PDA

View Full Version : Brandon Claussen DFA



Tom Servo
12-12-2006, 05:33 PM
per Marc's blog:


I should've seen this one coming. The Reds have finalized the David Weathers deal and cleared room for him on the 40-man roster by designating Brandon Claussen for assignment.

harangatang
12-12-2006, 05:36 PM
Yikes, his arm must not be good.

Aronchis
12-12-2006, 05:36 PM
Claussen's rotator cuff injury has probably been his "problem"(starting with fraying) and why he lost pop. Sad Brandon only got one decent year, should have been more.

Now another youngster steps up the ladder.

RedsManRick
12-12-2006, 05:37 PM
TINSTAAPP strikes again! Guess that Boone trade didn't work out so well after all. Wonder if he'll make it through waivers? I'm guessing he will since most people's 40 mans are full after the rule 5.

If he's not on the 40 man -- does he stay in the org and undergo more surgery or is he toast?

Joseph
12-12-2006, 05:47 PM
Nice guy. Hope the adage about nice guys doesn't hold true in his case.

Aronchis
12-12-2006, 05:47 PM
TINSTAAPP strikes again! Guess that Boone trade didn't work out so well after all. Wonder if he'll make it through waivers? I'm guessing he will since most people's 40 mans are full after the rule 5.

If he's not on the 40 man -- does he stay in the org and undergo more surgery or is he toast?

Though the JoseG deal was the equalizer. I remember when those deals went down, the opposite was ringing true...........

reds44
12-12-2006, 05:51 PM
That was a good move. Hopefully he never, ever wears a Reds uniform again.

dougdirt
12-12-2006, 06:12 PM
Claussen was never a major pitching prospect, so the whole there is no such thing as a pitching prospects doesnt hold much water if you want to use him as the example.

Heath
12-12-2006, 06:13 PM
Claussen was never a major pitching prospect, so the whole there is no such thing as a pitching prospects doesnt hold much water if you want to use him as the example.

He was just the best thing the Yankees had left.

pedro
12-12-2006, 06:40 PM
No, Claussen was a very highly regarded pitching prospect, Yankee hype or not.

Falls City Beer
12-12-2006, 06:42 PM
No, Claussen was a very highly regarded pitching prospect, Yankee hype or not.

Nothing quite like a little revisionist history, eh?

Aronchis
12-12-2006, 06:47 PM
Nothing quite like a little revisionist history, eh?

Yep, except Claussen was good. Before his intial injury, watching him in Columbus, the dude had nasty stuff. 91-94mph heater mixed in with a nasty slider and good cutter(the only decent pitch he had left).

Big time talent, but his delivery caught up to him.

Falls City Beer
12-12-2006, 06:50 PM
Yep, except Claussen was good. Before his intial injury, watching him in Columbus, the dude had nasty stuff. 91-94mph heater mixed in with a nasty slider and good cutter(the only decent pitch he had left).

Big time talent, but his delivery caught up to him.

No, I'm agreeing with Pedro. I really think he was a good prospect. I was goofing on the people saying he was crap to begin with.

Aronchis
12-12-2006, 06:51 PM
No, I'm agreeing with Pedro. I really think he was a good prospect. I was goofing on the people saying he was crap to begin with.

gotcha.

Willy
12-12-2006, 06:53 PM
I don't think this is much of surprise, he will sign a minor league deal with the Reds as he works his way back from injury.

I hope we see him back in a Reds uniform stronger than ever.

RFS62
12-12-2006, 06:56 PM
No, I'm agreeing with Pedro. I really think he was a good prospect. I was goofing on the people saying he was crap to begin with.



I do too. He was a good prospect at one time.

Good luck, kid.

redsupport
12-12-2006, 07:13 PM
He was/is/ and a;lways will be DROSS

Falls City Beer
12-12-2006, 07:15 PM
He was/is/ and a;lways will be DROSS

Except that his one good season trumps anything Milton's done since he's been here.

Dracodave
12-12-2006, 07:17 PM
Except that his one good season trumps anything Milton's done since he's been here.



Not to mention the fact that. He's younger than Milton and bad mechinics that no one fixed (and proper mind set) lead to a downfall. Claussen wasn't my favorite Reds pitcher, but he wasn't my most hated. Infact, there were days I called for his head and days where I said "..Claussen should start before him..

RANDY IN INDY
12-12-2006, 07:50 PM
I do too. He was a good prospect at one time.

Good luck, kid.

The word, prospect, is always iffy, good or not. With that said, "Good Luck, Brandon."

Gallen5862
12-12-2006, 08:03 PM
I think he will probably clear waivers and the Reds will assign him to AAA. If he had been tendered he would have gone to arbitration. This way the Reds can sign him to a minor league deal.

Superdude
12-12-2006, 08:17 PM
I'm glad we were able to hang onto Chad Moeller. :rolleyes: Either Claussen's arm has turned to peanut butter or Wayne Krvisky is stoned again.

camisadelgolf
12-12-2006, 08:23 PM
I'm glad we were able to hang onto Chad Moeller. :rolleyes: Either Claussen's arm has turned to peanut butter or Wayne Krvisky is stoned again.
. . . or the Reds are trying to sign him to a minor league deal. Yeah, the guy who traded for Brandon Phillips and David Ross must be stoned. :help:

Highlifeman21
12-12-2006, 08:33 PM
I don't think this is much of surprise, he will sign a minor league deal with the Reds as he works his way back from injury.

I hope we see him back in a Reds uniform stronger than ever.

I'd take a hurt Claussen over a healthy Milton or healthy Lizard everyday.

Maybe I'm still drinkin the prospect hype kool aid, but I think Claussen could eventually be a #3 or #4 for the Reds.

IslandRed
12-12-2006, 08:45 PM
I held out hope for a long time that his stuff would come back. I agree with some of you -- he really was a top prospect. Check out his pitching lines from the minors and the age at which he was putting them up... no fool's gold there.

It's possible that he tried to come back from the TJ too soon, I don't know. But it just points out that not everyone makes it all the way back soon, or at all.

TeamSelig
12-12-2006, 08:58 PM
Claussen is done. Maybe some day he will make it as a LH specialist but don't count on it.

George Anderson
12-12-2006, 09:28 PM
So if we brought Boone back and signed him to a minimal contract wouldnt that kinda be like a do over???:rolleyes:

Hap
12-12-2006, 09:34 PM
Is it at all possible that he will be given a minor league assignment?

bradmu
12-12-2006, 09:53 PM
Claussen had always shown a lot of promise in the Minors. I know when he first came over to the Reds he was a high strikeout pitcher. He seemed to be inconsistent. A typical game, he'd be on for 5 innings, but have 1 bad one. I was hoping that he'd continue to make strides in his development along side Harang...but he seemed to have a lot of set backs.

I sure hope he is able to recover and end up back with the club. Lance posted an article about Claussen from his hometown news paper about a month ago. It reflected the sentiments of many of the posters here about what a nice human being he is. Good luck Claussen.

UGADaddy
12-12-2006, 10:10 PM
All the best to him. I was pulling for him to recover. Hope he makes it back to the bigs someday...

JaxRed
12-12-2006, 10:24 PM
Is it at all possible that he will be given a minor league assignment?

At least 50/50. If he had been non-tendered, he'd be a FA and gone. Now we have 10 days to determine trade interest.

If there is none, they put him on waivers. If he clears, he goes to minors for Reds.

gm
12-12-2006, 10:46 PM
Looks like BC won't be Josh Hamilton's roomie

TOBTTReds
12-12-2006, 11:43 PM
His 2001 season in AA really put him on the map as a legit prospect.

21 games, 131 ip, 101 h, 151 k, 55 bb, 2.13 ERA....If the Reds had someone like that, we'd be drooling over him and calling him a great prospect.

WVRedsFan
12-13-2006, 12:02 AM
I think he will probably clear waivers and the Reds will assign him to AAA. If he had been tendered he would have gone to arbitration. This way the Reds can sign him to a minor league deal.

In this market, I don't think he'll clear. Someone will take a chance on him as a cheap 3rd starter.

WVRedsFan
12-13-2006, 12:04 AM
Claussen is done. Maybe some day he will make it as a LH specialist but don't count on it.


I keep thinking that we're missing the folks who said Paul Wilson would be pitching after the all star break (not you, some others).

Anyway, he may be toast, but someone will take a chance on him just like someone took a chance on Ryan Dempster.

Jpup
12-13-2006, 05:57 AM
I'm glad I got to watch him pitch a great game, in person, last year against the Phillies. I guess the shots wore off. Good luck and I hope he makes his way back when he is healthy.

Tom Servo
12-13-2006, 07:13 AM
Rotoworld is saying Claussen was non-tendered (along with Miguel Perez):

Reds non-tendered LHP Brandon Claussen.
All 28 non-tenders can now be found below. Obviously, the Reds' move to designate Claussen for assignment Tuesday was just a stall tactic. This is another loophole MLB should close one of these years. It's a silly rule that players like Claussen should have to go through waivers every other time of year, but not for one day in December. Maybe it makes sense for arbitration-eligible players, but those without the service time should be subject to the waiver wire just like they would be at any other time. The Reds now have a better chance of keeping Claussen than they would have otherwise. Still, someone should trump them with a guaranteed contract.

TRF
12-13-2006, 10:16 AM
. . . or the Reds are trying to sign him to a minor league deal. Yeah, the guy who traded for Brandon Phillips and David Ross must be stoned. :help:

oh please.

I guess that means he was stone sober when he acquired Joe Freaking Mays too.:bang:

camisadelgolf
12-13-2006, 11:29 AM
I don't understand your point, and I'm not sure you understand mine. Anyway, I don't think the idea of signing Mays was a bad idea (a groundball pitcher coming to a new league for cheap)--it was just one of those things that didn't work out. All I'm trying to say is that Superdude's criticism was uncalled for, seeing as how Way-K went about the Claussen release in the smartest way possible, in my opinion.

TRF
12-13-2006, 11:43 AM
Oh, i agree that DFA was the way to go over a non-tender.

But on no planet, in no universe was signing Joe Mays a good idea. not even in principle. Dude sucked in KC! A 10.27 ERA in six games started there. He was done in 2002. Yes, he was cheap. There was a reason for that. He was awful. Flat out awful. 7 games with the Reds was 7 too many, and 4 starts?

oy.

What I get tired of is reading about the three transactions Krivsky got right and anointing him a genius because of it. Especially getting Phillips. I read the same thing: "...29 other teams passed on him." So what? maybe those teams felt ok at 2B? The Reds certainly weren't. Not with Tony Womack running around with a wishbone C on his cap.

Ross was dumb luck, and Arroyo was a right fit with Boston who had no place for him in their rotation. At least at the time of the trade.

DFA'ing Claussen was the right move to remove him from the 40 man roster. However, it wasn't necessary, because signing Chad Moeller wasn't necessary.

dsmith421
12-13-2006, 11:59 AM
Anyway, I don't think the idea of signing Mays was a bad idea (a groundball pitcher coming to a new league for cheap)--it was just one of those things that didn't work out.

I once made a pie, but instead of fruit or chocolate filling I filled it with dog crap. Surprisingly, it tasted awful. I guess that's just one of those things that didn't work out.

camisadelgolf
12-13-2006, 02:53 PM
That analogy is very subtle, but I'm going to guess that the "dog crap" is AL All-Star starting pitcher, Joe Mays, who should not have been given a chance based on six starts (even though pretty much any pitcher ever has looked bad over a six-start period).

Team Clark
12-13-2006, 02:59 PM
That analogy is very subtle, but I'm going to guess that the "dog crap" is AL All-Star starting pitcher, Joe Mays, who should not have been given a chance based on six starts (even though pretty much any pitcher ever has looked bad over a six-start period).

Remember Reuss in '87? I saw him in one of those starts. Whew... Pete was Hoppin' mad when he got to the mound to take the ball.

0-5 7GS 34.7IP 52H 30ER 12BB 10SO 7.79 ERA 1.846WHIP :thumbdown

Now THAT is BAD!!

He even rebounded the next season with the White Sox.

BRM
12-13-2006, 03:02 PM
That analogy is very subtle, but I'm going to guess that the "dog crap" is AL All-Star starting pitcher, Joe Mays, who should not have been given a chance based on six starts (even though pretty much any pitcher ever has looked bad over a six-start period).

Joe Mays has looked bad over a four year period.

camisadelgolf
12-13-2006, 03:14 PM
I know it's apples and oranges, but his ERA was floating around 3.00 in AAA. And it's not like they were looking for him to duplicate that at the ML level, but I'm guessing they were hoping for something in the 4.00-5.00 ERA range. Besides, at the time of the call-up, almost anyone would have been an improvement. And for a (very) short while, he was an improvement. Hindsight's 20/20--I'll just leave it at that.

And about the Reuss example, it had been a while since he had last had success before he made a comeback in '88, so thank you for bring that up, Team Clark.

dsmith421
12-13-2006, 04:09 PM
That analogy is very subtle, but I'm going to guess that the "dog crap" is AL All-Star starting pitcher, Joe Mays, who should not have been given a chance based on six starts (even though pretty much any pitcher ever has looked bad over a six-start period).

2005 in KC: 6-10, 5.65 ERA, 1.564 WHIP
2006 in KC: 0-4, 10.27ERA, 2.197 WHIP.

Since missing 2004, the guy had been abject and total garbage. He's the pitching equivalent of dog crap.

Low risk moves are fine, I guess, if there's any chance of reward. Joe Mays had shown no reason to believe he could get anyone out at the major league level since returning from injury.

I could care less what the guy did in the first half of the 2001 season. That kind of attitude is what netted us the roster full of geriatric batting tees that made last spring so delightful.

BRM
12-13-2006, 04:11 PM
2005 in KC: 6-10, 5.65 ERA, 1.564 WHIP
2006 in KC: 0-4, 10.27ERA, 2.197 WHIP.

Since missing 2004, the guy had been abject and total garbage. He's the pitching equivalent of dog crap.


You're being very kind. He was garbage in 2002 and 2003 as well.

Dracodave
12-13-2006, 04:15 PM
Whats the point?

camisadelgolf
12-13-2006, 04:43 PM
You keep using Mays' previous few years as the only evidence needed to say that he was going to do poorly. What about Schoeneweis? He allowed one run over 16 games with the Reds, and what did he do prior to that? You'd probably call it "dog crap".

When Krivsky signed Mays, I don't think anyone ever said the Reds were getting a guy who would put up Cy Young-type numbers. It was just an attempt to fill a hole that desperately needed filling, and the options he had at that time were players like:
Chris Michalak
Justin Germano
Jason Standridge
Brian Shackelford
Mike Burns
Mike Gosling
Ryan Wagner
Jake Robbins

I mean, what are you supposed to do when those are your alternatives to Dave Williams, Rick White, and Chris Hammond? I'm just trying to say that, given the situation, Mays deserved a shot. Granted, the way he pitched, he didn't deserve 27 innings, but he deserved a shot, nonetheless.

TRF
12-13-2006, 04:48 PM
You keep using Mays' previous few years as the only evidence needed to say that he was going to do poorly. What about Schoeneweis? He allowed one run over 16 games with the Reds, and what did he do prior to that? You'd probably call it "dog crap".

When Krivsky signed Mays, I don't think anyone ever said the Reds were getting a guy who would put up Cy Young-type numbers. It was just an attempt to fill a hole that desperately needed filling, and the options he had at that time were players like:
Chris Michalak
Justin Germano
Jason Standridge
Brian Shackelford
Mike Burns
Mike Gosling
Ryan Wagner
Jake Robbins

I mean, what are you supposed to do when those are your alternatives to Dave Williams, Rick White, and Chris Hammond? I'm just trying to say that, given the situation, Mays deserved a shot. Granted, the way he pitched, he didn't deserve 27 innings, but he deserved a shot, nonetheless.

Of the guys you listed only 2 were starters, and I'd have taken Germano over Mays 10 times out of 10.

dsmith421
12-13-2006, 04:54 PM
When Krivsky signed Mays, I don't think anyone ever said the Reds were getting a guy who would put up Cy Young-type numbers. It was just an attempt to fill a hole that desperately needed filling, and the options he had at that time were players like

Justin Germano

There you go. At least if he goes out and stinks up the joint, you have learned something about a player in your organization. Every other pitcher you named (AFAI remember) is a reliever and is thus irrelevant.

No need to go dumpster diving in Kansas City.

[And no, Schoeneweis' 14 good innings in CIncinnati do not make him a good pitcher. It made him a lucky one for two weeks. Mays' 27 inning disaster was exactly in line with his production in '04 and '05; therefore, it was eminently foreseeable.]

camisadelgolf
12-13-2006, 05:17 PM
dsmith421, what were you for Halloween this year? Failure-to-See-the-Point Man? I never said Schoeneweis was good. In fact, I tried to imply the opposite. I was just saying that Krivsky was hoping for more "luck" from Mays and that his odds were about as good as anyone else's available at the time. Germano may have seemed like a better option to some, but 1.) he had twice as many innings as strikeouts, 2.) it would have added to his service time, 3.) he probably would've been knocked around just as much, and 4.) Mays, although only a limited amount, had a history of MLB success (and in 2006, had more minor league success, too, for whatever that's worth).

TRF
12-13-2006, 05:32 PM
dsmith421, what were you for Halloween this year? Failure-to-See-the-Point Man? I never said Schoeneweis was good. In fact, I tried to imply the opposite. I was just saying that Krivsky was hoping for more "luck" from Mays and that his odds were about as good as anyone else's available at the time. Germano may have seemed like a better option to some, but 1.) he had twice as many innings as strikeouts, 2.) it would have added to his service time, 3.) he probably would've been knocked around just as much, and 4.) Mays, although only a limited amount, had a history of MLB success (and in 2006, had more minor league success, too, for whatever that's worth).


no, he didn't. this year 8 K's 6.2 ip. Did you mean for his career? 24 K's, 28 ip. Not much of a book on him at the major league level.
So?
You actually don't know that. And his one start was better than ANY of Mays starts in two leagues in 2006.
His success was in 2001. He's had one good year since 1999. Jimmy Haynes had a better resume.As for Schoeweis, his three year splits indicate that as a reliever he wasn't awful. He dominated LH hitters. As a situational Lefty, he wasn't a bad pickup.

dsmith421
12-13-2006, 06:21 PM
dsmith421, what were you for Halloween this year? Failure-to-See-the-Point Man?

That's the single worst joke of all time. Congratulations.

No, the point is that there is no reason, no reason at all for anyone to believe that Joe Mays could contribute anything to the Reds in 2006 except giving up a load of runs. You seem to think it was a gamble that surprisingly worked out poorly. I think it's like betting on the Washington Generals.

camisadelgolf
12-14-2006, 09:11 AM
About Germano's K numbers, I used hyperbole. In AAA, he had a 5.15 k/9ip rate. That screams to me "hittable"--especially in MLB. But hey, maybe he's a control pitcher. Well, once you get past his career WHIP of 2.00.

But anyway, let me address the part where I said that it was surprising that the Mays trial didn't work out:

All I'm saying is that Mays was worth a limited chance at success. He was an All-Star in 2001. Granted, it was a long time ago, but he has never been in the National League, and when he was successful, he was still young. The thought was that facing National League hitters for the first time would be to his advantage. Obviously, it didn't work out. The Reds were desperate. If you think Germano would've been a better option, I won't disagree. If you think he would've been a [I]much better option, I will disagree.

TRF
12-14-2006, 10:26 AM
About Germano's K numbers, I used hyperbole. In AAA, he had a 5.15 k/9ip rate. That screams to me "hittable"--especially in MLB. But hey, maybe he's a control pitcher. Well, once you get past his career WHIP of 2.00.

But anyway, let me address the part where I said that it was surprising that the Mays trial didn't work out:

All I'm saying is that Mays was worth a limited chance at success. He was an All-Star in 2001. Granted, it was a long time ago, but he has never been in the National League, and when he was successful, he was still young. The thought was that facing National League hitters for the first time would be to his advantage. Obviously, it didn't work out. The Reds were desperate. If you think Germano would've been a better option, I won't disagree. If you think he would've been a [I]much better option, I will disagree.

He was a much better option. He was an unknown. no real book on him. The book on Mays was 6 years old. He was a known quantity. And he was awful. You keep pointing to 2001 like it was normal production for him. It was a complete aberration on his career. BTW bringing up Germano's career MAJOR LEAGUE WHIP of 2.00 is a bit misleading. it's 28 innings of work. Mays had a 2.20 WHIP with KC. As for Germano's 5.15 K/9 did you ignore the 8.04 K/9 he put up in the PCL the year before?

Germano's only start with the Reds yielded this line:


DATE OPP RESULT IP H R ER HR BB SO GB FB TBF #Pit Dec. ERA
7/29 @Mil L 3-6 (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/boxscore?gameId=260729108)5.2 8 4 4 1 2 8 9 3 27 96 L(0-1) 5.40

There is good and bad in those numbers. Too many hits, and too many runs. Nice GB/FB ration, good K numbers. And considering it was his first start since 1994 with SD, I'd say he warranted a second look.

What, besides 2001 has Joe Mays EVER done that warranted his signing in Cincinnati this year?

Signing Mays was not a gamble. It was sending wins into a wood chipper. Could Germano have pitched better? Well he couldn't have pitched worse, and he was already on the 40 man roster. The point is, if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and has a 10.43 ERA, try to avoid the duck that can't pitch.

camisadelgolf
12-14-2006, 10:58 AM
Those are all good points. I just don't think there was any way to know that Mays was going to do as poorly as he did. I'm not saying it's a surprise that he pitched badly. But if Schoneweis giving up only one run in his tenure with the Reds was "luck", the Reds were hoping for the same luck with Mays.

I don't think you can always rely on recent production as a good source. Schoeneweis had a 6.51 ERA at the time he was traded. Schoeneweis had mediocre-at-best production as a starter (over a three-year span, which isn't exactly a sample size). Mays was pretty much the same thing--terrible ERA and mediocre-at-best starter the past few years. And for all you know, the Reds may have thought they saw what Mays' problem was. In the Reds' eyes, maybe he wasn't following through on his delivery; maybe he wasn't happy and/or being as competitive with lowly Royals; maybe he was trying too hard to be a strikeout pitcher. We'll never know.

Degenerate39
12-15-2006, 02:36 AM
.
Reds still interested in Claussen
Wednesday, Dec 13, 2006 11:13 am EST
The Cincinnati Reds designated for assignment left-handed pitcher Brandon Claussen, but that does not mean his career with the team is over.

"We told him we would like for him to come back on a minor-league contract and we remain interested in keeping him," said General Manager Wayne Krivsky.

Source: Dayton Daily News

TRF
12-15-2006, 09:18 AM
Those are all good points. I just don't think there was any way to know that Mays was going to do as poorly as he did. I'm not saying it's a surprise that he pitched badly. But if Schoneweis giving up only one run in his tenure with the Reds was "luck", the Reds were hoping for the same luck with Mays.

I don't think you can always rely on recent production as a good source. Schoeneweis had a 6.51 ERA at the time he was traded. Schoeneweis had mediocre-at-best production as a starter (over a three-year span, which isn't exactly a sample size). Mays was pretty much the same thing--terrible ERA and mediocre-at-best starter the past few years. And for all you know, the Reds may have thought they saw what Mays' problem was. In the Reds' eyes, maybe he wasn't following through on his delivery; maybe he wasn't happy and/or being as competitive with lowly Royals; maybe he was trying too hard to be a strikeout pitcher. We'll never know.

no. no. no.

He's had exactly 1 season (2001) that can be considered even moderately successful, and even that one was mostly smoke and mirrors. He doesn't K guys at anywhere resembling a decent rate.

And don't compare him to Schoeneweiss. Mays was brought in as a starter. Schoeneweiss was brought in as a reliever. And as a reliever, he's been pretty good in his career post a K/9 as high as 9.35, though it usually stayed in the high 6's. Mays posted a K/9 over 6 (6.05) 1 time in his entire career. And that was 1999.

He was never a good pitcher.

camisadelgolf
12-15-2006, 11:30 AM
First of all, at no point did I say "moderately successful"--I said "mediocre-at-best". I also never said his 2001 numbers were normal production for him. And I never said it was a surprise that Mays didn't work out. But if you want to keep putting words in my mouth to make it seem like you're right, I guess you can do that.

Anyway, Mays wasn't brought here as a starter. It was the bullpen that was extremely desperate. His first few appearances as a Red were as a reliever, and he posted a 1.29 ERA over seven innings pitched. Once again, it's a lot like the Schoeneweis situation. And why do I compare him to Schoeneweis? It's beacuse there is a comparison. Mays' first three years as a starter (4.37, 5.56, and 3.16 ERA, respectively) compared to Schoeneweis' first three years as a starter (5.45 ERA, 5.08 ERA, and 4.88 ERA, respectively). In fact, Mays probably looked better than Schoeneweis. And for whatever it's worth, those numbers are over the same three-year period. I bring that up because I believe it's possible for a mediocre (or even poor) starter to be a good bullpen addition, as evidenced by Schoeneweis.

In fact, I never thought putting Mays in the rotation was a good idea. But if you saw him in the bullpen, he was actually very impressive. However, when he was moved to the rotation, his sinking pitches flattened out, and I believe there was a slight decrease in velocity. As a reliever, Mays did a great job in his limited opportunity (which is exactly what the Reds and Krivsky hoped for). Whoever said to move him to the rotation (which I never condoned) is the one who made the mistake.

But you know what? If you're going to keep putting words in my mouth, then you're always right, and I'm always wrong. Mays was brought here to be a starter. Mays was nothing but bad in his time here. Oh, and you spell the ex-Angels' name 'Schoeneweiss' and 'Schoeweis'.

TRF
12-15-2006, 12:17 PM
1st, i copied his name from the baseball cube. complain about their spelling.

2nd, if he was brought in as a reliever, why did he get 4 starts? SS didn't get 4 starts.

And what about Joe Mays even says mediocre pitching was possible.

So, lets see. so far in this thread, you have made up stats. you ignore trends, and you compare SS to mays, using Schoeneweis' Starting stats as a basis for comparison, then say how great Mays was in his 7 innings of relief. Never mind that he has NEVER been even an average pitcher.

And when did I put words in your mouth?


I don't think the idea of signing Mays was a bad idea

Yes it was


That analogy is very subtle, but I'm going to guess that the "dog crap" is AL All-Star starting pitcher, Joe Mays, who should not have been given a chance based on six starts (even though pretty much any pitcher ever has looked bad over a six-start period).
So one season that was decent at best vs. 6 abysmal ones. And he's not a terrible pitcher? ok.

And for a (very) short while, he was an improvement.
when?

I'm just trying to say that, given the situation, Mays deserved a shot. Granted, the way he pitched, he didn't deserve 27 innings, but he deserved a shot, nonetheless.
What was it about his 10+ ERA in KC that screamed to you he deserved a shot?

1.) he had twice as many innings as strikeouts, 2.) it would have added to his service time, 3.) he probably would've been knocked around just as much, and 4.) Mays, although only a limited amount, had a history of MLB success (and in 2006, had more minor league success, too, for whatever that's worth).
And not one of those reasons was good enough to even let Mays try on a Reds uniform.

All I'm saying is that Mays was worth a limited chance at success. He was an All-Star in 2001. Granted, it was a long time ago, but he has never been in the National League, and when he was successful, he was still young.
This one bugged me and I finally figured out why. He was young during 2001, has sucked ever since, and has been even worse since coming back from an injury in 2004. But you think all that would turn around just because he switches leagues?

His 1st three outings were in the pen, but it's that third outing that is really telling. 4 ip (in relief of Claussen who got BOMBED... see this is even germane to the original topic) but he gave up 7 hits and threw 75 pitches. That's getting in a whole lot of trouble. Getting out of it too as he allowed only 2 runs, 1 earned. Of course this was against the White Sox who were pretty familiar with him, so we give him a pass.

And lo and behold, he starts the very next game. against the Mets. Does well too. K'd 5 in 6 innings. 102 pitches. There is the little matter of the 8 hits and two walks he gave up. I wonder if that might be a sign of things to come?

And then the bottom falls out. Hard. in his next three starts he gives up 8 runs, 6 runs and finally 5 runs.

Yeah, he was brought in to help the pen.

Guys that are brought in for the pen usually stay there.

camisadelgolf
12-15-2006, 02:23 PM
1st, i copied his name from the baseball cube. complain about their spelling.

2nd, if he was brought in as a reliever, why did he get 4 starts? SS didn't get 4 starts.

And what about Joe Mays even says mediocre pitching was possible.

So, lets see. so far in this thread, you have made up stats. you ignore trends, and you compare SS to mays, using Schoeneweis' Starting stats as a basis for comparison, then say how great Mays was in his 7 innings of relief. Never mind that he has NEVER been even an average pitcher.

And when did I put words in your mouth?



Yes it was


So one season that was decent at best vs. 6 abysmal ones. And he's not a terrible pitcher? ok.

when?

What was it about his 10+ ERA in KC that screamed to you he deserved a shot?

And not one of those reasons was good enough to even let Mays try on a Reds uniform.

This one bugged me and I finally figured out why. He was young during 2001, has sucked ever since, and has been even worse since coming back from an injury in 2004. But you think all that would turn around just because he switches leagues?

His 1st three outings were in the pen, but it's that third outing that is really telling. 4 ip (in relief of Claussen who got BOMBED... see this is even germane to the original topic) but he gave up 7 hits and threw 75 pitches. That's getting in a whole lot of trouble. Getting out of it too as he allowed only 2 runs, 1 earned. Of course this was against the White Sox who were pretty familiar with him, so we give him a pass.

And lo and behold, he starts the very next game. against the Mets. Does well too. K'd 5 in 6 innings. 102 pitches. There is the little matter of the 8 hits and two walks he gave up. I wonder if that might be a sign of things to come?

And then the bottom falls out. Hard. in his next three starts he gives up 8 runs, 6 runs and finally 5 runs.

Yeah, he was brought in to help the pen.

Guys that are brought in for the pen usually stay there.

The baseball cube spelled his name two different ways, and both were incorrect? Okay . . .

Anyway, he was brought in as a reliever because the relief corp was god-awful at the time. The starting pitching was surprisingly efficient at the time, and he got switched to the rotation because of the success he was having in the bullpen (and injuries to the rotation, which included Eric Milton).

As for asking me what would have suggested Mays to have been at all successful, well, I'll honestly say there wasn't much, but he was coming to a new league (and the last time he was new to a league, he had done well), and he was coming to a team that had a chance to compete. Besides, his ERA was over 10.00, and the law of averages said he should've had a hot streak to balance things out.

At no point did I make up any stats. However, I did use hyperbole, and you chose not to pick up on it. I used Schoeneweis' stats as a comparison because it was the easiest player for me to think of, and there was a strong comparison in several ways pertaining to the discussion. Although it's been a while, there have been times when Mays was an average pitcher.

I already told you when you put words in my mouth, and you just did it again. I never said Mays wasn't terrible. But I did say that he did imply he did a great job in the bullpen (and he did). But hey, put words in my mouth again. That's cool. I don't know why you'd accuse anyone of making up stuff when you're the one who said he was brought here to bolster the rotation anyway.

TRF
12-15-2006, 03:09 PM
I already told you when you put words in my mouth, and you just did it again. I never said Mays wasn't terrible. But I did say that he did imply he did a great job in the bullpen (and he did). But hey, put words in my mouth again. That's cool. I don't know why you'd accuse anyone of making up stuff when you're the one who said he was brought here to bolster the rotation anyway.

Because he was brought in to bolster the rotation.

Guardado, SS, Majewski, Franklin, Yan, Cormier, and Bray were brought in to bolster the pen. Not a single game started by any of them. Gee, I wonder why that is?

Maybe it's because they were all relief pitchers. Mays was a "starter." A tremendously bad starter, Like Juan Castro at the plate bad. Worse than Milton bad, but he was a starter. SS is a converted starter. His future lies in relief, especially as a LOOGY.

But hey, All I can go by is the stats that say for a fact that Joe Freaking Mays is one of the most abysmally bad pitchers of all time.

BTW, i suggest you never make a stinking misspelling on here if you are pointing to that. I got his name wrong and looked it up. Learning is fun. Try it some time.


Although it's been a while, there have been times when Mays was an average pitcher.
twice in his career. 1999 and 2001. since 2001 he's been anyhing but average. he's been putrid.

westofyou
12-15-2006, 03:19 PM
Because he was brought in to bolster the rotation.

I saw him as nothing more then an emergency guy a stopgap.


June 17, 2006
Joe Mays is expected to make Brandon Claussen's scheduled start next Wednesday against the Mets in New York after Claussen was placed on the DL on Saturday, according to the AP. Mays has a 1.29 ERA in three relief appearances with the Reds. He was 0-4 with a 10.27 ERA in six starts for the Royals earlier this season.

June 24, 2006
Although Joe Mays picked up a quality start in his first rotation assignment for the Reds, the club will take advantage of Monday's day off to skip his next turn, according to the Cincinnati Post. His next start will now come a week from today, July 1.


July 26, 2006
It's possible the Reds could designate Joe Mays for assignment today to clear a roster spot for David Ross, who is expected to be activated from the DL, according to the Cincinnati Post. Mays, who holds an 8.70 ERA in 13 games for the Royals and Reds this year, is scheduled to pitch on Saturday, but it seems unlikely he will be around to make that start. The team will likely call up a starter from Triple-A to make a spot start on Saturday before activating Brandon Claussen from the DL the next time a fifth starter is needed.

July 26, 2006
The Reds designated Joe Mays for assignment Wednesday to make room on the roster for David Ross, according to the AP. Mays held a 7.33 ERA in seven games (four starts) for the Reds after being picked up from Kansas City.

July 29, 2006
Joe Mays, who was designated for assignment Wednesday, accepted an outright assignment to Triple-A Louisville, according to the Cincinnati Enquirer. In 13 games this season (10 starts), Mays went 0-5 with a 8.70 ERA.

camisadelgolf
12-15-2006, 03:19 PM
TRF, you keep changing your opinions to accommodate my facts.

By the way, Mays sucks. You know that. I know that. Everyone knows that. But when he got here, he was effective as a reliever (which was his intended use). He was brought here as a reliever, and if he were successful, he would be used as a starter if needed. Well, he was successful, and the Reds needed a starter. The rest didn't go as hoped, though.

Read what westofyou said. He understands what happened.

TRF
12-15-2006, 03:35 PM
WOY is right that he was brought in as a stopgap. I'll further it and say had Krivsky not known him from Minnesota he never would have been signed.

But I haven't changed one opinion yet, and you haven't stated a single fact. I mentioned 7 relievers brought in to bolster the pen, and not one of them got a start? Why do you suppose that is? How can you be presented with these FACTS and not see he was always being groomed to be a starter. Yes, I believe WK thought he could pull an Arroyo on the league. That's part of the problem. There was no underlying data that said he could.

I do believe you know Joe Mays sucks. This started with you stating that the guy that acquired Arroyo, Phillips and Ross can't possibly be high.

Now I don't think that WK gets high. But the man made bad move after bad move after Phillips.

I've said it before: Krivsky put the Reds into contention by acquiring Arroyo, Ross and Phillips. And he knocked them right out with everything he did after that.

westofyou
12-15-2006, 03:39 PM
Scott Mathieson was a worst starter for a better team then Joe Mays, almost had twice as many chances as well.

Damn that Pat Gillick.

TRF
12-15-2006, 03:45 PM
Scott Mathieson was a worst starter for a better team then Joe Mays, almost had twice as many chances as well.

Damn that Pat Gillick.

Which team? I'm trying to look him up on baseball reference, and all I see is a 22 year old rookie.

westofyou
12-15-2006, 03:54 PM
Which team? I'm trying to look him up on baseball reference, and all I see is a 22 year old rookie.

8 starts for the Phillies, 7.47 ERA.

Sometimes you're forced to eat gruel just to survive, or make a gamble on a kid Brian Reith style.

TRF
12-15-2006, 04:02 PM
Mathiesson was overmatched a bit. He might also be miscast as a starter. He's got some nice K/9 numbers in the minors. Personally, I'd have eased the kid into the majors via the pen. His ERA's were a little high in the minors, but he's a K machine that has a low WHIP. If he didn't get Reith'd this season, he's got a decent future ahead of him.

But Mays never had this kid's numbers, even in the minors.

Team Clark
12-15-2006, 04:06 PM
Because he was brought in to bolster the rotation.

Guardado, SS, Majewski, Franklin, Yan, Cormier, and Bray were brought in to bolster the pen. Not a single game started by any of them. Gee, I wonder why that is?

Maybe it's because they were all relief pitchers. Mays was a "starter." A tremendously bad starter, Like Juan Castro at the plate bad. Worse than Milton bad, but he was a starter. SS is a converted starter. His future lies in relief, especially as a LOOGY.

But hey, All I can go by is the stats that say for a fact that Joe Freaking Mays is one of the most abysmally bad pitchers of all time.

BTW, i suggest you never make a stinking misspelling on here if you are pointing to that. I got his name wrong and looked it up. Learning is fun. Try it some time.

twice in his career. 1999 and 2001. since 2001 he's been anyhing but average. he's been putrid.

And to think I voted for you as a "Nice" guy... :laugh:

Good post. When you break it down this way you wonder why the guys making the big bucks can not.... or will not.

TRF
12-15-2006, 04:09 PM
I'm neither nice nor mean.

I'm succinct.

I can be nice, though i don't suggest you ask my wife as a reference.

But when I am surly, especially about bad FO moves, I make FCB look like little Miss Mary Sunshine.

westofyou
12-15-2006, 04:13 PM
Personally, I'd have eased the kid into the majors via the pen.

But IIRC Leiber was hurt and Myers had that issue with is wife. Sometimes what you want to do is diverted by what you have to do.

TRF
12-15-2006, 04:16 PM
good point. I wonder why they never asked about Joe Mays?

They also had Germano. Even if you think there isn't much there, I'd rather have thrown him out there than one of my better pitching prospects too soon.

Damn that Pat Gillick indeed.

camisadelgolf
12-15-2006, 05:07 PM
WOY is right that he was brought in as a stopgap. I'll further it and say had Krivsky not known him from Minnesota he never would have been signed.

But I haven't changed one opinion yet, and you haven't stated a single fact. I mentioned 7 relievers brought in to bolster the pen, and not one of them got a start? Why do you suppose that is? How can you be presented with these FACTS and not see he was always being groomed to be a starter. Yes, I believe WK thought he could pull an Arroyo on the league. That's part of the problem. There was no underlying data that said he could.

I do believe you know Joe Mays sucks. This started with you stating that the guy that acquired Arroyo, Phillips and Ross can't possibly be high.

Now I don't think that WK gets high. But the man made bad move after bad move after Phillips.

I've said it before: Krivsky put the Reds into contention by acquiring Arroyo, Ross and Phillips. And he knocked them right out with everything he did after that.

Well, you said that Mays was brought in to be a starter, and I said he was brought in to be a reliever. I consider that a fact because, when he was brought in, he was used as a reliever. It wasn't until later, when there roster changes and injuries, that he was used as a starter. I consider it a fact, but I can see why you'd see it differently, and I don't think you're wrong. Anyway, I think we mostly see eye-to-eye on this (believe it or not). I just feel like you're overly-critical of Way-K, so I wanted to defend his moves, even if some of them didn't work out (although a lot of them did in my opinion, including the Schoeneweis and Guardado acquisitions). Either way, I respectfully disagree and wish you the best. :beerme:

TRF
12-15-2006, 05:45 PM
good enough i guess. On to other rants.

Raisor
12-15-2006, 10:54 PM
Like I said at the time, the problem with signing the Joe Mayseses of the world is that eventually you wind up playing the Joe Mayseses of the world.

blah

WVRedsFan
12-15-2006, 11:16 PM
Like I said at the time, the problem with signing the Joe Mayseses of the world is that eventually you wind up playing the Joe Mayseses of the world.

blah

And that my friends is the way it is in a nutshell. Raisor sums it all up in one sentence. You bring in trash and they trash the place. May we never see Joe Mays in a Reds uniform again.