way he wasn't going to cause a stink this year."

Clairvoyant, are you?

Neither LaRue nor his agent had to 'cause a stink'. Jason is getting paid and all he had to do was wait for Ross and himself to revert to career norms and he's the starter. If that doesn't happen then why put yourself through a trade if your 'career is almost over'?

Rem

Cedric
11-21-2006, 12:55 PM
By Cedric: "I bet Larue and his agent let it be known that there was no way he wasn't going to cause a stink this year."

Clairvoyant, are you?

Neither LaRue nor his agent had to 'cause a stink'. Jason is getting paid and all he had to do was wait for Ross and himself to revert to career norms and he's the starter. If that doesn't happen then why put yourself through a trade if your 'career is almost over'?

Rem

From CincinnatiReds.com


Near the end of the season, LaRue made it clear he did not want to return to the Reds if he was going to be a backup. He will compete with incumbent John Buck for regular catching duties with the Royals, Kansas City general manager Dayton Moore said.

"I'm not a backup catcher at this point of my career," LaRue said. "I'm just not accepting that. I think it was their decision to play Ross and this is a great thing for me. Hopefully, it's great for the Reds too."


Doesn't sound like a guy willing to wait for Ross to revert to his career norms.

Puffy
11-21-2006, 01:01 PM
From the Kansas City Star: http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/sports/16062708.htm

"The Royals are picking up roughly $2.5 million of LaRueís $5.45 million salary for 2006. He is completing a two-year deal signed last December for $9.1 million that included a $250,000 bonus if traded."

So we are basically paying 3M of LaRue's salary. To me LaRue is worth about 4M on the open market for 1 season, so we better get some kind of decent PTBNL for this trade to be worth dealing LaRue. Otherwise, we're just underselling him.

Well, my opinion on this trade just went to "blech" - like AK said that could change depending on whats coming back as the PTBNL, but as of right now its blech.

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 01:01 PM
From CincinnatiReds.com


Near the end of the season, LaRue made it clear he did not want to return to the Reds if he was going to be a backup. He will compete with incumbent John Buck for regular catching duties with the Royals, Kansas City general manager Dayton Moore said.

"I'm not a backup catcher at this point of my career," LaRue said. "I'm just not accepting that. I think it was their decision to play Ross and this is a great thing for me. Hopefully, it's great for the Reds too."


Doesn't sound like a guy willing to wait for Ross to revert to his career norms.

Then the Reds have just paid $2.5 million for "peace in the locker room."

It's not like Larue had a choice BUT to sit behind Ross next season. It's either that or no paycheck.

Cedric
11-21-2006, 01:02 PM
Then the Reds have just paid $2.5 million for "peace in the locker room."

It's not like Larue had a choice BUT to sit behind Ross next season. It's either that or no paycheck.

I won't really argue that.

It depends on the player in return also. Though I'm not holding my breath.

RFS62
11-21-2006, 01:04 PM
If anything, the money proves even more that he just isn't in Krivsky's plans for this year. His salary was already a sunk cost, why not try to get anything we can if we're not going to use him?

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 01:05 PM
I won't really argue that.

It depends on the player in return also. Though I'm not holding my breath.

And I'm saying if they have $2.5 to pi$$ away, then they've got money enough to get some real traction in the pitching market.

Puffy
11-21-2006, 01:15 PM
If anything, the money proves even more that he just isn't in Krivsky's plans for this year. His salary was already a sunk cost, why not try to get anything we can if we're not going to use him?

But if its a sunk cost then why not keep him around - then if the inevitable injury occurs this spring to some unlucky teams starting catcher - bingo, bango boingo there's LaRue w/ value again.

RFS62
11-21-2006, 01:24 PM
But if its a sunk cost then why not keep him around - then if the inevitable injury occurs this spring to some unlucky teams starting catcher - bingo, bango boingo there's LaRue w/ value again.


Takes up a roster spot and adds friction to the clubhouse. Plus, any deal at all gets some monetary relief.

VR
11-21-2006, 01:34 PM
Then the Reds have just paid $2.5 million for "peace in the locker room."

It's not like Larue had a choice BUT to sit behind Ross next season. It's either that or no paycheck.

Looks to me like the Reds just saved 2.5M to get peace in the locker room. The fact that he went to the Royals to compete with Buck should clearly clarify his value to the rest of the league. The Reds just got rid of at least part of an atrocious contract....and lost no production in doing so.

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 01:36 PM
Looks to me like the Reds just saved 2.5M to get peace in the locker room. The fact that he went to the Royals to compete with Buck should clearly clarify his value to the rest of the league. The Reds just got rid of at least part of an atrocious contract....and lost no production in doing so.

Why can't they spend 4.5 million to send Milton to some other team--and REALLY help the team? Probably because they're more interested in "peace" than "winning." (cf. the refusal to move Griffey).

VR
11-21-2006, 01:56 PM
Why can't they spend 4.5 million to send Milton to some other team--and REALLY help the team? Probably because they're more interested in "peace" than "winning." (cf. the refusal to move Griffey).

I'm not sure they can't. But Milty can fill a need as a 4th or 5th starter as well.....despite being overpaid to do so. An overpaid catcher isn't as ideal.

dfs
11-21-2006, 02:00 PM
If anything, the money proves even more that he just isn't in Krivsky's plans for this year. His salary was already a sunk cost, why not try to get anything we can if we're not going to use him?

As already mentioned there is the off chance that somebody gets hurt. The reds now have to get a AAAA type catcher.

While many here decried the three headed catching beast. It did allow Narron the freedom to use Valentin and Ross as pinch hitters. Now the need to add somebody with some thump to the bench becomes a bit more pressing. Between Crosby, Castro, Denorfia and Hopper you've got nobody on the bench who has a decent chance to drive in a run.

I find myself in the odd position of defending LaRue's usefullness to the team. It's a strange spot for me to be in.

So they saved 3 million and a roster spot, but in order to fill the organizational holes left by LaRue's departure it will likely take two roster spots and more than half of that "savings."

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 02:14 PM
But Milty can fill a need as a 4th or 5th starter as well.....

Come on. You don't really mean that.

Scrap Irony
11-21-2006, 02:20 PM
Ross was, last season, a AAAA catcher. They can be found. And cheaply.

Speaking of a PTBNL, my guess is 25-year-old Thomas Duenas. Excellent numbers in a limited number of games in High A, but he's supposed to be raking on them. He's 25.

Not a bad gamble. But a gamble nonetheless.

Patrick Bateman
11-21-2006, 02:25 PM
Ross was, last season, a AAAA catcher. They can be found. And cheaply.

Speaking of a PTBNL, my guess is 25-year-old Thomas Duenas. Excellent numbers in a limited number of games in High A, but he's supposed to be raking on them. He's 25.

Not a bad gamble. But a gamble nonetheless.

I wonder if there's any chance we could get Justin Huber. KC may not mind parting with him after trading for Shealy (and still have Sweeney).

corkedbat
11-21-2006, 02:33 PM
I really don't like the deal now that I know we're kickinng in that much cash. I want a decent high level prospect or two very good lower level prospects in return for that kind of cash.

Not expecting much though. All I've seen from Krivsky's deals is massive medioocrity so far. Hope he surprises me soon and changes my mind. Not holding my breath though.

VR
11-21-2006, 02:41 PM
Come on. You don't really mean that.


Sadly, #'s say he was in the upper echelon of #4 & #5 starters...by most metrics. Sadly also....he was in the upper echelon of salaries for that same set as well.

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 02:46 PM
Sadly, #'s say he was in the upper echelon of #4 & #5 starters...by most metrics. Sadly also....he was in the upper echelon of salaries for that same set as well.


I don't know about the salaries, and I don't care.

What I take issue with is the idea that a guy with a .830 OPSA the last two seasons is considered valuable anything.

I detest that notion, and think that a good team wouldn't tolerate that as a way of going about business.

TRF
11-21-2006, 02:54 PM
Baseball is a funny game. So much emphasis on power, that the SB has been devalued. doesn't mean they are going away.

Last year the NL racked up 1515 SB's the last time they had that many was 2002, 1514 SB's in 2003 SB's hit a low of 1294, but have been steadily increasing every year. The AL has hovered in the 1200's for 5 of the last 6 years. I'm thinking in a league that doesn't run, LaRue will stand out even more than he would in the NL, while Ross' defensive stiffness will be exposed more.

Jose Reyes, BP and Freel, FeLo, Pierre, Hanley Ramirez, Dave Roberts. Guys are running in the NL again. And when they smell the weakness that is behind the plate on A lot of teams, they'll run more.

FeLo had 44 SB's this year. What was that stat Steel came up with? Speed adjusted OPS?

Ltlabner
11-21-2006, 02:55 PM
What I take issue with is the idea that a guy with a .830 OPSA the last two seasons is considered valuable anything.

I detest that notion, and think that a good team wouldn't tolerate that as a way of going about business.

Does that mean then, by definition, that any team with a starting pitcher with an .830 OPSA is a "bad" team?

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 02:57 PM
Does that mean then, by definition, that any team with a starting pitcher with an .830 OPSA is a "bad" team?

It's not a "smart" team. And yes, that includes Boston with Clement. Why that team doesn't cut their losses with him, I'll never know.

But the point isn't to say whether a team is "bad" as a result, but to deal with each move on its own merits--and the business model that says keeping someone like Milton around is smart is just wrong.

Ltlabner
11-21-2006, 03:02 PM
It's not a "smart" team. And yes, that includes Boston with Clement. Why that team doesn't cut their losses with him, I'll never know.

But the point isn't to say whether a team is "bad" as a result, but to deal with each move on its own merits--and the business model that says keeping someone like Milton around is smart is just wrong.

I think sometimes teams realize they made a bad move or have a player who has hit the wall and they try to hang in hopes of squeezing "something of value" (whatever that "value" might be). In many cases it's that or litterally putting a match to a huge pile of cash. While it's easy for us arm-chair types to say, "flush the money" it's no so easy in real life, when you are managing someone elses money or (worst case) it's your own money.

The ballancing act is deciding that you'll get "at least something" vs "it's time to just take the loss".

Until this year, I think it would have been difficult to flush Milton's money and still have to spend money to get another #3. With BC and Kriv around....I'm not so sure they woln't find a way around the problem.

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 03:06 PM
I think sometimes teams realize they made a bad move or have a player who has hit the wall and they try to hang in hopes of squeezing "something of value" (whatever that "value" might be). In many cases it's that or litterally putting a match to a huge pile of cash. While it's easy for us arm-chair types to say, "flush the money" it's no so easy in real life, when you are managing someone elses money or (worst case) it's your own money.

The ballancing act is deciding that you'll get "at least something" vs "it's time to just take the loss".

Until this year, I think it would have been difficult to flush Milton's money and still have to spend money to get another #3. With BC and Kriv around....I'm not so sure they woln't find a way around the problem.

The Reds just "flushed" $3 million on dumping Larue--a player who at worst is a neutral asset, and highly likely to be a positive asset with more playing time.

VR
11-21-2006, 03:11 PM
I don't know about the salaries, and I don't care.

What I take issue with is the idea that a guy with a .830 OPSA the last two seasons is considered valuable anything.

I detest that notion, and think that a good team wouldn't tolerate that as a way of going about business.


Based on OPSA.....Milty would have been the Cards 3rd best starter this year....just missing Suppan by .016.

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 03:14 PM
Based on OPSA.....Milty would have been the Cards 3rd best starter this year....just missing Suppan by .016.

I looked it up: Milton's OPSA over the last two seasons was .850, not .830.

Ltlabner
11-21-2006, 03:24 PM
The Reds just "flushed" $3 million on dumping Larue--a player who at worst is a neutral asset, and highly likely to be a positive asset with more playing time.

Well, I guess we'll have to dissagree on a 30+ catcher comming off a knee injury and a horrable year as a "neutral" asset. Catching is a brutal position, is this knee injury the start of his body breaking down? Hard to say so I wouldn't call that a "highly likely" possibility of being a positive asset. One additional injury that knocks him out for a chunck of the 2007 season and you've flushed his entire contract, not just the $3m. Throw in a carear .740 OPS and two far less expensive options in the wings and I'd say that Krivsky was willing to risk that LaRue wasn't going to rebound and be worth the remaining $5m.

Until this point, there hasn't been such a scenario for Milton. There's been no better options waiting in the wings (except your close personal friends Mr. Lizzard and Mr Loshe) and no extra cash to play with to go get another arm after burning the millions left on his contract. Big difference.

Jpup
11-21-2006, 03:25 PM
I didn't like it yesterday and I don't like it even more today. :bang:

BRM
11-21-2006, 03:26 PM
I still would have liked to see what selling high on Ross would have netted the Reds.

VR
11-21-2006, 03:27 PM
I looked it up: Milton's OPSA over the last two seasons was .850, not .830.

Right. .890 last year. 790 last year.

I'm going to say 2005 was a career year, and 2006 he got back closer to career norms.
If he can regain strength in his knee, he's a decent option at #4, maybe even #3 compared to the league.

Yes, I'd love to see his contract gone.....but he's got a lot more value to the current team than LaRue did.

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 03:28 PM
Until this point, there hasn't been such a scenario for Milton. There's been no better options waiting in the wings (except your close personal friends Mr. Lizzard and Mr Loshe) and no extra cash to play with to go get another arm after burning the millions left on his contract. Big difference.

Hell, turn over a rock and find Milton-level "production." A difference of $1.5 million between dumping Larue and Milton isn't "big."

Ltlabner
11-21-2006, 03:31 PM
Hell, turn over a rock and find Milton-level "production." A difference of $1.5 million between dumping Larue and Milton isn't "big."

They did turn over rocks and turned up Loshe, Lizzard, Mays, et al. And you didn't like any of them either.

$1.5 million difference? Miltons contract is more like $12m/yr isn't it?

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 03:31 PM
Right. .890 last year. 790 last year.

I'm going to say 2005 was a career year, and 2006 he got back closer to career norms.
If he can regain strength in his knee, he's a decent option at #4, maybe even #3 compared to the league.

Yes, I'd love to see his contract gone.....but he's got a lot more value to the current team than LaRue did.


As has been mentioned ad infinitum, Milton's knee condition is degenerative, not recoverable.

He's the ultimate candidate for cutting your losses.

Milton's a negative value. You can argue all you want that Larue is, too, whatever. But I am doggedly sticking to the TRUTH that Milton HURTS this team. An .800 OPSA with 30 homers surrendered in 150 innings last year HURTS the team. Period.

BRM
11-21-2006, 03:32 PM
They did turn over rocks and turned up Loshe, Lizzard, Mays, et al. And you didn't like any of them either.

$1.5 million difference? Miltons contract is more like $12m/yr isn't it?

Milton is due $9M in 2007.

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 03:32 PM
They did turn over rocks and turned up Loshe, Lizzard, Mays, et al. And you didn't like any of them either.

$1.5 million difference? Miltons contract is more like $12m/yr isn't it?

$9 million a season for Milton

So what, they don't know how to locate talent: what else is new?

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 03:33 PM
I still would have liked to see what selling high on Ross would have netted the Reds.

Me too.

VR
11-21-2006, 04:01 PM
As has been mentioned ad infinitum, Milton's knee condition is degenerative, not recoverable.

He's the ultimate candidate for cutting your losses.

Milton's a negative value. You can argue all you want that Larue is, too, whatever. But I am doggedly sticking to the TRUTH that Milton HURTS this team. An .800 OPSA with 30 homers surrendered in 150 innings last year HURTS the team. Period.

I too want a #4 with a sub .800 ops. As the World Champion Cardinals have proven....it's tough to even get a sup .800 #3 starter. Stats unfortunately trump personal feelings. It's reality in baseball.

reds44
11-21-2006, 04:33 PM
Some Reds fans will complain about anything.

We got rid of our 3rd catcher and are saving between 2 and 3 mil in the process. LaRue hit below .200 last year and is on the wrong side of 30. I really doubt we could have gotten anything of worth for any of our catchers.

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 04:35 PM
I too want a #4 with a sub .800 ops. As the World Champion Cardinals have proven....it's tough to even get a sup .800 #3 starter. Stats unfortunately trump personal feelings. It's reality in baseball.

Well, you're making the necessary correlation that it's not a bad idea to cobble together a team with .800 + OPSA pitchers because of the Cardinals' success. But you're ignoring that the Cards had a much better bullpen, a better offense, and much better defense.

Just because a team lucked into a postseason berth, and hit their stride in October doesn't mean it isn't bad business to have a guy like Milton in your rotation. Especially when you don't HAVE to.

Ron Madden
11-21-2006, 04:39 PM
Some Reds fans will complain about anything.

We got rid of our 3rd catcher and are saving between 2 and 3 mil in the process. LaRue hit below .200 last year and is on the wrong side of 30. If you think we were going to get anything for LaRue, Javy, or Ross you are insane.

Well then, call me crazy. ;)

I'd like to see what we could've got in return for David Ross.

Puffy
11-21-2006, 04:42 PM
Some Reds fans will complain about anything.

We got rid of our 3rd catcher and are saving between 2 and 3 mil in the process. LaRue hit below .200 last year and is on the wrong side of 30. If you think we were going to get anything for LaRue, Javy, or Ross you are insane.

Wow, I'm insane - gee, thanks for letting me know!

reds44
11-21-2006, 04:46 PM
Wow, I'm insane - gee, thanks for letting me know!
What do you think we could have gotten for him?

Puffy
11-21-2006, 04:50 PM
What do you think we could have gotten for him?

For picking up over half of his salary, I'm not sure. I'm waiting to see what comes back as the PTBNL.

But I do think an average to above average offensive catcher who plays good defense and who has tread on the tires left had some value, as opposed to you who had stated he had no value.

Heck, if they paid none of his salary and got back a bag of balls that would be value to me. But trading him, picking up more than half his salary and getting a bag of balls back - he has more value than that, IMO.

Then again, I might be insane ;)

Patrick Bateman
11-21-2006, 04:56 PM
For picking up over half of his salary, I'm not sure. I'm waiting to see what comes back as the PTBNL.

But I do think an average to above average offensive catcher who plays good defense and who has tread on the tires left had some value, as opposed to you who had stated he had no value.

Heck, if they paid none of his salary and got back a bag of balls that would be value to me. But trading him, picking up more than half his salary and getting a bag of balls back - he has more value than that, IMO.

Then again, I might be insane ;)

Good post. I guess I'm insane too.

One bad year from a catcher with a history of good years is well worth the risk of paying him 4-5M for 1 season. He was close to being worth the contract he had. Dealing him and eating little would have been fair market.

The fact that we are eating 3M better lead to a decent player in return.

And a question for reds44: if we are only going to look at LaRue's 1 bad year, why don't we just look at Ross' 1 season? Shouldn't he have tremendous trade value based on his 1 good season?

VR
11-21-2006, 04:59 PM
Well, you're making the necessary correlation that it's not a bad idea to cobble together a team with .800 + OPSA pitchers because of the Cardinals' success. But you're ignoring that the Cards had a much better bullpen, a better offense, and much better defense.

Just because a team lucked into a postseason berth, and hit their stride in October doesn't mean it isn't bad business to have a guy like Milton in your rotation. Especially when you don't HAVE to.

Not sure of the list of sub .800 ops guys that are sitting out there?

Again, I want to get rid of Milty. The law of averages says he will be replaced as #5 or #4 by someone with worse #'s.....but at least they'll be cheaper. (unless DanO was around, of course)

reds44
11-21-2006, 05:01 PM
Good post. I guess I'm insane too.

One bad year from a catcher with a history of good years is well worth the risk of paying him 4-5M for 1 season. He was close to being worth the contract he had. Dealing him and eating little would have been fair market.

The fact that we are eating 3M better lead to a decent player in return.

And a question for reds44: if we are only going to look at LaRue's 1 bad year, why don't we just look at Ross' 1 season? Shouldn't he have tremendous trade value based on his 1 good season?
No. Why would Ross have tremendous trade value?

LaRue is a 32 year old catcher with a career .740 OPS. For some reason, I think we will live without him this year.

Talk about Ross' career year, but he actually has a better career OPS (.782) and is 3 years younger. He is also not making 5M.

And you can talk about his defense all you want, but look at what Ross did to Arroyo. It ovbiously wasn't all Ross, but I would guess he played some part in Arroyo's improvement.

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 05:01 PM
The law of averages says he will be replaced as #5 or #4 by someone with worse #'s.....but at least they'll be cheaper. (unless DanO was around, of course)

Why? I think that if you have a shred of intelligence/eye for pitchers you can find a guy who won't give you a +.800 OPSA. Or do what a lot of smart teams do: cobble their 5th spot together with guys.

The Brewers. The bloody BREWERS didn't have to endure a starter of Milton's awfulness last season. Not a one.

I might grant you that Milton might represent a 5th starter, but certainly not the average 4th starter. And certainly not what you would be likely to get by patchworking the 5th spot with several hot hands.

To keep sending Milton out there start after to start to surrender 30 bleepin' homers in 150 innings is crazy.

Patrick Bateman
11-21-2006, 05:09 PM
No. Why would Ross have tremendous trade value?

LaRue is a 32 year old catcher with a career .740 OPS. For some reason, I think we will live without him this year.

Talk about Ross' career year, but he actually has a better career OPS (.782) and is 3 years younger. He is also not making 5M.

And you can talk about his defense all you want, but look at what Ross did to Arroyo. It ovbiously wasn't all Ross, but I would guess he played some part in Arroyo's improvement.

My point is not to look at 1 year's worth of data. You say LaRue is basically worthless because of 1 off-season after many years worth of being an above average starter. Why shouldn't we use the same qualifications for Ross?

Based on 1 year he was one of the best catchers in baseball last season. That's why we look past 1 year's worth of data.

reds44
11-21-2006, 05:20 PM
My point is not to look at 1 year's worth of data. You say LaRue is basically worthless because of 1 off-season after many years worth of being an above average starter. Why shouldn't we use the same qualifications for Ross?

Based on 1 year he was one of the best catchers in baseball last season. That's why we look past 1 year's worth of data.
And looking past 1 year of Data (5 for Ross and 8 for LaRue) Ross has been the better offensive player.

Do you think LaRue should start over Ross next year? If not, LaRue basically demanded a trade unless he is the starter.

Red Leader
11-21-2006, 05:24 PM
The Reds' just traded Jason LaRue (at a $2.5M contract with 1 year remaining before he becomes a F.A.) for a minor league prospect.

If that prospect isn't pretty good, it's a real bad trade.

Puffy
11-21-2006, 05:29 PM
The Reds' just traded Jason LaRue (at a $2.5M contract with 1 year remaining before he becomes a F.A.) for a minor league prospect.

If that prospect isn't pretty good, it's a real bad trade.

Dude - you're insane.

:mooner:

TRF
11-21-2006, 05:29 PM
And you can talk about his defense all you want, but look at what Ross did to Arroyo. It ovbiously wasn't all Ross, but I would guess he played some part in Arroyo's improvement.

I'd say switching leagues and building stamina as a starter to post his second straight 200+ ip season did a heckuva lot more than Ross did.

reds44
11-21-2006, 05:30 PM
I have now concluded that nothing Wayne Krivsky does, unless we completely rob somebody in a deal, will make redszone happy.

We are complaining about trading a catcher making 5M dollar, who hit below .200 last year, who has an career OPS below .750, who basically demanded to be traded unless he was the starter, and who most people begged Krivsky to dump during last year.

Patrick Bateman
11-21-2006, 05:33 PM
And looking past 1 year of Data (5 for Ross and 8 for LaRue) Ross has been the better offensive player.

Do you think LaRue should start over Ross next year? If not, LaRue basically demanded a trade unless he is the starter.

Hardly 5 years of data for Ross. He has 671 career at-bats. LaRue has over 2000 career at-bats.

LaRue has had exactly one bad season in his last 5 (and he's been the starter all of those years).

Ross had done basically nothing in the majors coming into this season. He's a mortal lock to regress with LaRue on the opposite side of the spectrum.

My point is this: you said LaRue has no value and you based this on 1 season's worth of stats, and on the same token you said Ross/Valentine have no value, yet I'm guessing you base this on more than 1 season. The reason they have limited value is because they haven't been very good catchers in their career.

So how come you judge LaRue on one season, while jugding Ross on his entire career? It can't work both ways.

reds44
11-21-2006, 05:37 PM
Hardly 5 years of data for Ross. He has 671 career at-bats. LaRue has over 2000 career at-bats.

LaRue has had exactly one bad season in his last 5 (and he's been the starter all of those years).

Ross had done basically nothing in the majors coming into this season. He's a mortal lock to regress with LaRue on the opposite side of the spectrum.

My point is this: you said LaRue has no value and you based this on 1 season's worth of stats, and on the same token you said Ross/Valentine have no value, yet I'm guessing you base this on more than 1 season. The reason they have limited value is because they haven't been very good catchers in their career.

So how come you judge LaRue on one season, while jugding Ross on his entire career? It can't work both ways.
You're right. The .194 catcher who strikes out alot has alot of trading value.

LaRue has to improve, if his .194 batting average goes down he won't be in the majors past next season. So I guess you're right, he has nowhere to go but up.

Puffy
11-21-2006, 05:38 PM
I have now concluded that nothing Wayne Krivsky does, unless we completely rob somebody in a deal, will make redszone happy.

We are complaining about trading a catcher making 5M dollar, who hit below .200 last year, who has an career OPS below .750, who basically demanded to be traded unless he was the starter, and who most people begged Krivsky to dump during last year.

*sigh*

We have articulated the reasons why we don't like the trade. Much for the same reasons we stated last year right around this same time why a lot of us hated the Casey trade. And most of us got the same criticism back then - you guys will never like any trade.

And guess who was right. It has nothing to do with trading Casey or LaRue - it all has to do with the return. I have no problem whatsoever with trading LaRue - heck, I'd be the first to drive him out of Roy's neighborhood to Kansas City. It all has to do with the return. The Reds have few chips - getting rid of one just to get rid of one because he "demanded it" matters very little to me.

And by the way, we traded a catcher making 5M for an empty roster spot making 3M. Oh joy.

reds44
11-21-2006, 05:40 PM
*sigh*

We have articulated the reasons why we don't like the trade. Much for the same reasons we stated last year right around this same time why a lot of us hated the Casey trade. And most of us got the same criticism back then - you guys will never like any trade.

And guess who was right. It has nothing to do with trading Casey or LaRue - it all has to do with the return. I have no problem whatsoever with trading LaRue - heck, I'd be the first to drive him out of Roy's neighborhood to Kansas City. It all has to do with the return. The Reds have few chips - getting rid of one just to get rid of one because he "demanded it" matters very little to me.

And by the way, we traded a catcher making 5M for an empty roster spot making 3M. Oh joy.
Alot of people hated the Arroyo trade, and we saw how that worked out.

I don't think the Reds missed Casey all that much last year. The RA/Hatteberg platoon did just fine. Anyways, it's not like Casey hit below .200 the year before we traded him, so it's not really comparable. Not to mention that Wayne wasn't the one who made that trade.

LaRue did more bad then good for the Reds last year.

Puffy
11-21-2006, 05:46 PM
Alot of people hated the Arroyo trade, and we saw how that worked out.

I don't think the Reds missed Casey all that much last year. The RA/Hatteberg platoon did just fine. Anyways, it's not like Casey hit below .200 the year before we traded him, so it's not really comparable.

LaRue did more bad then good for the Reds last year.

Again, not the point.

The point is the Reds have needs - in order to address those needs you need assets. Assets can either be players or money. The Reds potentially got none of one back (player who we don't know yet) and very little of the other (a 2M savings - that won't even get you Mike Stanton this offseason).

This is about assets. If the Reds traded LaRue and got 5M in relief I would have loved the trade. But they didn't. They got 2M. Big difference in today's market.

And Larue's stats for the last three years:


Year Ag Tm Lg G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA OBP SLG TB SH SF IBB HBP GDP
+--------------+---+----+----+----+---+--+---+----+---+--+---+---+-----+-----+-----+----+---+---+---+---+---+
2004 30 CIN NL 114 390 46 98 24 2 14 55 0 2 26 108 .251 .334 .431 168 2 3 5 24 7
2005 31 CIN NL 110 361 38 94 27 0 14 60 0 0 41 101 .260 .355 .452 163 5 2 7 13 8
2006 32 CIN NL 72 191 22 37 5 0 8 21 1 0 27 51 .194 .317 .346 66 3 1 9 8 3

Patrick Bateman
11-21-2006, 05:47 PM
I have now concluded that nothing Wayne Krivsky does, unless we completely rob somebody in a deal, will make redszone happy.

We are complaining about trading a catcher making 5M dollar, who hit below .200 last year, who has an career OPS below .750, who basically demanded to be traded unless he was the starter, and who most people begged Krivsky to dump during last year.


A career OPS of .740 may not seem great, but it's pretty darned good for a catcher, especially when he strung together a 3 years of .743, .765, .806 (OPS). He had 1 bad season, and I attribute the bad season mostly due to luck. All of his luck-independent stats (HR's, BB's, K's) were all on par with his .806 OPS season. His main problem was his BAPIP going down from .325 to .220. And because he only ended up with 200 at-bats due to the emergence of Ross, luck didn't get a chance to go back towards the mean. LaRue played better near the end of the season once some of the hits started to go through.

Dumping a player like LaRue for potentially saving 2.5M (obviously we still have to wait for the PTBNL, but let's just pretend it's nothing of value in this scenario) based on 200 at-bats of uncharacteristic play is a bad move. It's selling a player at his low point. It's especially bad when you are relying on a guy who has had exactly 1 good season who is due to go downhill.

The majority may have wanted LaRue gone, but that doesn't make it right. The majority were excited with glee about Milton, and we all see how that turned out.

This is 1 person who didn't want LaRue dumped for a small amount of savings. If there was no market for LaRue, I would have either a) traded Ross if you could get decent value for him, or b) name LaRue the starter, and watch him revert to career levels and trade him while his value increases. If everybody values LaRue poorly based on 1 season, then you are selling him at his lowest point.

I hope this PTBNL is something of good value, or this is one to put up in the loss column for Krivsky IMO.

Caveat Emperor
11-21-2006, 06:12 PM
Some Reds fans will complain about anything.

We got rid of our 3rd catcher and are saving between 2 and 3 mil in the process. LaRue hit below .200 last year and is on the wrong side of 30. I really doubt we could have gotten anything of worth for any of our catchers.

If you really don't think we could've gotten anything of worth for the catchers, why are you banking on the guy that had no history of success with the stick prior to last year to replicate his 2006 numbers in '07 as the starter? In 2 of David Ross' 3 previous "seasons" (and I use that word loosely, considering he'd never accumulated more than 200 PAs prior to last year) he OPS'd under .650 -- not exactly a record I want to bet on.

At least with LaRue you knew where his career norms were when he got his work in. Ross? A wild card. We bet on a wild card with Javi Valentin 2 years ago -- and his OPS dipped almost .150 off a career season in '04. Where will Ross fall to next year?

I guess we'll find out, because we just shipped the reliable player out.

VR
11-21-2006, 06:28 PM
Is it the assumption that the phone has been ringing off the hook for last 5 months with great offers for LaRue? Again, trading him to a team that wants him to compete with a sub .700 career OPS catcher isn't Krivsky's fault. It is to his credit to get some relief from a horrible contract, for a team who already has two viable replacements at a much lower price.

He had no value, and I know that is hard to swallow, but the market proved it.

Patrick Bateman
11-21-2006, 06:32 PM
Is it the assumption that the phone has been ringing off the hook for last 5 months with great offers for LaRue? Again, trading him to a team that wants him to compete with a sub .700 career OPS catcher isn't Krivsky's fault. It is to his credit to get some relief from a horrible contract, for a team who already has two viable replacements at a much lower price.

He had no value, and I know that is hard to swallow, but the market proved it.

Then I would simply play him at the beginning of the year and bet that he plays to career norms (which is a pretty good bet) and watch his value climb dramtically. Paying 2.5M for a catcher of LaRue's calibre is not a bad thing especially when you the alternative is a catcher playing well above his means.

Anyways, we still have yet to see the PTBNL which is an integral part of the deal. It could prove LaRue's value, or that Krivsky was desperate to get rid of him.

westofyou
11-21-2006, 06:34 PM
Is it the assumption that the phone has been ringing off the hook for last 5 months with great offers for LaRue? Again, trading him to a team that wants him to compete with a sub .700 career OPS catcher isn't Krivsky's fault. It is to his credit to get some relief from a horrible contract, for a team who already has two viable replacements at a much lower price.

He had no value, and I know that is hard to swallow, but the market proved it.

He essentialy just had Charlie O'Briens 1997 season, but he is 5 years younger then Charlie was. But another one like that and he'll have to accept that he's a backup.

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 06:36 PM
He had no value, and I know that is hard to swallow, but the market proved it.

You keep insisting that this is some emotional issue; that most of us aren't capable of looking at Larue's shortcomings. I know he wasn't worth a ton, but this move does nothing to help anything but the bottom line. I said in another thread, if he Jason's money goes to another better player, great. But if not, then it's a bullcrap money-grab.

Cedric
11-21-2006, 06:41 PM
You keep insisting that this is some emotional issue; that most of us aren't capable of looking at Larue's shortcomings. I know he wasn't worth a ton, but this move does nothing to help anything but the bottom line. I said in another thread, if he Jason's money goes to another better player, great. But if not, then it's a bullcrap money-grab.

Not entirely true. If the guy is miserable and won't even compete for the starting job than we've got a situation here.

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 06:44 PM
Not entirely true. If the guy is miserable and won't even compete for the starting job than we've got a situation here.

As I said in another thread, my tack would have been to trade Ross and keep Larue. You know, actually try to bring talent in return than look to siphon off some cash.

RFS62
11-21-2006, 06:45 PM
Is it the assumption that the phone has been ringing off the hook for last 5 months with great offers for LaRue? Again, trading him to a team that wants him to compete with a sub .700 career OPS catcher isn't Krivsky's fault. It is to his credit to get some relief from a horrible contract, for a team who already has two viable replacements at a much lower price.

He had no value, and I know that is hard to swallow, but the market proved it.


I completely agree. Very well said.

Caveat Emperor
11-21-2006, 06:46 PM
As I said in another thread, my tack would have been to trade Ross and keep Larue. You know, actually try to bring talent in return than look to siphon off some cash.

Of course, that logic assumes someone is dumb enough to sell talent off based on 250 good PAs last season and ignore a career full of mediocrity.

Not saying there isn't someone dumb enough to do that, but you can't just assume there was a market for that.

VR
11-21-2006, 07:02 PM
You keep insisting that this is some emotional issue; that most of us aren't capable of looking at Larue's shortcomings. I know he wasn't worth a ton, but this move does nothing to help anything but the bottom line. I said in another thread, if he Jason's money goes to another better player, great. But if not, then it's a bullcrap money-grab.

Emotions? Redszone? nahh.

I'm not accusing any passionate Reds fan of being incapable of Larue's shortcomings, unless my reputation is one of degrading opinions on this board.

What I am saying is LaRue's 3 yr averages are right in the middle of Valentin and Ross, both offensively and defensively. They just saved millions, which can be replaced by a pinch hitting 25th man. I like that, a lot.

I think the Milton issue is where emotions are pulled into it. Jason's horrific 2006 should be ignored, but Milton's horrid 2005 shouldn't? Every team needs a fifth starter, (even though he is overpaid).... no team needs a third catcher. (ESpecially if he's overpaid)

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 07:10 PM
I think the Milton issue is where emotions are pulled into it. Jason's horrific 2006 should be ignored, but Milton's horrid 2005 shouldn't? Every team needs a fifth starter, (even though he is overpaid).... no team needs a third catcher. (ESpecially if he's overpaid)

Teams year in and year out get better production out of cobbled-together fifth rotation slots. There's no new look with Milton: it's all bad all the time. At least know when to cut your losses and try a different route. Milton's going to get burnt every time out (we all know it--even you), tax your bullpen and not make it past the 5th inning--all the while giving up tons and tons of homers.

What's the point? Oh I know: the team has a bunch of money tied up in him. So having a bunch of money tied up in an awful player justifies foisting his awfulness on the fans when there ARE other options?

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 07:14 PM
Of course, that logic assumes someone is dumb enough to sell talent off based on 250 good PAs last season and ignore a career full of mediocrity.

Not saying there isn't someone dumb enough to do that, but you can't just assume there was a market for that.

Of course I can't assume such a thing. But when the season approaches teams need to fill gaps in their roster. Who knows who gets injured in spring training? Or even earlier--who knows what gets shuffled around in other trades and which teams won't need a catcher?

It would have served to just wait on making this deal. I think most teams would have taken Larue's salary when it's basically for free and the season's 162 games loom ahead them.

What was the rush to pay some other team to play Larue?

redsmetz
11-21-2006, 07:17 PM
Teams year in and year out get better production out of cobbled-together fifth rotation slots. There's no new look with Milton: it's all bad all the time. At least know when to cut your losses and try a different route. Milton's going to get burnt every time out (we all know it--even you), tax your bullpen and not make it past the 5th inning--all the while giving up tons and tons of homers.

What's the point? Oh I know: the team has a bunch of money tied up in him. So having a bunch of money tied up in an awful player justifies foisting his awfulness on the fans when there ARE other options?

Hyperbole is alive and well at RZ. Last year, when he was healthy, Eric Milton was a good pitcher in our rotation. Now health remains a question, but I think we can make through this last year of the contract WK inherited. And like I said all last season, when he's on the mound for us, I'm pulling for him to pitch the lights out. Will it happen? Not always, but I'd like to see him pitching in '07 like he did when healthy in '06.

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 07:18 PM
Hyperbole is alive and well at RZ. Last year, when he was healthy, Eric Milton was a good pitcher in our rotation. Now health remains a question, but I think we can make through this last year of the contract WK inherited. And like I said all last season, when he's on the mound for us, I'm pulling for him to pitch the lights out. Will it happen? Not always, but I'd like to see him pitching in '07 like he did when healthy in '06.

His knee isn't going to get better. Ever. Why on earth is that so hard to understand? Why?

He has a degenerative condition.

redsmetz
11-21-2006, 07:34 PM
His knee isn't going to get better. Ever. Why on earth is that so hard to understand? Why?

He has a degenerative condition.

And yet, for much of this past season he pitcher reasonably well. WK didn't bring him in, he's on the team, you make the best of the lousy situation DOB puts us in. But I appreciate your diagnosis, Doc. It's highly doubtful the Reds are going to eat his $9 Million next season, so we might as well hope for the best. Why on earth is that so hard to understand? Why?

VR
11-21-2006, 07:35 PM
Milton's going to get burnt every time out (we all know it--even you), tax your bullpen and not make it past the 5th inning--all the while giving up tons and tons of homers.

What's the point? Oh I know: the team has a bunch of money tied up in him. So having a bunch of money tied up in an awful player justifies foisting his awfulness on the fans when there ARE other options?

Reality says he went 6+ innings 17 of his 29 starts.....with an earnie in the low 3's.

What I do know is that when he goes, he goes fast. Narron didn't see this, and left him out there to get hosed when it was obvious to most that he was toast.

The fact that Milty put up a large amount of very good starts in 2006 simply shouldnt' be flushed away because he stunk it up in /05

MWM
11-21-2006, 07:40 PM
I always thought Jason was never able to overcome the perceptions of his defensive deficiencies of his first few years. He improved immensely over the years behind the plate, beyond just his throwing out base stealers. He might not have been an elite defensive catcher, but he became a darn good one, at least in my observation.

And I'm not sure how many people don't think intangibles are important. The years when everyone was giving Sean Casey praise forhis leadership, it was a concensus among the players that the person they looked to the most for leadership was Larue, not Casey.

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 07:42 PM
And yet, for much of this past season he pitcher reasonably well.



No he didn't. He had a pathetic K/9 of 5.31, which is an even further dropoff from the season before (and the season before that). He gave up a bunch of hits (almost all of the flyball variety). He wasn't immune to the BB. He gave up an insane number of home runs. He averaged a touch over 5 2/3 innings a start. He had an OPSA of .800 on the heels of .890 the season before.

I realize that Wayne didn't acquire Milton, but he sure as hell can get rid of him.

If Castellini is serious about making the Reds great again, he'll lean heavily on Krivsky to dump Milton posthaste.

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 07:45 PM
Reality says he went 6+ innings 17 of his 29 starts.....with an earnie in the low 3's.

What I do know is that when he goes, he goes fast. Narron didn't see this, and left him out there to get hosed when it was obvious to most that he was toast.

The fact that Milty put up a large amount of very good starts in 2006 simply shouldnt' be flushed away because he stunk it up in /05

Yeah, he was mismanaged a handful of times, but let's be honest--if a guy can't make it through the fourth inning in those other starts, then what's the point? You don't get to pick and choose when he sucks and when he's respectable.

Ron Madden
11-21-2006, 07:51 PM
I always thought Jason was never able to overcome the perceptions of his defensive deficiencies of his first few years. He improved immensely over the years behind the plate, beyond just his throwing out base stealers. He might not have been an elite defensive catcher, but he became a darn good one, at least in my observation.

And I'm not sure how many people don't think intangibles are important. The years when everyone was giving Sean Casey praise forhis leadership, it was a concensus among the players that the person they looked to the most for leadership was Larue, not Casey.

Good post. :thumbup:

redsmetz
11-21-2006, 08:09 PM
No he didn't. He had a pathetic K/9 of 5.31, which is an even further dropoff from the season before (and the season before that). He gave up a bunch of hits (almost all of the flyball variety). He wasn't immune to the BB. He gave up an insane number of home runs. He averaged a touch over 5 2/3 innings a start. He had an OPSA of .800 on the heels of .890 the season before.

I realize that Wayne didn't acquire Milton, but he sure as hell can get rid of him.

If Castellini is serious about making the Reds great again, he'll lean heavily on Krivsky to dump Milton posthaste.

I wouldn't cry if we traded him, even eating some of that salary, but I don't expect a team like the Reds to take a $9 MIL hit.

BTW, when I say he was good some of the time, I'm talking about from various starts, not the overall record. And I do know, as another poster noted, that when he went, he went fast. But if we can't trade him, I'm comfortable with him as a fifth starter, which means we'll need two other pitchers to be ahead of him on the depth chart.

VR
11-21-2006, 09:04 PM
Yeah, he was mismanaged a handful of times, but let's be honest--if a guy can't make it through the fourth inning in those other starts, then what's the point? You don't get to pick and choose when he sucks and when he's respectable.

Interesting point. So, if a pitcher can't get past the 4th often enough he's a lousy pitcher? I'd be interested to see how many times Milton didn't get past the 4th inning last year....compared to a real quality pitcher like, oh, say Jeff Suppan?

Let me save anyone the time to research. Milty failed 4 times. Suppan 5.
It really is scary when you just look at the results. Milty's getting more worth the 9M at every turn.

RANDY IN INDY
11-21-2006, 09:07 PM
I always thought Jason was never able to overcome the perceptions of his defensive deficiencies of his first few years. He improved immensely over the years behind the plate, beyond just his throwing out base stealers. He might not have been an elite defensive catcher, but he became a darn good one, at least in my observation.

And I'm not sure how many people don't think intangibles are important. The years when everyone was giving Sean Casey praise forhis leadership, it was a concensus among the players that the person they looked to the most for leadership was Larue, not Casey.

I never saw that concensus. Where is that?

MWM
11-21-2006, 09:09 PM
It was reported by a couple of beat writers. One even said he went and asked most of the players who they look to as the clubhouse leader and it was almost unanimous it was Larue. I remember it well, but don't have the link.

RANDY IN INDY
11-21-2006, 09:11 PM
Thanks. Had never heard that.

RANDY IN INDY
11-21-2006, 09:15 PM
Could be like the Greg Vaughn team leader myth of a few years ago. People who were very involved in that team that I talked with at the Reds fantasy camp told me that Larkin was the leader of that team and Vaughn was nothing more than a loud prima dona.

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 09:16 PM
Milty's getting more worth the 9M at every turn.

Yeah, that DanO, he's a real Kreskin. The difference, of course, between Suppan and Milton is that Milton for three straight seasons has posted OPSA of:

2004: .810

2005: .890

2006: .797

And Suppan?

2004: .758

2005: .763

2006: .783 (and consider here, that post-ASB Suppan was .688--Milton hasn't had a half-season approaching that in years).

In other words, not even in the same universe. Then consider that Milton has an irreversible knee condition.

Milton is replacement level. Any number of arms could be brought up from the minors, like, say, Jared Fernandez along with a handful of other stiffs like Elizardo and pitch circles around Milton if rotated out quickly.

Milton should be making MLB minimum, not $9 million.

RANDY IN INDY
11-21-2006, 09:17 PM
Should be doesn't matter. It is what it is and all the complaining in the world isn't going to change it until it falls off the books.

MWM
11-21-2006, 09:20 PM
Could be like the Greg Vaughn team leader myth of a few years ago. People who were very involved in that team that I talked with at the Reds fantasy camp told me that Larkin was the leader of that team and Vaughn was nothing more than a loud prima dona.

Could be. I know it first came to the public a couple of years ago when the Reds were in the midst of a losing streak. They were down late in a game and the camera showed Jason in the dugout showing a lot of fire and not happy at all at the apparent complacency. He then went to the plate and hit a game tying two or three run HR. I think it was after that game when it appeared in print. But it wasn't the only time it was discussed.

And I agree on Barry. I said during the season on couple of occassions that the team really missed Barry Larkin. Haing a guy like that around this season would have made a difference, IMO.

And I never really bought the Greg Vaughn thing. I got tired of hearing about it.

RANDY IN INDY
11-21-2006, 09:26 PM
Could be. I know it first came to the public a couple of years ago when the Reds were in the midst of a losing streak. They were down late in a game and the camera showed Jason in the dugout showing a lot of fire and not happy at all at the apparent complacency. He then went to the plate and hit a game tying two or three run HR. I think it was after that game when it appeared in print. But it wasn't the only time it was discussed.

And I agree on Barry. I said during the season on couple of occassions that the team really missed Barry Larkin. Haing a guy like that around this season would have made a difference, IMO.

And I never really bought the Greg Vaughn thing. I got tired of hearing about it.

So did I. By the way, I don't doubt that Larue has/had the makeup to be a leader. My problem with Larue is that I always expected more from him, and that he was really going to turn the corner and be better than he was. Maybe that's why I never really appreciated what he brought to the table.

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 09:30 PM
Should be doesn't matter. It is what it is and all the complaining in the world isn't going to change it until it falls off the books.

Complaining?

How about getting creative to solve the problem instead of putting the fans' heads in the Milton Meatgrinder for another season and look for a place to dump him.

If you cotton to VR's opinion, Milton's a regular blue plate special. Should be a massive market for the guy. :)

RANDY IN INDY
11-21-2006, 09:33 PM
What is a person to create? A new knee. Looks pretty obvious that nobody wants Eric Milton. The Reds are going to have to hope for the best from him or eat the contract. That's about as creative as it gets from where I'm sittin'.:)

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 09:34 PM
What is a person to create? A new knee. Looks pretty obvious that nobody wants Eric Milton. The Reds are going to have to hope for the best from him or eat the contract. That's about as creative as it gets from where I'm sittin'.:)

Then eat the contract. I can't take the certainty of awfulness anymore. That's crap business.

Highlifeman21
11-21-2006, 09:35 PM
Complaining?

How about getting creative to solve the problem instead of putting the fans' heads in the Milton Meatgrinder for another season and look for a place to dump him.

If you cotton to VR's opinion, Milton's a regular blue plate special. Should be a massive market for the guy. :)


I'm sure Eric Milton was the talk of the town in Naples for the GM meeting. I bet all the other teams just formed a line to talk to Wayne about bringing Milton to their respective cities...

I would pay Milton's contract for him to pitch for another team in a heartbeat. He has no value left for or on the Reds.

VR
11-21-2006, 09:42 PM
Yeah, that DanO, he's a real Kreskin. The difference, of course, between Suppan and Milton is that Milton for three straight seasons has posted OPSA of:

2004: .810

2005: .890

2006: .797

And Suppan?

2004: .758

2005: .763

2006: .783 (and consider here, that post-ASB Suppan was .688--Milton hasn't had a half-season approaching that in years).

In other words, not even in the same universe. Then consider that Milton has an irreversible knee condition.

Milton is replacement level. Any number of arms could be brought up from the minors, like, say, Jared Fernandez along with a handful of other stiffs like Elizardo and pitch circles around Milton if rotated out quickly.

Milton should be making MLB minimum, not $9 million.

.712 May-July for Milty....pretty close.

But that's off track...the factor you were using was the number of sub 5 inning catastrophies....of which Milty had fewer than Suppan.
Either Milty ain't so bad or Suppan ain't so good, you can't have both though.

Better K rate, better bb rate, better whip, fewer bomb starts. Add that to a crazy advantage on bullpen support measurements for Suppan and it evens up pretty quickly.

RANDY IN INDY
11-21-2006, 09:45 PM
Other than a better knee, I don't see a lot in Suppan either. I'd almost guarantee that he doesn't pitch as well for the Reds as he does for the Redbirds.

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 09:45 PM
.712 May-July for Milty....pretty close.

But that's off track...the factor you were using was the number of sub 5 inning catastrophies....of which Milty had fewer than Suppan.
Either Milty ain't so bad or Suppan ain't so good, you can't have both though.

Better K rate, better bb rate, better whip, fewer bomb starts. Add that to a crazy advantage on bullpen support measurements for Suppan and it evens up pretty quickly.

No, Suppan's not great. But Milton's worse. And has been for three straight seasons.

George Foster
11-21-2006, 09:47 PM
Could be like the Greg Vaughn team leader myth of a few years ago. People who were very involved in that team that I talked with at the Reds fantasy camp told me that Larkin was the leader of that team and Vaughn was nothing more than a loud prima dona.

I played golf with Eddie Taubensee this summer and he said Vaughn was a real presence in the club house and would take it upon himself to solve clubhouse matters. " It was all about baseball with Vaughn." Sounds like a leader to me. No one besides Taubensee, plays in the Fantasy week, that played on the 99 team, (to my knowledge.)

VR
11-21-2006, 09:51 PM
No, Suppan's not great. But Milton's worse. And has been for three straight seasons.

As I said, when emotions overcome statistics, there is no convincing anyone otherwise....whether it be about LaRue, Casey, Milton et al. It's the Redszone way.....and that's what makes a discussion board successful. Cheers.

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 09:53 PM
As I said, when emotions overcome statistics, there is no convincing anyone otherwise....whether it be about LaRue, Casey, Milton et al. It's the Redszone way.....and that's what makes a discussion board successful. Cheers.

I've just used statistics, not emotion, to show you that Milton sucks. I don't get your emotions argument.

What's with this dismissive "Redszone" way?

RANDY IN INDY
11-21-2006, 09:56 PM
I played golf with Eddie Taubensee this summer and he said Vaughn was a real presence in the club house and would take it upon himself to solve clubhouse matters. " It was all about baseball with Vaughn." Sounds like a leader to me. No one besides Taubensee, plays in the Fantasy week, that played on the 99 team, (to my knowledge.)

Dennis Menke, Don Gullett, and some folks name Stowe were there.

Caveat Emperor
11-21-2006, 10:37 PM
Then eat the contract. I can't take the certainty of awfulness anymore. That's crap business.

Eat the contract and do what?

As bad as Milton is, his 2006 numbers were as good or better than anyone in the organization could produce as a replacement.

The best thing the team can do is find better pitcher to push Milton to the back of the rotation for this coming year, and then dump him before the deadline to get some value back in return.

Milton as a 5th starter that gets skipped regularly is the best outcome that can realisticly be hoped for in this situation, because this team certainly isn't going to find the coin to bring in 3 new starting pitchers.

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 10:41 PM
Eat the contract and do what?

As bad as Milton is, his 2006 numbers were as good or better than anyone in the organization could produce as a replacement.

The best thing the team can do is find better pitcher to push Milton to the back of the rotation for this coming year, and then dump him before the deadline to get some value back in return.

Milton as a 5th starter that gets skipped regularly is the best outcome that can realisticly be hoped for in this situation, because this team certainly isn't going to find the coin to bring in 3 new starting pitchers.

I rotate Belisle, Lizard, and sign a swingman like Ron Villone. I'll take my chances with a mixed bag rather than keep pounding my head till it bleeds.

A little inventiveness never hurt anybody.

Caveat Emperor
11-21-2006, 10:50 PM
I rotate Belisle, Lizard, and sign a swingman like Ron Villone. I'll take my chances with a mixed bag rather than keep pounding my head till it bleeds.

A little inventiveness never hurt anybody.

Amazing as it may seem, Elizardo Ramirez was stastically worse than Eric Milton in terms of ERA, WHIP and OPS-A. I guess Lizard gets the benefit of believing that, at 23, he is going to improve -- but I've seen nothing from the kid that makes me think he's anything more than what he's shown.

Personally, I'm a little tired of the Reds taking money and burning it to rid themselves of players who have fallen out of favor. Milton is horrificly bad, but when you compare him to the detritus that passes for 5th starters around the league, his 2006 numbers are fairly tolerable.

At some point next season, he'll have value to someone if the Reds eat some portion of the contract. I'd rather get something back from this debacle of a deal then cut it loose and get nothing whatsoever.

Get two more pitchers in here via FA or trades, set Milton as the #5 guy, and then dump him from the rotation when Homer Bailey is ready to go midseason. By that point, hopefully someone in need of lefthanded pitching will take him on and send something back in return.

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 10:55 PM
Amazing as it may seem, Elizardo Ramirez was stastically worse than Eric Milton in terms of ERA, WHIP and OPS-A.

Personally, I'm a little tired of the Reds taking money and burning it to rid themselves of players who have fallen out of favor. Milton is horrificly bad, but when you compare him to the detritus that passes for 5th starters around the league, his 2006 numbers are fairly tolerable.

At some point next season, he'll have value to someone if the Reds eat some portion of the contract. I'd rather get something back from this debacle of a deal then cut it loose and get nothing whatsoever.

Get two more pitchers in here via FA or trades, set Milton as the #5 guy, and then dump him from the rotation when Homer Bailey is ready to go midseason. By that point, hopefully someone in need of lefthanded pitching will take him on and send something back in return.


My guess is the Reds get nothing back--or at best a "Larue" return. Which is nothing. So we've again gone 3 months of certain awfulness in the "hopes" that a guy with three straight seasons of OPSA of .797--.890 is going to fool someone into taking his contract off our hands.

I'd rather the Reds just be honest with themselves and settle the matter; begin working on the very real task of actually improving the team. Not just hoping it will get better with the same cast of characters.

If anything, this ballclub hasn't been quick enough with the salary-dump hatchet.

VR
11-21-2006, 11:03 PM
I've just used statistics, not emotion, to show you that Milton sucks. I don't get your emotions argument.

What's with this dismissive "Redszone" way?

Perhaps it's just part of my "cotton'', speaking of dismissive.

The Redszone way, as it is for any fandom, is to see your players through a different set of shades. Some darker, some lighter.

Milton's quality starts alone put him in the upper 1/3 of all #4's in baseball. I know that's hard to believe, but it's true. But, alas, you are convinced there is a plethora of talent at AAA or in FA that says he should just be flushed.

Patrick Bateman
11-21-2006, 11:05 PM
Amazing as it may seem, Elizardo Ramirez was stastically worse than Eric Milton in terms of ERA, WHIP and OPS-A. I guess Lizard gets the benefit of believing that, at 23, he is going to improve -- but I've seen nothing from the kid that makes me think he's anything more than what he's shown.



There was one main difference. Elizardo gives up far less HR's. He gives up quite a few, but not nearly as many Milton. They have basically identical K/9 and BB/9 rates, so basically the HR's is the only difference.

Ramirez had far worse luck than Milton did last season, and I would like to think that some of the Lizard's bad outings came when he was used improperly by Narron against Philly. He came tumbling down basically at that point.

It's not that the Lizard is great or anything, but he could give #4/5 quality at the minimum. If we could find a taker for any sizeable portion of Milton's contract, we could replace him with an upgrade in a second (and save a bunch of money in the process.

Having guys like Ramirez around at the back end of the rotation isn't so bad. Getting cheap starters that could toss near league average for the minimum isn't a bad thing. It's overpaying bad pitchers like Milton 9M to fill that role that's going to kill you. Overpaying solid-good starters to fill the top 3 and then using guys like Ramirez to fill out the end of the rotation is the most cost effective way to go. We just can't afford to have any more than 2 Lizard calibre pitchers in the rotation.

Plus when you include ballpark effects and the fact that he should improve a bit, Ramirez could probably give us a 4.40-4.50 ERA at a low cost. He's not the worst guy to have around.

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 11:10 PM
Milton's quality starts alone put him in the upper 1/3 of all #4's in baseball. I know that's hard to believe, but it's true.

That's great. I mean, that really is sensational. But YOU DON'T GET TO KEEP THE GOOD AND THROW OUT THE BAD. Eric Milton is what his numbers say he is: awful. No emotion. No shades. No colors or whatever other nebulous stuff you want to throw around. He sucks--and it's not Jerry Narron's fault for leaving him in to give up the grand slam after he was the one to load the bases in the 5th inning. He's been awful for three seasons. He's not any team's answer to a number 5 pitcher. Any halfway intelligent team would have at least tried other options instead drinking from the same befouled toilet again.

I can't believe I'm arguing with someone over the worth of Eric Milton.

Where is SteelSD? :confused: :(

Be honest: you know for a fact that the only reason Eric Milton isn't pushing a mop at Wal-Mart instead of starting for the Reds is because of his massive contract. Under any other circumstance, Milton would likely be a) in someone's minor league system b)out of baseball altogether or c) in some team's bullpen.

Patrick Bateman
11-21-2006, 11:12 PM
That's great. I mean, that really is sensational. But YOU DON'T GET TO KEEP THE GOOD AND THROW OUT THE BAD. Eric Milton is what his numbers say he is: awful. No emotion. No shades. No colors or whatever other nebulous stuff you want to throw around. He sucks--and it's not Jerry Narron's fault for leaving him in to give up the grand slam after he was the one to load the bases in the 5th inning. He's been awful for three seasons. He's not any team's answer to a number 5 pitcher. Any halfway intelligent team would have at least tried other options instead drinking from the same befouled toilet again.

I can't believe I'm arguing with someone over the worth of Eric Milton.

Where is SteelSD? :confused: :(

Ya, that basically sums it up. Unfortunately, we all know Milton will take the ball every 5th day for us next season due to his contract.

Not that I wish injury on him, but we'd be better off without him.

DoogMinAmo
11-21-2006, 11:18 PM
Between the Lizard and Claussen one should earn the #5 spot. As far as I am concerned, Lohse and Milton are a wash for the #4, Lohse has better good games but Milton is more consistent. Wayne needs to find out who is more valuable in today's market, Lohse or Milton, and get something real for him, not like the Larue dump. Then he needs to sign a real #2 pitcher and a Villone-like swingman to back up the loser in the race for #5. That rotation seems fine by me for the season, now to address the offense...

VR
11-21-2006, 11:20 PM
That's great. I mean, that really is sensational. But YOU DON'T GET TO KEEP THE GOOD AND THROW OUT THE BAD. Eric Milton is what his numbers say he is: awful. No emotion. No shades. No colors or whatever other nebulous stuff you want to throw around. He sucks--and it's not Jerry Narron's fault for leaving him in to give up the grand slam after he was the one to load the bases in the 5th inning. He's been awful for three seasons. He's not any team's answer to a number 5 pitcher. Any halfway intelligent team would have at least tried other options instead drinking from the same befouled toilet again.

I can't believe I'm arguing with someone over the worth of Eric Milton.

Where is SteelSD? :confused: :(

BUT YOU CAN THROW OUT THE GOOD AND KEEP THE BAD?

You want to throw Milton and his 9M out the door, because there are so many fantastic pitchers out there to fill in the end of the rotation. Eric Milton's key stats say he is miserable as the #1 pitcher he was signed to be. His stats also show he was eerily similar to Jeff Suppan, a pitcher you'd love the Reds to acquire.

Other options? Did I mistake the Reds running 37 different starting pitchers out there this year as the same old toilet bowl? Joe Mays, Chris Michalak, Dave Williams, Sun-Woo Kim, Justin Germano? Is this the bumper crop of quality starters waiting to jump in? Or is it all the other stud starters waiting in the wings.

Milton is what he is, a #4/#5 starter on par with the rest fo the league. The fact that he made 9M doesn't change that a bit. It creates a lot of resentment with Reds fans, however.

Falls City Beer
11-21-2006, 11:24 PM
BUT YOU CAN THROW OUT THE GOOD AND KEEP THE BAD?


I wouldn't have to if the bad, by its nature, didn't TOTALLY overwhelm any good he might produce. I don't have to throw out the good.

But you DO have to throw out the bad to demonstrate the "good." The sum total of his figures says he's awful, no tricks, no excerpts, no splits. The whole kit and kaboodle.

Patrick Bateman
11-21-2006, 11:26 PM
BUT YOU CAN THROW OUT THE GOOD AND KEEP THE BAD?

You want to throw Milton and his 9M out the door, because there are so many fantastic pitchers out there to fill in the end of the rotation. Eric Milton's key stats say he is miserable as the #1 pitcher he was signed to be. His stats also show he was eerily similar to Jeff Suppan, a pitcher you'd love the Reds to acquire.

Other options? Did I mistake the Reds running 37 different starting pitchers out there this year as the same old toilet bowl? Joe Mays, Chris Michalak, Dave Williams, Sun-Woo Kim, Justin Germano? Is this the bumper crop of quality starters waiting to jump in? Or is it all the other stud starters waiting in the wings.

Milton is what he is, a #4/#5 starter on par with the rest fo the league. The fact that he made 9M doesn't change that a bit. It creates a lot of resentment with Reds fans, however.

There is no GOOD with Milton. I'd take my chances with Germano/Kim/Belisle/Claussen/Ramirez/Lohse before Milton.

You can replace pitchers of Milton's calibre for basically nothing. He is nowhere close to a good pitcher. If we want somebody as bad as Milton to pitch every 5th game we may as well get Ramon Ortiz back. At least he cost us 5M less per season.

If we could trade Milton for any kind of decent salary relief (and I think we could based on the current market), we should jump all over it. Guys like Milton are not difficult to replace.

VR
11-21-2006, 11:27 PM
I wouldn't have to if the bad, by its nature, didn't TOTALLY overwhelm any good he might produce. I don't have to throw out the good.

But you DO have to throw out the bad to demonstrate the "good." The sum total of his figures says he's awful, no tricks, no excerpts, no splits. The whole kit and kaboodle.


17 of 26 starts?

Suppan, 20 of 32 starts?

Redsland
11-21-2006, 11:31 PM
Be honest: you know for a fact that the only reason Eric Milton isn't pushing a mop at Wal-Mart instead of starting for the Reds is because of his massive contract. Under any other circumstance, Milton would likely be a) in someone's minor league system b)out of baseball altogether or c) in some team's bullpen.
Quoted for truth.

:clap:

Cedric
11-21-2006, 11:44 PM
There was one main difference. Elizardo gives up far less HR's. He gives up quite a few, but not nearly as many Milton. They have basically identical K/9 and BB/9 rates, so basically the HR's is the only difference.

Ramirez had far worse luck than Milton did last season, and I would like to think that some of the Lizard's bad outings came when he was used improperly by Narron against Philly. He came tumbling down basically at that point.

It's not that the Lizard is great or anything, but he could give #4/5 quality at the minimum. If we could find a taker for any sizeable portion of Milton's contract, we could replace him with an upgrade in a second (and save a bunch of money in the process.

Having guys like Ramirez around at the back end of the rotation isn't so bad. Getting cheap starters that could toss near league average for the minimum isn't a bad thing. It's overpaying bad pitchers like Milton 9M to fill that role that's going to kill you. Overpaying solid-good starters to fill the top 3 and then using guys like Ramirez to fill out the end of the rotation is the most cost effective way to go. We just can't afford to have any more than 2 Lizard calibre pitchers in the rotation.

Plus when you include ballpark effects and the fact that he should improve a bit, Ramirez could probably give us a 4.40-4.50 ERA at a low cost. He's not the worst guy to have around.

I pray to the baseball gods that we never have the need for Elizardo Ramirez to pitch for the Redlegs again. He reminds me so much of Jose Acevado it makes me painfully sick. He's horrendous. He's never going to have a low BABIP because he has absolutely no movement on his pitches and no ability to locate his pitches.

Highlifeman21
11-22-2006, 12:35 AM
There is no GOOD with Milton. I'd take my chances with Germano/Kim/Belisle/Claussen/Ramirez/Lohse before Milton.

You can replace pitchers of Milton's calibre for basically nothing. He is nowhere close to a good pitcher. If we want somebody as bad as Milton to pitch every 5th game we may as well get Ramon Ortiz back. At least he cost us 5M less per season.

If we could trade Milton for any kind of decent salary relief (and I think we could based on the current market), we should jump all over it. Guys like Milton are not difficult to replace.

Isn't he Philly property now?

Out of the rest of the list you provided, I'd rather see Lohse and Claussen get rotation shots before Kim, Belisle and the Lizard. The Lizard is the worst of that group, amazingly worse than Milton.

I repeat, let's pay another team to have Milton pitch for them. All of it. 9M. Free player for another team.

Mario-Rijo
11-22-2006, 01:59 AM
Originally Posted by Falls City Beer
Be honest: you know for a fact that the only reason Eric Milton isn't pushing a mop at Wal-Mart instead of starting for the Reds is because of his massive contract. Under any other circumstance, Milton would likely be a) in someone's minor league system b)out of baseball altogether or c) in some team's bullpen.


I hope you are not serious! This is what's wrong with some fans on this site, people just do not appreciate anything. My argument for Milty is this, he is a very good option for the 4th or 5th spot in the rotation based on his '06 season. IMO he is a solid 4th or 5th starter in this league, based strictly on his QS's. Of course the problem is that the Reds have been using him as a #3 starter where his value is not good. Granted when he goes bad he is awful, but when he is good he has been pretty good.

He had 150+ IP, 2:1 K/BB ratio, 26 starts 14 of which were quality starts 6IP or more and 3 er's or less. Match him up with some other 4th or 5th types around the league, then see what he is.

Ltlabner
11-22-2006, 07:13 AM
Other options? Did I mistake the Reds running 37 different starting pitchers out there this year as the same old toilet bowl? Joe Mays, Chris Michalak, Dave Williams, Sun-Woo Kim, Justin Germano? Is this the bumper crop of quality starters waiting to jump in? Or is it all the other stud starters waiting in the wings.

Milton is what he is, a #4/#5 starter on par with the rest fo the league. The fact that he made 9M doesn't change that a bit. It creates a lot of resentment with Reds fans, however.

This sums it up for me. People can rant about how we should eat $9mil and just go out and grab somebody. Ok...who? Who's on the FA market that you can just go grab, plug in as a #3 and move on. And don't say Suppan.

Oh yea, whatever FA pitcher you pick up to replace Milton....tack an additional $9m to whatever his contract is to reflect the money you just torched. So I ask again, name for me a FA starting pitcher that would be solid and be worth a his asking price + the $9mil we just ate?

And then once we do that, we have to find 2 more to shore up #4 and #5. I guess we could try the rotation method of the crap we already have but I can't see that being succesfull. And I'm darn sure that some of the people who would vote for that approach now would be the same people railing against Krivsky later on for doing just that.

Ltlabner
11-22-2006, 07:25 AM
There is no GOOD with Milton. I'd take my chances with Germano/Kim/Belisle/Claussen/Ramirez/Lohse before Milton.

You can replace pitchers of Milton's calibre for basically nothing. He is nowhere close to a good pitcher. If we want somebody as bad as Milton to pitch every 5th game we may as well get Ramon Ortiz back. At least he cost us 5M less per season.

If we could trade Milton for any kind of decent salary relief (and I think we could based on the current market), we should jump all over it. Guys like Milton are not difficult to replace.

Again I ask...who? Throw out some names and lets look at their numbers.

Now, trading Milton and getting some sort of salary relief, thats a different story. I can sign onto that plan because you are doing something to improve the team besides lighting fire to a huge pile of cash to satsify the mob. You are right that in this bizzare market there might be a chance for the old sallary dump-a-roo.

The key is how much do we pay? I'm don't have an exact number in mind, but if we could get a team to pay at least 1/2 and throw in the old PTBNL I'd be open to it. At least in that scenario you are getting something out of him. Combine his $4.5m with the $2m LaRue savings with Uncle Bobs pocket change and you might be able to get someone.

That's my biggest hang up on the "dump milton and eat the contract" nonsense. Then you just done nothing with $9 mill and still need a pitcher. If they signed a horrible FA for a 1 year $9m contract people here would explode in anger but if they throw $9m away and get absoluty nothing in return....that's cool! Makes no sense to me.

Always Red
11-22-2006, 07:59 AM
I'll bet my YEARLY paycheck that Milton does not go straight from the Reds to out of baseball next year, (unless the chronic knee drives him out of the game- then all bets are off ;) ).

There are about 20 ML teams out there that would love to have him in their #4 or 5 spots.

The only problem the Reds have is that OB overpaid for him; and as stated above, this creates much resentment, especially here.

The negativity on this site has really become overwhelming; I know September depressed everyone, but sheesh...

Falls City Beer
11-22-2006, 09:00 AM
What would you recommend doing if Milton goes out next season and posts another .890 OPSA campaign at the halfway point of the season? (Recent history says this is JUST as likely a possibility as him posting .800 OPSA again).

I assume you'd run him out there in a pennant race with those kind of numbers?

Because he'd be totally untradeable at that point, will have damaged severely the Reds' chances of competing, and prevented other potential arms from having contributed. What say you?

Stay the course?

Falls City Beer
11-22-2006, 09:03 AM
I'll bet my YEARLY paycheck that Milton does not go straight from the Reds to out of baseball next year, (unless the chronic knee drives him out of the game- then all bets are off ;) ).

There are about 20 ML teams out there that would love to have him in their #4 or 5 spots.

The only problem the Reds have is that OB overpaid for him; and as stated above, this creates much resentment, especially here.

The negativity on this site has really become overwhelming; I know September depressed everyone, but sheesh...

I'll take you up on that bet if we can change the terms to him pitching in a team's bullpen.

When this contract is up, Milton will never start an entire season for another MLB team.

Oh, someone will cling to hope and offer him some invite to spring training, and he might start a game or three for some team, but he'll never, ever be a regular starter again in his life.

Falls City Beer
11-22-2006, 09:07 AM
Again I ask...who? Throw out some names and lets look at their numbers.

Now, trading Milton and getting some sort of salary relief, thats a different story. I can sign onto that plan because you are doing something to improve the team besides lighting fire to a huge pile of cash to satsify the mob. You are right that in this bizzare market there might be a chance for the old sallary dump-a-roo.

The key is how much do we pay? I'm don't have an exact number in mind, but if we could get a team to pay at least 1/2 and throw in the old PTBNL I'd be open to it. At least in that scenario you are getting something out of him. Combine his $4.5m with the $2m LaRue savings with Uncle Bobs pocket change and you might be able to get someone.

That's my biggest hang up on the "dump milton and eat the contract" nonsense. Then you just done nothing with $9 mill and still need a pitcher. If they signed a horrible FA for a 1 year $9m contract people here would explode in anger but if they throw $9m away and get absoluty nothing in return....that's cool! Makes no sense to me.


All I've ever asked is for the team to get a little creative and pay half his contract for another team to take him on. And I think that's an extremely real possibility.

But some pooh-poohers think that's ill-advised or that 4.5 million couldn't be put to better use. Or something.

Falls City Beer
11-22-2006, 09:18 AM
That's my biggest hang up on the "dump milton and eat the contract" nonsense. Then you just done nothing with $9 mill and still need a pitcher. If they signed a horrible FA for a 1 year $9m contract people here would explode in anger but if they throw $9m away and get absoluty nothing in return....that's cool! Makes no sense to me.

Yep.

It's a big boy's game played with real greenbacks. If you don't have the stones to lose money, then get the hell out of the business.

You know the same darn thing could be said if Milton has season-ending knee surgery next season: he'd still be getting paid his $9 million and we'd STILL have to find another arm.

Welcome to the big leagues; it's not for the faint of heart.

I'm saying be proactive. Don't settle for crap because that's EXACTLY what you'll get. I guarantee it.

Redsland
11-22-2006, 09:27 AM
There are about 20 ML teams out there that would love to have him in their #4 or 5 spots.
If that were true then he and a smallish suitcase of money would've ridden out of town a long time ago.

If there were only a handful of teams that would "love" to have him, then the suitcase would be a little bigger.

Falls City Beer
11-22-2006, 09:42 AM
If that were true then he and a smallish suitcase of money would've ridden out of town a long time ago.

If there were only a handful of teams that would "love" to have him, then the suitcase would be a little bigger.

Right. Call it the "Larue Principle." People arrogantly claim the "market has spoken" vis. Larue, yet don't pause on the fact that similarly there is virtually no market for a waste like Milton.

Now it's time for Krivsky to thread the needle and find the bigger fool.

Heath
11-22-2006, 09:43 AM
If only MLB had NFL contracts. If that was the case, Eric Milton was cut a long time ago.

PuffyPig
11-22-2006, 10:01 AM
He's never going to have a low BABIP because he has absolutely no movement on his pitches and no ability to locate his pitches.

You need to reread your BABIP notes. Stuff has nothing to do with BABIP. Randy Johnson (in his prime) and Ramirez should have the same BABIP if they playerd in the same ballpark in front of the same fielders. The only varience would be luck.

RFS62
11-22-2006, 10:02 AM
If only MLB had NFL contracts. If that was the case, Eric Milton was cut a long time ago.


Yeah, but that's not the answer, not that it could ever happen. Those poor saps in the NFL need a guaranteed contract more than anyone on earth.

westofyou
11-22-2006, 10:18 AM
Right. Call it the "Larue Principle." People arrogantly claim the "market has spoken" vis. Larue, yet don't pause on the fact that similarly there is virtually no market for a waste like Milton.

Now it's time for Krivsky to thread the needle and find the bigger fool.

Arrogant?

Kinda strong words from a guy who pees on every fire lit in camp. :laugh:

LaRue's 33 coming off a knee injury and makes 5.5 million bucks a year for squatting, he's got a long way to go from last season to get back to being worth that jack to any team. Not that he can't do it, but history and catchers are an iffy bet and having an opinion that he wavers from his previous highs.

He hit his 25% level in PECOTA last year and prior his odds were thus:



Diagnostics
Breakout Rate Improve Rate Collapse Rate Attrition Rate
16% 41% 30% 24%

It will be interesting to see if he can rest the job away from Joe Buck fully, much alone improve his game to a .740 OPS.

Heath
11-22-2006, 11:22 AM
It will be interesting to see if he can rest the job away from Joe Buck fully, much alone improve his game to a .740 OPS.

I think that this Joe Buck couldn't .OPS his way out of a paper bag......
http://msn.foxsports.com/id/5871604_36_1.jpg

Now John Buck on the other hand.........

(sorry woy, couldn't resist)

bucksfan
11-22-2006, 01:01 PM
I wish Jason the best and have always appreciated his effort. From my vew, I think his position, considering both in the batting order and behind the plate, can be filled just as well for less money at this stage in his career. I cannot speak for his role in the clubhouse. But the overall move seems to be a positive one to me, especially if it also means we do not carry 3 catchers on the 25-man any more.

Redsland
11-22-2006, 01:04 PM
I think that this Joe Buck couldn't .OPS his way out of a paper bag......
http://msn.foxsports.com/id/5871604_36_1.jpg

Now John Buck on the other hand.........

(sorry woy, couldn't resist)
http://msn.foxsports.com/id/5818986
"Actually, Joe, most right-handers can't OPS their way out of a paper bag. That's because in the minors, they're taught to use Ziplocks, which are much, much stronger."

Patrick Bateman
11-22-2006, 05:31 PM
Again I ask...who? Throw out some names and lets look at their numbers.



Basically anyone. Claussen, Ramirez and Lohse are all better in house candidates (probably Belisle too, he can't be a heck of a lot worse).

Pitchers such as Ryan Drese, Jason Johnson, Brian Lawrence, Ramon Ortiz, Vicor Santos, Jamey Wright, Kip Wells are all on the market for next to nothing. That list may not look impressive (in fact it makes me violently ill just looking at it), but that's Milton's level.

As FCB said, Milton is replacement level. He's basically a 5.50 ERA type of pitcher. That's not hard to find. He is terrible, and he has been for 3 straight years since his injury. Since that time, he has been one of the worst (if not the worst) pitcher to get consistent starts.

Milton is not a good #4/5 starter. He's not a good anything. He could make some team's rotation, but he's right at the bottom tier of pitchers. I hope Krivsky can either get rid of or Narron chooses to use other guys in the rotation (not likely).

EDIT: I don't actually recommend picking up any of those pitchers, I only wanted to illustrate just how bad Milton really is.

Heath
11-22-2006, 05:38 PM
Basically anyone. Claussen, Ramirez and Lohse are all better in house candidates (probably Belisle too, he can't be a heck of a lot worse).

Pitchers such as Ryan Drese, Jason Johnson, Brian Lawrence, Ramon Ortiz, Vicor Santos, Jamey Wright, Kip Wells are all on the market for next to nothing. That list may not look impressive (in fact it makes me violently ill just looking at it), but that's Milton's level.

As FCB said, Milton is replacement level. He's basically a 5.50 ERA type of pitcher. That's not hard to find. He is terrible, and he has been for 3 straight years since his injury. Since that time, he has been one of the worst (if not the worst) pitcher to get consistent starts.

Milton is not a good #4/5 starter. He's not a good anything. He could make some team's rotation, but he's right at the bottom tier of pitchers. I hope Krivsky can either get rid of or Narron chooses to use other guys in the rotation (not likely).

EDIT: I don't actually recommend picking up any of those pitchers, I only wanted to illustrate just how bad Milton really is.

AK - good points, thanks for the insights. But here's the scenario against that.

So, if I'm a GM and I need #4/#5 or a live body in a rotation, here are my choices -

1 - Sign Drese, Johnson, Wells, Lawrence, et. al to a Minor-League deal with ST invite. If they make it, I'm on the hook for $1Mill.

or

2 - Get Eric Milton from the Reds who makes $9 Mill. But, I can coax out 5 Mill from the Reds just so they can get rid of him.

Which deal makes sense economically?

That's why Eric Milton spends 2007 in Cincinnati.

Falls City Beer
11-22-2006, 05:42 PM
AK - good points, thanks for the insights. But here's the scenario against that.

So, if I'm a GM and I need #4/#5 or a live body in a rotation, here are my choices -

1 - Sign Drese, Johnson, Wells, Lawrence, et. al to a Minor-League deal with ST invite. If they make it, I'm on the hook for $1Mill.

or

2 - Get Eric Milton from the Reds who makes $9 Mill. But, I can coax out 5 Mill from the Reds just so they can get rid of him.

Which deal makes sense economically?

That's why Eric Milton spends 2007 in Cincinnati.


I agree, it'll be a very difficult sale to dump Milton. He's awful and very few teams will want him. But part of being a GM is being a good pitch man.

Heath
11-22-2006, 05:44 PM
I agree, it'll be a very difficult sale to dump Milton. He's awful and very few teams will want him. But part of being a GM is being a good pitch man.

I think to dump Miltie will require us to take on someone elses' "Miltie"

One albatross for another.

Falls City Beer
11-22-2006, 05:46 PM
I think to dump Miltie will require us to take on someone elses' "Miltie"

One albatross for another.

Sometimes the other "albatross" isn't an albatross. But we know what we've got in Milton. I'd be willing to take on an albatross if he were switching leagues, say--coming to the NL for the first time. At least we might get a good half-year out of him.

Patrick Bateman
11-22-2006, 05:47 PM
AK - good points, thanks for the insights. But here's the scenario against that.

So, if I'm a GM and I need #4/#5 or a live body in a rotation, here are my choices -

1 - Sign Drese, Johnson, Wells, Lawrence, et. al to a Minor-League deal with ST invite. If they make it, I'm on the hook for $1Mill.

or

2 - Get Eric Milton from the Reds who makes $9 Mill. But, I can coax out 5 Mill from the Reds just so they can get rid of him.

Which deal makes sense economically?

That's why Eric Milton spends 2007 in Cincinnati.


If we could trade Milton and save 4M, that would be a very good trade. We could replace him in the rotation for little, and have some money to play with in free agency.

Heath
11-22-2006, 07:05 PM
Sometimes the other "albatross" isn't an albatross. But we know what we've got in Milton. I'd be willing to take on an albatross if he were switching leagues, say--coming to the NL for the first time. At least we might get a good half-year out of him.

FCB - you nailed it. Any albatross for an albatross is still an albatross.

Unless your albatross can turn out to be Jessica Alba, its a risk from either side.

Heath
11-22-2006, 07:08 PM
If we could trade Milton and save 4M, that would be a very good trade. We could replace him in the rotation for little, and have some money to play with in free agency.

No argument at all...if another GM feels that one team's trash is another man's treasure, go for it by all means.

But the realistic side says that unless Dan O'Brien gets a GM job, then not many are biting.

Here's another scenario - which is lesser than yours of happening. Milton has a fantastic '07 thru July and gets traded for mondo prospects. That's another hedge bet.

westofyou
11-22-2006, 08:11 PM
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=5723&PHPSESSID=fde9ac880b91a980fa0c5257a3b2a733#KCA


Acquired C-R Jason LaRue and cash from the Reds for a PTBNL; [11/20]

The nicest thing you can say about LaRue is that he might fetch something of value at the deadline if his bat bounces back at all, but that's about the full extent of his prospective value to the Royals. LaRue's hitting has been a bit strange over the last few years, in that he hasn't done all that well hitting in a good hitter's park while doing much better on the road (.252/.351/.457 over the last three years), so while I wouldn't normally expect him to do better in a tougher home run park, I suppose it isn't inconceivable. The really good news is that the Reds are reportedly paying nearly $3 million of LaRue's $5.2 million salary from 2007, but given that the only thing really at risk here is that the Royals gave up somebody of value (which seems unlikely) and John Buck's potential stardom (even less likely), I could see this paying off if its about trying to flip LaRue at the deadline in July. If it isn't, then it's really just random activity, and perhaps a little too much like Allard Baird's unfortunate pickups of stale placeholders before the 2006 season.

Matt700wlw
11-22-2006, 08:12 PM
Quotes!

"The writing was on the wall pretty much all year long, even after I got back from being hurt," he said. "From day one, it felt just a little bit different as I came off the DL. It seems like they, for whatever reason, had different plans – which is fine. That’s fine with me. I think I’m in a better place and it’s going to be a great opportunity."


"Obviously they have their plans of Ross being the starter this year, and as I said at the end of the year, I’m not at the backup stage of my career," he said. "I still feel like I’m one of the best catchers in the game right now. I had injuries at the beginning of the year and never got on my feet last year."

(Marc's blog)

Cedric
11-22-2006, 09:30 PM
You need to reread your BABIP notes. Stuff has nothing to do with BABIP. Randy Johnson (in his prime) and Ramirez should have the same BABIP if they playerd in the same ballpark in front of the same fielders. The only varience would be luck.

Power pitchers are completely different story all together. Greg Maddux is a better example.

Check your notes on him.

Some of the best hitters in the game have very high BABIP's while some of the worst low. There is plenty of evidence that supports that luck is not totally the cause of outcome.

Highlifeman21
11-22-2006, 09:30 PM
Quotes!

"The writing was on the wall pretty much all year long, even after I got back from being hurt," he said. "From day one, it felt just a little bit different as I came off the DL. It seems like they, for whatever reason, had different plans Ė which is fine. Thatís fine with me. I think Iím in a better place and itís going to be a great opportunity."


"Obviously they have their plans of Ross being the starter this year, and as I said at the end of the year, Iím not at the backup stage of my career," he said. "I still feel like Iím one of the best catchers in the game right now. I had injuries at the beginning of the year and never got on my feet last year."

(Marc's blog)

Jason LaRue can't really believe this about himself....

Cedric
11-22-2006, 09:44 PM
I like DIPS and BABIP and all that data. I think it does a great job in identifying total fluke seasons. I just think it being used as the end all of any debat is overdoing it. There is plenty of data to support that pitchers with high BABIP seem to sustain at that level and those with lower BABIP seems to sustain at about the same rate.

Also there have been studies shown that knuckleballers and Southpaws are a little worse at allowing balls hit into play turning into hits.

There's also been studies to suport that the best pitchers generally allow less hits on balls in play over other pitchers. That alone to me debunks the theory that BABIP is 100% luck.

mth123
11-22-2006, 10:38 PM
What would you recommend doing if Milton goes out next season and posts another .890 OPSA campaign at the halfway point of the season? (Recent history says this is JUST as likely a possibility as him posting .800 OPSA again).

I assume you'd run him out there in a pennant race with those kind of numbers?

Because he'd be totally untradeable at that point, will have damaged severely the Reds' chances of competing, and prevented other potential arms from having contributed. What say you?

Stay the course?

I don't think he would be untradeable. As bad as he was this year, he would have been better than any pitcher on the market in 2006 at the deadline (except Maddux but he wasn't really available to everybody). People were trying Lima, Ponson, Michalek, Mays, Williams, etc.

In 2007 there will be no next year's obligation to worry about. If he can go out and give 6 innings even with 4 Earned runs in that 6, he gives teams a chance to win more often than guys who are blown out in the 3rd with the game out of hand. That is really all a team is looking for from a number 5 guy these days. Get the game to the late innings with a chance to win. Why? Because most teams have #4's and #5's that suck just as much. In a race he'd be moveable and you'd get a mid level prospect. Right now teams can just sign other options instead. During the season he'd look darn good to teams with no one to turn to. Teams don't always behave rationally in a race and some one would bite.

Falls City Beer
11-22-2006, 10:41 PM
I don't think he would be untradeable. As bad as he was this year, he would have been better than any pitcher on the market in 2006 at the deadline (except Maddux but he wasn't really available to everybody). People were trying Lima, Ponson, Michalek, Mays, Williams, etc.

In 2007 there will be no next year's obligation to worry about. If he can go out and give 6 innings even with 4 Earned runs in that 6, he gives teams a chance to win more often than guys who are blown out in the 3rd with the game out of hand. That is really all a team is looking for from a number 5 guy these days. Get the game to the late innings with a chance to win. Why? Because most teams have #4's and #5's that suck just as much. In a race he'd be moveable and you'd get a mid level prospect. Right now teams can just sign other options instead. During the season he'd look darn good to teams with no one to turn to. Teams don't always behave rationally in a race and some one would bite.

He's not untradeable now, but if he repeats his 2005 campaign in 2007, then, yes, he's untradeable.

But I think people should abandon the notion of getting anything by way of a prospect in return. Just take the salary relief and run.

mth123
11-22-2006, 10:44 PM
He's not untradeable now, but if he repeats his 2005 campaign in 2007, then, yes, he's untradeable.

I would agree if he hadn't had surgery in the offseason. I think he will at least need to show some health in the spring. But the way teams are behaving now, Paul Wilson might be tradeable if he were still Reds property.

Falls City Beer
11-22-2006, 10:48 PM
I would agree if he hadn't had surgery in the offseason. I think he will at least need to show some health in the spring. But the way teams are behaving now, Paul Wilson might be tradeable if he were still Reds property.

Yeah. But I suppose the point is moot. To give him away at the deadline is a little beside the point. The point is to get his salary out of here and compel the front office to look hard for a better option for the rotation than the broken default of Milton.

mth123
11-22-2006, 10:56 PM
Yeah. But I suppose the point is moot. To give him away at the deadline is a little beside the point. The point is to get his salary out of here and compel the front office to look hard for a better option for the rotation than the broken default of Milton.

If he could be traded today for Salary relief I wouldn't hold out for a prospect. I just think with the surgery he'll need to have a few starts in 2007 to move him. That works out because that should be about the time Bailey is ready to take his spot and with no free agents to turn to and part of the dollars out of the way, teams will give a little more.

But you're right about one thing for sure. If 2005 returns he would not be moveable. I'm betting he'll at least do as well as 2006 before the arm injury. He does keep baserunners to a reasonable level and big park teams could actually get some decent use out of him at 2006 performance levels. Right now they can get other alternatives though so why get Milton? During the year its much more a sellers market (if he doesn't go all 2005 on us).

Patrick Bateman
11-23-2006, 12:33 AM
Some of the best hitters in the game have very high BABIP's while some of the worst low. There is plenty of evidence that supports that luck is not totally the cause of outcome.

Hitters are much different than pitchers in regards to BAPIP.

For pitchers, the best ones at "controlling" it only do it by a couple of points. Nothing substantial to really even consider.

Ramirez will have lots of "lucky" years and lots of "unlucky" ones. He wont be the exception that is always "unlucky".

Cedric
11-23-2006, 12:49 AM
There is a skill to getting hitters out without just striking them out. Common sense comes into play at some point.

Patrick Bateman
11-23-2006, 12:55 AM
There is a skill to getting hitters out without just striking them out. Common sense comes into play at some point.

Then go ahead and name some exceptions over long periods of time in regards to BAPIP.

The way to be successful, is to K guys, and limit the BB's and HR's. Everything else is basically due to ballpark effects, luck, and defense.

Cedric
11-23-2006, 12:56 AM
Then go ahead and name some exceptions over long periods of time in regards to BAPIP.

The way to be successful, is to K guys, and limit the BB's and HR's. Everything else is basically due to ballpark effects, luck, and defense.

Let's be honest. The reason BABIP is unreliable is because most MLB pitchers with enough years to compare are good at it. That's why they are in the league. Therefore defense, luck, and other factors do come into play and barely change the rates.

The truly bad pitchers like Elizardo Ramirez will almost always have bad babip. Like he has shown in his MLB career. He has no business pitching in the bigs, IMO.

Redsland
11-23-2006, 11:27 AM
Let's be honest. The reason BABIP is unreliable is because most MLB pitchers with enough years to compare are good at it.
The last study I remember seeing showed that most pitchers' career BABIP clumped around .300. One big exception to that was Greg Maddux. For "whatever reason," people noted, he was able to control BABIP.

When you remember that Greg Maddux has won a record 16 Gold Gloves, I'd say it's pretty easy to figure how how he's controlling BABIP. He's doing it by deftly becoming a ninth defender that the hitter has to get the ball past. No other pitcher has done as good a job of that over the past two decades, and it's that extra bit of leather out there that suppresses Maddux's BABIP.


The truly bad pitchers like Elizardo Ramirez will almost always have bad babip.
Agreed, but again, I think this has a pretty easy explanation. "Truly bad pitchers" are going to get hit harder than better pitchers are, by and large. Harder hits are tougher to defend because they scream into the alleys and bang off walls before defenders can get to them, or sail over walls, thereby preventing any defensive play at all. As a result, bad pitchers allow more balls to get into play, and to become hits once they get there. Wah-la, higher batting average on balls in play.

All BABIP does is permit you see how much of a factor luck has been in helping a pitcher accumulate the numbers he has. Sometimes a hot streak can make Jimmy Haynes look like a steal at $5MM with a player option to boot, or turn Elmer Dessens into the centerpiece of a four-team trade. On those occasions, it's nice to have an idea of how much of the player's performance is due to his ability to get people out, and how much is due to his team's ability or inability to do the same when he fails.

Cedric
11-23-2006, 11:32 AM
The last study I remember seeing showed that most pitchers' career BABIP clumped around .300. One big exception to that was Greg Maddux. For "whatever reason," people noted, he was able to control BABIP.

When you remember that Greg Maddux has won a record 16 Gold Gloves, I'd say it's pretty easy to figure how how he's controlling BABIP. He's doing it by deftly becoming a ninth defender that the hitter has to get the ball past. No other pitcher has done as good a job of that over the past two decades, and it's that extra bit of leather out there that suppresses Maddux's BABIP.


Agreed, but again, I think this has a pretty easy explanation. "Truly bad pitchers" are going to get hit harder that better pitchers are, by and large. Harder hits are tougher to defend because they scream into the alleys and bang off walls before defenders can get to them, or sail over walls, thereby preventing any defensive play at all. As a result, bad pitchers allow more balls to get into play, and to become hits once they get there. Wah-la, higher batting average on balls in play.

Alll BABIP does is permit you see how much of a factor luck has been in helping a pitcher accumulate the numbers he has. Sometimes a hot streak can make Jimmy Haynes look like a steal at $5MM with a player option to boot, or turn Elmer Dessens into the centerpiece of a four-team trade. On those occasions, it's nice to have an idea of how much of the player's performance is due to his ability to get people out, and how much is due to his team's ability or inability to do the same when he fails.

Totally and completely agree. That's exactly the point I'm trying to make. It's a great stat for showing truly bs seasons like Joe Mays in 2001.

And when I said that most major league pitchers are good at BABIP. I meant it in the sense that almost 75% of all balls are put into play. You better be good at it or you aren't going to be in the league. I know that's confusing, but I hope you can understand my awful writing :)

But it's just a tool. It's not something that is going to guarantee improvement for certain pitchers like Elizardo Ramirez. It's valuable, just not the end all to any discussion about a certain player.

Now I'm off for turkey day. Happy thanksgiving all!

RFS62
11-23-2006, 12:36 PM
"Truly bad pitchers" are going to get hit harder than better pitchers are, by and large. Harder hits are tougher to defend because they scream into the alleys and bang off walls before defenders can get to them, or sail over walls, thereby preventing any defensive play at all. As a result, bad pitchers allow more balls to get into play, and to become hits once they get there. Wah-la, higher batting average on balls in play.



Maddux has two things that I've long thought set him apart. Incredible command and late movement. The speed the ball comes out of his hand causes hitters to commit on what they judge as a meatball, and the late movement causes them to mis-hit or not "square up" on a ball they thought would be in their zone.