PDA

View Full Version : Verducci says the Reds have no chance



big boy
03-21-2007, 02:24 PM
Tom Verducci from SI says "There are only six teams that can't make the playoffs (Nationals, Royals, Devil Rays, Reds, Pirates and Orioles), and of the 25 teams that have a shot, any shot, at playing in October, roughly 15 of them could win the World Series -- about three times as much real competition as the Yankees faced in the '90s."

Is this true?

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/tom_verducci/03/20/preseason.picks/index.html?eref=si_topstories

Degenerate39
03-21-2007, 02:26 PM
No

REDREAD
03-21-2007, 02:27 PM
I'm afraid he's right. The Reds got a shot at being a .500 team but that's about it. I really doubt the division will be as mediocre as it was last year, which created the illusion of the Reds being a contender.

red-in-la
03-21-2007, 02:39 PM
"I coulda ben soomebody.....I coulda ben a contenda"

pedro
03-21-2007, 02:44 PM
The Reds are better than those 5 teams.

Degenerate39
03-21-2007, 02:46 PM
The Reds are better than those 5 teams.

That's not saying much

RANDY IN INDY
03-21-2007, 02:57 PM
That's why they play the games.

NastyBoy
03-21-2007, 03:00 PM
The Reds are better this year... but so are Houston and Chicago.

George Anderson
03-21-2007, 03:02 PM
If I had to bet I would say Verducci said the exact same thing last year and we all know how that prediction turned out.

klw
03-21-2007, 03:06 PM
Whereas Dyan Perry calls the Reds 1 of 10 teams that could surprise and be this years tigers. http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/6591812

durl
03-21-2007, 03:13 PM
Check out his 2006 predictions: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/tom_verducci/03/28/preseason.predictions/index.html

He picked the White Sox to win it all in 2006.

The Braves were supposed to play in the 2006 NLCS...he missed it by 18 games.

Brewers were supposed to challenge for the wild card with "upper 80s wins." Missed by at least 10 wins and they finished 13 games out of the NL Wild Card.

Eric Gagne was predicted to be 2006's NL Comeback Player of the Year.

He got a few things right, but not a lot.

Wheelhouse
03-21-2007, 03:26 PM
You can't say that about the Reds in a division of .500 teams. Houston is OLD and Chicago is still a mess, Lou notwithstanding. I don't see any major changes except those that could help the Reds: Prior and Wood are becoming nonfactors, Hou lost Pettitte and odds on won't get the Rocket back. StL is aging if not past its prime, and oft injured: J. Encarnacion, Edmonds, and Rolen are walking wounded. Every year I hear the Pirates and Brewers could be a dark horse, and every year they're up the track. I see no reason the Reds can't not only win, but clean up in the division: the defense is much better, the depth is superb, the pitching is as solid as any staff in the division. The key to me is Encarnacion--as the only big RH bat in the lineup, he HAS to excel.

TheWalls
03-21-2007, 03:29 PM
"Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? HELL NO!"

Same goes for this yahoo. He did have Tigers and Cards last year in the preseason right? Uh huh, I thought so.

REDREAD
03-21-2007, 03:43 PM
That's not saying much


Yep, we are probably the best of those lousy teams, but we still don't have a shot at contending, barring a miracle season from Milton and/or Lohse.

Bigredfan#1
03-21-2007, 03:43 PM
Most everyone picked the Reds to finish last in 06!! Narron should have gotten more consideration at Manager of the Year, I don't think he should have won it but at least some votes

Matt700wlw
03-21-2007, 03:44 PM
Maybe he's right, maybe he'll be wrong.

One thing I do know, is that if he is wrong, like all "experts," he'll never return to the topic and admit it.

pedro
03-21-2007, 03:45 PM
Whereas Dyan Perry calls the Reds 1 of 10 teams that could surprise and be this years tigers. http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/6591812


Jason Stark said the Reds could be the surprise team of the year in the NL too.

cacollinsmba
03-21-2007, 04:23 PM
You can't say that about the Reds in a division of .500 teams. Houston is OLD and Chicago is still a mess, Lou notwithstanding. I don't see any major changes except those that could help the Reds: Prior and Wood are becoming nonfactors, Hou lost Pettitte and odds on won't get the Rocket back. StL is aging if not past its prime, and oft injured: J. Encarnacion, Edmonds, and Rolen are walking wounded. Every year I hear the Pirates and Brewers could be a dark horse, and every year they're up the track. I see no reason the Reds can't not only win, but clean up in the division: the defense is much better, the depth is superb, the pitching is as solid as any staff in the division. The key to me is Encarnacion--as the only big RH bat in the lineup, he HAS to excel.


I agree with pretty much all of your points here.

I really don't feel that Houston or St. Louis overall are better. St. Louis losing Suppan and Weaver does not improve their team. Houston's rotation is not improved by losing Pettitte and potentially the Rocket. You also have to wonder how many more good years Woody Williams has left - he will be 41 this year.

The Reds are going to have to play well from the get-go, in my opinion. I don't think that's any great insight, but they are going to have to take advantage of St. Louis waiting on Encarnacion and Edmonds getting back to 100%, and they are also going to have to play Houston well and hope that they do not bring back the Rocket midseason. If St. Louis gets healthy and Houston turns up the arms race, that's going to hurt the Reds in my opinion.

flyer85
03-21-2007, 04:25 PM
I honestly pay little attention to the talking/writing phalli. They only they know is the difference between day and night. :D

Ltlabner
03-21-2007, 04:42 PM
:runawaycr

Roy Tucker
03-21-2007, 04:46 PM
Like talk show hosts and Enquirer columnists, tguys like Verducci say these kinds of things to put headlines out there that will grab people and get them to read their stuff. Or else they're out of a job.

Pre-season forecasts are interesting to read to try and discern trends and give me someone to yell at. And fun to go back and read at the end of the season to see how bad they were.

But I'd put as much stock in them as I do my NCAA picks. Pure conjecture.

CINCYREDS#1
03-21-2007, 07:12 PM
No
Chicago isnt gonna be good just cuz they spent 100000000 dollars
Milwaukee only has good pitching
Houston has no offense
Pittsburgh is just bad
St. Louis has a rotation shakeup

Cincy is the only pick for NL champ 2007

Redsfan08
03-21-2007, 07:17 PM
Verducci is an idiot

reds2221
03-21-2007, 09:08 PM
I really don't pay attention to that much of that talk, I just pay attention to the statistics:D

bucksfan2
03-22-2007, 09:52 AM
Could it be that us reds fans are a little too optimistic? If yu are someone who only follows the reds from the surface you dont see too much improvement from last year if at all. Here is what you see
Narron as a manager.
Dunn, your best player coming off his worst season.
Everyone is waiting for Phillips and Ross to fail.
Harang and Arroyo are very undervalued.
Gonzales is your big acquisition who is primarily a no bat slick golve SS.
And your other additions are Conine, Stanton, Crosby, Hermanson, and Hamilton.

They did not make a splash in the offseason, infact some people thought that they paid too much for Harang and Arroyo (which shows how much they know about baseball). Most of the reds success this year will be determined if their players out perform last years performance. I dont think they are near as bad as Verducci says, I also think they have an outside shot at the playoffs, but they also could have a disappointing season.

membengal
03-22-2007, 12:10 PM
It's not optimism to know that the Reds have a chance. I am not saying they will win the division, in fact, I don't think they will. At all. I don't think they will break .500.

But can I come up with a somewhat realistic scenario whereby they get to 90 wins? Yes I can. When you have anchors in a rotation like Harang and Arroyo, in a division as fairly week as this one is, it is certainly possible. And that is why the Reds don't belong on that list. I think Verducci was just being lazy and didn't really think it through.

Matt700wlw
03-22-2007, 02:04 PM
SI also has the Reds projected fifth starter as Mike Belisle.

Credibilty on how much "scouting" this guy really does is already shot. It's hard to analyze a team when you don't even know who the players are.

Of course, if you read the article, it's an article about Bronson Arroyo.

I'm sure they spend as little time as possible on the "unimportant" teams

Highlifeman21
03-22-2007, 11:32 PM
Most everyone picked the Reds to finish last in 06!! Narron should have gotten more consideration at Manager of the Year, I don't think he should have won it but at least some votes

You've got to be joking.

Jerry Narron?

Manager of the Year?

For what sport?

Doc. Scott
03-22-2007, 11:37 PM
You've got to be joking.

Jerry Narron?

Manager of the Year?

For what sport?

His daughter's basketball team were league champions, weren't they?

blumj
03-23-2007, 01:23 AM
Did anyone else notice in SI, in the Seattle preview, where it said that the Mariners got a combined .667 OPS from their designated hitters last season? Unbelievable.

kaldaniels
04-05-2007, 01:16 AM
And Verducci Backpedals....

Thank very much Ryan Limke from Lima Ohio.

Are my beloved Reds really a team that can't make the playoffs? I would argue they're much closer to a "franchise turnaround" than other teams you mentioned.
-- Ryan Limke, Cincinnati, Ohio

I actually think the Pirates are in the "can't-make-it" category, not the Reds. It's a longshot, but the Reds, who have a hard time surviving that bullpen in that ballpark, do have a shot because of that division.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/tom_verducci/04/04/weekone.mailbag/1.html

Topcat
04-05-2007, 07:17 AM
Carpenter's already down and reportedly was throwing with low velocity, the Astro's are a mess in my opinion if the Red's are in contention come trade deadline time. They can have a shot at the Playoff's.