PDA

View Full Version : Notes From Trent--Reds Working on a Trade



reds44
03-30-2008, 05:24 PM
Here's your lineup... will have more in a sec:

Patterson, CF
Keppinger, SS
Griffey, RF
Phillips, 2B
Dunn, LF
Encarnacion, 3B
Hatteberg, 1B
Valentin, C
Harang, RHP




Although David Ross will start the season on the disabled list and Johnny Cueto and Mike Lincoln are making the team, the moves that will clear up the roster space on the 40-man roster and for the final 25-man roster won't be official until Monday.

Part of these changes are logistics, but another part is the Reds front office is still trying to work a trade, sources said.

As the Reds worked out at Great American Ball Park on Sunday, Ryan Freel was still in Sarasota along with Norris Hopper to get in a few more swings after Freel had been slowed by the flu and Hopper had missed several days with a family situation.

Also in back in Sarasota were pitchers Josh Fogg and Edinson Volquez, who will fill out the starting rotation following Johnny Cueto, who will start Thursday's game.

Fogg threw a complete game in a minor league start on Sunday, allowing six hits with a walk and three strikeouts on 93 pitches for Billings against Sarasota. Volquez was also scheduled to throw in Sarasota.

As for now, the Reds still have Thursday's starter listed as "TBA", but that's only because Major League rules don't allow teams to list players not on the 40-man roster as starters. That will be changed tomorrow when all the moves are made to get the team to 25 and 40 and Johnny Cueto is added to both rosters.

"You know who's going to pitch," Baker said when asked about Thursday's start. "That might as well be TBAC (To Be Announced Cueto)."

Aaron Harang will start his third Opening Day at Great American Ball Park on Monday, making him the first Reds to start three consecutive Opening Days since Jose Rijo started four in a row from 1992-95. The only other Reds pitchers to make at least three consecutive Opening Day starts are Pete Donohue (1923-27), Si Johnson (1932-34) and Mario Soto (1982-86).

"It's going to be a good game, you have a tough Harang and a tough Brandon Webb from the area," Baker said, referring to Arizona's starter, Webb, a native of Ashland, Ky., and a former UK star. "We went on the caravan this winter and stopped in his hometown and all we heard about was Brandon Webb."

Webb will face a veteran Reds lineup, with no rookies in the Opening Day lineup. Scott Hatteberg will play first instead of rookie Joey Votto.

"The regular first baseman is going to be the one playing that day. Joey has great upside potential, but Hatteberg had a great spring. A lot of is going to depend on matchups," Baker said when asked about his regular first baseman going into the season. "Joey came up a little strong at the end, you wish he would have done better. He's here now because of what he did last year. Dunn has had a fair spring, Edwin (Encarnacion's) stuggled all spring in the sixth spot and you don't want that many guys in a row who are not on the top of their game. We want someone who is swinging the bat pretty good, at least initially. Everyone had a few at-bats to show if they're right now. You have to go with right now and hopefully the other guys get their acts together."


Votto hit .206 in the spring with 63 at-bats, the third-most of any player this spring. Hatteberg hit .386 in 57 at-bats. Third baseman Edwin Encarnacion struggled, hitting .152 in 66 at-bats.

Encarnacion will still start, batting in his customary sixth spot behind Adam Dunn. Hatteberg will bat behind Encarnacion.

Catcher David Ross is expected to go on the disabled list today after playing four games during the spring. Ross had struggled with back problems all spring, only to play the last four games. Javier Valentin will start in his spot.

Baker told Ross of the team's decision on Saturday before the team left Sarasota for Cincinnati.

"Spring training's not six weeks long for nothing. I tried to justify it, but I just couldn't do it. I look on that board and he missed four weeks," Baker said. "We have a a board with how many at-bats a guy's gotten and how many innings he played, if he didn't play, he got an X. Ross had a lot of Xs.

"You want to give him the best shot of not having a repeat of last year, these things creep into your mind and creep into the mind of fans. He didn't like it, but I didn't expect him to like it. But I was doing what was best for us."




Also of note, Dusty was asked about starting center fielder Corey Patterson at length, but the most interesting statement was his comparison of Patterson -- the one-time hot shot Cubs prospect -- and Jay Bruce, the Reds' minor league star.

"(Patterson is) one of those guys that you use as an example of the hype early, much like Jay Bruce," Baker said. "Everyone wants to push him there, you'd rather have them overready than underready so they can be on top of their game big time."

Matt700wlw
03-30-2008, 05:34 PM
I wonder if it involves Ryan Freel?

reds44
03-30-2008, 05:36 PM
I wonder if it involves Ryan Freel?
You would assume so.

Majewski for Lopez. :D

smith288
03-30-2008, 05:39 PM
I remember I used to think Patterson was a player i would like to see in a Reds uni. Of course that dates back to when he was a rookie...

jojo
03-30-2008, 05:44 PM
A lot of is going to depend on matchups," Baker said when asked about his regular first baseman going into the season.

Both are lefties with platoon splits-what's this depending upon matchups stuff? Does Votto get the nod when the Reds are facing an arm Hattie has gone 0 for 7 against for his career?

Jpup
03-30-2008, 05:44 PM
Cueto is starting Thursday. Of course, it's the only game not on FSN Ohio this week. :thumbdown

Caveat Emperor
03-30-2008, 05:47 PM
Cueto is starting Thursday. Of course, it's the only game not on FSN Ohio this week. :thumbdown

AND the only game I can't go to because of work.

Figures.

Matt700wlw
03-30-2008, 05:50 PM
Note from Fay:

Highlight of the workout was Harang going deep. The fans loved it.

boognish
03-30-2008, 05:53 PM
Both are lefties with platoon splits-what's this depending upon matchups stuff? Does Votto get the nod when the Reds are facing an arm Hattie has gone 0 for 7 against for his career?

2 for 11 per baseball-reference. 2 singles, a grounder and one missing from the game logs.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/pi/pvb.cgi?n1=webbbr01&n2=hattesc01

Yet, the point is taken. ;)

reds44
03-30-2008, 06:00 PM
More trade news from MLBTR


The Reds have put Ryan Freel on the market, but more teams appear to be interested in Scott Hatteberg. However, Rosenthal indicates that it is unlikely for the Reds to trade Hatteberg even if Joey Votto is named the starter.


The Tigers, Reds and Orioles all tried to acquire backup catcher Brayan Pena from the Braves, but the Braves do not appear interested in letting him go

Tom Servo
03-30-2008, 06:00 PM
Maybe it's for Jason Ellison? :D

klw
03-30-2008, 06:00 PM
Good to see Fogg did better in his minor league start than Milton did against the Pirates minor leaguers last year.

cincrazy
03-30-2008, 06:56 PM
Good to see Fogg did better in his minor league start than Milton did against the Pirates minor leaguers last year.

SHHHH!!!!!! Do not use the M word on this board please.

UKFlounder
03-30-2008, 07:41 PM
SHHHH!!!!!! Do not use the M word on this board please.


Why can't we say "minor?" :p:

mth123
03-30-2008, 08:39 PM
Question for the board.

If the Reds are working on a deal or two to create room on the 40 man, why would Cueto need to be added before Thursday afternoon? He's an NRI. They aren't burning an option and I don't see why he has to be on the roster on opening day. If they have to be at 25, they can simply wait and place Belisle on the DL on Thursday back dated to his last game (or 9 days before the season starts whichever is more recent). I could see the roster moves dragging on.

D-Man
03-30-2008, 08:48 PM
Both are lefties with platoon splits-what's this depending upon matchups stuff? Does Votto get the nod when the Reds are facing an arm Hattie has gone 0 for 7 against for his career?

This doesn't necessarily strike me as a bad thing, really. Earl Weaver thought that 10 or fewer PAs was enough to make lineup and pitcher v. hitter decisions.

My preference would be 30+ PAs for these sorts of decisions, but I think this is where in-game scouting can certainly help.

jojo
03-30-2008, 09:01 PM
This doesn't necessarily strike me as a bad thing, really. Earl Weaver thought that 10 or fewer PAs was enough to make lineup and pitcher v. hitter decisions.

My preference would be 30+ PAs for these sorts of decisions, but I think this is where in-game scouting can certainly help.

Even if 30 PAs provided enough information to make that decision something more than just guessing (30 PA's doesn't BTW), how in the world could Dusty make the decision that Votto was a better option since Votto has only faced 10 pitchers at least three times?

Reds1
03-30-2008, 09:06 PM
Cueto is starting Thursday. Of course, it's the only game not on FSN Ohio this week. :thumbdown

However, if you have access to a friend or yourself with the dish or direct tv it's free mlb preview week so I'm hoping the other team will do it. :)

HokieRed
03-30-2008, 09:14 PM
I've been a major supporter defender of Edwin Encarnacion from his first coming up, but his spring was abysmal. I'm hoping his rebound starts tomorrow, and I think it very well could. Still I wonder if it isn't premature to trade Ryan Freel while EE is struggling so badly. In fact, I wonder if Ryan Freel's overall value to this team isn't being underestimated.

RBA
03-30-2008, 09:17 PM
Is it Homer Bailey for Sean Casey?

D-Man
03-30-2008, 09:23 PM
Even if 30 PAs provided enough information to make that decision something more than just guessing (30 PA's doesn't BTW), how in the world could Dusty make the decision that Votto was a better option since Votto has only faced 10 pitchers at least three times?

Fair enough point on Votto having *no* track record.

But if you can make judgment (with a limited data set) that Hatteberg is horrible against a given pitcher, Votto can't possibly be any worse. And what are your relative options? I think scouting can help inform the decisions here. A good scout can identify if a hitter is totally off balance or clueless v. a given pitcher.

If 30 PAs isn't sufficient in your opinion--then what is the appropriate cutoff? If you're suggesting 300+ PAs is sufficient, then that's an analysis by paralysis approach to lineups.

mth123
03-30-2008, 09:24 PM
I've been a major supporter defender of Edwin Encarnacion from his first coming up, but his spring was abysmal. I'm hoping his rebound starts tomorrow, and I think it very well could. Still I wonder if it isn't premature to trade Ryan Freel while EE is struggling so badly. In fact, I wonder if Ryan Freel's overall value to this team isn't being underestimated.

I think so. I'm not sure that a budget conscious team should have a $7 Million obligation to a bench player, but a team that sells itself as a contender shoud have quality bench players and for all of his maddening baserunning blunders, Freel is a quality bench player. The Reds do have the advantage of knowing that if an OF goes down, its likely to be Bruce and not Freel who goes in the line-up and Keppinger is the first guy off the bench in the IF. So the need for Freel to be a line-up fill in for a significant portion of time is probably not likely. But he is a better player than Hopper and he shouldn't be traded just to move him, but to acquire an upgrade at another spot (like the Bullpen or Catcher). I'm not convincd he has the value to bring back a real upgrade and the Reds are probably better off keeping him.

SteelSD
03-30-2008, 09:52 PM
If 30 PAs isn't sufficient in your opinion--then what is the appropriate cutoff? If you're suggesting 300+ PAs is sufficient, then that's an analysis by paralysis approach to lineups.

30 PA certainly isn't a large enough sample size to determine anything. And we also should note that a player has to likely play a long while to rack up a long list of pitchers he's seen for 30+ PA. Using only AB (because I'm a bit lazy right now), even a guy who's produced 3,300+ AB like Adam Dunn has a list of only 8 MLB pitchers he's faced that often.

I'd suggest that if we're ever going to see meaningful matchup data, it's going to evolve out of something like Pitch-f/x. Using that kind of data, culled from at least a couple full seasons of information, we might be able to match up hitters and pitchers based on their normal "zone" tendencies. For example, if Pitcher A demonstrates a tendency to work the plate in a certain zone, then a prepared Manager may be able to identify that Hitter B may be a better "matchup" for that pitcher than another hitter who posts better numbers over time, but who has shown less success with pitches in that zone.

jojo
03-30-2008, 10:04 PM
If you're suggesting 300+ PAs is sufficient, then that's an analysis by paralysis approach to lineups.

You bat your best hitters and don't get distracted by small sample size theater. No paralysis there.

Trying to decide whether to drive the red sedan or the green one (basically Votto and Hatteberg are redundant in their roles) on a given day based upon data that can't even begin to control randomness is analysis by paralysis. Dusty might as well use one of those eight ball thingies.

Suppose Larussa decides to start Ryan Franklin for some strange unknown reason. Great! Hattie has 43 PAs against him. However, 31 of them came during 2004 or earlier. Even if 43 was a big enough sample size to address a matchup betwee two specific players would something they did against one another 4, 5, or 6 years ago inform anything about a game this April?

Falls City Beer
03-30-2008, 10:06 PM
I'm guessing the breakdown between Votto/Hatte will be close to 50/50.

dougdirt
03-30-2008, 10:07 PM
Dusty might as well use one of those eight ball thingies.
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/3867/801/400/dusty_dice.jpg

Falls City Beer
03-30-2008, 10:09 PM
I guess though the best option would be to send down Votto so he can get work in, while playing Hatte every day in order to trade him.

Highlifeman21
03-30-2008, 10:13 PM
I guess though the best option would be to send down Votto so he can get work in, while playing Hatte every day in order to trade him.

That's an interesting thought.

Votto needs regular work, and under Dusty won't get that while in Cincinnati.

If we really are trying to showcase Hatteberg to try and trade him, then he should play everyday in Cincinnati and Votto should play everyday in Louisville.

Might as well bring up a RHB to give Hatteberg the needed day(s) off.

Tom Servo
03-30-2008, 10:17 PM
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/3867/801/400/dusty_dice.jpg
http://usera.imagecave.com/rynman/dusty_dice.jpg

edabbs44
03-30-2008, 10:17 PM
That's an interesting thought.

Votto needs regular work, and under Dusty won't get that while in Cincinnati.

If we really are trying to showcase Hatteberg to try and trade him, then he should play everyday in Cincinnati and Votto should play everyday in Louisville.

Might as well bring up a RHB to give Hatteberg the needed day(s) off.

Does anyone think that this, if the case, would be a good thing? Picking up an option on a guy where the main goal is to trade him? I can't see the end justifying the means in this case.

Middling prospect(s) in return for delayed experience for Votto, Hatteberg's salary and roster inefficiency.

penantboundreds
03-30-2008, 10:18 PM
Do you guys really think we have to "SHOWCASE" Scott Hatteberg? The guy has been around and has that track revord we are talking about. I see no reason to showcase someone who has this much time in the major leagues.

Falls City Beer
03-30-2008, 10:21 PM
Do you guys really think we have to "SHOWCASE" Scott Hatteberg? The guy has been around and has that track revord we are talking about. I see no reason to showcase someone who has this much time in the major leagues.

Yeah, it's not that you have to showcase Hatteberg, but rather that Votto not playing full time is not really a good thing for his development.

SteelSD
03-30-2008, 10:30 PM
I guess though the best option would be to send down Votto so he can get work in, while playing Hatte every day in order to trade him.

Hatteberg's splits for the last two years:

2007:

Home: .370 BA/.436 OBP/.571 SLG (1.007 OPS)
Away: .244 BA/.351 OBP/.366 SLG (.717 OPS)

2006:

Home: .329 BA/.428 OBP/.507 SLG (.935 OPS)
Away: .251 BA/.351 OBP/.368 SLG (.719 OPS)

Assuming that the Reds were forward-thinking enough to do it, Hatteberg profiles pretty well as a GAB-only/RHP-only platoon partner for Votto. I know it's weird to think of a LH/LH platoon, but that's what Hatteberg might be best at. On the road, maybe start Hatteberg instead of Votto versus some of the tougher LHP Votto hasn't seen.

Certainly a Hatteberg trade could come, but if he starts consistently, then Votto is really the only viable pinch-hitting option off the bench so sending him down at this point wasn't going to happen.

BTW, listening to Manny Acta speak during a game is a real treat.

SteelSD
03-30-2008, 10:33 PM
http://usera.imagecave.com/rynman/dusty_dice.jpg

ROTFL!!

Exceptional work, sir.:thumbup:

Cyclone792
03-30-2008, 10:39 PM
http://usera.imagecave.com/rynman/dusty_dice.jpg

If we still had rep points you'd have a guaranteed 100+ for that single post.

Phenomenal! All we need now are RedsZone T-Shirts with that logo on the front.

Chip R
03-30-2008, 10:40 PM
http://usera.imagecave.com/rynman/dusty_dice.jpg


Excellent work.

Patrick Bateman
03-30-2008, 10:44 PM
Does anyone think that this, if the case, would be a good thing? Picking up an option on a guy where the main goal is to trade him? I can't see the end justifying the means in this case.

Middling prospect(s) in return for delayed experience for Votto, Hatteberg's salary and roster inefficiency.

Well he had trade value when we picked up the option.

The Reds could move him for said middling prospect right now if they wanted... which would be an interesting move, if in unison with a guy like Ensberg in the fold as your suggestion.

I might have picked the option for that reason alone.

D-Man
03-30-2008, 10:45 PM
I'd suggest that if we're ever going to see meaningful matchup data, it's going to evolve out of something like Pitch-f/x. Using that kind of data, culled from at least a couple full seasons of information, we might be able to match up hitters and pitchers based on their normal "zone" tendencies. For example, if Pitcher A demonstrates a tendency to work the plate in a certain zone, then a prepared Manager may be able to identify that Hitter B may be a better "matchup" for that pitcher than another hitter who posts better numbers over time, but who has shown less success with pitches in that zone.

That's what I'm talking about. I expressed the issue in more traditional scouting terms (i.e., making inferences based on observations), but the recommendation is the same. If you can make judgments that a given player doesn't maximize your chances of winning against a given pitcher, then it makes sense to consider other options.


You bat your best hitters and don't get distracted by small sample size theater. No paralysis there.

That's Cito Gastonism. That's the sleeeeeepy approach to lineup construction, and it doesn't strike me as the optimal way of maximizing results in a given game.

My take is that if you have evidence that Hatteberg won't maximize your chances of winning a given game, then consider other options. A small sample may or may not inform the decision.

4256 Hits
03-30-2008, 10:56 PM
Question for the board.

If the Reds are working on a deal or two to create room on the 40 man, why would Cueto need to be added before Thursday afternoon? He's an NRI. They aren't burning an option and I don't see why he has to be on the roster on opening day. If they have to be at 25, they can simply wait and place Belisle on the DL on Thursday back dated to his last game (or 9 days before the season starts whichever is more recent). I could see the roster moves dragging on.

Good call mth, maybe you should be the reds GM. :beerme:

Make it even better put a player on the roster that can play the 1st two games that are on the 40 and got optioned (Bray, Dickerson).

Plus what could be a hugh bonus is it could cause Cueto to miss FA by 3 days six years from now.

Jpup
03-30-2008, 11:19 PM
However, if you have access to a friend or yourself with the dish or direct tv it's free mlb preview week so I'm hoping the other team will do it. :)

It's on FSN Arizona, but it will be blacked out in Cincinnati's market no matter the free preview.

jojo
03-30-2008, 11:21 PM
Do you guys really think we have to "SHOWCASE" Scott Hatteberg? The guy has been around and has that track revord we are talking about. I see no reason to showcase someone who has this much time in the major leagues.

In Hattie's case it would be to show he's not fallen off of a cliff with another birthday.

edabbs44
03-30-2008, 11:23 PM
Well he had trade value when we picked up the option.

The Reds could move him for said middling prospect right now if they wanted... which would be an interesting move, if in unison with a guy like Ensberg in the fold as your suggestion.

I might have picked the option for that reason alone.

If the return were to be a middling rospect, then I don't see the risk of picking up the option being worth it. You run the risk of injury or Hatteberg having a crap spring and then you are left holding the bag.

MikeS21
03-30-2008, 11:43 PM
Does anyone worry that this whole Votto/Hattiesburg situation is going to become another Ben Broussard/Sean Casey debate?

Like Votto, Broussard was supposed be the answer to 1B for ten years. But Broussard became expendable because of Sean Casey. Now we have the same dynamic with Votto and Hattiesburg. The Reds cannot succumb to the temptation to hang on to Hattiesburg at the expense of Votto. You know what you have in Hattiesburg. He won't get any better. He won't make the team any better. Go ahead and trade the Hatt-Man now. His trade value is as high as it will ever be, and it's not like it's going to cost you the World Series if you don't have him on the roster. If the Reds ought to have learned anything from the Casey/Broussard situation, sentimentalism doesn't win ballgames.

Now, I believe Votto is a far better player than Broussard, and has a higher ceiling that Broussard ever had. But Hattiesburg, IMO, is nothing more than Sean Casey - Part II. If Krivsky is that worried about losing Hattiesburg's bat and wants to be sentimental, I'm almost positive he could swing a minor deal with the BoSox and bring Sean Casey back home to be a bat off the bench and spell Votto at 1B three or four games every month - especially against those tough lefthanders. Not only would he replace Hattiesburg's bat, but he would be bringing back a beloved fan favorite who knows his role would nothing more than a pinch hitter and occassional start here and there. And I think at this point in his career, Casey would be satisfied with that role.

I'd hate to have another Broussard/Votto being pushed aside for Casey/Hattiesburg.

jojo
03-30-2008, 11:46 PM
That's Cito Gastonism. That's the sleeeeeepy approach to lineup construction, and it doesn't strike me as the optimal way of maximizing results in a given game.

No it's not. It's knowing the limitations of the data and acting accordingly.


My take is that if you have evidence that Hatteberg won't maximize your chances of winning a given game, then consider other options. A small sample may or may not inform the decision.

My take is that if you know a hitter's true level of performance is better than another option, you play the better player absent a tangible reason not too if the goal is to win this game at all costs. Thirty PAs spread over many years is NOT a tangible reason. The last 30 PAs isn't even a tangible reason. Playing a far superior glove in centerfield when you're running out an extreme flyball pitcher in a place like Petco, IS a tangible reason.

That's neither lazy nor unenlightened.

Patrick Bateman
03-30-2008, 11:47 PM
If the return were to be a middling rospect, then I don't see the risk of picking up the option being worth it. You run the risk of injury or Hatteberg having a crap spring and then you are left holding the bag.

No I'm saying he had value right at the moment you signed him. Right now there are teams interested in him... and I don't see how his value has really changed, as an established player, we know what we get out of Hatt at this point.

I doubt the Reds would have any problem finding a suitor the minute they extended him. Considering the rumored interest, I think we could have parlayed Hatt into a decent prospect, all at the cost of nothing. The Reds seem to prefer the different route.

Simply declining him was a waste of assets, guarateed loss.

edabbs44
03-30-2008, 11:52 PM
No I'm saying he had value right at the moment you signed him. Right now there are teams interested in him... and I don't see how his value has really changed, as an established player, we know what we get out of Hatt at this point.

I doubt the Reds would have any problem finding a suitor the minute they extended him. Considering the rumored interest, I think we could have parlayed Hatt into a decent prospect, all at the cost of nothing. The Reds seem to prefer the different route.

Simply declining him was a waste of assets, guarateed loss.

I think his value is overblown. His recent "success" is purely a product of the ballpark. I cannot see anyone giving up much of anything for him right now, unless said team was reeling b/c of a last minute injury.

Patrick Bateman
03-30-2008, 11:59 PM
Ya but ANY value is better than NO value. I don't know what you could get, but it's more than nothing. Why toss that away when it's obvious that teams have had interest in him?

edabbs44
03-31-2008, 12:01 AM
Ya but ANY value is better than NO value. I don't know what you could get, but it's more than nothing. Why toss that away when it's obvious that teams have had interest in him?

Risk/reward.

Is the reward (nothing special prospect) work the risk (not being unable to unload him for whatever reason and being on the hook for $2MM or thereabouts)?

Patrick Bateman
03-31-2008, 12:10 AM
Risk/reward.

Is the reward (nothing special prospect) work the risk (not being unable to unload him for whatever reason and being on the hook for $2MM or thereabouts)?

What risk is there? That Hatteberg is going to cut himself in a bagel cutter (wait that was Villone)?

Hatt's production has value, especially for his contract. There is a reason why teams have shown interest in him right from the start. There is zero chance that nobody is willing to take him at 2M. That just doesn't make sense in this market.

Aronchis
03-31-2008, 12:20 AM
Does anyone worry that this whole Votto/Hattiesburg situation is going to become another Ben Broussard/Sean Casey debate?

Like Votto, Broussard was supposed be the answer to 1B for ten years. But Broussard became expendable because of Sean Casey. Now we have the same dynamic with Votto and Hattiesburg. The Reds cannot succumb to the temptation to hang on to Hattiesburg at the expense of Votto. You know what you have in Hattiesburg. He won't get any better. He won't make the team any better. Go ahead and trade the Hatt-Man now. His trade value is as high as it will ever be, and it's not like it's going to cost you the World Series if you don't have him on the roster. If the Reds ought to have learned anything from the Casey/Broussard situation, sentimentalism doesn't win ballgames.

Now, I believe Votto is a far better player than Broussard, and has a higher ceiling that Broussard ever had. But Hattiesburg, IMO, is nothing more than Sean Casey - Part II. If Krivsky is that worried about losing Hattiesburg's bat and wants to be sentimental, I'm almost positive he could swing a minor deal with the BoSox and bring Sean Casey back home to be a bat off the bench and spell Votto at 1B three or four games every month - especially against those tough lefthanders. Not only would he replace Hattiesburg's bat, but he would be bringing back a beloved fan favorite who knows his role would nothing more than a pinch hitter and occassional start here and there. And I think at this point in his career, Casey would be satisfied with that role.

I'd hate to have another Broussard/Votto being pushed aside for Casey/Hattiesburg.

Nope. Worlds different. Broussard ran into problems at AAA that Votto didn't experience 2 years younger.

Hatte shouldn't even be on the Reds. They have been trying to trade him for awhile. At some point, they need to move.

RedsManRick
03-31-2008, 12:47 AM
Nope. Worlds different. Broussard ran into problems at AAA that Votto didn't experience 2 years younger.

Hatte shouldn't even be on the Reds. They have been trying to trade him for awhile. At some point, they need to move.

Broussard really broke out at age 24, in AA, in 2001. Meanwhile, Sean Casey was hitting .310/.369/.458 in the majors at age 26. He was blocked by a player basically just two years ahead of him on the same development path who already had major league success.

Joey Votto is being blocked by 38 year old who can't hit righties or outside of GABP. Votto just hit .294/.381/.478 as a 23 year old in AAA, after destroying AA the year prior, and had a very successful cup of coffee during that age 23 season.

Not remotely comparable.

The idea that you sit Votto until his bat comes around is just stupid. Showcasing Hatteberg for a trade might make sense if there wasn't already interest and if his skill set wasn't already known exactly by the entire industry. As for Votto, by what measure and in what sample do you finally determine that his bat is coming around such that he's a better option? When he gets a spot start and goes 2-3? Just ridiculous. It's not the end of the world, just another indicator of a mixed up thought process.

Jpup
03-31-2008, 12:57 AM
I don't see the point of trading Scott unless you can get something of value for him. GABP is not the only hitters park in baseball. He has value. Joey Votto will get his chance and he will be starting a lot of games for the Reds in '08. Who gives the Reds the best chance to win today? I think it's about even.

fearofpopvol1
03-31-2008, 01:05 AM
I don't see the point of trading Scott unless you can get something of value for him. GABP is not the only hitters park in baseball. He has value. Joey Votto will get his chance and he will be starting a lot of games for the Reds in '08. Who gives the Reds the best chance to win today? I think it's about even.

I agree with this completely. I think most RZ'ers want Hatteberg traded because they fear Dusty will start him over Votto! At his pricetag, the guy is a real bargain and a good player to have around.

WVRedsFan
03-31-2008, 01:29 AM
I agree with this completely. I think most RZ'ers want Hatteberg traded because they fear Dusty will start him over Votto! At his pricetag, the guy is a real bargain and a good player to have around.

That's certainly part of the reason. The other reason is the clock is ticking for Votto. Why waste his production at AAA. He's 10years younger, is faster (who isn't), and brings a lot more pop. This may not be a univeral opinion, but I think he fields his position better and can play the outfield in a pinch.

I love Scott, but only as a fill-in or a pinch hitter. Same with Freel. They both are fools gold if the thought are that they can start day in and day out. And I don't favor trading him unless he brings a stud.

fearofpopvol1
03-31-2008, 02:10 AM
That's certainly part of the reason. The other reason is the clock is ticking for Votto. Why waste his production at AAA. He's 10years younger, is faster (who isn't), and brings a lot more pop. This may not be a univeral opinion, but I think he fields his position better and can play the outfield in a pinch.

I love Scott, but only as a fill-in or a pinch hitter. Same with Freel. They both are fools gold if the thought are that they can start day in and day out. And I don't favor trading him unless he brings a stud.

I honestly don't think that Hatteberg will get the majority of playing time at 1B. I think at most it's probably a 50/50 split, but I still think Votto is favored.

redsrule2500
03-31-2008, 02:34 AM
http://usera.imagecave.com/rynman/dusty_dice.jpg

:lol::lol: That's a classic...

MikeS21
03-31-2008, 07:48 AM
Nope. Worlds different. Broussard ran into problems at AAA that Votto didn't experience 2 years younger.

Hatte shouldn't even be on the Reds. They have been trying to trade him for awhile. At some point, they need to move.
Don't misunderstand me. I think Joey Votto ought to start at 1B today - Opening Day 2008 - and be the fixture at 1B for the next ten years. And Votto is obviously a far superior player than Ben Broussard.

But I also remember all those RedsZone discussions where Broussard was considered the superior player over Casey. When Broussard went to Cleveland, there was much angst around here, including the famed "Ben Broussard Watch" thread, where virtually every AB of Broussard was compared to Sean Casey's AB's.

I agree that Hatte needs to go, and I doubt his trade value will be any higher in June/July than it is right now. And if teams are already showing interest, now is the time to trade him.

Ltlabner
03-31-2008, 08:17 AM
I guess though the best option would be to send down Votto so he can get work in, while playing Hatte every day in order to trade him.

Yea, agree 100% I'd rather have Votto start and Hatte be the PH, but yours is also a viable option. However there was this blurb posted earlier


The Reds have put Ryan Freel on the market, but more teams appear to be interested in Scott Hatteberg. However, Rosenthal indicates that it is unlikely for the Reds to trade Hatteberg even if Joey Votto is named the starter.

Hopefully that's just a rumor or guesswork on the reporters part.

Caveat Emperor
03-31-2008, 08:49 AM
I don't see the point of trading Scott unless you can get something of value for him. GABP is not the only hitters park in baseball. He has value. Joey Votto will get his chance and he will be starting a lot of games for the Reds in '08. Who gives the Reds the best chance to win today? I think it's about even.

Who gives the Reds the best chance to win now? Votto.
Who gives the Reds the best chance to win next yer? Votto.

Even if you think it is a push between the two, you give the nod to Votto because he's going to be around next year -- Hatteberg isn't. If they're even, you're wasting PAs on Hatteberg that could be used in helping develop Votto into an even better player.

HokieRed
03-31-2008, 10:37 AM
If you're looking for an analogy in the history of Sean Casey, as I remember it, it might be better to focus on one of Jim B's decisions--to go with Casey over Konerko--rather than Broussard-Casey. The critical mistake was Casey rather than Konerko, not Casey over Broussard. Is Hatteberg over Votto a repeat of Casey-Konerko? Not to say that the organization has decided for Hat or anything that extreme. This may be a very simple matter: Votto had a lousy spring, Hatteberg had a good one--and was one of the few regulars who did. I'm more worried at the moment about whether this team is going to hit the ball at all for the first several weeks. Dusty might be too.

Joseph
03-31-2008, 10:52 AM
Hopefully that's just a rumor or guesswork on the reporters part.

I'd bet the Reds aren't inclined to just push Hatte out. I think they value him as a backup, and with Votto possibly as a LFer if Dunn is moved later on, as a more permanent starter.

I think there are a lot here who view Hatte as something that threatens Votto instead of something that helps the Reds. There is no reason to give Hatte away, as some suggest, and I don't think a lot of teams are knocking down the doors offering something that is a plus to the Reds now or the future. I believe Hattes more valuable than a suspect A ball player. I'd rather keep him and have some argument and question than to dump him just because Votto is here. Dusty will play him, but so what, when he's playing we've got Votto's stick on the bench, when Votto plays we've got Hatte. It's better than Hopper being our top PHer.

Tommyjohn25
03-31-2008, 11:00 AM
I'd bet the Reds aren't inclined to just push Hatte out. I think they value him as a backup, and with Votto possibly as a LFer if Dunn is moved later on, as a more permanent starter.

I think there are a lot here who view Hatte as something that threatens Votto instead of something that helps the Reds. There is no reason to give Hatte away, as some suggest, and I don't think a lot of teams are knocking down the doors offering something that is a plus to the Reds now or the future. I believe Hattes more valuable than a suspect A ball player. I'd rather keep him and have some argument and question than to dump him just because Votto is here. Dusty will play him, but so what, when he's playing we've got Votto's stick on the bench, when Votto plays we've got Hatte. It's better than Hopper being our top PHer.

:clap:

Always Red
03-31-2008, 11:29 AM
10:30am....Coutlangus DFA'd according to C Trent on radio. One more spot needs opened up on the 40 man, and C Trent re-iterated that he thinks a trade is still in the works, maybe involving Freel. Cutler moans about losing Coutlangus, C Trent not that upset- says he's not that good, he can't throw strikes, and he (Coutlangus) may be back even before the end of the day, depending on what happens with the roster before the game starts...

klw
03-31-2008, 11:33 AM
Well if there is ever a time of year to try to sneak a guy like Coutlangus off of the 40 man it is probably now when teams are lagrely looking to shed players or for a more estbalished player. Not the time of year to pick up a guy that there likely is limited scouting on.

IslandRed
03-31-2008, 11:37 AM
I'd suggest that if we're ever going to see meaningful matchup data, it's going to evolve out of something like Pitch-f/x.

Not to hijack, but you're right, that's the next frontier of analyzing batter-pitcher confrontations. It's probably going on already, we just don't know about it. Just one example out of a zillion questions that could be posed -- is a pitcher's HR/FB rate out of whack because of random luck, or does he have this annoying habit where every time he gets a pitch up, it's over the heart of the plate?

Heath
03-31-2008, 11:51 AM
If Ryan Freel gets traded, Marty Brennaman's Plan B if EdE gets off to a slow start is out the window.

REDREAD
03-31-2008, 11:52 AM
Does anyone think that this, if the case, would be a good thing? Picking up an option on a guy where the main goal is to trade him? I can't see the end justifying the means in this case.

Middling prospect(s) in return for delayed experience for Votto, Hatteberg's salary and roster inefficiency.

I think Dusty is under pressure to win now. Whether it is from Cast or just from within himself, he wants to win.

In all fairness, it doesn't seem as if Votto had a great spring. It seems as if Dusty was very clear from the beginning that spring training would decide who plays initially.

The push might be very good for Votto. That might be what the Reds are trying to do with Votto and Bruce (and Homer).. impress upon them that they have to earn their jobs through merit, and that nothing will be handed to them. It's a defensible strategy for the Reds, because playing Hatt/Patterson instead of Bruce/Votto isn't likely to cost them the pennant.

I do agree that if Votto doesn't play around 40-50% of the time, they should send him to Louisvlle.

REDREAD
03-31-2008, 12:02 PM
If you're looking for an analogy in the history of Sean Casey, as I remember it, it might be better to focus on one of Jim B's decisions--to go with Casey over Konerko--rather than Broussard-Casey.

I don't see the Konerko trade as a mistake by any means. I think the Cameron-Konerko trade was one of the best trades Bowden ever made. It got us exactly what we needed to contend in 1999. We have to consider that the White Sox probably wouldn't have accepted Casey instead of Konerko. Another consideration is that in 1999, even though Konerko was projected to be the better player, Casey was a better player at that moment.

IMO, a contending team doesn't necessarily have the goal of maximizing talent return or minimizing transaction costs. They need to do what it takes to win.

edabbs44
03-31-2008, 12:32 PM
In all fairness, it doesn't seem as if Votto had a great spring. It seems as if Dusty was very clear from the beginning that spring training would decide who plays initially.

I think they have been all over the place. Spring means something one day, another day it means nothing.


Baker said Votto is one of the guys for whom he checks the past performance charts.

"You don't want to just use what he has done in the spring," said Baker. "You use what he has done over the course of a year and what you see now. Also, you track him from start to finish. At the end of last year, he was rolling, right?"

Called up in September, the Brampton, Ontario, resident not only hit .321, he hit four home runs and drove in 17 runs in 24 games.

"They told me he hit .185 in April last year," said Baker. "That tells me he may be a slow starter, something you have to take into consideration."


http://www.daytondailynews.com/r/content/oh/story/sports/pro/reds/2008/03/15/ddn031508redsweb.html

TRF
03-31-2008, 12:33 PM
I wonder if the Reds are talking to the Dodgers? They need a 3B, and Freel can fill the role.

Hoosier Red
03-31-2008, 12:48 PM
I think they have been all over the place. Spring means something one day, another day it means nothing.



http://www.daytondailynews.com/r/content/oh/story/sports/pro/reds/2008/03/15/ddn031508redsweb.html

I think what spring means is different for every player. I definately think their's merit to making the young guys earn a position.
I'm not sure I'd take that approach, but its a defensible position.

klw
03-31-2008, 01:01 PM
I don't see the Konerko trade as a mistake by any means. I think the Cameron-Konerko trade was one of the best trades Bowden ever made. It got us exactly what we needed to contend in 1999. We have to consider that the White Sox probably wouldn't have accepted Casey instead of Konerko. Another consideration is that in 1999, even though Konerko was projected to be the better player, Casey was a better player at that moment.

IMO, a contending team doesn't necessarily have the goal of maximizing talent return or minimizing transaction costs. They need to do what it takes to win.

Interesting sidenote on the trade. A few weeks earlier the Reds had told Konerko that he was a building block and important to them. They didn't know what position they were going to use him at but he was to be a building block. They then turned around and moved him.

paulrichjr
03-31-2008, 01:03 PM
Interesting sidenote on the trade. A few weeks earlier the Reds had told Konerko that he was a building block and important to them. They didn't know what position they were going to use him at but he was to be a building block. They then turned around and moved him.

Uhhh we are talking Jim "liar" Bowden here....

TRF
03-31-2008, 01:06 PM
Uhhh we are talking Jim "liar" Bowden here....

Where is the lie? He was an important building block, and apparently they decided to play him in Chicago.

flyer85
03-31-2008, 01:20 PM
I wonder if the Reds are talking to the Dodgers? They need a 3B, and Freel can fill the role.tell them to send Young.

Kent is banged up as well.

fearofpopvol1
03-31-2008, 01:25 PM
Who gives the Reds the best chance to win now? Votto.
Who gives the Reds the best chance to win next yer? Votto.

Even if you think it is a push between the two, you give the nod to Votto because he's going to be around next year -- Hatteberg isn't. If they're even, you're wasting PAs on Hatteberg that could be used in helping develop Votto into an even better player.

What information do you have to substantiate your first claim? The fact that Joey Votto has played 1 month in the majors at the end of a season?

TRF
03-31-2008, 01:41 PM
What information do you have to substantiate your first claim? The fact that Joey Votto has played 1 month in the majors at the end of a season?

1 month plus IL rookie of the year in 2007 plus Southern League MVP in 2006 vs 38 year old 1B with declining range and extreme home road splits.

RedsManRick
03-31-2008, 02:10 PM
What information do you have to substantiate your first claim? The fact that Joey Votto has played 1 month in the majors at the end of a season?

Well, I think the future point speaks for itself unless you think Hatteberg will not age like most 38 year olds. Regarding the first point, the most accurate projection sytsem in existence has Votto as a better bet than Hatteberg this year.

Here are the weighted mean projections:
Hatteberg: .286/.368/.441
Votto: .279/.359/.497

That 56 points in slugging is a pretty big deal.

PECOTA certainly isn't God or anything. But when it comes to projecting likely performance, it's the best we've got. That said, what often goes unappreciated with PECOTA is that it projects a range of possibilities. The weighted means are used most often, but they don't give a very full picture of what might happen. Here's a quick chart of OPS for each of them by percentile, the range of possible outcomes. Sure, Hatteberg might be better. But the best model in existence, which factors in a ton of things including seasonal splits, park factors, minor league translations, etc. shows Votto to be the better choice --- particularly when it comes to minimizing downside. Throw in the development issues and it's hard to make a macro case for Hatteberg.

http://www.screenshots.cc/images/exz7tvvxtbqgvjnm29pc.jpg

fearofpopvol1
03-31-2008, 02:10 PM
1 month plus IL rookie of the year in 2007 plus Southern League MVP in 2006 vs 38 year old 1B with declining range and extreme home road splits.

That's fine and great, but those accomplishments were in the minor leagues, not the majors. I love Votto, but he hasn't proven anything yet over any real period of time. You could certainly argue that he needs to have the chance to prove himself, but there is not any concrete information that would suggest that over the course of this 2008 season that Votto would outperform Hatte in batting average or OBP.

fearofpopvol1
03-31-2008, 02:11 PM
Well, I think the future point speaks for itself unless you think Hatteberg will not age like most 38 year olds. Regarding the first point, the most accurate projection sytsem in existence has Votto as a better bet than Hatteberg this year.

Here are the weighted mean projections:
Hatteberg: .286/.368/.441
Votto: .279/.359/.497

That 56 points in slugging is a pretty big deal.

PECOTA certainly isn't God or anything. But when it comes to projecting likely performance, it's the best we've got. That said, what often goes unappreciated with PECOTA is that it projects a range of possibilities. The weighted means are used most often, but they don't give a very full picture of what might happen.

http://www.screenshots.cc/images/exz7tvvxtbqgvjnm29pc.jpg

Votto could outperform Hatte, but I just don't think for this season that Votto is a substantial upgrade, as the original poster suggested.

BuckeyeRedleg
03-31-2008, 02:15 PM
Votto could outperform Hatte, but I just don't think for this season that Votto is a substantial upgrade, as the original poster suggested.

Even if it's a wash, Votto at 400K with a year of experience under his belt, is better than an aging Hatteberg at 1.85M.

Heath
03-31-2008, 02:16 PM
hey Dudes - it's opening day.

TRF
03-31-2008, 02:18 PM
That's fine and great, but those accomplishments were in the minor leagues, not the majors. I love Votto, but he hasn't proven anything yet over any real period of time. You could certainly argue that he needs to have the chance to prove himself, but there is not any concrete information that would suggest that over the course of this 2008 season that Votto would outperform Hatte in batting average or OBP.

It certainly suggests future performance including this year. Hatte's second half OPS in 2007 was certainly nothing to sneeze at was still a 90 point drop from his first half. His home road splits show a 300 point difference in OPS. That pretty much says he's a product of the GABP. Vottos is the present and the future of this franchise at 1B. I don't mind that Hatte got the nod today, he had a fine spring, but the everyday 1B should be Votto.

lollipopcurve
03-31-2008, 02:19 PM
hey Dudes - it's opening day.

no, I think I heard that's when the PECOTA projections come out

RedsManRick
03-31-2008, 02:20 PM
I'm sorry, I didn't hear you. My head was buried in a spreadsheet. God forbid somebody use stats AND enjoy baseball...

flyer85
03-31-2008, 02:20 PM
no, I think I heard that's when the PECOTA projections come outthat's when the season ended. :D

lollipopcurve
03-31-2008, 02:31 PM
God forbid somebody use stats AND enjoy baseball...

You're going to enjoy Dusty and Corey, I just know it.

flyer85
03-31-2008, 02:33 PM
You're going to enjoy Dusty and Corey, I just know it.
we all know Dusty really doesn't have dugout dice ... he has a magic 8-ball. :beerme:

Falls City Beer
03-31-2008, 02:36 PM
Well, I think the future point speaks for itself unless you think Hatteberg will not age like most 38 year olds. Regarding the first point, the most accurate projection sytsem in existence has Votto as a better bet than Hatteberg this year.

Here are the weighted mean projections:
Hatteberg: .286/.368/.441
Votto: .279/.359/.497

That 56 points in slugging is a pretty big deal.

PECOTA certainly isn't God or anything. But when it comes to projecting likely performance, it's the best we've got. That said, what often goes unappreciated with PECOTA is that it projects a range of possibilities. The weighted means are used most often, but they don't give a very full picture of what might happen. Here's a quick chart of OPS for each of them by percentile, the range of possible outcomes. Sure, Hatteberg might be better. But the best model in existence, which factors in a ton of things including seasonal splits, park factors, minor league translations, etc. shows Votto to be the better choice --- particularly when it comes to minimizing downside. Throw in the development issues and it's hard to make a macro case for Hatteberg.

http://www.screenshots.cc/images/exz7tvvxtbqgvjnm29pc.jpg


PECOTA really is about as good as it gets as far as projections are concerned, despite its proprietary nature. Its admission that we are dealing with a range of possibilities/ probabilities is helpful.

klw
03-31-2008, 02:45 PM
Well, I think the future point speaks for itself unless you think Hatteberg will not age like most 38 year olds. Regarding the first point, the most accurate projection sytsem in existence has Votto as a better bet than Hatteberg this year.

Here are the weighted mean projections:
Hatteberg: .286/.368/.441
Votto: .279/.359/.497

That 56 points in slugging is a pretty big deal.

PECOTA certainly isn't God or anything. But when it comes to projecting likely performance, it's the best we've got. That said, what often goes unappreciated with PECOTA is that it projects a range of possibilities. The weighted means are used most often, but they don't give a very full picture of what might happen. Here's a quick chart of OPS for each of them by percentile, the range of possible outcomes. Sure, Hatteberg might be better. But the best model in existence, which factors in a ton of things including seasonal splits, park factors, minor league translations, etc. shows Votto to be the better choice --- particularly when it comes to minimizing downside. Throw in the development issues and it's hard to make a macro case for Hatteberg.

http://www.screenshots.cc/images/exz7tvvxtbqgvjnm29pc.jpg

I hate to ask but what does the graph show? Are each of the columns mean to represent the percentage chance that the player's OPS will be below that level? I'm just having a problem telling what the parameters are other than OPS but that could be a result of using Shoe-Goo on my boots this morning and having them sit in the corner of my office all day.

medford
03-31-2008, 02:48 PM
C Trent just posted the latest move, which I assume was the one after 1:00 that we would know about. Richie Gardner has been claimed by the brewers.

Play Ball!

princeton
03-31-2008, 02:50 PM
PECOTA certainly isn't God or anything. But when it comes to projecting likely performance, it's the best we've got.

a really good scout destroys PECOTA, of course.

but it's fun for people that don't have those skills but need to draft a catcher for their roto team.

Caveat Emperor
03-31-2008, 02:50 PM
Votto could outperform Hatte, but I just don't think for this season that Votto is a substantial upgrade, as the original poster suggested.

Honestly, he could be a little bit of a drop-off and it still would make better sense to play Votto now. Throw PECOTA out if you want, it's still moronic to bench the kid.

Get the kid his experience, get his career started -- maximize the production you see in his pre-Arb years. All they're doing right now is retarding his development and ensuring that he'll spend his most productive years commanding bigger dollars in Arb or Free Agency.

flyer85
03-31-2008, 02:52 PM
a really good scout.now if the Reds could get a couple of those :)

Tom Servo
03-31-2008, 02:52 PM
C Trent just posted the latest move, which I assume was the one after 1:00 that we would know about. Richie Gardner has been claimed by the brewers.

Play Ball!
The tide of power in the NL Central has shifted.

lollipopcurve
03-31-2008, 02:53 PM
C Trent just posted the latest move, which I assume was the one after 1:00 that we would know about. Richie Gardner has been claimed by the brewers.

Revenge for Cordero! Take that, Krivsky!

klw
03-31-2008, 02:56 PM
C Trent just posted the latest move, which I assume was the one after 1:00 that we would know about. Richie Gardner has been claimed by the brewers.

Play Ball!
Wouldn't the Reds have been better off not keeping him on the 40 man roster, letting him get selected, forcing him to be on a 25 or returned? Oh well hindsight.

flyer85
03-31-2008, 02:57 PM
Gardner was just another example of how a minor league pitcher is always one pitch from going from prospect to suspect.

princeton
03-31-2008, 02:59 PM
now if the Reds could get a couple of those :)

We have the William Wordsworth of scouts. Capable of the very best work (Hamilton, Phillips, Schoeneweiss), capable of the very worst (long list).

princeton
03-31-2008, 03:00 PM
Wouldn't the Reds have been better off not keeping him on the 40 man roster, letting him get selected, forcing him to be on a 25 or returned? Oh well hindsight.

it's a great point.

jojo
03-31-2008, 03:01 PM
a really good scout destroys PECOTA, of course.

Not really so much.

RedsManRick
03-31-2008, 03:01 PM
a really good scout destroys PECOTA, of course.

but it's fun for people that don't have those skills but need to draft a catcher for their roto team.

Really? At the major league level is that true? Which scout? How often? Which decision? Any evidence at all to back up this claim? Are these the same expert scouts who said Jack Cust would never do anything? The ones who thought it was a good idea to sign Juan Pierre and block Matt Kemp? The ones who thought Royce Clayton would be a decent every day SS for us? The ones who thought Rheal Cormier would bolster the pen? The ones who though Mike Stanton merited a 2 year deal?

Of wait, we don't need evidence. Actual evidence is for stat geeks who only play roto baseball, don't understand the game, never played it, and don't like to watch it. I'll go back to my computer now. Sorry.

Princeton, I appreciate the value scouting. I would never simply look at what PECOTA has to say and run with it. But scouts need to be accountable too. When you have a 24 year old guy with copius success in the upper level minors vs a 38 year old barely was who's success has come only against righties at home, it shouldn't be a terribly difficult decision. What exactly is Joey Votto struggling with this spring? Batting average isn't an answer. Has his skill level changed? Is he not picking up the ball well? Are his swing mechanics off? Or is it simply that in a fairly small sample of at bats he his batting average is low? Is this really a scouting decision -- or is Dusty reacting to a statistic? Neither of us really know. But if we're going to play the scouting card, it would be nice to get a peak at the scouting case -- rather than a very poorly applied stat based one.

klw
03-31-2008, 03:04 PM
it's a great point.

That Commuity Park School education being put to good use.

flyer85
03-31-2008, 03:05 PM
We have the William Wordsworth of scouts. Capable of the very best work (Hamilton, Phillips, Schoeneweiss),those kind of deals don't show much of anything because they are low risk. Deals where you give up nothing(or close to it) are no brainers.

The ones where you prove your talent/knnowledge are the ones where you are giving up something of value to get something of value ... because it really hurts to be wrong.

princeton
03-31-2008, 03:07 PM
those kind of deals don't show much of anything because they are low risk. Deals where you give up nothing(or close to it) are no brainers.

The ones where you prove your talent/knnowledge are the ones where you are giving up something of value to get something of value ... because it really hurts to be wrong.

like Arroyo and Volquez?

Caveat Emperor
03-31-2008, 03:07 PM
those kind of deals don't show much of anything because they are low risk. Deals where you give up nothing(or close to it) are no brainers.

The ones where you prove your talent/knnowledge are the ones where you are giving up something of value to get something of value ... because it really hurts to be wrong.

It's always good to be a great day-trader, but it really helps when you know how to print money in the basement.

princeton
03-31-2008, 03:08 PM
Really? At the major league level is that true? Which scout? How often? Which decision? Any evidence at all to back up this claim?

Of wait, we don't need evidence. Actual evidence is for stat geeks who only play roto baseball, don't understand the game, never played it, and don't like to watch it. I'll go back to my computer now. Sorry.

well of course YOU'RE an exception, since you can walk into any dugout right now and do a better job than a major league manager ;)

flyer85
03-31-2008, 03:15 PM
like Arroyo and Volquez?much better examples. WK had to push something into the middle of table in those deals.

SMcGavin
03-31-2008, 03:16 PM
It's always good to be a great day-trader, but it really helps when you know how to print money in the basement.

Printing money in the basement is a lot more helpful making the transition from 70 to 85 wins than it is going from 85 to 95 wins. When your team isn't any good you can do stuff like pick up a talented 2B who just OPS'd .735 in AAA and make him the every day starter. And maybe it will work out, and suddenly you got something for nothing. If you take that same risk on a 85-90 win team, and the guy continues to be a terrible hitter (which is usually what happens), you may have just cost yourself a playoff spot.

RedsManRick
03-31-2008, 03:19 PM
well of course YOU'RE an exception, since you can walk into any dugout right now and do a better job than a major league manager ;)

When the Reds fail to win the World Series this year, I will place blame squarely on them not hiring me. Good to see you had to change the subject to a personal attack rather than answer the question though -- definitely helps make your case. If you can't defend your position, just attack the credibility of the other guy. Maybe you should run for office ;)

Team Clark
03-31-2008, 03:20 PM
Printing money in the basement is a lot more helpful making the transition from 70 to 85 wins than it is going from 85 to 95 wins.

What kind of printer do you need for that? :D

jojo
03-31-2008, 03:21 PM
I hate to ask but what does the graph show? Are each of the columns mean to represent the percentage chance that the player's OPS will be below that level? I'm just having a problem telling what the parameters are other than OPS but that could be a result of using Shoe-Goo on my boots this morning and having them sit in the corner of my office all day.

From what I gather, it compares the Pecota-projected OPS for Votto and Hatteberg for '08. WM would be the weighted mean with the percentiles on either side.

Basically Pecota projects Votto to post a higher OPS than Hattie over the range of possible performances that are most likely. (40-60th percentiles).

RedsManRick
03-31-2008, 03:27 PM
I hate to ask but what does the graph show? Are each of the columns mean to represent the percentage chance that the player's OPS will be below that level? I'm just having a problem telling what the parameters are other than OPS but that could be a result of using Shoe-Goo on my boots this morning and having them sit in the corner of my office all day.

Sorry, was in a rush. X-axis is the PECOTA percentile. Each percentile is a different possible way for the season to play out. Each of those percentiles have varying likelihoods of occuring. Think of it the likelihood as coming from a bell curve centered around the 50% mark. As Jojo said, the most likely outcomes are between 40 and 60 with decreasing likelihood as you move out to the extremes.

What's interesting to me is that when you look at the ranges, Votto and Hatteberg have similar upside, but Votto has much better numbers on the downside. This is against convential wisdom which says the veteran is the safer bet. PECOTA is saying that in the event the player doesn't live up to expectations, a Hatteberg failure is much uglier than a Votto failure. So if you want to make the conservative choice (avoid disaster) Votto is actually the better option. In this case, our intuition puts too much emphasis on a past established performance level and not enough on how that performance will likely be affected by aging.

Betting on 38 year olds to replicate their prior season's level of performance is a bet you are likely to lose. And not only that, but if they decline, here's a decent chance that it gets really ugly, really quickly. Maybe it call it the Mike Stanton effect...

princeton
03-31-2008, 03:31 PM
When the Reds fail to win the World Series this year, I will place blame squarely on them not hiring me. Good to see you had to change the subject to a personal attack rather than answer the question though -- definitely helps make your case. If you can't defend your position, just attack the credibility of the other guy. Maybe you should run for office ;)

I do think that you'll have success once the players are replaced by robots, and once the number of games approaches infinite.

But in a world of improving young human players or declining older ones, playing a finite number of games, the best decisions are made by skilled individuals at the local level, making key decisions based on too little information.

but those skilled individuals have got to be good at it. As we know, the most dangerous thing is a little learning.

SMcGavin
03-31-2008, 03:32 PM
What kind of printer do you need for that? :D

I guess you haven't been to Office Depot lately?:)

RedsManRick
03-31-2008, 03:33 PM
I do think that you'll have success once the players are replaced by robots, and once the number of games approaches infinite.

But in a world of improving young human players or declining older ones, playing a finite number of games, the best decisions are made by skilled individuals at the local level, making key decisions based on too little information.

but those skilled individuals have got to be good at it. As we know, the most dangerous thing is a little learning.

I'm all for using as much information as we have available. I freely admit that any model will fail to capture certain complexities. So again, which pieces of information suggest Hatteberg is the better choice, and how are they being weighted against the rest of the information we have? That's all I'm asking.

It's one thing to start with a model as a base, and adjust based off special knowledge not incorporated. It's another to start with your existing assumptions and maybe consider the model when you feel like it.

Team Clark
03-31-2008, 03:35 PM
I guess you haven't been to Office Depot lately?:)

:D I like Staples better. That EASY button is a life saver! :thumbup:

princeton
03-31-2008, 03:37 PM
Printing money in the basement is a lot more helpful making the transition from 70 to 85 wins than it is going from 85 to 95 wins.

I disagree with this, by the way. Improvement almost always comes from adding new players, whether they come off the farm or off the waiver wire, and whether they go to a bad team, medium team, or good team.

I heard that we worked out trade for Brandon Phillips, rather than wait for our waiver position to roll around, out of concern that the Red Sox would claim him. I suspect that he would have made a big difference there.

jojo
03-31-2008, 03:41 PM
I do think that you'll have success once the players are replaced by robots, and once the number of games approaches infinite.

But in a world of improving young human players or declining older ones, playing a finite number of games, the best decisions are made by skilled individuals at the local level, making key decisions based on too little information.

but those skilled individuals have got to be good at it. As we know, the most dangerous thing is a little learning.

Scouts obviously have an important role in projecting players when the only information is tool-related.

Scouts have no monopoly on the aged and a reliance on tools-based analysis at the major league level is fraught with peril especially when it comes to the free agent market.

Sabermetrics has made tremendous strides understanding aging curves and they're reaching earlier and earlier into the developmental process too as more data accumulates for minor league and college performance.

princeton
03-31-2008, 03:42 PM
I'm all for using as much information as we have available. I freely admit that any model will fail to capture certain complexities. So again, which pieces of information suggest Hatteberg is the better choice, and how are they being weighted against the rest of the information we have? That's all I'm asking.

better choice?

the Reds choice was that both will help. I suspect that they're right.

SMcGavin
03-31-2008, 03:42 PM
I heard that we worked out trade for Brandon Phillips, rather than wait for our waiver position to roll around, out of concern that the Red Sox would claim him. I suspect that he would have made a big difference there.

I don't follow the AL, so I know little about Boston's 2B situation when that move was made. I'm of the opinion that BP's emergence would not have been the same without regular playing time and the absence of a quick hook, and it's hard to dispute the point that regular playing time is more easily available on poor teams.

RedsManRick
03-31-2008, 03:44 PM
better choice?

the Reds choice was that both will help. I suspect that they're right.

Well, Votto will help when he's deemed ready. You know, after he has enough good BP sessions...

I don't disagree that there might be a completely valid scouting-based reason why Hatteberg is the option today than Votto. I just have yet to hear a single person suggest what that reason might be...

Team Clark
03-31-2008, 03:48 PM
a really good scout destroys PECOTA, of course.

but it's fun for people that don't have those skills but need to draft a catcher for their roto team.

:thumbup: This is what is known as a Flaming Arrow!

Really good scouting comes in handy when there is a very small sample size and/or a player like Brandon Phillips is not in the right situation. You have to be able to evaluate what is physically happening to a player. A change of scenery in baseball usually boils down to "We see what is wrong with him, do we have the coaches to fix this player"? The info the scout collects COUPLED with statistics can help you evaluate the risk/reward. Sometimes you just have to take a risk. ALL GM's make mistakes.

I have said this numerous times on this board. Baseball is a game played by real people, which in turn leaves itself open to a lot of human variables. (i.e mistakes) Although mistakes are factored in most statistical analysis that I have read as of late.

When you are counting on another person to perform at a specific level you are taking a risk. Plain and simple. Some, over time have shown they are low risk. Great. Doesn't mean that they are NOT a risk. No one can guarantee that a particular player will repeat, duplicate, replicate, however you want to say it... previous seasons numbers or project without a shadow of a doubt performance. We are all "hoping" that a particular player can produce at a high level. I am always amazed that fans in general seem to forget that these players get tired, frustrated, distracted, disenchanted and it DOES affect their performance. Just my two cents.

IslandRed
03-31-2008, 03:51 PM
A really good scout destroys PECOTA, of course.


Really? At the major league level is that true? Which scout? How often? Which decision? Any evidence at all to back up this claim?

RMR, I think you're making a false assumption that the scout in question is unaware of the performance record of the players he's evaluating. Major-league scouting isn't done blind, at least not by anyone who deserves the "really good scout" label.

Put another way: PECOTA relies on making the best possible historical comps, but it's still based on aggregates and trends. There are hundreds of reasons why a specific player may out-perform or under-perform his PECOTA projection. Some of them are chance, but others aren't, and many of those things are detectable. A good scout ought to have a solid winning record of telling me who's going to beat his projection and who won't.

princeton
03-31-2008, 04:06 PM
I don't follow the AL, so I know little about Boston's 2B situation when that move was made. I'm of the opinion that BP's emergence would not have been the same without regular playing time and the absence of a quick hook, and it's hard to dispute the point that regular playing time is more easily available on poor teams.

it's hard to dispute the point that Brandon Phillips would have gotten significant playing time on a team starting Mark Loretta, and pushed them above their 86 wins.

RedsManRick
03-31-2008, 04:23 PM
RMR, I think you're making a false assumption that the scout in question is unaware of the performance record of the players he's evaluating. Major-league scouting isn't done blind, at least not by anyone who deserves the "really good scout" label.

Put another way: PECOTA relies on making the best possible historical comps, but it's still based on aggregates and trends. There are hundreds of reasons why a specific player may out-perform or under-perform his PECOTA projection. Some of them are chance, but others aren't, and many of those things are detectable. A good scout ought to have a solid winning record of telling me who's going to beat his projection and who won't.

I agree, he "ought to". And maybe I'm being obtuse, but show me one who does. And then show me that most veteran scouts do.

I admit completely that when you look at developing players, it's incredibly unlikely the model beats the scouts. But when you get down to established major leaguers and guys with significant upper minors experience, I bet the model does a whole lot better than you think, allowing for the obvious things (like injuries).

I'm not married to a model itself. I just want evidenced based decision making. If the scouts are truly better, great. But let's have more than an assumption behind that claim.

If the best generic system suggests Votto is the better option, but the scouts per their money on Hatteberg, what is the model missing? I agree that the best decisions come from a melding -- taking the general model as a starting point and adjusting when more information is available which suggests a different conclusion. But I worry about the slippery slope of every single decision becoming so affected by special circumstance as to render the model irrelevant -- and ending up with a poorer result for it.

I think the thought process issue is really key. When it comes to models, nobody wants them applied blindly. However, they do make for great starting points. And if they aren't a starting point, how are they used, if at all? If the model is only used when it confirms the scouting conclusions, and ignored when the scouts vary, then what's the point at all? There are books, studies, meta-studies, etc. showing copius real world case studies where the experts refused to cede any authority to a model and how the results suffered for it.

IR, I'm not making that assumption at all. The problem I'm citing is that people often put too much weight on the specific circumstance when they shouldn't. As an extremely simplified, unrealistic case, take a guy went 0-4 yesterday. If the "scout" is looking at the at bat outcomes and concludes the guy is likely to go hitless today, we have a problem. However, if he says the guys mechanics are all out of whack, that he's pulling off the ball, and needs to fix them before starting again, then that's something we can work with.

Reiterating my question from a while back, if Votto is on the bench due to a scouting based concern, what does Votto need to do to merit starting over Hatteberg? What does he need to fix? What skill does he need to further develop? I have no problem with benching him for those sorts of reasons. My problem stems from the fact that, based on the quotes we've heard, he hit for a low average this spring. That's not a scouting based justification. It's an incredibly poor stats based one.

REDREAD
03-31-2008, 04:28 PM
Interesting sidenote on the trade. A few weeks earlier the Reds had told Konerko that he was a building block and important to them. They didn't know what position they were going to use him at but he was to be a building block. They then turned around and moved him.

Actually, they did the same with Brett Boone shortly before they shipped him out for Neagle. The Pirates did it with Johnny Ray as well. I'm sure it's a common technique management uses to stroke the ego of players to get them to sign longterm (Boone/Ray) or to buy time (Konerko).

princeton
03-31-2008, 04:31 PM
I agree, he "ought to". And maybe I'm being obtuse, but show me one who does.

Marge died, but came back to post on Redszone

RedsManRick
03-31-2008, 04:37 PM
Marge died, but came back to post on Redszone

Wow. You are on a strawman-inference role today.

blumj
03-31-2008, 04:42 PM
it's hard to dispute the point that Brandon Phillips would have gotten significant playing time on a team starting Mark Loretta, and pushed them above their 86 wins.
Not "that" Brandon Phillips, failed Indians prospect, not over Loretta. Maybe at SS, if it wasn't too late to dump Gonzo. His contract wasn't guaranteed in spring.

osuceltic
03-31-2008, 04:58 PM
Well, Votto will help when he's deemed ready. You know, after he has enough good BP sessions...

I don't disagree that there might be a completely valid scouting-based reason why Hatteberg is the option today than Votto. I just have yet to hear a single person suggest what that reason might be...

Hatteberg has been swinging a really hot bat and Votto has been struggling mightily. Votto is a notoriously slow starter. Hatteberg has been through the opening day hoopla and knows how to handle it. I think those are all valid reasons.

princeton
03-31-2008, 05:02 PM
not over Loretta.

I think that you would have beaten out Loretta that season.

blumj
03-31-2008, 05:38 PM
I think that you would have beaten out Loretta that season.
Then you'd think they'd have given Pedroia a chance to try a bit sooner. He's a way better ballplayer than I am. They were even playing Loretta at 1B with Carlos Pena rotting away on the bench late in the season. They might easily have done the same to Phillips. But, really, I honestly think they saw Loretta as a good bounce-back candidate before that season(it did work with Mike Lowell), and Gonzo was the one they seemed pretty lukewarm about at that time.