PDA

View Full Version : Votto and C. Trent Rosecrans



AmarilloRed
08-22-2007, 12:47 AM
I could not believe this when I heard it. He said yesterday" The Reds are looking to pick up Hatteberg for another year. They are not very high on Joey Votto. They think he is a AAAA player". I really hope he is wrong about this, as Votto is the best 1st base prospect the Reds have had in many years. He has not played at the major league level. I would not see why the Reds would say this without him showing what he can do at Cincinnati.

Degenerate39
08-22-2007, 01:04 AM
I'm losing confidence in the front office if this is true. What do they think Hopper is? Or Freel? Or Livingston? Or Dumatrait?

dougdirt
08-22-2007, 01:09 AM
The Reds evaluation of player talent is so hit and miss I have no faith in them.

Rheal Cormier and Mike Stanton were good idea's to them. Royce Clayton was a good idea. Letting Brendan Harris walk was a good idea.

Sure, they hit on Phillips, Arroyo and Hamilton, but man they sure have missed an awful lot too.

TOBTTReds
08-22-2007, 01:22 AM
The Reds evaluation of player talent is so hit and miss I have no faith in them.

Rheal Cormier and Mike Stanton were good idea's to them. Royce Clayton was a good idea. Letting Brendan Harris walk was a good idea.

Sure, they hit on Phillips, Arroyo and Hamilton, but man they sure have missed an awful lot too.

Every team is going to miss a lot. It's the ones you hit, or the stars you miss that count. Cormier and Stanton were misses, but that didn't change the teams future. If they mess this one up with Votto, I'll lose all faith. You can't let a big prospect slide because of your love for a 38 year old 1B with no power.

HumnHilghtFreel
08-22-2007, 01:36 AM
How you could determine if a guy is a AAAA talent without giving him a shot is a mystery to me. Especially when you have guys on the 25 man who are hardly even AAA guys.

boognish
08-22-2007, 01:40 AM
:angry:

If Votto is a 4-A talent, no way do you let that eval slip to a beat writer, you call him up and let him accumulate counting stats in your bandbox of a ballpark and trade him for something you will use. You certainly do not maroon him in AAA. Baseball America, Kevin Golstein from BP, and another author in a BP chat have all talked up Votto in the past week...there is no reason to quash public buzz about one of your prospects.

I am certainly not a professional talent evaluator or scout, but Votto really stood out to me in Spring Training when I attended a couple of practices. I will be disappointed to not see him in a Reds uniform for the next 5 years.

Frankly, I am shocked at such a comment even given the bi-polar evaluations of the current front office (as AvesIce alluded to). Why would a front office official run down Votto--or any prospect in hand, for that matter--to Trent? Is there a method to the madness I am missing here?

KronoRed
08-22-2007, 02:30 AM
To be fair, maybe C Trent is just making fluff up like Fay does, but IF the Reds see him as AAAA then expect Bruce to get the same treatment, I mean..they both K a lot and walk instead of "being aggressive" ;)

Ron Madden
08-22-2007, 03:37 AM
IF the Reds see him as AAAA then expect Bruce to get the same treatment, I mean..they both K a lot and walk instead of "being aggressive" ;)

That's the way I see it too Krono.

Seems like most of the folks in and around this organization ignore the many valuable positives of a player just because he has a fault or two, faults that don't really mean much in the long run.

Untill this organization learns which set of numbers actually mean anything about a Pitcher, a Hitter, or a Fielder we can expect the same ol' tune.

Muggerd
08-22-2007, 06:06 AM
Rosecrans is pretty awful so I dont doubt he just makes stuff up to get some pub.

redsmetz
08-22-2007, 08:27 AM
The more I thought about this statement this morning, the more absurd it seemed. I agree with Boognish that it seems unlikely that anyone in the organization would let it slip that Votto only being a "AAAA" player is the belief of the organization. As others have said, how would they know that? Dubbing a player AAAA is something that can only be seen over time; and part of that time must be spent at the ML level! It's somewhat like stating a player is having a "career year", which can't be known without the perspective of some history.

I went out and found the blog entry where Rosecrans made this statement and it was some back and forth between him and other folks, seemingly a live blog, where folks were bellyaching about Votto not being called up. As I've been typing this, I'm wondering if this isn't something that Trent heard from Marty prior to going on the air for one of their chats.

It's way too premature to reach the conclusion he alleges the Reds have. I think he's blowing smoke. And the Reds can certainly pick up Hatteberg's option without being a statement of their intent viz Joey Votto. Oy!

LoganBuck
08-22-2007, 08:29 AM
Rosecrans is pretty awful so I dont doubt he just makes stuff up to get some pub.

CTR is just fine. Don't shoot the messenger, what have you seen from the Reds recently that makes you doubt what he is saying?

Votto should have been up after the futures game.

LoganBuck
08-22-2007, 08:37 AM
The more I thought about this statement this morning, the more absurd it seemed. I agree with Boognish that it seems unlikely that anyone in the organization would let it slip that Votto only being a "AAAA" player is the belief of the organization. As others have said, how would they know that? Dubbing a player AAAA is something that can only be seen over time; and part of that time must be spent at the ML level! It's somewhat like stating a player is having a "career year", which can't be known without the perspective of some history.

I went out and found the blog entry where Rosecrans made this statement and it was some back and forth between him and other folks, seemingly a live blog, where folks were bellyaching about Votto not being called up. As I've been typing this, I'm wondering if this isn't something that Trent heard from Marty prior to going on the air for one of their chats.

It's way too premature to reach the conclusion he alleges the Reds have. I think he's blowing smoke. And the Reds can certainly pick up Hatteberg's option without being a statement of their intent viz Joey Votto. Oy!

Hal McCoy said the same thing as CTR on the broadcast last night.

edabbs44
08-22-2007, 08:50 AM
Every team is going to miss a lot. It's the ones you hit, or the stars you miss that count. Cormier and Stanton were misses, but that didn't change the teams future. If they mess this one up with Votto, I'll lose all faith. You can't let a big prospect slide because of your love for a 38 year old 1B with no power.

You could make arguments that Cormier and Stanton did hurt the team's future. They essentially flushed millions down the toilet on those two stiffs and, since hindsight is 20/20, they could have used Germano over Lohse this year and saved another $4 million. Those millions could have been spent on drafting better guys or signing more DPs.

HokieRed
08-22-2007, 09:30 AM
I wouldn't put an ounce of faith in this report by Rosecrans. Obviously the Reds tried to move Dunn, Hatteberg, and Conine, but they weren't willing to give them away. Keeping Hatteberg gives Krivsky the option to bring up Votto, move Dunn if he can get the right deal, and still put a credible offense on the field next year. Votto in either left or at first, Hat/Cantu at first if Votto's in left. If you trade Hat now and don't pick up Dunn's option or you trade him, then you've got Norris Hopper as an everyday outfielder next year and you also have to play Hamilton against lefties--unless you want to use both Freel and Hopper at the same time.

Muggerd
08-22-2007, 09:57 AM
CTR is just fine. Don't shoot the messenger, what have you seen from the Reds recently that makes you doubt what he is saying?

Votto should have been up after the futures game.

Hes not fine but I dont doubt he made it up. So hes more than just the messenger.

Hoosier Red
08-22-2007, 10:17 AM
Hal McCoy said the same thing as CTR on the broadcast last night.

Hal mentioned other big league scouts said they didn't think he could hit. Hal didn't mention if they were Reds scouts or other teams'.

Heath
08-22-2007, 10:21 AM
I am amazed by the complexity of the Reds front office to dismiss one of your top prospects without playing a major league game. On top of that, you downplay his abilities in the press, which makes his trade value less.

I'm confused.

redsmetz
08-22-2007, 10:25 AM
I am amazed by the complexity of the Reds front office to dismiss one of your top prospects without playing a major league game. On top of that, you downplay his abilities in the press, which makes his trade value less.

I'm confused.

What surprises me is that so many assume that reporters really are privy to so many things they blather on about on the 2nd inning portion of the game and on their respective blogs. Is it any wonder that WK is so tight lipped about moves the club are making.

Now maybe it's a "cause and effect" situation: Wayne's silence evokes writers to grasp at straws for any modicum of information etc. Do they make it up out of whole cloth? I'm not saying that, but I think they take any tiny fragment and blow it up bigger than it actually is.

It's really getting terrible about Reds town these days. I think the press plays an important role in our society, but the sports writing community surrounding this club is just getting goofy, IMO.

nate
08-22-2007, 11:11 AM
I am amazed by the complexity of the Reds front office to dismiss one of your top prospects without playing a major league game. On top of that, you downplay his abilities in the press, which makes his trade value less.

I'm confused.

Don't be!

Its a comment in a blog with no source. He could've read it on a fortune cookie for all we know.

I usually like CTR but an off-hand comment like this requires further explanation.

TOBTTReds
08-22-2007, 11:56 AM
Hes not fine but I dont doubt he made it up. So hes more than just the messenger.

Please stop stating your opinions as fact, especially about someone that is liked around here...heck, whether he is liked or not.

redsmetz
08-22-2007, 11:57 AM
I glanced at the Bats schedule and see their season ends September 3rd. It doesn't appear they're play-off bound (they're 8 games back presently) and it doesn't look like the Intl League does a split season championship arrangement.

In some ways, it really makes little sense to call Votto up until the Bats season is over. Then the ML rosters expand and he can come up for his first taste of the big leagues. To me it just seems logical to let him play out the AAA season and then make the move when the roster expands.

dougdirt
08-22-2007, 12:02 PM
Don't be!

Its a comment in a blog with no source. He could've read it on a fortune cookie for all we know.

I usually like CTR but an off-hand comment like this requires further explanation.

Sure, but like stated earlier in the thread, Hal McCoy said the same thing on the radio broadcast the other night....

IslandRed
08-22-2007, 12:03 PM
Its a comment in a blog with no source. He could've read it on a fortune cookie for all we know.

I usually like CTR but an off-hand comment like this requires further explanation.

Yeah... "the Reds say" is kind of nebulous. WHO said? And was he speaking for the organization or for himself?

nate
08-22-2007, 12:05 PM
This may be ultra nerdy, but I sent him an email asking for clarification. We'll see what happens.

JLB5
08-22-2007, 12:24 PM
It would be good to clarify if he meant that WK does not see Votto as a significant upgrade over Hatte in the short term or that he does not project him as a long term solution at 1st base. The former wouldn't surprise me, but the later would.

paulrichjr
08-22-2007, 12:32 PM
The option isn't much and having Hatte here to compete with a young gun seems to be the way almost all teams go about bringing up their young guys. It would not shock me to see Votto in a Reds uniform next season nor would it shock me to see him in Louisville next season.

flyer85
08-22-2007, 12:45 PM
I have no clue how the front office views Votto, but the fact they didn't trade Hatty is a good indicator that the Reds plan on having him around next year.

dougdirt
08-22-2007, 12:50 PM
Well I would bring him back next year too. His salary is way too good for him numbers to not bring him back. The problem is, do you start him at first still, or do you let him be the bat you bring off the bench who you know is going to give you that quality at bat you need late in a game?

BRM
08-22-2007, 01:05 PM
Well I would bring him back next year too. His salary is way too good for him numbers to not bring him back. The problem is, do you start him at first still, or do you let him be the bat you bring off the bench who you know is going to give you that quality at bat you need late in a game?

I think the Reds plan on starting Hatteberg at 1B again next year. They are probably going to evaluate Cantu the rest of this season to see if he can be the RH piece of the platoon (Conine's replacement). I think Votto starts the year in AAA if he's not traded this winter.

GoReds
08-22-2007, 01:16 PM
I don't consider Votto to be in competition for the 1B job next year, particularly considering the fact that they have played Votto in LF quite a bit in the last couple of months. The question is, who in the outfield is he projected to replace?

BRM
08-22-2007, 01:18 PM
Cantu at 1B and Votto in LF? I thought Wayne was big on defense?

Muggerd
08-22-2007, 01:36 PM
Please stop stating your opinions as fact, especially about someone that is liked around here...heck, whether he is liked or not.

If you think hes fine then great, i for a fact dont think he is fine.

I just dont enjoy sneaky reporters that bash people like Marty, Lance, Doc and others on his blog in comments and play Mr. Nice Guy when given air time.

TOBTTReds
08-22-2007, 01:37 PM
i for a fact dont think he is fine.


That's what I'm looking for. Thanks.

flyer85
08-22-2007, 01:46 PM
I don't consider Votto to be in competition for the 1B job next year, particularly considering the fact that they have played Votto in LF quite a bit in the last couple of months. The question is, who in the outfield is he projected to replace?
the only answer to that is Dunn.

dougdirt
08-22-2007, 01:52 PM
I don't consider Votto to be in competition for the 1B job next year, particularly considering the fact that they have played Votto in LF quite a bit in the last couple of months. The question is, who in the outfield is he projected to replace?

No one. I think if someone is going to step into the outfield I imagine it has to be Jay Bruce.

GoReds
08-22-2007, 01:53 PM
No one. I think if someone is going to step into the outfield I imagine it has to be Jay Bruce.

Then why has Votto been playing LF?

dougdirt
08-22-2007, 02:04 PM
Then why has Votto been playing LF?

Becuase the Reds are morons.

BRM
08-22-2007, 02:11 PM
Becuase the Reds are morons.

Nah, they just had to find playing time for Jesse Gutierrez.

Heath
08-22-2007, 02:16 PM
I don't consider Votto to be in competition for the 1B job next year, particularly considering the fact that they have played Votto in LF quite a bit in the last couple of months. The question is, who in the outfield is he projected to replace?

Probably some guy who hits overrated homeruns, fails in the clutch, and strikes out too much, even though he usually OPS's around .900 or so.

KronoRed
08-22-2007, 02:21 PM
Votto in LF would be even worse then Dunn, so much for "defense matters" if they do that.

I still cling to the hope they put him in LF to see others at 1st, it's a fading hope though

TOBTTReds
08-22-2007, 02:22 PM
Probably some guy who hits overrated homeruns, fails in the clutch, and strikes out too much, even though he usually OPS's around .900 or so.

I didn't know Marty posted here!

JLB5
08-22-2007, 02:23 PM
Then why has Votto been playing LF?

Actually, listening to the Krivsky interview on 1530 this morning, it sounds like he isn't too high on Votto's D period. Maybe they are trying him in left because they don't think he can play 1st. Might be a last effort to find him a position before shipping him to the AL to DH (hopefully for some pitching).

I'm reading into a comment he made about why Votto isn't up after his hitting stats were quoted and he said something to the effect that "those are offensive numbers and you have to play both sides."

Also, from what I heard in that interview, Wayne wants to see guys perform at a high level for an extended period in the minors before moving them. Many of the promotions this year have been due to shortages or injuries.

I posted the link in the Sundeck, but will put it here too. Worth a listen, starts about 14 minutes into hour 1.

http://www.1530homer.com/cc-common/podcast/single_podcast.html?podcast=GreggandMo.xml

TOBTTReds
08-22-2007, 02:31 PM
Actually, listening to the Krivsky interview on 1530 this morning, it sounds like he isn't too high on Votto's D period. Maybe they are trying him in left because they don't think he can play 1st. Might be a last effort to find him a position before shipping him to the AL to DH (hopefully for some pitching).

I'm reading into a comment he made about why Votto isn't up after his hitting stats were quoted and he said something to the effect that "those are offensive numbers and you have to play both sides."

Also, from what I heard in that interview, Wayne wants to see guys perform at a high level for an extended period in the minors before moving them. Many of the promotions this year have been due to shortages or injuries.

I posted the link in the Sundeck, but will put it here too. Worth a listen, starts about 14 minutes into hour 1.

http://www.1530homer.com/cc-common/podcast/single_podcast.html?podcast=GreggandMo.xml

Hatteberg is pretty darn miserable around the bag himself. Been saying it for two years now. I guess he and Dunn shouldn't be here then??

BRM
08-22-2007, 02:33 PM
So, Votto remains in Louisville because of poor defense but Cantu gets a callup? Oh, the irony. Is the front office capable of recognizing good or bad defenders when they see it?

Muggerd
08-22-2007, 02:42 PM
Hatteberg is pretty darn miserable around the bag himself. Been saying it for two years now. I guess he and Dunn shouldn't be here then??

Hatteberg has been pretty solid at 1st base if you ask me. Why do you think he has been miserable?

Muggerd
08-22-2007, 02:43 PM
That's what I'm looking for. Thanks.

No problem

TOBTTReds
08-22-2007, 02:55 PM
Hatteberg has been pretty solid at 1st base if you ask me. Why do you think he has been miserable?

I just think his footwork has cost the Reds quite a few outs. He's good fielding ground balls. When a grounder is hit to an IF'er, he puts his foot on the bag and reaches towards the fielder before the throw. So if his foot is planted on the left side of the bag for a throw, he doesn't manuever to the other side on a throw to his right. This also makes it hard for him to adjust to poor throws. I think he actually does it correctly on EdE's plays bc he might expect a bad throw. Whereas with others, he seems lazy. Cost the Reds an out two nights ago I believe when he got pulled off the bag on a play he shouldn't have.

Muggerd
08-22-2007, 03:03 PM
I just think his footwork has cost the Reds quite a few outs. He's good fielding ground balls. When a grounder is hit to an IF'er, he puts his foot on the bag and reaches towards the fielder before the throw. So if his foot is planted on the left side of the bag for a throw, he doesn't manuever to the other side on a throw to his right. This also makes it hard for him to adjust to poor throws. I think he actually does it correctly on EdE's plays bc he might expect a bad throw. Whereas with others, he seems lazy. Cost the Reds an out two nights ago I believe when he got pulled off the bag on a play he shouldn't have.

For as many plays he is involved in its hard to not expect some mistakes from him but I can see where you could say hes not the greatest 1st baseman but hes far from miserable. I would say hes as solid as I could expect from a guy.

I'm not going to say you are completly wrong but a couple footwork mistakes a year I can handle if he keep a solid glove and doesnt let balls that short hop him go to the foul lines.

New Fever
08-22-2007, 03:04 PM
It sounds like Krivisky wants Votto to stay in AAA for a couple of years. He also sounds like he won't be here next year, if you listen to the interview. He still saying we are in it in 07. WOW

nate
08-22-2007, 03:08 PM
It sounds like Krivisky wants Votto to stay in AAA for a couple of years. He also sounds like he won't be here next year, if you listen to the interview. He still saying we are in it in 07. WOW

I suppose most GMs would say that until the team is mathematically eliminated.

BRM
08-22-2007, 03:08 PM
I suppose most GMs would say that until the team is mathematically eliminated.

I hope that's all it was. Just GM speak.

KronoRed
08-22-2007, 03:09 PM
Me thinks Krivky has been told he's in trouble unless the team gets to .500/playoffs.

He's certainly not going to admit we are out of it, even if it's obvious.

Muggerd
08-22-2007, 03:13 PM
I suppose most GMs would say that until the team is mathematically eliminated.

I have to say I agree with that.

New Fever
08-22-2007, 03:16 PM
Most fans aren't stupid though, we know when we are out of a race. Saying that we are not going to play (Bring Up) Votto just makes no sense.

camisadelgolf
08-22-2007, 04:14 PM
So, Votto remains in Louisville because of poor defense but Cantu gets a callup? Oh, the irony. Is the front office capable of recognizing good or bad defenders when they see it?

Cantu plays all the infield positions (granted, not very well) and is right-handed. It's not defense that's keeping Votto down--it's the left-handed Scott Hatteberg.

membengal
08-22-2007, 04:28 PM
So 23-year-olds with Votto's apparent skill-set are not worth a call-up in this organization? Wow. We must be absolutely teeming with talent at the big league level. Silly me for not seeing what must be so obvious to WK.

TOBTTReds
08-22-2007, 05:07 PM
For as many plays he is involved in its hard to not expect some mistakes from him but I can see where you could say hes not the greatest 1st baseman but hes far from miserable. I would say hes as solid as I could expect from a guy.

I'm not going to say you are completly wrong but a couple footwork mistakes a year I can handle if he keep a solid glove and doesnt let balls that short hop him go to the foul lines.

I'm with you. He's no butcher. I guess poor footwork is a pet peeve of mine.

BRM
08-22-2007, 05:07 PM
Cantu plays all the infield positions (granted, not very well) and is right-handed. It's not defense that's keeping Votto down--it's the left-handed Scott Hatteberg.

That's not what Wayne alluded to this morning, according to those who listened to the interview. Maybe I misinterpreted.

AmarilloRed
08-22-2007, 05:22 PM
I think we could carry 3 first baseman on the roster next year . We carried 3 catchers this year, so it could work. Hatteberg could help teach the 2 young first baseman, and Votto/Cantu could learn to hit major league pitching next year. By 2009, Votto and Cantu could be a platoon unless on of them learns to hit from both sides of the plate.

Muggerd
08-22-2007, 05:25 PM
I'm with you. He's no butcher. I guess poor footwork is a pet peeve of mine.

Alright :)

flyer85
08-22-2007, 05:26 PM
Becuase the Reds are morons.

:bowrofl:

flyer85
08-22-2007, 05:27 PM
So 23-year-olds with Votto's apparent skill-set are not worth a call-up in this organization? not with Ellison around. :D

dfs
08-22-2007, 05:39 PM
A few days ago good Wayne showed up and cashed in a retiring veteran for a 20 year old shortstop who can hit at the high A level.

And now bad Wayne shows back up again and says his 23 year old first baseman who has spent the season tearing up AAA, burning an option in the process, isn't seen as a major league player .....

It's maddening.

Aronchis
08-22-2007, 05:42 PM
If Krivsky is fired, this may all be meaningless, though with Cast, he may not bring in anybody better(a more scary thought).

lollipopcurve
08-22-2007, 05:44 PM
And now bad Wayne shows back up again and says his 23 year old first baseman who has spent the season tearing up AAA, burning an option in the process, isn't seen as a major league player .....

He hasn't said anything remotely like this. Pure hysteria.

I listened to his radio interview today and all he said was that he's had a fine season and it was implied he needed work on his defense, which is likely true given that he's been playing OF for the first time.

flyer85
08-22-2007, 05:49 PM
It's maddening.he is a walking contradiction. he does some really good things and then mixes in the inexplicable.

BRM
08-22-2007, 05:50 PM
he is a walking contradiction. he does some really good things and then mixes in the inexplicable.

Maybe there is a method to his madness? I still hold out hope...although I've stopped holding my breath. ;)

AmarilloRed
08-22-2007, 05:59 PM
I also listened to the interview. He sounded like we had the veterans around until the prospects are ready, and his scouts told him the prospects were not ready yet. Maybe Wayne should hire better scouts?

nate
08-22-2007, 06:03 PM
I also listened to the interview. He sounded like we had the veterans around until the prospects are ready, and his scouts told him the prospects were not ready yet. Maybe Wayne should hire better scouts?

Is there a chance that the scouts know something we don't?

BRM
08-22-2007, 06:05 PM
Is there a chance that the scouts know something we don't?

Scouts? Pfft. They're just guys getting paid to watch baseball games. ;)

AmarilloRed
08-22-2007, 06:05 PM
It is certainly possible. Players like Votto and Bruce look like they are ready to the average fan, but maybe the scouts know something we don't.

flyer85
08-22-2007, 06:07 PM
I would worry about scouts that recommended Cormier, Majewski, Stanton, Saarloos, Ellison, etc.

Eric_Davis
08-22-2007, 06:09 PM
How you could determine if a guy is a AAAA talent without giving him a shot is a mystery to me. Especially when you have guys on the 25 man who are hardly even AAA guys.


You can't.

Nobody know how well a player will do in the Majors until he's given a "full-time" chance to prove it. You can guess, and you might be right most of the time, but you can't know for sure, even 75% of the time.

Otherwise, why would every G. M. and their entire evaluating staffs miss on players every single year. There's 50 guys every year you can list where G. M.'s and their staffs "judged" wrong about their abilities or inabilities.

Eric_Davis
08-22-2007, 06:16 PM
Even though he struggles power wise against lefties, he has a very good OBP against them. ...and really, how much better defensively can a 38-year old 1st Baseman be than a player 15 years younger than him? ...and how important is it really to have a good glove at 1st Base? He can't be any worse than Cantu.

What Votto offers with his ability to hit Right-Handers, which by last count is still over 2/3rd's of the league, is immensely more valuable than what Hatteberg offers.

The Mariners and A's would love to have Votto.

Management definitely has some holes, as Doug pointed out, in evaluating talent. They're good more times than not, but they miss some, what seem to us, obvious identifications of talent.

After last year, Hatteberg was a Type-C player (he was 4 players behind the B-Level) and the REDS would have gotten nothing for him if he had been available in free-agency. With his increased play this year and his good year last year he's pushed himself into the Type-B class and returns a 1st Round supplemental pick if we let him go, of which someone will surely sign him. But, we won't get anything for him next year as he's sure to drop back down to a Type-C player. So, the REDS, by picking up his option are going to throw away a supplemental first round pick in the 2007 draft. That makes no economic sense or does it make sense in support of the minor leagues and the franchises overall talent level.

Votto should be playing 1st Base Opening Day for the REDS, and let him have his success against right-handers and take his lumps against left-handers or let Cantu start those games.

Eric_Davis
08-22-2007, 06:29 PM
What surprises me is that so many assume that reporters really are privy to so many things they blather on about on the 2nd inning portion of the game and on their respective blogs. Is it any wonder that WK is so tight lipped about moves the club are making.

Now maybe it's a "cause and effect" situation: Wayne's silence evokes writers to grasp at straws for any modicum of information etc. Do they make it up out of whole cloth? I'm not saying that, but I think they take any tiny fragment and blow it up bigger than it actually is.
It's really getting terrible about Reds town these days. I think the press plays an important role in our society, but the sports writing community surrounding this club is just getting goofy, IMO.

That's for sure.

Screwball
08-22-2007, 06:29 PM
What Votto offers with his ability to hit Right-Handers, which by last count is still over 2/3rd's of the league, is immensely more valuable than what Hatteberg offers.


Votto offers immensely more value than an .889 OPS vs. RHP?

Eric_Davis
08-22-2007, 06:35 PM
Votto would hit left-handers better than Hatteberg in fact.

Hatteberg is old. His numbers are declining as the season wears on where most REDS' numbers are improving.

He's hitting .188 vs Left-handers this year.

It's time to let Hatteberg go and get the 1st round pick for him. They'll never get that much in a trade.

Eric_Davis
08-22-2007, 06:38 PM
Votto was the "Cincinnati REDS Minor League Player of the Year" last year. I can't see what was reported as being true.

Eric_Davis
08-22-2007, 06:42 PM
Becuase the Reds are morons.

I imagine the same reason San Diego and Baltimore tried to play Jack Cust in the Outfield, not realizing that he can only be a DH.

Votto, however, can at least play 1st Base adequately to support his bat, right Doug?

StillFunkyB
08-22-2007, 06:49 PM
This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

Honestly, I'm kind of ticked off I even learned of this.

dougdirt
08-22-2007, 06:58 PM
I imagine the same reason San Diego and Baltimore tried to play Jack Cust in the Outfield, not realizing that he can only be a DH.

Votto, however, can at least play 1st Base adequately to support his bat, right Doug?

He is no Derrek Lee or Albert Pujols over there.... but he is surely good enough to start there every day if he is going to hit.

Blue
08-22-2007, 07:07 PM
I'd rather trade him and play Dunn at 1B. Griffey, Bruce, Hamilton in the OF.

Eric_Davis
08-22-2007, 07:15 PM
Actually, listening to the Krivsky interview on 1530 this morning, it sounds like he isn't too high on Votto's D period. Maybe they are trying him in left because they don't think he can play 1st. Might be a last effort to find him a position before shipping him to the AL to DH (hopefully for some pitching).

I'm reading into a comment he made about why Votto isn't up after his hitting stats were quoted and he said something to the effect that "those are offensive numbers and you have to play both sides."

Also, from what I heard in that interview, Wayne wants to see guys perform at a high level for an extended period in the minors before moving them. Many of the promotions this year have been due to shortages or injuries.

I posted the link in the Sundeck, but will put it here too. Worth a listen, starts about 14 minutes into hour 1.

http://www.1530homer.com/cc-common/podcast/single_podcast.html?podcast=GreggandMo.xml

It was great to hear what Wayne Krivsky had to say. Thanks a lot.

Those radio guys are really poor listeners and a couple of jerks, but they asked really good questions.

Listening to that reassured me that the REDS are in great hands in Krivsky. We're going to get back to the playoffs under his regime. I hope he's around for several more years.

That interview also reiterated that there's a wide gap between the understanding of baseball between those that are in the game and those who watch them game (you, me, and all the media).

KronoRed
08-22-2007, 07:15 PM
I'd rather trade him and play Dunn at 1B. Griffey, Bruce, Hamilton in the OF.

Logical.

Never gonna happen ;)

Eric_Davis
08-22-2007, 07:21 PM
Votto offers immensely more value than an .889 OPS vs. RHP?

It doesn't really matter. The organization will do the right thing, which after hearing Wayne's interview from Homer has nothing to do with anything that CTR supposedly said.

It turns out that this whole thread comes from something made up in the mind of CTR.

redsmetz
08-22-2007, 07:30 PM
Is it remotely possible that the likes of Trent and John Fay get their jollies lighting up the boards and blogs with their theories?

StillFunkyB
08-22-2007, 07:34 PM
That interview also reiterated that there's a wide gap between the understanding of baseball between those that are in the game and those who watch them game (you, me, and all the media).

I really don't believe this for one second. There are some very smart people out there that are just "watchers" that I honestly believe could do a much better job then some of the GM's out there. There are a few on this board.

No, I do not think I am one of them. :)

StillFunkyB
08-22-2007, 07:36 PM
Is it remotely possible that the likes of Trent and John Fay get their jollies lighting up the boards and blogs with their theories?

Not only do I think that is a remote possibility, but I think you are pretty close to bullseye with that one.

What makes this even more frustrating is the fact that this club has been bad for so long a lot of us fans cling to every bit of hope we can.

jnwohio
08-23-2007, 12:35 AM
Votto's problem as I see it is that he is caught in a "numbers game" because the team is too left handed at the plate. Bruce's rapid rise has closed a window that was open for Votto in '08 because of the two, Bruce is clearly the one they would want if they only had room for 1 of them.

I look for them to try and balance the line up next year by using Cantu or EE at 1B with Keppinger at 3B. The OF is going to be some combination of Hamilton, Griffey, Dunn, Hopper, and Bruce. Bank on it that at least one of the pair of Dunn and Griffey will still be there at the first of the year and quite possibly both.

It has been a persistent rumor that some "scouts" think Votto is an AAAA at best.

jlb1705
08-23-2007, 01:19 AM
It is certainly possible. Players like Votto and Bruce look like they are ready to the average fan, but maybe the scouts know something we don't.

Homer Bailey says "hello". :wave:

TOBTTReds
08-23-2007, 01:53 AM
I really don't believe this for one second. There are some very smart people out there that are just "watchers" that I honestly believe could do a much better job then some of the GM's out there. There are a few on this board.

No, I do not think I am one of them. :)

I know what you are saying, but I slightly disagree. You have to also be a "student" of the game. Read all sources available, research it to death, and then "normal fans" can level up to a baseball exec. I've seen many a big time knowledgeable fan make a fool of themselves in a call in show, or even in front of an exec.

Muggerd
08-23-2007, 02:04 AM
I know what you are saying, but I slightly disagree. You have to also be a "student" of the game. Read all sources available, research it to death, and then "normal fans" can level up to a baseball exec. I've seen many a big time knowledgeable fan make a fool of themselves in a call in show, or even in front of an exec.

Isnt that the freaking truth. Some times you can tie your self in knots by stumbling over your great points. So many things going through your mind and 1 little miss cue and you can just get blown to bit by someone even if your point is correct.

dougdirt
08-23-2007, 02:33 AM
Homer Bailey says "hello". :wave:

Homer Bailey would have been fine had his leg not been hurting and he tried pitching through it.

Topcat
08-23-2007, 03:35 AM
I notice that the football coach mentality has not been addressed on the matter of Votto's D. Could a message being sent threw the media to Votto? Nothing like challenging a kid and him attacking his only weakness and improving it? My honest opinion is the Red's are buying time on his arbitration clock in a season that is otherwise lost.

mth123
08-23-2007, 06:01 AM
I like Votto a lot, but trading him for a pitcher wouldn't be the worst thing in the world with Hatte still around, Cantu as well and guys coming up who could also fit at first only a few years away (Rosales, Frazier, Francisco, etc..).

Two arms that may have a chance to help were garnered for an injured Deno. I would think Votto could net two better ones.

Looking at the crystal ball for fun ...

... If the defensive concerns are true, Votto fits better at DH in the AL... The Twins need a middle of the order bat that is still cheap... The Twins have a few young, cheap reasonable arms beyond Garza (with warts I know - Slowey, Perkins, Swarzak, Sosa, Morlan, Depaula) and they are probably going to need to deal a couple for some offense ... Krivsky has ties to the Twins, familiarity with these players and a history of dealing with his former organization (some say too much, but the right combo of these arms would be nice additions) ...

redsmetz
08-23-2007, 06:45 AM
I notice that the football coach mentality has not been addressed on the matter of Votto's D. Could a message being sent threw the media to Votto? Nothing like challenging a kid and him attacking his only weakness and improving it? My honest opinion is the Red's are buying time on his arbitration clock in a season that is otherwise lost.

You may well be onto something. With regards to Krivsky's comment on The Homer about there being two sides to the game, for a National League team that's true.

How many fans scream for Adam Dunn's head because he's a not a topnotch fielder? If the intent was to send Votto a message, learn your position better, then that's important. A good defensive first basemen is going to keep you in the game and is as important as their offensive skills.

Muggerd
08-23-2007, 09:36 AM
Homer Bailey would have been fine had his leg not been hurting and he tried pitching through it.

At least we hope

dougdirt
08-23-2007, 01:19 PM
At least we hope

I am pretty confident in that one.

dougdirt
08-23-2007, 01:22 PM
You may well be onto something. With regards to Krivsky's comment on The Homer about there being two sides to the game, for a National League team that's true.

How many fans scream for Adam Dunn's head because he's a not a topnotch fielder? If the intent was to send Votto a message, learn your position better, then that's important. A good defensive first basemen is going to keep you in the game and is as important as their offensive skills.

No one screams for Dunns head because hes not a top notch fielder. We scream because he is one of the worst fielders in baseball at a position filled with horrible fielders, most of whom are much older than he is.

I don't think the Reds are trying to talk to Votto through the media to light a fire under him. I honestly get a feeling that they just don't have the best feeling about him.

Muggerd
08-23-2007, 02:00 PM
I am pretty confident in that one.

Yea i feel the same way

Falls City Beer
08-23-2007, 02:23 PM
Every team is going to miss a lot. .

Good teams don't. They really don't.

BLEEDS
08-23-2007, 02:49 PM
I have no clue how the front office views Votto, but the fact they didn't trade Hatty is a good indicator that the Reds plan on having him around next year.

they TRIED to trade Hatt. He was put on waivers, he was claimed, and then withdrawn. If he had cleared Waivers, he'd be gone by now.

Absolutely NO reason to have Hatteberg back next year. We just traded away his 1B combo to get Cantu some PT. He's next for Votto.


I sort of like the idea of playing Dunn at 1B, but Jay Bruce won't be up next year if Dunn is here, which he shoud be. Votto will be getting the call-up. He's got nothing to prove in AAA, he's an All-Star and was in the Future's Game, what's left?

This lefty problem is only a "problem" if we call up every single lefty at the same time. Griffey is here only for next year - no way we pay him $16.5M, and no way he signs to play for less in 2009. That's where Jay Bruce enters the picture - maybe late 2008 if we trade Griffey.

Hamilton is the big surprise and he should be the starting CF-er for 80% of the games, only pulled agains the "tough" lefty SP's.

The real "PROBLEM" is that we don't have ANY good RH bats in the OF/1B. Cantu might give us some pop at 1b. Good news is we have Phillips at 2B, Gonzo is a decent power bat at SS (though he's no Derek Jeter at the plate, he's no Juan Castro either), and EE should develop at 3B.

Hopper's a good injury-replacement lead-off guy who can bunt. BUT, if you don't have a Votto or Dunn-type power at 1B, you can't afford to have him as your everyday CF-er.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

dougdirt
08-23-2007, 02:59 PM
they TRIED to trade Hatt. He was put on waivers, he was claimed, and then withdrawn. If he had cleared Waivers, he'd be gone by now.
Thats not even close to true. Almost every player in baseball is put on waivers and 80% of them are not put out there with the idea of trading them.


Absolutely NO reason to have Hatteberg back next year. We just traded away his 1B combo to get Cantu some PT. He's next for Votto.
There are tons of reasons to bring back Hatteberg back next year. I want him back, I just don't want him starting. He makes peanuts for starters next year. He is a solid bat and would be a great bat to bring off of the bench.



This lefty problem is only a "problem" if we call up every single lefty at the same time. Griffey is here only for next year - no way we pay him $16.5M, and no way he signs to play for less in 2009. That's where Jay Bruce enters the picture - maybe late 2008 if we trade Griffey.
The lefty thing is only a problem because the Reds don't have any right handed hitters that pitchers really fear. Phillips is solid and all, but I don't think pitchers are going to pitch around him in most cases.


Hamilton is the big surprise and he should be the starting CF-er for 80% of the games, only pulled agains the "tough" lefty SP's.
If Jay Bruce is here, then he should be in CF until he proves he isn't as good as Hamilton, who is slightly below average out there.

AmarilloRed
08-23-2007, 03:33 PM
Would you carry a third first baseman, Doug? We did it earlier with three catchers, and I would not expect us to carry three catchers again. I believe Hatteberg could help with both Cantu and Votto. We could have a platoon of Votto and Cantu in 2009 if Votto struggles with lefties.

BLEEDS
08-23-2007, 03:42 PM
Thats not even close to true. Almost every player in baseball is put on waivers and 80% of them are not put out there with the idea of trading them.

There are tons of reasons to bring back Hatteberg back next year. I want him back, I just don't want him starting. He makes peanuts for starters next year. He is a solid bat and would be a great bat to bring off of the bench.

So, every player was put on the waiver wire after the trade deadline? No, both he and Conine were put through Waivers, Conine cleared and was traded. Hatteberg was claimed, so we had to pull him back. Now he can't be traded. Simple as that.

Sure, he's a solid Bat, but he's not a corner infielder for a Contending team. No Power. He's a stop-gap. He also wouldn't want to be a bench player, so he'd rather be traded where he could get more AB's. I guess if you want to pay him $1.7M to sit on the bench that's cool, but I don't see it happening.



The lefty thing is only a problem because the Reds don't have any right handed hitters that pitchers really fear. Phillips is solid and all, but I don't think pitchers are going to pitch around him in most cases.

If Jay Bruce is here, then he should be in CF until he proves he isn't as good as Hamilton, who is slightly below average out there.

If Hamilton is slightly below average, what is Freel?

PEACE

-BLEEDS

nate
08-23-2007, 03:55 PM
So, every player was put on the waiver wire after the trade deadline?

He said "almost every player" is. And its true. I bet Griffey was on that list...he was last year.



No, both he and Conine were put through Waivers, Conine cleared and was traded. Hatteberg was claimed, so we had to pull him back. Now he can't be traded. Simple as that.

Right.


Sure, he's a solid Bat, but he's not a corner infielder for a Contending team. No Power. He's a stop-gap. He also wouldn't want to be a bench player, so he'd rather be traded where he could get more AB's. I guess if you want to pay him $1.7M to sit on the bench that's cool, but I don't see it happening.

He gets on base, he doesn't make outs. Only 36 guys in all of baseball get on base with greater frequency than Hatteberg.

I absolutely want a guy like that on my bench.


If Hamilton is slightly below average, what is Freel?

The same with a poorer arm and 5 years.

BLEEDS
08-23-2007, 03:58 PM
No arguments, but it was pretty obvious that we were trying to trade Hatteberg, and if he would have cleared waivers, he wouldn't be on our team right now.

The Reds won't pay him $1.7M to be a bench player, not if they have the OPTION of not doing it.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

redsmetz
08-23-2007, 04:15 PM
No arguments, but it was pretty obvious that we were trying to trade Hatteberg, and if he would have cleared waivers, he wouldn't be on our team right now.

The Reds won't pay him $1.7M to be a bench player, not if they have the OPTION of not doing it.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

It's more likely that whoever claimed him wouldn't be given us what we wanted in return or that we had a specific deal we were working one.

It's not unheard of for a bench player to make that sort of money these day. Hatteberg may well be willing to provide a different role for this team next year. His playing days are winding down. It's not a given that he would accept being a bench player now.

geemac
08-23-2007, 04:16 PM
C. Trent writes excellent columns in the Post and I also enjoy his blogs. But he does not always have the right information. I think he is overly aggressive iin his second inning talks with Marty B. I get the impression that he tries to sieze control of their discussions. He is probably wrong about Votto.
The Reds I'm sure will give Votto a good look in September and in Spring Training.
Hatte has done a fine job but hie's not in the Reds future after 2008.

dougdirt
08-23-2007, 06:23 PM
So, every player was put on the waiver wire after the trade deadline? No, both he and Conine were put through Waivers, Conine cleared and was traded. Hatteberg was claimed, so we had to pull him back. Now he can't be traded. Simple as that.
Those are the players we heard about. Manny Ramirez was put on waivers a few years ago. Seriously, 80% of players are probably put on waivers every August.


Sure, he's a solid Bat, but he's not a corner infielder for a Contending team. No Power. He's a stop-gap. He also wouldn't want to be a bench player, so he'd rather be traded where he could get more AB's. I guess if you want to pay him $1.7M to sit on the bench that's cool, but I don't see it happening.
He isnt a corner infielder on a contending team, but he is a solid guy to be able to bring off the bench. I bet that a lot of teams would love to pick him up right now before the playoffs.... especially if the cost was little. That is why he was claimed. We dont know who claimed him, but I will tell you what, he was claimed becuase he is good and he has a great contract. I don't think he has any say in whether or not he is a bench player either though. I bet he really doesn't want to be a platoon guy, but he is.



If Hamilton is slightly below average, what is Freel?

Hamilton is good at getting to balls in the CF area. He is not good at getting balls into the gaps at all. Slightly below average.

Freel is slightly below average at getting balls in the CF area, but well above average at getting to balls into the gaps. Overall, slightly above average.

LoganBuck
08-24-2007, 03:39 PM
Would anyone be overly upset if the Reds moved Dunn to first, (I know about all the supposed reasons not to), and parlayed Votto into a Dave Burba for Sean Casey type deal, for next season?

The reasons to do so:
1. Keeps Dunn and moves him out of left field. I would ask him to work with a private coach on this during the offseason. I would also extend his contract and give him incentive to move to first.
2. Opens a spot for Bruce next season if he is ready. Freel and Hopper can man the position for the very short term if he isn't immediately ready out of spring training.
3. Shores up a third spot in the rotation.

Reasons not to:
1. Trading a cheap bat
2. Dunn playing first base

Thoughts?

Eric_Davis
08-24-2007, 03:50 PM
Straight question:

Would you rather have a supplemental 1st Round pick in 2008 and fill Hatteberg's spot with someone else (don't forget that Hatteberg can be an emergency 3rd Catcher so there's no more need for a 3rd catcher, which meant we were really carrying 4 catchers most of the year); or, would you rather have Hatteberg on the team next year and get nothing for him after that (because he'll drop back down to a Type-C player as a Free-Agent)?

Hattberg for one more year; or,

One 2008 Supplemental 1st Round pick.

I'll take the pick.

flyer85
08-24-2007, 03:53 PM
they TRIED to trade Hatt. He was put on waivers, he was claimed, and then withdrawn. If he had cleared Waivers, he'd be gone by now.One would surmise then that they could have traded before the August 1st if they so desired.

LoganBuck
08-24-2007, 03:54 PM
One would surmise then that they could have traded before the August 1st if they so desired.

Blasphemy!

BLEEDS
08-24-2007, 03:59 PM
Would anyone be overly upset if the Reds moved Dunn to first, (I know about all the supposed reasons not to), and parlayed Votto into a Dave Burba for Sean Casey type deal, for next season?

The reasons to do so:
1. Keeps Dunn and moves him out of left field. I would ask him to work with a private coach on this during the offseason. I would also extend his contract and give him incentive to move to first.
2. Opens a spot for Bruce next season if he is ready. Freel and Hopper can man the position for the very short term if he isn't immediately ready out of spring training.
3. Shores up a third spot in the rotation.

Reasons not to:
1. Trading a cheap bat
2. Dunn playing first base

Thoughts?

I'm not sure that the FO is THAT disenchanted that they would trade Votto for a SP, but they might.

I like anything that involves keeping Dunn Long-term. He is at least a CONSISTENT and proven commodity in the Major Leagues.

However, getting rid of Votto gives us the same dilemma - what to do with Jr when he is Inevitably let go after 2008.

For 2008 - you can go Junior, Hamilton, and Freel/Hopper (if you must) around the OF. Bruce is - from all Accounts - scheduled for a late 2008 call-up and to be ready by 2009. Kid's not even old enough to drink yet, he's not going to be the starter in 2008.

In 2009, though, you've got Bruce, Hamilton, and den... and den... and no more and den, you still are looking at Freel/Hopper.

The idea is to GET BETTER (and younger, and cheaper), not just stand pat or replace proven MLB veterans with unproven rookies - albeit All-Star AAA quality unproven rookies.

It would make most sense for our future - 2009 and beyond - should include Bruce, Votto - along with Homer, Cueto - AND to keep a Dunn around. You could put Dunn in the middle of the order, and put these young guys around them, along with a blossoming Phillips and take the pressure of of them.

You replace Griffey with Bruce, and Dunn with Votto, and you're taking a HUGE chance that both of those guys won't skip a beat replacing their Proven Production.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

BLEEDS
08-24-2007, 04:03 PM
One would surmise then that they could have traded before the August 1st if they so desired.

You are correct, because certainly we weren't trying to trade Conine before August 1st.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

BLEEDS
08-24-2007, 04:09 PM
Straight question:

Would you rather have a supplemental 1st Round pick in 2008 and fill Hatteberg's spot with someone else (don't forget that Hatteberg can be an emergency 3rd Catcher so there's no more need for a 3rd catcher, which meant we were really carrying 4 catchers most of the year); or, would you rather have Hatteberg on the team next year and get nothing for him after that (because he'll drop back down to a Type-C player as a Free-Agent)?

Hattberg for one more year; or,

One 2008 Supplemental 1st Round pick.

I'll take the pick.

Agreed. Sure, he's a good, veteran Hitter. Give me a GREAT prospect and a 2008 Pick instead. I can't remember the last time we had over 20 HR"s from 1B in Cincinnati - and Sean Casey doesn't count because he was obviously on Steroids, dude can't even get double-digits anymore.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

dougdirt
08-24-2007, 04:10 PM
For 2008 - you can go Junior, Hamilton, and Freel/Hopper (if you must) around the OF. Bruce is - from all Accounts - scheduled for a late 2008 call-up and to be ready by 2009. Kid's not even old enough to drink yet, he's not going to be the starter in 2008.

Not sure where you get your information, but the last time Jay Bruce was scheduled for a late 2008 call up was 2006. A lot of places think Jay Bruce is ready for a call up right now and could contribute as a starter out of April next season. Kid will be old enough to drink the first week of next season, not that it has anything to do with his abilities on the field though.

You replace Griffey with Bruce, and Dunn with Votto, and you're taking a HUGE chance that both of those guys won't skip a beat replacing their Proven Production.
[/QUOTE]

I don't expect Bruce or Votto to replace Dunn or Griffeys offensive production. However, I expect them both to help offset their offensive production and I also expect Bruce's glove to be a substantial upgrade over both Griffey and Dunn, which brings his value even closer. Now of course, if you were to straight replace Dunn and Griffey with Votto and Bruce, you are talking about saving 22-25 million in payroll. I don't advocate letting Dunn just walk, or just trading him to get it done. I just don't advocate paying him 15+ million to play left field on my baseball team. If he moves to first base, its an entirely different discussion.

BRM
08-24-2007, 04:12 PM
Straight question:

Would you rather have a supplemental 1st Round pick in 2008 and fill Hatteberg's spot with someone else (don't forget that Hatteberg can be an emergency 3rd Catcher so there's no more need for a 3rd catcher, which meant we were really carrying 4 catchers most of the year); or, would you rather have Hatteberg on the team next year and get nothing for him after that (because he'll drop back down to a Type-C player as a Free-Agent)?

Hattberg for one more year; or,

One 2008 Supplemental 1st Round pick.

I'll take the pick.

Would Hatteberg be classified as a Type A?

nate
08-24-2007, 04:46 PM
Would anyone be overly upset if the Reds moved Dunn to first, (I know about all the supposed reasons not to), and parlayed Votto into a Dave Burba for Sean Casey type deal, for next season?

Nope. And I like Votto!

nate
08-24-2007, 04:48 PM
Straight question:

Would you rather have a supplemental 1st Round pick in 2008 and fill Hatteberg's spot with someone else (don't forget that Hatteberg can be an emergency 3rd Catcher so there's no more need for a 3rd catcher, which meant we were really carrying 4 catchers most of the year); or, would you rather have Hatteberg on the team next year and get nothing for him after that (because he'll drop back down to a Type-C player as a Free-Agent)?

Hattberg for one more year; or,

One 2008 Supplemental 1st Round pick.

I'll take the pick.

Not to pick nits but Hatteberg really can't play catcher because he can't throw any longer. That's why he's a 1B now.

TC81190
08-24-2007, 04:50 PM
Agreed. Sure, he's a good, veteran Hitter. Give me a GREAT prospect and a 2008 Pick instead. I can't remember the last time we had over 20 HR"s from 1B in Cincinnati - and Sean Casey doesn't count because he was obviously on Steroids, dude can't even get double-digits anymore.

PEACE

-BLEEDS


:thumbdown:thumbdown:thumbdown:thumbdown:thumbdown :thumbdown:thumbdown:thumbdown:thumbdown:thumbdown

BLEEDS
08-24-2007, 04:51 PM
Not sure where you get your information, but the last time Jay Bruce was scheduled for a late 2008 call up was 2006. A lot of places think Jay Bruce is ready for a call up right now and could contribute as a starter out of April next season. Kid will be old enough to drink the first week of next season, not that it has anything to do with his abilities on the field though.

I don't expect Bruce or Votto to replace Dunn or Griffeys offensive production. However, I expect them both to help offset their offensive production and I also expect Bruce's glove to be a substantial upgrade over both Griffey and Dunn, which brings his value even closer. Now of course, if you were to straight replace Dunn and Griffey with Votto and Bruce, you are talking about saving 22-25 million in payroll. I don't advocate letting Dunn just walk, or just trading him to get it done. I just don't advocate paying him 15+ million to play left field on my baseball team. If he moves to first base, its an entirely different discussion.


Well, lucky for us, you don't run the Reds.

$15M is a bargain for Dunn's production, especially in FA. $13M is a STEAL.

I've read many reports on Bruce, and the MAJORITY say he's not getting a starting job until late 2008, and probably 2009. He might get a CALLUP this September, along with about 15 other guys, but he's not making a 25 Man roster until late 2008 at the EARLIEST. We could have a gentlemen's wager on that.

My point is, Bruce is really tagged as Jr's replacement.

IMO, Votto is Hatteberg's replacement.

We don't have a replacement for Dunn, unless you count Norris Hopper as your replacement.

Dunn is 27, and has many years ahead of him. Looks like he has flourished under Jacoby's instruction because he's cut down on his strikeouts and is taking balls the other way. He definitely has a place on my baseball team, LF, 1B, RF, wherever... he's a PROVEN SOLID YOUNG corner OF/1B-man. Period.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

BLEEDS
08-24-2007, 04:56 PM
:thumbdown:thumbdown:thumbdown:thumbdown:thumbdown :thumbdown:thumbdown:thumbdown:thumbdown:thumbdown

Okay, that was a joke...

PEACE

-BLEEDS

dougdirt
08-24-2007, 05:02 PM
Well, lucky for us, you don't run the Reds.

$15M is a bargain for Dunn's production, especially in FA. $13M is a STEAL.

I don't think its a steal. It is market appropriate, the 15 million that is. My point is, the Reds can't afford to pay market value for many people, and if the Reds are going to be paying 15 million dollars to someone, I don't want them being a complete 1 sided player like Dunn is.



I've read many reports on Bruce, and the MAJORITY say he's not getting a starting job until late 2008, and probably 2009. He might get a CALLUP this September, along with about 15 other guys, but he's not making a 25 Man roster until late 2008 at the EARLIEST. We could have a gentlemen's wager on that.
Which reports did you read and when did you read them? Whether or not he makes the 25 man roster before next August is one thing, but whether or not he is ready by then is a completely different question.



My point is, Bruce is really tagged as Jr's replacement.

IMO, Votto is Hatteberg's replacement.

I would start Bruce in CF until he can't play the position or you have a Drew Stubbs type ready (the type who plays game changing CF defense every game). I think Votto should be Hattebergs replacement, I just don't think the Reds are as certain.



We don't have a replacement for Dunn, unless you count Norris Hopper as your replacement.

Dunn is 27, and has many years ahead of him. Looks like he has flourished under Jacoby's instruction because he's cut down on his strikeouts and is taking balls the other way. He definitely has a place on my baseball team, LF, 1B, RF, wherever... he's a PROVEN SOLID YOUNG corner OF/1B-man. Period.


I have never said Dunn wasn't valuable to this team. I just don't know if I would be paying him 15 million bucks into his 30s to play the outfield. As for Dunns replacement, Josh Hamilton looks like that guy. Hamilton is not a centerfielder.

BLEEDS
08-24-2007, 05:21 PM
I don't think its a steal. It is market appropriate, the 15 million that is. My point is, the Reds can't afford to pay market value for many people, and if the Reds are going to be paying 15 million dollars to someone, I don't want them being a complete 1 sided player like Dunn is.

You're right, we can't afford to pay market value for many people. Dunn however, a 27 year old proven VET, is one of them. Especially when one of the other Market Value guys you are paying is 10 years older and is due $16.5M in 2009.



Which reports did you read and when did you read them? Whether or not he makes the 25 man roster before next August is one thing, but whether or not he is ready by then is a completely different question.

I wasn't arguing subjectiveness (if he's ready) I was just pointing to reality - he won't be called up until mid-late 2008.



I would start Bruce in CF until he can't play the position or you have a Drew Stubbs type ready (the type who plays game changing CF defense every game).
Bruce has played in CF since when? He's being groomed for RF. Griffey currently plays RF. Coincidence? I think not...



I think Votto should be Hattebergs replacement, I just don't think the Reds are as certain.

Finally we agree on something.



I have never said Dunn wasn't valuable to this team. I just don't know if I would be paying him 15 million bucks into his 30s to play the outfield.

In 3 years, when Dunn is 30, $15M will look like a STEAL for a guy with his production.



As for Dunns replacement, Josh Hamilton looks like that guy. Hamilton is not a centerfielder.

That's your opinion. He's played like 80% of his games in CF.
Please tell me the number of games Josh has played in LF (hint: you won't need more than two hands). How many has he STARTED in LF (hint: you won't need more than one).


PEACE

-BLEEDS

nate
08-24-2007, 05:33 PM
That's your opinion. He's played like 80% of his games in CF.

That's because on _this_ team, Hammy _IS BEST_ in CF.

With Bruce and Stubbs (or a game-changer like Doug said) out there, no.

BLEEDS
08-24-2007, 05:40 PM
That's because on _this_ team, Hammy _IS BEST_ in CF.

With Bruce and Stubbs (or a game-changer like Doug said) out there, no.

I'll agree on Stubbs, but this is the REDS, not Lousville, give it a couple years before we have that argument, ERR... discussion.


PEACE

-BLEEDS

dougdirt
08-24-2007, 06:13 PM
You're right, we can't afford to pay market value for many people. Dunn however, a 27 year old proven VET, is one of them. Especially when one of the other Market Value guys you are paying is 10 years older and is due $16.5M in 2009.

Griffey isn't due that money if the Reds don't want to pay it.



Bruce has played in CF since when? He's being groomed for RF. Griffey currently plays RF. Coincidence? I think not...
Jay has played tons in CF. As a matter of fact, he plays more CF than anyonewhere else. Coincidence? Probably not.



In 3 years, when Dunn is 30, $15M will look like a STEAL for a guy with his production.
You are assuming that it is Dunn of 2007 and not Dunn of 2006. 15 million for his offensive production, maybe so. But if he repeats anything like his 2006, he was basically league average if you include his defense and at that point he is worth nowhere near that money.



That's your opinion. He's played like 80% of his games in CF.
Please tell me the number of games Josh has played in LF (hint: you won't need more than two hands). How many has he STARTED in LF (hint: you won't need more than one).

Hamilton has played most of his games in CF becuase well lets be honest, Dunn and Griffey simply can't play other positions outside of first base, and well, neither of them seem willing to do that one just yet. They are both proven guys and are going to play every day almost, so that only leaves one spot left in the OF.

GoReds33
08-24-2007, 06:48 PM
No matter what this team is stacked in the outfield. Bruce, Hamilton, and Dunn should be opening day starters next year. Yes, I got rid of Griffey. I think he should be traded. There have got to be people looking for a proven comoddity to be a dh for a year. He is an ideal rent-a-player.

Eric_Davis
08-24-2007, 07:11 PM
Would Hatteberg be classified as a Type A?

Rankings at the end of last season listed Hatteberg as the 4th player overall in the Type-C class. He just missed reaching the Type B class. He had an improved year in 2006 over 2005, so when you put together his 2006-7 years he'll move up to Type-B, but still be a long way from Type-A. No way next year does he do as well as this year or last year, and he should drop back down to being a Type-C player. His production has decreased as the year has gone on....he's getting old and tired, where most everyone else on the team is improving as the year goes on (hitting-wise). The gradings always cover the previous 2 years, so that's why Fielder is so low...hardly any at-bats. Hatteberg may not get as many at-bats next year, also.

Here's the players listed around Hatteberg (in the NL):

47 Juan Pierre 58.111 B
48 Jose Guillen 57.556 B
49 Andre Ethier 55.889 B
50 Shea Hillenbrand 54.783 B
51 Ryan Klesko 53.778 B
52 Chris Duncan 53.444 B
53 Marlon Anderson 53.222 B
54 Adam LaRoche 53.043 B
55 Willy Taveras 52.222 B
56 Luke Scott 52.111 B
57t Jeromy Burnitz 51.111 B
57t Matt Diaz 51.111 B
59 Jason Lane 49.778 C
60 Ryan Langerhans 49.333 C
61 Eric Byrnes 49.222 C
62 Scott Hatteberg 48.696 C
63 So Taguchi 48.333 C
64 Adrian Gonzalez 48.261 C
65 Shane Victorino 48.000 C
66t Alex Escobar 47.556 C
66t Cory Sullivan 47.556 C
68 Chris Burke 47.111 C
69 Jeff DaVanon 46.222 C
70 Tony Clark 46.087
71 Gabe Gross 42.778
72 Steve Finley 40.889
73 Wes Helms 40.870
74 Endy Chavez 39.556
75 Jayson Werth 38.889
76 Conor Jackson 38.261
77 Prince Fielder 36.957

Eric_Davis
08-24-2007, 07:17 PM
$15M is a bargain for Dunn's production, especially in FA. $13M is a STEAL.



There's no value there for a club with a payroll in the $65M range.

Paying 1/5th of your payroll for one player, even if he was Alex Rodriguez or Brandon Webb, is a poor financial decision and suicide if you have any desire to put together a winning ballclub.

SMcGavin
08-24-2007, 07:22 PM
I don't think its a steal. It is market appropriate, the 15 million that is. My point is, the Reds can't afford to pay market value for many people, and if the Reds are going to be paying 15 million dollars to someone, I don't want them being a complete 1 sided player like Dunn is.


Just curious Doug, why does it matter if he is one-sided if his production is worth of contract? In my mind $15M of production is $15M of production no matter what way it comes. If we had a different very good player with a better BA, less power, and better defense - and all that came out to the same level of production as Dunn gives - why would that guy be more worthy of his market value contract?

A secondary point: You said the Reds can't afford to pay market value for many players - I would argue the Reds couldn't get many players to come here for market value. No reason to let guys go who are producing at a level that is appropriate for their contract.

SMcGavin
08-24-2007, 07:24 PM
There's no value there for a club with a payroll in the $65M range.

Paying 1/5th of your payroll for one player, even if he was Alex Rodriguez or Brandon Webb, is a poor financial decision and suicide if you have any desire to put together a winning ballclub.

So if A-Rod or Brandon Webb want to come here for $15M/year this offseason, and you don't have to give up anything to get them, you say no thanks?

TOBTTReds
08-24-2007, 07:28 PM
In 3 years, when Dunn is 30, $15M will look like a STEAL for a guy with his production.


If he continues to hit like he is in August, then yes. The only thing is, that the market is being determined by LARGE market clubs. Take all teams with payrolls under 100 mil, and now see what his value is. I bet it is around 10 mil.

PEACE

-AVESICE51

TOBTTReds
08-24-2007, 07:30 PM
So if A-Rod or Brandon Webb want to come here for $15M/year this offseason, and you don't have to give up anything to get them, you say no thanks?

Probably say yes, but you probably wouldn't win without a strong core of young cheap players. The problem with the Reds is that they have about 1/3 of their payroll in 2 players.

BLEEDS
08-24-2007, 07:38 PM
Griffey isn't due that money if the Reds don't want to pay it.

My point exactly, so we just saved $12.5M, so we CAN afford to pay Dunn - in response to your "we can't afford to pay too many guys Market Value"



Jay has played tons in CF. As a matter of fact, he plays more CF than anyonewhere else. Coincidence? Probably not.

He's also played tons of RF. Again, RF/CF, whatever, neither Jay nor Hamilton has played hardly ANY LF.



You are assuming that it is Dunn of 2007 and not Dunn of 2006. 15 million for his offensive production, maybe so. But if he repeats anything like his 2006, he was basically league average if you include his defense and at that point he is worth nowhere near that money.

Maybe I'm assuming it's 2004.
2006 was his worst year. 2007 may end up being better than 2004. 27 is around an athlete's physical peak. I don't think he's going to regress anytime soon. A 4-5 year contract would be a good idea.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

BLEEDS
08-24-2007, 07:39 PM
There's no value there for a club with a payroll in the $65M range.


When was our payroll in that range, 2005?!?

Our payroll is in the 70's and will be closer to $80M next year.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

dougdirt
08-24-2007, 07:40 PM
Just curious Doug, why does it matter if he is one-sided if his production is worth of contract? In my mind $15M of production is $15M of production no matter what way it comes. If we had a different very good player with a better BA, less power, and better defense - and all that came out to the same level of production as Dunn gives - why would that guy be more worthy of his market value contract?
Becuase most guys with his bat, which is what most people want to use as contract comparisons are better defenders than Dunn is. Therefore, when people make comparisons to Dunn being worth as much as another player and they use stats to back it up, they hardly ever bring up his defense, which is actually a negative. So while his bat may look like its worth that much compared to other players, his defense actually negates a bit of his offense.
The guy you brought to the table in your example is more of a complete player. He is helping out the team in more ways. However, batting average is not something I would exactly look at. It all depends on the defense one guy plays and what position he plays.


A secondary point: You said the Reds can't afford to pay market value for many players - I would argue the Reds couldn't get many players to come here for market value. No reason to let guys go who are producing at a level that is appropriate for their contract.
There is when the only way you keep that player around is to sign him for 5 years at that same rate, and by the 3rd year of that pay raise you have over 40 million bucks wrapped up in 3 players (Arroyo, Harang and Dunn is he signed) and that would make up likely half of your entire payroll.

dougdirt
08-24-2007, 07:44 PM
My point exactly, so we just saved $12.5M, so we CAN afford to pay Dunn - in response to your "we can't afford to pay too many guys Market Value"
That money is going toward paying Harang and Arroyo.



He's also played tons of RF. Again, RF/CF, whatever, neither Jay nor Hamilton has played hardly ANY LF.

But I bet they could play it better than Dunn if they began playing it today.



Maybe I'm assuming it's 2004.
2006 was his worst year. 2007 may end up being better than 2004. 27 is around an athlete's physical peak. I don't think he's going to regress anytime soon. A 4-5 year contract would be a good idea.
2006 sucked for him. 2004 was great. 2007 thus far has been right up there. You hit the nail on the head though, 27 is roughly an athletes peak. Dunn may not regress much at the plate by the time he is 30-32, but I don't want to think about him running around in the field during that time.

SMcGavin
08-24-2007, 07:44 PM
Becuase most guys with his bat, which is what most people want to use as contract comparisons are better defenders than Dunn is. Therefore, when people make comparisons to Dunn being worth as much as another player and they use stats to back it up, they hardly ever bring up his defense, which is actually a negative. So while his bat may look like its worth that much compared to other players, his defense actually negates a bit of his offense.
The guy you brought to the table in your example is more of a complete player. He is helping out the team in more ways. However, batting average is not something I would exactly look at. It all depends on the defense one guy plays and what position he plays.

If you don't think Dunn is worth $15M that is a totally different argument that I understand completely. What I got from your earlier post was that $15M is Dunn's market value, but you still don't want to pay it. If you think my hypothetical player B is better, obviously you'd take him, my scenario was that they are equally productive all things considered - they just had different skill sets.

dougdirt
08-24-2007, 07:46 PM
If you don't think Dunn is worth $15M that is a totally different argument that I understand completely. What I got from your earlier post was that $15M is Dunn's market value, but you still don't want to pay it. If you think my hypothetical player B is better, obviously you'd take him, my scenario was that they are equally productive all things considered - they just had different skill sets.

I think Dunn can be worth that much money to certain teams. I just don't think teams with sub 100 million dollar pay rolls are teams that can afford to pay a guy like Dunn that much money.

BLEEDS
08-24-2007, 07:48 PM
Becuase most guys with his bat, which is what most people want to use as contract comparisons are better defenders than Dunn is. Therefore, when people make comparisons to Dunn being worth as much as another player and they use stats to back it up, they hardly ever bring up his defense, which is actually a negative. So while his bat may look like its worth that much compared to other players, his defense actually negates a bit of his offense..

We're talking LF, not exactly a position of Defensive Gold-Glove Necessity.

You all put too much emphasis on Defense. Up the middle is WAY more important for your Defense (catcher, Pitcher, SS, 2B, CF). The others are for putting less-stellar defensive-minded people who can MASH the ball. (3B, 1B, LF, RF).

If you notice, we fit the bill pretty much around the horn - outside of 1B, where we have an All-Star AAA prospect ready to take over for a 38.5 year old, which - in case we forgot - was the actual POINT of this initial Thread.


Does EVERY thread have to become an Adam Dunn love/hate thread?!?!?!:confused:

time for :beerme:


PEACE

-BLEEDS

dougdirt
08-24-2007, 07:51 PM
We're talking LF, not exactly a position of Defensive Gold-Glove Necessity.

You all put too much emphasis on Defense. Up the middle is WAY more important for your Defense (catcher, Pitcher, SS, 2B, CF). The others are for putting less-stellar defensive-minded people who can MASH the ball. (3B, 1B, LF, RF).

If you notice, we fit the bill pretty much around the horn - outside of 1B, where we have an All-Star AAA prospect ready to take over for a 38.5 year old, which - in case we forgot - was the actual POINT of this initial Thread.


I understand that LF is not exactly the most important position on the field. Problem is even at such a horrible position filled with players who cant field, Adam Dunn is still worth a considerable amount of plays fewer than just the average guy at his position. For example, Dunn at the AS break was worth roughly -10 to -15 plays already to the average left fielder in baseball. So while LF is not a position of great defensive value, Dunn has still allowed 10-15 more hits than just the average guy at his position.

As for Votto being what the thread was about, the decision on Dunn has a lot to do with Votto in my mind.

jojo
08-24-2007, 08:36 PM
Votto in left field boggles my mind. The Reds really might feel his defense is unfixable. Or maybe they just love Hatteberg and were trying to hedge their bets in case they could've moved Dunn. An argument can be made that Hatteberg is actually a better option for next year than Votto. Hatteberg plays league average or slightly above average defense while putting up these numbers vs. righties: .312/.402/.483. Even if Votto can match Hatteberg's bat next season, he certainly can't match Hattie's defense. The Reds might be thinking that they can't find a spot for Votto until he's roughly 26 yo (i.e. in '09).

I think they look at Votto's severe platoon splits and his subpar defense and have evaluated him based upon what he can't do rather than what he can do.

jojo
08-24-2007, 08:45 PM
We're talking LF, not exactly a position of Defensive Gold-Glove Necessity.

You all put too much emphasis on Defense. Up the middle is WAY more important for your Defense (catcher, Pitcher, SS, 2B, CF). The others are for putting less-stellar defensive-minded people who can MASH the ball. (3B, 1B, LF, RF).

It's true that positions on the right end of the spectrum are more premium because they are both more demanding AND generally get more defensive chances. That said, just because the pool of defenders in the corner positions aren't as talented as those up the middle doesn't mean that defense in the positions at the left of the spectrum doesn't matter. If your guy is 10 runs worse than his fellow LFer's over the course of the season, it's a problem and it detracts from his value.

And for the record, I'd have issues with Votto in left without proof he can play there adequately.

SteelSD
08-24-2007, 08:58 PM
I understand that LF is not exactly the most important position on the field. Problem is even at such a horrible position filled with players who cant field, Adam Dunn is still worth a considerable amount of plays fewer than just the average guy at his position. For example, Dunn at the AS break was worth roughly -10 to -15 plays already to the average left fielder in baseball. So while LF is not a position of great defensive value, Dunn has still allowed 10-15 more hits than just the average guy at his position.

No.

Even if we're to use your defensive stat de jour (THT's warped attempt at Zone Rating), here's what we get as of right now for NL qualifiers in Left Field:

NL Average RZR: .844
NL Median RZR: .833
Adam Dunn RZR: .825

Of Dunn's 217 "Balls in Zone" (BIZ), the difference between the "Average" NL LF and Dunn to this point in the season is 4 BIZ Hits. Four. The variance versus the NL Median LF RZR and Dunn is less than 2 BIZ Hits. The entirety of the differential assuming a 33% scoring rate for runners on base is between 0 and 1 Run negative to this point in the season versus an average and/or median National League LF. Last year he would have been worth between 0 and 1 Run to the positive.

If we're going to use the data you've bought into, Dunn has basically been League Average both this year and last.

jojo
08-24-2007, 09:03 PM
No.

Even if we're to use your defensive stat de jour (THT's warped attempt at Zone Rating), here's what we get as of right now for NL qualifiers in Left Field:

NL Average RZR: .844
NL Median RZR: .833
Adam Dunn RZR: .825

Of Dunn's 217 "Balls in Zone" (BIZ), the difference between the "Average" NL LF and Dunn to this point in the season is 4 BIZ Hits. Four. The variance versus the NL Median LF RZR and Dunn is less than 2 BIZ Hits. The entirety of the differential assuming a 33% scoring rate for runners on base is between 0 and 1 Run negative to this point in the season versus an average and/or median National League LF. Last year he would have been worth between 0 and 1 Run to the positive.

If we're going to use the data you've bought into, Dunn has basically been League Average both this year and last.

Zone rating has been marginalized for sometime now. Dewan's *improved* ZR on THT is neat because it's accessible and it's updated regularly but it's more a toy than a really useful tool.

SteelSD
08-24-2007, 09:24 PM
Zone rating has been marginalized for sometime now. Dewan's *improved* ZR on THT is neat because it's accessible and it's updated regularly but it's more a toy than a really useful tool.

Honestly, I think what we're going to have to see is a whole new level of tracking. Like a QuesTec system for the entire field and something akin to a GPS tracking chip embedded in each player's glove. At that point we might be able to truly track everything objectively and compensate for defensive positioning by figuring out exactly how much ground an average fielder can reasonably be expected to cover from his starting position. No subjective tracking required.

AmarilloRed
08-25-2007, 01:20 AM
I know the question might have been missed because of the discussion you and BLEEDS are having Doug, but would you carry three first baseman next year? We did it at the catcher position this year, and I think it might help the Reds to have someone like Hatteberg help votto and Cantu next year.

zjr1717
08-25-2007, 02:01 AM
I like Votto, but he is similar to lots of hot prospect first basemen who washed out and became 4A players. His bat speed has been questioned in the past and check this out...

Votto at AA: 319/408/547/955
Mystery player A at AA: 292/406/562/968
Mystery player B at AA: 328/429/515/944
Mystery player C at AA: 320/428/592/1020






Myster Player A is Josh Phelps, B is Jeremy Giambi, and C is Ben Broussard. Not exactly the greatest major leaguers.

dougdirt
08-25-2007, 04:28 AM
It depends on what you define as three third baseman. If Joey Votto isnt starting most of the time at first base, then he probably shouldn't be on the team.

reds44
08-25-2007, 04:36 AM
Is Votto even a first baseman anymore?

Muggerd
08-25-2007, 10:48 AM
Is Votto even a first baseman anymore?

Hes played more 1st base than he has OF. They are grooming him for 2 positions so he has more value.

BLEEDS
08-25-2007, 12:20 PM
Hes played more 1st base than he has OF. They are grooming him for 2 positions so he has more value.

Yah, he may not be better than Dunn in the OF, but he's definitely an upgrade over Hatte all around.

Just think, maybe he can be switched to LF, where all reports are he makes Dunn look like a Gold-Glover, he'll hit for less power, but better average, and produce less HR/RBI/R/BB. Surely Muggerd you could find something to complain about that!! especially with your favorite whipping boy Dunn gone!:thumbup:

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Muggerd
08-25-2007, 12:47 PM
Yah, he may not be better than Dunn in the OF, but he's definitely an upgrade over Hatte all around.

Just think, maybe he can be switched to LF, where all reports are he makes Dunn look like a Gold-Glover, he'll hit for less power, but better average, and produce less HR/RBI/R/BB. Surely Muggerd you could find something to complain about that!! especially with your favorite whipping boy Dunn gone!:thumbup:

PEACE

-BLEEDS
What is it wrong that I want our middle of the line up guys to have more than just home run power?

TC81190
08-25-2007, 01:50 PM
I like Votto, but he is similar to lots of hot prospect first basemen who washed out and became 4A players. His bat speed has been questioned in the past and check this out...

Votto at AA: 319/408/547/955
Mystery player A at AA: 292/406/562/968
Mystery player B at AA: 328/429/515/944
Mystery player C at AA: 320/428/592/1020






Myster Player A is Josh Phelps, B is Jeremy Giambi, and C is Ben Broussard. Not exactly the greatest major leaguers.


Yikes. :eek:

What ages were they though when they hit their respective levels?

TOBTTReds
08-25-2007, 02:50 PM
Yikes. :eek:

What ages were they though when they hit their respective levels?

Don't worry about it. You can come up with 100 players with worse numbers than Votto's that had great careers.

Hatteberg's MiL totals: .256/.360/.384/.744 (Shows you what our park will do for a guy).

Travis Hafner in AA: .282/.396/.545/.941

Richie Sexson in AA: .276/.331/.444/.775

Jason Giambi in AA: .223/.319/.363/.682 (193 AB's)

Jason Giambi's first year in AAA: .318/.388/.500/.888

Those were the first 4 guys I looked at. It's foolish to compare minor league numbers to see who a guy will turn out to be. It is possible he won't pan out, but he could also become a star.

nate
08-25-2007, 02:59 PM
What is it wrong that I want our middle of the line up guys to have more than just home run power?

Like the ability to get on base?

AmarilloRed
08-25-2007, 03:01 PM
I was counting Hatteberg, Votto and Cantu as the three first baseman. I would have a platoon of Cantu and Votto until it is clear Joey can hit LHP, and Hatteberg on the bench to help the young first baseman.

camisadelgolf
08-25-2007, 03:12 PM
It sounds like they don't want Hatteberg on the bench because it would kill his trade value.

TOBTTReds
08-25-2007, 03:20 PM
It sounds like they don't want Hatteberg on the bench because it would kill his trade value.

If they were so worried about trade value, they would have dealt him when he was at his peak.

Muggerd
08-25-2007, 03:45 PM
Like the ability to get on base?

or be able to get a ball into play more.

BLEEDS
08-25-2007, 04:06 PM
What is it wrong that I want our middle of the line up guys to have more than just home run power?

Nothing, but you want them to hit .300, play Gold Glove Defense, have 40 Homers and 135 RBI's, and play for less than $13M per season.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Muggerd
08-25-2007, 04:14 PM
Nothing, but you want them to hit .300, play Gold Glove Defense, have 40 Homers and 135 RBI's, and play for less than $13M per season.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

I could care less how much he made if he was batting .300 and 135 rbis. You guys are the ones that only want homers and a high obp.

camisadelgolf
08-25-2007, 04:25 PM
If they were so worried about trade value, they would have dealt him when he was at his peak.

I think they're hoping that Hatteberg can groom Votto into the role, starting in September, and if Votto can play, they will be able to trade Hatteberg in the off-season.

SteelSD
08-25-2007, 08:40 PM
I could care less how much he made if he was batting .300 and 135 rbis.

No NL player does that on a consistent basis. No one. From 2002 to 2005, only one NL players had produced 135 or more RBI (Preston Wilson in Coors Field) in a season. Since 2000, we've seen only 9 NL player seasons of .300 or higher BA and 135 or more RBI:

Albert Pujols 2006
Lance Berkman 2006
Ryan Howard 2006
Sammy Sosa 2001
Luis Gonzalez 2001
Todd Helton 2001
Barry Bonds 2001
Todd Helton 2000
Sammy Sosa 2000

On that list, we've got four probable steriod-driven performances (Bonds, Sosa x 2, Gonzalez), and two seasons from Helton that were aided by the rarified air of Coors Field. After that you've got the NL ROY and MVP with Ryan Howard (oh, how you'd complain about his K rate), an oft-injured Lance Berkman, and all-world Albert Pujols (who still can't reach 135 RBI consistently).

It's pretty clear that you're mistaking your completely unrealistic expectations for an "acceptable standard" when you speak to player price tag. A ton of teams have handed out bad contracts for BA or non-repeatable RBI performance. The Reds should be willing to go beyond that and pay for actual offensive Run Value, but that can't be gleaned from the back of a baseball card.

jojo
08-25-2007, 08:59 PM
No NL player does that on a consistent basis. No one. From 2002 to 2005, only one NL players had produced 135 or more RBI (Preston Wilson in Coors Field) in a season. Since 2000, we've seen only 9 NL player seasons of .300 or higher BA and 135 or more RBI:

Albert Pujols 2006
Lance Berkman 2006
Ryan Howard 2006
Sammy Sosa 2001
Luis Gonzalez 2001
Todd Helton 2001
Barry Bonds 2001
Todd Helton 2000
Sammy Sosa 2000

On that list, we've got four probable steriod-driven performances (Bonds, Sosa x 2, Gonzalez), and two seasons from Helton that were aided by the rarified air of Coors Field. After that you've got the NL ROY and MVP with Ryan Howard (oh, how you'd complain about his K rate), an oft-injured Lance Berkman, and all-world Albert Pujols (who still can't reach 135 RBI consistently).

It's pretty clear that you're mistaking your completely unrealistic expectations for an "acceptable standard" when you speak to player price tag. A ton of teams have handed out bad contracts for BA or non-repeatable RBI performance. The Reds should be willing to go beyond that and pay for actual offensive Run Value, but that can't be gleaned from the back of a baseball card.

Lou Gherig did it 9 times.... Babe Ruth did it 10 times.... What's Dunn's problem?

:cool:

dougdirt
08-25-2007, 09:07 PM
Lou Gherig did it 9 times.... Babe Ruth did it 10 times.... What's Dunn's problem?

:cool:

Dunn has to play against actual talent.

SteelSD
08-25-2007, 09:12 PM
Lou Gherig did it 9 times.... Babe Ruth did it 10 times.... What's Dunn's problem?

:cool:

Shut up! Babe Ruth led the AL in Strikeouts five times!! ;)

Of course, Ruth had seasons during his prime where he K'd more versus his league average than Dunn did when he set the MLB offensive Strikeout record.

Folks also gloss over the fact that Hack Wilson led the NL in Strikeouts during his 191 RBI season. He led the NL in K's five times. Jimmie Foxx topped Wilson by leading the NL SEVEN times during his Hall of Fame career. He was the RAWK!

But at least Mickey Mantle was all-contact, no-K. Wait...there he is leading the AL in Strikeouts five times. That really didn't happen, did it?

Muggerd
08-25-2007, 11:21 PM
No NL player does that on a consistent basis. No one. From 2002 to 2005, only one NL players had produced 135 or more RBI (Preston Wilson in Coors Field) in a season. Since 2000, we've seen only 9 NL player seasons of .300 or higher BA and 135 or more RBI:

Albert Pujols 2006
Lance Berkman 2006
Ryan Howard 2006
Sammy Sosa 2001
Luis Gonzalez 2001
Todd Helton 2001
Barry Bonds 2001
Todd Helton 2000
Sammy Sosa 2000

On that list, we've got four probable steriod-driven performances (Bonds, Sosa x 2, Gonzalez), and two seasons from Helton that were aided by the rarified air of Coors Field. After that you've got the NL ROY and MVP with Ryan Howard (oh, how you'd complain about his K rate), an oft-injured Lance Berkman, and all-world Albert Pujols (who still can't reach 135 RBI consistently).

It's pretty clear that you're mistaking your completely unrealistic expectations for an "acceptable standard" when you speak to player price tag. A ton of teams have handed out bad contracts for BA or non-repeatable RBI performance. The Reds should be willing to go beyond that and pay for actual offensive Run Value, but that can't be gleaned from the back of a baseball card.

You missed my point, it was more about the money wise if he was pulling that off.

Screwball
08-25-2007, 11:26 PM
You missed my point, it was more about the money wise if he was pulling that off.

Funny, it seems as though anybody that disagrees with you misses your point. Nevermind the fact SteelSD struck at the heart of what you were saying, he still missed the point somehow.

nate
08-25-2007, 11:33 PM
or be able to get a ball into play more.

Which would be at the expense of their power.

Blitz Dorsey
08-25-2007, 11:35 PM
A better question is why someone would call themselves C. Trent. Why not just Trent? Just want to sound like a high-brow bastage? What if everyone took their first initial and their middle name and made that their name? Seriously, try it with your own name. Wouldn't you just hate yourself?

What in the name of C. Vivian Stringer are these nappy-headed hos thinking?

C Trent.

C. Trent run.

C. Trent miss deadline.

C. Trent not tell us anything new.

Muggerd
08-25-2007, 11:39 PM
Funny, it seems as though anybody that disagrees with you misses your point. Nevermind the fact SteelSD struck at the heart of what you were saying, he still missed the point somehow.

No my post was in response to keeping it under 13 million :bowrofl: If he could bat .300 and drive in 135 RBIs I really could careless how much he made. It has nothing to do with Dunn really more a sarcastic response to the original post.

Muggerd
08-25-2007, 11:44 PM
Which would be at the expense of their power.

I dont want to turn this into a Dunn thread but im not talking about turning Dunn into a singles hitter. Dunn has enough power to take a little off and still drive the ball a long long way. Thats what i mean when putting the ball into play. I would just like to see his OBP driven by a better BA in the end not .300 but .280 or .285 would be really nice. With the emergence of other players like keppinger who are a BA driven player it takes less pressure and takes less importance off homers to win the game because we dont have to rely on out power hitters crushing the ball. We can score runs through doubles and singles and the homers we get are just a plus.

Screwball
08-26-2007, 12:24 AM
With the emergence of other players like keppinger who are a BA driven player it takes less pressure and takes less importance off homers to win the game because we dont have to rely on out power hitters crushing the ball.

I think you bring up a good point here, although I'm not so sure you meant it this way. What the Reds have needed for a long time is somebody to complement the Dunns and Griffeys of the team. How many times have we heard about people complaining that Dunn (et. al.) needs to make more contact, hit for higher avg. with RISP, etc. Instead of accepting his great production, they want to change what makes him so good, rather than complementing his type with the Keppingers of the baseball world.

This is why I'd still be pretty excited if Votto was Casey II, a high avg guy with a little bit of pop (although, IMO, he'll have plenty of SLG to justify manning 1B). Like Kepp, he'd be a great complement to the current offense, and would be cheap while doing so.

SteelSD
08-26-2007, 09:23 AM
I would just like to see his OBP driven by a better BA in the end not .300 but .280 or .285 would be really nice.

At this point in the season, the difference between a .262 BA and a .280 BA is basically 7 hits; equalling an additional base hit once every 63.71 At Bats. Based on Dunn's rate of AB, that's one additional hit every 18 Games, or fewer than 10 base hits over a 162 game season. If you didn't have the stats in front of you, you wouldn't even realize those hits were missing.

Interestingly enough, Dunn could easily reach a .280 Batting Average without putting more balls in play at all. All he needs to do is walk more.

But really, is one "missing" hit every 18 games important enough to cause you to mercilessly bust on him for months? Really?

I think we all hope Votto can show up, play a decent enough first base, and in a season or two post "prime" Casey-type numbers to augment the offense on the cheap. But that has nothing at all to do with Adam Dunn, strikeouts, batting average, or the price of beer.

Muggerd
08-26-2007, 10:13 AM
At this point in the season, the difference between a .262 BA and a .280 BA is basically 7 hits; equalling an additional base hit once every 63.71 At Bats. Based on Dunn's rate of AB, that's one additional hit every 18 Games, or fewer than 10 base hits over a 162 game season. If you didn't have the stats in front of you, you wouldn't even realize those hits were missing.

Interestingly enough, Dunn could easily reach a .280 Batting Average without putting more balls in play at all. All he needs to do is walk more.

But really, is one "missing" hit every 18 games important enough to cause you to mercilessly bust on him for months? Really?

I think we all hope Votto can show up, play a decent enough first base, and in a season or two post "prime" Casey-type numbers to augment the offense on the cheap. But that has nothing at all to do with Adam Dunn, strikeouts, batting average, or the price of beer.
If you think I am busting on him then I dont know what to tell you. I just want him to become a better hitter. Hes already a good at bat most of the time up. I just want to see him get a little more bat control and tune his ability the most he can.

nate
08-26-2007, 10:19 AM
I dont want to turn this into a Dunn thread but im not talking about turning Dunn into a singles hitter. Dunn has enough power to take a little off and still drive the ball a long long way.

When Dunn drives the ball and it goes a long, long way, it usually leaves the park.


Thats what i mean when putting the ball into play. I would just like to see his OBP driven by a better BA in the end not .300 but .280 or .285 would be really nice.

We basically have a player who does that already: Ken Griffey Jr. Actually, if you project that out to a full season, we might have another one: Josh Hamilton.


With the emergence of other players like keppinger who are a BA driven player it takes less pressure and takes less importance off homers to win the game because we dont have to rely on out power hitters crushing the ball. We can score runs through doubles and singles and the homers we get are just a plus.

I like Keppinger too but we'll have to see if he's truly emerging. His stats say he's a good hitter throughout his career. .370 for a season? Maybe not.

I see having Kep as an argument _against_ your wanting to adjust Dunn's "contact" and "power" slides.

Muggerd
08-26-2007, 10:31 AM
When Dunn drives the ball and it goes a long, long way, it usually leaves the park.

What? I dont know if you are replying to me or just repeating what I said.



We basically have a player who does that already: Ken Griffey Jr. Actually, if you project that out to a full season, we might have another one: Josh Hamilton.

I dont think anyone would have the problem with having Dunn turn into Ken Griffey Jr at the plate.


I like Keppinger too but we'll have to see if he's truly emerging. His stats say he's a good hitter throughout his career. .370 for a season? Maybe not.

I see having Kep as an argument _against_ your wanting to adjust Dunn's "contact" and "power" slides.


The emergence and play of Kepp right now takes awaay from the importance of Dunn to become a better hitter a lot. Im not saying Kepp is going to be a .370 hitter either but how it is right now we dont need the homer to win games. With Hamilton, Javy, Kepp and heck even Hopper playing like they are we are able to score runs the old fashioned way and if someone pops one out of the park its a bonus.

If Kepp keeps up playing like he is then the pressure I have on Dunn to stop a few long balls in place for timely hitting is lessened. As long as we keep a balanced line up I have no problem with Dunn batting the way he does. Its just when we needed so much production from our middle line up guys earlier in the year it was a must for Dunn to get some sac flies or better RISP hitting and Phillips to stop trying to crush every ball until hes down 2 strikes.

SteelSD
08-26-2007, 10:49 AM
If you think I am busting on him then I dont know what to tell you. I just want him to become a better hitter. Hes already a good at bat most of the time up. I just want to see him get a little more bat control and tune his ability the most he can.

And, apparently, the difference between being worth 13M and not being worth 13M boils down to only 9 hits per season. Now, would I love Dunn to turn into a 1.000+ OPS monster? Sure, but we need to realize that an extra 9 its per season isn't going to do that. We also need to realize that, even with some flaws, Adam Dunn is an excellent offensive performer. The guy plays every day. And he plays hard. On a team with so many other holes, does Dunn so often need to come up as a negative topic for you? Over 9 hits?

As is, Dunn should be a guy any fan could get excited about. He's young, he's durable, he's funny, and he's really really good. As is. If he gets better, then super. But "gets better" would be nothing more than the cherry on top of an already great tasting hot fudge sundae. Instead of just enjoying it, you're moping about grumping about the absence of that last little detail.

In the end, you may need to realize that those little things you want might not be forthcoming and learn to appreciate what you get to see on a daily basis because what you get to see from Dunn isn't something the Reds have had for a long LONG time. "Better" would just be a bonus. Take it if if comes, don't lament it's absence, and focus on the things that actually do hold the Reds back from winning. Adam Dunn ain't one of those things.

Then we might be able to move on and actually talk about Joey Votto on a thread created for the purpose of talking about Joey Votto.

Muggerd
08-26-2007, 11:05 AM
And, apparently, the difference between being worth 13M and not being worth 13M boils down to only 9 hits per season. Now, would I love Dunn to turn into a 1.000+ OPS monster? Sure, but we need to realize that an extra 9 its per season isn't going to do that. We also need to realize that, even with some flaws, Adam Dunn is an excellent offensive performer. The guy plays every day. And he plays hard. On a team with so many other holes, does Dunn so often need to come up as a negative topic for you? Over 9 hits?

Its not about the money totally with me. Although I would feel more comfortable paying Dunn larger portions of our payroll if he was a MVP caliber player. When it comes down to it for the payroll we have and the production Dunn gives us its kind of a middle of the road type thing. I dont think we can afford to invest all his money like that. If he made less and performed less it might fit but if he was an MVP and made more he would probably fit as well. As it is right now hes a great guy to have in the line up but also isnt someone we can build around.

Its not just 9 hits either, its him being able to tune his batting so he doesnt rely on 40 homers for his production. I would like for the sake of Dunn to be able to cut the swing down some and make contact when we are pressing for runs, and it would also make him less slump prone and more consistent. I know hes flawed and all but I am not bashing him for the way he is I would just like for him to mature more as a hitter and have more control of his ABs.


As is, Dunn should be a guy any fan could get excited about. He's young, he's durable, he's funny, and he's really really good. As is. If he gets better, then super. But "gets better" would be nothing more than the cherry on top of an already great tasting hot fudge sundae. Instead of just enjoying it, you're moping about grumping about the absence of that last little detail.


Why am I the bad guy for wanting a guy to improve his flaws? I enjoy when Dunn does well but it doesnt mean I cant notice other things about him...


In the end, you may need to realize that those little things you want might not be forthcoming and learn to appreciate what you get to see on a daily basis because what you get to see from Dunn isn't something the Reds have had for a long LONG time. "Better" would just be a bonus. Take it if if comes, don't lament it's absence, and focus on the things that actually do hold the Reds back from winning. Adam Dunn ain't one of those things.

Then we might be able to move on and actually talk about Joey Votto on a thread created for the purpose of talking about Joey Votto.

I never said Dunn is a problem with the team.

Muggerd
08-26-2007, 11:11 AM
I heard Joey Votto was a AAAA player?

nate
08-26-2007, 11:47 AM
I dont think anyone would have the problem with having Dunn turn into Ken Griffey Jr at the plate.

You keep saying things like this as if its a mental thing with Dunn that he needs to set his "hitting preferences" differently for, what? A higher number in the box score that the average fan is unlikely to ever notice by watching the games?

Like Steel said, is someone going to notice 9 more hits in some 600 ABs over the course of a season?



The emergence and play of Kepp right now takes awaay from the importance of Dunn to become a better hitter a lot. Im not saying Kepp is going to be a .370 hitter either but how it is right now we dont need the homer to win games. With Hamilton, Javy, Kepp and heck even Hopper playing like they are we are able to score runs the old fashioned way and if someone pops one out of the park its a bonus.

Are you saying we should stop hitting home runs because we don't need them right now? Why is the home run "new fashioned"?

nate
08-26-2007, 11:55 AM
Its not about the money totally with me. Although I would feel more comfortable paying Dunn larger portions of our payroll if he was a MVP caliber player. When it comes down to it for the payroll we have and the production Dunn gives us its kind of a middle of the road type thing. I dont think we can afford to invest all his money like that. If he made less and performed less it might fit but if he was an MVP and made more he would probably fit as well. As it is right now hes a great guy to have in the line up but also isnt someone we can build around.

That's a fair argument. I don't agree but that argument, to me, is more true than "he strikes out too much" or "if only he'd become Hal Morris."


Its not just 9 hits either, its him being able to tune his batting so he doesnt rely on 40 homers for his production. I would like for the sake of Dunn to be able to cut the swing down some and make contact when we are pressing for runs, and it would also make him less slump prone and more consistent. I know hes flawed and all but I am not bashing him for the way he is I would just like for him to mature more as a hitter and have more control of his ABs.

Career Average: .248
2007: .262

Maybe he is? Here's another one:

Career OBP: .379
2007: .373

A career IsoD of .131...that's pretty disciplined. But look at that, he's raised his BA and his OBP has gone _down_ slightly. He's actually done exactly what you've wanted him to do but the OBP remains the same.

And he's currently projected to 112 "RBIs"...even though he doesn't really have a lot to do with the guy batting in front him being on base.


Why am I the bad guy for wanting a guy to improve his flaws? I enjoy when Dunn does well but it doesnt mean I cant notice other things about him...

You're not. Why are we bad for arguing why he's a great player and the Reds should keep him?

Muggerd
08-26-2007, 11:59 AM
You keep saying things like this as if its a mental thing with Dunn that he needs to set his "hitting preferences" differently for, what? A higher number in the box score that the average fan is unlikely to ever notice by watching the games?

Like Steel said, is someone going to notice 9 more hits in some 600 ABs over the course of a season?

Its not about the 9 hits... its about him being less streaky. I think Dunns approach to the plate doesn't change when he comes up to bat in different situations. Im not saying he should be up there looking for a opposite field singles all the time but he shouldnt be up there looking for a home run either. He is doing better in the last week with his ABs with taking what he can get at the plate instead of the all or nothing approach.

I dont care what the average fan notices either. Majority of them could care less if Dunn hit .150 if he hit a home run while they were watching. I just want Dunn to improve because he has a ton of ability to be even better player. I just dont think hes living up to the potential he possesses.



Are you saying we should stop hitting home runs because we don't need them right now? Why is the home run "new fashioned"?

What the heck? Where did I say we should stop hitting homers. I said how the rest of the line up is playing it takes dependency of the homer away a little. With how the rest of the line up is hitting we are able to score runs with out the homer. Home runs are great but you cant depend on them. We have a solid line up of power and contact right now.

Muggerd
08-26-2007, 12:07 PM
Career Average: .248
2007: .262

Maybe he is? Here's another one:

Career OBP: .379
2007: .373

A career IsoD of .131...that's pretty disciplined. But look at that, he's raised his BA and his OBP has gone _down_ slightly. He's actually done exactly what you've wanted him to do but the OBP remains the same.

And he's currently projected to 112 "RBIs"...even though he doesn't really have a lot to do with the guy batting in front him being on base.



You're not. Why are we bad for arguing why he's a great player and the Reds should keep him?
The OBP has room to drop if its replaced with BA. I will take more hits and less walks if that means a slight drop in OBP any day from our Power bats.

Also, I dont fault anyone for saying we should keep him. I agree it would be nice but I also know we are not the Yankees.

Muggerd
08-26-2007, 12:10 PM
We have really killed this thread

SteelSD
08-26-2007, 01:40 PM
Its not about the money totally with me. Although I would feel more comfortable paying Dunn larger portions of our payroll if he was a MVP caliber player. When it comes down to it for the payroll we have and the production Dunn gives us its kind of a middle of the road type thing. I dont think we can afford to invest all his money like that. If he made less and performed less it might fit but if he was an MVP and made more he would probably fit as well. As it is right now hes a great guy to have in the line up but also isnt someone we can build around.

I'm sorry, but you're all over the place here. First, if Dunn cost less but performed worse, the team would have to spend more money to make up that gap. All you're talking about is borrowing from Peter to pay Paul. Secondly, if you can't pay market value for an Adam Dunn or can't build around one of the best offensive players in the league while he's absolutely affordable, then you just need to close up shop and fold the team.

The irony is that considering your infatuation with value-slotting Dunn based on his performance, you should appreciate the fact that his K rate and Batting Average may allow a good portion of the baseball marketplace to actually undervalue him. If they do, then that's actually good for your favorite team because they may be able to keep the big guy for less than what they'd have to give a higher-BA/lower-K rate player who doesn't actually peform any differently. Heck, take a look at the stupid money the White Sox will be paying Jermaine Dye over the next couple of seasons because the low-IsoD/higher BA guy lucked into a career year last season. But has Dye- the kind of player who fits your preferred profile- been anything resembling "consistent"? Nope.


Its not just 9 hits either, its him being able to tune his batting so he doesnt rely on 40 homers for his production. I would like for the sake of Dunn to be able to cut the swing down some and make contact when we are pressing for runs, and it would also make him less slump prone and more consistent. I know hes flawed and all but I am not bashing him for the way he is I would just like for him to mature more as a hitter and have more control of his ABs.

You don't seem to realize that Home Runs are the ONLY type of hit a player actually has control of. Any other ball in play chances finding a glove. K rate simply doesn't correlate in any way with scoring Runs. Trying to up ball in play rate for the sake of upping ball in play rate is a foolish goal- particularly when the result of "cutting down" on one's swing is likely to result in suppressed HR totals.

And it IS about nine Hits. You've already told us that a .280 BA would be "very nice". Problem is that you didn't actually realize how small the gap was between .262 and .280 over the course of a season. It's just not a Big Deal.

Now, while responding to nate, you've switched gears to the "streaky" argument. Unfortunately, you haven't noticed that higher Isolated Discipline (OBP minus BA) are actually more "slump-proof" than low IsoD hitters. Baseball is a game of streaks and when a hitter like Dunn is at his low point, he's still more capable of helping his offense avoid outs than a player who's more "Ball-in-Play" driven. Adam Dunn's propensity to avoid Outs regardless of his Batting Average actually assists the team more than if his production were more BA-driven. Might sound abstract to you at first, but when you really think about it, it's completely intuitive.

When it's all said and done, I don't care how a player avoids outs. But I'm not going to lament the fact that Player A does so with a higher Walk rate and a lower BA than Player B.


Why am I the bad guy for wanting a guy to improve his flaws? I enjoy when Dunn does well but it doesnt mean I cant notice other things about him...

I never said Dunn is a problem with the team.

For a guy you don't think is a problem, you're sure awfully fixated on why you think he's either not good enough and not worth his salary.


The OBP has room to drop if its replaced with BA. I will take more hits and less walks if that means a slight drop in OBP any day from our Power bats.

Yours is a common misconception. The goal of an offense is to score Runs. OBP- not Batting Average- posts a higher correlation with scoring more Runs. In short, you're positioning a tradeoff that's actually BAD for an offense over time

Secondly, for players like Dunn, Hits do not replace Walks. Outs replace Walks. It might take a little effort to grasp that, but it has to do with the fact that Walks represent balls outside of the strike zone. Asking a hitter to make contact with those pitches in an effort to produce base hits plays to a weakness as pitchers are simply not going to place those pitches in areas of weakness (low and outside, up and in) for Dunn. There's nothing to be gained by trying to hit those into play. Not even Ted Williams himself would perpetuate the notion that those pitches should draw swings.

Muggerd
08-26-2007, 01:50 PM
So you are saying a .260 hitter with an .390 OBP is better for a team than a .300 hitter with a .370 obp?

Eric_Davis
08-26-2007, 01:54 PM
So if A-Rod or Brandon Webb want to come here for $15M/year this offseason, and you don't have to give up anything to get them, you say no thanks?

No thanks. It was like that stupid Larkin contract. It would guarantee continued losing as long as either player was taking up that large a percentage of the club's payroll, just as keeping Dunn next year or any subsequent year's will also guarantee continued losing on this club.

And, if you say it's the pitching, then you're right. You can't afford any pitching if you're playing another player 1/5th of your payroll.

Again, it's economic suicide and guarantees that you'll have a losing team if you devote 1/5th of your payroll to one guy, Dunn or whoever that might be. Show me a club where it's worked and I'll show you a dozen that it hasn't.

Eric_Davis
08-26-2007, 02:00 PM
When was our payroll in that range, 2005?!?

Our payroll is in the 70's and will be closer to $80M next year.

PEACE

-BLEEDS


I don't know where you get your numbers, but here are the numbers:

A group led by Robert Castellini purchased controlling interest (about 70 percent) in the Reds in November, 2005. (The purchase was based on an enterprise value of the team of about $270M.) Carl Lindner, who retains a minority ownership stake, bought the Reds in 1999 for $183M. Forbes magazine valued the club at $307M in April 2007.

Opening Day payrolls for 25-man roster
(salaries plus pro-rated signing bonuses):


2007: $ 68,904,980 *
2006: $ 60,909,519
2005: $ 61,892,583
2004: $ 46,615,250
2003: $ 59,355,667
2002: $ 45,050,390
2001: $ 48,986,000
2000: $ 44,200,000


* 2007 payroll obligations for former players:
$2,950,000 (Jason LaRue)
$2,250,000 (Rheal Cormier)



You tell me where the money's going to come from that justifies spending 1/5th of your payroll on one player. It's just not going to happen if you have half a lick of sense as a businessman.

SteelSD
08-26-2007, 02:13 PM
So you are saying a .260 hitter with an .390 OBP is better for a team than a .300 hitter with a .370 obp?

If the SLG is the same, then yep. For the 2007 NL teams, the correlations are as follows:

High Runs per Game to High BA: 0.74
High Runs per Game to High OBP: 0.82
High Runs per Game to High OPS: 0.94

Avoiding Outs, regardless of how they're avoided, is the goal teams need to be shooting for. At the top of the spectrum, both avoiding Outs and acquiring Bases (OPS) is the real driver. Sure, Batting Average has a lot to do with the first and hits drive Slugging Percentage exclusively. But it's not about hit volume or even hit rate. It's about coupling a high frequency of Out avoidance with high volume base acquisition. That produces the opportunity and distance required to drive a real good offense.

And to my point about Isolated Discipline, the NL team correlation between high IsoD and high Runs per Game is 0.26. That's nothing more than slightly suggestive, but it's there.

SteelSD
08-26-2007, 02:19 PM
You tell me where the money's going to come from that justifies spending 1/5th of your payroll on one player. It's just not going to happen if you have half a lick of sense as a businessman.

So I guess the 2003 Florida Marlins didn't really win the World Series with a sub-50 million dollar payroll while spending ten million bucks on Ivan Rodriguez? Interesting.

AmarilloRed
08-26-2007, 02:21 PM
I created this thread to talk about Joey Votto, how did Adam Dunn get into the discussion?:confused:

jojo
08-26-2007, 02:24 PM
So if A-Rod or Brandon Webb want to come here for $15M/year this offseason, and you don't have to give up anything to get them, you say no thanks?

Brandon Webb for $15M/year without trading talent? I'll take two please.....

dougdirt
08-26-2007, 02:28 PM
Brandon Webb for $15M/year without trading talent? I'll take two please.....
Two? Heck, I will take 5.

SteelSD
08-26-2007, 02:28 PM
Brandon Webb for $15M/year without trading talent? I'll take two please.....

Yep. That's a no-brainer. In fact, if you could get two of that type in the fold along with the talent already here, the Reds would be well-served to raise payroll to make them fit as the likely resulting payoff would be excellent future revenue opportunities driven by what should be at least a couple appearances deep into the playoffs.

SteelSD
08-26-2007, 02:29 PM
I created this thread to talk about Joey Votto, how did Adam Dunn get into the discussion?:confused:

Quiet, you! We're talking about Brandon Webb now. :p:

mth123
08-26-2007, 02:30 PM
So you are saying a .260 hitter with an .390 OBP is better for a team than a .300 hitter with a .370 obp?

Depends on the slugging percentage, but if the slugging is equal, then yes. The whole point of BA is to measure a rate of success versus a rate of failure - same as with OBP. In your example the guy was successful 30% of the time but downright failed 63% of the time. The other guy was successful by your measure only 26% of the time but really only failed 61% of the time.

Since the scarce resource that any offense has to work with is the number of outs left until they are out of chances, IMO the guy who makes the fewer outs is more valuable.

But these players are close enough that if the slugging is significantly different the guy with the better slugging percentage wins IMO.

In Dunn's case, he doesn't squander his offense's resources by making an undue percentage of outs (as compared to say Brandon Phillips who makes too many) and even though he has a lower BA he still moves runners around the bases by slugging the heck out of the ball. He's not Babe Ruth or Lou Gehrig or even better modern day guys like Albert Pujols or A-Rod, but he is pretty good at doing the two things that a player needs to do to create runs. He avoids outs (as evidenced by his high OBP) and moves runners around the bases in multiples (including himself - as evidenced buy his high slugging percentage). He doesn't do the little things like Bunt or get a lot of Sac Flys, but he does both of the big things very well and players who can do both are scarce commodities and are worth a lot of money.

EDIT: Sorry Steel missed your answer.

Degenerate39
08-26-2007, 03:11 PM
I created this thread to talk about Joey Votto, how did Adam Dunn get into the discussion?:confused:

You don't even have to make a thread related to baseball for it to end up as an Adam Dunn discussion

nate
08-26-2007, 03:22 PM
I just want Dunn to improve because he has a ton of ability to be even better player. I just dont think hes living up to the potential he possesses.

It looks to me like we're seeing the improved Dunn and its very good at doing what it does. Not every player hits .300 and not every player gets on bass at a .379 clip. Not every player plays GG defense and not every player hits 40 HR every year.


What the heck? Where did I say we should stop hitting homers. I said how the rest of the line up is playing it takes dependency of the homer away a little. With how the rest of the line up is hitting we are able to score runs with out the homer. Home runs are great but you cant depend on them.

Unless you have Adam Dunn who hits one about every 4 games.

Anyhow, that Joey Votto is some kind of player!

SMcGavin
08-26-2007, 03:49 PM
No thanks. It was like that stupid Larkin contract. It would guarantee continued losing as long as either player was taking up that large a percentage of the club's payroll, just as keeping Dunn next year or any subsequent year's will also guarantee continued losing on this club.

And, if you say it's the pitching, then you're right. You can't afford any pitching if you're playing another player 1/5th of your payroll.

Again, it's economic suicide and guarantees that you'll have a losing team if you devote 1/5th of your payroll to one guy, Dunn or whoever that might be. Show me a club where it's worked and I'll show you a dozen that it hasn't.

It wouldn't guarantee anything, except that you'd have one of the league's best players for well below market value.

Muggerd
08-26-2007, 04:51 PM
It looks to me like we're seeing the improved Dunn and its very good at doing what it does. Not every player hits .300 and not every player gets on bass at a .379 clip. Not every player plays GG defense and not every player hits 40 HR every year.



Unless you have Adam Dunn who hits one about every 4 games.

Anyhow, that Joey Votto is some kind of player!

I think you are just trying to twist my words to make it seem like im saying Dunn is the worst player on the reds team honestly.

AmarilloRed
08-26-2007, 04:53 PM
I like both Joey Votto and Adam Dunn.

jojo
08-26-2007, 05:18 PM
I created this thread to talk about Joey Votto, how did Adam Dunn get into the discussion?:confused:

Aren't the Reds trying to turn Votto into Dunn lite?

SMcGavin
08-26-2007, 05:41 PM
OK, back to the topic of Votto - are people expecting him to be an immediate upgrade over Hatteberg next season? I think that may be difficult with the kind of season Hatte has had, especially since reports on Joey's D are not impressive.

nate
08-26-2007, 06:16 PM
I think you are just trying to twist my words to make it seem like im saying Dunn is the worst player on the reds team honestly.

I think you just have a grudge against Dunn.

Muggerd
08-26-2007, 06:25 PM
I think you just have a grudge against Dunn.

I would tell you where each player needs to improve if it came up.

nate
08-26-2007, 07:36 PM
I would tell you where each player needs to improve if it came up.

I think Votto might be traded in the offseason for pitching.

SteelSD
08-26-2007, 07:51 PM
OK, back to the topic of Votto - are people expecting him to be an immediate upgrade over Hatteberg next season? I think that may be difficult with the kind of season Hatte has had, especially since reports on Joey's D are not impressive.

Furthermore, those who've suggested the Reds deal Votto might not be terribly happy with what he may be worth considering that the D'Backs just swapped AAA 1B Chris Carter (the eventual Boston return for Wily Mo Pena) to the Nats for an iffy AAA RHP Emiliano Fruto. Carter is the same age and projects similarly (along with defensive concerns at 1B and LF). That's certainly not the kind of return I'd want for Votto.

I agree that folks are likely to be disappointed if they think Votto is going to just hit the ground running. That's unlikely to happen. IMHO, the best thing they could do with Votto is give him a call after September 1st and see what he's got defensively at 1B- regardless of his offensive contribution. If he can hack it defensively or if he only needs a little bit of work, then the team can look to re-up and then swap Scott Hatteberg. But if Votto is so far away from adequate that he's more "project" than "projectible" defensively, the Reds are going to have a bit of a problem on their hands.

edabbs44
08-26-2007, 09:01 PM
Furthermore, those who've suggested the Reds deal Votto might not be terribly happy with what he may be worth considering that the D'Backs just swapped AAA 1B Chris Carter (the eventual Boston return for Wily Mo Pena) to the Nats for an iffy AAA RHP Emiliano Fruto. Carter is the same age and projects similarly (along with defensive concerns at 1B and LF). That's certainly not the kind of return I'd want for Votto.

I would think that Votto would draw more than what Carter yielded in return on rep alone. Votto was #18 in the midseason rankings...Carter wasn't even top 10 in his own organization at the start of the year.

SMcGavin
08-26-2007, 09:18 PM
I agree that folks are likely to be disappointed if they think Votto is going to just hit the ground running. That's unlikely to happen. IMHO, the best thing they could do with Votto is give him a call after September 1st and see what he's got defensively at 1B- regardless of his offensive contribution. If he can hack it defensively or if he only needs a little bit of work, then the team can look to re-up and then swap Scott Hatteberg. But if Votto is so far away from adequate that he's more "project" than "projectible" defensively, the Reds are going to have a bit of a problem on their hands.

Completely agree with this. I also wouldn't mind keeping Hatteberg around even if Votto has a good showing in September. I'm not sure how high Scott's trade value is, and one month from Votto won't really prove anything. Hatteberg's option price is reasonable enough for him to be our primary LH pinch hitter if Votto is in fact the answer at 1B.

jojo
08-26-2007, 09:27 PM
Completely agree with this. I also wouldn't mind keeping Hatteberg around even if Votto has a good showing in September. I'm not sure how high Scott's trade value is, and one month from Votto won't really prove anything. Hatteberg's option price is reasonable enough for him to be our primary LH pinch hitter if Votto is in fact the answer at 1B.

Thats really the irony. Assuming Hatteberg doesn't finally fall off a cliff, he makes Votto irrelevant in '08.

edabbs44
08-26-2007, 09:33 PM
Thats really the irony. Assuming Hatteberg doesn't finally fall off a cliff, he makes Votto irrelevant in '08.

Hatteberg should not be playing over Votto next season.

jojo
08-26-2007, 09:42 PM
Hatteberg should not be playing over Votto next season.

As a matter of principle?

Used in a platoon situation, Hatteberg might very well be expected to be better than Votto. Factoring in their defensive abilities, Hatteberg could reasonably be expected to be at least win better than Votto in '08. A win at the cost of only $1.5M more than Votto would be a steal.

Is the goal to field the best team possible next year or to make GABP an extension of the farm?

edabbs44
08-26-2007, 09:59 PM
As a matter of principle?

Used in a platoon situation, Hatteberg might very well be expected to be better than Votto. Factoring in their defensive abilities, Hatteberg could reasonably be expected to be at least win better than Votto in '08. A win at the cost of only $1.5M more than Votto would be a steal.

Is the goal to field the best team possible next year or to make GABP an extension of the farm?

No...as a matter of logic. I don't think that Hatteberg has miraculously found the fountain of youth. He's found the fountain of GABP. His splits are ridiculous this season and he has been pretty much useless on the road. It was more of the same last year. It isn't Hatteberg...it seems to be the park.

I don't know why you would think that it's a given that Hatteberg would perform better than Votto next year. I'd rather see the opportunity given to Votto. He is more than ready and has paid his dues. Keeping him in AAA or on the bench would be a moronic act of biblical proportions.

jojo
08-26-2007, 10:17 PM
No...as a matter of logic. I don't think that Hatteberg has miraculously found the fountain of youth. He's found the fountain of GABP. His splits are ridiculous this season and he has been pretty much useless on the road. It was more of the same last year. It isn't Hatteberg...it seems to be the park.

I don't know why you would think that it's a given that Hatteberg would perform better than Votto next year. I'd rather see the opportunity given to Votto. He is more than ready and has paid his dues. Keeping him in AAA or on the bench would be a moronic act of biblical proportions.

I didn't say it was a given. I said it is reasonable to expect. You're the one suggesting absolutes concerning Hatteberg/Votto. Obviously GABP is prolonging Hatteberg's career but he's had almost identical back to back seasons and it's actually a smart thing to leverage the advantages that your home park can create.

A moronic act of biblical proprotions would be purposefully playing a lesser player if you're trying to win. Hatteberg's defense alone is probably close to a win better than Votto's. Votto can't hit lefties either and apparently in the Reds eyes, he can't play defense at even a passable level. He's pretty one dimensional to be considered a lock. If the Reds are correct about his defense, then Votto really projects as half of a DH platoon.

mth123
08-26-2007, 10:24 PM
I didn't say it was a given. I said it is reasonable to expect. You're the one suggesting absolutes concerning Hatteberg/Votto. Obviously GABP is prolonging Hatteberg's career but he's had almost identical back to back seasons and it's actually a smart thing to leverage the advantages that your home park can create.

A moronic act of biblical proprotions would be purposefully playing a lesser player if you're trying to win. Hatteberg's defense alone is probably close to a win better than Votto's. Votto can't hit lefties either and apparently in the Reds eyes, he can't play defense at even a passable level. He's pretty one dimensional to be considered a lock.

Agree that Hatte is a bargain at $1.85 Million and lessens the need for Votto. But if the park is helping Hatte, it would help Votto too. And Votto profiles as a better hitter than Hatte ever did. Especially where slugging is concerned. I could easily see Votto exceeding Hatte's production from the get go, but I'd deal him for a similarly rated starter prospect if it could happen.

jojo
08-26-2007, 10:32 PM
Agree that Hatte is a bargain at $1.85 Million and lessens the need for Votto. But if the park is helping Hatte, it would help Votto too. And Votto profiles as a better hitter than Hatte ever did. Especially where slugging is concerned. I could easily see Votto exceeding Hatte's production from the get go, but I'd deal him for a similarly rated starter prospect if it could happen.

Votto's offensive value is going to be derived almost entirely by what he does against righties.... the wild card is whether his platoon split can carry his glove. At this point I can only trust the Reds assessment that he stinks defensively.

edabbs44
08-26-2007, 10:34 PM
Agree that Hatte is a bargain at $1.85 Million and lessens the need for Votto. But if the park is helping Hatte, it would help Votto too. And Votto profiles as a better hitter than Hatte ever did. Especially where slugging is concerned. I could easily see Votto exceeding Hatte's production from the get go, but I'd deal him for a similarly rated starter prospect if it could happen.

IF the Reds don't have plans for Votto, they need to deal him for pitching asap.

edabbs44
08-26-2007, 10:36 PM
I didn't say it was a given. I said it is reasonable to expect. You're the one suggesting absolutes concerning Hatteberg/Votto. Obviously GABP is prolonging Hatteberg's career but he's had almost identical back to back seasons and it's actually a smart thing to leverage the advantages that your home park can create.

A moronic act of biblical proprotions would be purposefully playing a lesser player if you're trying to win. Hatteberg's defense alone is probably close to a win better than Votto's. Votto can't hit lefties either and apparently in the Reds eyes, he can't play defense at even a passable level. He's pretty one dimensional to be considered a lock. If the Reds are correct about his defense, then Votto really projects as half of a DH platoon.

There is a difference between purposely playing a lesser player and purposely playing a player who, while possibly producing less in the short term, projects to produce more in the long term.

Huge difference.

AmarilloRed
08-26-2007, 10:39 PM
I don't believe they ever said he stinks defensively. They mentioned their are 2 sides-not just offense; and he needs to work on his defense. I would be very disappointed if we traded Votto; I believe he would show better power than Hatteberg would. I want Hatteberg back next year-but only as a back-up. Teams are very reluctant to trade quality arms, and I doubt we would get one for Votto in any trade.

mth123
08-26-2007, 10:40 PM
Votto's offensive value is going to be derived almost entirely by what he does against righties.... the wild card is whether his platoon split can carry his glove. At this point I can only trust the Reds assessment that he stinks defensively.

I'm in the minority that thinks Votto should be platooned should he get a job with Cincy in 2008. He truly would replace Hatte. He struggles with lefties and I think at least a couple years of working him up to it is wise.

The Braves broke Adam Laroche in this way and I think it paid dividends. Doing what smart people (or in this case organizations) do is never a bad plan.

jojo
08-26-2007, 10:45 PM
Huge difference.

Only if next season isn't as important to you as the future.

If the Reds are correct about Votto's defense, then he basically projects as a guy who'll probably never be better than league average. While that has it's merits at league minimum, it's certainly not something that the Reds shouldn't look for ways to upgrade if possible.

BLEEDS
08-27-2007, 03:53 PM
The more I read and research, the more I think the Reds are looking to trade Votto. Probably to an AL club (best fit) for pitching. However, I think they still hold out hope that he will improve his D.

He's about at his HEIGHT of value - Minor League ALL-STAR and Futures games - but they seem reluctant to bring him up and/or commit to him being a starter anytime in the future. They obviously are not high on him - the "leaks" to the press some say are a "smokescreen", I say "a smokescreen to what?!" they should be praising him if they wanted to trade him, so by putting him down is it a ploy to get him to focus more on D? Perhaps.

I also think that Dunn and Votto discussions ARE related, as the more I read and research, we Truly have an issue with all of the Left-Handed bats in the future of our team. Dunn, Jr, Hamilton, Bruce, Votto. Hatteberg. These guys are all solid hitter - against Righties, but NONE of them hits Lefties worth a lick. Currently our only two above-average Power Righties are Phillips, and EE. Both of them were similar last year, but BP took off this year while EE regressed.

I don't think they can afford to part with EE and leave Keppinger/Freel/Hopper/Gonzo as their other Righty bats. Won't help in the long-run.

In a PERFECT world, we'd have moved Dunn to 1B a year or so ago, so we could play Hamilton and Griffey/Bruce and a Freel/Hopper type in the OF.

Here's an idea - can Keppinger play LF?!?
2009:
Hamilton - CF
Keppinger - LF
Phillips - 2B
Dunn - 1B
Bruce - CF
EE - 3B
Gonzo - SS
Ross - C

Bench - Freel, Hopper, Cantu, Lopez/Catcher/OF-er/whateva...

PEACE

-BLEEDS

GoReds33
08-27-2007, 03:56 PM
Keppinger can do everything!!!

dougdirt
08-27-2007, 05:47 PM
I also think that Dunn and Votto discussions ARE related, as the more I read and research, we Truly have an issue with all of the Left-Handed bats in the future of our team. Dunn, Jr, Hamilton, Bruce, Votto. Hatteberg. These guys are all solid hitter - against Righties, but NONE of them hits Lefties worth a lick. Currently our only two above-average Power Righties are Phillips, and EE. Both of them were similar last year, but BP took off this year while EE regressed.


Just coming to argue with you here....
Jay Bruce vs lefties in AAA
.283/.353/.587
Jay Bruce vs lefties in A+
.310/.354/.506
Jay Bruce vs lefties in AA
.286/.400/.619

I wish a lot of guys couldn't hit lefties that well.

BLEEDS
08-27-2007, 06:04 PM
Just coming to argue with you here....
Jay Bruce vs lefties in AAA
.283/.353/.587
Jay Bruce vs lefties in A+
.310/.354/.506
Jay Bruce vs lefties in AA
.286/.400/.619

I wish a lot of guys couldn't hit lefties that well.

You are correct. I actually didn't mean to include him in the "list" of guys who can't hit lefties. Primarily meant for our current roster, plus Votto.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

SMcGavin
08-27-2007, 06:50 PM
Votto's offensive value is going to be derived almost entirely by what he does against righties.... the wild card is whether his platoon split can carry his glove. At this point I can only trust the Reds assessment that he stinks defensively.

Two questions:
Where can I find minor league hitting splits?
Do you think the Reds go into 2008 with Cantu as the right handed side of the 1B platoon?

dougdirt
08-27-2007, 06:57 PM
Two questions:
Where can I find minor league hitting splits?


www.Minorleaguesplits.com
www.firstinning.com
www.minorleaguebaseball.com (only for current teams)

SMcGavin
08-27-2007, 09:18 PM
www.Minorleaguesplits.com
www.firstinning.com
www.minorleaguebaseball.com (only for current teams)

Thanks! I actually use firstinning.com all the time, but I thought they only had home/away and monthly splits. Am I missing the LHP/RHP numbers? The other two look great.

As for Votto's splits, I can see now why there is talk of platooning him. I will get to see the Bats when they come to Indy this Friday so I'm looking forward to getting a peek at him and Bruce first-hand. Looks like Ramon Ramirez will be starting, a guy I know nothing about.

jojo
08-27-2007, 09:20 PM
Two questions:
Where can I find minor league hitting splits?
Do you think the Reds go into 2008 with Cantu as the right handed side of the 1B platoon?

Doug nicely answered the split question.

Concerning Cantu, we'd better hope that he was picked up expressly to be the RH half of the first base platoon because his glove has flamed out at every other infield spot he's played. Truthfully, even at first it'll be tough for his bat to overcome his defense.

Really, assuming Gonzo isn't going anywhere, Keppinger might be the X factor that marginalizes Cantu. If the Reds decide Kepp beats out EE for 3b duties (which would be counter to my opinion), then EE would probably be a good candidate to platoon at first. If EE wins the 3b battle, then Kepp probably is a better option for the RH platoon role.

It's probably pretty obvious that I'm of the opinion that Cantu's real value is strengthening the bench....

SMcGavin
08-27-2007, 10:33 PM
Doug nicely answered the split question.

Concerning Cantu, we'd better hope that he was picked up expressly to be the RH half of the first base platoon because his glove has flamed out at every other infield spot he's played. Truthfully, even at first it'll be tough for his bat to overcome his defense.

Really, assuming Gonzo isn't going anywhere, Keppinger might be the X factor that marginalizes Cantu. If the Reds decide Kepp beats out EE for 3b duties (which would be counter to my opinion), then EE would probably be a good candidate to platoon at first. If EE wins the 3b battle, then Kepp probably is a better option for the RH platoon role.

It's probably pretty obvious that I'm of the opinion that Cantu's real value is strengthening the bench....

Yea, I'm assuming WK got Cantu specifically to be part of the 1B platoon, knowing Conine would be heading out shortly. I'd expect Keppinger to keep getting starts around the infield and not be tied to the 1B platoon. Even if he doesn't have an opening day starting spot, something will open up over the infield at some point during the season. Honestly I'd rather Gonzo didn't start the rest of the year, we need to know if Keppinger is a legitimate option at SS or not. Unfortunately Mackanin's recent comments seem to say the job is Gonzo's when he's ready.

In any case I hope the Reds don't move EE from third. His defense has stablilized like many thought it would, and if I had to bet I'd guess his offense next year is closer like 2006 than 2007.

Sorry for getting away from the Votto discussion again! At least I'm not talking about Dunn...

dougdirt
08-27-2007, 10:43 PM
Thanks! I actually use firstinning.com all the time, but I thought they only had home/away and monthly splits. Am I missing the LHP/RHP numbers? The other two look great.


Firstinning.com has home and road splits, and tons of other information that the others don't so I thought I would offer it up. I don't think they do righty/lefty splits, but the other stuff they provide is nice.