PDA

View Full Version : C Trent says...



Will M
03-13-2008, 06:17 PM
I am suprised no one has posted this. I caught C trent on 1530 the afternoon. From memory:

1. There is 'no way' Jay Bruce starts the season in Cincinnati. No way. Get over it. Move on. He plays 2-8 weeks in AAA.

2. Bray looked good last night. He had some 'pop' on his fastball.

3. Some cuts after fridays games

4. Cueto was awesome last night

5. Reds seem to be showcasing Hat

6. Unless Affeldt pitches great tonight he'll for sure be in the bullpen opening day

Ltlabner
03-13-2008, 06:20 PM
In order...

1) Thanks Dusty
2) Hope he doesn't trip walking into the clubhouse and break his spine
3) No surpise there
4) Good to hear
5) Better to hear
6) Best to hear

BoydsOfSummer
03-13-2008, 06:33 PM
I really have no problem with Bruce starting in AAA. I think it might be best for him to get raking down there and maybe gain some momentum and "seasoning". But if he is raking down there whilst the guys manning CF in Cincy are reeking, I'll be po'd.

KoryMac5
03-13-2008, 06:42 PM
I guess I don't get this at all. If you go with Votto at first and Cueto and Volquez in the rotation, why send Bruce to AAA. Let's hope that C Trent is off on his prediction.

pedro
03-13-2008, 06:53 PM
I guess I don't get this at all. If you go with Votto at first and Cueto and Volquez in the rotation, why send Bruce to AAA. Let's hope that C Trent is off on his prediction.

let's not get ahead of ourselves. Bruce, while having had a pretty good spring, is only 20 years old and really hasn't kicked the door down yet.

BTW, his ST OPS is .654

A couple more months in the minors isn't going to hurt him at all.

Puffy
03-13-2008, 06:56 PM
let's not get ahead of ourselves. Bruce, while having had a pretty good spring, is only 20 years old and really hasn't kicked the door down yet.

BTW, his ST OPS is .654

A couple more months in the minors isn't going to hurt him at all.

In the immortal words of Winston Churchhill, "word."

Spring~Fields
03-13-2008, 06:59 PM
5. Reds seem to be showcasing Hat

6. Unless Affeldt pitches great tonight he'll for sure be in the bullpen opening day

Krivsky could still package a Hatterberg with a Freel or Hopper type along with a borderline pitcher like Fogg to get a better return. I don't think my comment is accurate but, I have a feeling that he is going to have to move someone.

RedsManRick
03-13-2008, 07:10 PM
1. There is 'no way' Jay Bruce starts the season in Cincinnati. No way. Get over it. Move on. He plays 2-8 weeks in AAA.

Fine with me. I don't think we're truly in the division hunt this year and I think giving Bruce 8 weeks in AAA won't hurt a thing. It will back his arb clock up another year though, while buying us time to trade away from our CF surplus.



2. Bray looked good last night. He had some 'pop' on his fastball.
Knock on wood. Let's hope he stays healthy.



3. Some cuts after fridays games
'Bout time.



4. Cueto was awesome last night
I wonder if he's pitching with the same approach as he pitched last year. I would hate to see him set a precedent based on a 4 innings approach when throughout his career one of his biggest assets was his ability to manage his effort well.



5. Reds seem to be showcasing Hat
I hope so.


6. Unless Affeldt pitches great tonight he'll for sure be in the bullpen opening day
Hopefully at the expense of Mike Stanton, not Brad Salmon or Marcus McBeth (who will probably be sent down undeservedly... again)

Spring~Fields
03-13-2008, 07:20 PM
I think giving Bruce 8 weeks in AAA won't hurt a thing. It will back his arb clock up another year though, while buying us time to trade away from our CF surplus.


I could see this occuring. Giving Bruce around 8 weeks to get sharp, while giving the Reds time to move someone, and then bring J. Bruce up to get him sufficent playing time, perhaps in some type of rotation with Patterson, I think that Baker will want Bruce and his bat on the team while getting him seasoned and past the "next second coming" type pressures.

Highlifeman21
03-13-2008, 07:35 PM
As much as some of us want Jay Bruce to be the Opening Day CF and play 150 games, that won't happen in 2008. And there's no reason it should.

I'd love to see Jay Bruce play between 60-90 games for the Reds this year, obviously the last 60-90. Jay Bruce doesn't win us the division in 2008, Jay Bruce doesn't win us the division in 2008, so why waste unnecessary service time in 2008?

I want the Reds to give every kid every chance to succeed. So far we haven't seen that with Homer Bailey, I'm just hoping the Reds can learn from that mistake. And that includes Bailey. I want him to turn out to be everything he can be. I just want the Reds to give him a chance to succeed.

Spring~Fields
03-13-2008, 07:50 PM
As much as some of us want Jay Bruce to be the Opening Day CF and play 150 games, that won't happen in 2008. And there's no reason it should.

I'd love to see Jay Bruce play between 60-90 games for the Reds this year, obviously the last 60-90. Jay Bruce doesn't win us the division in 2008, Jay Bruce doesn't win us the division in 2008, so why waste unnecessary service time in 2008?

I want the Reds to give every kid every chance to succeed.

With the question mark regarding Griffey next year, I think that the Reds will or Baker will want Bruce to have plenty of time to get acclimated at the major league level this year vs just handing him the job next year in the event that Jr moves on with his career in a different direction.

reds44
03-13-2008, 07:55 PM
So a Norris Hopper/Corey Patterson platoon in CF?

Mario-Rijo
03-13-2008, 07:59 PM
So a Norris Hopper/Corey Patterson platoon in CF?

I'd say that's the best case scenario assuming Bruce indeed starts @ Louisville.

KoryMac5
03-13-2008, 08:03 PM
My point is this, if you are going to go with a youth movement to infuse this team with some energy that they are obviusly lacking, why not go all in. Put Votto, Cueto, Volquez, and Bruce in their and let it ride. I just can't see Patterson, Hopper, or Freel being a better option than Bruce right now. I know I am in the minority here but I think going with a nice mix of vets and rookies will make this team exciting again, I personally hope Bruce is a part of that. Maybe I am just caught up in the concept.

Aronchis
03-13-2008, 08:07 PM
Yeah, if the Reds are going to put Volquez,Cueto and Roenicke all on the pitching staff, might as well let Bruce start in the majors. Bailey,Maloney,Pelland and Rosales would then be in the minors waiting for failure or somebody like Matt Belisle or Kepp not putting it together.

If Dusty tries to bring that quad excuse again for keeping Jay down, that will be sad.

Far East
03-13-2008, 08:45 PM
(3. Some cuts after fridays games)
'Bout time.

I'd prefer to keep the camp population as large as can be managable and allow more PT for some of the borderline or younger guys. I'd rather see fewer cuts, right up to the last day of ST.

Questions can be answered that way:

1. Can (RH) Andy Phillips become serviceable at both corner IF and corner OF positions?
2. Can (RH) Cabrera play 1B?
3. Who's more valuable: Castro, Green, Hairston, or Janish?
4. Is there an in-house catcher who could become as valuable as Ross?
5. Is Affeldt a starter or reliever?
6. Can Hatteberg hit lefty pitching well enough to "platoon" with Votto, despite the fact that they are both lefties?
7. Is Patterson enough of a defensive improvement over Freel/Hopper to compensate for being another lefty-hitting OFer?
8. Is Dickerson more ready for the majors than Bruce?
9. Who's more valuable: Shearn, Stanton, Salmon, or Brower?
10. etc.

With the maximum playing time allowable, the above named players just might open a few eyes. Cut them too early and you might never find out.

As for the veterans who are certain to start or at least make the top 25, Dusty as eased them toward probably being ready for opening day right now.

StillFunkyB
03-13-2008, 09:26 PM
In the immortal words of Winston Churchhill, "word."

agreed.

*BaseClogger*
03-13-2008, 10:43 PM
It worked for Ryan Braun last year didn't it?

top6
03-14-2008, 10:05 AM
HA HA HA. He is starting Corey Patterson over Bruce. I know it. Awesome. Just awesome.

Far East
03-14-2008, 10:58 AM
HA HA HA. He is starting Corey Patterson over Bruce. I know it. Awesome. Just awesome.

When? When is he starting Patterson over Bruce? Today's game? All week? All of 2008? This is just spring training, and early/middle of spring training, to boot.

Patterson ain't Josh Hamilton, but he's a known, proven quantity to Dusty; I agree that they need to take a long hard look at Jay, but Bruce has been getting and will get his chances; he has the 2nd most AB (29) for the Reds so far this spring; Patterson has just 9.

Bruce possibly could become -- and I hope he does -- the Reds' best offensive impact player. But that might not begin to unfold until the first day game in June, or until the seventh night game in July, or until 2009. He's only 20 years old.

Johnny Footstool
03-14-2008, 11:09 AM
Why start the Arbitration Clock on Jay Bruce just to have him struggle? Let him bomb AAA for a month.

Cueto is a different story. If he's ready, don't hold him back.

M2
03-14-2008, 11:19 AM
Bruce is hitting .267/.300/.310 this spring and has been slumping of late. If he wants to make the team he needs to turn it around quickly. Kids have to kick the door down and he's just not doing it at the moment.

jojo
03-14-2008, 11:24 AM
I really didn't want the Reds to be "all in" this season anyway.

RANDY IN INDY
03-14-2008, 11:26 AM
Bruce is hitting .267/.300/.310 this spring and has been slumping of late. If he wants to make the team he needs to turn it around quickly. Kids have to kick the door down and he's just not doing it at the moment.
:beerme:

blumj
03-14-2008, 11:31 AM
Bruce is hitting .267/.300/.310 this spring and has been slumping of late. If he wants to make the team he needs to turn it around quickly. Kids have to kick the door down and he's just not doing it at the moment.
Spring stats are meaningless. Nothing he's doing now, outside of demonstrating his professionalism and preparation levels, should be able to change what their plan was for him from the outset. No one should ever make or not make an MLB team based on spring performance.

M2
03-14-2008, 11:44 AM
Spring stats are meaningless. Nothing he's doing now, outside of demonstrating his professionalism and preparation levels, should be able to change what their plan was for him from the outset. No one should ever make or not make an MLB team based on spring performance.

I agree with that on a certain level, but what was the plan?

Seems to me that it was "maybe he wins the CF job." The truth is a lot of job are up for grabs in ST. When they are, then ST performance matters.

traderumor
03-14-2008, 11:59 AM
I agree that you cannot categorically make a statement that ST doesn't matter. For the crown jewel of the system, as far as the Reds are concerned, Jay Bruce's ST performance should not matter. They should have a plan with him and stick to it regardless of what he does in exhibition games. The same with Cueto and Bailey. I really doubt that the Reds FO had to wait until ST to say "wow, maybe Cueto IS ready."

However, there are some folks who "win" or "lose" jobs in ST. For example, how else do you know if the old guy has lost it or not, or if the middling prospect might be able to help immediately on the bench or in the bullpen? This seems to be one of those times when the scouts get to bow their chest because ST stats will often lead to bad decisions, but a good scout can make a decision on some borderline guys that will pay off, all based on what went on in ST.

blumj
03-14-2008, 12:06 PM
I agree with that on a certain level, but what was the plan?

Seems to me that it was "maybe he wins the CF job." The truth is a lot of job are up for grabs in ST. When they are, then ST performance matters.
Well, if that was the plan, that he could win the job by hitting well based on a really small sample of spring stats against random competition with no advance scouting, it wasn't a very good plan. They should be making that decision based on how well prepared he is to do the job at this time and what's they think is best for his long term future.

top6
03-14-2008, 12:10 PM
Bruce is hitting .267/.300/.310 this spring and has been slumping of late.
That .300 OBP is still better than Patterson's career .298 OBP.

I'm just saying that if Patterson makes the team and Bruce doesn't, it certainly goes a long way to showing that the criticisms of Dusty Baker are accurate (or, more importantly, that the criticisms of a team that would hire Dusty Baker are accurate).

Long season though.

Highlifeman21
03-14-2008, 12:11 PM
With the question mark regarding Griffey next year, I think that the Reds will or Baker will want Bruce to have plenty of time to get acclimated at the major league level this year vs just handing him the job next year in the event that Jr moves on with his career in a different direction.

I'd say 60-90 games at the end of 2008 is plenty of time for Bruce to get acclimated at the major league level....

blumj
03-14-2008, 12:19 PM
That .300 OBP is still better than Patterson's career .298 OBP.

I'm just saying that if Patterson makes the team and Bruce doesn't, it certainly goes a long way to showing that the criticisms of Dusty Baker are accurate (or, more importantly, that the criticisms of a team that would hire Dusty Baker are accurate).

Long season though.
I don't know that we should assume that it's entirely up to Dusty to decide if Bruce makes the team or not.

edabbs44
03-14-2008, 12:22 PM
I don't know that we should assume that it's entirely up to Dusty to decide if Bruce makes the team or not.

I think that is 100% valid.

No matter what, the GM should have a lot to say on the #1 prospect in baseball. Dusty should be petitioning Wayne on Bruce playing for the big team, if that's what he wants.

Chip R
03-14-2008, 12:36 PM
I think that is 100% valid.

No matter what, the GM should have a lot to say on the #1 prospect in baseball. Dusty should be petitioning Wayne on Bruce playing for the big team, if that's what he wants.


Perhaps there was compromising that took place. Maybe Dusty wanted Bruce, Volquez and Cueto and Wayne didn't want to have any of them up here. So, instead of going to the mat for Bruce, he makes a deal: Volquez and/or Cueto on the 25 man roster and Bruce to LOU.

top6
03-14-2008, 12:41 PM
Well, I think the point is that the powers that be in the Reds' organization agree with Dusty's approach to the game. It isn't a secret. I don't really blame Dusty all that much in this; he is who he is and has never pretended otherwise. I still can't believe they hired him.

blumj
03-14-2008, 12:42 PM
I think that is 100% valid.

No matter what, the GM should have a lot to say on the #1 prospect in baseball. Dusty should be petitioning Wayne on Bruce playing for the big team, if that's what he wants.
Honestly, I would think that, if the GM and the player development staff don't think a prospect is ready yet, I'd ordinarily think the manager would usually defer to them, particularly a manager who's new to the system. If it is the other way around, if they think he is ready, and the manager doesn't want him? Well, chances are, we wouldn't know that's what happened. And it wouldn't be fair to the manager to assume it is. Of course, with what we've heard from Dusty so far, it wouldn't exactly be a shock if he just spilled it himself.

M2
03-14-2008, 12:44 PM
Well, if that was the plan, that he could win the job by hitting well based on a really small sample of spring stats against random competition with no advance scouting, it wasn't a very good plan. They should be making that decision based on how well prepared he is to do the job at this time and what's they think is best for his long term future.

The problem is you're talking about a kid with 253 ABs in the high minors. No one really knows how ready he is. The organization has seen every pro game he's ever played and the truth is there's no easy answer on what the best plan of action is for him at this moment. If he were tearing the cover off the ball in ST, perhaps there would be an easy answer, but he isn't and it's an open question as to how much you can ask of a kid who's still a few weeks shy of his 21st birthday.

I'm a proponent of not putting anything in Jay Bruce's way if he's ready to play in the majors, but he's got to demonstrate that he is ready to play in the majors.

If Jay Bruce is going to hit like Alex Gordon did last year, then sign me up for Corey Patterson in CF in 2008. That's what the Reds are trying to sort out.

Beyond Bruce, teams deal with gray areas all the time. Every club has them at the start of the season. They don't know who all five starters in the rotation will be (case in point, the Boston Red Sox this spring) or who's starting at every position. What they're doing right now is sorting through options based on the players' histories and what the club is seeing at this moment in time. Both of those things matter and there's not a pat method of deciding these issues.

redsrule2500
03-14-2008, 01:03 PM
2. Bray looked good last night. He had some 'pop' on his fastball.


awesome to hear. I still think that bray has potential as a stud RP or even closer.

jojo
03-14-2008, 01:09 PM
Assuming Bruce doesn't make it north, it'll be more a casualty of role (i.e. we need a lead off hitter!)/position (OMG, what do we do with our OFer named Sue!?! e.g. Freel) than talent.

Unless '08 is just practice, this roster needs as much "high ceiling" as it can get. The going rate is simply choosing risk/high-ceiling over "locked-in suck".

MikeS21
03-14-2008, 01:21 PM
I think what makes the Bruce to Louisville idea so sour to many folks is that some of us just assumed that when Josh Hamilton got traded, that automatically meant that the team felt Jay Bruce was ready to take over in CF. But that wasn't the case. And I'm not so sure another year in the minors for a 20 year old kid isn't that bad of idea.

It can't hurt starting him at AAA for six or eight weeks to really get zoned in.

Speaking of Rosecran's blog, I got a pleasant surprise in today's short blurb, a quote from Dusty:


Mario Soto was talking with Homer Bailey the other day. I told Homer to go talk to Mario during the game because Dick's busy during the game. I saw him down there all game. I liked that. It's like going to school.
I have always felt if the powers that be would get Homer to hook up with Mario Soto, it would only serve to improve Homer's game. It certainly helped Cueto. This may be the most promising and positive thing about Bailey's spring thus far.

Perhaps we could get Soto to help Bailey develop a decent change, and get Billingham to help Mad Dog learn a decent slider. ;)

RedlegJake
03-14-2008, 01:27 PM
I think ST DOES matter for rookies, and veterans with a couple poor seasons recently that are trying to catch on. For vets that are PROVEN like Hate, Harang, Junior, Dunn, EE etc then yes, a tough spring is meaningless. There are only so many spots truly open to competitionand spring is what a mgr has to make his decisions with. Bruce is certainly the CF of the future but why pressure him to go from opening day if his ST numbers aren't good?
Everything outside the Cordero signing - everything I've seen this winter indicates this team was put together to do the best possible this season without removing any of the elements looked at as central to 2009-2010. Why bother with Patterson, Fog and Affeldt at all if Bailey, Volquez, Roenicke and Cueto were considered central to this year's plans? The Reds are doing this the right way imo, whoever kicks sdown the door in ST (Cueto, Volquez, maybe Roenicke) gets his opportunity now, whoever struggles a bit or is thought o stil ned a bit of time to get in agroove first, can go down and come up later on. I'll be happy with 2008 if the Reds are around .500 or a bit over, the kids stay healthy and progress, if Bruce ENDS UP in CF (or RF if Junior goes down) and if Votto gets the lion share of playing time at First. Seeing Hatte on first would upset me a lot more than the Bruce situation. After so many years of futility it is exciting to watch - seeing a Reds starter throwing 94-95 leave the game and a Roenicke relieve him and throw even harder! Seeing young talent in the rotation, the pen and the lineup at the same time - and more guys who can actually play the game pushing for a chance down on the farm...this scenario has been a long long time arriving. What's beter -I can see the Reds winning if a realistic number of things go right for them. Realistic -that's the key. For years they needed everything to go right all year to have any chance and even then it was a real long shot. So if Bruce starts in AAA, along with Bailey or whoever else -it's alright this year.

fearofpopvol1
03-14-2008, 01:36 PM
If he were tearing the cover off the ball in ST, perhaps there would be an easy answer, but he isn't and it's an open question as to how much you can ask of a kid who's still a few weeks shy of his 21st birthday.

I completely agree with this. I think that's why Cueto and Volquez are likely to make the team right now (though that remains to be seen). Their sample size is smaller, but there are also more spots that aren't guaranteed too. Still, Cueto especially, has been killing it.

MikeS21
03-14-2008, 01:42 PM
Spring stats are meaningless. Nothing he's doing now, outside of demonstrating his professionalism and preparation levels, should be able to change what their plan was for him from the outset. No one should ever make or not make an MLB team based on spring performance.
Unfortunately, spring performance has shaped the Reds' roster every year for the last ten years.

The problem with that is that fringe players tend to put up great spring numbers. How many AAAA players make the team out of spring training because they put up good numbers during the spring? How many sub-par pitchers have made this team due to great spring numbers? Then when the bell rings and the games are for real, the wonder boys of spring training resort back to filler fodder for the AAA roster.

I see that same tendency playing out this year, when it comes to players like Cabrera, Stanton, and Green. And I cringe every time Juan Castro or Jerry Hairston does something positive because all it accomplishes is to reinforce the chance they may actually make the team.

blumj
03-14-2008, 01:47 PM
If he were tearing the cover off the ball in ST, perhaps there would be an easy answer
Maybe it would seem like an easy answer, but there's no basis to believe it would be the correct answer. If you really believed that, wouldn't you also assume the alternative, that you have your easy answer because he's not tearing the cover off the ball? But you don't assume that because you do know better.

And, of course, teams are sorting through their options based on players' histories and what they're seeing now. But, hopefully not on the results of what they're seeing now, on the process of what they're seeing now.

Patrick Bateman
03-14-2008, 01:54 PM
Krivsky has said on numerous occasions that the plan is when Bruce makes the jump to the majors, that it will be for the long haul. For that to happen, Bruce needs to prove to the Reds that he is ready to be a high quality major league player, and that hasn't happened yet. Whether you care about srping training stats or not, Bruce is not a guaranteed major league player right now. He's going to have to finish spring on a high note to make the team and prove to the Reds that he's ready to make the jump.

And to me, that makes sense. Bruce's development is vastly more important... moreso than the Reds slight contention hopes. I don't want to hinder his devlopment and burn arb. time and a level of play that can be had from the other competition.

flyer85
03-14-2008, 02:05 PM
Your starting centerfielder... Corey Patterson. RBI single for Patterson following an ANdy Green double and Jerry Hairston single. I don't really see him as a long-term solution, but, I'm betting right now he'll start in center on Opening Day.

I thought that when they signed him. Sure looked like a signal Bruce was going to AAA. I guess against RHP there really isn't much difference between Freel/Hopper/Patterson. The only problem is that Patterson should never bat higher than 7th.

Joseph
03-14-2008, 02:14 PM
Krivksy said the same thing about Homer last year, does that mean he makes the rotation out of ST?

Patrick Bateman
03-14-2008, 02:29 PM
Krivksy said the same thing about Homer last year, does that mean he makes the rotation out of ST?

It doesn't mean that everything works out as planned, I'm just saying that it's likely Krivsky is going to wait until Bruce shows he's ready (at least in Krivsky's/Baker's eyes. A rough ST really doesn't mean much to me, but it probably does to the Reds.

BTW, with Bailey, that was a clear miscalculation by Krivsky. He probably did think he was ready for the long haul, he was just wrong. That might affect his decision on Bruce.

KittyDuran
03-14-2008, 02:29 PM
btw it looks like Affeldt is viewing today's game from the bp...

KronoRed
03-14-2008, 02:32 PM
The going rate is simply choosing risk/high-ceiling over "locked-in suck".

I like it, Corey "Locked-in suck" Patterson batting first :cool:

redsmetz
03-14-2008, 02:34 PM
btw it looks like Affeldt is viewing today's game from the bp...

Isn't that where all the pitchers hang out when they're not pitching?

M2
03-14-2008, 02:41 PM
Maybe it would seem like an easy answer, but there's no basis to believe it would be the correct answer. If you really believed that, wouldn't you also assume the alternative, that you have your easy answer because he's not tearing the cover off the ball? But you don't assume that because you do know better.

No, at least I wouldn't. If you're approaching from the perspective of Bruce a question of when, not if, then he hasn't done anything to clear that up for you. If he were going ape at the plate, you could land on "now" without too much trouble. March 31 still might be the answer, but he's not making that an easy call.


And, of course, teams are sorting through their options based on players' histories and what they're seeing now. But, hopefully not on the results of what they're seeing now, on the process of what they're seeing now.

At some juncture the results are a function of the process. I'm not saying that they're wholly intertwined, but Jay Bruce has one extra base base entering today and there's a process behind that in need of improvement. Baseball is a collection of result-oriented processes. That doesn't mean ST numbers count for a whole lot, but some numbers do give insight into where a player's at in a key area.

For instance, I've speculated that the Reds will be watching K/BB with the young pitchers this spring because that will be a key indicator of how well those pitchers are controlling the strike zone. ERA? I doubt the club pays it much attention at the moment.

BRM
03-14-2008, 02:44 PM
The only problem is that Patterson should never bat higher than 7th.

Corey is going to lead off when he plays. Might as well get used to it.

pedro
03-14-2008, 02:51 PM
I just hope we get the Corey Patterson who did so well against RHP in 2006 (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/splits?statsId=6400&type=batting&year=2006), not the one who did so poorly last year (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/splits?statsId=6400&type=batting&year=2007).

fearofpopvol1
03-14-2008, 02:52 PM
I just hope we get the Corey Patterson who did so well against RHP in 2006 (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/splits?statsId=6400&type=batting&year=2006), not the one who did so poorly last year (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/splits?statsId=6400&type=batting&year=2007).

I think his power will bode very well at GAB and I think he'll fair better in the NL Central this go round opposed to the AL East.

flyer85
03-14-2008, 03:04 PM
I think his power will bode very well at GAB and I think he'll fair better in the NL Central this go round opposed to the AL East.camden yards is not a bad hitters park. I expect the 2008 version Patterson is likely to be what he has always been ... poor OBP, a little pop and good speed.

blumj
03-14-2008, 03:04 PM
At some juncture the results are a function of the process.
At some juncture, yes, but spring training just isn't long enough for that to happen. A spring training hot streak doesn't tell you anything more than a spring training cold streak. If anything, the cold streak lets the staff see how he handles a cold streak. That's probably more informative.

KittyDuran
03-14-2008, 03:08 PM
Isn't that where all the pitchers hang out when they're not pitching?
maybe...tho' a parade of players just filed past from the dugout including Harang & Bailey...

M2
03-14-2008, 03:28 PM
At some juncture, yes, but spring training just isn't long enough for that to happen. A spring training hot streak doesn't tell you anything more than a spring training cold streak. If anything, the cold streak lets the staff see how he handles a cold streak. That's probably more informative.

Disagree. If you're not controlling the strike zone or driving the ball then that's a process with a definitive result and the club is well within the bounds of reason to put you in AAA until you start doing those things.

fearofpopvol1
03-14-2008, 03:29 PM
camden yards is not a bad hitters park. I expect the 2008 version Patterson is likely to be what he has always been ... poor OBP, a little pop and good speed.

I agree that Camden isn't a bad hitter's park, but it's certainly not GAB. I think you'll seen an increase in HRs and probably XBH. I think his OBP and speed will remain similar.

KittyDuran
03-14-2008, 04:03 PM
On second thought...Affeldt looked way too happy...

flyer85
03-14-2008, 04:06 PM
I think you'll seen an increase in HRs and probably XBH. just like you'll see for most oppossing hitters. Reds need actual improvement from Patterson not a mirage induced by park effects.

Highlifeman21
03-14-2008, 04:37 PM
On second thought...Affeldt looked way too happy...

He has a guaranteed contract?

If so, I'd look happy too.

KronoRed
03-14-2008, 04:48 PM
Aren't left handers always happy? :D

fearofpopvol1
03-14-2008, 05:57 PM
just like you'll see for most oppossing hitters. Reds need actual improvement from Patterson not a mirage induced by park effects.

Yep, but the difference is, opposing hitters don't play 81 games at GAB like Patterson will be. Call it a mirage or whatever you want, but his power/hitting will likely bode better in GAB.