PDA

View Full Version : Special K on the Radio



MartyFan
08-22-2007, 03:07 PM
JLB5 posted this on the Sundeck board...


Worth a listen. Seems he's not too high on Votto's D and Homer is scheduled to start in Sarasota tomorrow. Talks about why guys like Cueto aren't up and some of the moves like Coutlangus going down (said he was walking too many and 1st batter faced reaching base too often).

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

I can tell you that I would never ever want to be in an ally fight with Special K...dude doesn't hesitate to take the bull by the horn.

lollipopcurve
08-22-2007, 03:25 PM
These shock jocks do nothing for me. I'd be surly with them, too. But, points of interest....

Krivsky really likes Guardado. I would not be surprised to see him back next year, even at 3+MM.

Krivsky likes Mackanin a lot -- really praised his handling of the blowout Monday vs Atlanta.

He likes Bruce a lot -- forecasts a "great career."

The rest was pretty much by the book -- won't rush prospects, vets help buy time for prospects, won't commit to anything vis-a-vis 2008 (re: Keppinger).

Joseph
08-22-2007, 03:35 PM
Kudos to the shock jocks for asking why the Reds are wasting time with some riff raff instead of seeing what a guy like Votto can do though. Most lob in softballs and while this isn't hard hitting journalism, its pretty good for sports interviews considering the subject matter.

bucksfan2
08-22-2007, 03:37 PM
I think that was the best interview that any 1530 homer guy has done in a long long time. Whether you like Doyle or not he didn't kiss up to the guests like a lot of host do and asked him some tough questions. He basically asked him the questions that all of us on RZ wanted to have answers to.

Matt700wlw
08-22-2007, 03:43 PM
Krivsky's snippy.

God fordbid his moves get questioned when his team is in the mess that he's put it in.

I like the Votto and Bruce answer "there's only room for 25 guys until September."

Ok...Belhorn, gone....Votto up. Ellison down, Bruce..up. I'm a damn genius.

Tell Hatte his role will be limited the rest of the season so they can get a look at Votto and Cantu (if they must..plus he doesn't have to play first, he can fill in for other guys if they need a rest). Tell Dunn and Junior their role's will be limited so they can give Bruce a look. Griffey sits 2-3days...same with Dunn...Bruce plays 5 days a week.

Wow...that was tough.

BRM
08-22-2007, 03:49 PM
Krivsky really likes Guardado. I would not be surprised to see him back next year, even at 3+MM.


That's just sad.

acredsfan
08-22-2007, 03:53 PM
Krivsky's snippy.

God fordbid his moves get questioned when his team is in the mess that he's put it in.

I like the Votto and Bruce answer "there's only room for 25 guys until September."

Ok...Belhorn, gone....Votto up. Ellison down, Bruce..up. I'm a damn genius.

Tell Hatte his role will be limited the rest of the season so they can get a look at Votto and Cantu (if they must..plus he doesn't have to play first, he can fill in for other guys if they need a rest). Tell Dunn and Junior their role's will be limited so they can give Bruce a look. Griffey sits 2-3days...same with Dunn...Bruce plays 5 days a week.

Wow...that was tough.I agree with what you say except for sitting Griffey. He is on his way to 600 and it just wouldn't be right to sit a guy that is that close to a milestone. Let him play everyday until he reaches the mark, then he can sit if needed. I know it's a sentimental thing, but when it comes to milestones like that, you don't mess with a guy. Dunn is also potentially in a contract year, sitting him would be unfair to him if you aren't going to pick up his option. Same goes for Hatteburg. Even though I agree we need to see these younger players, it's harder to do than it would seem. Yeah, baseball is a business, but things like this have to be taken into consideration.

Matt700wlw
08-22-2007, 04:01 PM
I agree with what you say except for sitting Griffey. He is on his way to 600 and it just wouldn't be right to sit a guy that is that close to a milestone. Let him play everyday until he reaches the mark, then he can sit if needed. I know it's a sentimental thing, but when it comes to milestones like that, you don't mess with a guy. Dunn is also potentially in a contract year, sitting him would be unfair to him if you aren't going to pick up his option. Same goes for Hatteburg. Even though I agree we need to see these younger players, it's harder to do than it would seem. Yeah, baseball is a business, but things like this have to be taken into consideration.

Maybe Griffey sits twice a week (which may not be a bad thing for him)....I don't think Dunn sitting a bit more in the last month and a half is going to hurt him...team's know what he's done this season, and know what kind of player he is....or decide on that option NOW and tell him the situation. Quit toying around and start looking toward 2008....there's nothing left to play for in 2007. It'd be nice to go into the offseason having an idea of who you have, who is ready, and who is expendable.


Hatteberg...you either pick up his option or you don't. If you bring Votto up to give him a look, and decide he's not ready, you pick up Hatteberg's option....if Votto comes up and you get enough of a look, and decide he's ready to go, then you can let Hatteberg walk, or pick up the option anyway and make him a resevere/bench player.

I'd rather know (or at least have an idea) in Votto before deciding on Hatteberg one way or another. I would AT LEAST like to know that....if they want to wait on Bruce, I can understand that given their current outfield situation...and the fact that he is only 20. AT LEAST see what Votto can do if nothing else. They owe it to him, and the organization.

KronoRed
08-22-2007, 04:05 PM
That's just sad.

That and the guarantee of Stanton in the pen next season is depressing

BRM
08-22-2007, 04:08 PM
That and the guarantee of Stanton in the pen next season is depressing

Every contender needs a couple of veteran lefties in the pen...

Matt700wlw
08-22-2007, 04:12 PM
Every contender needs a couple of veteran lefties in the pen...

I'd rather have guys who can get opposting batters out on a consistant basis.

fearofpopvol1
08-22-2007, 04:16 PM
Krivsky's snippy.

God fordbid his moves get questioned when his team is in the mess that he's put it in.

I like the Votto and Bruce answer "there's only room for 25 guys until September."

Ok...Belhorn, gone....Votto up. Ellison down, Bruce..up. I'm a damn genius.

Tell Hatte his role will be limited the rest of the season so they can get a look at Votto and Cantu (if they must..plus he doesn't have to play first, he can fill in for other guys if they need a rest). Tell Dunn and Junior their role's will be limited so they can give Bruce a look. Griffey sits 2-3days...same with Dunn...Bruce plays 5 days a week.

Wow...that was tough.

That's crazy talk! We're in the middle of a race! We now have Eddie and Bray back! We're contenders!

KronoRed
08-22-2007, 04:53 PM
Every contender needs a couple of veteran lefties in the pen...

I love when they come in and give up a 4 spot, that's learning how to lose right there

BRM
08-22-2007, 05:00 PM
I love when they come in and give up a 4 spot, that's learning how to lose right there

It teaches the youngsters how to handle adversity.

VR
08-22-2007, 05:33 PM
Krivsky likes Mackanin a lot -- really praised his handling of the blowout Monday vs Atlanta.




Wayne is really tuned in to managing losses.

flyer85
08-22-2007, 05:38 PM
Wayne is really tuned in to managing losses.this is the Reds ... so it must be important.

BCubb2003
08-22-2007, 05:58 PM
I don't agree with everything Krivsky said, but we often accuse him of not having a plan, when our plan often seems to be, call up Dumatrait and throw him away when he crashes, call up Cueto, call up the next guy, etc. I remember how much concern there was over whether Homer Bailey was being rushed, now it doesn't seem to matter who gets "Dumatraited."

Doc. Scott
08-22-2007, 11:07 PM
Wayne is really tuned in to managing losses.

I think most thinking fans understand what Krivsky means- but it sounds terrible given the Castellini rhetoric and the underwhelming season the Reds have had. I'd be happier if Mackanin kept on handling blowouts with skill and cunning, but that everyone associated with the Reds shut up about it to the press.

SteelSD
08-23-2007, 01:09 AM
I don't agree with everything Krivsky said, but we often accuse him of not having a plan, when our plan often seems to be, call up Dumatrait and throw him away when he crashes, call up Cueto, call up the next guy, etc. I remember how much concern there was over whether Homer Bailey was being rushed, now it doesn't seem to matter who gets "Dumatraited."

I'm not sure that's accurate. I haven't seen many (if any) folks who were dead set against calling up Homer who've been pushing for a Cueto callup. I disagreed with the Bailey callup and I want Cueto nowhere near MLB this season. Heck, I really didn't want to see Cueto further up the chain than AA this season. Dumatrait? No...freakin'...way.

Now onto the rest of the segment...

It was interesting to hear Krivsky's fractured logic about how a young Jay Bruce "played" himself onto the AAA roster after his first few games of performance but after Cueto sees similar success, he's sent back to AA. Krivsky refuses to "rush" young players, but didn't we already see a Homer Bailey appearance in the Show this season? I don't care that Cueto is back in AA. I only care that Krivsky's reasoning for that runs contrary to what he's already done. Logic of convenience is Krivsky's tool after all.

That whole radio segment was the bomb. Krivsky got pushed and his performance was absolutely awful.

My favorite parts:

1. Jon Coutlangus. "To get the first hitter out is paramount." Ok. Sure. When you're walking "...six per nine..." that sounds bad, sure. According to Krivsky, "This was a very logical, well-thought-out decision..."

Except it ain't.

Since July 1st, Jon Coutlangus posted 17 appearances and allowed the first batter to reach safely 5 times. If we count the one time a batter singled but was thrown out at 2nd, we've got an OBP against of .352. Looks not so good, but that one guy who was removed gives us an OBPA of .294. Krivsky considers RP ERA to be "misleading". Ok. Made that point myself. However, during those last 17 appearances, Coutlangus has been responsible for only two ER and one IRS over 10.1 Innings. Even if we counted that Inherited Runner as a ding against his ERA, we're at 2.68 since June.

For the season, Coutlangus' DIPS ERA is 4.91. That's not good. But he appeared to be stabilizing, produced a high K rate, and hasn't allowed a Home Run since May 22nd. In short, this is a guy who might just have been starting to actually "get it" at the MLB level. But he gets sent down. Now we get to watch gas cans like Guardado and Stanton. I've never been a huge Coutlangus fan, but he's certainly worth trying versus the older LH reliever crud Krivksy has decided to put on the mound this season.

2. "You're only allowed 25 players on your roster..." - Wayne Krivsky when asked about Bruce and Votto callups.

Then Krivsky needs to pick the best 25 players to make up that roster rather than shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic. You've got 25. Make them count.

Krivsky then goes on to heap praise on Jay Bruce while insinuating that Joey Votto can't play defense by noting that "...there are two sides to the game in the National League..."

Of course, let's ignore the fact that Krivsky's take on defense has produced the third worst Defense Efficiency Rating (.679) in baseball.

3. According to Krivsky, maybe Jeff Keppinger (at age 27) wouldn't be producing right now without spending a couple months at AAA this season.

That's just plain bad reasoning. Horrible, actually.

4. Eddie Guardado is a Big Thing because he's a "warrior" regardless of his velocity. Just ugh.

5. Knowing how to lose a game is a really really Big Thing. Apparently an early-game 8-1 deficit is unwinnable in today's version of MLB. This is a night when the Texas Rangers scored 30 Runs and a day after the Reds produced a five Run inning versus the same Braves team. Saving the best of your bullpen- especially the short men- might be a good strategy here, but Krivsky is forwarding something altogether different.

6. We're not worried about 2008, just like we weren't worried about 2007. This is the pinnacle of crap reasoning. The Reds are tying to "buy time" with veterans until the "kids" are ready.

Classic five-year plan rhetoric. And in the meantime, we're seeing erosion of the offense while fielding a rotation and bullpen that can't possibly be good while his drafts are suspect.

That's a bad plan executed poorly by a GM who can't seem to figure out what actually wins ballgames and what doesn't.

Big Klu
08-23-2007, 01:25 AM
Krivsky's snippy.

God fordbid his moves get questioned when his team is in the mess that he's put it in.

I like the Votto and Bruce answer "there's only room for 25 guys until September."

Ok...Belhorn, gone....Votto up. Ellison down, Bruce..up. I'm a damn genius.

Tell Hatte his role will be limited the rest of the season so they can get a look at Votto and Cantu (if they must..plus he doesn't have to play first, he can fill in for other guys if they need a rest). Tell Dunn and Junior their role's will be limited so they can give Bruce a look. Griffey sits 2-3days...same with Dunn...Bruce plays 5 days a week.

Wow...that was tough.


I agree with what you say except for sitting Griffey. He is on his way to 600 and it just wouldn't be right to sit a guy that is that close to a milestone. Let him play everyday until he reaches the mark, then he can sit if needed. I know it's a sentimental thing, but when it comes to milestones like that, you don't mess with a guy. Dunn is also potentially in a contract year, sitting him would be unfair to him if you aren't going to pick up his option. Same goes for Hatteburg. Even though I agree we need to see these younger players, it's harder to do than it would seem. Yeah, baseball is a business, but things like this have to be taken into consideration.

Something else you have to keep in mind is that if a player has a performance clause in his contract, and the club sits him in September, then that club is opening itself up for a grievance.

Ron Madden
08-23-2007, 04:13 AM
OK, WK's plan is Pitching and Defense. That's fine.


The plan aint gonna work untill Wayne can identify good Pitching and good Defense.

nate
08-23-2007, 08:55 AM
It was interesting to hear Krivsky's fractured logic about how a young Jay Bruce "played" himself onto the AAA roster after his first few games of performance but after Cueto sees similar success, he's sent back to AA. Krivsky refuses to "rush" young players, but didn't we already see a Homer Bailey appearance in the Show this season? I don't care that Cueto is back in AA. I only care that Krivsky's reasoning for that runs contrary to what he's already done. Logic of convenience is Krivsky's tool after all.

Is it within the realm of possibility that these two players are being evaluated on more than their shiny numbers? The guys who spend time with them every day know more than their batting average, K/9 and whatnot. Could it be that there are other "metrics" than what shows up on the back of a baseball card or on TV?

MartyFan
08-23-2007, 09:02 AM
OK, WK's plan is Pitching and Defense. That's fine.


The plan aint gonna work untill Wayne can identify good Pitching and good Defense.

So ar you saying we should get rid of Adam Dunn?

GAC
08-23-2007, 09:29 AM
Krivsky really likes Guardado. I would not be surprised to see him back next year, even at 3+MM.

His comments on Eddie didn't leave me with that impression at all. Sure, he paid the veteran every respect due to him because of the career he has had, and the fact Krivsky has gotten to know him as far as type of personality, character, competitive nature; but I was impressed with his synopsis of Eddies struggles since his return - after the type of surgery he underwent, the last thing to come around is command. And Wayne is absolutely right in that aspect.

But they are going to continue to try and give him the IPs to see if he is gonna recover, and if they should exercise that option. But I doubt that if continues to struggle badly they will renew it. But they have to find out. I don't think it is a given.


Krivsky likes Mackanin a lot -- really praised his handling of the blowout Monday vs Atlanta.

I thought he did a solid job of explaining an earlier comment he made about "learning how to lose a game." People really ran with that one, and what he said (meant) is really right - in bowouts you try to get "positives" out of it, for the most part.

bucksfan2
08-23-2007, 10:31 AM
I thought he did a solid job of explaining an earlier comment he made about "learning how to lose a game." People really ran with that one, and what he said (meant) is really right - in bowouts you try to get "positives" out of it, for the most part.


I thought he did as well. Knowing how to lose a game sounds stupid but it is very important over a 162 game season. The thing I have always argued that a poorely managed game will hurt a team for the next 2-3 games. It is very important to limit the damage to only the game being played. Nothing is worse than getting blown out one day and in doing so you manage to the point where you put your team at a disadvantage for the next week.

SteelSD
08-23-2007, 11:41 AM
Is it within the realm of possibility that these two players are being evaluated on more than their shiny numbers? The guys who spend time with them every day know more than their batting average, K/9 and whatnot. Could it be that there are other "metrics" than what shows up on the back of a baseball card or on TV?

You mean the same kind of daily analysis by those who've brought us the call-ups of guys like Bailey and Dumatrait? The same folks who've given us the one of the worst pitching staffs in the National League?

The same spot-on observation leading Krivsky to believe that Jon Coutlangus was allowing too many first batters faced to reach base while Jon Coutlangus actually led the Reds' bullpen in percentage of first batters retired prior to his demotion?

nate
08-23-2007, 11:53 AM
You mean the same kind of daily analysis by those who've brought us the call-ups of guys like Bailey and Dumatrait? The same folks who've given us the one of the worst pitching staffs in the National League?

The same spot-on observation leading Krivsky to believe that Jon Coutlangus was allowing too many first batters faced to reach base while Jon Coutlangus actually led the Reds' bullpen in percentage of first batters retired prior to his demotion?

I'll put you down for a "no" then!

westofyou
08-23-2007, 12:10 PM
God fordbid his moves get questioned when his team is in the mess that he's put it in.

Yes god forbid... after all he built this mess in just a year an half.

Because Bowden's last two years the Reds had a .454 winning percentage and O'Brien had a .460 winning percentage.

Lord knows those were good times, nothing "messy" about that... just a bunch of fun day in and day out.

Yippeeeee

lollipopcurve
08-23-2007, 12:17 PM
Yes god forbid... after all he built this mess in just a year an half.

Because Bowden's last two years the Reds had a .454 winning percentage and O'Brien had a .460 winning percentage.

Lord knows those were good times, nothing "messy" about that... just a bunch of fun day in and day out.

Yeah, big picture this organization is in A LOT better shape than it was pre-Castellini/Krivsky, in my opinion. Folks can nitpick to death all the minor transactions and sound bytes they want, but I think we're close to a real upswing -- if they can find some more pitching.

MartyFan
08-23-2007, 12:56 PM
Maybe Griffey sits twice a week (which may not be a bad thing for him)....I don't think Dunn sitting a bit more in the last month and a half is going to hurt him...team's know what he's done this season, and know what kind of player he is....or decide on that option NOW and tell him the situation. Quit toying around and start looking toward 2008....there's nothing left to play for in 2007. It'd be nice to go into the offseason having an idea of who you have, who is ready, and who is expendable.


Hatteberg...you either pick up his option or you don't. If you bring Votto up to give him a look, and decide he's not ready, you pick up Hatteberg's option....if Votto comes up and you get enough of a look, and decide he's ready to go, then you can let Hatteberg walk, or pick up the option anyway and make him a resevere/bench player.

I'd rather know (or at least have an idea) in Votto before deciding on Hatteberg one way or another. I would AT LEAST like to know that....if they want to wait on Bruce, I can understand that given their current outfield situation...and the fact that he is only 20. AT LEAST see what Votto can do if nothing else. They owe it to him, and the organization.

Do you think there is any chance at all that the organization has already told Dunn's agent their decision?

I had a passing thought in that regard when he made the "I'm just employee number..." comment.

Thinking maybe they had told him they had decided not to pick up the option so his agents could get their presentations and strategy more refined...I know his team already has a game plan in place but if they know now that he will not be re-signed then it gives them a better strategy to bring more teams to the table more quickly.

If Dunn signs quick with another team would that help the Reds as far as any sort of compensation picks?

Stormy
08-23-2007, 01:04 PM
Yeah, big picture this organization is in A LOT better shape than it was pre-Castellini/Krivsky, in my opinion. Folks can nitpick to death all the minor transactions and sound bytes they want, but I think we're close to a real upswing -- if they can find some more pitching.

I agree. I've been disappointed with the Front Office's lack of adherence to sound guiding principles at numerous junctures over the past 2 seasons. However, the cumulative results to this point have actually been a very nice increase in our young talent base, which should help provide an affordable, youthful foundation around which to build for 2008 and beyond. There have been innumerable missteps and misevaluations in the process, but the fact remains that we have a chance to enter 2008 with the strongest, most productive young starting 9 that we've featured in years, bolstered by a quickly improving, more versatile bench.

This is why it remains paramount that Wayne moves the valuable pieces which don't fit for the appropriate young pitching return, and that he avoids his previous shenanigans with veteran relievers, extensions and F.A. acquisitions given our limited resources. If you can move a big $ bat like Griffey/Dunn, and veterans like Hatte/AGon for some immediate impact arms this offseason, you could suddenly see a team built to compete in the NL Central, very quickly (and a team whose primary parts are young enough to contend for the longhaul).

However, without the proper direction this offseason, we could just as easily be a team with a seriously deficient pitching staff, and with a logjam of costly, redundant veterans impeding the contributions of youthful talent. If we can't move Dunn coming off what will likely be his best career year, or move Griffey amidst his resurgence and his run towards history, then there's a major disconnect IMO. Likewise, if Hatteberg, Freel, AGon, Guardado, Stanton type veterans, are allowed to eclipse the contributions of more worthy youngsters, then the offense and bullpen will both continue the erratic sputtering we've grown accustomed to.

Hamilton, Phillips, Keppinger, EdE, Votto/Cantu (not a fan of Cantu), Bruce, and either Griffey or Dunn, would make for the nucleus of a potentially potent offense for the future. Likewise, if we could add legitimate starting and relief help, via trade and F.A. to assist Harang, Arroyo, and the young bullpen, then we really aren't far from contending in the NLC.

MartyFan
08-23-2007, 01:11 PM
I'm not too concerned about the franchise...I think they are moving in the right direction and I point to the Detroit Tigers as an example...they were dead last...dead franchise...made fun of, laughed at the brunt of every joke while they built up their minor league system...they made a couple signings on FA market and made a couple trades.

Do I think the Reds will get near the amount of "L's" that the Tigers did? Nope, never...not even next year...I think they will be better next year but 2009 will be the year they start to be a real force.

Wheelhouse
08-23-2007, 01:52 PM
Kudos to Krivsky for going on the air...I still disagree with him sometimes, but good for putting himself out there.

jojo
08-23-2007, 01:55 PM
1. Jon Coutlangus. "To get the first hitter out is paramount." Ok. Sure. When you're walking "...six per nine..." that sounds bad, sure. According to Krivsky, "This was a very logical, well-thought-out decision..."

Except it ain't.

Since July 1st, Jon Coutlangus posted 17 appearances and allowed the first batter to reach safely 5 times. If we count the one time a batter singled but was thrown out at 2nd, we've got an OBP against of .352. Looks not so good, but that one guy who was removed gives us an OBPA of .294. Krivsky considers RP ERA to be "misleading". Ok. Made that point myself. However, during those last 17 appearances, Coutlangus has been responsible for only two ER and one IRS over 10.1 Innings. Even if we counted that Inherited Runner as a ding against his ERA, we're at 2.68 since June.

For the season, Coutlangus' DIPS ERA is 4.91. That's not good. But he appeared to be stabilizing, produced a high K rate, and hasn't allowed a Home Run since May 22nd. In short, this is a guy who might just have been starting to actually "get it" at the MLB level. But he gets sent down. Now we get to watch gas cans like Guardado and Stanton. I've never been a huge Coutlangus fan, but he's certainly worth trying versus the older LH reliever crud Krivksy has decided to put on the mound this season.

The reason Krivsky gave for demoting JC was his horrid walk rate. Basically Krivsky pointed to Coutlangus' extreme issues with command and it's difficult to argue with his point as JC has a BB/9=6.14. Frankly, I don't think Krivsky meant to argue that "the first out is critical" was a metric they used when making the decision. If he's smart enough to realize ERA is meaningless for relievers then I'm sure he hasn't focused on first-out nonsense or LOB% etc. Krivsky just happens to be inarticulate and people have jumped on his verbal misstep.

Command is the first prerequisite for major league success and JC has issues there that trump his respectable Krate and GB tendencies. Basically JC was sent down because the Reds correctly recognized a potentially fatal flaw in his true skillset and ignored results-based analysis when making the decision. I say kudos for the Reds on that one-there is hope for them yet. JC wasn't a good pitcher before the all-star break (BB/9= 5.4) and he wasn't a good one since the all-star break (BB/9=10.2).

To have a prominent local sports talking head call Krivsky either a liar or a moron on the airwaves based upon the JC demotion (especially since in support of his rant, he evoked the fact that JC hadn't walked anyone in his last 3 2/3 innings!) really was disapointing and frankly requires a big public apology from the talking head. In the very least it really hurt the on air personality's credibility. The notion that out of towners might have heard the rant should embarrass us as Reds fans or really Cincinnati sports fans in general.

edabbs44
08-23-2007, 02:05 PM
Yeah, big picture this organization is in A LOT better shape than it was pre-Castellini/Krivsky, in my opinion. Folks can nitpick to death all the minor transactions and sound bytes they want, but I think we're close to a real upswing -- if they can find some more pitching.

That might be the biggest IF of them all. If he can't find it then this team will still be in a lot of trouble, no matter how many scrap heap stars he finds.

BCubb2003
08-23-2007, 02:06 PM
The reason Krivsky gave for demoting JC was his horrid walk rate. Basically Krivsky pointed to Coutlangus' extreme issues with command and it's difficult to argue with his point as JC has a BB/9=6.14. Frankly, I don't think Krivsky meant to argue that "the first out is critical" was a metric they used when making the decision. If he's smart enough to realize ERA is meaningless for relievers then I'm sure he hasn't focused on first-out nonsense or LOB% etc. Krivsky just happens to be inarticulate and people have jumped on his verbal misstep.

Command is the first prerequisite for major league success and JC has issues there that trump his respectable Krate and GB tendencies. Basically JC was sent down because the Reds correctly recognized a potentially fatal flaw in his true skillset and ignored results-based analysis when making the decision. I say kudos for the Reds on that one-there is hope for them yet. JC wasn't a good pitcher before the all-star break (BB/9= 5.4) and he wasn't a good one since the all-star break (BB/9=10.2).

To have a prominent local sports talking head call Krivsky either a liar or a moron on the airwaves based upon the JC demotion (especially since in support of his rant, he evoked the fact that JC hadn't walked anyone in his last 3 2/3 innings!) really was disapointing and frankly requires a big public apology from the talking head. In the very least it really hurt the on air personality's credibility. The notion that out of towners might have heard the rant should embarrass us as Reds fans or really Cincinnati sports fans in general.

I agree here. Also, I think there are slightly different standards for guys who have value vs. guys who are just fodder. Coutlangus might get sent down to work on his walks precisely because he has the potential to be good. Others don't get sent down because they're fodder.

KronoRed
08-23-2007, 02:12 PM
If Dunn signs quick with another team would that help the Reds as far as any sort of compensation picks?
The Reds have to decline the option then offer arbitration, then they SHOULD get 2 picks out of it, no matter when he signs.

Dunn's "employee number" business made me think he was told he was being traded but then wasn't, hopefully the Reds are going to keep him.

Falls City Beer
08-23-2007, 02:15 PM
The reason Krivsky gave for demoting JC was his horrid walk rate. Basically Krivsky pointed to Coutlangus' extreme issues with command and it's difficult to argue with his point as JC has a BB/9=6.14. Frankly, I don't think Krivsky meant to argue that "the first out is critical" was a metric they used when making the decision. If he's smart enough to realize ERA is meaningless for relievers then I'm sure he hasn't focused on first-out nonsense or LOB% etc. Krivsky just happens to be inarticulate and people have jumped on his verbal misstep.

Command is the first prerequisite for major league success and JC has issues there that trump his respectable Krate and GB tendencies. Basically JC was sent down because the Reds correctly recognized a potentially fatal flaw in his true skillset and ignored results-based analysis when making the decision. I say kudos for the Reds on that one-there is hope for them yet. JC wasn't a good pitcher before the all-star break (BB/9= 5.4) and he wasn't a good one since the all-star break (BB/9=10.2).

To have a prominent local sports talking head call Krivsky either a liar or a moron on the airwaves based upon the JC demotion (especially since in support of his rant, he evoked the fact that JC hadn't walked anyone in his last 3 2/3 innings!) really was disapointing and frankly requires a big public apology from the talking head. In the very least it really hurt the on air personality's credibility. The notion that out of towners might have heard the rant should embarrass us as Reds fans or really Cincinnati sports fans in general.

But JC is young and capable of improvement--as his K rate has shown. 4/7th of the Reds' bullpen isn't.

JC is easily one of the best arms in the Reds' system. Which is horrifying and vomit-inducing when you consider how barren the rest of the cupboard is.

I think it's interesting that you dismiss JC for his command issues, but ignore Homer's command issues--which are just as bad--nay, worse, because he's a starter.

Falls City Beer
08-23-2007, 02:20 PM
I agree. I've been disappointed with the Front Office's lack of adherence to sound guiding principles at numerous junctures over the past 2 seasons. However, the cumulative results to this point have actually been a very nice increase in our young talent base, which should help provide an affordable, youthful foundation around which to build for 2008 and beyond. There have been innumerable missteps and misevaluations in the process, but the fact remains that we have a chance to enter 2008 with the strongest, most productive young starting 9 that we've featured in years, bolstered by a quickly improving, more versatile bench.

This is why it remains paramount that Wayne moves the valuable pieces which don't fit for the appropriate young pitching return, and that he avoids his previous shenanigans with veteran relievers, extensions and F.A. acquisitions given our limited resources. If you can move a big $ bat like Griffey/Dunn, and veterans like Hatte/AGon for some immediate impact arms this offseason, you could suddenly see a team built to compete in the NL Central, very quickly (and a team whose primary parts are young enough to contend for the longhaul).

However, without the proper direction this offseason, we could just as easily be a team with a seriously deficient pitching staff, and with a logjam of costly, redundant veterans impeding the contributions of youthful talent. If we can't move Dunn coming off what will likely be his best career year, or move Griffey amidst his resurgence and his run towards history, then there's a major disconnect IMO. Likewise, if Hatteberg, Freel, AGon, Guardado, Stanton type veterans, are allowed to eclipse the contributions of more worthy youngsters, then the offense and bullpen will both continue the erratic sputtering we've grown accustomed to.

Hamilton, Phillips, Keppinger, EdE, Votto/Cantu (not a fan of Cantu), Bruce, and either Griffey or Dunn, would make for the nucleus of a potentially potent offense for the future. Likewise, if we could add legitimate starting and relief help, via trade and F.A. to assist Harang, Arroyo, and the young bullpen, then we really aren't far from contending in the NLC.

I'm not sold on this offense at all. I think it will be a HUGE question mark after Dunn is dealt. As in, godawful. Hamilton's fragile, Phillips has reached his ceiling, Votto's been a bitter disappointment, and Bruce is at least a couple seasons away from making meaningful contributions in the MLB.

I think the Reds are as far away from contention as their indecision and passivity will take them. There's absolutely NO REASON for the Reds not to be in the midst of this division race this season.

Yet here we sit.

lollipopcurve
08-23-2007, 02:20 PM
The reason Krivsky gave for demoting JC was his horrid walk rate. Basically Krivsky pointed to Coutlangus' extreme issues with command and it's difficult to argue with his point as JC has a BB/9=6.14. Frankly, I don't think Krivsky meant to argue that "the first out is critical" was a metric they used when making the decision. If he's smart enough to realize ERA is meaningless for relievers then I'm sure he hasn't focused on first-out nonsense or LOB% etc. Krivsky just happens to be inarticulate and people have jumped on his verbal misstep.

Command is the first prerequisite for major league success and JC has issues there that trump his respectable Krate and GB tendencies. Basically JC was sent down because the Reds correctly recognized a potentially fatal flaw in his true skillset and ignored results-based analysis when making the decision. I say kudos for the Reds on that one-there is hope for them yet. JC wasn't a good pitcher before the all-star break (BB/9= 5.4) and he wasn't a good one since the all-star break (BB/9=10.2).

To have a prominent local sports talking head call Krivsky either a liar or a moron on the airwaves based upon the JC demotion (especially since in support of his rant, he evoked the fact that JC hadn't walked anyone in his last 3 2/3 innings!) really was disapointing and frankly requires a big public apology from the talking head. In the very least it really hurt the on air personality's credibility. The notion that out of towners might have heard the rant should embarrass us as Reds fans or really Cincinnati sports fans in general.

Great stuff, jojo -- couldn't agree more.

IslandRed
08-23-2007, 02:27 PM
OK, WK's plan is Pitching and Defense. That's fine.

The plan aint gonna work untill Wayne can identify good Pitching and good Defense.

The fundamental problem with the defense is, the two positions costing us the most runs are the ones filled by the two guys providing the most offense. I don't want the defense "fixed" if it means Norris Hopper takes over for Dunn or Griffey. The Reds have sensibly decided the cure is worse than the disease for the moment, however much they may not like the disease. When the cure is named Jay Bruce, the decision will probably be different.

One of the Reds' fundamental problems for years now is that the roster is full of "or" players -- they provide value in one area while being a liability in the other. Griffey and Dunn are good examples. To get where we need to go, to have good offense and solid defense, we need to find some more "and" players.

Falls City Beer
08-23-2007, 02:30 PM
The fundamental problem with the defense is, the two positions costing us the most runs are the ones filled by the two guys providing the most offense. I don't want the defense "fixed" if it means Norris Hopper takes over for Dunn or Griffey. The Reds have sensibly decided the cure is worse than the disease for the moment, however much they may not like the disease. When the cure is named Jay Bruce, the decision will probably be different.

One of the Reds' fundamental problems for years now is that the roster is full of "or" players -- they provide value in one area while being a liability in the other. Griffey and Dunn are good examples. To get where we need to go, to have good offense and solid defense, we need to find some more "and" players.

Every team has these "or" player issues, even excellent ones. It's just a matter of optimizing. And NOT leaning too heavily on the defense side of things. When you err on the side of offense, you're erring correctly.

nate
08-23-2007, 02:33 PM
But JC is young and capable of improvement--as his K rate has shown. 4/7th of the Reds' bullpen isn't.

JC is easily one of the best arms in the Reds' system. Which is horrifying and vomit-inducing when you consider how barren the rest of the cupboard is.

I think it's interesting that you dismiss JC for his command issues, but ignore Homer's command issues--which are just as bad--nay, worse, because he's a starter.

I didn't read the words "Homer Bailey" in jojo's post at all.

Falls City Beer
08-23-2007, 02:42 PM
I didn't read the words "Homer Bailey" in jojo's post at all.

Past discussions. He seems to think Bailey will get his command issues together (despite showing command problems at every level); yet contemns Coutlangus, calling him a bad pitcher because of command issues (which I don't entirely disagree with--Cout's command IS a problem).

I took part of the conversation out of another context.

jojo
08-23-2007, 02:48 PM
But JC is young and capable of improvement--as his K rate has shown. 4/7th of the Reds' bullpen isn't.

JC is easily one of the best arms in the Reds' system. Which is horrifying and vomit-inducing when you consider how barren the rest of the cupboard is.

I think it's interesting that you dismiss JC for his command issues, but ignore Homer's command issues--which are just as bad--nay, worse, because he's a starter.

First, I was a pretty vocal advocate of NOT bringing Homer up because of his command issues.

Second, I wasn't dismissing JC's potential to be a valuable bullpen arm for the Reds in the future. I was arguing that his demotion was a sound decision based upon the need to rectify his poor command.

It's a pretty consistent stance.

Falls City Beer
08-23-2007, 02:51 PM
It's a pretty consistent stance.

Except that you call Cout a "bad pitcher" and think Homer will be a future ace, despite possessing command problems of equal gravity to Cout. It's not that consistent.

Coutlangus should be up here. Wayne Krivsky isn't using some arcane wisdom to demonstrate that he shouldn't be up here beyond "he walks too durn many." What's good about Cout is that he actually RETIRES people too. That's pretty awesome.

dougdirt
08-23-2007, 02:53 PM
If they sent down JC because of his walks, then they chose the wrong time to do it coming off 5 straight games where he had not walked a batter. Yes, he had command problems. However to send him down for them when he had not had them 5 straight times rubs me the wrong way.

As for Bailey gaining command, I think it will come around too. Power pitches typically gain more control as they age, unlike their softer throwing counterparts.

Falls City Beer
08-23-2007, 02:55 PM
If they sent down JC because of his walks, then they chose the wrong time to do it coming off 5 straight games where he had not walked a batter. Yes, he had command problems. However to send him down for them when he had not had them 5 straight times rubs me the wrong way.

As for Bailey gaining command, I think it will come around too. Power pitches typically gain more control as they age, unlike their softer throwing counterparts.

If I had my druthers Cout would be up and Bailey would be looking to become a fixture in Louisville's pen, then promoted next season as a bullpen arm.

jojo
08-23-2007, 02:57 PM
If I had my druthers Cout would be up and Bailey would be looking to become a fixture in Louisville's pen, then promoted next season as a bullpen arm.

Well that's because you're a nut.

:mooner:


:D

Stormy
08-23-2007, 03:01 PM
I'm not sold on this offense at all. I think it will be a HUGE question mark after Dunn is dealt. As in, godawful. Hamilton's fragile, Phillips has reached his ceiling, Votto's been a bitter disappointment, and Bruce is at least a couple seasons away from making meaningful contributions in the MLB.

I understand some of your trepidation, but I don't share it, nor do I completely share your evaluation of some of the aforementioned players.

Hamilton may, or may not, prove fragile, but his consistent manner of producing at a 900+ OPS throughout the season should indicate more of the same in the future. Phillips probably is starting to reach his ceiling assuming no further growth in plate discipline, however, there's nothing wrong with an elite fielding, elite baserunning middle infielder with tons of pop for his position, who will likely post an 800OPS year in and out.

Keppinger is going to be a low cost producer, even if it's in the 800+OPS range rather than his currently scorching 1000+OPS clip. His 'high contact' style is a nice offset to our contact challenged skill sets, and he's a vast offensive upgrade at MI or off the bench, with a basement of a Stynes type of sub. And one would hope for a rebound year featuring far greater EBH power from EdE.

I'm not sure how 'Votto has been a bitter disappointment', as all he's done is basically mash the ball in near MVP fashion at the AAA level in his first go round. He should already be here, and there's no reason to think that his hitting prowess at the AAA level won't translate into solid production as a young 1B, especially with the potential depth already at 1B. Bruce is the icing on the cake type of OFer who doesn't need to make an immediate impact, but who will likely start being a cog in the offensive engine the moment he starts to click.

As for Dunn, I agree with you that he's pivotal to this offense. If we could trade Griffey, I would be in favor of extending Dunn, if he were to agree to a reasonable offer (doubtful). However, he instead may need to be used as the key trading chip required to land the frontline arms we desparetly need to start filling out the back 3/5 of this dreadful rotation.

At the very least, it's an improved offensive landscape from the last few years when we had Dunn, and innumerable tweener youngsters, and declining vets trying to bridge the gap. Greater diversity in the starting 9, and greater flexibility and strength from the bench. Likewise, given the inexpensiveness of an offensive core of Hamilton, Phillips, Encarnacion, Keppinger, Votto/Cantu, Bruce, the team can afford to keep a guy like Dunn, and/or have some financial flexibility to pursue direly needed pitching upgrades, or even the right power RHH bat. That's IF Wayne can move some contracts, get some talent in return, and somehow refrain from adding more bad contracts in the process.

It's far from an ideally constructed offense, but it's certainly trending in the right direction, with a great deal of young, inexpensive potential for improvement.

dougdirt
08-23-2007, 03:02 PM
If I had my druthers Cout would be up and Bailey would be looking to become a fixture in Louisville's pen, then promoted next season as a bullpen arm.

Why would you put Homer Bailey in the bullpen?

Falls City Beer
08-23-2007, 03:04 PM
Why would you put Homer Bailey in the bullpen?

I don't think he profiles well as a MLB starter. His control problems and secondary pitches continue to be a serious issue.

jojo
08-23-2007, 03:08 PM
Except that you call Cout a "bad pitcher" and think Homer will be a future ace, despite possessing command problems of equal gravity to Cout. It's not that consistent.

Coutlangus should be up here. Wayne Krivsky isn't using some arcane wisdom to demonstrate that he shouldn't be up here beyond "he walks too durn many." What's good about Cout is that he actually RETIRES people too. That's pretty awesome.

In the interest of fairness, I'll state for the record that Homer also was a bad pitcher during his call up with the Reds earlier this year.

I've never argued that Homer would be a star and JC would never be useful. That's simply a mischaracterization of my position.

Falls City Beer
08-23-2007, 03:12 PM
In the interest of fairness, I'll state for the record that Homer also was a bad pitcher during his call up with the Reds earlier this year.

I've never argued that Homer would be a star and JC would never be useful. That's simply a mischaracterization of my position.

That's a start.

No you didn't say that JC would never be a decent pitcher. But you called him "bad," which, IMO, is false.

dougdirt
08-23-2007, 03:13 PM
I don't think he profiles well as a MLB starter. His control problems and secondary pitches continue to be a serious issue.

He is 21 years old. You have only seen him pitch 6 games, at least two of which he was pitching on a bad groin and you decided that he is bullpen material already? FCB, we rarely agree on much in terms of prospects, but you give up on guys so fast its not funny.

Falls City Beer
08-23-2007, 03:15 PM
He is 21 years old. You have only seen him pitch 6 games, at least two of which he was pitching on a bad groin and you decided that he is bullpen material already? FCB, we rarely agree on much in terms of prospects, but you give up on guys so fast its not funny.

My concerns about his control comprise his entire career. Not just 6 starts.

IslandRed
08-23-2007, 03:17 PM
Every team has these "or" player issues, even excellent ones. It's just a matter of optimizing. And NOT leaning too heavily on the defense side of things. When you err on the side of offense, you're erring correctly.

True, but a good team has more "ands" than we do. I'm not using a ridiculously high standard here; I'm just comparing a player's offense and defense to the league average at his position. If neither part of his game is dragging the team toward the wrong side of .500, he's an "and." I'm having a hard time figuring out who they are on the Reds. Brandon Phillips, I think. I'd add Josh Hamilton, when he's healthy, although some folks would further clarify it by saying it applies to when he's playing a corner spot instead of center.

But the primary problem is still pitching. Nothing new there.

dougdirt
08-23-2007, 03:17 PM
My concerns about his control comprise his entire career. Not just 6 starts.

Yes, but you are pretending that at age 21 Homer Bailey is a finished product and his secondary pitches will forever be inconsistant and he will never gain any more control than he has right now. That premise is just silly, specifically for a young hard thrower, who are the exact type who tend to gain control as the age, as opposed to their softer tossing counterparts who in general peak much earlier.

Doc. Scott
08-23-2007, 03:17 PM
To have a prominent local sports talking head call Krivsky either a liar or a moron on the airwaves based upon the JC demotion (especially since in support of his rant, he evoked the fact that JC hadn't walked anyone in his last 3 2/3 innings!) really was disapointing and frankly requires a big public apology from the talking head. In the very least it really hurt the on air personality's credibility. The notion that out of towners might have heard the rant should embarrass us as Reds fans or really Cincinnati sports fans in general.

Agreed, but without necessarily talking specifically about the merits of Jon Coutlangus, that also underlines the mentality of radio personalities in general- they value and are evaluated in turn on attracting listeners, not on being correct, wise, or ethical. The veneer of "truth" is more important than the actual truth.

It's why I don't listen to opinion-based talk radio of any kind these days.

On the plus side, though, I wouldn't worry if I were you that this is going to make Cincinnati sports fans look stupid. Talking heads in bigger markets are even more likely to say or do stupid, misleading, or wrong things for the sake of listenership themselves.

jojo
08-23-2007, 03:19 PM
If they sent down JC because of his walks, then they chose the wrong time to do it coming off 5 straight games where he had not walked a batter. Yes, he had command problems. However to send him down for them when he had not had them 5 straight times rubs me the wrong way.

True he hadn't walked anyone in those 3 2/3 innings. But he started the season walking only 1 in his first 6 2/3 IP and later had another streak of 8 outings where he only walked 1 batter (over 4 IP). Too much can be made out of short stretches during a season.

nate
08-23-2007, 03:20 PM
If they sent down JC because of his walks, then they chose the wrong time to do it coming off 5 straight games where he had not walked a batter. Yes, he had command problems. However to send him down for them when he had not had them 5 straight times rubs me the wrong way.

No, but he had allowed 5 hits in the 5 games since his last walk. I think Krivsky was referring to baserunners regardless of how they got there.

For the OFFICIAL REDSZONE RECORD, I like Cooter.

As it were.

dougdirt
08-23-2007, 03:21 PM
True he hadn't walked anyone in those 3 2/3 innings. But he started the season walking only 1 in his first 6 2/3 IP and later had another streak of 8 outings where he only walked 1 batter (over 4 IP). Too much can be made out of short stretches during a season.

Well my whole problem with it is that if you are going to say you are sending a guy down for a problem, then they waited too long to make that move for that reason.

jojo
08-23-2007, 03:21 PM
It's why I don't listen to opinion-based talk radio of any kind these days.

Ya. I rarely listen either but in my defense I thought Dave Lapham was going to be on.... :cool:

Falls City Beer
08-23-2007, 03:21 PM
Yes, but you are pretending that at age 21 Homer Bailey is a finished product and his secondary pitches will forever be inconsistant and he will never gain any more control than he has right now. That premise is just silly, specifically for a young hard thrower, who are the exact type who tend to gain control as the age, as opposed to their softer tossing counterparts who in general peak much earlier.

I'm saying it's insanely hard to make it in MLB. And Bailey's got two big strikes against him: control and secondary pitches.

I'm saying the guy has the odds against him, even on his best days; throw in fundamental skill set issues and the climb gets much steeper.

jojo
08-23-2007, 03:36 PM
Except that you call Cout a "bad pitcher" and think Homer will be a future ace, despite possessing command problems of equal gravity to Cout. It's not that consistent.

That's a hair YOURE splitting, not one I've split. I've been pretty consistent with the notion that command issues are a death knell to a pitcher's ability to be effective at the major league level and with the idea that command issues can be overcome.

If you want to evoke the notion of upside, I'd certainly be more patient with a young arm that has the upside to be a successful starter than with a young arm who's upside is that of a reliever simply because the former is much rarer than the latter. That said, no where have I argued that it's time to give up on JC.


Coutlangus should be up here. Wayne Krivsky isn't using some arcane wisdom to demonstrate that he shouldn't be up here beyond "he walks too durn many." What's good about Cout is that he actually RETIRES people too. That's pretty awesome.

I don't get this notion that Coutlangus was especially adept at retiring people this season. His Krate has been respectable but his walk rate is atrocious (K/BB: 1.28). Show me a major league pitcher that has been sustainably successful while exhibiting the degree of command issues that JC has this season-especially given JC's Krate isn't nearly high enough to overcome the walks.

Ron Madden
08-23-2007, 03:40 PM
So ar you saying we should get rid of Adam Dunn?

Not at all.

Most teams would hide a bad defensive player in LF, If that bad defensive player provided the kind of offense Dunn provides. :)

Ron Madden
08-23-2007, 03:42 PM
The fundamental problem with the defense is, the two positions costing us the most runs are the ones filled by the two guys providing the most offense. I don't want the defense "fixed" if it means Norris Hopper takes over for Dunn or Griffey. The Reds have sensibly decided the cure is worse than the disease for the moment, however much they may not like the disease. When the cure is named Jay Bruce, the decision will probably be different.

One of the Reds' fundamental problems for years now is that the roster is full of "or" players -- they provide value in one area while being a liability in the other. Griffey and Dunn are good examples. To get where we need to go, to have good offense and solid defense, we need to find some more "and" players.

I agree.

Kc61
08-23-2007, 03:45 PM
Cout's K/BB rate of 32/25 is troublesome, but IMO he wasn't handled optimally this year. Guy goes from AA to the majors, converted outfielder, and suddenly is used day after day after day. He had 57 appearances when sent down, in about 2/3 of a season. Similarly, I thought Coffey was way overused -- and his effectiveness suffered.

Sometimes a pitcher is ready for the majors but not ready to pitch every day. Needs some rest, time to work on things. There was one stretch when Cout pitched every day for almost a week, if I recall. Coffey -- he pitched 26 times in April/May.

I agree that Cout should be in the major leagues, but in an appropriate role.

bucksfan2
08-23-2007, 04:46 PM
My concerns about his control comprise his entire career. Not just 6 starts.

FCB just out of curiosity have many times have you seen homer pitch?

Falls City Beer
08-23-2007, 04:52 PM
FCB just out of curiosity have many times have you seen homer pitch?

Four times. I'm not entirely sure what that has to do with anything though.

Matt700wlw
08-23-2007, 04:55 PM
Four times. I'm not entirely sure what that has to do with anything though.

So 4 (5, 6..however many it was) big league starts makes a career..

Thankfully, you're not in charge.

bucksfan2
08-23-2007, 04:56 PM
Four times. I'm not entirely sure what that has to do with anything though.

So you have basically developed the thought that Bailey isn't a major league starter through box scores and stats? Not to mention you have no idea how his groin may have effected his pitching performance.

BRM
08-23-2007, 05:01 PM
So 4 (5, 6..however many it was) big league starts makes a career..

Thankfully, you're not in charge.

That's not what he has postured. He's had concerns about Bailey's command his entire career.

dougdirt
08-23-2007, 06:15 PM
That's not what he has postured. He's had concerns about Bailey's command his entire career.

He had concerns about Baileys command as a 19 and 20 year old in box scores. That in itself is funny.

Bailey only has 1 strike against him in my mind, and it is his control, which I think will be fine in due time. His offspeed stuff is very good at times, just inconsistant at this point in time. He will begin next year at age 21 and likely in the major leagues. I have plenty of faith that he will be just fine.

MikeS21
08-23-2007, 06:46 PM
I want to go back to WK's comments about Votto's fielding. Wasn't it just last year when everyone was raving about how much Votto's defense at 1B had improved, and that he in fact, was getting close to being a very good fielder? Right before the Futures' Game last year, there was much talk about how hard Votto worked, and how he was already an average fielder.

So what's the deal? Was that all hype or what?

wheels
08-23-2007, 07:54 PM
I want to go back to WK's comments about Votto's fielding. Wasn't it just last year when everyone was raving about how much Votto's defense at 1B had improved, and that he in fact, was getting close to being a very good fielder? Right before the Futures' Game last year, there was much talk about how hard Votto worked, and how he was already an average fielder.

So what's the deal? Was that all hype or what?

I think it means they're grooming him to be the next Left Fielder, but it's not going as well as they'd hoped.

I'll be willing to wager that it's only reason he's still in AAA.

I think it stinks.

jojo
08-23-2007, 08:20 PM
I want to go back to WK's comments about Votto's fielding. Wasn't it just last year when everyone was raving about how much Votto's defense at 1B had improved, and that he in fact, was getting close to being a very good fielder? Right before the Futures' Game last year, there was much talk about how hard Votto worked, and how he was already an average fielder.

So what's the deal? Was that all hype or what?

I don't know how many errors Votto has this season (anyone know where to find up to date fielding stats for minor leaguers?) but I've heard that he has a high total this season. The Reds as a matter of philosophy HATE errors. Duh I guess but I think they have a pretty old fashioned view of evaluating defense in the sense that making the routine play is weighted heavier than range etc at times. They've shown an absolute willingness to compromise leather in favor of offense so in my mind it's got to be Votto's errors....

Anyway, some of the farm gurus could speak more intelligently on why the Reds seem to be grading Votto's defense so poorly. I'm just positing an educated guess.

dougdirt
08-23-2007, 08:25 PM
Joey Votto has 11 errors on the season. I know for a fact that at least 3 of those have come as an outfielder. It could be more. I don't know exactly as it just lists total errors.

pedro
08-23-2007, 08:25 PM
I don't know how many errors Votto has this season (anyone know where to find up to date fielding stats for minor leaguers?) but I've heard that he has a high total this season. The Reds as a matter of philosophy HATE errors. Duh I guess but I think they have a pretty old fashioned view of evaluating defense in the sense that making the routine play is weighted heavier than range etc at times. They've shown an absolute willingness to compromise leather in favor of offense so in my mind it's got to be Votto's errors....

Anyway, some of the farm gurus could speak more intelligently on why the Reds seem to be grading Votto's defense so poorly. I'm just positing an educated guess.

According to the bats website he has 11. I don't know many are at 1st vs. the outfield.

Always Red
08-23-2007, 08:32 PM
FCB can stick up for himself; he certainly needs no help from me.

But Homer indeed has struggled to throw strikes, every step of the way. MLB hitters are much more disciplined than minor leaguers; they are not as prone to swing at close pitches from guys who throw 93-94.

I'll give Homer every benefit of the doubt, and say that he'll be back next year, and will be the #3-4 starter for this team.

But his command is a concern for me, as well. And I have seen him pitch, once in person (his first game), and 4 times on TV (I missed his best start- the Oakland game).

MikeS21
08-23-2007, 09:04 PM
The only thing I can figure is that the powers that be must be thinking about a future OF of Votto, Hamilton, and Bruce. The idea being that there is a young 1B coming up through the system. At this point, I can't think of a single 1B prospect other than Logan Parker, but after a decent year at Billings, he hasn't exactly set the world on fire at Dayton.

DoogMinAmo
08-23-2007, 09:18 PM
The only thing I can figure is that the powers that be must be thinking about a future OF of Votto, Hamilton, and Bruce. The idea being that there is a young 1B coming up through the system. At this point, I can't think of a single 1B prospect other than Logan Parker, but after a decent year at Billings, he hasn't exactly set the world on fire at Dayton.

Or they feel it will be easier to get a good 1B prospect in a deal for Dunn than an OF prospect, Or they just the flexibility, whether in a trade or is day to day lineup management.

GAC
08-23-2007, 09:22 PM
Votto's been a bitter disappointment

Scratching my head on this one, fer sure.


and Bruce is at least a couple seasons away from making meaningful contributions in the MLB.

So?

The success of this franchise is in rebuilding this infrastructure and talent pool in the farms. And while I'm no minor league expert, some of the people on here who follow it pretty avidly, and who I highly respect, say Kriv has been doing more then the previous FO in scouting/acquiring young talent and restocking those systems.

And yes, that is gonna take some time. I'm sorry that some hate to still hear that. But Cast/Kriv cannot be held accountable for "the sins of their fathers" (previous FO)... though some want to.

But when I look at the younger guys he currently has in Hamilton, Phillips, EE, Keppinger, Burton, Bray.... and then maybe add to that list kids like Votto, Cuerto, Bailey, Coutlangus, Maloney, and maybe Salmon, we are looking better.

Maybe not immediately; but we are looking better.

Falls City Beer
08-23-2007, 09:43 PM
Scratching my head on this one, fer sure.



So?

The success of this franchise is in rebuilding this infrastructure and talent pool in the farms. And while I'm no minor league expert, some of the people on here who follow it pretty avidly, and who I highly respect, say Kriv has been doing more then the previous FO in scouting/acquiring young talent and restocking those systems.

And yes, that is gonna take some time. I'm sorry that some hate to still hear that. But Cast/Kriv cannot be held accountable for "the sins of their fathers" (previous FO)... though some want to.

But when I look at the younger guys he currently has in Hamilton, Phillips, EE, Keppinger, Burton, Bray.... and then maybe add to that list kids like Votto, Cuerto, Bailey, Coutlangus, Maloney, and maybe Salmon, we are looking better.

Maybe not immediately; but we are looking better.

Who has Krivsky restocked the farm with? I'd love to know. DanO accomplished in one draft what Krivsky's not been able to do in two years.

This isn't anyone else's team anymore. That excuse is kaput. This is Wayne's team. It's time to reap whatever harvest is in the field. No excuses at all. This is his team.

westofyou
08-23-2007, 10:08 PM
Here's what Kevin Goldstein said about Votto last fall, he currently sits at .303/.393/.491 yet at 23 being down there isn't likely the death knell to his career.


3. Joey Votto, 1B
DOB: 9/10/83
Height/Weight: 6-3/220

Bats/Throws: L/R
Draft: 2nd round, 2002, Canada HS
What he did in 2006: .319/.408/.547 at Double-A

The Good: Athletic first baseman combines solid hitting skills with plus power and patience. A rapidly improving defender after being drafted as a catcher and being tinkered with at third base.

The Bad: Up-and-down minor league career leaves some wary of his breakout campaign, his power drops off against lefties, and he has a tendency to press at times.
The Irrelevant: After stealing four bases in 2005 and 27 total in his four-year career entering 2006, Votto suddenly swiped 24 bags last year in 31 attempts.
In A Perfect World, He Becomes: An above-average first baseman, but not upper echelon.

Gap Between What He Is Now, And What He Can Be: Average. Votto's line at Double-A has no obvious weaknesses, but people still want to see if that's the real Votto, or if the one who hit .256/.330/.425 in 2005 is the real Votto; the truth lies somewhere in between. He'll start the year in Triple-A, but will hit the big leagues at some point next year.


BTW in the last ten years here are the Reds age 23 and under who got ab's


AT BATS YEAR AB AGE RC/G
1 Adam Dunn 2002 535 22 1.68
2 Edwin Encarnacion 2006 406 23 0.69
3 Adam Dunn 2003 381 23 0.79
4 Austin Kearns 2002 372 22 2.52
5 Wily Mo Pena 2004 336 22 0.29
6 Wily Mo Pena 2005 311 23 -.14
7 Sean Casey 1998 302 23 0.08
8 Austin Kearns 2003 292 23 0.75
9 Adam Dunn 2001 244 21 2.43
10 Rainer Olmedo 2003 230 22 -2.70
11 Edwin Encarnacion 2005 211 22 -.78
12 Felipe Lopez 2003 197 23 -1.88
13 Wily Mo Pena 2003 165 21 -1.93
14 Paul Konerko 1998 73 22 -2.09
15 Andy Machado 2004 56 23 0.53
16 Gookie Dawkins 2002 48 23 -3.82
17 Gookie Dawkins 2000 41 21 -4.09
18 William Bergolla 2005 38 22 -5.07

westofyou
08-23-2007, 10:10 PM
This isn't anyone else's team anymore. That excuse is kaput.

That's an opinion that discards a million other aspects of the business of baseball and focuses solely on the dugout of the current squad, one that still pays Eric Milton $307,692 every Friday.

OnBaseMachine
08-23-2007, 10:12 PM
I hate when people crap on Votto over his 2005 season. He played in the very pitcher friendly Florida State League plus he was under Dan O'Brien's stupid take-the-first-pitch orders. It's hard to hit well when you are constantly behind in the count, especially in that league.

GAC
08-23-2007, 10:19 PM
Who has Krivsky restocked the farm with? I'd love to know.

As I just stated - I am by no means an expert on the minor league farm system. Are you? I am in the process of trying get more involved and learn more. And I have been relying on those who do follow it, and I'm trusting/relying on their evaluation. I follow the minor league forum on here, as well as the Red's minor league affilliates. And from THEIR input, Krivsky gets a better grade in that area then his predeccessors.


DanO accomplished in one draft what Krivsky's not been able to do in two years.

According to who? When you draft you're mainly dealing with 18-19 yr olds. Unprovens. So other than Jay Bruce, where is all this talent (especially arms) that DanO acquired and have now progressed to the pinnacle of stardom?

How can you gauge Krivsky's drafts when you're dealing with youngsters who start at the lowest level?



This isn't anyone else's team anymore. That excuse is kaput. This is Wayne's team. It's time to reap whatever harvest is in the field. No excuses at all. This is his team.

And of course we were solid winners heading in the right direction prior to his coming right? Our farm system was sound and had alot of high level talent ready to come up.

Why were Bowden and then DanO fired then if they were doing such a solid job?

The fact of the matter is you hated the Krivsky hiring from the beginning, and due to that strong bias you're not going to give him ANY benefit of the doubt; but you're going to amplify any mistake he may make. You attempt to show no objectivity or balance at all when evaluating Krivsky.

Even when the guy has made a good move you'll twist it to say "even a blind dog finds a bone".

This organization's future success is dependent upon a strong farm system.

And you obviously believe that should be turned around pronto, and the results seen immediately.

Falls City Beer
08-23-2007, 10:26 PM
As I just stated - I am by no means an expert on the minor league farm system. Are you? I am in the process of trying get more involved and learn more. And I have been relying on those who do follow it, and I'm trusting/relying on their evaluation. I follow the minor league forum on here, as well as the Red's minor league affilliates. And from THEIR input, Krivsky gets a better grade in that area then his predeccessors.



According to who? When you draft you're mainly dealing with 18-19 yr olds. Unprovens. So other than Jay Bruce, where is all this talent (especially arms) that DanO acquired and have now progressed to the pinnacle of stardom?

How can you gauge Krivsky's drafts when you're dealing with youngsters who start at the lowest level?




And of course we were solid winners heading in the right direction prior to his coming right? Our farm system was sound and had alot of high level talent ready to come up.

Why were Bowden and then DanO fired then if they were doing such a solid job?

The fact of the matter is you hated the Krivsky hiring from the beginning, and due to that strong bias you're not going to give him ANY benefit of the doubt; but you're going to amplify any mistake he may make. You attempt to show no objectivity or balance at all when evaluating Krivsky.

Even when the guy has made a good move you'll twist it to say "even a blind dog finds a bone".

This organization's future success is dependent upon a strong farm system.

And you obviously believe that should be turned around pronto, and the results seen immediately.

I don't say it's blind luck when he makes a good move. In fact, I've always given credit where it's due. But Krivsky makes his good moves at the fringes and completely blows the important moves. That's a bad formula--one that Bowden had mastered. It's scary how similar their skill sets are, Bowden's and Krivsky's.

And no, I didn't hate Krivsky from the beginning; that's another mischaracterization of my position--I was one of a small minority who was pretty ecstatic with the Pena for Arroyo deal.

GAC
08-23-2007, 10:29 PM
I forgot to list Homer Bailey. But you don't give him much of a chance any-who.

nate
08-23-2007, 10:46 PM
Who has Krivsky restocked the farm with? I'd love to know. DanO accomplished in one draft what Krivsky not been able to do in two years.

He did?

How many Dan-O picks are playing for the Reds this year?

How many are playing in the big leagues period?

I only count one that's played with a big league club.

Even though they're at least two years in the minors and at most, three, only one has spent any time with the Reds.

Who am I missing?

Falls City Beer
08-23-2007, 10:50 PM
He did?

How many Dan-O picks are playing for the Reds this year?

How many are playing in the big leagues period?

I only count one that's played with a big league club.

Even though they're at least two years in the minors and at most, three, only one has spent any time with the Reds.

Who am I missing?

Bailey and Bruce have trumped anything Krivsky's gotten by a long shot. Krivsky hasn't acquired anything even close to that caliber. And we knew how good they were very shortly after they were drafted. We didn't need the 3-6 years that Krivsky's been granted to "turn around" the farm.

nate
08-23-2007, 10:55 PM
Bailey and Bruce have trumped anything Krivsky's gotten by a long shot. Krivsky hasn't acquired anything even close to that caliber. And we knew how good they were very shortly after they were drafted. We didn't need the 3-6 years that Krivsky's been granted to "turn around" the farm.

Dan-O got 3-4 years.

Did Krivsky pee on your dog?

Falls City Beer
08-23-2007, 11:01 PM
Did Krivsky pee on your dog?

No. DanO got two (and like I said, Bruce and Bailey were already making huge leaps through the minors). But that's neither here nor there. DanO was pathetic too; it only points to how bad Krivsky is that DanO can be compared favorably with him.

Krivsky's been a train wreck since after the Phillips trade. Sure he's made a couple of decent fringy moves since then, but his roster management has been nothing short of noxious, his trades have gained no ground, and his drafting has been a step above free association miming. The best that can be said for the guy is that he's not handed out massive contracts--yet he has nickel-and-dimed the club into penury with contracts to septuagenerians.

Ltlabner
08-23-2007, 11:12 PM
Phillips has reached his ceiling, Votto's been a bitter disappointment....

On what planet is this line considered a "bitter disappointment" ?


OBP SLG AVG OPS
.393 .496 .305 .889

And I like how you slip in that Philiips has reached his ceiling as if being a 20/20 secondbaseman with a solid glove and several years away from FA is somehow a bad thing.

I agree with you that the offense is still shaky if a few things don't go the Reds way (Hamilton injured, etc) but those comments are a bit of a head-scratcher.

redsmetz
08-23-2007, 11:17 PM
On what planet is this line considered a "bitter disappointment" ?


OBP SLG AVG OPS
.393 .496 .305 .889

And I like how you slip in that Philiips has reached his ceiling as if being a 20/20 secondbaseman with a solid glove and several years away from FA is somehow a bad thing.

I agree with you that the offense is still shaky if a few things don't go the Reds way (Hamilton injured, etc) but those comments are a bit of a head-scratcher.

I think we're back to the philosphy that if the player is on the Reds, they've peaked, they can never improve on a previous year or they'll regress to their norm.

How does anyone ever hope for a winning club when no one we get can ever do any good or maybe only have one "career year" etc. etc. etc.?

nate
08-23-2007, 11:28 PM
No. DanO got two (and like I said, Bruce and Bailey were already making huge leaps through the minors). But that's neither here nor there. DanO was pathetic too; it only points to how bad Krivsky is that DanO can be compared favorably with him.

Krivsky's been a train wreck since after the Phillips trade. Sure he's made a couple of decent fringy moves since then, but his roster management has been nothing short of noxious, his trades have gained no ground, and his drafting has been a step above free association miming. The best that can be said for the guy is that he's not handed out massive contracts--yet he has nickel-and-dimed the club into penury with contracts to septuagenerians.

The "Word a Day" calendar doesn't make your argument more convincing.

I do agree with what you said in the other thread; we need 3/5ths of a pitching staff.

The rest, not so much.

Falls City Beer
08-23-2007, 11:32 PM
On what planet is this line considered a "bitter disappointment" ?


OBP SLG AVG OPS
.393 .496 .305 .889

And I like how you slip in that Philiips has reached his ceiling as if being a 20/20 secondbaseman with a solid glove and several years away from FA is somehow a bad thing.

I agree with you that the offense is still shaky if a few things don't go the Reds way (Hamilton injured, etc) but those comments are a bit of a head-scratcher.

.890 OPS is nice, but it's a step backwards in an upward trajectory. He doesn't have great pop, and looks to be cut of the Casey mold instead of the Thome/Hafner mold. If Dunn leaves don't look for Votto to compensate much for his lost power. Plus, he, unlike Dunn, actually plays defense badly enough to hurt the team.

Falls City Beer
08-23-2007, 11:40 PM
The "Word a Day" calendar doesn't make your argument more convincing.

I do agree with what you said in the other thread; we need 3/5ths of a pitching staff.

The rest, not so much.

I know where the shiny new optimism is coming from: the team plays well for 3 weeks, the skies look clear, everything seems sunny. It's human nature--who doesn't get a little electricity from the hope created from a few weeks of non-embarrassing play?

But then you realize that this is the same team that lost all those games at the beginning of the year. Then you realize you've seen this team have these spurts in the last 7 seasons only to fall apart out of the gate the following season. It's going to take a dramatic change in philosophy to untrack this franchise from its constant losing, and there's really just nothing at all radical about Krivsky. I think he could do an okay job with a bigger budget or an already-in-place farm system, but he's not the man to turn this thing around. In two years, you can take the measure of a man's skills, and I have. And they are wanting for this task.

nate
08-23-2007, 11:50 PM
I know where the shiny new optimism is coming from: the team plays well for 3 weeks, the skies look clear, everything seems sunny. It's human nature--who doesn't get a little electricity from the hope created from a few weeks of non-embarrassing play?

Largely incorrect.

I'm not overly optimistic. I'm "Krivsky neutral."

You're just so pessimistic that someone who doesn't want to go in with you for the case of "Wayne Krivsky Toilet Paper" seems like a one of the disciples.


But then you realize that this is the same team that lost all those games at the beginning of the year. Then you realize you've seen this team have these spurts in the last 7 seasons only to fall apart out of the gate the following season. It's going to take a dramatic change in philosophy to untrack this franchise from its constant losing, and there's really just nothing at all radical about Krivsky. I think he could do an okay job with a bigger budget or an already-in-place farm system, but he's not the man to turn this thing around. In two years, you can take the measure of a man's skills, and I have. And they are wanting for this task.

I don't think there's anything radical about Krivsky either. But I don't know that the team needs a "radical" to make it successful.

But hey, since you took measure of him after two years on the job I have two questions: how did the Bengals do and can I go for a ride in your time machine with you some time?

Ltlabner
08-23-2007, 11:58 PM
.890 OPS is nice, but it's a step backwards in an upward trajectory. He doesn't have great pop, and looks to be cut of the Casey mold instead of the Thome/Hafner mold. If Dunn leaves don't look for Votto to compensate much for his lost power. Plus, he, unlike Dunn, actually plays defense badly enough to hurt the team.

Votto's numbers thus far...


Year Tm Lg PA AVG OBP SLG EqA VORP
2004 DYT 1B 473 .302 .419 .486 .276 13.1
2004 POT 1C 96 .298 .385 .560 .272 3.8
2005 SAR 1C 529 .256 .330 .425 .237 -15.8
2006 CHT 2A 590 .319 .408 .547 .319 64.9
2007 LOU 3A .305 .469 .496

Unfortunatley, I can't find an EqA for 2007 to account for park effects. Nonetheless, here's the league average production at 1st base in 2007


AVG OBP SLG
.276 .359 .464

Toss ontop of what Votto has done, his age, and the whole GABP effect for lefties and your Casey comparison and "bitter disapointment" talk goes out the window.


I know where the shiny new optimism is coming from

Always on the lookout to guard against that icky optimism.


In two years, you can take the measure of a man's skills, and I have. And they are wanting for this task.

Except you took the measure of the man's skills 4 months into the job, wrote him off, and have beating the drum since. And that four months includes the Arroyo/Pena deal that caused you so much joy.

Falls City Beer
08-24-2007, 12:00 AM
Votto's numbers thus far...


Year Tm Lg PA AVG OBP SLG EqA VORP
2004 DYT 1B 473 .302 .419 .486 .276 13.1
2004 POT 1C 96 .298 .385 .560 .272 3.8
2005 SAR 1C 529 .256 .330 .425 .237 -15.8
2006 CHT 2A 590 .319 .408 .547 .319 64.9
2007 LOU 3A .305 .469 .496

Unfortunatley, I can't find an EqA for 2007 to account for park effects. Nonetheless, here's the league average production at 1st base in 2007


AVG OBP SLG
.276 .359 .464

Toss ontop of what Votto has done the whole GABP effect for lefties and your Casey comparison and "bitter disapointment" talk goes out the window.



Always on the lookout to guard against that icky optimism.



Except you took the measure of the man's skills 4 months into the job, wrote him off, and have beating the drum since. And that four months includes the Arroyo/Pena deal that caused you so much joy.

Optimism, like pessimism, is a distortion.

Falls City Beer
08-24-2007, 12:04 AM
"Krivsky neutral" eh?

I've never seen "neutral" quite so dogged a defender of a cause.

Maybe "Krivsky Every Benefit of the Doubt Wait and See" perhaps?

Ltlabner
08-24-2007, 12:21 AM
Optimism, like pessimism, is a distortion.

And speaking of "lack of pop"

BPhil slg = .469 - 23 HR
Agon slg = .475 - 16 HR

Two guys who are generally considered to have "pop" yet have found a way to survive in MLB with slugging percentages around where Votto's is. And neither of these guys has the OBP track record Votto has.

Votto also hit 18 doubles in addition to 21 home runs in Louisville so he's far from an "all or nothing" hitter. And again, being a lefty in GABP can't hurt him.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think he's a savior and I wouldn't count on him to replace Dunn 1:1. I'm also not in a position to really dig up the other important numbers on Votto to paint a more complete picture about his EBH, IsoD, IsoP, etc etc. And as a further cavat, I don't expect him to produce MLB numbers from day 1.

But again, I think the label of "bitter dissapointment", while not without flair, is off base.

dougdirt
08-24-2007, 03:21 AM
.890 OPS is nice, but it's a step backwards in an upward trajectory. He doesn't have great pop, and looks to be cut of the Casey mold instead of the Thome/Hafner mold. If Dunn leaves don't look for Votto to compensate much for his lost power. Plus, he, unlike Dunn, actually plays defense badly enough to hurt the team.

Wait.... Dunn doesnt play defense badly enough to hurt the team?

That is utterly hilarious. Adam Dunn ranks 9th in the NL out of 12 qualified left fielders in zone rating. He also ranks 10th in ball out of zone gotten to. Of the 15 left fielders with at least 500 innings played (and Dunn has more than all but 4, and over 100 more than everyone below him on the list), he has gotten to fewer out of zone balls than 13 of them.

So even at a position filled with horrible defenders, Adam Dunn is still one of the worst in the league and does indeed hurt the team defensively.

Just a question though FCB, how many times have you seen Joey Votto play defense?

nate
08-24-2007, 08:03 AM
"Krivsky neutral" eh?

I've never seen "neutral" quite so dogged a defender of a cause.

Maybe "Krivsky Every Benefit of the Doubt Wait and See" perhaps?

If the cause is countering the spleen vent and hyberbole then, guilty.

Of course, it isn't.

Your sloganeering aside.

nate
08-24-2007, 08:04 AM
Wait.... Dunn doesnt play defense badly enough to hurt the team?

That is utterly hilarious. Adam Dunn ranks 9th in the NL out of 12 qualified left fielders in zone rating. He also ranks 10th in ball out of zone gotten to. Of the 15 left fielders with at least 500 innings played (and Dunn has more than all but 4, and over 100 more than everyone below him on the list), he has gotten to fewer out of zone balls than 13 of them.

So even at a position filled with horrible defenders, Adam Dunn is still one of the worst in the league and does indeed hurt the team defensively.

Just a question though FCB, how many times have you seen Joey Votto play defense?

I'm pretty sure I can guess what the two-part answer is:

1. Not a lot

2. It doesn't matter

nate
08-24-2007, 09:50 AM
And snark aside, I suppose this "discussion" has run its course like a bad burrito.

I suppose more positions were galvanized than changed.

GAC
08-24-2007, 10:17 AM
But Krivsky makes his good moves at the fringes and completely blows the important moves.

Would you consider the following "important moves"?....

Immediately signing Dunn

Signing Harang longterm to a ridiclously under market contract?

Retaining Arroyo.

Solidified 2B with Brandon Phillips over Freel, Olmedo, and a host of others.

And whether you personally don't like the contract or not, Gonzo, regardless of his personal family problems that have weighed on him this year, and I believe affected his performance overall (how could it not?), has been a plus at SS since Larkin.

He projects out at - 22 Hrs, 71 RBIs, .262 BA .317 OB% .475 SLG% .792 OPS

And the contract is not burdensome. 3.5 in '07, 4.6 in '08, 5.3 in '09.

Hamilton is young and has solid potential in the OF, and with the bat. Nice replacement for Kearns, and in CF. Still yet to be determined; but still a nice find for WK.

What about a kid like Keppinger? You can't just simply say he's a "flash in the pan". No one knows that. Aren't these the types of young, inexpensive players we should be acquiring and giving look-sees?

And how about Burton and Bray? These are young arms that are starting to come around and show bullpen promise.

My point is - WK has made alot of moves. And when you look at the number of moves he has made (percentages), then certainy some are gonna not pan out, or even turn into busts (ex - Cormier). And I don't deny his scrambling, trying to find arms to bring some sort of "order" to this bullpen. He has been acquiring them about any why he can (even Rule V's). Guess what? So has practically every other team in MLB. They are all out there "throwing crap up against the wall and hoping it somehow sticks".

If some on here think it's so easy to immediately fix this problem and pry these young talents from other organizations (while sometimes over valuing our own), then maybe they need to send their resumes into Mr. Castellini? ;)


And no, I didn't hate Krivsky from the beginning; that's another mischaracterization of my position--I was one of a small minority who was pretty ecstatic with the Pena for Arroyo deal.

We'll mark that one in your column then..... but one is a lonely number. ;)

Falls City Beer
08-24-2007, 12:37 PM
I'm pretty sure I can guess what the two-part answer is:

1. Not a lot

2. It doesn't matter

1. Not once.

2. Yes, I'm going on the reports of every last scout who has ever laid eyes on the guy fielding. And a serious defensive liability at first base is WAY more damaging than a minor liability in left.

dougdirt
08-24-2007, 12:42 PM
1. Not once.

2. Yes, I'm going on the reports of every last scout who has ever laid eyes on the guy fielding. And a serious defensive liability at first base is WAY more damaging than a minor liability in left.

2a. I have read scouts that think he is fine.
2b. I am going to pretend you didnt just call dunn a minor defensive liability in left and hold a straight face.

Falls City Beer
08-24-2007, 12:42 PM
If the cause is countering the spleen vent and hyberbole then, guilty.

Of course, it isn't.

Your sloganeering aside.

I've heard this one before: moderateness always trumps alarmism. Even when alarmism is warranted.

It's practically the motto of Redszone and Cincinnati.

It's why nothing ever gets done to improve the team--"we'll get 'em tomorrow."

Falls City Beer
08-24-2007, 12:44 PM
2a. I have read scouts that think he is fine.
2b. I am going to pretend you didnt just call dunn a minor defensive liability in left and hold a straight face.

Adam Dunn is a minor liability in left. I'll trust my eyes over yours or any cherry-picked "defensive metric" you trot out (because honestly, depending on which metric you choose, Dunn's anywhere from a decent LF to a horrible LF).

I'm myopic like that.

Ltlabner
08-24-2007, 12:52 PM
Adam Dunn is a minor liability in left. I'll trust my eyes over yours or any cherry-picked "defensive metric" you trot out (because honestly, depending on which metric you choose, Dunn's anywhere from a decent LF to a horrible LF).

I'm myopic like that.

So you trust your eyes on the Dunn situation, but can't be bothered to lay your eyes on Votto before declaring him a bust and tossing him on the scrap heap?

The defensive numbers on Dunn are flawed, but the defensive numbers on Votto ring true?

Falls City Beer
08-24-2007, 12:53 PM
So you trust your eyes on the Dunn situation, but can't be bothered to lay your eyes on Votto before declaring him a bust and tossing him on the scrap heap?

The numbers on Dunn are flawed, but the numbers on Votto ring true?

I trust the eyes of a flotilla of scouts viz. Votto. Yes.

Sue me if I don't trust the eyes of dougdirt before my own.

I think Votto can be a solid Caseyish bat for the next several years. But that's not much to get excited about.

flyer85
08-24-2007, 12:55 PM
So you trust your eyes on the Dunn situation, but can't be bothered to lay your eyes on Votto before declaring him a bust and tossing him on the scrap heap?

The defensive numbers on Dunn are flawed, but the defensive numbers on Votto ring true?all this talk makes me think of Greg Luzinski in LF. He used to stand facing the LF line, everything to the RF side of his butt(which was extensive) was for Maddox to catch.

pedro
08-24-2007, 12:55 PM
2a. I have read scouts that think he is fine.
2b. I am going to pretend you didnt just call dunn a minor defensive liability in left and hold a straight face.

Guys who are fine at first base don't make as many errors there as Votto does. Defensive problems at first base are much more damaging than a left fielder with somewhat poor range.

Votto doesn't currently project to be anything more than an average offensive 1st baseman right now. Coupled with his defensive problems he projects to be a below average 1st baseman at this point.

So excuse me but I'm going to keep a straight face while you continue to overvalue Reds minor leaguers just because they are your age.

dougdirt
08-24-2007, 12:57 PM
Adam Dunn is a minor liability in left. I'll trust my eyes over yours or any cherry-picked "defensive metric" you trot out (because honestly, depending on which metric you choose, Dunn's anywhere from a decent LF to a horrible LF).

I'm myopic like that.

I see that you live in Philadelphia according to your information. I also take that to mean you don't see Adam Dunn play in person much. If that is true, your eyes have absolutely no ability to evaluate Adam Dunn's defense at all, because you can't evaluate someones defense with your eyes on TV, because you simply can't see the entire play on TV.

For what its worth though, most scouts think Adam Dunn is absolutely horrible in the field and should be moved to first base or DH. Which scouts do you trust?

flyer85
08-24-2007, 12:58 PM
Votto doesn't currently project to be anything more than an average offensive 1st baseman right now. Coupled with his defensive problems ... all depends on how well he hits. The Phillies just ignore the defensive shortcomings of Ryan Howard, knowing that the offense will more than make up for it.

nate
08-24-2007, 12:58 PM
I've heard this one before: moderateness always trumps alarmism. Even when alarmism is warranted.

I've heard that too.

Usually attributed to "alarmists."


It's practically the motto of Redszone and Cincinnati.

Not the one I visit. Then again, you're the one with the time machine and 2 year evaluation of Wayne.


It's why nothing ever gets done to improve the team--"we'll get 'em tomorrow."

Right. We have so much influence on the front office.

Falls City Beer
08-24-2007, 01:00 PM
I see that you live in Philadelphia according to your information. I also take that to mean you don't see Adam Dunn play in person much. If that is true, your eyes have absolutely no ability to evaluate Adam Dunn's defense at all, because you can't evaluate someones defense with your eyes on TV, because you simply can't see the entire play on TV.

For what its worth though, most scouts think Adam Dunn is absolutely horrible in the field and should be moved to first base or DH. Which scouts do you trust?

I've watched Dunn play anywhere from 10-30 games a season over the last 7 years.

I don't need scouts when I have ready access to watching the games. In the absence of being able to watch games, I go with scouts' opinions. Then I go with other people; but I got to tell, doug: your ethos in this argument isn't all that great since you basically adore whatever moves and breathes in the Reds' minor league system.

Ltlabner
08-24-2007, 01:00 PM
I think Votto can be a solid Caseyish bat for the next several years. But that's not much to get excited about.

Even if we accept your premise as true, having a "Caseyish" bat (assuming he can maintain his high OBP numbers) in the midsts of a bunch of free swingers gets me a little excited.

Falls City Beer
08-24-2007, 01:01 PM
Right. We have so much influence on the front office.

The attitude pervades the FO too. It has since the days of Howsam.

westofyou
08-24-2007, 01:02 PM
The attitude pervades the FO too. It has since the days of Howsam.

Yeah he was a dog.

Falls City Beer
08-24-2007, 01:03 PM
Even if we accept your premise as true, having a "Caseyish" bat (assuming he can maintain his high OBP) numbers in the midsts of a bunch of free swingers gets me a little excited.

Fine. If you like it, great. We were told, however, that Votto could become a Thome. Casey is obviously a step down from Thome, correct? Hence, the "bitter disappointment" comment.

pedro
08-24-2007, 01:03 PM
... all depends on how well he hits. The Phillies just ignore the defensive shortcomings of Ryan Howard, knowing that the offense will more than make up for it.

If Votto could hit like Howard then his offense would make up for it. But he can't or at least doesn't right now.

Adam Dunn, OTOH, does hit like Ryan Howard and plays a less important defensive position so his defense isn't nearly as important, despite the consternation of many here (yourself not necessarily included)

Falls City Beer
08-24-2007, 01:04 PM
Yeah he was a dog.

Sorry, I meant to say "since AFTER the days of Howsam." Apologies.

nate
08-24-2007, 01:05 PM
The attitude pervades the FO too. It has since the days of Howsam.

Maybe its ghosts?

dougdirt
08-24-2007, 01:05 PM
Guys who are fine at first base don't make as many errors there as Votto does. Defensive problems at first base are much more damaging than a left fielder with somewhat poor range.

Votto doesn't currently project to be anything more than an average offensive 1st baseman right now. Coupled with his defensive problems he projects to be a below average 1st baseman at this point.

So excuse me but I'm going to keep a straight face while you continue to overvalue Reds minor leaguers just because they are your age.

I don't think my age, or their age has anything to do with it, although you did a good job on knowing that Votto and I are both 23. At most, Votto has 8 errors at first base in roughly 95 games at first base. Just looked at some other first baseman in the majors from 2000-2006 with 75-110 games at first base with 8 or more errors. The lowest fielding percentage among them was a .981 by Andres Gallarraga. Everyone else was .987 or higher, so just going by that, I would have to make a reasonable assumption that Votto is boasting at least a .981 fielding percentage, but probably higher. I think defensively a first baseman with a .981 fielding percentage is not hurting the team as much as a left fielder who can't get to balls in the gaps that turn into doubles and triples.

flyer85
08-24-2007, 01:06 PM
If Votto could hit like Howard then his offense would make up for it. But he can't or at least doesn't right now.but there is always a point where the offense will cause the team to ignore defensive shortcomings, no matter the position. Just wondering where that is for Votto, especially since Hatty isn't very good at 1B either.

Not making errors at 1st is nice, but the ability to dig throws is probably the most important skill a 1B can have. A really low number of infield errors for a team used to follow Olerud around.

dougdirt
08-24-2007, 01:09 PM
I've watched Dunn play anywhere from 10-30 games a season over the last 7 years.

I don't need scouts when I have ready access to watching the games. In the absence of being able to watch games, I go with scouts' opinions. Then I go with other people; but I got to tell, doug: your ethos in this argument isn't all that great since you basically adore whatever moves and breathes in the Reds' minor league system.

You see Dunn play in person 10-30 times a year and still think he is not a defensive liability? I see Dunn play that much in person too and the guy is a butcher out there. Its not really his fault, he just is too big for the position and I don't think he can really get much better no matter how hard he tried, its just the best he can do.

As for me adoring all that moves and breathes in the system, I disagree. Obviously you have not seen my opinions on Livingston, Dumatrait or Matt Maloney recently.

pedro
08-24-2007, 01:09 PM
I don't think my age, or their age has anything to do with it, although you did a good job on knowing that Votto and I are both 23. At most, Votto has 8 errors at first base in roughly 95 games at first base. Just looked at some other first baseman in the majors from 2000-2006 with 75-110 games at first base with 8 or more errors. The lowest fielding percentage among them was a .981 by Andres Gallarraga. Everyone else was .987 or higher, so just going by that, I would have to make a reasonable assumption that Votto is boasting at least a .981 fielding percentage, but probably higher. I think defensively a first baseman with a .981 fielding percentage is not hurting the team as much as a left fielder who can't get to balls in the gaps that turn into doubles and triples.

But you're wrong.

A first baseman is going to get somewhere in the order of 1200 TC's over the course of a year. A LF is going to get somewhere around 225-250.

Where do you want the ham fisted guy playing?

Falls City Beer
08-24-2007, 01:10 PM
but there is always a point where the offense will cause the team to ignore defensive shortcomings, no matter the position. Just wondering where that is for Votto, especially since Hatty isn't very good at 1B either.

Not making errors at 1st is nice, but the ability to dig throws is probably the most important skill a 1B can have. The a really low number of infield errors for a team used to follow Olerud around.


I'm not sure there is one magic number to answer your question. However, I know that I'm not enamored of the Reds installing a poorer-fielding Casey at first and calling that a "fix."

dougdirt
08-24-2007, 01:11 PM
But you're wrong.

A first baseman is going to get somewhere in the order or 1200 TC's over the course of a year. A LF is going to get somewhere around 225-250.

Where do you want the ham fisted guy playing?

Thats my point though, 8 errors in 700 chances isn't nearly as bad as 4 errors in 200 chances and then 10-15 extra doubles allowed over just average left fielders because someone can't get to the gap or the line.

Falls City Beer
08-24-2007, 01:11 PM
As for me adoring all that moves and breathes in the system, I disagree. Obviously you have not seen my opinions on Livingston, Dumatrait or Matt Maloney recently.


You'd have to have serious brain damage to like ANYTHING that Dumatrait does. Except maybe fart and pick his teeth.

jojo
08-24-2007, 01:13 PM
I've watched Dunn play anywhere from 10-30 games a season over the last 7 years.

I don't need scouts when I have ready access to watching the games. In the absence of being able to watch games, I go with scouts' opinions. Then I go with other people; but I got to tell, doug: your ethos in this argument isn't all that great since you basically adore whatever moves and breathes in the Reds' minor league system.

I'd love to see the scouting reports or barring those, attributable comments where any scout thought Dunn's defense wasn't an issue.

Concerning your comment about cherry picking defensive metrics, you really mean that you prefer not to give the best ones more weight...... That seems like a strange approach to me.

flyer85
08-24-2007, 01:14 PM
I really don't think errors are the big issue because a 1B that can dig throws will save the other infielders a ton of errors while one that can't doesn't run up his own error total.

Having never watched Votto the Reds "lack of faith" in his ability makes me wonder about a couple of issues.

Do they like Hatty's defense at 1B? I sure don't, his footwork is awful and he costs the other IFs some errors by being very average at digging throws.

If they don't like Hatty's defense what does that imply about Votto?

pedro
08-24-2007, 01:16 PM
Thats my point though, 8 errors in 700 chances isn't nearly as bad as 4 errors in 200 chances and then 10-15 extra doubles allowed over just average left fielders because someone can't get to the gap or the line.

When a first baseman can't catch the ball or has lousy footwork you can bet they give up their fair share of doubles into the RF corner, don't prevent errors given to the other IF's on throws in the dirt or give up hits that they should have converted into outs.

You're completely underestimating the importance of not having a clod touching the ball so much.

Falls City Beer
08-24-2007, 01:22 PM
I'd love to see the scouting reports or barring those, attributable comments where any scout thought Dunn's defense wasn't an issue.

Concerning your comment about cherry picking defensive metrics, you really mean that you prefer not to give the best ones more weight...... That seems like a strange approach to me.

There's a real problem with your logic--you're begging the question that there ARE better and worse metrics. You're presupposing their efficacy. I don't think ANY defensive metric corresponds sufficiently with the reality of what happens on the field--because I don't think that fielding events are controlled enough (like offensive and pitching events) to measure with anything resembling accuracy. I'd put a good, knowledeable scouts word on defense up against any metric.

And neither any scouts nor I have said that Dunn's defense isn't ANY issue. To be sure, he's not good out there. But on balance, it makes very little difference.

jojo
08-24-2007, 01:23 PM
Defensive problems at first base are much more damaging than a left fielder with somewhat poor range.

That's not really true. A left fielder who is -10 compared to his peers really impacts the teams run differential the same way a firstbaseman who is -10 compared to his peers would.


So excuse me but I'm going to keep a straight face while you continue to overvalue Reds minor leaguers just because they are your age.

In Doug's defense, he's an old 23....:mooner:

All kidding aside, the Reds currently have four guys who have been making scouts giddy. Bruce is the best outfield prospect left in the minors (maybe he's simply just the best prospect left in the minors) while Homer is thought by many to be the best pitching prospect in the minors. Cueto and Votto are also being praised. There's legit reason to be high on the Reds farm right now.

Falls City Beer
08-24-2007, 01:27 PM
That's not really true. A left fielder who is -10 compared to his peers really impacts the teams run differential the same way a firstbaseman who is -10 compared to his peers would.

Explain this. Thoroughly.

flyer85
08-24-2007, 01:27 PM
All kidding aside, the Reds currently have four guys who have been making scouts giddy. Bruce is the best outfield prospect left in the minors (maybe he's simply just the best prospect left in the minors) while Homer is thought by many to be the best pitching prospect in the minors. Cueto and Votto are also being praised. There's legit reason to be high on the Reds farm right now.I wait until I see some success at the major league. Most top prospects struggle to perform at the beginning of their major league careers(just like Homer did). It seems that Votto is likely ready but the others may need another year.

Defensive metrics won't do justice to 1B until they have a way of capturing data about digging errant throws from the infielders.

jojo
08-24-2007, 01:28 PM
There's a real problem with your logic--you're begging the question that there ARE better and worse metrics. You're presupposing their efficacy. I don't think ANY defensive metric corresponds sufficiently with the reality of what happens on the field--because I don't think that fielding events are controlled enough (like offensive and pitching events) to measure with anything resembling accuracy. I'd put a good, knowledeable scouts word on defense up against any metric.

I'm not begging the question. There is a consensus within the sabr community that PBP metrics are superior, a super majority of major league FO's have begun evaluating defense using them, and I've reached the same conclusion about them through studying the issue.

You formed a conclusion about PBP metrics but really haven't supported it in a meaningful way.

Finally, I think its actually best when scouts AND defensive metrics agree. In the case of Dunn, that is indeed the reality.

pedro
08-24-2007, 01:29 PM
That's not really true. A left fielder who is -10 compared to his peers really impacts the teams run differential the same way a firstbaseman who is -10 compared to his peers would.



In Doug's defense, he's an old 23....:mooner:

All kidding aside, the Reds currently have four guys who have been making scouts giddy. Bruce is the best outfield prospect left in the minors (maybe he's simply just the best prospect left in the minors) while Homer is thought by many to be the best pitching prospect in the minors. Cueto and Votto are also being praised. There's legit reason to be high on the Reds farm right now.

I never said anything about run differential. (which, by the way, I think is extremely inaccurate, especially at either end of the spectrum)

As for the Reds prospects, it's not that I think Votto won't be a good player someday it's just that I don't think it's a given that he's ready right now. Bailey? I couldn't have been less impressed with his stint in the majors after all the hype thrown his way. I watched Philip Hughes pitch the other night and he blows Bailey away (and he's not ready yet either)

flyer85
08-24-2007, 01:30 PM
Explain this. Thoroughly.I do not know how they translate defensive metrics into +/- runs. To me it inherently smacks of making a leap that is extremely difficult. Seems like you would need some kind of PBP analysis to do something like that.

I guess my point is it seems like it would be extremely difficult to translate fielding data into runs.

Ltlabner
08-24-2007, 01:33 PM
However, I know that I'm not enamored of the Reds installing a poorer-fielding Casey at first and calling that a "fix."

Repetition of an idea does not imbue it with more accuracy.


Sean Casey

Year Tm Lg PA AVG OBP SLG
2005 CIN MJ 587 .312 .371 .423
2006 PIT MJ 244 .296 .377 .408
2006 DET MJ 196 .245 .286 .364
2007 DET-A 378 .286 .346 .378

Joey Votto

Year Tm Lg PA AVG OBP SLG
2004 DYT 1B 473 .302 .419 .486
2005 SAR 1C 529 .256 .330 .425
2006 CHT 2A 590 .319 .408 .547
2007 LOU 3A 456 .300 .390 .487

With all the usual caveats for park effects, AAA to MLB diferentals and the big giant astricks that Votto might fail in the bigs, I just don't see the comp to Casey. Especially in the area of "pop" which is what you and I have been discussing.

jojo
08-24-2007, 01:34 PM
Explain this. Thoroughly.

We've been through this ad nausea and I have. Search your name and UZR.

If a LFer costs his team 10 runs versus league average and a first baseman costs his team 10 runs versus league average, then each have cost their team 10 runs versus league average. :cool:

Falls City Beer
08-24-2007, 01:35 PM
I'm not begging the question. There is a consensus within the sabr community that PBP metrics are superior, a super majority of major league FO's have begun evaluating defense using them, and I've reached the same conclusion about them through studying the issue.

You formed a conclusion about PBP metrics but really haven't supported it in a meaningful way.

Finally, I think its actually best when scouts AND defensive metrics agree. In the case of Dunn, that is indeed the reality.

So: argument from authority, and certainly dubious authority. They say they're good, so they're good. I'm afraid I form my own opinions about the nature of tabulating events that differs from the SABR community. While I can see that some stats are clearly more logical and sensible than others (fielding percentage is obviously an awful metric; PBP might be better), I still don't see enough in the metrics that squares with empirical, on-site observations to warrant my trust. I'm not just going to take another's "word for it."

Patrick Bateman
08-24-2007, 01:37 PM
The way to judge Dunn's fielding is to compare him to his peers (other left fielders). Dunn looks pretty bad in left field, but there are very few left fielders who can actually field.

Dunn is not that bad for a left fielder. The likes of Carlos Lee, Jason Bay, Pat Burrell, Josh Willingham, Chris Duncan, Matt Holliday, Barry Bonds, Luis Gonzalez, etc. need to be considered.

Dunn is no gold glover out there, but besides maybe Eric Byrnes, there is basically nobody in the NL that can field well in LF. And that's why Dunn's fielding doesn't hurt the team. His ability to hit the ball makes him a superb player in our line-up, all things considered.

Falls City Beer
08-24-2007, 01:38 PM
We've been through this ad nausea and I have. Search your name and UZR.

If a LFer costs his team 10 runs versus league average and a first baseman costs his team 10 runs versus league average, then each have cost their team 10 runs versus league average. :cool:

Actually this is the first time you have attempted to explain it without acronyms. So thank you.

Boy: that's a tangled bunch of presuppositions to untangle to reach this conclusion:

"If a LFer costs his team 10 runs versus league average and a first baseman costs his team 10 runs versus league average, then each have cost their team 10 runs versus league average."

flyer85
08-24-2007, 01:39 PM
The way to judge Dunn's fielding is to compare him to his peers (other left fielders). Dunn looks pretty bad in left field, but there are very few left fielders who can actually field.

Dunn is not that bad for a left fielder. The likes of Carlos Lee, Jason Bay, Pat Burrell, Josh Willingham, Chris Duncan, Matt Holliday, Barry Bonds, Luis Gonzalez, etc. need to be considered.

Dunn is no gold glover out there, but besides maybe Eric Byrnes, there is basically nobody in the NL that can field well in LF. And that's why Dunn's fielding doesn't hurt the team. His ability to hit the ball makes him a superb player in our line-up, all things considered.worrying about LF defense(with all of the Reds real problems) is one of those pimple on the butt kind of things.

nate
08-24-2007, 01:47 PM
worrying about LF defense(with all of the Reds real problems) is one of those pimple on the butt kind of things.

It only worries butt models?

SteelSD
08-24-2007, 01:56 PM
Wait.... Dunn doesnt play defense badly enough to hurt the team?

That is utterly hilarious. Adam Dunn ranks 9th in the NL out of 12 qualified left fielders in zone rating. He also ranks 10th in ball out of zone gotten to. Of the 15 left fielders with at least 500 innings played (and Dunn has more than all but 4, and over 100 more than everyone below him on the list), he has gotten to fewer out of zone balls than 13 of them.

So even at a position filled with horrible defenders, Adam Dunn is still one of the worst in the league and does indeed hurt the team defensively.

Just an FYI- the THT fielding data you're viewing is highly suspect and their "breakout" of OOZ Put-Outs tells us little. One example is Barry Bonds (who can barely walk):

2007: OOZ % of total Put Outs- 18.05% (NL Rank- 3rd)
2007: OOZ % of BIZ Plays- 22.03% (NL Rank- 3rd)

2006: OOZ % of total Put Outs- 18.62% (NL Rank- 2nd)
2006: OOZ % of BIZ Plays- 22.88% (NL Rank- 1st)

Bonds ranks 8th in the NL in 2007 in "New" ZR according to THT and ranked 9th in the NL in 2006. Now, do we really believe that a guy who doesn't do a very good job of getting to balls in his zone actually produces such a high % of OOZ Plays versus his total Put Outs and BIZ Plays due to his range? Was he really so skilled last season that he got to more OOZ balls (35) than Dave Roberts (34) in 95 fewer Innings than Roberts? How could a guy so bad in his area of responsibility be so good outside of it?

Another problem is that ZR is being tweaked by folks who don't seem to understand how original ZR is actually calculated. Here's Dave Studeman on the subject in a recent article at THT:

http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/fielding-stats-at-the-hardball-times/

When fielders make plays on balls outside their zones, they're given credit for an "Out of Zone" play. In the STATS Zone Rating metric, still published by ESPN, among others, plays made out of the zone are included in a player's numerator (the "Plays Made" total) and denominator (the "Balls in Zone") in order to give the player credit for wider range.

Studeman starts off fine by noting that players do receive credit for BOZ Outs recorded. But ZR is simply ZR Outs divided by ZR Chances. A BOZ Out counts as a ZR Out, but not as a ZR Chance. That means it DOESN'T count as a "Ball in Zone".

Interestingly enough, we find that THT's version of Zone Rating places Dunn as one of the five BEST NL Left Fielders in 2006 when regular Zone Rating suggests that he was the 2nd worst among qualified players. In fact, to produce a .878 ZR with 8 Errors would suggest that Dunn flashed fabulous range last year while, apparently, falling off a cliff this season. Is that really what we think happened?

dougdirt
08-24-2007, 02:09 PM
The way to judge Dunn's fielding is to compare him to his peers (other left fielders). Dunn looks pretty bad in left field, but there are very few left fielders who can actually field.

Dunn is not that bad for a left fielder. The likes of Carlos Lee, Jason Bay, Pat Burrell, Josh Willingham, Chris Duncan, Matt Holliday, Barry Bonds, Luis Gonzalez, etc. need to be considered.

Dunn is no gold glover out there, but besides maybe Eric Byrnes, there is basically nobody in the NL that can field well in LF. And that's why Dunn's fielding doesn't hurt the team. His ability to hit the ball makes him a superb player in our line-up, all things considered.

Josh Willingham is the only guy you listed that is worse than Dunn in LF. When compared to his peers, Adam Dunn, even out in left field among other horrible fielders, is still near the bottom rung on the ladder.

westofyou
08-24-2007, 02:12 PM
Josh Willingham is the only guy you listed that is worse than Dunn in LF. When compared to his peers, Adam Dunn, even out in left field among other horrible fielders, is still near the bottom rung on the ladder.

Yet the importance of defense in LF in the grand scheme of things is the equivalent to a step ladder, easily to work around if you ain't got one.

flyer85
08-24-2007, 02:14 PM
Worrying about defensive metrics is specious. Even the saber folks admit that all defensive metrics are decidedly lacking and as Steel pointed out, the THT stuff doesn't pass the "smell test" because it can't explain how someone can be bad getting to balls in their zone and at the same time good in getting to balls outside of their zone. The defensive stuff is still highly subjective at this point and hard to correlate to the real world(what actually happens). I'm sure it will get better and more refined in the future but is seems to be mostly shooting in the dark. My take is that among LFs Dunn is slightly below average on defense and above average on offense and I will leave it at that. If I was the Reds I worry more about the guys that are average or below in both areas.

I have seen a lot of games with Dunn in LF and my observations are:
1) his starts are below average(mainly due to his size)
2) he takes straight lines


The contrast between Dunn and WMP when he was a Red were interesting because WMP got terrible jumps(sometimes he hadn't even started moving when you snapeed your head around), he never took straight lines to the ball(always made a mid-course adjustment).

Patrick Bateman
08-24-2007, 02:22 PM
Josh Willingham is the only guy you listed that is worse than Dunn in LF. When compared to his peers, Adam Dunn, even out in left field among other horrible fielders, is still near the bottom rung on the ladder.

I disagree. Bonds has no range. Chris Duncan looks like he's never played a day of OF in his entire life. Carlos makes the ground shake when he runs. Pat Burell is basically Dunn's twin brother. Holliday and Bay have always gotten by due to their hitting. The list goes on.

Doug, you suggest that FCB doesn't have enough experience to make a judgement about Dunn's fielding because he hasn't seen him play enough in person, have you seen each and eery one of those LF'ders play enough in person to really gauge an informative position with 100% authority. Obviously you hae seen Dunn play plenty, but I really have to disagree with you if you think guys like Carlos Lee are equating more value than Dunn because of their abilities to field. They basically all stink. Dunn's inability to field is costing the Reds very little, if at all. Again, left field is the last place where you want to make a fuss about fielding anyways. It's why all of those guys are playing there in the first place.

dougdirt
08-24-2007, 02:29 PM
I disagree. Bonds has no range. Chris Duncan looks like he's never played a day of OF in his entire life. Carlos makes the ground shake when he runs. Pat Burell is basically Dunn's twin brother. Holliday and Bay have always gotten by due to their hitting. The list goes on.

Doug, you suggest that FCB doesn't have enough experience to make a judgement about Dunn's fielding because he hasn't seen him play enough in person, have you seen each and eery one of those LF'ders play enough in person to really gauge an informative position with 100% authority. Obiously you hae seen Dunn play plenty, but I really have to disagree with you if you think guys like Carlos Lee are equating more value than Dunn because of their abilities to field. They basically all stink. Dunn's inability to field is costing the Reds very little, if at all.

Surely I have not seen enough of the other guys to make full judgements on them. However when the numbers agree with the eyes of nearly everyone in the 'Adam Dunn still really sucks in the field' arguement, there is not a lot to talk about when it comes to his defense.

While I agree defensive stats are lacking in comparison to nearly all other stats, when they all agree to the point that Adam Dunn is still very bad at his position compared to his peers, I don't think I need to see every other left fielder in baseball.

jojo
08-24-2007, 02:31 PM
Actually this is the first time you have attempted to explain it without acronyms. So thank you.

Boy: that's a tangled bunch of presuppositions to untangle to reach this conclusion:

"If a LFer costs his team 10 runs versus league average and a first baseman costs his team 10 runs versus league average, then each have cost their team 10 runs versus league average."

And I humbly submit you haven't honestly tried....

pedro
08-24-2007, 02:33 PM
Surely I have not seen enough of the other guys to make full judgements on them. However when the numbers agree with the eyes of nearly everyone in the 'Adam Dunn still really sucks in the field' arguement, there is not a lot to talk about when it comes to his defense.

While I agree defensive stats are lacking in comparison to nearly all other stats, when they all agree to the point that Adam Dunn is still very bad at his position compared to his peers, I don't think I need to see every other left fielder in baseball.

You can't have it both ways Doug.

Dunn is a below average LF but only slightly.

I really wish you could have seen Greg Luzinski or Pete Incaviglia play out there.You'd have a whole new appreciation for how good Dunn is in LF.

Falls City Beer
08-24-2007, 02:36 PM
And I humble submit you haven't honestly tried....

You are wrong. Look, I'm not some incurious clod. I know what fundamental flaws underlie defensive metrics, most of them I've already outlined in the thread.

Though you've never answered the contention--by several on this board--that the run differential assumption you make is dubious.

You just keep repeating that the sabr community gives it the blue ribbon.

You don't pick apart the fact that a TON of unpacked assumptions undergird the contention that defensive metrics can be so handily translated into run figures.

I can't help it if you can't clearly outline the basis of those assumptions in English--at least not till now.

jojo
08-24-2007, 02:36 PM
So argument from authority, and certainly dubious authority. They say they're good, so they're good.

We've been through this in intricate detail many times. Evoking logical fallacies not only ignores those many conversations it also amounts to hand waving on your part in this instance. You have a lot to say about defensive metrics-that's true- but unfortunately it's always spoken in generalities.

BTW, suggesting something is valid in part because a group of experts have concluded it, is NOT a logical fallacy. I understand that you wouldn't take my word for it (though it is insulting of you to conveniently ignore that I've formed my own opinion). However, I'm not sure how groups of statisticians who have devoted years to the issue or major league FO's who have hired them qualify as a dubious authority.


I'm afraid I form my own opinions about the nature of tabulating events that differs from the SABR community.

On this issue, you refute PBP metrics with generalities.

BTW, IMHO, winshares suck. Likewise, the way Baseball Prospectus handles defense sucks too. My arguments about the proper evaluation of defense can hardly be cast aside because of slavelike lambing up to popular sabermetricians.


While I can see that some stats are clearly more logical and sensible than others (fielding percentage is obviously an awful metric; PBP might be better), I still don't see enough in the metrics that squares with empirical, on-site observations to warrant my trust. I'm not just going to take another's "word for it."

Are you really evoking this argument based upon Dunn's defense?

flyer85
08-24-2007, 02:37 PM
You can't have it both ways Doug.

Dunn is a below average LF but only slightly.

I really wish you could have seen Greg Luzinski ... still thinks Luzinski take the cake. He had massive thighs and butt, was built like a refrigerator with short stumpy legs and a wide torso and had no speed whatsoever. I am not kidding when I say he played LF facing the line and not the infield.

SteelSD
08-24-2007, 02:39 PM
Surely I have not seen enough of the other guys to make full judgements on them. However when the numbers agree with the eyes of nearly everyone in the 'Adam Dunn still really sucks in the field' arguement, there is not a lot to talk about when it comes to his defense.

Whoa there. Adam Dunn still really sucks in the field? The THT ZR data you were using suggests that Dunn was very good in the field in 2006. But he "still" sucks? Or does he just now suck?

Or is it more plausible that he's slightly below average for his peer group and actually average to above average versus the better offensive NL left fielder options?

pedro
08-24-2007, 02:39 PM
... still thinks Luzinski takes the cake. He had massive thighs and butt, short stumpy legs and no speed whatsoever. I am not kidding when I say he played LF facing the line and not the infield.

Yup. He and Inky used to fall down when they ran.

How many times have we seen Dunn just trip over his feet and fall on his face? That's bad LF defense.

dougdirt
08-24-2007, 02:39 PM
You can't have it both ways Doug.

Dunn is a below average LF but only slightly.

I really wish you could have seen Greg Luzinski or Pete Incaviglia play out there.You'd have a whole new appreciation for how good Dunn is in LF.

I am not having it both ways. Dunn sucks in LF no matter how you want to look at it. Just becuase he may not be the worst EVER does not mean he doesnt suck with the leather.

flyer85
08-24-2007, 02:41 PM
That's bad LF defense.
Kal Daniels says :wave:. As soon as Kal started circling(which happened on any ball hit directly over his head), there was a good chance he wan't going to end the play still on his feet.

westofyou
08-24-2007, 02:43 PM
You can't have it both ways Doug.

Dunn is a below average LF but only slightly.

I really wish you could have seen Greg Luzinski or Pete Incaviglia play out there.You'd have a whole new appreciation for how good Dunn is in LF.

or Lonnie Smith, or George Foster or Willie Horton or ....

pedro
08-24-2007, 02:44 PM
I am not having it both ways. Dunn sucks in LF no matter how you want to look at it. Just becuase he may not be the worst EVER does not mean he doesnt suck with the leather.

You sure are. You told FCB his opinions weren't valid b/c he didn't see Dunn play live as much as you did and then went on to say that you didn't need to see anyone else to know he was pretty much the worst with exception of Josh Willingham. If it's not doubletalk to cover your rump then it's complete arrogance. Either way it ain't good.

flyer85
08-24-2007, 02:46 PM
or Lonnie Smith, or George Foster or Willie Horton or ....or Alex Johnson(although I can't claim first hand knowledge, just anecdotal from my dad telling me how bad he was as an OF when with the Reds.)

westofyou
08-24-2007, 02:48 PM
or Alex Johnson(although I can't claim first hand knowledge, just anecdotal from my dad telling me how bad he was as an OF when with the Reds.)

Johnson once dropped a ball and Bristol made him get a new glove because he thought Alex's was a hunk... he got a new one, didn't break it in and took it out in the field, the first ball he had hit to him clanked off the new leather which could be barely opened.

Alex also once ignored the Angels coaches defensing of him to stay in the shade created by the light tower.

dabvu2498
08-24-2007, 02:49 PM
Lonnie Smith

Skates.

Falls City Beer
08-24-2007, 02:52 PM
We've been through this in intricate detail many times. Evoking logical fallacies not only ignores those many conversations it also amounts to hand waving on your part in this instance. You have a lot to say about defensive metrics-that's true- but unfortunately it's always spoken in generalities.

There's nothing the least bit general at all about pointing out the untenability of tracking defensive stats, even PBP ones--ones that contend to be the most accurate--; as I said, and I want you to pay attention, so you don't once again dismiss it and claim that you've trotted out the numbers, while I've spoken globally (no less a valid position than the self-reflexive method of pointing STRICTLY to numbers): defensive metrics are PROBLEMATIC (not useless) because of the unreliability of tabulating defensive events, unlike tabulating controlled and discrete events like pitches and hitting. The best that defensive metrics can do--and yes, the ones YOU chose are better than the vast majority of them--is to give you a bleary picture of what is happening on the field. Whereas, IMO, most advanced hitting and pitching metrics give you much closer to an HDTV picture of events. No stat is perfect, and I'm not utterly impugning the methodologies of the sabr community in their search for defensive metrics; I just don't find them convincing or sufficiently stable.

I am curious, though; if you do dismiss BP's defensive metrics, why? What are your warrants in doing so? And how do you gauge the reliability of one versus the other?

jojo
08-24-2007, 02:52 PM
You are wrong. Look, I'm not some incurious clod.

I have never said you were an incurious clod. Rather IMHO you're insufferably obtuse when you decide to be. :cool:


ugh you've never answered the contention--by several on this board--that the run differential assumption you make is dubious.

You just keep repeating that the sabr community gives it the blue ribbon.

Use the search function. I've posted a lot on that issue.

And you're starting to get a little offensive (or maybe I shouldn't have skipped lunch). Imagine if, say, someone suggested that you were incapable of forming your own thoughts but rather simply gravitated toward any position that opposed consensus thought or cheerful commentary. Now imagine if someone actually used that as a premise to refute your argument.

You're an intelligent fellow and you would be rightly miffed in that hypothetical I think.


You don't pick apart the fact that a TON of unpacked assumptions undergird the contention that defensive metrics can be so handily translated into run figures.

Please educate me then since what I've written in the past doesn't do the subject justice. If I could benefit from your carefully constructed argument which points out the specific (and it sounds like fatal) flaws in PBP metrics like UZR then I certainly am very willing to listen. We're all seeking the truth here-I'd count it a blessing to be corrected (and that is typed with heartfelt sincerity). I already know you think PBP metrics are flawed. I'm very interested in how they're flawed specifically.

SteelSD
08-24-2007, 02:59 PM
You sure are. You told FCB his opinions weren't valid b/c he didn't see Dunn play live as much as you did and then went on to say that you didn't need to see anyone else to know he was pretty much the worst with exception of Josh Willingham. If it's not doubletalk to cover your rump then it's complete arrogance. Either way it ain't good.

Ohhh...I'm always very impressed when someone can complete that kind of lockdown during a debate. Well done.

Falls City Beer
08-24-2007, 03:14 PM
I have never said you were an incurious clod. Rather IMHO you're insufferably obtuse when you decide to be. :cool:



Use the search function. I've posted a lot on that issue.

And you're starting to get a little offensive (or maybe I shouldn't have skipped lunch). Imagine if, say, someone suggested that you were incapable of forming your own thoughts but rather simply gravitated toward any position that opposed consensus thought or cheerful commentary. Now imagine if someone actually used that as a premise to refute your argument.

You're an intelligent fellow and you would be rightly miffed in that hypothetical I think.



Please educate me then since what I've written in the past doesn't do the subject justice. If I could benefit from your carefully constructed argument which points out the specific (and it sounds like fatal) flaws in PBP metrics like UZR then I certainly am very willing to listen. We're all seeking the truth here-I'd count it a blessing to be corrected (and that is typed with heartfelt sincerity). I already know you think PBP metrics are flawed. I'm very interested in how they're flawed specifically.

I said PBP as it pertains to know very neatly what defense costs in terms of runs is flawed. It's basic scientific method stuff: statistics that require too many events and don't provide enough by way of repeatability are lesser statistics than those drawn from events that are closer to one-to-one, repeatable, and that bridge the shortest distance between cause and effect, like hitting or pitching events.

Cyclone792
08-24-2007, 03:44 PM
My take is that among LFs Dunn is slightly below average on defense and above average on offense and I will leave it at that. If I was the Reds I worry more about the guys that are average or below in both areas.

I have seen a lot of games with Dunn in LF and my observations are:
1) his starts are below average (mainly due to his size)
2) he takes straight lines

The contrast between Dunn and WMP when he was a Red were interesting because WMP got terrible jumps(sometimes he hadn't even started moving when you snapeed your head around), he never took straight lines to the ball(always made a mid-course adjustment).

I've seen Dunn (and Pena) play live countless times, and I agree with all of the above. I've even sat down the left field line and in the left field terrace seats numerous times this season, and I've gotten a great feel for how effective Dunn's defense has been.

The most obvious thing I've noticed with Dunn's defense? It's improved in 2007, no doubt about it. As flyer noted, Dunn's lines to the ball are oftentimes very good and pretty much the best line possible to take. And once Dunn gets moving, he actually has decent speed thanks to the long stride he takes. He may look slow because of his size, but that long stride is very helpful.

The two biggest weaknesses in Dunn's defensive game are the jumps and his hands fielding balls in the corner. He does get slow jumps, though his reads are good and when he does get going it's almost always in the right direction. His hands are still a bit shaky too fielding balls hit down in the corner, but I'd say he's improved in that aspect a bit too from previous seasons.

An interesting sidenote to Dunn's defense: as soon as every new hitter is announced, he's always looking into the dugout between batters for defensive positioning shifts from Reds coaches, whether the coaches are calling for shifts or not. In Wednesday night's game, Dunn was helping Hamilton with positioning in center field, both in telling Hamilton to look in the dugout to find out where he needs to go, and also relaying information from the dugout and reassuring Hamilton where he needs to go.

RichRed
08-24-2007, 04:11 PM
An interesting sidenote to Dunn's defense: as soon as every new hitter is announced, he's always looking into the dugout between batters for defensive positioning shifts from Reds coaches, whether the coaches are calling for shifts or not. In Wednesday night's game, Dunn was helping Hamilton with positioning in center field, both in telling Hamilton to look in the dugout to find out where he needs to go, and also relaying information from the dugout and reassuring Hamilton where he needs to go.

He's really going to ruin his lazy non-leader reputation with behavior like that.

lollipopcurve
08-24-2007, 04:17 PM
The two biggest weaknesses in Dunn's defensive game are the jumps and his hands fielding balls in the corner. He does get slow jumps, though his reads are good and when he does get going it's almost always in the right direction. His hands are still a bit shaky too fielding balls hit down in the corner, but I'd say he's improved in that aspect a bit too from previous seasons.


And his arm. He's got a pretty weak arm.

TeamBoone
08-24-2007, 04:36 PM
And his arm. He's got a pretty weak arm.

Ya think? I think it's pretty good, just not as accurate as it could be.

nate
08-24-2007, 04:37 PM
The two biggest weaknesses in Dunn's defensive game are the jumps and his hands fielding balls in the corner. He does get slow jumps, though his reads are good and when he does get going it's almost always in the right direction. His hands are still a bit shaky too fielding balls hit down in the corner, but I'd say he's improved in that aspect a bit too from previous seasons.

An interesting sidenote to Dunn's defense: as soon as every new hitter is announced, he's always looking into the dugout between batters for defensive positioning shifts from Reds coaches, whether the coaches are calling for shifts or not. In Wednesday night's game, Dunn was helping Hamilton with positioning in center field, both in telling Hamilton to look in the dugout to find out where he needs to go, and also relaying information from the dugout and reassuring Hamilton where he needs to go.

I haven't seen him play live in a couple of years but it seems like this year he's better. There was a ball Chipper (I think) hit the other night that looked like a home run but Dunn played it off the top of the wall very cleanly for a single. I think he prevented a run from scoring too.

Interesting note about the positioning. Sounds like someone who's a leader on the team.

I'd still like to see him at first.

jojo
08-24-2007, 04:37 PM
I said PBP as it pertains to know very neatly what defense costs in terms of runs is flawed. It's basic scientific method stuff: statistics that require too many events and don't provide enough by way of repeatability are lesser statistics than those drawn from events that are closer to one-to-one, repeatable, and that bridge the shortest distance between cause and effect, like hitting or pitching events.

Your argument is philosophical rather than emperical. I understand that you think they are fatally flawed but you haven't supported that assertion in a meaningful way with evidence.

BTW, I have never argued that PBP metrics are perfect but rather that even with their flaws (which IMHO aren't anywhere near the threshhold required to be fatal), they represent a huge leap forward in evaluating defense quantitatively. In fact, in a manner consistent with your attitude about these metrics, I've advocated using surveys of the best ones when forming an opinion-often speaking in terms of ranges (and I consistently error on the side of the player in question to the best of my ability). Even given as a range, a player's defensive value can inform his total worth in a tangible, useful, accurate sense.

In the very least such an approach propels discussions about player evaluation forward to a much greater level than previously possible.


and yes, the ones YOU chose are better than the vast majority of them--is to give you a bleary picture of what is happening on the field. Whereas, IMO, most advanced hitting and pitching metrics give you much closer to an HDTV picture of events. No stat is perfect, and I'm not utterly impugning the methodologies of the sabr community in their search for defensive metrics; I just don't find them convincing or sufficiently stable.

If you discount PBP metrics like UZR because they derive run values using linear weights and run expectancy, then you have to also discount a vast majority of the current advanced offensive measures and theory as well.


I am curious, though; if you do dismiss BP's defensive metrics, why? What are your warrants in doing so? And how do you gauge the reliability of one versus the other?

My disdain for BP’s defensive metrics basically can be summed up with this bit of snark: 1. it’s a proprietary methodology that unlike VORP (another of their proprietary tools) hasn’t been explained in even the most rudimentary sense that would allow it to be tested/critiqued, 2. Davenport changes parameters of their methodology without explanation and seemingly on a whim (in fact I think he’s spending this afternoon changing the changes he changed this morning), 3. fatally, in the end, they quite often don't jive with reality in the most grossest sense while wildly fluctuating from year to year. In other words, BP's defensive metrics are closer to voodoo than they are statistics.

lollipopcurve
08-24-2007, 04:48 PM
Ya think? I think it's pretty good, just not as accurate as it could be.

Yeah, I think his arm is marginal at best. Two assists this year. Can't remember a time he cut somebody down at the plate. I don't see the trajectory of the throws, but I do see that his release is slow.

He may tread water defensively for 2-3 more years, but even as he remains an offensive force into his early 30s, he's going to have to be moved out of left before too long, I think. If he's smart, he'll realize 1B (or DH) is better for him physically, too.

GAC
08-25-2007, 07:57 AM
You can't have it both ways Doug.

Dunn is a below average LF but only slightly.

I really wish you could have seen Greg Luzinski or Pete Incaviglia play out there.You'd have a whole new appreciation for how good Dunn is in LF.

Benny Agbayani was one of the worst I have ever seen. Dunn is a GGer standing next to him. :D

I rated Dunn as a below average LFer. There are times he has made phenomenal plays out there. And there are alot of times, especially when it comes to balls hit down the line and off the wall, that he is like a kitten chasing a ball of yarn. Simply comical. He's not the best judge of balls when they come off the bat.

But you hit on something earlier that is important. With a guy like Dunn, you place him where he is gonna do the least amount of damage. And 1B ain't it. LF is the most obvious spot.

I think the omportant question to ask, concerning Adam, is.... does his offense offset his defensive liabilities?

Always Red
08-25-2007, 08:02 AM
Benny Agbayani was one of the worst I have ever seen. Dunn is a GGer standing next to him. :D

I rated Dunn as a below average LFer. There are times he has made phenomenal plays out there. And there are alot of times, especially when it comes to balls hit down the line and off the wall, that he is like a kitten chasing a ball of yarn. Simply comical. He's not the best judge of balls when they come off the bat.

But you hit on something earlier that is important. With a guy like Dunn, you place him where he is gonna do the least amount of damage. And 1B ain't it. LF is the most obvious spot.

I agree: Dunn is no gold glover, but he's far from abysmal.

Kal Daniels and Kevin Mitchell were both far worse LF'ers than Dunn.


he is like a kitten chasing a ball of yarn.:laugh::laugh::laugh:

His size alone means that as he ages, he's going to need to learn to play 1B (if he can) or become a DH, IMO.

KronoRed
08-25-2007, 02:27 PM
His size alone means that as he ages, he's going to need to learn to play 1B (if he can) or become a DH, IMO.

Probably, if he's sill here though I bet he stays in left, tradition and all that