PDA

View Full Version : Tomo Ohka



Gamble
12-24-2006, 05:06 PM
Why hasn't anyone signed him yet? Better yet why havent the Reds signed him? Any word on what he is in the market for?

CF - Chris Denorfia
1B - Scott Hatteberg
3B - Edwin Encarnacion
LF - Adam Dunn
RF - Ken Griffey Jr.
2B - Brandon Phillips
C - David Ross
SS - Alex Gonzalez

Aaron Harang
Bronson Arroyo
Tomo Ohka
Eric Milton
Kyle Lohse

Jpup
12-24-2006, 05:25 PM
Why hasn't anyone signed him yet?

He isn't very good and will probably cost 5-6 million per year.

marcshoe
12-24-2006, 06:18 PM
I wouldn't complain if the Reds signed Ohka cheap, simply because he's not total dreck, but I would much rather see them trade for a better young pitcher. Be creative; do some scouting and put together a package.

Dracodave
12-24-2006, 06:25 PM
Quite honestly, scout the white sox, braves, and other teams in need of a lead-off hitter.

Package Freel, Stanton/Shack/Cormier and whoever up for some young pitching prospects. Find teams that need to fill a gap and work together, don't stopgap just cause you can.

Redhook
12-24-2006, 10:50 PM
Why hasn't anyone signed him yet? Better yet why havent the Reds signed him? Any word on what he is in the market for?

CF - Chris Denorfia
1B - Scott Hatteberg
3B - Edwin Encarnacion
LF - Adam Dunn
RF - Ken Griffey Jr.
2B - Brandon Phillips
C - David Ross
SS - Alex Gonzalez

Aaron Harang
Bronson Arroyo
Tomo Ohka
Eric Milton
Kyle Lohse

lineup = C -
rotation = B

lineup after Jr. goes down with an injury = F
rotation if someone gets injured = C, at best

The 2007 Reds are in for a world of hurt after the inevitable injuries occur. 90+ losses wouldn't be a surprise at all.

Happy Holidays!

Bah Hum Bug ;)

Chip R
12-25-2006, 02:06 AM
Why hasn't anyone signed him yet? Better yet why havent the Reds signed him?


He's not old enough.

reds44
12-25-2006, 02:07 AM
lineup = C -
rotation = B

lineup after Jr. goes down with an injury = F
rotation if someone gets injured = C, at best

The 2007 Reds are in for a world of hurt after the inevitable injuries occur. 90+ losses wouldn't be a surprise at all.

Happy Holidays!

Bah Hum Bug ;)
Griffey wasn't very good last year. Just saying.

Redhook
12-25-2006, 11:16 AM
Griffey wasn't very good last year. Just saying.

You're right, he wasn't. But he is still Ken Griffey Jr. Even though he's walking around on stilts and his defense is putrid, the guy can still hit. He needs to be alot more patient this year so he swings at better pitches and takes more walks.

I'd be happy if he played 120 games. Sad, but true. If he playes 120+ games then our offense could barely survive. If he doesn't we're in deep trouble. The problem is, if and when he gets hurt, we have absolutely no one to replace him. No one.

chettt
12-25-2006, 01:17 PM
I would rather give Belisle, Ramirez, Livingston & Bailey a shot. Then to over- pay for what is left on the free agent market.

BEETTLEBUG
12-26-2006, 05:08 AM
Does anyone know if Belisle got his back problems solved over the winter? I think he would be a great Starter if he didn't have his back problems.

jojo
12-26-2006, 10:09 AM
Cincinnati might be the only market in the US that thinks Freel is an every day player let alone a bona fide lead off hitter...

RedLegSuperStar
12-26-2006, 10:37 AM
Give me Mark Mulder instead... Istill would like the Reds to sign either Craig Wilson or Eduardo Perez even though Conine was obtained.

jojo
12-26-2006, 11:03 AM
[QUOTE=Redhook;1217246]the guy can still hit. He needs to be alot more patient this year so he swings at better pitches and takes more walks. QUOTE]

I really don't think Griffey can be counted on to be the big bat any longer.... To me, at his age and with his injury history, last season is pretty hard to write off as a fluke. he's aged into almost an exclusive pull hitter... shifting the defense pretty much neutralized him. Does anyone think Griffey can reinvent himself at this stage? After all he hasn't exactly embraced change as a Red (cough, corner poristion cough)....

bucksfan2
12-26-2006, 11:12 AM
Why not offer Mulder an incentive laden one year contract with an option for the next if he hits certain celings? A bad one year contract doesn't hurt as much as a bad multi year contract. Give mulder the opportunity to reach 8-10 mil with an option for the next year. If he doesn't have a good year he will cost this team a little but wont put them in a financial bind for the years to come (Milton).

Hoosier Red
12-26-2006, 11:27 AM
Because Mulder will get a multi year contract similar to what Suppan got.
Just watch.

marcshoe
12-26-2006, 12:25 PM
Cincinnati might be the only market in the US that thinks Freel is an every day player let alone a bona fide lead off hitter...

How so? I can see the everyday player idea if you're talking about the inevitable injuries from crashing into objects, both animate and inanimate, but from the last part of your post, I get the idea that you're talking about ability. Take a look at Freel's season-by-season stats. There is a remarkable consistency there. Looking at his ability to get on base and his stolen base numbers, I don't see why many teams wouldn't love to have him leading off.

jojo
12-26-2006, 12:29 PM
How so? I can see the everyday player idea if you're talking about the inevitable injuries from crashing into objects, both animate and inanimate, but from the last part of your post, I get the idea that you're talking about ability. Take a look at Freel's season-by-season stats. There is a remarkable consistency there. Looking at his ability to get on base and his stolen base numbers, I don't see why many teams wouldn't love to have him leading off.


Then why aren't there a gazillion trade rumors swirling about teams trying to pry away Freel and his cheap remaining year? I would think if the league viewed him as a bona fide everyday centerfielder/leadoff hitter, he'd be the biggest value out there for a mill and a half and the hottest commodity on the Reds roster......

marcshoe
12-26-2006, 12:33 PM
Then why aren't there a gazillion trade rumors swirling about teams trying to pry away Freel and his cheap remaining year? I would think if the league viewed him as a bona fide everyday centerfielder/leadoff hitter, he'd be the biggest value out there for a mill and a half and the hottest commodity on the Reds roster......


So you're basing the idea that teams don't consider him a legit everyday leadoff hitter on the lack of trade rumors?

Why do you think they feel this way? What do you think their basis is?

jojo
12-26-2006, 03:37 PM
So you're basing the idea that teams don't consider him a legit everyday leadoff hitter on the lack of trade rumors?

Why do you think they feel this way? What do you think their basis is?

I'm suggesting that people in cincinnati value Freel more highly than the rest of the league....he's roster glue not the everyday answer to centerfield/leadoff....


He plays several positions but only adequately-not above average.....

He does have a good OBP... but he doesn't hit for average, K's way more than he walks, only has a career OPS of .750 and he has had 500 ab in a season only once in his career. He has a career EqA of about .265 which is decidely average.

He's fast but not a great baserunner,

Basically he is useful if used correctly.....

Falls City Beer
12-26-2006, 03:42 PM
I'm suggesting that people in cincinnati value Freel more highly than the rest of the league....he's roster glue not the everyday answer to centerfield/leadoff....


He plays several positions but only adequately-not above average.....

He does have a good OBP... but he doesn't hit for average, K's way more than he walks, only has a career OPS of .750 and he has had 500 ab in a season only once in his career. He has a career EqA of about .265 which is decidely average.

He's fast but not a great baserunner,

Basically he is useful if used correctly.....


And he's better than about 60% of all leadoff hitters and centerfielders in MLB...

My guess is that Wayne's holding on to Freel for a bigger splash than what was made with Lopez and Kearns. Feeling snakebit on that one, so he wants to make sure he recoups as much as possible for his hitters. Remember, this team is a terrible offensive squad right now. I don't think it's wise to piss away a commodity like Freel too readily. And if Wayne is holding onto Freel to drive up his price I applaud him for that.

Handofdeath
12-26-2006, 04:06 PM
He isn't very good and will probably cost 5-6 million per year.



I think he would be a great signing except for his problems staying healthy. You're talking about a guy who's pitched almost 1,000 innings and has an ERA of 4.04. How could someone not think that is good? If he stays healthy he's good for 180 IP and an ERA around 4.00.

Dracodave
12-26-2006, 05:19 PM
I think he would be a great signing except for his problems staying healthy. You're talking about a guy who's pitched almost 1,000 innings and has an ERA of 4.04. How could someone not think that is good? If he stays healthy he's good for 180 IP and an ERA around 4.00.

People who think 6 years of Dice-K for 100 million is cheap...

Handofdeath
12-26-2006, 05:23 PM
People who think 6 years of Dice-K for 100 million is cheap...

I would love to reply

If you would just tell me what you are saying

Dracodave
12-26-2006, 05:30 PM
I would love to reply

If you would just tell me what you are saying

Daisuke Matsuzaka, people who think he is cheap. Think that Ohka sucks.

jojo
12-26-2006, 11:19 PM
And he's better than about 60% of all leadoff hitters and centerfielders in MLB...


Uhhhhh...well.......not really so much....

Freel's various splits:
Career: .274 /.367 /.383 OPS: .750
three year splits as a CF: 350 AB; .251/.350/.333 OPS:.683
three year splits as an OF: 787 AB; .269/.367/.367 OPS: .734

2006 average mlb centerfielder:
.267/.332/.425 OPS: .757
2006 average mlb leftfielder:
.276/.348/.456 OPS: .804
2006 average mlb rightfielder:
.277/.345/.458 OPS: .803

If you examine Freel's career numbers, the best you can say would be he is comparable offensively to an average centerfielder. Despite being an upgrade over Griffey and despite his speed, the obviously poor routes he takes on balls makes it a stretch to argue he is anything other than a league average defensive centerfielder at best and that is probably optimistic.

Now consider what he has done as an outfielder since that is the most appropriate comparison given the physical requirements. Taking his splits as an OF (all three positions combined) because theyre better, he isn't even as good as an average centerfielder offensively and centerfield is by and far the weakest offensive position in the OF. Essentially his OPS as an outfielder places him in the company of average shortstops and catchers in 2006 (i.e. the weakest offensive positions of outside of pitcher).

So once again.... no Freel isn't better than 60% of all centerfielders (offensively or more importantly defensively)....


Is he better than 60% of all lead off hitters?

Freel as a leadoff hitter (2004-2006):
1185 AB; .273/.373/.375 OPS: .748

Average NL leadoff hitter (1993-2004):
.272/.341/.393 OPS: .734

The answer....no. He's roughly an average leadoff hitter for the NL and considering AL leadoff hitters are better than NL leadoff hitters, there is no way it can be argued Freel is better than 60% of all leadoff hitters.

I like Freel-he's useful and cheap so he's a pretty good value for the Reds. But lets not get carried away concerning his trade value.

Falls City Beer
12-26-2006, 11:40 PM
Uhhhhh...well.......not really so much....

Freel's various splits:
Career: .274 /.367 /.383 OPS: .750
three year splits as a CF: 350 AB; .251/.350/.333 OPS:.683
three year splits as an OF: 787 AB; .269/.367/.367 OPS: .734

2006 average mlb centerfielder:
.267/.332/.425 OPS: .757
2006 average mlb leftfielder:
.276/.348/.456 OPS: .804
2006 average mlb rightfielder:
.277/.345/.458 OPS: .803

If you examine Freel's career numbers, the best you can say would be he is comparable offensively to an average centerfielder. Despite being an upgrade over Griffey and despite his speed, the obviously poor routes he takes on balls makes it a stretch to argue he is anything other than a league average defensive centerfielder at best and that is probably optimistic.

Now consider what he has done as an outfielder since that is the most appropriate comparison given the physical requirements. Taking his splits as an OF (all three positions combined) because theyre better, he isn't even as good as an average centerfielder offensively and centerfield is by and far the weakest offensive position in the OF. Essentially his OPS as an outfielder places him in the company of average shortstops and catchers in 2006 (i.e. the weakest offensive positions of outside of pitcher).

So once again.... no Freel isn't better than 60% of all centerfielders (offensively or more importantly defensively)....


Is he better than 60% of all lead off hitters?

Freel as a leadoff hitter (2004-2006):
1185 AB; .273/.373/.375 OPS: .748

Average NL leadoff hitter (1993-2004):
.272/.341/.393 OPS: .734

The answer....no. He's roughly an average leadoff hitter for the NL and considering AL leadoff hitters are better than NL leadoff hitters, there is no way it can be argued Freel is better than 60% of all leadoff hitters.

I like Freel-he's useful and cheap so he's a pretty good value for the Reds. But lets not get carried away concerning his trade value.


The slugging part of OPS means nothing for a leadoff hitter. Exactly nothing. Try again.

And you've hardly done an exhaustive exploration of how he's sub-average defensively as you put it. No empirical or (ack) statistical metric will demonstrate that he is sub-average in center.

jojo
12-27-2006, 10:04 AM
The slugging part of OPS means nothing for a leadoff hitter. Exactly nothing. Try again.

Right........because lead off hitters only bat in the first inning and their contribution to runs scored thus rests solely on their ability to get on base.... sigh :cool:


And you've hardly done an exhaustive exploration of how he's sub-average defensively as you put it. No empirical or (ack) statistical metric will demonstrate that he is sub-average in center.

There is really no point to quote defensive metrics for Freel because since he is roster glue it is nearly impossible to not have sample size issues for any position he played. For instance, he only started 44 games in center field in '06. Given sample size issues pretty much mean defensive metrics are unreliable for Freel, in this case, IMHO, "old school" rules and the eyes have to be relied upon. No one would argue Freel doesn't have range. However, he takes lousy routes to balls and compensates with his quickness. That allows him to get by but certainly there is no way he is better than an average defender in centerfield (most centerfielders not named Griffey have range). Ever wonder why Freel has to dive so much? Anyway, I erred in his favor and suggested he was a league average defensive center fielder.....

So even with league average defense, given that his offense seems to suffer under the strain of playing the outfield regularly (as splits suggest), his value is mitigated dramatically. The list of teams willing to accept below average offense in favor of average defense, even in center field, is a short one. The teams that would embrace such a compromise, frankly, would be more interested in the fact he only costs $1.7M....and unfortunately, the reds head the list of that kind of team....

Freel would be a mutil-year allstar if utility men were considered... He's very useful-if used properly. He's not an everyday starting centerfielder though.

Falls City Beer
12-27-2006, 11:45 AM
Right........because lead off hitters only bat in the first inning and their contribution to runs scored thus rests solely on their ability to get on base.... sigh :cool:



There is really no point to quote defensive metrics for Freel because since he is roster glue it is nearly impossible to not have sample size issues for any position he played. For instance, he only started 44 games in center field in '06. Given sample size issues pretty much mean defensive metrics are unreliable for Freel, in this case, IMHO, "old school" rules and the eyes have to be relied upon. No one would argue Freel doesn't have range. However, he takes lousy routes to balls and compensates with his quickness. That allows him to get by but certainly there is no way he is better than an average defender in centerfield (most centerfielders not named Griffey have range). Ever wonder why Freel has to dive so much? Anyway, I erred in his favor and suggested he was a league average defensive center fielder.....

So even with league average defense, given that his offense seems to suffer under the strain of playing the outfield regularly (as splits suggest), his value is mitigated dramatically. The list of teams willing to accept below average offense in favor of average defense, even in center field, is a short one. The teams that would embrace such a compromise, frankly, would be more interested in the fact he only costs $1.7M....and unfortunately, the reds head the list of that kind of team....

Freel would be a mutil-year allstar if utility men were considered... He's very useful-if used properly. He's not an everyday starting centerfielder though.


Exactly, observation says he's an above average defender.

And seriously, just do a comp of centerfielders from 2006, Freel is more valuable than the Kotsays and Randy Winns, on a par with a guy like Denorfia--his OBP (which really is much, much more important for a leadoff guy than slg--it is in all cases, but particularly for a guy who's got to be fast for his position CF) is among the best over the last three years (.370) for MLB centerfielders.

mth123
12-27-2006, 12:02 PM
Exactly, observation says he's an above average defender.

And seriously, just do a comp of centerfielders from 2006, Freel is more valuable than the Kotsays and Randy Winns, on a par with a guy like Denorfia--his OBP (which really is much, much more important for a leadoff guy than slg--it is in all cases, but particularly for a guy who's got to be fast for his position CF) is among the best over the last three years (.370) for MLB centerfielders.

I'll jump in and say that Freel is a better bet in the OF than some starters like Juan Piere, Willy Tavares, Scott Podsednick, Kenny Lofton, Brady Clark, the combo of Jose Cruz JR and Termel Sledge, Nook Logan, and Alfredo Amezega to name a few. At his salary he should bring a decent return in trade IMO.

NJReds
12-27-2006, 12:37 PM
Cincinnati might be the only market in the US that thinks Freel is an every day player let alone a bona fide lead off hitter...

I'll pencil in Freel at leadoff every day if the other options are Juan Pierre at $10M/yr or Scott Podsenick at any price. (And those two are held in high regard by most fans).

edabbs44
12-27-2006, 12:39 PM
I'll pencil in Freel at leadoff every day if the other options are Juan Pierre at $10M/yr or Scott Podsenick at any price. (And those two are held in high regard by most fans).

I think Freel has shown that he is best when he plays 4 days per week. I know that goes against what a lot of people here think, but I think it is a fact.

All we are saying, is give Deno a chance.

NJReds
12-27-2006, 02:38 PM
I think Freel has shown that he is best when he plays 4 days per week. I know that goes against what a lot of people here think, but I think it is a fact.

All we are saying, is give Deno a chance.


Oh. I agree that he's not an everyday guy. I prefer him in the supersub role. But I'd rather try to play him everyday then overpay for for 'leadoff' talent.