PDA

View Full Version : Kyle Lohse



Willy
11-25-2006, 08:23 PM
Kyle has taken a lot of heat here at Redszone, but is he really that bad?

Here is a look at some numbers.

Kyle Lohse
2002 180.2 IP 4.23 ERA 6.2 K/9IP .83 G/F
2003 201 IP 4.61 ERA 5.8 K/9IP .90 G/F
2004 194 IP 5.34 ERA 5.2 K/9IP 1.18 G/F
2005 178.2 IP 4.18 ERA 4.3 K/9IP 1.25 G/F
2006 126.2 IP 5.86 ERA 6.9 K9IP 1.18 G/F

Ted Lilly
2002 100 IP 3.69 ERA 7.7 K/IP .68 G/F
2003 178.2 IP 4.34 ERA 7.4 K/IP .85 G/F
2004 197.1 IP 4.06 ERA 7.7 K.IP .80 G/F
2005 126.1 IP 5.56 ERA 6.8 K/IP .92 G/F
2006 181.2 IP 4.31 ERA 7.9 K/IP .89 G/F

Couple of things really stand out to me.

1) Over the last 5 years Kyle's numbers are not a whole lot different than one of the top free agent pitchers in this year's market.

2) After going over Kyle's numbers, it seems like he has been going through an identity crisis. Take a look at his best 2 years. In 2002 he was striking out over 6 guys an inning but was more of a flyball pitcher. Over the next few years both those stats gradually changed. In 2005 his K's were way down but his groundball ratio was way up. It was well documented that Kyle had some troubles with the Twins coaching staff, could this be his biggest problem? Maybe if he finds a pitching coach that is consistant and either coaches one style over the other he might settle in.

I think Kyle was confused in 2006, was he a groundball pitcher, or a strikeout guy. Once he figures that out he will be fine. If Dick Pole and Kyle can figure out his style, I think we are going to have a gem on our hands. Remember 2002-2005 numbers were in the AL. I think with our new MI, a year sub 4.0 ERA is very possible.

Falls City Beer
11-25-2006, 08:25 PM
Kyle has taken a lot of heat here at Redszone, but is he really that bad?

Here is a look at some numbers.

Kyle Lohse
2002 180.2 IP 4.23 ERA 6.2 K/9IP .83 G/F
2003 201 IP 4.61 ERA 5.8 K/9IP .90 G/F
2004 194 IP 5.34 ERA 5.2 K/9IP 1.18 G/F
2005 178.2 IP 4.18 ERA 4.3 K/9IP 1.25 G/F
2006 126.2 IP 4.86 ERA 6.9 K9IP 1.18 G/F

Ted Lilly
2002 100 IP 3.69 ERA 7.7 K/IP .68 G/F
2003 178.2 IP 4.34 ERA 7.4 K/IP .85 G/F
2004 197.1 IP 4.06 ERA 7.7 K.IP .80 G/F
2005 126.1 IP 5.56 ERA 6.8 K/IP .92 G/F
2006 181.2 IP 4.31 ERA 7.9 K/IP .89 G/F

Couple of things really stand out to me.

1) Over the last 5 years Kyle's numbers are not a whole lot different than one of the top free agent pitchers in this year's market.

2) After going over Kyle's numbers, it seems like he has been going through an identity crisis. Take a look at his best 2 years. In 2002 he was striking out over 6 guys an inning but was more of a flyball pitcher. Over the next few years both those stats gradually changed. In 2005 his K's were way down but his groundball ratio was way up. It was well documented that Kyle had some troubles with the Twins coaching staff, could this be his biggest problem? Maybe if he finds a pitching coach that is consistant and either coaches one style over the other he might settle in.

I think Kyle was confused in 2006, was he a groundball pitcher, or a strikeout guy. Once he figures that out he will be fine. If Dick Pole and Kyle can figure out his style, I think we are going to have a gem on our hands. Remember 2002-2005 numbers were in the AL. I think with our new MI, a year sub 4.0 ERA is very possible.


Where are you getting those Lohse 2006 numbers? He did not have a 4.86 ERA for the season.

Willy
11-25-2006, 08:26 PM
Typo 5.38

Highlifeman21
11-25-2006, 08:35 PM
Kyle has taken a lot of heat here at Redszone, but is he really that bad?

Here is a look at some numbers.

Kyle Lohse
2002 180.2 IP 4.23 ERA 6.2 K/9IP .83 G/F
2003 201 IP 4.61 ERA 5.8 K/9IP .90 G/F
2004 194 IP 5.34 ERA 5.2 K/9IP 1.18 G/F
2005 178.2 IP 4.18 ERA 4.3 K/9IP 1.25 G/F
2006 126.2 IP 5.86 ERA 6.9 K9IP 1.18 G/F

Ted Lilly
2002 100 IP 3.69 ERA 7.7 K/IP .68 G/F
2003 178.2 IP 4.34 ERA 7.4 K/IP .85 G/F
2004 197.1 IP 4.06 ERA 7.7 K.IP .80 G/F
2005 126.1 IP 5.56 ERA 6.8 K/IP .92 G/F
2006 181.2 IP 4.31 ERA 7.9 K/IP .89 G/F

Couple of things really stand out to me.

1) Over the last 5 years Kyle's numbers are not a whole lot different than one of the top free agent pitchers in this year's market.

2) After going over Kyle's numbers, it seems like he has been going through an identity crisis. Take a look at his best 2 years. In 2002 he was striking out over 6 guys an inning but was more of a flyball pitcher. Over the next few years both those stats gradually changed. In 2005 his K's were way down but his groundball ratio was way up. It was well documented that Kyle had some troubles with the Twins coaching staff, could this be his biggest problem? Maybe if he finds a pitching coach that is consistant and either coaches one style over the other he might settle in.

I think Kyle was confused in 2006, was he a groundball pitcher, or a strikeout guy. Once he figures that out he will be fine. If Dick Pole and Kyle can figure out his style, I think we are going to have a gem on our hands. Remember 2002-2005 numbers were in the AL. I think with our new MI, a year sub 4.0 ERA is very possible.

The main 2 things that jump out at me from this data are...

1. Lohse is a back of the rotation guy at best.

2. The manlove for Ted Lilly on this board is unfathomable. He's at best a #3, but probably more suited to also be a back of the rotation guy.

Will M
11-25-2006, 08:45 PM
Lohse may be primed for a good year ( he is a free agent at the end of 2007 ). i would keep him. if we fall out of contention he could net a good return in a trade mid season.

pedro
11-25-2006, 08:48 PM
Where are you getting those Lohse 2006 numbers? He did not have a 4.86 ERA for the season.

2006- His ERA in cincy in 63 innings was 4.57 (7.07 in 63 innings for the twins)

His career ERA is 4.86

RedsManRick
11-25-2006, 08:58 PM
Yup. My interpretation of the above is that Ted Lilly isn't a great pitcher and neither of these guys should be anybody's #3.

vaticanplum
11-25-2006, 09:01 PM
You know, Lohse's numbers to me are very relative. If we can pull in a great #3 (or #2 or #1) pitcher during the offseason, I'd grant a lot more leeway to the numbers 4 & 5 starters. Those stats at #4 can look serviceable or awful depending on who's one spot ahead of him.

deltachi8
11-25-2006, 09:15 PM
Yup. My interpretation of the above is that Ted Lilly isn't a great pitcher and neither of these guys should be anybody's #3.

I agree.

vaticanplum
11-25-2006, 09:30 PM
Regarding Ted Lilly, I think the Yankees may sign him if they don't get Kei Igawa (that bidding will end Monday). This is just a hunch of mine. The Yankees have been publicly lukewarm on him...but Lilly has said he'd like to go back there, so I think they could agree on a price that might be less than what he'd take from other teams, but still a substantial amount that the Yankees can afford. He'd be a serviceable #3 (or 4 depending on Johnson) there. Again, it's just a hunch, but I've heard very little about the Yankees chasing any other big-name pitcher. They've surprised in the past, but still it's odd since the Yankees typically come up in rumors for every major free agent on earth.

Willy
11-25-2006, 09:57 PM
What I really want to talk about is Kyle's G/F #'s and K #'s. Is it posssible that he has gone through an Identity crisis? I'm not that familiar with the Twins pitching coach situation, was there a change somewhere between 2002 and 2005? It seems odd that a pitcher can change that much, 2 less k's a game, but a .52 change in his G/F ratio? If we can get him back to 2005 form, with or MI defence, nd a switch to the NL. A sub 4 ERA doesn't sound all that far fetched.

Falls City Beer
11-25-2006, 10:10 PM
What I really want to talk about is Kyle's G/F #'s and K #'s. Is it posssible that he has gone through an Identity crisis? I'm not that familiar with the Twins pitching coach situation, was there a change somewhere between 2002 and 2005? It seems odd that a pitcher can change that much, 2 less k's a game, but a .52 change in his G/F ratio? If we can get him back to 2005 form, with or MI defence, nd a switch to the NL. A sub 4 ERA doesn't sound all that far fetched.

Lohse has never been a K pitcher. And not enough of a GB pitcher to make much difference.

Willy
11-25-2006, 11:56 PM
Lohse has never been a K pitcher. And not enough of a GB pitcher to make much difference.

It just seemed like a strange trend to me. Maybe I'm looking at something that isn't that big of a deal.

Mario-Rijo
11-26-2006, 12:40 AM
It just seemed like a strange trend to me. Maybe I'm looking at something that isn't that big of a deal.

I think it's an interesting thought and something worth keeping an eye on. My gut would say that he fancies himself a strikeout pitcher and perhaps the Minnesota staff didn't feel the same and asked him to change his approach. He tried it and wasn't K'ing enough guys for his liking (or felt he wasn't being true to himself) and it became a point of contention between the 2 thus cometh the "Doghouse".

It's really not all that different from what the Reds (and every other team) experienced with Brett Tomko. Young pitchers sometimes have this issue. I guess what it boils down to is if he can have success doing things "his way" then fine but if not he is always gonna have trouble until he embraces the idea of actually becoming a pitcher. I think that he showed me enough to think that he may have it right, he has some good stuff. But this next season will show whether he's right or not.

fewfirstchoice
11-26-2006, 01:39 AM
Rijo I agree I to believe Lohse is better than most here give him credit for.Give him a season here and see what he can do.Hes young and throws hard thats a pretty good combo in todays game.He can learn to be more in the zone and mind strong.

FCB why do you hate Lohses game so much?He didnt pitch bad enough for Cincy for you to dislike it this much.

Handofdeath
11-26-2006, 02:46 AM
When you compare Lohse's #'s with other NL starters who are #3-#5 on their staffs, his #'s compare pretty favorably. Give him some time with Pole and the Reds might have themselves a pretty good middle of the rotation starter.

Redsland
11-26-2006, 11:32 AM
Yeah, who knows how he'll respond to Dick Pole's prodding?

cincy09
11-26-2006, 11:44 AM
Yeah, who knows how he'll respond to Dick Pole's prodding?

wow, that's an image I didn't need.

Chip R
11-26-2006, 02:36 PM
When you compare Lohse's #'s with other NL starters who are #3-#5 on their staffs, his #'s compare pretty favorably. Give him some time with Pole and the Reds might have themselves a pretty good middle of the rotation starter.


And if he were making under $2M, I'd be all for him. But he could make anywhere between $5-8M next year. Personally, I'd rather have someone in there who could do as well for a lot less money.

Willy
11-26-2006, 02:58 PM
And if he were making under $2M, I'd be all for him. But he could make anywhere between $5-8M next year. Personally, I'd rather have someone in there who could do as well for a lot less money.


Why don't we wait to see his contract before we decide if he is worth it or not.

Redsland
11-26-2006, 05:31 PM
Why don't we wait to see his contract before we decide if he is worth it or not.
Because we already know what his contract is going to look like, and if we wait for it to materialize, he's going to get paid either 20% or 100% of it.

Kyle Lohse is in his third and final year of arbitration eligibility. That means he can compare himself to any and all players irrespective of service time. So his arbitration figure will be bouyed by the bloated contracts of former free agents who have stats comparable to his.

Kyle started 11 games (a third of the season) for the Reds and put up a 4.57 ERA against a league average of 4.81, for an ERA+ of 105. He did that on a contract that paid him $3.95 million after a season in which he posted an identical ERA+ of 105. Since that was only his second arbitration season, he was not yet able to compare himself to all players, which suppressed his dollar amount. This year, it's wide open.

We know his agent has won for him in arbitration before. We know the Reds have to offer at least $3.16 million (maximum 20% pay cut), and we know that they'll have to offer at least $5 million to keep from getting laughed out of the hearing. So you have to ask yourself here and now (or at least prior to offering arbitration), is Kyle Lohse worth at least $5 million? If not, then now's the time to cut and run. Not after he has a deal.

Falls City Beer
11-26-2006, 06:02 PM
Because we already know what his contract is going to look like, and if we wait for it to materialize, he's going to get paid either 20% or 100% of it.

Kyle Lohse is in his third and final year of arbitration eligibility. That means he can compare himself to any and all players irrespective of service time. So his arbitration figure will be bouyed by the bloated contracts of former free agents who have stats comparable to his.

Kyle started 11 games (a third of the season) for the Reds and put up a 4.57 ERA against a league average of 4.81, for an ERA+ of 105. He did that on a contract that paid him $3.95 million after a season in which he posted an identical ERA+ of 105. Since that was only his second arbitration season, he was not yet able to compare himself to all players, which suppressed his dollar amount. This year, it's wide open.

We know his agent has won for him in arbitration before. We know the Reds have to offer at least $3.16 million (maximum 20% pay cut), and we know that they'll have to offer at least $5 million to keep from getting laughed out of the hearing. So you have to ask yourself here and now (or at least prior to offering arbitration), is Kyle Lohse worth at least $5 million? If not, then now's the time to cut and run. Not after he has a deal.

They know roughly what Lohse will make. Paying that to him would be to nickel and dime the team into obscurity.

Think about this: if the Reds sign Lohse to a 5.5 million one year deal then next year's payroll would comprise $20 million going to Milton, Lohse, and Gonzalez. :barf:

That's like making a sweater out of bellybutton lint.

fearofpopvol1
11-26-2006, 07:53 PM
They know roughly what Lohse will make. Paying that to him would be to nickel and dime the team into obscurity.

Think about this: if the Reds sign Lohse to a 5.5 million one year deal then next year's payroll would comprise $20 million going to Milton, Lohse, and Gonzalez. :barf:

That's like making a sweater out of bellybutton lint.

I do agree, but that seems to be the going rate for a pitcher of Lohse's caliber this offseason, unfortunately. Is it worth paying $5.5 million for Lohse or would you rather pay much less and have Belisle or Ramirez in the rotation?

I guess it all depends on how serious this team is about trying to contend.

Falls City Beer
11-26-2006, 07:57 PM
Is it worth paying $5.5 million for Lohse or would you rather pay much less and have Belisle or Ramirez in the rotation?
.

I don't think those are the only two choices.

fearofpopvol1
11-26-2006, 07:59 PM
I don't think those are the only two choices.

What are the other alternatives that will a.) be much less expensive and b.) post better numbers than Lohse?

Falls City Beer
11-26-2006, 08:02 PM
What are the other alternatives that will a.) be much less expensive and b.) post better numbers than Lohse?

Why does said player HAVE to be "much less expensive?" I don't get it. Are we looking to budget the Ovaltine or are we looking to put together a winning franchise?

Falls City Beer
11-26-2006, 08:11 PM
What are the other alternatives that will post better numbers than Lohse?

Doug Davis (oops)

Woody Williams (oops)

Jason Jennings

I'd roll the dice on a dirtcheap Taylor Buchholz (sure he's a longshot, but he'd cost nothing)

Aaron Heilman

Ron Villone

Matt Belisle

Horacio Ramirez

Tomo Ohka

westofyou
11-26-2006, 08:16 PM
Ron Villone
48% of Ron's starts were as a Red, a team he left in 2000.

He's a reliever now.

Falls City Beer
11-26-2006, 08:17 PM
He's a reliever now.

So is Lohse.

If he's lucky.

fearofpopvol1
11-26-2006, 08:35 PM
Doug Davis (oops)

Woody Williams (oops)

Jason Jennings

I'd roll the dice on a dirtcheap Taylor Buchholz (sure he's a longshot, but he'd cost nothing)

Aaron Heilman

Ron Villone

Matt Belisle

Horacio Ramirez

Tomo Ohka

Davis was traded, not signed as a free agent.

Williams was not a less expensive option and significantly older than Lohse.

Jennings is owned by the Rockies so unless you plan on giving something of note up for him, you're not going to get him.

Heilman is great, but he is also a reliever. The reds need starting pitcher much more.

Villone had a 5.04 ERA last season which is not better than Lohse (even though his salary is less). He's also much older than Lohse and again, is a reliever.

H. Ramirez would be a nice addition, but has a history of injuries and that's never a good thing. I could be wrong, but I think he is due for a raise too from his 2.2 million.

Belisle is a huge question mark with injuries and uncertainty, but it's certainly a less expensive option.

Ohka's ERA last season was worse than Lohse's and was making similar to Lohse last season. However, I think he would be one of the better options.

mth123
11-26-2006, 08:36 PM
Doug Davis (oops)

Woody Williams (oops)

Jason Jennings

I'd roll the dice on a dirtcheap Taylor Buchholz (sure he's a longshot, but he'd cost nothing)

Aaron Heilman

Ron Villone

Matt Belisle

Horacio Ramirez

Tomo Ohka

Kevin Correia

Wil Ledezma

Tony Armas Jr

Ryan Madson ....

Falls City Beer
11-26-2006, 08:39 PM
Davis was traded, not signed as a free agent.

Williams was not a less expensive option and significantly older than Lohse.

Jennings is owned by the Rockies so unless you plan on giving something of note up for him, you're not going to get him.

Heilman is great, but he is also a reliever. The reds need starting pitcher much more.

Villone had a 5.04 ERA last season which is not better than Lohse (even though his salary is less). He's also much older than Lohse and again, is a reliever.

H. Ramirez would be a nice addition, but has a history of injuries and that's never a good thing. I could be wrong, but I think he is due for a raise too from his 2.2 million.

Belisle is a huge question mark with injuries and uncertainty, but it's certainly a less expensive option.

Ohka's ERA last season was worse than Lohse's and was making similar to Lohse last season. However, I think he would be one of the better options.


Man, you and your stipulations: I can't trade for someone better? I can't pay little more for someone who's a lot better?

Again, I don't get it. I thought teams had more than one way to go out and fix their teams.

(Ohka's season ERA was much lower than Lohse's combined AL/NL numbers)

Willy
11-26-2006, 08:49 PM
Doug Davis (oops)

Woody Williams (oops)

Jason Jennings

I'd roll the dice on a dirtcheap Taylor Buchholz (sure he's a longshot, but he'd cost nothing)

Aaron Heilman

Ron Villone

Matt Belisle

Horacio Ramirez

Tomo Ohka

You list a total of 2 guys the Reds wouldn't have to trade talent for.

Woody Williams just signed for $6.25 Million a year, and he is 40, and hasn't pitched over 200 innings in 3 years.

Why the hate for Loshe?

Chip R
11-26-2006, 08:53 PM
I do agree, but that seems to be the going rate for a pitcher of Lohse's caliber this offseason, unfortunately. Is it worth paying $5.5 million for Lohse or would you rather pay much less and have Belisle or Ramirez in the rotation?

I guess it all depends on how serious this team is about trying to contend.


I'd rather have one of those two in the rotation rather than Lohse at $5-6M. Or, I'd like to get someone else. Lohse was available for next to nothing, surely someone else is. Plus, if you don't pay Lohse $5-6M and you add another $3-4M to that, you can get yourself a mighty fine pitcher. Or at the very least someone in Harang and Arroyo's class. I'm not against paying someone $5-6M. I'm just against paying that kind of money and getting results you could get from someone making major league minimum.

Willy
11-26-2006, 08:54 PM
Man, you and your stipulations: I can't trade for someone better? I can't pay little more for someone who's a lot better?

Again, I don't get it. I thought teams had more than one way to go out and fix their teams.

(Ohka's season ERA was much lower than Lohse's combined AL/NL numbers)

Trades are fine, but you are either weakening your current team or your future, you must consider this in the true expense of a player.

fearofpopvol1
11-26-2006, 08:57 PM
You list a total of 2 guys the Reds wouldn't have to trade talent for.

Woody Williams just signed for $6.25 Million a year, and he is 40, and hasn't pitched over 200 innings in 3 years.

Why the hate for Loshe?

This is essentially the point I was trying to get across in my other post.

Surely Lohse is overpaid and there are better options than him. However, given the marketplace, the restrictions the Reds have financially and given the trading chips they have (or lack there of), the Reds seemingly don't have many (better) options.

mth123
11-26-2006, 09:02 PM
Trades are fine, but you are either weakening your current team or your future, you must consider this in the true expense of a player.

Or you are adding a piece that can be a cornerstone. I wouldn't trade for guys who only will be around in 2007.

Will M
11-26-2006, 11:01 PM
what can Lohse likely give that Milton, EZ, Belisle, Claussen and Bailey likely won't?

200 innings

heck, he might even post a sub 5 era for those 200 innings.

IMO Lohse is fine as a #4 or #5 starter for 2007.

westofyou
11-26-2006, 11:13 PM
Davis was traded, not signed as a free agent.

Traded out of the division too, but of course that doesn't matter.. nor the return (which the Reds couldn't match with young talent)

Falls City Beer
11-26-2006, 11:37 PM
what can Lohse likely give that Milton, EZ, Belisle, Claussen and Bailey likely won't?

200 innings

heck, he might even post a sub 5 era for those 200 innings.

IMO Lohse is fine as a #4 or #5 starter for 2007.

Lohse hasn't thrown 200 innings since 2003. And that only once.

I'll explain my dislike of Lohse: he makes pitch selections that would make Brett Tomko or Josias Manzanillo blush. And while, yes, sometimes a game is called from the dugout, he still insists either on: a. throwing a different pitch or b. throwing it in the wrong spot.

Also, I do not see what others see in his "stuff." I think it's very straight, very pedestrian, and very, very hittable.

There's a very high probability that he'll repeat his 2006 numbers in 2007: do you want $15 million tied up in Milton and Lohse, two guys with @ .800 OPSA and 5+ ERAs for the season?

If you're fine with that okay. We're just going to have to agree to disagree.

Ravenlord
11-27-2006, 06:41 AM
for most intents and purposes, Paul Wilson and Kyle Lohse have identical career numbers. as pointed out, even when calling pitches from the dugout, Lohse doesn't always follow suit. if Lohse had Wilson's makeup, he'd probably be a front line pitcher.

the scouting reports i can find on Lohse (from 2002, 2004 and 2005) all say pretty much the same thing: hard fastball with no movement, good curveball, changeup that needs to improve as he rarely maintains arm speed with it. he has to hit his spots with the fastball or he'll get hard. needs to improve his endurance as he visibly tires around the fifth inning. my observation is that he's Luke Hudson with better control and poorer curveball.

pitches 1-15 are bad for Lohse. but afterward he pitches fairly well until he gets to 50 pitches, then his numbers jump up to his first 15 pitches (296 BAA).

Lohse screams good set up guy to me. Ted Lilly, Tomo Ohka, and Jason Jennings are where the FAs suring up the rotation are at. Ohka is the only one i expect to be horribly over priced this market's standards. though Lilly is the better pitcher, i think the Reds should heavily pursue Jennings as he will benefit immensly from Encarnacion, Gonzalez, and Phillips.

and as to the original comparison of the thread (as well as a couple others):

Player ERA IP K/BB BB/9 K/9 H/9 HR/9 WHIP GB/FB OBA SLG BABIP
Wilson 4.86 941.2 1.82 3.21 5.92 9.83 1.20 1.45 0.99 345 452 299
Lohse 4.86 971.1 1.99 2.85 5.67 10.15 1.25 1.44 0.94 343 453 304
Lilly 4.60 936 2.09 3.67 7.68 8.73 1.38 1.39 0.73 326 433 281
Davis 4.35 1089.2 1.70 3.91 6.67 9.29 0.93 1.47 1.13 344 415 301
Ohka 4.04 943 2.06 249 5.13 9.90 1.07 1.38 1.05 330 439 296
Jennings4.74 941 1.46 4.06 5.95 9.87 0.99 1.55 1.37 359 438 310

jojo
11-27-2006, 10:06 AM
Here's the biggest factor in the equation for me..... the Reds actually control Lohse for 1 more year. Even if they go to arbitration and lose and Lohse stinks it up in '07, one year of bad at $5-6M is ALOT better than 3 years of bad at $24-27M from a free agent signing....

Redsland
11-27-2006, 11:09 AM
Even if they go to arbitration and lose and Lohse stinks it up in '07, one year of bad at $5-6M is ALOT better than 3 years of bad at $24-27M from a free agent signing....
Is there a choice that involves a couple years of good? That seems preferable to your other choices.

jojo
11-27-2006, 11:24 AM
Is there a choice that involves a couple years of good? That seems preferable to your other choices.

;)

I was arguing from a risk management point of view.... I really don't see a free agent arm (especially in the Reds price range) that won't require taking on an undesirable amount of risk.

The Reds have adopted a small market payroll philosophy-good risk management is paramount to success for such teams when signing free agents because payroll flexibility is severely taxed at $65M.

BRM
11-27-2006, 01:28 PM
If Milton has to stay, then Lohse has to go. Having both of them in the rotation would be very bad news for the Reds in 2007. Especially if they occupy the 3 and 4 spots.

flyer85
11-27-2006, 01:30 PM
Having either of them in the rotation would be very bad news for the Reds in 2007. fixed

BRM
11-27-2006, 02:28 PM
fixed

Well, my preference would definitely be having neither in the rotation but I suspect we are stuck seeing at least one of them every fifth day. I can live with one of them as long as they are the #5 guy.

TeamSelig
11-27-2006, 03:03 PM
We're not doomed if they are both in the rotation IMO

Milton led the team in quality starts (or was close, can't remember)... his contract is HORRIBLE I'll agree with that, and when he is not pitching well, he really sucks, but he pitches pretty good games quite a bit.