PDA

View Full Version : Edwin Encarnacion Appreciation Thread



WMR
04-28-2008, 11:02 PM
Defensive play of the year so far for the Reds.

Another amazing play to end the game.

Swinging an amazingly hot bat right now.

Edwin is pwning right now.

Props to you, Edwin.

OnBaseMachine
04-28-2008, 11:03 PM
Edwin saved the game with that diving play to end the 7th. That is one of the top five plays of the year.

reds44
04-28-2008, 11:05 PM
What a fantastic play to end the 7th, and another web gem to end the game.

Awesome.

We won a series opener!
And a winning streak!

jesusfan
04-28-2008, 11:07 PM
12-15... looking up! Cueto and Harang going the next 2 days... Let's get the sweep!

VR
04-28-2008, 11:07 PM
Edwin saved the game with that diving play to end the 7th. That is one of the top five plays of the year.

Can't wait to see it.

Perhaps EE should go Edmonds on those 1 hoppers right at him. Step out out of the way and then dive back to get the ball and nail the runner by half a step.

He makes those dives look routine/ and the lazy 1 hoppers look like a high-wire act.

Joseph
04-28-2008, 11:08 PM
Props to EdE.

The throw was almost as impressive as the stop. He's reportedly out taking groundballs early and of late it is absolutely paying off in big ways for the Reds.

RFS62
04-28-2008, 11:08 PM
Awesome game by Eddie.

Benihana
04-28-2008, 11:09 PM
I love this guy. Please don't trade him Walt.

Reds Freak
04-28-2008, 11:13 PM
Also kudos to Dusty, Wayne, or whoever for not yanking him around from the bench to AAA and back. It's been good for his confidence...

reds44
04-28-2008, 11:14 PM
Also kudos to Dusty, Wayne, or whoever for not yanking him around from the bench to AAA and back. It's been good for his confidence...
Dusty. He deserves props for that.

PuffyPig
04-28-2008, 11:18 PM
I love this guy. Please don't trade him Walt.


The only people that had any intention of trading EE reside on this board.

Crede, Inge and a bunch of others.

Beware the small sample size.

Phillips OPS is now .867, Encarnacion .947.

RedFanAlways1966
04-28-2008, 11:22 PM
EE... I appreciate thEE. :notworthy

Matt700wlw
04-28-2008, 11:22 PM
Edwin can stay :)

Caveat Emperor
04-28-2008, 11:28 PM
Glove flashes brilliance again tonight, but you can bet your bottom dollar it'll be a different tune when he doesn't get his feet set and gets a throw off-line.

I still haven't decided if his future is at 3B or LF. It'll take more games like tonight and fewer Es before I become convinced.

Glad that his stick has come around, though.

SirFelixCat
04-28-2008, 11:31 PM
Glove flashes brilliance again tonight, but you can bet your bottom dollar it'll be a different tune when he doesn't get his feet set and gets a throw off-line.

I still haven't decided if his future is at 3B or LF. It'll take more games like tonight and fewer Es before I become convinced.

Glad that his stick has come around, though.


Obviously the kid can pick it w/ the best of them @ 3B. It's all about his throwing, or, more precisely, his footwork. I really believe that Chris Spier (sp?) can help him fix it and help him become the all around stud we all want him to be. :thumbup:

WMR
04-28-2008, 11:34 PM
Glove flashes brilliance again tonight, but you can bet your bottom dollar it'll be a different tune when he doesn't get his feet set and gets a throw off-line.

I still haven't decided if his future is at 3B or LF. It'll take more games like tonight and fewer Es before I become convinced.

Glad that his stick has come around, though.

It won't be a different tune as far as I'm concerned. The number of runs that he prevents vis a vis his range far outweigh the occasional throwing gaffe, often made on plays that would be difficult/impossible outs anyway.

His bat profiles to be EXTREMELY good at 3B. And his range is just sick.

Spring~Fields
04-28-2008, 11:35 PM
Great job, nice to see

fearofpopvol1
04-28-2008, 11:45 PM
I do love his bat, that's for sure. Even if he does have some crazy slumps.

The guy can definitely make amazing plays, but he also has a propensity to make unexplainable blunders. This is a critical year for him. Is this the breakout year? Will all the pieces to the puzzle come together? The dude still has a lot of errors for being so early in the season, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and evaluate him at the end of the season.

paulrichjr
04-28-2008, 11:52 PM
Tonight was a thing of beauty. Edwin needs to be signed to a long-term deal soon...for cheap.

RedlegJake
04-29-2008, 12:28 AM
EE's arm seems to go south when his bat does. At least it seems that way -that is mostly mental. He's still a young player, which I tend to forget sometimes since it seems we've been discussing him forever. I'd stick with him at third for the rest of the year and then be very slow to make a change unless he just totally blows up over there. His potential upside is at the very best of the best at third. In left, where just about every team has a slugger, he'd be working hard to be middle of the road. If Dunner's not going to be here, it will be easier to find a solid bat for left field than to replace EE's offense at third. Kepp, for instance is a good offensive player for 2nd or short but as a 3rd sacker he falls lower in the pecking order. EE in left, Kepp at third - imo you have 2 league average hitters for their positions. EE at 3rd and Kepp at SS and you have 2 above average hitters positionally. I think I'm against a move of either.

TOBTTReds
04-29-2008, 12:31 AM
Anyone else surprised EdE got an error on the Pujols AB? Good diving stop, throw off line, home scorer? I know it shouldn't be mentioned in the appreciation thread...

WMR
04-29-2008, 12:32 AM
Nice post, RLJ. Very logically argued.

Caveat Emperor
04-29-2008, 12:49 AM
Anyone else surprised EdE got an error on the Pujols AB? Good diving stop, throw off line, home scorer? I know it shouldn't be mentioned in the appreciation thread...

I'd have scored it an infield hit, but I can understand giving him an error when a good throw would've clearly beaten Pujols by several steps.

OnBaseMachine
04-29-2008, 01:24 AM
Cordero struck out Ryan Ludwick, Rick Ankiel grounded to short, Albert Pujols, the tying run, singled to right and Chris Duncan hit a foul pop on which Encarnacion made a diving catch near the dugout railing and the Reds had their third straight victory.

"Edwin saved the game on that play in the seventh on Molina," said manager Dusty Baker. "And that last play of the game ó a great play, a tough play sliding into the bench."

Baker sees the errors Encarnacion makes on easy plays and the prodigious plays he makes on tough plays and predicts, because of his hard work, Encarnacion will become a great defensive player.

"He has made some great plays and it is a matter of consistency, because he works," said Baker. "Some day he has a chance to win Gold out there."

And Encarnacion won't disagree.

"If you focus, you have opportunities to make plays like I did tonight," said Encarnacion. On the game-ender, he said, "I almost went into dugout but I said in my mind, 'I'm going to catch that ball no matter what.' I don't care if I hit the wall or the fence or what.' That's how you help your team win games, especially a 4-3 game."

A Gold Glove?

"Yeah, I know I can do it," he said. "I just have to keep working and moving forward. I know I will play defense the rest of my career."

http://www.daytondailynews.com/s/content/oh/story/sports/pro/reds/2008/04/29/ddn042908spredsweb.html

WMR
04-29-2008, 01:25 AM
That's just great. :) :) :)

redsmetz
04-29-2008, 08:02 AM
Here's a snippet from this a.m.'s St. Louis paper:


The Reds' Edwin Encarnacion became a goalie at third base. He took an early-inning throwing error after making a diving stop against first baseman Albert Pujols but atoned with a diving stop and throw on Molina's one-hop smash to end a seventh-inning rally, then ended the game with a sprawling catch against the Reds dugout.

"He made some plays," manager Tony La Russa said.

redsmetz
04-29-2008, 08:05 AM
I just watched the clip of the Edwin highlights. On that final play, EE made a great play, but kudos go to Bako too - he made it all the way over there and had to jump over Edwin making the catch. Nice movement.

RFS62
04-29-2008, 08:08 AM
He's still young. He works hard, by all accounts.

Overcoming adversity will make him stronger, looks to me like it already has.

He hasn't sulked and withdrawn. He's worked hard to get better.

membengal
04-29-2008, 08:16 AM
The only people that had any intention of trading EE reside on this board.

Crede, Inge and a bunch of others.

Beware the small sample size.

Phillips OPS is now .867, Encarnacion .947.

Geh! Again, since you ignored me last time, I was the one that started the Crede thread. And, if you go read it, I was NOT suggesting they get Crede to bench EE. I was suggesting they get Crede for insurance, a RH-bat with power off the bench, and a chance to get a platoon going at 1b if necessary. It was part of the continuing discussion we have all had about how you find a RH bat to help EE on this team. But go on and keep misrepresenting that thread if it makes you feel better. I didn't advocate trading EE for Crede...

As for last night, as marvelous a play as I have seen from a 3b in a big spot in a long time. A bring-you-off-the-couch type play.

Even better was seeing the genuine joy that brought to his teammates, not just for saving the game, but for him personally.

And, as I have said elsewhere, props to Dusty for how he has handled EE. Dusty has had the gravitas to ignore the early EE bashing that occurred from the booth, per usual. For a guy like EE, who seems rather sensitive, Dusty appears to have handled him just right...

Cyclone792
04-29-2008, 08:17 AM
Helluva game by Encarnacion. He's shown flashes of brilliance and pure athleticism with the leather that I know he's capable of, and when he puts the throwing issues behind him people will look back at his days of struggling and chuckle.

I'm also loving that .298/.383/.564/.947 batting line right now. And with 0 CS and only 2 GDPs, he's creating nearly 8.5 runs per 27 outs.

Stick him at the hot corner for 150 starts this year and forget about him. It'll all work out.

PuffyPig
04-29-2008, 08:43 AM
Geh! Again, since you ignored me last time, I was the one that started the Crede thread. And, if you go read it, I was NOT suggesting they get Crede to bench EE. I was suggesting they get Crede for insurance, a RH-bat with power off the bench, and a chance to get a platoon going at 1b if necessary. It was part of the continuing discussion we have all had about how you find a RH bat to help EE on this team. But go on and keep misrepresenting that thread if it makes you feel better. I didn't advocate trading EE for Crede...




Who said I was referring to you?

I was simply referring to the large number of posters who wanted EE gone, replaced whatever, based on a small sample size.

lollipopcurve
04-29-2008, 08:46 AM
EdE has had to persevere through some real rough waters between Cincinnati and Louisville early in his career. Phillips had similar struggles in his early 20s. What doesn't kill ya.......

membengal
04-29-2008, 08:46 AM
You keep mentioning Crede, which was a thread I started, and linking it to posters wanting EE gone.

That's a mis-statement, and then some.

Any long-time members of this forum, which you are, know how big a fan and proponent I was of Edwin's, right from the get go. Ltl and GAC well remember, at any rate, given the somewhat heated discussions we used to have over his usage early on.

I am thrilled for Edwin, everyone should be. That doesn't mean this team should not keep trying to find a way to improve its offense. RH power for the bench and for a sometime starting gig against lefties is still a need for this team. Edwin needs help.

Chip R
04-29-2008, 09:01 AM
So, we don't want to send him to AAA now?

RFS62
04-29-2008, 09:03 AM
So, we don't want to send him to AAA now?



Yep. He's bought himself another couple of days.

PuffyPig
04-29-2008, 09:10 AM
You keep mentioning Crede, which was a thread I started, and linking it to posters wanting EE gone.

That's a mis-statement, and then some.

Any long-time members of this forum, which you are, know how big a fan and proponent I was of Edwin's, right from the get go.

Again, I never said you wanted EE gone.

Are you suggesting no one wanted him gone?

Spring~Fields
04-29-2008, 10:00 AM
I was simply referring to the large number of posters who wanted EE gone, replaced whatever, based on a small sample size.

I still havenít change my mind over thinking that the Reds need to upgrade at 3B, SS, C, LF, RF, CF, the bullpen and the bench, even if these players do have some fine moments in the field or at the plate.

I am hoping that over time that Jocketty will accomplish that upgrading. Not based on a month of April but over the past 3-4 season cumulative.

Spring~Fields
04-29-2008, 10:06 AM
"If you focus, you have opportunities to make plays like I did tonight," said Encarnacion.

See that "you" statement, EE is talking about himself and it is telling that he, Edwin has a problem with focus.

Often when a person uses a “you” statement they are unwittingly disclosing something about themselves.

lollipopcurve
04-29-2008, 10:16 AM
I still haven’t change my mind over thinking that the Reds need to upgrade at 3B, SS, C, LF, RF, CF, the bullpen and the bench,

You are going to be forever disappointed.

Spring~Fields
04-29-2008, 10:32 AM
You are going to be forever disappointed.


:evil: :lol:

Remember the "Big Red Machine" ? I do, before, during and after, it can happen .

RedsManRick
04-29-2008, 10:40 AM
I still haven’t change my mind over thinking that the Reds need to upgrade at 3B, SS, C, LF, RF, CF, the bullpen and the bench, even if these players do have some fine moments in the field or at the plate.

I think you forgot 1B, 2B, SP, RP, manager, 3rd base coach GM, owner, broadcaster, and fans... 1st base coach is solid though.

Seriously... You can't have all-stars at every position. That's not to say that the Reds wouldn't benefit from upgrades, but suggesting they "need" to upgrade over Dunn and Encarnacion is pretty crazy. The Reds aren't the Yankees and will no time in the near future be capable of fielding a team full of only above average players.

Luckily, the reality is that you don't have to have the best player at every position to win. The Reds need to continue adding talent, no doubt. But let's be realistic about what we "need" and where we merely have room to improve.

The Big Red Machine took place right before free agency -- and was destroyed by it. The Yankees tried to do it, spent $200M, and still couldn't pull it off.

Spring~Fields
04-29-2008, 10:51 AM
I think you forgot 1B, 2B, SP, RP, manager, 3rd base coach GM, owner, broadcaster, and fans... 1st base coach is solid though.

No, but I forgot the d in changed. ;)


Seriously... You can't have all-stars at every position. That's not to say that the Reds wouldn't benefit from upgrades, but suggesting they "need" to upgrade over Dunn and Encarnacion is pretty crazy.

Who said all star ? That's you generalizing. "pretty crazy", not very objective is it?

"The Reds need to continue adding talent, no doubt." "where we merely have room to improve".

Those are fairly synonymous and redundant.

Now you are interpretting and inferring my comments correctly and we agree based on your comment above. Improve add talent. No that is not crazy.

We will see what Jocketty thinks about upgrading especially with Dunn, Ross, Valentin, Griffey, Encarcion, Gonzalez and Keppinger at ss. Perhaps he will be considered "crazy"

Many of us have seen the Reds organization go from a team that could not get over the top to almost an "all-star" team and know that it can be done. Some of us saw the teams of the 60's and early 70's and then saw. Rose, Morgan, Griffey, Perez, Bench etc. No, it is not crazy.

To label anothers thought or person "crazy" without even knowing them or knowing for sure what they are talking about is subjective and might be questionable characteristics though.

RedsManRick
04-29-2008, 11:12 AM
Many of us have seen the Reds organization go from a team that could not get over the top to almost an "all-star" team and know that it can be done. Some of us saw the teams of the 60's and early 70's and then saw. Rose, Morgan, Griffey, Perez, Bench etc. No, it is not crazy.

To label anothers thought or person "crazy" without even knowing them or knowing for sure what they are talking about is subjective and might be questionable characteristics though.

I didn't call you crazy -- just the assertion that we need to upgrade at all of those positions. Setting aside the issue of whether or not you meant "all-star", you clearly didn't, on what basis do you make the claim that we need to upgrade at those positions? I take greater issue with the idea that we cannot win unless we upgrade the majority of the team than the magnitude of the upgrades themselves.

But now you've said that you said you don't need all-stars. I'm curious, What does a non all-star upgrade over EE look like? Over Dunn?

That said, it simply isn't reasonable to use Reds teams past to justify your statement. The rules of team building are fundamentally different today. There was no free agency in the 60's and early 70's. There was no 3 years of arbitration. Those great Reds teams of that era were undeniably built in large part on the back of the reserve clause -- which allowed the Reds to collect a massive amount of talent without undue financial burden. There's no way the Reds could afford to field a team like the Big Red Machine these days. Again, I'll cite the Yankees. The Yankees tried to field a comparable offense to the BRM and it cost them $100M on offense alone. And even if through perfect timing it could be accomplished for a year, it could not be sustained.

I struggle to find any team of this era, let alone one with a middle of the road payroll (at best), to field 8 above average position players. I also see a long track record of teams who both made the playoffs and won championships with sub-par talent in a few positions. Could the Reds upgrade at a number of positions? Of course they could. Do the Reds need to upgrade at 6 starting positions, the bullpen, and the bench before they can win? No, they don't. They need to upgrade at some of those positions, not all of them. That's really all my disagreement was about. They do need to improve, we agree on that. And those positions, particularly RF, CF, C, and the bullpen are areas where the improvement would be most useful. But you don't have to be the Big Red Machine to win the World Series.

If your assertion is that we need to be the BRM again, you're going to be in for a very long wait. The introduction of free agency, the changes to arbitration, and the role of media markets in creating a vastly unequal fiscal playing field have fundamentally altered the rules of roster construction. The BRM was of an era in baseball that's gone and not coming back any time soon.

Spring~Fields
04-29-2008, 12:06 PM
I didn't call you crazy -- just the assertion that we need to upgrade at all of those positions. Setting aside the issue of whether or not you meant "all-star", you clearly didn't, on what basis do you make the claim that we need to upgrade at those positions?


First of all, I did not use an "all" statement as in all or nothing statements, because those are normally false statements. I did not write that "the Reds need to upgrade all positions". So I cannot respond to that.
If an "all” statement would have been used it clearly would be a false statement.

That “all” was an extension of your perceptions and transference as we see with a quick review of the posted remarks above.

You rationalized and generalized for some reason that I did say that the Reds need to upgrade “all” or everyone of their player personnel.

Perhaps it was my comments regarding EE or Dunn that cued or triggered that response from you, I have no idea why you were motivated to do so, but I have my suspicions that it may have been what I said about his making “you“ statements being a disclosure and not understanding how I could make that assertion. Or perhaps it was because I put the name Dunn in the LF category, I am not sure.

I am having a problem with those embellishments or exaggerations, taking liberties with such as “all”, or “crazy” or “all-star”

You apparently saw a need to input those terms loosely and I am having a problem with that.

Conversely you normally want objective empirical evidence, i.e. as in mean, mode, range, median, variance, probability, supported by a constancy in data points and thereby obtaining the probability outcome as in stats. Yet your choice here is the opposite and you want me to give an account with some integrity and supporting evidence. I have a problem with that and take issue with the double mindedness of it. Perhaps you were just being wordy like I am now in a superfluous manner.

So I will ask you the question.

Do you feel that the Reds have the best personnel that can possibly be found at the positions of CF, LF, RF, 3B, C and SS ? What is the possibility and probability of that being true with the current roster make up? And why? In follow up, Can you see in the foreseeable future a time when the Reds might benefit from such a progressive thinking and actions in light of the Jocketty hiring?


As for myself, upgrade, move forward in a progressive manner, to bring constructive change.

I believe that is the logic behind the firing of the previous general manager, and the hiring of the new general manager, the goal or objective behind hiring Jocketty with a history and record of making moves to upgrade a team in various positions. It would seem to follow that their logic, Castellini, Baker and Jocketty’s, would be that the Reds need to improve or upgrade the quality of play or the product on the field So I can reasonably assume that there is a need to upgrade, and that one can assume that will be accomplished by upgrading certain personnel over a span of time. Otherwise the firing of Krivsky could be thought “crazy” if they do not intend to upgrade.

RedsManRick
04-29-2008, 01:52 PM
First of all, I did not use an "all" statement as in all or nothing statements, because those are normally false statements. I did not write that "the Reds need to upgrade all positions". So I cannot respond to that.
If an "all” statement would have been used it clearly would be a false statement.

That “all” was an extension of your perceptions and transference as we see with a quick review of the posted remarks above.


The initial statement of yours to which I was replying is as follows:

...the Reds need to upgrade at 3B, SS, C, LF, RF, CF, the bullpen and the bench...

I guess I'm not clear on how I've misconstrued this statement. Perhaps my English is off, but the use of the above "and" statement, coupled with the preceding "need" implies all, not some.

The psychological analysis simply isn't necessary. There is no transference here. I read a statement of yours and reacted based on exactly what was said. My statement regarding the craziness of your assertion was predicated on an interpretation of your statement that was not accurate -- that the Reds could not win until and unless they improved at all of the aforementioned positions. Now, you've since clarified that you did not mean it in that way.

All my further statements regarding the nature of roster construction was to the point of not being able to put together another super team like the Big Red Machine. Given your clarification, that conversation is not necessary. We agree that, as a team, the Reds need to improve to compete. So, moving on...

To your questions.



Do you feel that the Reds have the best personnel that can possibly be found at the positions of CF, LF, RF, 3B, C and SS ? What is the possibility and probability of that being true with the current roster make up? And why? In follow up, Can you see in the foreseeable future a time when the Reds might benefit from such a progressive thinking and actions in light of the Jocketty hiring?

I absolutely believe that the Reds do not have the best player in baseball at any position on the field. Thus, based on the logic I saw in your first statement, it could be said that the Reds need to improve upon every single position. However, based on your clarification, it seems you meant that those positions represent the best opportunity to improve the team; that those are particular areas of weakness which can be addressed. However, I think you have identified some positions at which an upgrade would be extremely costly and/or that the amount of additional production we'd receive over the current level of production we're getting, particularly over EE (3B), Dunn (LF), Keppinger (SS), and Ross (C) would not merit the additional cost. The resources needed to meaningfully improve those positions could be more efficiently spent elsewhere.

My biggest fundamental compliant about these sorts of discussions is a disconnect between the identification of needs, the identification of solutions, and both in context of available resources. Discussing them in abstract is a pointless exercise, in my opinion, and often leads to poor conclusions.

On the position player side, I think there are 2 positions which merit significant attention -- that is, that an upgrade can be obtained within our financial means which would provide substantial increase in production. Another may potentially need addressed depending on events yet to come. However, one of those positions is already set to be addressed.

1. Right Field. Ken Griffey Jr., factoring in defense, is among the least productive RF in baseball. This weakness seems to be a complete blind spot for the organization. While I like Jr a lot as a person and as a player in the context of history, I think replacing him with a higher production, lower cost option should be top priority.

2. Center Field. Freel, Hopper, Patterson, etc. are somewhere between replacement level and average. Unfortunately, getting an average or better CF is not easy. Luckily for us, Jay Bruce looks ready to fill the spot. If not, he plays RF and we need to fill CF.

Regarding catcher, none of our catchers are very good. I wouldn't deny this. However, what's often ignored is that most team's catchers aren't very good. Sure, there are a handful of guys out there who are very productive like, Brian McCann, Victor Martinez, Joe Mauer, and Russell Martin. However, once you get past the top 5 or 6 catches, the distribution of overall production is pretty narrow, and on the whole less than other positions. The cost of adding production at catcher is likely prohibitive. Sure, we could upgrade over Ross/Valentin/Bako, but to whom and at what cost? I've seen people say we should pursue Michael Barrett -- he's likely to be no better. Now, that's not to say we shouldn't try to upgrade. We should always being trying to upgrade every position and looking for opportunities to do so. It's just that I don't think the catcher position represents a particularly easy opportunity.

The issue I have here fundamentally is the one of context. You're right -- we can improve in many areas. However, for me, such an assertion, outside of a discussion which includes the cost of replacement and the level of production being added, simply doesn't mean anything.

What 3B are available who are better than EE? How much would it cost to acquire him? If you want to upgrade over Dunn in LF, who should we pursue? In FA, Dunn is going to be the most productive FA LF for 2009, so I assume you mean trade. Who should we trade?

I don't expect answers on these specfic questions. I just get frustrated by comments like "we need to upgrade at X". It's such a broad statement which really has no implication. The Reds would be improved as a team by adding production an any position relative to what we have now. But the meat of the conversation is only found when we look at the specifics of who we can add (both in terms of cost and availability) and what the size of that impact would be. Otherwise, it's essentially saying, "The Reds need to get better players, so they can score more runs, allow fewer runs, and win more games." Yes, that would be an accurate statement -- I'm just not clear on what saying it accomplishes.

I agree with you. The Reds need to score more runs and allow fewer runs if they are going to make the playoffs. We score more runs by hitting the ball better and running the bases better. We allow fewer runs by pitching better and playing better defense. This can be accomplished by either adding better talent (Jocketty's job) or getting the players we have now to play better (Dusty's job). I'm pretty sure we're in complete agreement here.

I do not agree with you that the most effective way to achieving this result is by acquiring better players at the positions you've identified. I think the Reds are in very good shape at 3B and that getting any sort of upgrade in LF or SS would be much more costly relative to the production gained. I do think that CF, RF, and the bullpen represent the biggest opportunities to improve. I believe that improvements at those positions would, generally speaking, best be obtained through player development and/or trades. I'm happy to discuss particular ideas with you.

TRF
04-29-2008, 02:07 PM
Right now, Bako is playing as well as any catcher. Plus he's aptly handling the young guns on the mound. I'm ok with Bako for now, now being this year. But a true long term solution is needed stating in 2009.

There are internal solutions to the OF issue. Jr. is likely, and IMO sadly gone after this year. Next year's OF WILL have Jay Bruce in it. It could also have any of up to 5 current Reds minor leaguers like Dorn, Rosales and even dare I say it Stubbs. (he was still a bad pick doug, but I am happily eating crow).

The upgrades by position don't hold water. At every infield position with a minimum of 50 AB's the Reds have someone in the top 10 in hitting (OPS). The OF is a little worse off, but Dunn and Jr. have gotten off to slow starts.

EE is 4th, 2 points behind Aramis Ramirez in OPS in all of baseball. And that comes after an awful start.

bucksfan2
04-29-2008, 02:37 PM
[QUOTE=SpringfieldFan;1618207]
Do you feel that the Reds have the best personnel that can possibly be found at the positions of CF, LF, RF, 3B, C and SS ? What is the possibility and probability of that being true with the current roster make up? And why? In follow up, Can you see in the foreseeable future a time when the Reds might benefit from such a progressive thinking and actions in light of the Jocketty hiring?
QUOTE]

Springfield I think you initial comments were a little too optimistic. In all reality the reds could always improve ever position unless they had an infield of Pujols, Utley, Ramirez, and A-Rod. As for the needs, I agree there are positions that the Reds need to improve at. But the question becomes is it possible to improve and at what cost.

CF - Patterson. How would you improve at the CF position. The two biggest FA's of last season were Jones and Hunter. Jones right now makes Patterson great. Who do you trade to improve your CF? Bruce and Bailey? Bailey and Thompson? It takes something to get something.

LF and RF - You have the improvement sitting in AAA right now. The question is how do you get rid of Jr. or Dunn? There is no doubt that there is room for improvement there but how?

3B - Edwin is just fine there. He is streaky and his defense seems to improve as the season goes along. Who do you replace him with and how?

SS - I am actually fine with Keppinger at SS. He isn't going to light the world on fire and doesn't have the best range but he is solid and steady both at the plate and in the field. Look at what Baltimore got for Tejada and both teams had to know that his better days were behind him.

C - Again Bako and Ross will give you average C output. If you remove the top 5 or 6 catchers Bako and Ross will give you adequate output. Again where do you look and how much do you have to give up to get a drastic improvement at catcher?

Spring~Fields
04-29-2008, 04:20 PM
The initial statement of yours to which I was replying is as follows:


I guess I'm not clear on how I've misconstrued this statement. Perhaps my English is off, but the use of the above "and" statement, coupled with the preceding "need" implies all, not some.

The psychological analysis simply isn't necessary. There is no transference here. I read a statement of yours and reacted based on exactly what was said. My statement regarding the craziness of your assertion was predicated on an interpretation of your statement that was not accurate -- that the Reds could not win until and unless they improved at all of the aforementioned positions. Now, you've since clarified that you did not mean it in that way.

All my further statements regarding the nature of roster construction was to the point of not being able to put together another super team like the Big Red Machine. Given your clarification, that conversation is not necessary. We agree that, as a team, the Reds need to improve to compete. So, moving on...

To your questions.



I absolutely believe that the Reds do not have the best player in baseball at any position on the field. Thus, based on the logic I saw in your first statement, it could be said that the Reds need to improve upon every single position. However, based on your clarification, it seems you meant that those positions represent the best opportunity to improve the team; that those are particular areas of weakness which can be addressed. However, I think you have identified some positions at which an upgrade would be extremely costly and/or that the amount of additional production we'd receive over the current level of production we're getting, particularly over EE (3B), Dunn (LF), Keppinger (SS), and Ross (C) would not merit the additional cost. The resources needed to meaningfully improve those positions could be more efficiently spent elsewhere.

My biggest fundamental compliant about these sorts of discussions is a disconnect between the identification of needs, the identification of solutions, and both in context of available resources. Discussing them in abstract is a pointless exercise, in my opinion, and often leads to poor conclusions.

On the position player side, I think there are 2 positions which merit significant attention -- that is, that an upgrade can be obtained within our financial means which would provide substantial increase in production. Another may potentially need addressed depending on events yet to come. However, one of those positions is already set to be addressed.

1. Right Field. Ken Griffey Jr., factoring in defense, is among the least productive RF in baseball. This weakness seems to be a complete blind spot for the organization. While I like Jr a lot as a person and as a player in the context of history, I think replacing him with a higher production, lower cost option should be top priority.

2. Center Field. Freel, Hopper, Patterson, etc. are somewhere between replacement level and average. Unfortunately, getting an average or better CF is not easy. Luckily for us, Jay Bruce looks ready to fill the spot. If not, he plays RF and we need to fill CF.

Regarding catcher, none of our catchers are very good. I wouldn't deny this. However, what's often ignored is that most team's catchers aren't very good. Sure, there are a handful of guys out there who are very productive like, Brian McCann, Victor Martinez, Joe Mauer, and Russell Martin. However, once you get past the top 5 or 6 catches, the distribution of overall production is pretty narrow, and on the whole less than other positions. The cost of adding production at catcher is likely prohibitive. Sure, we could upgrade over Ross/Valentin/Bako, but to whom and at what cost? I've seen people say we should pursue Michael Barrett -- he's likely to be no better. Now, that's not to say we shouldn't try to upgrade. We should always being trying to upgrade every position and looking for opportunities to do so. It's just that I don't think the catcher position represents a particularly easy opportunity.

The issue I have here fundamentally is the one of context. You're right -- we can improve in many areas. However, for me, such an assertion, outside of a discussion which includes the cost of replacement and the level of production being added, simply doesn't mean anything.

What 3B are available who are better than EE? How much would it cost to acquire him? If you want to upgrade over Dunn in LF, who should we pursue? In FA, Dunn is going to be the most productive FA LF for 2009, so I assume you mean trade. Who should we trade?

I don't expect answers on these specfic questions. I just get frustrated by comments like "we need to upgrade at X". It's such a broad statement which really has no implication. The Reds would be improved as a team by adding production an any position relative to what we have now. But the meat of the conversation is only found when we look at the specifics of who we can add (both in terms of cost and availability) and what the size of that impact would be. Otherwise, it's essentially saying, "The Reds need to get better players, so they can score more runs, allow fewer runs, and win more games." Yes, that would be an accurate statement -- I'm just not clear on what saying it accomplishes.

I agree with you. The Reds need to score more runs and allow fewer runs if they are going to make the playoffs. We score more runs by hitting the ball better and running the bases better. We allow fewer runs by pitching better and playing better defense. This can be accomplished by either adding better talent (Jocketty's job) or getting the players we have now to play better (Dusty's job). I'm pretty sure we're in complete agreement here.

I do not agree with you that the most effective way to achieving this result is by acquiring better players at the positions you've identified. I think the Reds are in very good shape at 3B and that getting any sort of upgrade in LF or SS would be much more costly relative to the production gained. I do think that CF, RF, and the bullpen represent the biggest opportunities to improve. I believe that improvements at those positions would, generally speaking, best be obtained through player development and/or trades. I'm happy to discuss particular ideas with you.


I wanted to show you respect since you responded in great detail and expertise to my provoked discourse, it took me awhile to get back to you because I was in some pain and needed some meds. I apologize for the delay.


The psychological analysis simply isn't necessary.
True, that is why I took umbrage with the implication that the use of the term “crazy” brought through what I perceived as a knee-jerk pseudo psychological analysis.

You're exactly right, lets move on.



My biggest fundamental compliant about these sorts of discussions is a disconnect between the identification of needs, the identification of solutions, and both in context of available resources. Discussing them in abstract is a pointless exercise, in my opinion, and often leads to poor conclusions.

Outstanding response, because as often is the case it is very accurate and true.

I have witnessed that often myself, and I must admit I, too will utter or write some knee jerk reaction at times without specifically defining the problem, researching possible solutions, stating the possible solution, and then clearly submit a solution to be implemented within the boundaries of the financial and competitive market constraints for player resources. Another words come up with a reasonable solution to a perceived problem and fully support why that is workable and doable.

Now I am even a bigger fan of your writings and comments regarding baseball and the Reds. I can always count on you to cover it much better than I can myself as your comments below give testimony to.


I absolutely believe that the Reds do not have the best player in baseball at any position on the field. Thus, every single position can conceivably be improved upon.

Mutually agreed upon, for clarifications sake.


However, I think you have identified some positions at which an upgrade would be extremely costly, unreasonably so, given the amount of improved production we'd receive over the current level of production we're getting, particularly over EE (3B), Dunn (LF), and Keppinger (SS).

This is problematic for me because I have to make some assumptions that I cannot prove because we do not have a historical record or data to support.

For example:
Votto at $390,000 compared to Adam Dunn at $13 million in left would be an upgrade to me with the resource liquidity of $12, 710, 000.00, that’s a substantive amount that can be utilized by Jocketty.

Votto defense in left vs. Adam Dunn, I don’t think that it would be a reach to call them equal, perhaps on the small sampling of Votto at the mlb level coupled with his milb record there would be justification that would indicate that Votto would be a plus defender over that of Dunn.
Left Field
Votto projects offensively .311 .329 .541 .869 or career numbers are -.316 .345 .544 .890 compared to Dunn’s career numbers of .247 .381 .515 .896, it might be said with greater time that Votto might be an offensive upgrade to Dunn in left. At a 12.6 rounded million cost savings, rounded, and liquidity increase in the same amount.
RC
Adam Dunn - 12.0
Joey Votto - 10.9

RC27
Joey Votto - 6.14
Adam Dunn - 5.32

*these RC numbers are from the other day and not all inclusive.


The contractual commitment would lean toward Votto as being an upgrade over Dunn in left, while the defense is assumed a wash, and the offensive numbers are near equal or indicating to me that Votto may be an offensive upgrade over Dunn. Cost effective with a major savings netting a liquidity of 12 million plus that Jocketty can utilize. Votto has more speed, that might equate into a better fielder than Dunn.


First base
Encarcion the often maligned fielder whose bat is not in question may make a better fielder at the corner, at first base to replacing Votto, with Encarcion could be an upgrade of first base, the Votto who moves to left, reducing the main complaint on the third baseman Encarcion by taking away or reducing his throwing across the diamond at the same price and same or great fielding efficiency. Encarcion- .275 .351 .459 .810 career vs. Votto career -.316 .345 .544 .890 a drop off in offensive production. Yet cost effective. Perhaps a defensive increase with Encarcion. Encarcion has better reflexes than Votto, as evidenced by some of the great plays that Encarcion makes at 3B, I think those skills would also fit at 1B, better than Votto’s.

Right Field
Currently and aged former super star, 38 yrs of age, with fading numbers offensively and defensive range, Ken Griffey Jr. $8,282,695 plus deferred monies that are at or about 4-5 mil making his salary at, rounded 13 million compared to a Jay Bruce of 300k to 390,000
A cost expense savings of 12.6 million, rounded, and liquidity increase in the same amount. That does not consider the contract value for Griffey next year valued at or around 16 million dollars.

Bruce offensively, we do not know, he has not played one day in the majors.
Bruce defensively, we do not know, he has not played one day in the majors.

Bruce does project to be better than the current Griffey offensively and defensively at an age of 20-21 for Bruce. But that is problematic because we don’t have any supporting data at the major league level on Bruce. We can assume that Bruce would not be much of a reach if all research reports on Bruce are accurate to date equals an upgrade in right field with a major savings and liquidity 12 million plus that Jocketty can utilize.
Bruce minor league stats to get some feel for what he might produce -
.322 .347 .567 .914 compared to today’s Ken Griffey Jr. .289 .373 .552 .926 career numbers which wouldn’t be fair because those incorporated a Griffey that no longer exists, but his projections are not fair either at - .255 .343 .436 .779 even though his last years performance of - .277 .372 .496 .868 might be a more fair comparison.

Factoring in that Griffey is near walk in contract, and at a much higher salary, I will take the subjective risk and say that Jay Bruce is an upgrade over Griffey Jr, with a major financial savings. Of course Bruce has youth and speed on his side in comparison to the once great Ken Griffey Jr., respectfully.


So far in their baseball careers Votto has played LF, Encarcion has played 1B, and Bruce has played all outfield positions, so it would not be fantasy that these three could benefit the Reds in new positions and be an upgrade.



In order:
1. Right Field. Ken Griffey Jr., factoring in defense, is among the least productive RF in baseball. This weakness seems to be a complete blind spot for the organization. While I like Jr a lot as a person and as a player in the context of history, I think replacing him with a higher production, lower cost option should be top priority.

Agree, and I think that it is feasible and within reason of reality.


2. Center Field. Freel, Hopper, Patterson, etc. are somewhere between replacement level and average. Unfortunately, getting an average or better CF is not easy. Luckily for us, Jay Bruce looks ready to fill the spot. If not, he plays RF and we need to fill CF.

I agree, and I also have to worm out here because I not familiar with possible solutions. I think it would be wrong to say that the Reds can just this or just that. As you said it is just not that easy to do realistically.

Would we be amiss to say that Pattersons OBP can be upgraded and his fielding matched? Especially with the liquidity savings speculated on from moving a Griffey and Dunn at or about 24 million dollars? An amount of it coupled with pitching prospect or so in a trade?

Even with a 20% error factor allowance (I mean dollar allowance 20%) I believe that there is enough funds to be made available to make the moves or to achieve an upgrade without the detail specifics that will be determined. TBD.
Even without substantive or objective proof I have to think that it is within reason to upgrade over Patterson, Freel, Hopper, Hairston or Dickerson.


3. Catcher. None of our catchers are very good. However, what's often not considered is that most people's catchers aren't very good. Sure, there are a handful of guys out there who are very productive like, Brian McCann, Victor Martinez, Joe Mauer, and Russell Martin. However, once you get past the top 5 or 6 catches, the distribution of overall production is pretty narrow, and on the whole less than other positions. Sure, we could upgrade over Ross/Valentin/Bako, but to whom and at what cost? I've seen people say we should pursue Michael Barrett -- he's likely to be no better.

Can’t debate you there, you are in all honesty better prepared than I am. Barrett a better bat maybe than the three above. Plus how can I support other factors such as a catchers ability to work with or call a game better than another, in a manner that actually helps to improve the pitcher on the mound, sure we could cross reference there defenses throwing out runners and passed balls, but that is not all of the story on catchers, so I have to punt. Though I prefer that Valetin and Ross be moved and other’s be found. I appreciate Bako and his career year to date.


The issue I have here fundamentally is the one of context. You're right -- we can improve in many areas. However, for me, such an assertion, outside of a discussion which includes the cost of replacement and the level of production being added, simply doesn't mean anything.

I am compelled to respect the above with one caveat, and that would be leniency for it being baseball message board and forum, where many are not expected to have the expertise that those with all the pertinent inside information that comes with the territory of those actually employed by the Cincinnati Reds organization vs. we who do not have that information at our ready.


What 3B are available who are better than EE? How much would it cost to acquire him? If you want to upgrade over Dunn in LF, who should we pursue? In FA, Dunn is going to be the most productive FA LF for 2009, so I assume you mean trade. Who should we trade? Trade no one at this time, make the moves within the organization, take the financial savings and utilize the liquidity if and when the opportunity arises with great stewardship dollar and player wise. I am speaking of the third baseman search. I don’t have an immediate answer, though it appears that one or two are on there way via the minors within the Reds organization, yet but not limited to a trade with other teams. I again don’t have the answer, but there is no rush to judgment needed at this moment.


I don't expect answers on these specfic questions. I just get frustrated by comments like "we need to upgrade at X". It's such a broad statement which really has no implication. The Reds would be improved as a team by adding production an any position relative to what we have now.

We need to upgrade x or y is a true statement, because it is not an indictment of an absolute solution, it only suggests that improvements are needed, and that is true. You are also correct when you personally are seeking a deeper more profound input/feedback, when you say x or y is such a broad statement that it really says nothing on the other hand and is clutter or noise in the manner of a baseball fan at the ballgame without stat resources or other to support his remarks. One doesn’t always anticipate a lengthy discourse over the ump is a bum, Cueto is being pinched in the strike zone. Etc.

In my perception you and the guy that says the Reds need an upgrade for position x, y, and z are both correct for the depth of discussion that they are promoting at the time. We would have about 20 posters if we always were subject to a rule and standard of complete objectivity.


Otherwise, it's essentially saying, "The Reds need to get better players, so they can score more runs, allow fewer runs, and win more games." Yes, that would be an accurate statement -- I'm just not clear on what saying it accomplishes.

Realistically ? Most often with a high degree of probability, it won’t accomplish anything in the way of changes to the improvement of the Reds organization or end product on the field. It is just a sports fans discussion and allowances have to be made for that right or wrong, because the majority of us would be black balled from the joy of discussing sports, which is part of being a fan.

I wish some other's would help us out here instead of looking to counter, perhaps fill in some of the gaps, becaue you and I made big effort here, even though I was a bit short.

kaldaniels
04-30-2008, 02:54 PM
7 homeruns by the end of April...nice job turning it around Edwin. I don't want to get ahead of myself...but could he be a 40 HR guy?

RedsManRick
04-30-2008, 03:14 PM
7 homeruns by the end of April...nice job turning it around Edwin. I don't want to get ahead of myself...but could he be a 40 HR guy?

In 2007:

- 19 players in the NL hit 30 or more home runs. 3 of them played 3B: Cabrera (now in DET), Braun (now in LF), and David Wright.

- 15 players in the NL OPSd over .900, 16 if you include Braun. Chipper Jones, David Wright, Miguel Cabrera (DET), and Ryan Braun (LF).

But I'm thinking we should probably send EE to Louisville to get his act together.

Benihana
04-30-2008, 03:24 PM
He really needs to be batting cleanup.

Keppinger
Votto
Dunn
Encarnacion
Griffey
Phillips
Bako
Pitcher
Fratterston, Jr.

AmarilloRed
04-30-2008, 04:38 PM
7 homeruns by the end of April...nice job turning it around Edwin. I don't want to get ahead of myself...but could he be a 40 HR guy?

He has never gotten over 16 HR before; this seems to be a breakout year for Edwin however. I would be satisfied with 30 HR and 90 RBI.

edabbs44
04-30-2008, 04:41 PM
Is EdE providing enough protection for Dunn yet? Just curious...;)

Highlifeman21
04-30-2008, 04:45 PM
EE is hitting HRs just to spite everyone.

Just sayin'.....

Spring~Fields
04-30-2008, 05:06 PM
EE looks good to me.

E. Encarnacion 28 101 15 29 7 0 7 57 15 14 15 1 0 .287 .374 .564 .938

*BaseClogger*
04-30-2008, 06:11 PM
Is EdE providing enough protection for Dunn yet? Just curious...;)

and Dunn seems to be heating up... coincidence? ;)

Matt700wlw
04-30-2008, 06:19 PM
He's up to .224!

WOO!!! :roll:

RedsManRick
04-30-2008, 06:23 PM
He's up to .224!

WOO!!! :roll:

.224/.391/.400 with more walks than strikeouts. Obviously that's not enough production, but it could be worse. He could be hitting 3rd every day and hitting .248/.336/.416.

OnBaseMachine
04-30-2008, 06:46 PM
.224/.391/.400 with more walks than strikeouts. Obviously that's not enough production, but it could be worse. He could be hitting 3rd every day and hitting .248/.336/.416.

Yup. Griffey and Phillips are killing this team in the three/four spots in the lineup. I can't think of a worse 3/4 duo in the majors than Griffey/Phillips. If it were up to me Votto would be moved up to the two or three spot and Edwin would hit cleanup. My lineup would look something like this:

Jay Bruce
Jeff Keppinger
Joey Votto
Edwin Encarnacion
Adam Dunn
Ken Griffey Jr.
Brandon Phillips
Paul Bako/David Ross

Spring~Fields
04-30-2008, 07:00 PM
Yup. Griffey and Phillips are killing this team in the three/four spots in the lineup. I can't think of a worse 3/4 duo in the majors than Griffey/Phillips. If it were up to me Votto would be moved up to the two or three spot and Edwin would hit cleanup. My lineup would look something like this:

Jay Bruce
Jeff Keppinger
Joey Votto
Edwin Encarnacion
Adam Dunn
Ken Griffey Jr.
Brandon Phillips
Paul Bako/David Ross

How much are the Reds paying that manager?

You make out a better lineup than he does, you could delegate the rest.

If Dunn’s walks were counted as singles, he would have a batting average of .394, kind of like his on base percentage of .391 which is better than all of the rest on the team. Looks like a number two slot hitter to me.

OnBaseMachine
04-30-2008, 07:05 PM
How much are the Reds paying that manager?

You make out a better lineup than he does, you could delegate the rest.

I would get fired after two games for tackling Ryan Freel after one of his boneheaded baserunning mistakes.

*BaseClogger*
04-30-2008, 07:39 PM
I can't think of a worse 3/4 duo in the majors than Griffey/Phillips.

Randy Winn and Bengie Molina come to mind... :eek:

OnBaseMachine
04-30-2008, 07:43 PM
Randy Winn and Bengie Molina come to mind... :eek:

True.

edabbs44
04-30-2008, 07:46 PM
Yup. Griffey and Phillips are killing this team in the three/four spots in the lineup. I can't think of a worse 3/4 duo in the majors than Griffey/Phillips. If it were up to me Votto would be moved up to the two or three spot and Edwin would hit cleanup. My lineup would look something like this:

Jay Bruce
Jeff Keppinger
Joey Votto
Edwin Encarnacion
Adam Dunn
Ken Griffey Jr.
Brandon Phillips
Paul Bako/David Ross

It seems like only yesterday that Dunn was a lock to be hitting 2nd or 3rd in this lineup.

KronoRed
05-01-2008, 12:03 AM
So we love EE again? seems like only last week we had 4 threads about dumping him for cheese.

Oh wait it was..gotta love RZ :D

WMR
05-01-2008, 12:12 AM
So we love EE again? seems like only last week we had 4 threads about dumping him for cheese.

Oh wait it was..gotta love RZ :D

I never stopped loving him.

reds44
05-01-2008, 12:22 AM
I never stopped loving him.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=eNrN9fXa-pc&feature=related

That's really bad music.

Spring~Fields
05-01-2008, 09:51 AM
It seems like only yesterday that Dunn was a lock to be hitting 2nd or 3rd in this lineup.

Do you ever wonder if that would change the dynamics of the lineup and effect the production or outcomes percentage wise? I do.

KronoRed
05-01-2008, 11:33 AM
Putting a guy who is getting on base like Dunn is high in the lineup would only lead to good things.

Raisor
05-01-2008, 11:45 AM
Putting a guy who is getting on base like Dunn is high in the lineup would only lead to good things.


but he only has a .225 batting average!!!!

Gainesville Red
05-01-2008, 11:47 AM
but he only has a .225 batting average!!!!

I heard he's lazy.

Spring~Fields
05-01-2008, 11:50 AM
but he only has a .225 batting average!!!!

Not if you count the walks as a single, with the walks he is challenging Ted Williams. But that is what the OBP does right, consider those?

KronoRed
05-01-2008, 11:53 AM
Change his bases empty walks to singles and he's hitting .340 and the 700 gang want to give him 20mill a year ;)

Will M
05-01-2008, 12:00 PM
Yup. Griffey and Phillips are killing this team in the three/four spots in the lineup. I can't think of a worse 3/4 duo in the majors than Griffey/Phillips. If it were up to me Votto would be moved up to the two or three spot and Edwin would hit cleanup. My lineup would look something like this:

Jay Bruce
Jeff Keppinger
Joey Votto
Edwin Encarnacion
Adam Dunn
Ken Griffey Jr.
Brandon Phillips
Paul Bako/David Ross

1. I like your lineup

2. I think a 2-3-4-5 of Kep-Votto-EE-Dunn is best for the Reds now.

3. Phillips was very good in the 6 or 7 spot in the past. Plus his speed works well at the bottom of the lineup

4. Bring up Bruce to man CF. Hit him leadoff. Late in the game move him to RF and put Patterson in CF

Spring~Fields
05-01-2008, 01:21 PM
1. I like your lineup

2. I think a 2-3-4-5 of Kep-Votto-EE-Dunn is best for the Reds now.

3. Phillips was very good in the 6 or 7 spot in the past. Plus his speed works well at the bottom of the lineup

4. Bring up Bruce to man CF. Hit him leadoff. Late in the game move him to RF and put Patterson in CF

You two are more flexible, accepting what your eyes and the stats are telling you. Youíre not fixated or obsessed with making a previously wrong choice and decision look correct through a filtering process called confirmation bias and escalation of commitment like the one who loves Corey at leadoff, one who after insisting that Corey be with the Reds, (assumed) is now struggling to justify his mistake versus seeking other viable alternatives.

Plus both of you show that it is not hard to make a constructive effort at positive change. To at least try!

Because the losing percentage is greater than the winning percentage.

Me, I am fixated on this below:
Keppinger
Dunn - because of his walks, and I think that he will see some fastballs here.
Encarcion
Votto
Griffey
Phillips
Bruce -work him in gradually
Bako

Even Dusty was quoted in the Enquirer in the past day or two that the Reds needed to get more production, with that in mind, I would think that Dusty would take proactive steps to achieve that, rather than repeating the past that has netted a less than a desirable outcome to date.

edabbs44
05-02-2008, 08:01 AM
Do you ever wonder if that would change the dynamics of the lineup and effect the production or outcomes percentage wise? I do.

Not really. 2 weeks ago Dunn needed protection in the lineup. He was being killed by EdE's lack of production. EdE should be sent down, they clamored.

Now EdE is killing it, yet Dunn is still in a funk. Must be the lineup slot.

Except, for his career, Dunn has a higher OPS in the 5th spot (.906) than he does hitting 3rd (.809) or 4th (.900). Amazingly, 6th is better than those choices as well. He is hitting a robust .910 in that spot. 2nd is the leader at .942.

So, to answer your question, I really don't wonder about it too much. I think that it is just a pat excuse for Dunn's struggles. First it was no protection. Now it is the lineup slot. Next on the list is "luck", since his BABIP is only .250 this year.

While I agree that Dunn is under a microscope on this board, I would love to see others in the lineup get the same leniency from the masses. Griffey isn't declining, Phillips just isn't protecting him. EdE's struggles in the first few weeks had more to do with the lack of protection or lineup spot than we thought. Valentin wasn't providing enough protection. You know, things like that.

Sometimes I think that many here believe that the roles of others on the team revolve around getting Dunn to hit. Dunn's in a slump? It's obviously on the guys hitting behind him. Maybe we should rearrange the entire lineup because Dunn isn't hitting.

If that's what it will honestly take, then he can walk at the end of the year. Paying him what he gets paid should necessitate his production no matter what the situation. It doesn't matter how the stars are aligned that day.

Raisor
05-02-2008, 08:56 AM
Not really. 2 weeks ago Dunn needed protection in the lineup. He was being killed by EdE's lack of production. EdE should be sent down, they clamored.

Now EdE is killing it, yet Dunn is still in a funk. Must be the lineup slot.

.

On April 15, Dunn had a .650 OPS, he's up to .391 .400 .791 now.

Looks like, to me, that he's coming out of his funk.

nate
05-02-2008, 09:21 AM
So, to answer your question, I really don't wonder about it too much. I think that it is just a pat excuse for Dunn's struggles. First it was no protection. Now it is the lineup slot. Next on the list is "luck", since his BABIP is only .250 this year.

Is it your opinion that these are not contributors to his low batting average?

KronoRed
05-02-2008, 12:23 PM
On April 15, Dunn had a .650 OPS, he's up to .391 .400 .791 now.

Looks like, to me, that he's coming out of his funk.

Stop that, he's only hitting .224, he's lazy and should be traded to North Korea :D

edabbs44
05-02-2008, 12:39 PM
On April 15, Dunn had a .650 OPS, he's up to .391 .400 .791 now.

Looks like, to me, that he's coming out of his funk.

On April 22nd, he had an .822 OPS. Now, he has a .791.

edabbs44
05-02-2008, 12:41 PM
Is it your opinion that these are not contributors to his low batting average?

His BA hasn't been his strong suit his whole career. So it's not like 2008 is an outlier.

Spring~Fields
05-02-2008, 02:06 PM
Sometimes I think that many here believe that the roles of others on the team revolve around getting Dunn to hit. Dunn's in a slump? It's obviously on the guys hitting behind him. Maybe we should rearrange the entire lineup because Dunn isn't hitting.

If that's what it will honestly take, then he can walk at the end of the year. Paying him what he gets paid should necessitate his production no matter what the situation. It doesn't matter how the stars are aligned that day.

As watched the games that had a high LOB, very little scoring, items of that ilk, I just started wondering if the team might be better served with a change. A change by moving Griffey and Dunn out of those 3-4-5 spots, moving Dunn up and moving Griffey down while placing the higher SLG hitting players in the 3-4-5, players that might come through at a higher pct of time.

I just don't see what else the Reds can do this year with the team, contracts and the quality of players that they have. I mean the hitters and fielders on the Reds are what the are so I thought that management would have to work that much harder to make sure each piece is in the correct place to get something out of the limited talent that they have.

Raisor
05-02-2008, 02:08 PM
His BA hasn't been his strong suit his whole career. So it's not like 2008 is an outlier.

Which kinda proves what kind of a small sample size will do.

edabbs44
05-02-2008, 02:18 PM
Which kinda proves what kind of a small sample size will do.

Could be a small sample size.