PDA

View Full Version : 10 Reasons Why The Reds Will Win The NL Central



Krusty
02-03-2007, 09:30 PM
10 Reasons Why The Reds Will Win The Central:

1. A double play duo of Gonzalez and Phillips along with a combo of Freel/Denorifa in center with a solid catcher defensively in Ross gives the Reds best defense they have had in this decade.

2. Brook Jacoby will be the hitting coach that gets Dunn to cut down on his strikeouts by at least 25-30 and put the ball in play more.

3. Junior will play at least 120 games and provide at least 30 HRs and 90+ RBIs. Playing RF will be less stress physically despite what Junior is saying now.

4. Harang and Arroyo will be one of the best one-two tandems in the NL Central. Each player could easily win between 15-20 games apiece.

5. Milton, Lohse and Saarloos are very capable of winning 10-12 games apiece.

6. Aging veterans Mike Stanton and David Weathers will be able to hold the fort in regards to the closer role till Eddie Guardado is ready by the allstar break. But if Todd Coffey or Bill Bray show they are ready to assume the closer role, the bullpen becomes stronger yet.

7. Edwin Encarncion will have a breakout season and will make fewer errors than he did in 2006.

8. The combination of Scott Hatteberg and Jeff Conine at lst will put up better numbers than any year that Casey manned the position.

9. The emergence of Homer Bailey sometime around Memorial Day will bolster the rotation and add more depth to the pen with either Saarloos, Belisle or Ramirez.

10. There is no reason why Krivsky and Castanelli won't be aggressive as they were in the first year running the show. And no matter how you look at, the Cardinals, Astros, Cubs and Brewers each have their flaws going into spring training.

Call me crazy if you want but if this team can avoid the injury bug, I see this team winning close to 90 games this season.

TOBTTReds
02-03-2007, 09:33 PM
I'm calling you crazy.

deltachi8
02-03-2007, 09:37 PM
if we weren't already crazy we would go insane.

redsfanmia
02-03-2007, 09:40 PM
Only in the Bizzaro World could any of these things happen.

edabbs44
02-03-2007, 09:41 PM
Reason #11: Krusty starting drinking at noon today. :)

deltachi8
02-03-2007, 09:42 PM
Reason #11: Krusty starting drinking at noon today. :)

you say that like it's a bad thing.

Hap
02-03-2007, 09:47 PM
1. Agree Completely

2. That's what we said about Chambliss.

3. I agree that Junior will be productive at times, but he will also show signs of aging.

4. Easy call....just see last year....both guys are still on the way up

5. Ain't gonna happen.

6. Solid yes....spectacular no

7. He will put up good numbers. He will have more errors than last year because he will play more games.

8. No way will they reach 40 doubles and 20+ homers like Sean did in 1999 and 2004.

9. Homer Bailey is still a year or two away.

10. Agree completely.

reds44
02-03-2007, 09:54 PM
I could see it happening. We're not going to be as bad as 90% of the people on this board think. I will gurantee that.

Bigredfan#1
02-03-2007, 09:55 PM
Could everything fall into place like you say? Yes! Will it, probably not. I believe the Reds are in trouble offensively!! Love Griffey but he is starting to show the wear and tear of playing on artificial turf. I hope you are right about Dunn but would not count on it. I do think EE is in for a breakout season. Reds need another bat to compete and a closer!!

redsmetz
02-03-2007, 10:05 PM
1. Agree Completely

2. That's what we said about Chambliss.

3. I agree that Junior will be productive at times, but he will also show signs of aging.

4. Easy call....just see last year....both guys are still on the way up

5. Ain't gonna happen.

6. Solid yes....spectacular no

7. He will put up good numbers. He will have more errors than last year because he will play more games.

8. No way will they reach 40 doubles and 20+ homers like Sean did in 1999 and 2004.

9. Homer Bailey is still a year or two away.

10. Agree completely.

The two I've highlighted, I'll comment on.

It's not out of the realm of possibility of those three putting up ten wins. Milton could have easily been to that this year with a little bit of help from the pen. Lohse has exceeded that number twice in his career and fallen one short in the two years prior to 2006. I'll cross my fingers on Saarloos, but I think he's capable.

Regarding Bailey, I don't think he'll break with the club. He's going to do some time in AAA. While I think May might be optimistic, I think he could be up some time this year. At worst, he's only a year away, not two.

Hats off to Krusty for dragging some optimism on to the board!

hippie07
02-03-2007, 10:11 PM
Krusty - you may be crazy -- but I like it - finally a little optimism on RedsZone... it's a new season guys - and we're supposed to be fans... why not believe, dream, and/or pray... it could happen!! Add in a few advantageous trades and... maybe we can make something out of this season!!

pahster
02-03-2007, 11:14 PM
8. The combination of Scott Hatteberg and Jeff Conine at lst will put up better numbers than any year that Casey manned the position.


You do realize that Casey had an OPS above .900 three times right? And that neither Conine nor Hatteberg ever have (though admittedly Conine came within a couple of points twice, but that was in 1994 and 1995)?

GoReds
02-03-2007, 11:34 PM
2. Brook Jacoby will be the hitting coach that gets Dunn to cut down on his strikeouts by at least 25-30 and put the ball in play more.

If Dunn improves - and he could - I think it will be because he figured something out for himself. Brook Jacoby will just be incidental. If that happens and Dunn does take that next step, it would be a very satisfying thing to see. If not, then this board is going to be a repeat of last year with Dunn threads galore.



6. Aging veterans Mike Stanton and David Weathers will be able to hold the fort in regards to the closer role till Eddie Guardado is ready by the allstar break. But if Todd Coffey or Bill Bray show they are ready to assume the closer role, the bullpen becomes stronger yet.

I think this hinges entirely on Coffey and his ability to step into the closer's role for good. He does that and it improves the staff A LOT. He has some questionable periods and the bullpen is in trouble. I think the bullpen is in for a long season. Krivsky's going to be fielding questions about the bullpen makeup again at the ASB.

BigRed
02-03-2007, 11:39 PM
Kudos, Krusty. I love to hear some optimism around here. You would think with most of the chat on this board that the Reds were expected to lose 120 games this year.

I don't know enough about Jacoby to say whether he can get Dunn to cut down on the K's. I think that the hitting coach can make a difference, but the only person that can make that change is Dunn himself. He has to realize that even if he hits a few less HRs that putting the ball in play more will result in more RBI's and more wins. He has to buy into this, though? If Dunn only hits 32 HRs, but drove in 125 runs and hits 285 how much better will the Reds be?

With regard to Griffey, Narron has to be careful and have enough guts to give Griff days off whether Jr. thinks he needs them or not. He can put up numbers, but you have to be smart and keep him rested to help avoid injury.

I agree with Pahster. #8 won't happen, but if they are respectable, it should be good enough. With any luck, maybe Votto is the man in 2008.

With regard to # 6, the season hasn't started. I think the closer role solves itself either by performance or a late pickup during the spring.

HumnHilghtFreel
02-03-2007, 11:41 PM
#8 is the only one I really don't think will happen. The rest I think are possible.

jmac
02-03-2007, 11:42 PM
Many of the things said negatively this offseason were said last offseason also.
I can see areas where the Reds are better and some that concern me.
Yes we competed because of a not so tough division but we are still in the NL Central and despite some additions by the competition , I still think we are not that far behind them.

Superdude
02-04-2007, 12:06 AM
4. Harang and Arroyo will be one of the best one-two tandems in the NL Central.

Really going out on a limb with that one!

camisadelgolf
02-04-2007, 01:16 AM
I've got five more reasons:

11. Pirates
12. Brewers
13. Cubs
14. Astros
15. Cardinals

Patrick Bateman
02-04-2007, 03:10 AM
In what world is the Hatteberg/Conine platoon going to OPS .938 in???

RedsBaron
02-04-2007, 07:45 AM
I agree with Krusty: The Reds will win the NL Central.
Please note that nowhere in either Krusty's original post nor this post did anyone say anything about the Reds winning the NL Central in 2007.
The Reds will win the NL Central, just not any year soon.

mth123
02-04-2007, 09:26 AM
I've got five more reasons:

11. Pirates
12. Brewers
13. Cubs
14. Astros
15. Cardinals

You mean the Reds, who haven't had a winning season since 2000, compare with the defending World Series champs who boast the games best hitter, two other perennial All Stars on offense and an annual contender for the Cy Young award?

You mean the Reds, who man 1B with a pair of players who offer little in the way of power or promise, compare with an annual contender like Houston who boast one of the games top hitters at 1B?

You mean the Reds, who spent the off-season overpaying for the likes of David Weathers, Mike Stanton, Chad Moeller and Jeff Conine, compare with a team that went out and spent serious money to retain or acquire all star caliber players like Alfonso Soriano and Aramis Ramirez?

You mean the Reds, who haven’t developed a starting pitcher since Tom Browning and boast only Adam Dunn, Chris Denorfia and Todd Coffey as homegrown talents that project to play serious roles with any success, compare with the Brewers who have budding homegrown stars all around like Prince Fielder, Ricky Weeks, Ben Sheets, JJ Hardy and Corey Hart?

Before the Reds lay claim to any ability to compete with those teams, lets aim a little lower and see if the Reds could even compete with its fellow friend in futility the Pittsburgh Pirates.

Offensively, when I look at the Pirates I see a team with middle of the order that could be formidable with Jason Bay as the key guy and other power bats like Adam LaRoche and Xavier Nady (both projected at OPS over .800). The Pirates could be an offensive force if Freddy Sanchez (.344/.378/.473 with 53 doubles in 2006) makes the move to 2B. Sanchez probably won’t repeat his 2006 numbers but still should OPS near .800 and at 2B that would be quite an asset. This would also allow Jose Bautista in the line-up at 3B. Bautista could end-up as the power bat that pushes the Pirates to respectability. He still projects with an OPS below .800 but at the 60th percentile PECOTA predicts a slugging percentage of .454. Additional power could come from Ryan Doumit who should see some time at Catcher and as a switch hitter possibly some time at 1B against lefties. PECOTA is projecting a slugging % of .448 at the 50th percentile. Last year’s 2B Jose Castilla could move to the super sub role (he has been playing OF in the Carribean World Series) and would probably benefit with less exposure. Jack Wilson is still at SS and isn’t much offensively but is at least a wash with Alex Gonzalez IMO. The other key to the offense could be at CF/Lead-off. Here the Reds seem to have an advantage with Freel and Denorfia over Chris Duffy and Nate McClouth. Both Duffy and McLouth project to OBPs in the .325 to .340 range. Both put up decent OBPs in the minors but Duffy’s was more batting average driven while McLouth sprinkled in a few more walks. Overall I see an offense at Pittsburgh with similar strengths and similar question marks as compared to the Reds. I actually see more upside at Pittsburgh though.

As far as Pitching goes, the Reds seem to have an advantage with the top 2 starters, but the Pirates rotation of Duke, Gorzelanny, Snell, Malholm and Armas is much more likely to put up a good start day in and day out. PECOTA projects the top 4 to be about average or better with Armas having an ERA in Milton-land. ZIPS projects all 5 to have an ERA less than 5.00 with Duke at 3.92. The best case for the Reds would be a wash in these rotations, but Pittsburgh has more depth and more upside. In the Bullpen Pittsburgh took a hit by trading Mike Gonzalez, but with Salomon Torres closing (a projected ZIPS ERA of 3.44), Damaso Marte (3.97 ZIPS) providing a veteran lefy and Matt Capps (23 with a ZIPS ERA projected at 3.87), Josh Sharpless (26 with a 4.11 ZIPS), Jonah Bayliss (26/4.69), and John Grabow (28/4.23) providing youth, effectiveness and upside they compare favorably with the Reds. Todd Coffey (4.04 ZIPS) and maybe Mike Stanton (3.71) might be the only Reds reliever to even make the roster in Pittsburgh. David Weathers (5.35), Rheal Cormier (4.89), and Bill Bray (4.79) would probably be deemed past their expiration date or not yet ready. Gary Majewski (4.21) could possibly be a 12th man on the staff.

The Reds and Pittsburgh are pretty evenly matched with similar holes and strengths on offense. I like Pittsburgh’s pitching better with the Reds having an advantage at the top but Pittsburgh having a deeper rotation and a better bullpen.

Its going to be a good race in the central - for 5th place.

Matt700wlw
02-04-2007, 09:29 AM
10 Reasons Why The Reds Will Win The Central:

1. A double play duo of Gonzalez and Phillips along with a combo of Freel/Denorifa in center with a solid catcher defensively in Ross gives the Reds best defense they have had in this decade.

2. Brook Jacoby will be the hitting coach that gets Dunn to cut down on his strikeouts by at least 25-30 and put the ball in play more.

3. Junior will play at least 120 games and provide at least 30 HRs and 90+ RBIs. Playing RF will be less stress physically despite what Junior is saying now.

4. Harang and Arroyo will be one of the best one-two tandems in the NL Central. Each player could easily win between 15-20 games apiece.

5. Milton, Lohse and Saarloos are very capable of winning 10-12 games apiece.

6. Aging veterans Mike Stanton and David Weathers will be able to hold the fort in regards to the closer role till Eddie Guardado is ready by the allstar break. But if Todd Coffey or Bill Bray show they are ready to assume the closer role, the bullpen becomes stronger yet.

7. Edwin Encarncion will have a breakout season and will make fewer errors than he did in 2006.

8. The combination of Scott Hatteberg and Jeff Conine at lst will put up better numbers than any year that Casey manned the position.

9. The emergence of Homer Bailey sometime around Memorial Day will bolster the rotation and add more depth to the pen with either Saarloos, Belisle or Ramirez.

10. There is no reason why Krivsky and Castanelli won't be aggressive as they were in the first year running the show. And no matter how you look at, the Cardinals, Astros, Cubs and Brewers each have their flaws going into spring training.

Call me crazy if you want but if this team can avoid the injury bug, I see this team winning close to 90 games this season.

I give you props for coming up with 10 reasons.....

Reds1
02-04-2007, 09:53 AM
I think you are right on. This team is not as bad as some think. I don't believe #5, but they are all capable of 10-12 wins. I also think the Harang/Arroyo duo won't be as good as last year. It's almost scary as I think of all the positive things and what might happen Krusty nailed it which we don't always see eye to eye, but on the 2007 Reds we are like twin brothers. :)

Krusty
02-04-2007, 10:34 AM
I'll go a step further and look at the Reds opponents:

Cardinals---Okay they signed second baseman Adam Kennedy, OF Preston Wilson and re-signed Mark Mulder (who won't be ready at the start of the season). But did they improve that much significantly? Pujols was out for a portion of the season but Jim Edmonds is in decline and Scott Rolen's injury history is something to note. But losing Marquis and Suppan and hoping Reyes and Wainwright will step in maintain the same level of success for the starting rotation remains to be seen. And Jason Isringhausen recovery from hip surgery will be watched closely in spring training. Still, has the Cards offseason moves doesn't seem like they improved significantly from last season.

Chicago---They made a big splash this offseason with all their signings and moves including bringing in Lou Pinella. But an outfield of Floyd/Murton, Soriano and Jones is horrible defensively. Sure the Cubs will be able smash the ball with their hitters but so could the Reds and where did that get them? Their starting rotation is questionable and if they think Marquis and Lilly will win more than 15 games apiece, that is asking alot. But the bullpen with the erratic Ryan Dempster will hurt them in the long haul unless Kerry Wood and his achy elbow show he can be a successful closer.

Houston---They lose Pettite but acquire Jennings and we'll call that even. Signing Carlos Lee was nice but there are questions about his weight and we know how players become complacent after they signed that big multi-year deal. Lee can replace loss production with the departure of Bagwell and makes a nice tandem with Lance Berkman. But asking their second baseman of today, Chris Burke, to play center and their second baseman of the past, Craig Biggio to play 120+ games is asking alot. But if OF Jason Lane and closer Brad Lidge don't rebound from horrible 2006 seasons, this team might not have improved as much as people think. And there is always the Roger Clemens issue.

Milwaukee---Here is a team that bears watching. If Richie Weeks and Ben Sheets can remain healthy this team will contend. Estrada improves their catching and a full year of Cordero as the closer will be better than what Kolb or Turnbow did last year. They still have a move to make because they want to shift Bill Hall to LF which means either Mench or Jenkins could be dealt to possibly upgrade center field or add more pitching depth. But even with Sheets and Suppan in the rotation, the rest of it looks ordinary and the Reds rotation looks possibly better than the Brewers on paper.

Pittsburgh---The Pirates were mentioned before on this thread so I won't elaborate in depth. Sure they have a young, promising rotation but trading Mike Gonzalez means Salamon Torres is the closer for the time being unless Matt Capps steps up to be closer. Adam LaRoche was a big trade but this team has been cursed since it dealt 3rd baseman Armis Ramirez to the Cubs. What they lack is a bopper that can swing from the right side (Xavier Nady isn't it). Still losing since 1992 brings up a stench in Pittsburgh that is only wiped away come September when the Steelers take over the sports pages in town.

There is my short analysis. Again, I don't see any team improving themselves significantly. With all the wheeling and dealing the Cubs did, they weaken their outfield defense and signing Marquis and Lilly to big contracts for .500 records is ludicrous. I'm willing to bet Milton and Loshe will have more wins than these two.

edabbs44
02-04-2007, 10:48 AM
I give you props for coming up with 10 reasons.....

Some are reasons...


Harang and Arroyo will be one of the best one-two tandems in the NL Central.

...and some are pipe dreams.


The combination of Scott Hatteberg and Jeff Conine at lst will put up better numbers than any year that Casey manned the position.

Krusty
02-04-2007, 10:58 AM
Some are reasons...



...and some are pipe dreams.

The Hatteberg/Conine prediction might be stretching it a bit but I do think they will put up better numbers together than what Sean Casey has done the past two seasons.

jojo
02-04-2007, 11:20 AM
I'll go a step further and look at the Reds opponents:

Cardinals---Okay they signed second baseman Adam Kennedy, OF Preston Wilson and re-signed Mark Mulder (who won't be ready at the start of the season). But did they improve that much significantly? Pujols was out for a portion of the season but Jim Edmonds is in decline and Scott Rolen's injury history is something to note. But losing Marquis and Suppan and hoping Reyes and Wainwright will step in maintain the same level of success for the starting rotation remains to be seen. And Jason Isringhausen recovery from hip surgery will be watched closely in spring training. Still, has the Cards offseason moves doesn't seem like they improved significantly from last season.

Reyes and Wainwright are absolutely significant upgrades over Marquis and Suppan. Their projections suggest Reyes and Wainwright will be 3+ wins better (at league minimum!) over Marquis/Suppan who collectively will make $11M on '07. Thats the epitomy of an upgrade.

Will M
02-04-2007, 11:20 AM
Best team = Brew Crew. If Sheets is healthy look out!

Despite winning the series the Cards are in decline. Pujols & Carpenter are great. Rolen is injury prone. The rest of the team is weak. Very weak.

Astros are also in decline. Carlos Lee does not make up for losing Clemens & Petite. Not to mention Bagwell is gone and Biggio is on his last legs.
The Astros are Berkman, Lee, Oswalt and filler.

Cubs spent a lot of money but I would rather have the Reds team.
Lots of questions regarding their pitching.
Also defensively they have holes.
Oh and did I mention they don't have a CF.

Pirates have Jason Bay and some young pitching but lots of holes.

I still think the Reds will win between 75 and 92 games. Krusty is right.
If things fall into place the Reds could win the division.

My 2007 prediction:

1. Brewers
2. Reds
3. Cards
4. Astros
5. Cubs
6. Pirates

Dom Heffner
02-04-2007, 11:25 AM
But did they (The Cardinals) improve that much significantly?

They were already twice as good as the Reds if they didn't make a single move. They have lots of room to fall here.


The Hatteberg/Conine prediction might be stretching it a bit but I do think they will put up better numbers together than what Sean Casey has done the past two seasons.

My feeling is we don't have to merely improve on what Casey did but we have to smash what Casey did. Casey was a terrible benchmark to begin with for the position, so only improving doesn't help much.

I applaud the optimism, though. Might be the last we see of over the next seven months.

Wheelhouse
02-04-2007, 11:47 AM
Bravo Krusty. I'm in! But not for too much money...

mth123
02-04-2007, 11:54 AM
I'll go a step further and look at the Reds opponents:

Cardinals---Okay they signed second baseman Adam Kennedy, OF Preston Wilson and re-signed Mark Mulder (who won't be ready at the start of the season). But did they improve that much significantly? Pujols was out for a portion of the season but Jim Edmonds is in decline and Scott Rolen's injury history is something to note. But losing Marquis and Suppan and hoping Reyes and Wainwright will step in maintain the same level of success for the starting rotation remains to be seen. And Jason Isringhausen recovery from hip surgery will be watched closely in spring training. Still, has the Cards offseason moves doesn't seem like they improved significantly from last season.

Losing Marquis and Suppan is addition by subtraction. The rotation is improved because of the losses of these guys not worse. And Wainwright and Reyes would be the 3 and 4 we've been screaming for. Kip Wells will be the free agent signing of the off-season. This team is good when they are all on the field. Don't count on Edmonds, Izzy and Rolen missing so much time in 2007 like they did in 2006. Chris Duncan may be the break-out player of 2007.


Chicago---They made a big splash this offseason with all their signings and moves including bringing in Lou Pinella. But an outfield of Floyd/Murton, Soriano and Jones is horrible defensively. Sure the Cubs will be able smash the ball with their hitters but so could the Reds and where did that get them? Their starting rotation is questionable and if they think Marquis and Lilly will win more than 15 games apiece, that is asking alot. But the bullpen with the erratic Ryan Dempster will hurt them in the long haul unless Kerry Wood and his achy elbow show he can be a successful closer.

Zambrano, Hill, Prior, Lilly, Marmol, Marshall, and Guzman would all be better bets as the Reds number three than anyone on the Reds roster. I agree that Marquis is a waste of money. In the bullpen, Dempster is a little shaky but with Eyre, Howry, Wood, Ohman and Wuertz (and the starters above that don't make it) they are deep, effective and have options to turn to. I wish the reds had the cubs pen.


Houston---They lose Pettite but acquire Jennings and we'll call that even. Signing Carlos Lee was nice but there are questions about his weight and we know how players become complacent after they signed that big multi-year deal. Lee can replace loss production with the departure of Bagwell and makes a nice tandem with Lance Berkman. But asking their second baseman of today, Chris Burke, to play center and their second baseman of the past, Craig Biggio to play 120+ games is asking alot. But if OF Jason Lane and closer Brad Lidge don't rebound from horrible 2006 seasons, this team might not have improved as much as people think. And there is always the Roger Clemens issue.

Bagwell hasn't been on the field in a couple years so his loss doesn't matter when looking at last year. Burke will be an upgrade in CF overall. I was not and am not a fan of Willy Tavaras or that Juan Pierre type of player. I agree tha Biggio is on the decline, but they signed Mark Loretta to ease the burden and the combination will be ok. Jason Lane is only tabbed for the bench at this point and Luke Scott (who had an MVP caliber 2nd half) will be in the OF with Lee and Burke. I agree that a lot hinges on Clemens and Lidge. If Clemens doesn't pitch for Houston they'll finish 4th (looking down on Pittsburgh and Cincy). If he comes back by July or so, they'll be in it.


Milwaukee---Here is a team that bears watching. If Richie Weeks and Ben Sheets can remain healthy this team will contend. Estrada improves their catching and a full year of Cordero as the closer will be better than what Kolb or Turnbow did last year. They still have a move to make because they want to shift Bill Hall to LF which means either Mench or Jenkins could be dealt to possibly upgrade center field or add more pitching depth. But even with Sheets and Suppan in the rotation, the rest of it looks ordinary and the Reds rotation looks possibly better than the Brewers on paper.

Corey Koskie's post concussion syndrome could mean Hall back at 3B with Mench and Jenkins in LF. They'll be pretty good offensively if they do that. I like their pitching the best with Sheets, Capuano, Suppan and Bush in the rotation and the back of the bullpen with Cordero, Capellan, Wise and that pesky Shouse. This is a team that just needs to stay healthy (especially in the rotation).


Pittsburgh---The Pirates were mentioned before on this thread so I won't elaborate in depth. Sure they have a young, promising rotation but trading Mike Gonzalez means Salamon Torres is the closer for the time being unless Matt Capps steps up to be closer. Adam LaRoche was a big trade but this team has been cursed since it dealt 3rd baseman Armis Ramirez to the Cubs. What they lack is a bopper that can swing from the right side (Xavier Nady isn't it). Still losing since 1992 brings up a stench in Pittsburgh that is only wiped away come September when the Steelers take over the sports pages in town.

I already discussed them above and they are not on par with these other 4 teams. But they do look very similar to the Reds IMO. If everyone is so quick to write-off the Pirates, what is the source of all this belief in the Reds outside of springtime optimism?


There is my short analysis. Again, I don't see any team improving themselves significantly. With all the wheeling and dealing the Cubs did, they weaken their outfield defense and signing Marquis and Lilly to big contracts for .500 records is ludicrous. I'm willing to bet Milton and Loshe will have more wins than these two.

I hope you are right and I am wrong. I really do. Good discussion.:beerme:

Falls City Beer
02-04-2007, 01:04 PM
Everything could break right for the Reds--everything--and they're still not going to catch Houston, St. Louis, or Milwaukee.

I'm picking them to finish last in the division. 68 wins.

vaticanplum
02-04-2007, 01:53 PM
I want to remind everyone who points out that the Cardinals haven't improved significantly that the Cardinals WON THE WORLD SERIES. Call it a fluke, point out the weaknesses on that team, but you don't get through an entire season and three playoff series and come out on top without some kind of team of merit.

That said...and I have been avoiding saying it...I feel good about the Reds this year. I have nothing to back that up and I'm not going to try. That's just how I feel.

camisadelgolf
02-04-2007, 02:09 PM
You mean the Reds, who haven't had a winning season since 2000, compare with the defending World Series champs who boast the games best hitter, two other perennial All Stars on offense and an annual contender for the Cy Young award?

Yes, I think the reds compare. How far apart were their records last year? What did the Cardinals do to improve?


You mean the Reds, who man 1B with a pair of players who offer little in the way of power or promise, compare with an annual contender like Houston who boast one of the games top hitters at 1B?

No, Houston definitely has an edge at first base. However, there is a lot more than one position on the baseball field.


You mean the Reds, who spent the off-season overpaying for the likes of David Weathers, Mike Stanton, Chad Moeller and Jeff Conine, compare with a team that went out and spent serious money to retain or acquire all star caliber players like Alfonso Soriano and Aramis Ramirez?

You're right--Javon Moran, a utility outfielder "prospect", was way too much to give up for Jeff Conine, a proven utility guy who will reap us two early draft picks after 2007. And David Weathers is certainly over-paid. I mean, $2.25 million for a guy who posted a 4.00+ ERA once in the past seven years? RIDICULOUS! Oh, and Stanton? Who in his right mind would pay $2 million dollars for a guy who has been approximately league average or better ever single year for over the past decade while posting a 2.10 ERA in 53 career post-season appearances? There's no way I'd want to fill gaps on a team with those three World Series winners. Oh, and "over-paying" is a good word for bringing in Chad Moeller--it's because of that signing we couldn't afford a third starter in free agency.


You mean the Reds, who haven’t developed a starting pitcher since Tom Browning and boast only Adam Dunn, Chris Denorfia and Todd Coffey as homegrown talents that project to play serious roles with any success, compare with the Brewers who have budding homegrown stars all around like Prince Fielder, Ricky Weeks, Ben Sheets, JJ Hardy and Corey Hart?

You're right--the Brewers have better home-grown talent. Let's just skip the regular season and put them in the World Series right now. Good point.


Before the Reds lay claim to any ability to compete with those teams, lets aim a little lower and see if the Reds could even compete with its fellow friend in futility the Pittsburgh Pirates.

Offensively, when I look at the Pirates I see a team with middle of the order that could be formidable with Jason Bay as the key guy and other power bats like Adam LaRoche and Xavier Nady (both projected at OPS over .800). The Pirates could be an offensive force if Freddy Sanchez (.344/.378/.473 with 53 doubles in 2006) makes the move to 2B. Sanchez probably won’t repeat his 2006 numbers but still should OPS near .800 and at 2B that would be quite an asset. This would also allow Jose Bautista in the line-up at 3B. Bautista could end-up as the power bat that pushes the Pirates to respectability. He still projects with an OPS below .800 but at the 60th percentile PECOTA predicts a slugging percentage of .454. Additional power could come from Ryan Doumit who should see some time at Catcher and as a switch hitter possibly some time at 1B against lefties. PECOTA is projecting a slugging % of .448 at the 50th percentile. Last year’s 2B Jose Castilla could move to the super sub role (he has been playing OF in the Carribean World Series) and would probably benefit with less exposure. Jack Wilson is still at SS and isn’t much offensively but is at least a wash with Alex Gonzalez IMO. The other key to the offense could be at CF/Lead-off. Here the Reds seem to have an advantage with Freel and Denorfia over Chris Duffy and Nate McClouth. Both Duffy and McLouth project to OBPs in the .325 to .340 range. Both put up decent OBPs in the minors but Duffy’s was more batting average driven while McLouth sprinkled in a few more walks. Overall I see an offense at Pittsburgh with similar strengths and similar question marks as compared to the Reds. I actually see more upside at Pittsburgh though.

As far as Pitching goes, the Reds seem to have an advantage with the top 2 starters, but the Pirates rotation of Duke, Gorzelanny, Snell, Malholm and Armas is much more likely to put up a good start day in and day out. PECOTA projects the top 4 to be about average or better with Armas having an ERA in Milton-land. ZIPS projects all 5 to have an ERA less than 5.00 with Duke at 3.92. The best case for the Reds would be a wash in these rotations, but Pittsburgh has more depth and more upside. In the Bullpen Pittsburgh took a hit by trading Mike Gonzalez, but with Salomon Torres closing (a projected ZIPS ERA of 3.44), Damaso Marte (3.97 ZIPS) providing a veteran lefy and Matt Capps (23 with a ZIPS ERA projected at 3.87), Josh Sharpless (26 with a 4.11 ZIPS), Jonah Bayliss (26/4.69), and John Grabow (28/4.23) providing youth, effectiveness and upside they compare favorably with the Reds. Todd Coffey (4.04 ZIPS) and maybe Mike Stanton (3.71) might be the only Reds reliever to even make the roster in Pittsburgh. David Weathers (5.35), Rheal Cormier (4.89), and Bill Bray (4.79) would probably be deemed past their expiration date or not yet ready. Gary Majewski (4.21) could possibly be a 12th man on the staff.

The Reds and Pittsburgh are pretty evenly matched with similar holes and strengths on offense. I like Pittsburgh’s pitching better with the Reds having an advantage at the top but Pittsburgh having a deeper rotation and a better bullpen.

Its going to be a good race in the central - for 5th place.

You're right about Pittsburgh. Everyone knows it's the youthful pitchers that put together the most dominant, consistent numbers. I think you can pretty much bank on almost all their guys having 10+ win seasons and sub-4.00 ERAs.

AdamDunn
02-04-2007, 02:39 PM
by tradition, we'll be tied for first at the all-star break and then fall to third place

mth123
02-04-2007, 02:44 PM
Yes, I think the reds compare. How far apart were their records last year? What did the Cardinals do to improve?



No, Houston definitely has an edge at first base. However, there is a lot more than one position on the baseball field.



You're right--Javon Moran, a utility outfielder "prospect", was way too much to give up for Jeff Conine, a proven utility guy who will reap us two early draft picks after 2007. And David Weathers is certainly over-paid. I mean, $2.25 million for a guy who posted a 4.00+ ERA once in the past seven years? RIDICULOUS! Oh, and Stanton? Who in his right mind would pay $2 million dollars for a guy who has been approximately league average or better ever single year for over the past decade while posting a 2.10 ERA in 53 career post-season appearances? There's no way I'd want to fill gaps on a team with those three World Series winners. Oh, and "over-paying" is a good word for bringing in Chad Moeller--it's because of that signing we couldn't afford a third starter in free agency.



You're right--the Brewers have better home-grown talent. Let's just skip the regular season and put them in the World Series right now. Good point.



You're right about Pittsburgh. Everyone knows it's the youthful pitchers that put together the most dominant, consistent numbers. I think you can pretty much bank on almost all their guys having 10+ win seasons and sub-4.00 ERAs.

St. Louis will have a better rotation in 2007 than in 2006. And in 2006 the Cardinals lost significant time from the lead-off hitter (and SS), and 2/3 of the middle of its order (who happen to man key defensive spots in CF and 3B). They will have their closer back. Even Pujols was out for a couple weeks and playing a little hurt upon returning. There is no comparison. As the Cardinals got all of these guys back and their play improved to the play-off caliber team that they are, the Reds lost 2 key offensive players at the all star break and the guy who was the best hitter afterwards. These teams seemed fairly evenly matched while going head to head in June of 2006, but since then the Cardinals have added a lot just by getting guys back from injury while the Reds have subtracted key offensive contributors with no real improvement to the pitching staff. Don't confuse the Reds being competitive with St. Louis in June with where either of these teams are now.

As for the overpayment remarks. Conine has slugged .450 once since 1999 (2003) and had an OBP above .350 twice (2001 and 2005) since 1996. Any talent at all and the $2 Million paid is an overpayment. Weathers walked over 4 and gave up 1.47 HR per nine innings in 2006. A deadly combination that was mitigated by a BABIP of .236. He is projected for an ERA over 5 in 2007. This was not a guy to re-sign at any cost, so over $2 Million is an overpayment IMO. Stanton wasn't as bad a deal, but the combined money from those 3 (and some others where it is being slowly frittered away) could have actually addressed a need or 2. An upgrade from Lohse $4 Million by some of that amount could go a long way. The point is simply that the contention that other teams did nothing to improve and that the Reds moves are on par is completely false. Chicago and Houston may have overpaid for the like of Lilly, Derosa, Marquis, Williams and Lee but they have actually improved the on-field performance of those positions. The Reds meanwhile combined all of these small "wise not overpaying" signings to spend a large % of this years payroll on inferior players. Paying above minimum for inferior players is a waste IMO. This was a year to go big or stay home.

Krusty
02-04-2007, 02:45 PM
I want to remind everyone who points out that the Cardinals haven't improved significantly that the Cardinals WON THE WORLD SERIES. Call it a fluke, point out the weaknesses on that team, but you don't get through an entire season and three playoff series and come out on top without some kind of team of merit.

That said...and I have been avoiding saying it...I feel good about the Reds this year. I have nothing to back that up and I'm not going to try. That's just how I feel.

The Cardinals winning the World Series reminded me of how the Pittsburgh Steelers won the Super Bowl last year....they got on a roll towards the end of the season and carried them through the playoffs and championship. We all seen how the Steelers did this year. And odds are the Cardinals will have a tough time duplicating that stretch run they had last year.

As for the Reds, it will be interesting to see if they learned anything from that West Coast trip in late August which essentially separated them from the Cardinals. Add to that Griffey going down with an injury and no protection for Dunn in the lineup. If Griffey remains healthy and Dunn can put the ball in play more along with this team getting hot like the Cardinals did down the stretch last year.....we'll anything can happen.

Did you honestly think the Detroit Tigers was going to win their division last year with the likes of the White Sox, Twins and Indians in that division? Did you think the Marlins would have done what they did last season during spring training?

That is why you play the games.

buckshotrod
02-04-2007, 02:57 PM
I'm in Krusty....my big concern is the bullpen. We have coughed up too many wins or lost ground in close games too many times. What used to be a great bullpen years ago has become a doormat. Hopefully these guys in the pen come thru this year. If so, it could be interesting. Remember, we went down to the next to last game last year!

vaticanplum
02-04-2007, 03:20 PM
The Cardinals winning the World Series reminded me of how the Pittsburgh Steelers won the Super Bowl last year....they got on a roll towards the end of the season and carried them through the playoffs and championship. We all seen how the Steelers did this year. And odds are the Cardinals will have a tough time duplicating that stretch run they had last year.

To me, the point regarding the Cardinals is that they were/are a cohesive team. A lot of people point to the fact that only three games separated the Cards from the Reds in the regular season. That's true. But talent and experience carried the Cardinals through the postseason; it wasn't just a lucky or "hot" streak. I do not believe the Reds would have had the same success had they squeaked into the postseason last year. The Cardinals were a high-quality team that faltered through the year and then reached their potential when it counted. The Reds were a mid-level team who overperformed during parts of the year and then faltered back down to their abilities when it counted. That's all the difference in the world in this sport.

I don't believe it's a matter of the Cardinals "duplicating their stretch" next year. They were and are a better team than their regular-season record reflected. If anything, I'd point to odds that they're likely to have a much better year in 2007 than in 2006.


As for the Reds, it will be interesting to see if they learned anything from that West Coast trip in late August which essentially separated them from the Cardinals. Add to that Griffey going down with an injury and no protection for Dunn in the lineup. If Griffey remains healthy and Dunn can put the ball in play more along with this team getting hot like the Cardinals did down the stretch last year.....we'll anything can happen.

This I agree with. It may be one reason I believe the Reds are due for a good year. We knock experience on this board, but it does make a difference. The Reds have not been good for a long time. There are a handful of incredibly talented players on the team who have never had a good taste of what it's like to get close to winning. Last year, they did. I think it will affect them. I think this team will be a lot hungrier this year than we've been used to seeing the last few years.


Did you honestly think the Detroit Tigers was going to win their division last year with the likes of the White Sox, Twins and Indians in that division? Did you think the Marlins would have done what they did last season during spring training?

That is why you play the games.

back to facts again, unfortunately: all of those teams have a higher level of base talent than the Reds. All of them. I could easily look at the Tigers at the beginning of last season and see than they had a well-constructed, well-balanced team.

As I said, I'm torn. I do think the Reds could do very well this year. It's just hard for me to gauge exactly why I think that, because compared to other teams, it still is a team with serious defecits in its very makeup.

camisadelgolf
02-04-2007, 03:50 PM
St. Louis will have a better rotation in 2007 than in 2006. And in 2006 the Cardinals lost significant time from the lead-off hitter (and SS), and 2/3 of the middle of its order (who happen to man key defensive spots in CF and 3B). They will have their closer back. Even Pujols was out for a couple weeks and playing a little hurt upon returning. There is no comparison. As the Cardinals got all of these guys back and their play improved to the play-off caliber team that they are, the Reds lost 2 key offensive players at the all star break and the guy who was the best hitter afterwards. These teams seemed fairly evenly matched while going head to head in June of 2006, but since then the Cardinals have added a lot just by getting guys back from injury while the Reds have subtracted key offensive contributors with no real improvement to the pitching staff. Don't confuse the Reds being competitive with St. Louis in June with where either of these teams are now.

As for the overpayment remarks. Conine has slugged .450 once since 1999 (2003) and had an OBP above .350 twice (2001 and 2005) since 1996. Any talent at all and the $2 Million paid is an overpayment. Weathers walked over 4 and gave up 1.47 HR per nine innings in 2006. A deadly combination that was mitigated by a BABIP of .236. He is projected for an ERA over 5 in 2007. This was not a guy to re-sign at any cost, so over $2 Million is an overpayment IMO. Stanton wasn't as bad a deal, but the combined money from those 3 (and some others where it is being slowly frittered away) could have actually addressed a need or 2. An upgrade from Lohse $4 Million by some of that amount could go a long way. The point is simply that the contention that other teams did nothing to improve and that the Reds moves are on par is completely false. Chicago and Houston may have overpaid for the like of Lilly, Derosa, Marquis, Williams and Lee but they have actually improved the on-field performance of those positions. The Reds meanwhile combined all of these small "wise not overpaying" signings to spend a large % of this years payroll on inferior players. Paying above minimum for inferior players is a waste IMO. This was a year to go big or stay home.

So we're on the same page, I'll go on the record saying that I don't think the Reds will win the NL Central. If I had to make a pick, I'd actually go for the Astros. However, to respond to your statements, I'll say this:

St. Louis should be better than they were in 2006. I think they could win a 100 games this year. The Cubs' signings however (plus players rebounding from injury) should result in them being a team in the middle of the NL Central race, but by no means are they a run-away winner.

I think you won't understand the signings of Cormier, Weathers, Stanton, Conine, etc. until 2009, when Griffey's contract is off the books. In 2009, the Reds are going to look completely different, and they'll have tons of draft pick compensation. The players signed to $2 million contracts are all about plugging holes and bringing in draft picks. Granted, they could spend a little less to fill those holes--and let's say it brings you an extra $6 million to spend on an impact player this year--but what is $6 million going to get you? Shannon Stewart and a journeyman starter? I'm pretty sure it won't be enough to make a difference between the Reds competing and the Reds being an NL Central favorite.

TheWalls
02-04-2007, 04:04 PM
As I look at this list, they all appear plausible. However, the likelihood of all of the planets aligning seems remote. However, even if only seven or eight of them fell we could be contending at the break and use some of the money we didn't waste on overpriced free agents to make a run. Do we have enough protection for these items if they don't work out???


10 Reasons Why The Reds Will Win The Central:

1. A double play duo of Gonzalez and Phillips along with a combo of Freel/Denorifa in center with a solid catcher defensively in Ross gives the Reds best defense they have had in this decade.

This necessitates Jr. moving to right for the good of the team, Freel staying healthy and Ross avoiding the drops he had on way too many plays at the plate last year. Denorfia and Valentine provide backup plans.

2. Brook Jacoby will be the hitting coach that gets Dunn to cut down on his strikeouts by at least 25-30 and put the ball in play more.

Hard to get around this issue. Not sure the we have enough small ball offense to overcome Dunn hitting 6th because of his awful situational hitting and untimely and frequent Ks.

3. Junior will play at least 120 games and provide at least 30 HRs and 90+ RBIs. Playing RF will be less stress physically despite what Junior is saying now.

Again, hard to overcome losing the most professional hitter on the team.

4. Harang and Arroyo will be one of the best one-two tandems in the NL Central. Each player could easily win between 15-20 games apiece.

As much as I hate Milton, he'll eat innings and keep us in games (especailly on the road). I think Saarlos and Lohse have a chance to be pretty good and I like Belisle and EZ as the first reserve starters. Heaven help us if Arroyo or Harang's arms fall off.

5. Milton, Lohse and Saarloos are very capable of winning 10-12 games apiece.

See above.

6. Aging veterans Mike Stanton and David Weathers will be able to hold the fort in regards to the closer role till Eddie Guardado is ready by the allstar break. But if Todd Coffey or Bill Bray show they are ready to assume the closer role, the bullpen becomes stronger yet.

I really do think this pen could be pretty good. Cormier, Bray, Majik, Stanton, Coffey, Weathers, Belisle/Saarlos looks decent on paper.

7. Edwin Encarncion will have a breakout season and will make fewer errors than he did in 2006.

Best clutch hitter in the lineup. Should hit between Dunn and Griffey EVERY GAME! Again, no real fall back strategy.

8. The combination of Scott Hatteberg and Jeff Conine at lst will put up better numbers than any year that Casey manned the position.

They'll be productive if unspectacular. If it doesn't work, look for Votto.

9. The emergence of Homer Bailey sometime around Memorial Day will bolster the rotation and add more depth to the pen with either Saarloos, Belisle or Ramirez.

I don't expect him to have a significant impact this year.

10. There is no reason why Krivsky and Castanelli won't be aggressive as they were in the first year running the show. And no matter how you look at, the Cardinals, Astros, Cubs and Brewers each have their flaws going into spring training.

I agree. Our restraint this winter should pay off if we're competing at the break. If we're not, let the second guessing begin.

Call me crazy if you want but if this team can avoid the injury bug, I see this team winning close to 90 games this season.

I agree. This is highly dependent on the middle of the lineup and the starting pitching. Unfortunately, these are the two parts of the team that have the least insurance at this time.

M2
02-04-2007, 04:08 PM
I think Krusty touched on most of what needs to go right for the Reds to win in 2007. Unlike some previous seasons, I can see where this team could win 85-90 games (though I can also see where it could lose 85-90 games).

As for the division, I don't like what the Cubs have added and the Astros look ready to do the collapse. As usual, the Cardinals are the team to beat. The most complete challenger in the division looks to be the Brewers. Obviously you never know when or if everything will come together for a team, but Milwaukee's got its act together on paper.

Falls City Beer
02-04-2007, 04:14 PM
I think Krusty touched on most of what needs to go right for the Reds to win in 2007. Unlike some previous seasons, I can see where this team could win 85-90 games (though I can also see where it could lose 85-90 games).

As for the division, I don't like what the Cubs have added and the Astros look ready to do the collapse. As usual, the Cardinals are the team to beat. The most complete challenger in the division looks to be the Brewers. Obviously you never know when or if everything will come together for a team, but Milwaukee's got its act together on paper.

I'm surprised that you could see this version of the Reds winning 85. This team looks like one of the worst in a very, very long time. This offense could (likely will) be a turd for the ages.

I've almost stopped dropping by Redszone (which is insane, as I usually drop by once or twice a day even in the dead of winter) I have so little hope or interest in this year's squad. I'm bored to the point of nausea with this incarnation.

M2
02-04-2007, 04:22 PM
I'm surprised that you could see this version of the Reds winning 85. This team looks like one of the worst in a very, very long time. This offense could (likely will) be a turd for the ages.

You very well could be right. The offense is going to need huge contributions from Dunn and Encarnacion. The CF situation also has to be resolved before the season. Lohse has to step up, the bullpen has to be functional and Saarloos probably has to have a solid campaign. A lot of things have to go right. The good news is they aren't wildly outlandish things. Yes, many are unlikely, but not snowball's chance in hell unlikely. Right now I've got the Reds figured in with the Cubs and Astros at sub-.500 and in the 3-4-5 mix (I'm leaning toward 4), but we'll see what spring training brings.

It is unfortunate the club added so little this offseason. I agree with you that if things go wrong (namely health), then 2007 could be on par with 2001 in how ugly it gets.

mth123
02-04-2007, 04:26 PM
So we're on the same page, I'll go on the record saying that I don't think the Reds will win the NL Central. If I had to make a pick, I'd actually go for the Astros. However, to respond to your statements, I'll say this:

St. Louis should be better than they were in 2006. I think they could win a 100 games this year. The Cubs' signings however (plus players rebounding from injury) should result in them being a team in the middle of the NL Central race, but by no means are they a run-away winner.

I think you won't understand the signings of Cormier, Weathers, Stanton, Conine, etc. until 2009, when Griffey's contract is off the books. In 2009, the Reds are going to look completely different, and they'll have tons of draft pick compensation. The players signed to $2 million contracts are all about plugging holes and bringing in draft picks. Granted, they could spend a little less to fill those holes--and let's say it brings you an extra $6 million to spend on an impact player this year--but what is $6 million going to get you? Shannon Stewart and a journeyman starter? I'm pretty sure it won't be enough to make a difference between the Reds competing and the Reds being an NL Central favorite.

$6 Million plus the $4 Million starting point for Lohse means you upgrade to a very solid $10 Million guy.

As for the draft picks, it remains to be seen whether fading relievers would even qualify for compenstation under the new rules concerning type A and B Free Agents. Even if they do, the Reds would have to offer arbitration which would be absolutely insane. More likely these guys will be DFA'd or announce their intent to retire when their current deals expire.

mth123
02-04-2007, 04:34 PM
I'm surprised that you could see this version of the Reds winning 85. This team looks like one of the worst in a very, very long time. This offense could (likely will) be a turd for the ages.

I've almost stopped dropping by Redszone (which is insane, as I usually drop by once or twice a day even in the dead of winter) I have so little hope or interest in this year's squad. I'm bored to the point of nausea with this incarnation.

I'm with you concerning excitement level and outlook for this season. I think 95 to 100 losses is a very real possibility, but I still like talking about the team and hope for better.

jmac
02-04-2007, 05:48 PM
I'm surprised that you could see this version of the Reds winning 85. This team looks like one of the worst in a very, very long time. This offense could (likely will) be a turd for the ages.

Would you have felt same way if reds had brought back Aurelia?
If Dunn goes 45/120....EE 25/100 Jr 25/90 then you never know.
However though Jr may be the 3rd best run producer on the team, if/when he goes down....then we will be hurting big time.

redsmetz
02-04-2007, 07:08 PM
I'm surprised that you could see this version of the Reds winning 85. This team looks like one of the worst in a very, very long time. This offense could (likely will) be a turd for the ages.

I've almost stopped dropping by Redszone (which is insane, as I usually drop by once or twice a day even in the dead of winter) I have so little hope or interest in this year's squad. I'm bored to the point of nausea with this incarnation.

This club is better than the team that opened last season, particularly the pitching staff. I can't predict wins, but it's better than last year's team, IMO.

Falls City Beer
02-04-2007, 07:12 PM
This club is better than the team that opened last season, particularly the pitching staff. I can't predict wins, but it's better than last year's team, IMO.

How so?

The offense is much worse. The starters are the same. And the bullpen is a year older but no better.

reds44
02-04-2007, 07:19 PM
How so?

The offense is much worse. The starters are the same. And the bullpen is a year older but no better.
How are the starters the same? Saarloos wasn't here, and Loshe was here for what, 2 months? Homer will be up this year, that's a matter of when not if. The defense is much improved, and it will be even better when Griffey is moved to RF. The offense will be worse, but much worse? The offense (with Kearns and Lopez) did nothing in May. I think we will be better then last year. I'm thinking 85 wins or so.

The bullpen is going to be MUCH better then it was all season. Bray, Majewski (healhty), Weathers, Stanton, and Coffey will all be solid. Whatever you get out of Cormier and Belisle will be a bonus.

kbrake
02-04-2007, 07:21 PM
Does anyone have any serious hope that Griffey will actually move to RF?

Falls City Beer
02-04-2007, 07:28 PM
Does anyone have any serious hope that Griffey will actually move to RF?

Not really. But I genuinely believe that most are overamplifying the benefits of a Griffey move. No question it will help having Freel/Denorfia in center and Griffey in right, but to me it's like removing an infected toenail from a lung cancer patient. It'll ease some pain for the patient, but it ain't gonna help the real problem (hint: slots 3 through 5 in the rotation and the offense).

reds44
02-04-2007, 07:41 PM
Does anyone have any serious hope that Griffey will actually move to RF?
Yes. Why would the bring it up to him if it wasn't serious? If they aren't going to it, they wouldn't have brought it up.

jmac
02-04-2007, 08:12 PM
Not really. But I genuinely believe that most are overamplifying the benefits of a Griffey move. No question it will help having Freel/Denorfia in center and Griffey in right, but to me it's like removing an infected toenail from a lung cancer patient. It'll ease some pain for the patient, but it ain't gonna help the real problem (hint: slots 3 through 5 in the rotation and the offense).

I dont think anyone on this board is saying our 3-5 is that solid.
However most will say or ask , are the reds 3-5 that much worse than the rest of the division's?

Falls City Beer
02-04-2007, 08:45 PM
However most will say or ask , are the reds 3-5 that much worse than the rest of the division's?

Absolutely. The Reds' 3-5 is stone age in comparison to every team in the Central with the possible exception of Chicago. But in a coin-flip I'd say Cincy's is the worse of the two, and worst of the division. Every other team's 1-4 is either very good or has good upside.

Add a shaky and unreliable bullpen with terrible K rates and you're looking at an utterly noxious blend.

Krusty
02-04-2007, 11:30 PM
On the otherhand, if the bullpen can be stable and Guardado can come back at the allstar break and pitch like he did last season, how can it be that bad? A healthy Majewski and another year under his belt in Bill Bray can only help.

Talk about the talent base difference between the Tigers and Reds and it really might not be that significant especially if Denorifa, Bailey and Votto contribute to the club next season.

Dracodave
02-04-2007, 11:49 PM
Talk about the talent base difference between the Tigers and Reds and it really might not be that significant especially if Denorifa, Bailey and Votto contribute to the club next season.


Okay, the Tigers have...

Verlander, Robertson, Rogers, Bonderman. Thats a highly good top four. Followed by Maroth, Ledzema, Miner, Tata etc for the fifth spot?

Harrang, Arroyo, Loshe, Milton. Thats a weaker top four. Followed by Belisle, EZ-E and Saarloos for the fifth? Bailey wont break camp unless he's lights out.

Rotation, I take the Tigers.

Bullpen.
Any of the number five canidates from The tigers as long relief, coupled with Zumaya and Jones at the bottom half of it.

Any of our number five candidates for long relief coupled with Coffey.

Bullpen, I take the Tigers.

They have depth.

We have wish in one hand and aging crap in the other.

Edit---

As far as batting orders go..

I'm not even going to comment because of two things..
1)Tigers surplus of good pitching can get them good bats.
2)Reds haven't traded for anything (Saarloos could be the exception but not the rule) but crap this winter.

camisadelgolf
02-05-2007, 02:13 AM
$6 Million plus the $4 Million starting point for Lohse means you upgrade to a very solid $10 Million guy.
Oh, I see. So the Reds could sign Ted Lilly or Gil Meche to the Milton-esque contracts that have them in such bad financial position in the first place.

mth123
02-05-2007, 07:32 AM
Oh, I see. So the Reds could sign Ted Lilly or Gil Meche to the Milton-esque contracts that have them in such bad financial position in the first place.

I wouldn't have signed Lilly or Meche and really wasn't that interested in most of the free agent pitchers. I liked Padilla ok but he went back to Texes for more than I would have paid. I woould have bid on Wolf, but not the $9 Million he got. But guys like Freddy Garcia and Jason Jennings were moved for returns that Reds may have been able to match (maybe not though). If I couldn't get a good one, it doesn't justify paying so much money to bad ones. As I said earlier go big or stay home. I wouldn't have flushed the money down the drain that the Reds did this offseason. The Reds were better off with going with young and unproven or with minor league free agents than flushing money on Lohse ($4), Weathers ($2.5), Conine ($2), Stanton ($2.5 although he wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't for all the others), Moeller ($.75) and I'd have been looking to dump Cormier ($2.25). That's about $14 Million pretty quickly saved to put toward a good player or two, a Harang deal, or just as flexibility to make a move later. Cheap players who are likely to be comparable and offer more upside and future value if they come through were out there.

Ltlabner
02-05-2007, 09:10 AM
Cheap players who are likely to be comparable and offer more upside and future value if they come through were out there.


I too have been unhappy with the offseason pickups. That said, I'm not sure I'm comfortable with the "let all the kids in AAA" start idea. First, they are not likely to give "comparable" performances. Even at MLB average, some of these guys (especially pitchers) do have value in that they have an established level of success. The key to that is MLB average, I understand that, and there is some question if you could get even that from some of these guys. But how many of the 'young and cheep crowd' are just going to jump in and suddenly give you MLB average performances?

How many times have we seen "can't miss" prospects peter out and do nothing in the bigs? Or fall apart at AAA after dominating AA? So the idea that "well, these kids could do at least as well as the crap we got" sounds like a nifity idea, but in practicality I don't think it works out that was as often as we like.

fourrunhomer
02-05-2007, 10:27 AM
[QUOTE=Falls City Beer;1237102]I'm surprised that you could see this version of the Reds winning 85. This team looks like one of the worst in a very, very long time. This offense could (likely will) be a turd for the ages.

Funny, I've been hearing this same thing for the last 5 years. I'm always optimistic going into the season. This year I'm not predicting one way or the other. I see some bright spots with this team as well as some big questions. What I don't understand is why some people even call themselves fans when all they do is complain. I'm not saying everybody should look through rose-colored glasses or not question some moves sometimes, but sometimes enough is enough. I'm not directing this to you Falls City. Yours just happens to be the post I stopped on to quote.
Anyway, regardless of whether they win or lose I will love The Reds. It's just more fun if they win. Unfortunatley, I won't be able to go to as many games this year as the past couple because of money issues, having a newborn, and not being able to get off work. I will still be following closely by watching games on TV and listening on radio.

Krusty, I appreciate the positive thread you've started. Let's hope you're right about most of it.

camisadelgolf
02-05-2007, 01:06 PM
I wouldn't have signed Lilly or Meche and really wasn't that interested in most of the free agent pitchers. I liked Padilla ok but he went back to Texes for more than I would have paid. I woould have bid on Wolf, but not the $9 Million he got. But guys like Freddy Garcia and Jason Jennings were moved for returns that Reds may have been able to match (maybe not though). If I couldn't get a good one, it doesn't justify paying so much money to bad ones. As I said earlier go big or stay home. I wouldn't have flushed the money down the drain that the Reds did this offseason. The Reds were better off with going with young and unproven or with minor league free agents than flushing money on Lohse ($4), Weathers ($2.5), Conine ($2), Stanton ($2.5 although he wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't for all the others), Moeller ($.75) and I'd have been looking to dump Cormier ($2.25). That's about $14 Million pretty quickly saved to put toward a good player or two, a Harang deal, or just as flexibility to make a move later. Cheap players who are likely to be comparable and offer more upside and future value if they come through were out there.

If Harang wants to stay, the Harang deal will get done. There's no way they would trade for Conine, Lohse, and Cormier and then let that be what handicapped them from signing Harang to a LTC.

I'm just curious--with whom would you replace the above-mentioned players?

PuffyPig
02-05-2007, 03:21 PM
In my mind, the Reds only need 3 things to occur to be contender in what may well be a "parity" Central Division.

1. General good health;
2. Griffey to have one last very good season where he bats .280 and hits 35-40 HR's;
3. Credible pitching form the 3-5 spots in the rotation.

The chances of any of the 3 happening isn't great. The chances of all three happening is quite a bit less.

registerthis
02-05-2007, 03:52 PM
2. Griffey to have one last very good season where he bats .280 and hits 35-40 HR's;

Griffey *might* hit .280 again, but his days as a 40 HR guy are long since over. If you can get .270-30-80 out of the guy, I would consider that to be successful.

PuffyPig
02-05-2007, 04:29 PM
Griffey *might* hit .280 again, but his days as a 40 HR guy are long since over. If you can get .270-30-80 out of the guy, I would consider that to be successful.

I think that there's a better chance he might have one good power year left than a high average year. But neither is likely.

durl
02-05-2007, 05:27 PM
I've seen quite a bit of talk about how the Reds compared with the Cardinals, but didn't the Reds do well against Cards in 2006?

The Reds did show promise last year. Among NL Central teams, only 2 had winning records against division opponents: Cincinnati and Houston. Chicago came in at 42-42. The Cards were 39-42. (Odd that the World Series champion had a losing record within their division.) Against NL East, only 2 Central teams had winning records, Cincinnati and St Louis.

It was the NL West that hurt Cincinnati and that can be traced to the horrible West Coast slide late in the season. Against the NL West, the Reds were 11-20 compared to the Cards' 23-11. Even Houston finished 14-19 against the West.

Puffy
02-05-2007, 06:22 PM
Griffey *might* hit .280 again, but his days as a 40 HR guy are long since over. If you can get .270-30-80 out of the guy, I would consider that to be successful.

His days of 40 HR's are over only because he can't stay healthy enough to get enough at bats. He still has the power.

Roy Tucker
02-05-2007, 06:40 PM
I'd sure like Krusty's list of 10 come true. You never know. As always, I'm an indefatigable optimist at the beginning of the season (and anyone who plunked down substantial season ticket bucks as I did has to be) and I hope the Reds to come in first.

But realistically, it is a bit much to expect. 2-3 of Krusty's things will come true. Some other unexpected things will go wrong (my guess is Harang/Arroyo out for an extended stretch). Other unexpected things will go right (guessing Gonzalez and Denorfia will play well). It's all why they play the games.

Men plan, God laughs. The 2007 Reds will be no exception to that rule.

jmcclain19
02-05-2007, 10:33 PM
I enjoyed the list Krusty.

However, for the Reds even to come within a ballpark of winning 85, every one of the items listed on your 10 has to happen, along with some other pieces to fall in place.

That's how razor thin the Reds margin of success will be in 2007.

In my humble opinion, anyway.

Will M
02-05-2007, 10:54 PM
I enjoyed the list Krusty.

However, for the Reds even to come within a ballpark of winning 85, every one of the items listed on your 10 has to happen, along with some other pieces to fall in place.

That's how razor thin the Reds margin of success will be in 2007.

In my humble opinion, anyway.

why?

The Reds won 80 games in 2006.

The 2007 version: Has a lot more pitching depth behind Arroyo and Harang, an improved defense and a better bench.

I honestly think the Reds could win 92 games. How? Lohse pitches light outs to cash in on his walk year and Bailey arrives and is the real deal.

mth123
02-05-2007, 11:05 PM
If Harang wants to stay, the Harang deal will get done. There's no way they would trade for Conine, Lohse, and Cormier and then let that be what handicapped them from signing Harang to a LTC.

I'm just curious--with whom would you replace the above-mentioned players?

In Conine's place almost anybody. I would have gone after Craig Wilson when seeing the money he got. Failing that I'd have gone after a minor league free agent like Josh Phelps. He signed to play the same RH 1B role with the Yankees on a minor league contract. I'm sure the Reds could have lured him with a major league deal. A roster spot was easily available by just passing on Crosby or Moeller. If a guy like Phelps does ok you have a guy for a couple years to help Votto ease in by limiting his exposure against LH at the beginning. The way the Braves worked in LaRoche seems like the right approach with Votto. The thing is, if it doesn't work out in 2007 you just let Hatte play full-time. I don't really like the idea of Hatte, but he is better than Conine against RH, LH, sidearmers and under-handers. I think Hatte is the worst starting 1B in the NL, but he is significantly better than Conine.

As for Cormier, anyone again. The Reds have Shackelford and Coutlangus as LH for the pen with no room. Phil Dumatrait is out of options and will need to be exposed. If the lefties don't grab you then Brad Salmon and Jared Burton don't have a spot. Lots of guys were available. The Reds didn't need more guys for the 7th inning which is what they got with Stanton and Weathers (at best) and Cormier is a LH mop-up guy on a good team (if he makes the team). Bray and Majewski are 7th inning guys, Coffey is still here for the 7th and 8th and the Reds had a 2 bullpens full of guys at AAA and AA to do the same job. I'd keep trying them until I find a good one and chalk-up an actual spot filed for the future. The role that Cormier can realistically play is easily filled. Save that money for the start of the game or the 9th inning IMO.

Lohse is a tougher question to answer. Here is what I will say, the Reds shouldn't have a rotation with both Kyle Lohse and Eric Milton. Since the Reds are on the hook for Milton, then Lohse is the guy to go IMO. The Reds could have traded or non-tendered Lohse and avoided that bad deal. $4 Million would come in handy somewhere. The Reds needed to add a quality pitcher with upside. Adding an unproven starter who is stuck in relief from another team would have been my preference. It may fail, but paying $4 Million to a guy who has had 5 major league season to prove he isn't good is not the answer. In Krivsky's defense he did go after a guy like that in Saarloos, I just didn't particularly like the guy he chose (I think Oakland chose Krivsky because Saarloos was out of their plans). I would have liked to have seen Krivsky go after Kevin Correia, Wil Ledezma, Ryan Madson, one of the Cubs youngsters like Marmol, Marshall or Guzman, one of the FLA odd men out, etc. As for who to trade for these guys Freel, Majewski, Minor leaguers, even Lohse in the right package to the right team. Seattle traded Rafael Soriano for Horacio Ramirez. Other than being LH, Lohse and Ramirez might be comparable as far as expectation for 2007. We won't ever know if the Reds made a play for Soriano, but he would be our closer for the next few years.

Here is my problem with this offseason in a nutshell, WK felt he couldn't afford what this team needed (he practically said as much at Redsfest) so he spent the money in his pocket on any old thing. He had some money to spend and a lot of needs. He settled for low budget junk toward every need and spent a lot of cash without really fixing any of his problems. I personally would rather he'd have really skimped on most and gotten a good fix for one or two.

PuffyPig
02-05-2007, 11:50 PM
I enjoyed the list Krusty.

However, for the Reds even to come within a ballpark of winning 85, every one of the items listed on your 10 has to happen, along with some other pieces to fall in place.

That's how razor thin the Reds margin of success will be in 2007.

In my humble opinion, anyway.

If those 10 things happen, the Reds will be the best team in the major leagues by a wide margin.

Basically, if those 10 things happen, everyone will have a career year. We'll win 110 games.

We can win 85 games by doing a bit better than last year.

captainmorgan07
02-06-2007, 12:31 AM
whoever said kip wells was gonna be the steal of free agency is nuts i live in the pittsburgh area and have watched kip pitch enough he is way to inconsistent and has just never gotten it right and doens't look like he's goin to real soon either he has the stuff but it's all in his head and work ethic

camisadelgolf
02-06-2007, 02:14 AM
In Conine's place almost anybody. I would have gone after Craig Wilson when seeing the money he got. Failing that I'd have gone after a minor league free agent like Josh Phelps. He signed to play the same RH 1B role with the Yankees on a minor league contract. I'm sure the Reds could have lured him with a major league deal. A roster spot was easily available by just passing on Crosby or Moeller. If a guy like Phelps does ok you have a guy for a couple years to help Votto ease in by limiting his exposure against LH at the beginning. The way the Braves worked in LaRoche seems like the right approach with Votto. The thing is, if it doesn't work out in 2007 you just let Hatte play full-time. I don't really like the idea of Hatte, but he is better than Conine against RH, LH, sidearmers and under-handers. I think Hatte is the worst starting 1B in the NL, but he is significantly better than Conine.

As for Cormier, anyone again. The Reds have Shackelford and Coutlangus as LH for the pen with no room. Phil Dumatrait is out of options and will need to be exposed. If the lefties don't grab you then Brad Salmon and Jared Burton don't have a spot. Lots of guys were available. The Reds didn't need more guys for the 7th inning which is what they got with Stanton and Weathers (at best) and Cormier is a LH mop-up guy on a good team (if he makes the team). Bray and Majewski are 7th inning guys, Coffey is still here for the 7th and 8th and the Reds had a 2 bullpens full of guys at AAA and AA to do the same job. I'd keep trying them until I find a good one and chalk-up an actual spot filed for the future. The role that Cormier can realistically play is easily filled. Save that money for the start of the game or the 9th inning IMO.

Lohse is a tougher question to answer. Here is what I will say, the Reds shouldn't have a rotation with both Kyle Lohse and Eric Milton. Since the Reds are on the hook for Milton, then Lohse is the guy to go IMO. The Reds could have traded or non-tendered Lohse and avoided that bad deal. $4 Million would come in handy somewhere. The Reds needed to add a quality pitcher with upside. Adding an unproven starter who is stuck in relief from another team would have been my preference. It may fail, but paying $4 Million to a guy who has had 5 major league season to prove he isn't good is not the answer. In Krivsky's defense he did go after a guy like that in Saarloos, I just didn't particularly like the guy he chose (I think Oakland chose Krivsky because Saarloos was out of their plans). I would have liked to have seen Krivsky go after Kevin Correia, Wil Ledezma, Ryan Madson, one of the Cubs youngsters like Marmol, Marshall or Guzman, one of the FLA odd men out, etc. As for who to trade for these guys Freel, Majewski, Minor leaguers, even Lohse in the right package to the right team. Seattle traded Rafael Soriano for Horacio Ramirez. Other than being LH, Lohse and Ramirez might be comparable as far as expectation for 2007. We won't ever know if the Reds made a play for Soriano, but he would be our closer for the next few years.

Here is my problem with this offseason in a nutshell, WK felt he couldn't afford what this team needed (he practically said as much at Redsfest) so he spent the money in his pocket on any old thing. He had some money to spend and a lot of needs. He settled for low budget junk toward every need and spent a lot of cash without really fixing any of his problems. I personally would rather he'd have really skimped on most and gotten a good fix for one or two.

I agree and disagree. I'll pretty much just leave it at that. The big things I don't like are that it may bring up players too early to be effective, it starts their service time earlier than it normally would, and if they don't work out, there's no one in the wings you can rely on (unless you make a trade, in which case you'd probably have to give up young talent). My personal opinion is that the Reds are actually building for the future but are trying to create a facade of trying to compete right now. For the past several years, we've always been told "in a couple years . . .", but this is the first time I've actually believed it. I'm feeling very good about 2009-10 but not so much about 2007-08.

guttle11
02-06-2007, 02:23 AM
I'll buy it.

I'd rather have hope and crash and burn in September than have no hope at all. I don't know if they will win it, but until further notice they can. Sign me up, that's all I need.

mbgrayson
02-06-2007, 03:11 AM
Today Baseball Prospectus did an NL Central Roundup. Here is their conclusion about the Reds:

"Summary: It's a team that can continue to contend as long as nobody else in the division takes a step forward. That should make Krivsky look good while he overhauls the player development system."

mth123
02-06-2007, 06:51 AM
My personal opinion is that the Reds are actually building for the future but are trying to create a facade of trying to compete right now. For the past several years, we've always been told "in a couple years . . .", but this is the first time I've actually believed it. I'm feeling very good about 2009-10 but not so much about 2007-08.

I agree somewhat. The part about the facade and the future is right on, but the future doesn't look any good either unless the Reds 1.) add to the core team even if its just a low budget young guy for a role where the Reds have nothing to lose (like my Phelps versus Conine example or sorting through some of the youngsters versus Cormier). 2.) do something to secure the core (Harang, Dunn, Arroyo) so that its intact when the rest of the core arrives.

Right now the 2009-10 timetable looks no better than now. If Bailey, Votto and Bruce all hit it big, the team will still be undermanned if Harang, Dunn and Arroyo (or a replacement that has yet to be secured) are all gone.

Keeping up the facade is diverting resources (i.e. $ and opportunity) from the Reds real mission of adding to and securing that core IMO. Best chances to do that off of this offseason are Josh Hamilton (longest of shots) and Kirk Saarloos (dubious ability at best). As I said earlier this offseason was the time to add a big player to actually try to contend now and with that core in the future or go through some youngsters in hopes of discovering something that can help when the 2009-10 time frame is here. Go Big or stay home. The old vet facade won't help in 2009-10 and is just as much a long shot for 2007 than some of the alternatives IMO.

I understand everyone's search for optimism and I'm sorry to be such a downer. For me 2007 is about looking for pieces to add to the puzzle and I know that the vets aren't it.

klw
02-06-2007, 01:15 PM
10 Reasons Why The Reds Will Win The Central:

4. Harang and Arroyo will be one of the best one-two tandems in the NL Central. Each player could easily win between 15-20 games apiece.

5. Milton, Lohse and Saarloos are very capable of winning 10-12 games apiece.

9. The emergence of Homer Bailey sometime around Memorial Day will bolster the rotation and add more depth to the pen with either Saarloos, Belisle or Ramirez.


Call me crazy if you want but if this team can avoid the injury bug, I see this team winning close to 90 games this season.

I don't see all three of these happening as you would end up with a six man rotation. If Bailey emerges around mid-season then it is doubtful that all three in reason 5 will win that many games.

This is the time of year for optimism. If you can't be optimistic in the winter and spring then when can you? I will not call you crazy, just hopeful.

Slyder
02-06-2007, 01:48 PM
The two I've highlighted, I'll comment on.

It's not out of the realm of possibility of those three putting up ten wins. Milton could have easily been to that this year with a little bit of help from the pen. Lohse has exceeded that number twice in his career and fallen one short in the two years prior to 2006. I'll cross my fingers on Saarloos, but I think he's capable.

Regarding Bailey, I don't think he'll break with the club. He's going to do some time in AAA. While I think May might be optimistic, I think he could be up some time this year. At worst, he's only a year away, not two.

Hats off to Krusty for dragging some optimism on to the board!

I agree. I think (if healthy) Bailey is a september call up and get some work in to get a lot of "1sts" out of the way. Setting him up to break into the rotation in Milton's vacated spot.

Puffy
02-06-2007, 05:04 PM
5. Milton, Lohse and Saarloos are very capable of winning 10-12 games apiece.



If those guys get 10 wins a piece they that means each is making 30-35 starts, which means records of 10-15, 11-14, 10-16. Does 31-45 really help the Reds? Cause thats how bad those pitchers are - to win 10 they are gonna lose 15.

camisadelgolf
02-06-2007, 05:43 PM
If those guys get 10 wins a piece they that means each is making 30-35 starts, which means records of 10-15, 11-14, 10-16. Does 31-45 really help the Reds? Cause thats how bad those pitchers are - to win 10 they are gonna lose 15.

Actually, it doesn't necessarily mean that.

Hoosier Red
02-06-2007, 05:58 PM
Talking to a friend of mine, I've noted that 5 of the 6 teams in the Central have the potential to win anywhere from 70-90 games. I just don't see a lot of difference in the clubs.

Eric_Davis
02-06-2007, 06:25 PM
All of those reasons can be expected, but the one I see as the most difficult and most critical is Junior moving out of Center.

Slyder
02-06-2007, 07:03 PM
Talking to a friend of mine, I've noted that 5 of the 6 teams in the Central have the potential to win anywhere from 70-90 games. I just don't see a lot of difference in the clubs.

Thats being generous to the cubs.. ya they added Soriano but they threw money (and a LOT of it) at inconsistant, never weres, and has been pitchers. They STILL have nothing behind Zambrano of note (unless Wood and Prior wake up and their arms are 100% again) in the rotation, they still have the same ??? in the pen, they at least got rid of Dusty Baker for Lou...

I dont see the Cubs competing for the division without making a couple more MAJOR moves.