PDA

View Full Version : Chris Dickerson



reds44
09-03-2008, 04:52 PM
In 70 ABs in Cincinnati, Dickerson has posted a .329/.427/.700 line. It's a very small sample size and those numbers will come down for sure. My question is, with 24 games what does he have to do for you to hand him a starting spot next year? Or is there nothing he could do that would convince you that he's anything more than a 4th outfielder?

OnBaseMachine
09-03-2008, 05:00 PM
Dating back to July 1st, Dickerson has hit 13 homeruns in his last 199 atbats between Louisville and Cincinnati. He was always a guy who was considered to have good power potential and it appears something may finally be clicking for him. I know it's only been a small sample size but he has been very impressive, both defensively and offensively. He works the count deep every atbat and doesn't get himself out at the plate. He's nowhere near as good as his current numbers and he'll eventually drop off, but I think he's got a decent chance to be a platoon starter against right handed pitchers. An .800 OPS isn't out of the question from Dickerson IMO.

Patrick Bateman
09-03-2008, 05:02 PM
The thing I like is that even when you account for his good luck (ie. .419 BAPIP), he's still doing quite well.

Consider that his OBP is about 100 points higher than his batting average, and his ISOP is .371, that if he was spotted a more reasonable batting average of say, .250, he'd still post a split of .250/.350/.621

Now, obviously that power distribution is crazy for basically anyone, let alone Dickerson with his track record, but he's showing skills in the areas that he needs to improve on to be a legit starter. I think that his on base abilities are fairly reasonable, that if he can continue posting improved power numbers that he can succeed. He only needs to sustain a .420 or so SLG to make the rest of the package work.

RedlegJake
09-03-2008, 05:12 PM
Dickerson has always possessed terrific athletic tools, the question has always been whether he'd attain the necessary skills to exploit them. He's debunked a lot of junk I've heard - inability to make contact, slow bat, etc. He makes enough contact and his bat sure doesn't look at all slow to me. His defense is terrific. I'm ready to hand him a semi-starting role. Not necessarily a full time platoon but his splits ARE really divergent - to the point of being two completely different hitters and that to me is when you have to look for a complement to Chris who can take the starts against most lefty starters. That would be Freel in a perfect world, if Ryan could stay healthy enough to be relied on.

Spring~Fields
09-03-2008, 05:18 PM
In 70 ABs in Cincinnati, Dickerson has posted a .329/.427/.700 line. It's a very small sample size and those numbers will come down for sure. My question is, with 24 games what does he have to do for you to hand him a starting spot next year? Or is there nothing he could do that would convince you that he's anything more than a 4th outfielder?

I think that the question is premature.

I believe that between now and next season that Bob Castellini and Walt Jocketty should do everything within their ability to acquire better talent all round to make the Reds equally competitive with Chicago, St. Louis, Houston and Milwaukee regardless of the position of the player or pitcher.

Because certainly Chicago, Milwaukee, Houston and St. Louis are not going to stop the bus and wait on the Reds to catch up, they will be out attempting to improve teams that are already better than the Reds.

paulrichjr
09-03-2008, 05:21 PM
Dickerson appears to be one of those guys that comes out of nowhere and surprises people...and wins a job.

I know the Reds have had a lot of those type of guys over the years but I think Dickerson is more Guillen than Hopper or Freel. I have never thought of Hopper or Freel as long-term starters. Dickerson makes me think that he can be. I'm too lazy to look but how does Dickerson compare to Dunn since the trade? (I love Dunn by the way so this isn't meant to be a bash on him)

I say give him a shot next year but add one outfielder this winter.

Ltlabner
09-03-2008, 05:25 PM
Dickerson appears to be one of those guys that comes out of nowhere and surprises people...and wins a job.

Put him in the mix but don't make the same mistake made with Freel and now Keppenger. If a deal for a better outfielder comes along take it and Dickerson suddenely becomes a 4th outfielder who can actually do something or even trade bait.

He's earned himself a solid look-see in spring training with a leg up over the Stubbs, Dorns of the world. But I wouldn't pencil him in until he's proven he can adjust once the league adjusts to him.

He's certinally a more interesting outfield option than we've had reciently.

Kc61
09-03-2008, 05:32 PM
At this point, I think Dickerson is earning a spot on the team next year. On the team. Whether he is a starter depends on off-season acquisitions.

He also is increasing his trade value so he could go in a deal for a major player.

He strikes out a lot, but otherwise is a very impressive and athletic player.

reds44
09-03-2008, 05:59 PM
Dickerson appears to be one of those guys that comes out of nowhere and surprises people...and wins a job.

I know the Reds have had a lot of those type of guys over the years but I think Dickerson is more Guillen than Hopper or Freel. I have never thought of Hopper or Freel as long-term starters. Dickerson makes me think that he can be. I'm too lazy to look but how does Dickerson compare to Dunn since the trade? (I love Dunn by the way so this isn't meant to be a bash on him)

I say give him a shot next year but add one outfielder this winter.
Dunn: .279/.488/.492
3 HR, 13 RBI, 1 SB

Dickerson: .329/.427/.700
5 HR, 11 RBI, 5 SB

Spring~Fields
09-03-2008, 07:09 PM
Dunn: .279/.488/.492
3 HR, 13 RBI, 1 SB

Dickerson: .329/.427/.700
5 HR, 11 RBI, 5 SB

Were you asking about Dickerson in general or for a certain position such as LF or CF?

lollipopcurve
09-03-2008, 07:33 PM
My question is, with 24 games what does he have to do for you to hand him a starting spot next year? Or is there nothing he could do that would convince you that he's anything more than a 4th outfielder?

If he continues to show a very solid approach at the plate, then I think you have to consider him a starter next year. He has had very, very bad ABs, period. Still plenty of room out there for a big bat alongside him and Bruce.

flyer85
09-03-2008, 07:59 PM
we saw some other rookie have a real hot start earlier this year. Give the pitchers and scouting some time to get a book on him, although with the callups it may not be til next year.

Stormy
09-03-2008, 08:24 PM
In 70 ABs in Cincinnati, Dickerson has posted a .329/.427/.700 line. It's a very small sample size and those numbers will come down for sure. My question is, with 24 games what does he have to do for you to hand him a starting spot next year? Or is there nothing he could do that would convince you that he's anything more than a 4th outfielder?

He's our starting CF, and I wouldn't be overly surprised to see him become the best we've had since the late-blossoming Cameron. Yea, that's right, a poor man's LHH version of Mike Cameron, which I will take in CF 8 days a week. Of course, I've been a proponent of Dickerson as CF of the present/future since day 1... plenty of room for him to grow.

dougdirt
09-03-2008, 08:33 PM
What the heck has gotten into this kid?

RedsManRick
09-03-2008, 08:33 PM
I don't care what people say, Chris Dickerson has power. He just hit one 430 feet to left center. I'm sure he's going to struggle as pitchers learn his weaknesses, but given what he did in AAA, I'm quite optimistic that he's going to stick as a solid option in CF.

HokieRed
09-03-2008, 08:42 PM
The power development is very interesting. I think those of us who thought he might be a reasonable option in CF figured that his combination of speed, defense, decent OBP etc. would be enough to make him an everyday guy. But I certainly didn't expect this level of power. Obviously it's unsustainable and the sample size is too small to take very seriously as yet, but it's starting to get very interesting. As AK points out, the package works with a .420 slugging pct. and it really doesn't look as if he's going to have any trouble putting up that. I think the whole outfield dilemma is pretty interesting--complicated not only by Dickerson's emergence but also by Stubbs' progress and by Dorn. One place to look for offense in the free agent or trade market is LF, obviously, but it may be we have better inhouse options. Dorn's hitting against RHers is so good, for instance, that it seems to me we are really going to want him in the lineup in 2010 (or mid to late 2009)--at least against righties--no matter who's available through FA or trade. Not to hijack the Dickerson thread, but could we see a Dorn-Owings platoon in the near future?

Superdude
09-03-2008, 08:48 PM
I always said Chris Dickerson looked physically like one of those guys who falsely gets labeled a once in a generation talent. I never expected him to all of the sudden start playing like one though. Surely the guy has made some kind of adjustment? I mean, sure the pitchers havenít really gotten to scout him yet and stuff, but the guys been on absolute tear since June. Is Chris Dickerson finally unlocking his toolbox?

Team Clark
09-03-2008, 09:06 PM
If anything, he has earned an OPPORTUNITY in ST. Good enough for me.

guttle11
09-03-2008, 09:16 PM
What the heck has gotten into this kid?

Awesomeness.

Save the money on a "better" option and put it toward other areas. Let Dickerson and his tiny salary have time to show exactly what he will be. At worst he'll probably be a low to mid .300 OBP speed/defense machine. In other words, a better, cheaper Patterson. At best he could be Mike Cameron. We have time, let's find out.

LoganBuck
09-03-2008, 09:36 PM
Awesomeness.

Save the money on a "better" option and put it toward other areas. Let Dickerson and his tiny salary have time to show exactly what he will be. At worst he'll probably be a low to mid .300 OBP speed/defense machine. In other words, a better, cheaper Patterson. At best he could be Mike Cameron. We have time, let's find out.

If he fails, Stubbs may earn an opportunity mid season. At worst he could be part of a nice platoon situation of him and Stubbs.

fearofpopvol1
09-03-2008, 09:50 PM
Serious question...if WK was still here, would Dickerson have ever been given a shot? I honestly don't think so.

Anyway, I know the sample sizes are small, but I'm on the Dickerson bandwaggon. That home run tonight that had to be close to 450 feet was unbelievable. 6 home runs in 18 games is nothing to sneeze at. His defense isn't a question mark and he has speed on the bases. I just really like what I see of him. He's got a good approach at the plate, even if he does whiff pretty badly every now and then.

The one thing also not mentioned is that Dickerson is cheap and will be for a long time. That doesn't mean he'll be good, but obviously in-house options are better than trading or spending a bunch of money on a free agent. If it were me, I'd let Dickerson start off the next year in CF and see how he does. Let Stubbs get some more time at Louisville and maybe you have the 2 of them platoon or you make a decision once you've seen both play for a bit longer.

Highlifeman21
09-03-2008, 10:03 PM
What the heck has gotten into this kid?

The juice. :D

Highlifeman21
09-03-2008, 10:06 PM
Serious question...if WK was still here, would Dickerson have ever been given a shot? I honestly don't think so.

Anyway, I know the sample sizes are small, but I'm on the Dickerson bandwaggon. That home run tonight that had to be close to 450 feet was unbelievable. 6 home runs in 18 games is nothing to sneeze at. His defense isn't a question mark and he has speed on the bases. I just really like what I see of him. He's got a good approach at the plate, even if he does whiff pretty badly every now and then.

The one thing also not mentioned is that Dickerson is cheap and will be for a long time. That doesn't mean he'll be good, but obviously in-house options are better than trading or spending a bunch of money on a free agent. If it were me, I'd let Dickerson start off the next year in CF and see how he does. Let Stubbs get some more time at Louisville and maybe you have the 2 of them platoon or you make a decision once you've seen both play for a bit longer.

We'd see Denorfia take 2....

Kearns traded, Denorfia handed the keys to a starting OF spot, sputters for a week, sent back down, we don't see Coombs Jr until August/September (I can't remember when, but I know it was late in the season)

Had WK been running this team and traded Dunn, we most certainly would have seen a similar scenario involving Dickerson, playing the role of Denorfia.

Dickerson would have been called up, given a week, and then probably sent back down.

Although, Dunn was traded much later in the season than Kearns, so maybe Dickerson would have gotten a fair shake regardless of the GM? :confused:

OnBaseMachine
09-03-2008, 10:08 PM
Maybe if Denorfia would have hit like Dickerson he would have gotten more time in the majors? It's time to move on. Denorfia hasn't did anything.

WVRedsFan
09-04-2008, 12:26 AM
Serious question...if WK was still here, would Dickerson have ever been given a shot? I honestly don't think so.

In time, many will see the disaster WK was. However, in this case he was right. Denorfia was no Chris Dickerson and never will be. Just like Ryan Freel is no Pete Rose (running and ducking for cover).

That said, let's let Dickerson be Dickerson and see what happens. We saw a young Jay Bruce put up world numbers for a couple of weeks, maybe more and then fizzle. The same could be true of Dickerson. I think he has a role on this club next year, but it would be a mistake of huge magnitide to not sign a right handed power bat for the outfield in the off season. If Dickerson makes it, so be it, but the big bopper and another hitting outfielder need to be acquired. And please. Let Hariston, Hopper and Freel go and get some players with pop and talent come aboard.

VR
09-04-2008, 12:30 AM
Very promising....but I'd guess the league has not developed a serious scouting report on him that exposes his weaknesses.
Without question he gets a serious look next spring, but his overall success will completely depend on how responds to the league's adjustment to him.

Cooper
09-04-2008, 06:36 AM
You take his translated triple A stats and add them to his mlb stats and you have something to work with. It would be absolutely silly to base anything on these 70AB's.

I think he would make a great CFer with a platoon partner of Jerry Hairston (who kills lefties). Maybe a combined OPS of .800. that's good production from a CFer. He gets a good AB 3 out 4 times a game. That's a rare feat with this current team.

Can he play CF?

The one thing the Reds have going for them is opportunity time and they throw it away trying to hope Patterson gets hot and hits .220 the rest o the way. These September games are valuable in that they give the FO an idea of who can handle what.

camisadelgolf
09-04-2008, 07:20 AM
What I read was that Dickerson changed his batting stance to be more upright like Jay Bruce, and since then, he has had more power.

But to answer the original question, if Dickerson cut down his strikeouts by at least 25% without sacrificing production, I would hand him the starting job in a heartbeat. Actually, he could strike out 300 times per year if he continues to put up a 1.000+ OPS, but neither of these are realistic. I wouldn't give him more than a platoon job with Ryan Freel.

bucksfan2
09-04-2008, 08:14 AM
From what I have seen of Dickerson I like him. His bat speed doesn't seem to be slow, rather pretty quick. Even if his hitting reverts to the minor league version, his obp and outfield defense should warrant him a starting spot. Yes I said it a starting spot. Start him in CF, with Bruce in RF, when Stubbs comes up ship Dickerson over to LF and you have an outfield that can cover a large amount of space.

RANDY IN INDY
09-04-2008, 11:44 AM
Maybe if Denorfia would have hit like Dickerson he would have gotten more time in the majors? It's time to move on. Denorfia hasn't did anything.
:laugh:

When I started reading the thread, I new Denorfia's name wasn't far off.

redsfan30
09-04-2008, 11:45 AM
Maybe if Denorfia would have hit like Dickerson he would have gotten more time in the majors? It's time to move on. Denorfia hasn't did anything.

:clap:

AmarilloRed
09-04-2008, 01:45 PM
I think he has to be considered the favorite to win the starting CF job. Good defense, a high OBP, and some pop in his bat make him the favorite. We have Stubbs at AAA if he struggles. I do worry about the strikeouts, but I think he will improve in that area. He has shown some improvement in hitting LHP, and I think he will hold his own in that respect given time. He may eventually end up being part of a platoon, but you give him the opportunity to win a starting job.

dougdirt
09-04-2008, 01:54 PM
I think he has to be considered the favorite to win the starting CF job. Good defense, a high OBP, and some pop in his bat make him the favorite. We have Stubbs at AAA if he struggles. I do worry about the strikeouts, but I think he will improve in that area. He has shown some improvement in hitting LHP, and I think he will hold his own in that respect given time. He may eventually end up being part of a platoon, but you give him the opportunity to win a starting job.

What makes you think Dickerson will improve his strikeout rate? It has been consistently at or above 25% his entire minor league career.



Level PA K K%
Rookie 240 66 27.50%
Low A 365 92 25.21%
High A 557 138 24.78%
AA 588 160 27.21%
AAA 830 233 28.07%


I just don't see where he has made adjustments anywhere to really suggest he can do that in the majors.

OnBaseMachine
09-04-2008, 02:08 PM
Dickerson showing surprising power
Rookie outfielder clubs six homers in first 19 games
By Mark Sheldon / MLB.com

CINCINNATI -- If you didn't look at the hitter, Chris Dickerson's home run on Wednesday night could have easily been mistaken for one normally hit at Great American Ball Park by former Red Adam Dunn.

In the sixth inning during the Reds' 6-5 loss, the lefty-hitting Dickerson took Pirates starter Ross Ohlendorf's 1-1 pitch over the plate the opposite way. The drive traveled 425 feet and landed deep in the left-center-field bullpen.

Even Dickerson was stunned by the power he displayed.

"I'll be honest with you, yeah," said Dickerson, more known for his speed than power. "When I came back to the dugout, I looked at [hitting coach] Brook Jacoby and he was like, 'Wow!' It's funny when you do things you didn't know you could do. I hit it and thought, 'Sweet, another double.' The ball just kept carrying."

Under Jacoby's direction, Dickerson has been tinkering with a new batting stance that has him lower to the ground so he can see the ball better. But it wasn't expected to improve his power.

"I told him I couldn't drive the ball the other way. After that, I'll have to rethink it," Dickerson said Thursday.

That was Dickerson's second home run in two nights, and his sixth in 19 games since his first big league promotion. With Triple-A Louisville this year, he had 11 in 97 games. His career high was 14 homers last season.

Entering Thursday, Dickerson was batting .320 with 12 RBIs and five steals. Of his 24 hits in 75 at-bats, 15 have been for extra bases. Reds manager Dusty Baker recalled seeing Dickerson show some pop in his bat during Spring Training, but hoped the outfielder didn't get too caught up in hitting home runs.

"The one last night showed you don't have to be pop-conscious," Baker said. "He hit one the opposite way like that -- it shows you have the strength to do it. All you have to do is meet it. You don't have to try to pull it. What happens is guys get the home run-itis, which is a bad disease. I had it. A lot of people had it, especially when you're young and in a small ballpark."

Dickerson admitted he caught a little of the home run-itis following Wednesday's long ball. He struck out during his final two at-bats.

"I'll be honest -- there was one point when I tried to hit another one [Wednesday]," Dickerson said. "It's tough when you feel so good at the plate. But you just have to go back to trying to hit line drives and hit the ball up the middle. Naturally, it's going to happen. That's exactly what I've done all year. The balls I've hit out, I haven't tried to hit them. I'm finding good pitches up in the strike zone and trying to put a good swing on it."

The Reds play several contending teams over the final month of the season, which could be a test for Dickerson to show if he can sustain his success over the long haul.

"You know they're going to make some adjustments to him, some phone calls to somebody," Baker said. "The thing he's doing is taking some pretty good pitches, which tells me he's seeing the ball. Ordinarily, he might have swung at some of those pitches."

http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20080904&content_id=3418139&vkey=news_cin&fext=.jsp&c_id=cin

HokieRed
09-04-2008, 02:55 PM
Agree with Doug that he won't change the strikeout rate. It's been very consistent and is the weak part of his game. The hope has to be that his power can make up for it. On CP, I see absolutely no reason why CP should play one more inning this season. This should be pure development/assessment time. Same should be true for Bako.

OnBaseMachine
09-04-2008, 02:57 PM
I love Stormy's comparison of Dickerson to a left handed version of Mike Cameron. I think that's spot on. Anyway, another good day by Dickerson today as he's 2-for-3 with a double and a walk.

GAC
09-04-2008, 02:59 PM
Kids like CDick and Hanigan were called up, according to this FO, to " see what we got."

So that is what they're doing. I'm impressed with what I've seen of CDick so far; but until I can see what he does in a larger window (a full season) at the ML level, then it's still unclear.

But he does deserve (and will get ) and invite to ST next year.

And will probably have a locker right next to CPatt! :eek:

Patrick Bateman
09-04-2008, 03:03 PM
The strikeout rate doesn't bother me to a huge degree.

Part of it is flat out inability to make contact, and the other part is his willingness to go deep into counts (which I love btw). If he can keep his BB/K at .50 or so, I think his OBP skills will be fine.

What ultimately will seperate him from 4th OF, to legit starter is the power. His recent surge from not only the majors, but also the minors is huge step in the right direction. As I said earlier, if he can keep the power up to an acceptable degree, he'll be fine. Luckily, his pitch recognition and patient approach is conduscive to power, and with his raw skills, I think he's got a shot to keep the eventual slide to a relative minimum.

jojo
09-04-2008, 03:10 PM
I love Stormy's comparison of Dickerson to a left handed version of Mike Cameron. I think that's spot on. Anyway, another good day by Dickerson today as he's 2-for-3 with a double and a walk.

With the minor exceptions that Cameron actually has legitimate power, can actually hit same-handed pitchers at a proficiency that makes him a viable player against them, and was called up to the big dance before he started getting grey hair...ya, they're identical players. :cool:

OnBaseMachine
09-04-2008, 03:16 PM
With the minor exceptions that Cameron actually has legitimate power, can actually hit same-handed pitchers at a proficiency that makes him a viable player against them, and was called up to the big dance before he started getting grey hair...ya, they're identical players. :cool:

Believe it or not, some guys don't develop on the same timeline. Dickerson has always been considered a guy with good tools and raw power. Ever since the first of July he has started to tap into that raw power after making adjustments to his swing.

jojo
09-04-2008, 03:22 PM
Believe it or not, some guys don't develop on the same timeline. Dickerson has always been considered a guy with good tools and raw power. Ever since the first of July he has started to tap into that raw power after making adjustments to his swing.

Raw power or gap power?

OnBaseMachine
09-04-2008, 03:24 PM
Raw power or gap power?

Raw power. He's a big guy with great bat speed. 15-20 homeruns isn't out of the question IMO.

jojo
09-04-2008, 03:28 PM
Raw power. He's a big guy with great bat speed. 15-20 homeruns isn't out of the question IMO.

Something is not like the other in that statement.

RedsManRick
09-04-2008, 03:30 PM
Raw power or gap power?

Just curious Jojo, was that 430 footer in to bullpen in left center the result of gap power?

Now I don't think Dickerson is Cameron's equal, but I think we often mistake performance for ability. And I'm not suggesting that Dickerson will continue to hit for so much power. But I don't think we should so cavalierly dismiss the possibility that he's realizing talent not previously utilized -- even accounting for a healthy regression.

jojo
09-04-2008, 03:41 PM
Just curious Jojo, was that 430 footer in to bullpen in left center the result of gap power?

Was it indicative of a transformed player (or should a person's posting history consisting of over 7500 entries be judged by one containing a non sequitur)?

There is nothing cavalier about doubting a player with his history and skill set has suddenly become the answer in CF.

Jeepers, I'd think Reds fans would be healthy skeptics at this point.

RANDY IN INDY
09-04-2008, 03:43 PM
Personally, I like what I see with Dickerson so far. What's not to like? The question is, "Will he be able to make the adjustments?" That's a question that has to be answered, but from a physical standpoint, he looks to have all the tools. His bat speed is really good, he drives the gaps, and most players get stronger as they mature. His defense is pretty good and he doesn't look, at all, awed by his surroundings. Really, there is a lot to work with in the package. The ability to make adjustments and deal with a little bit of failure will tell the tale. Nothing not to like at this point.

OnBaseMachine
09-04-2008, 03:46 PM
Dickerson has always had a strong skill set. Good raw power, willingness to take a walk, great speed, great arm, and strong defensive skills. The problem is he's never been able to put those tools to use over a full season, until this year. I think we can all agree that he's not as good as he's playing right now but he's got the talent to be a solid player.

RedsManRick
09-04-2008, 04:27 PM
Was it indicative of a transformed player (or should a person's posting history consisting of over 7500 entries be judged by one containing a non sequitur)?

There is nothing cavalier about doubting a player with his history and skill set has suddenly become the answer in CF.

Jeepers, I'd think Reds fans would be healthy skeptics at this point.

Maybe we define power differently. I don't think he's suddenly going to put up a .200 ISO because of one HR. But I'm not sure what "gap power" means if it a 430' oppo homer doesn't contradict it. If you have a slugging percentage in mind, just say it, because it's clear he's got "power".

I see a guy whose game has continually progressed as he's aged through his mid 20's. PECOTA saw him as a low 700's OPS guy coming in to this year. I think his current batting average and IsoP are both out of line, as evidenced by his very high BABIP and HR/FB. But I do think he's fully capable of .250/.340/.420, particularly if he's benched against particularly tough lefties. We know he's got the glove. And a .760 OPS from a plus defensive CF is not something to sneeze at. So where exactly am I making poor assumptions?

jojo
09-04-2008, 04:37 PM
Maybe we define power differently. I don't think he's suddenly going to put up a .200 ISO because of one HR. But I'm not sure what "gap power" means if it a 430' oppo homer doesn't contradict it. If you have a slugging percentage in mind, just say it, because it's clear he's got "power".

I see a guy whose game has continually progressed as he's aged through his mid 20's. PECOTA saw him as a low 700's OPS guy coming in to this year. I think his current batting average and IsoP are both out of line, as evidenced by his very high BABIP and HR/FB. But I do think he's fully capable of .250/.340/.420, particularly if he's benched against particularly tough lefties. We know he's got the glove. And a .760 OPS from a plus defensive CF is not something to sneeze at. So where exactly am I making poor assumptions?

You're describing a platoon player/4th outfielder, and I agree, he'd be a good option for that role.

dougdirt
09-04-2008, 04:40 PM
Almost sounds like a description of Brandon Phillips. I don't think there is really an issue with a guy showing platoon splits when he is the guy who excels against right handers when he is starting about 70% of the season anyways. Dickerson likely is a platoon type, but he is the part that will get a lot more starts than the other part of it.

Highlifeman21
09-04-2008, 04:47 PM
Maybe if Denorfia would have hit like Dickerson he would have gotten more time in the majors? It's time to move on. Denorfia hasn't did anything.

Denorfia put up better numbers in the Minors.

He was given a week in the Majors and tripped.

Wayne banished him to AAA.



Dickerson is my new Denorfia on the team. I wanna see him prove that he's more than a 4th OF, when deep down I know he's not.


All I know is that I'm enjoying Dickerson on my fantasy team, b/c after all, that's what MLB is really about!

reds44
09-04-2008, 05:14 PM
Denorfia put up better numbers in the Minors.

He was given a week in the Majors and tripped.

Wayne banished him to AAA.



Dickerson is my new Denorfia on the team. I wanna see him prove that he's more than a 4th OF, when deep down I know he's not.


All I know is that I'm enjoying Dickerson on my fantasy team, b/c after all, that's what MLB is really about!
Dickerson skill set is world's better than Denorfia's was.

OnBaseMachine
09-04-2008, 06:42 PM
Dickerson skill set is world's better than Denorfia's was.

Agreed 100%. Denorfia was a polished player with average tools while Dickerson had solid tools but was raw.

Highlifeman21
09-04-2008, 06:47 PM
Dickerson skill set is world's better than Denorfia's was.

Dickerson has more power, but strikes out more.

Denorfia had better plate patience/discipline, and struck out far less.

I'd say it's advantage push defensively.

But, Denorfia is an A, while Dickerson's still a Red. I'll continue to root for them both, and hope Dickerson sticks around longer than Denorfia.

oneupper
09-04-2008, 06:51 PM
I dunno. Dickerson has looked good so far. Here's a tidbit.
His minor league career OBP has been (was?) .361.
Ryan Freel's was .360.

But a good part of this board was always willing to give Freel a "shot" or at least "some" PT because of his on-base skills (which granted, he did duplicate in the majors). Many even like him to start.

Dickerson brings much more to the table, with defense, power and hopefully not getting picked off too much (like the other day...ughh). And...why shouldn't he be able to duplicate his minor league OBP in the bigs, like Freel did?

Give the kid a shot, No platoon, no 4th OF role. Start him in CF. I've got a feeling he's going to surprise a lot of us.

OnBaseMachine
09-04-2008, 06:51 PM
Denorfia had better plate patience/discipline, and struck out far less.


Denorfia's minor league OBP is 79 points higher than his BA whereas Dickerson's is 103 points higher than his BA.

fearofpopvol1
09-04-2008, 07:11 PM
You're describing a platoon player/4th outfielder, and I agree, he'd be a good option for that role.

Just curious, but who do you think should be the starting CF for the Reds next season? And feel free to use free agents/trades if you deem necessary.

Rojo
09-04-2008, 08:05 PM
You're describing a platoon player/4th outfielder, and I agree, he'd be a good option for that role.


If you can get .340 OBP from a centerfielder with a plus glove, speed and some HR smack, you take it and don't look back.

lollipopcurve
09-04-2008, 09:06 PM
Dickerson is showing he can be a starter. He's certainly shown he deserves the chance to play himself out of the lineup. If the Reds don't give him that chance, I guarantee that some other team will. Dismissing him as a 4th OF is, without question, pushing him below what his market value is, and underestimating his talent, I think.

jojo
09-04-2008, 09:59 PM
Just curious, but who do you think should be the starting CF for the Reds next season? And feel free to use free agents/trades if you deem necessary.

This is off the cuff with acknowledgment that the devil is in the details.

Here's an outfield that would have an excellent expectation of being a significant advantage in '09:

LF: Luke Scott
CF: Jay Bruce
RF: Randy Winn

Winn could be had mostly by a willingness to pay him in '09 and he wouldn't require a long term deal leaving RF for Bruce in the very near future. Scott would take some doing but I've heard the Jocketty is a genius. Dickerson could be thrown into the mix to take some at bats away from Winn against righties or to play CF with Bruce playing RF occasionally. Then the Reds would be stuck with Freel somewhere too.

That's a starting outfield that would be excellent defensively without having to cross your fingers offensively. It would largely be cheap while allowing room for Dickerson/Stubbs to kick the door down. Basically it represents both a short term solution that is a tangible upgrade, doesn't sacrifice the future but rather builds toward it by solidifying the corners for several years to come (Bruce is eventually a RFer), allows the Reds to bide their time in CF and is very cost effective.

Scott would cost some treasure but what is the point of digging for it if you're not going to spend it?

I'd also consider the possibility of acquiring Beltre and extending him given the potential that the Ms might actually jettison him for payroll and the effect of Safeco on his bat may make it possible to extend him reasonably (both money-wise and years aka a Mark Ellis). He's an incredible defensive player whose RHed bat would play well in GABP. This would allow EE to be trade bait which might help with SS. For instance, Texas needs a 3b pretty badly and they might bite on a package of a youngish EE plus Bailey plus something else for a guy like Andrus though they might like their chances with Davis/Whittleman long term. Actually, the Rangers might be more willing to part with one of their catching studs which would probably be even better.

So there's a little bit for everyone. There's a nod to defense (which I've obviously championed quite often) but without the risk that offense might be sacrificed (i.e. you don't have to count on a guy to duplicate career numbers amassed over a very short time but rather you could leverage a role player until you're sure he's not just a role player). There's a nod to offense. There's a nod to those who want payroll to be raised come heck or high water. There's a nod to trying to solve the black hole at short/catcher.

Like I said above though, the devil is in the details. But it's a proposal mostly borne from a philosophy that the Reds should be chasing real, significant improvements meant to substantially close the gap between them and the teams above them in '09.

PuffyPig
09-04-2008, 10:03 PM
You're describing a platoon player/4th outfielder, and I agree, he'd be a good option for that role.


A .760 OPS CF with plus defensive skills is not a 4th OF, he's a $10M per year ball player come FA time.

jojo
09-04-2008, 10:11 PM
A .760 OPS CF with plus defensive skills is not a 4th OF, he's a $10M per year ball player come FA time.

Lets pause for a moment before we ordain Dickerson as that player.

*BaseClogger*
09-04-2008, 10:23 PM
Lets pause for a moment before we ordain Dickerson as that player.

I paused, looked up PECOTA's .727 OPS projection before the season, and decided to ordain him that player...

jojo
09-04-2008, 10:28 PM
I paused, looked up PECOTA's .727 OPS projection before the season, and decided to ordain him that player...

I guess his projected VORP of 2.2 next season makes you giddy then? :cool:

*BaseClogger*
09-04-2008, 10:30 PM
I guess his projected VORP of 2.2 next season makes you giddy then? :cool:

I'm certainly not giddy, but ready to ordain him a CF capable of a .760 OPS with gold glove defense...

jojo
09-04-2008, 10:36 PM
I'm certainly not giddy, but ready to ordain him a CF capable of a .760 OPS with gold glove defense...

If you buy into Pecota's take on him, he'll have to play gold glove defense (basically be an elite CFer-truly one of the top 2 most valuable defensive CFers in the majors) over the course of his career to be an average player.

alloverjr
09-04-2008, 10:39 PM
I guess his projected VORP of 2.2 next season makes you giddy then? :cool:


Which begs a question I'd love to know the answer to: does VORP take into consideration where a certain player plays, or projects to play, in the OF or is an outfielder an outfielder? Would seem not to be the case as it would be unfair IMO to compare a CF to corner player.

jojo
09-04-2008, 10:44 PM
Which begs a question I'd love to know the answer to: does VORP take into consideration where a certain player plays, or projects to play, in the OF or is an outfielder an outfielder? Would seem not to be the case as it would be unfair IMO to compare a CF to corner player.

Pecota projected him as CFer. His VORP would take a ding if he was projected as a corner outfielder.

*BaseClogger*
09-04-2008, 10:49 PM
If you buy into Pecota's take on him, he'll have to play gold glove defense (basically be an elite CFer-truly one of the top 2 most valuable defensive CFers in the majors) over the course of his career to be an average player.

I said I buy into a .760 OPS. The NL average OPS in CF this year is .758, which means he'd be average with the bat alone. With his strong defense and base-running, his package overall would be above-average...

jojo
09-04-2008, 10:52 PM
I said I buy into a .760 OPS. The NL average OPS in CF this year is .758, which he'd be average with the bat alone. With his strong defense and base-running, his package overall would be above-average...

You probably shouldn't be championing the part of the projection you like and ignoring the part you don't. This is especially so when the part you're ignoring is using the data to relate the value of the projected performance to his peers.

*BaseClogger*
09-04-2008, 10:55 PM
You probably shouldn't be championing the part of the projection you like and ignoring the part you don't. This is especially so when the part you're ignoring is using the data to relate the value of the projected performance to his peers.

Yes, but as I mentioned earlier, that projection was before this season. I guarantee you the updated PECOTA projection will be closer to .760 than .727...

jojo
09-04-2008, 10:57 PM
Yes, but as I mentioned earlier, that projection was before this season. I guarantee you the updated PECOTA projection will be closer to .760 than .727...

Pecota is pretty resilient regarding the impact of single seasons.

*BaseClogger*
09-04-2008, 11:02 PM
Pecota is pretty resilient regarding the impact of single seasons.

You understand this stuff better than I do, but wouldn't a successful first season in the bigs have a fairly drastic influence on the sophomore season?

jojo
09-04-2008, 11:05 PM
You understand this stuff better than I do, but wouldn't a successful first season in the bigs have a fairly drastic influence on the sophomore season?

It's going to be a very small sample size. If Pecota went bonkers, you'd really have to start wondering about Pecota I think.

One example that speaks to this would be Jeremy Reed. He OPS'd over .900 in '04 for Seattle and followed it up with an OPS under .700 in '05 but Pecota did not swing wildly.

*BaseClogger*
09-04-2008, 11:07 PM
It's goiing to be a very small sample size. If Pecota went bonkers, you'd really have to start wondering about Pecota I think.

Well, the thing is, he was having a terrific year at AAA as well...

jojo
09-04-2008, 11:16 PM
Well, the thing is, he was having a terrific year at AAA as well...

Reed was too in '04 (a comment referencing Reed was added as an edit to a previous post above).

*BaseClogger*
09-04-2008, 11:21 PM
Reed was too in '04 (a comment referencing Reed was added as an edit to a previous post above).

I don't quite follow that example, could you expand? BTW I appreciate the research...

SteelSD
09-04-2008, 11:22 PM
You understand this stuff better than I do, but wouldn't a successful first season in the bigs have a fairly drastic influence on the sophomore season?

If that season is a full season and it's in line with historicals. But that's not what we're seeing now. It's nice that Dickerson is going all Jon Nunnally at the plate right now, but when you see a .400+ BABIP coupled with an unsupportable (for Dickerson) HR per Fly Ball rate (@25%) and a K rate that's extreme for a player without monster HR power then we need to take his performance with a huge block of salt.

That being said, if a team is ever betting on someone like Dickerson to produce at the plate, this is the right time. He's entering his age-prime seasons. Knowing that, sans incredible offseason acquisitions to the better, I'd actually play Dickerson in CF in 2009 in the hopes that he could potentially out-perform his PECOTA and become a solid trade commodity.

RedsManRick
09-04-2008, 11:29 PM
That being said, if a team is ever betting on someone like Dickerson to produce at the plate, this is the right time. He's entering his age-prime seasons. Knowing that, sans incredible offseason acquisitions to the better, I'd actually play Dickerson in CF in 2009 in the hopes that he could potentially out-perform his PECOTA and become a solid trade commodity.

He's clearly in for a massive regression and I don't think anybody here has suggested otherwise. The question is regression to what? Dickerson had a .241/.321/.409, .730 OPS PECOTA projection entering 2008. What do you guess it'll look like for 2009? I don't think he'll have to outperform his PECOTA to have value, to the Reds or in trade.

I'm not trying to be a Dickerson fanboy -- if the strikeouts are simply too high to sustain a high enough average to buoy a .070-.100 IsoD and .160-.180 IsoP, then so be it. But it seems like we've been saying for awhile that a mid .700s OPS with a plus glove in CF is an asset. And now we're trying to explain one away.

Highlifeman21
09-04-2008, 11:43 PM
Dickerson and Janish are two guys I would give a long, hard look in 2009, to figure out what the Hell we have for 2010 and beyond.

I'm still waiting for this organization to walk the defense walk after talking the defense talk.

Dickerson and Janish would definitely be two steps in the correct direction.

Caveat Emperor
09-04-2008, 11:55 PM
Knowing that, sans incredible offseason acquisitions to the better, I'd actually play Dickerson in CF in 2009 in the hopes that he could potentially out-perform his PECOTA and become a solid trade commodity.

Actually, given the glaring needs elsewhere on the ballclub, playing Dickerson in CF isn't all that bad an option for 2009. The dollars can be better spent elsewhere where there isn't an in-house option of any sort.

At the same time, though, people need to remember that this is a VERY limited sample size for Dickerson. Any player, even Paul Bako, can look good in a limited number of plate appearances.

SMcGavin
09-05-2008, 01:03 AM
But it seems like we've been saying for awhile that a mid .700s OPS with a plus glove in CF is an asset. And now we're trying to explain one away.

Well said. To reference an eariler post, Dickerson might not be "the answer" in CF. But he likely would not be a problem. Especially for the league minimum as he enters his prime.

Also, I would not throw Janish into the argument with Dickerson. Dickerson can hit at least a little bit, Janish has a .666 career OPS in AAA. No way should Janish be in contention for any role on the Reds other than 9th inning glove man.

mth123
09-05-2008, 06:03 AM
Chris Dickerson's minor league line includes 2154 AB, 321BB, .258/.361/.411/.772. He's 6-4, 215 LB of long lean muscle. He runs like the wind and plays a superb CF. There is certainly a possibility that he ends up like many of the "atheltes" that came before him (Dewayne Wise and Reggie Taylor come to mind) but Dickerson has always had better plate discipline than those guys and seems to be a guy who is putting his game together as he reaches his prime age level. From here he looks like a guy who can platoon in CF and put up pretty decent numbers that are fairly close to that minor league line.

On the RH side, the Reds are locked in with Freel in 2009, and have 3 RH bats capable of playing CF in the high minors in Drew Stubbs, Chris Heisey and Sean Henry. All 3 of these guys should be ready for the big leagues by the time Freel's contract mercifully expires.

I think those options should provide the Reds a reasonable expectation for a combined CF production with a .350+ OBP and a .400+ Slugging %. When Dickerson, Stubbs or Heisey are in there, the defense will be top notch. Freel is a reasonable, even if flawed, defender there. Not as sure about Henry. I have no illusions that this group is going to put up star level production, but the role will be filled adequately or better on both offense and defense.

The team has relatively few chips to deal (and money to invest) that actually could make a trade partner shake loose anything that is much of an upgrade. Those chips need to be pooled in order to acquire some stuff where the team has no internal option in sight within the next three years and those spots are C and SS. Anything left-over needs to go toward more rotation depth.

Chip R
09-05-2008, 08:07 AM
Actually, given the glaring needs elsewhere on the ballclub, playing Dickerson in CF isn't all that bad an option for 2009. The dollars can be better spent elsewhere where there isn't an in-house option of any sort.

At the same time, though, people need to remember that this is a VERY limited sample size for Dickerson. Any player, even Paul Bako, can look good in a limited number of plate appearances.


Also, putting Dickerson in CF and leadoff makes the Jerry Hariston CF/leadoff idea seem like a poor one. Even if you just look at the financial aspect of things, Hariston will probably command at least $2M a year if he's brought back while Dickerson makes the league minimum of $400K.

fearofpopvol1
09-05-2008, 12:40 PM
This is off the cuff with acknowledgment that the devil is in the details.

Here's an outfield that would have an excellent expectation of being a significant advantage in '09:

LF: Luke Scott
CF: Jay Bruce
RF: Randy Winn

Winn could be had mostly by a willingness to pay him in '09 and he wouldn't require a long term deal leaving RF for Bruce in the very near future. Scott would take some doing but I've heard the Jocketty is a genius. Dickerson could be thrown into the mix to take some at bats away from Winn against righties or to play CF with Bruce playing RF occasionally. Then the Reds would be stuck with Freel somewhere too.

That's a starting outfield that would be excellent defensively without having to cross your fingers offensively. It would largely be cheap while allowing room for Dickerson/Stubbs to kick the door down. Basically it represents both a short term solution that is a tangible upgrade, doesn't sacrifice the future but rather builds toward it by solidifying the corners for several years to come (Bruce is eventually a RFer), allows the Reds to bide their time in CF and is very cost effective.

Scott would cost some treasure but what is the point of digging for it if you're not going to spend it?

I'd also consider the possibility of acquiring Beltre and extending him given the potential that the Ms might actually jettison him for payroll and the effect of Safeco on his bat may make it possible to extend him reasonably (both money-wise and years aka a Mark Ellis). He's an incredible defensive player whose RHed bat would play well in GABP. This would allow EE to be trade bait which might help with SS. For instance, Texas needs a 3b pretty badly and they might bite on a package of a youngish EE plus Bailey plus something else for a guy like Andrus though they might like their chances with Davis/Whittleman long term. Actually, the Rangers might be more willing to part with one of their catching studs which would probably be even better.

So there's a little bit for everyone. There's a nod to defense (which I've obviously championed quite often) but without the risk that offense might be sacrificed (i.e. you don't have to count on a guy to duplicate career numbers amassed over a very short time but rather you could leverage a role player until you're sure he's not just a role player). There's a nod to offense. There's a nod to those who want payroll to be raised come heck or high water. There's a nod to trying to solve the black hole at short/catcher.

Like I said above though, the devil is in the details. But it's a proposal mostly borne from a philosophy that the Reds should be chasing real, significant improvements meant to substantially close the gap between them and the teams above them in '09.

Thanks for sharing. I do like the thinking here for sure and I wouldn't be surprised if Jocketty had similar ideas in mind (even if the players may be different).

MWM
09-05-2008, 12:51 PM
I don't see Dickerson getting a legit shot at being a starter next year as Waltellini is determined to "go for it". I suspect center field is pretty high on the list of things they want to address this off-season.

corkedbat
09-05-2008, 10:12 PM
I don't see Dickerson getting a legit shot at being a starter next year as Waltellini is determined to "go for it". I suspect center field is pretty high on the list of things they want to address this off-season.

I think CD has clearly put forth a strong case for a roster spot next year, but the question is what role and where does he hit in the order?

He has been quite impressive since his callup, but I don't know that you can actually expect him to keep it up. While it wouldn't shock me to see him in CF and leading off, it doesn't mean that the Reds shouldn't loook for another option in the offseason who might be a more proto-typical leadoff hitter and can move Chris to the 4th or 5th OF spot if i can (I think that is unlikley though).

Another option would be a young SS who can leadoff and hitting CD 7th (possibly in a platoon with Stubbs by the end of next season.

AmarilloRed
09-05-2008, 10:37 PM
Votto and Dickerson actually put up similar numbers the first time they were called up.

Votto 2007: 84 ab, 11 runs, 27 hits, 7 doubles, 0 triples, 4 HR, 17 RBI, 5 BB, 15 K, 1 SB, .321 BA, .360 OBP, .548 SLG.

Dickerson 2008: 78 AB, 16runs, 26 hits, 8 doubles, 2 triples, 6 HR, 12 RBI, 13 BB, 25 K, 5 SB, .333 BA, .429 OBP, .718 Slg.

If Chris Dickerson keeps it up through September, why shouldn't he be the favorite to be the starting CF next spring. I fully expect him to come back to Earth, but he stilled should be considered the favorite to start in CF.

RedlegJake
09-06-2008, 03:18 PM
Looking at a player's career minor league numbers can be misleading. I'd rather look at the progression as a player advances. Does he appear to get better each year, does he adjust at each level vand then better his numbers? That progression, or learning curve is, to me, very important. The raw numbers have to be reasonable but a guy who blows up Billings and Dayton and then settles back to normal numbers at AA then in AAA is slightly down is moving the wrong direction. His career minor league line might still look really good. In Chris' case he shows a steady improvement after a dip following a strong Dayton year. It's that upward trend in his numbers that may indicate a player who can sustain the AAA numbers in the majors. No way he continues this kind of streak but heck, anyone expecting that is being really unrealistic. This is a guy entering prime years who has a learning curve going the right direction who doesn't appear overmatched.

Redmachine2003
09-06-2008, 07:14 PM
The impressive thing for me is how short of stroke he has and the power it produces. That is why I think Dickerson has a better chance to become a solid hitter. Unlike these highly regarded players like Willy Mo who had great power but a long looping swing. This is one reason I like having Eric Davis around. He was that guy who had a long swing with a lot of power but as he got older he shorten his swing lost a little power but became a much better hitter. If he can keep these young guys on that type of approach it would be a big help.

mth123
09-06-2008, 07:16 PM
The impressive thing for me is how short of stroke he has and the power it produces. That is why I think Dickerson has a better chance to become a solid hitter. Unlike these highly regarded players like Willy Mo who had great power but a long looping swing. This is one reason I like having Eric Davis around. He was that guy who had a long swing with a lot of power but as he got older he shorten his swing lost a little power but became a much better hitter. If he can keep these young guys on that type of approach it would be a big help.

The short swing is new. Its a big reason for his maturation as a player. Hopefully he sticks with it. We've seen guys go back to the long swing at the first sign of a slump. It will be the key with Dickerson, who is plenty big and strong enough to produce power without the long swing.

*BaseClogger*
09-08-2008, 04:26 PM
This is off the cuff with acknowledgment that the devil is in the details.

Here's an outfield that would have an excellent expectation of being a significant advantage in '09:

LF: Luke Scott
CF: Jay Bruce
RF: Randy Winn

Winn could be had mostly by a willingness to pay him in '09 and he wouldn't require a long term deal leaving RF for Bruce in the very near future. Scott would take some doing but I've heard the Jocketty is a genius. Dickerson could be thrown into the mix to take some at bats away from Winn against righties or to play CF with Bruce playing RF occasionally. Then the Reds would be stuck with Freel somewhere too.

That's a starting outfield that would be excellent defensively without having to cross your fingers offensively. It would largely be cheap while allowing room for Dickerson/Stubbs to kick the door down. Basically it represents both a short term solution that is a tangible upgrade, doesn't sacrifice the future but rather builds toward it by solidifying the corners for several years to come (Bruce is eventually a RFer), allows the Reds to bide their time in CF and is very cost effective.

Scott would cost some treasure but what is the point of digging for it if you're not going to spend it?

I'd also consider the possibility of acquiring Beltre and extending him given the potential that the Ms might actually jettison him for payroll and the effect of Safeco on his bat may make it possible to extend him reasonably (both money-wise and years aka a Mark Ellis). He's an incredible defensive player whose RHed bat would play well in GABP. This would allow EE to be trade bait which might help with SS. For instance, Texas needs a 3b pretty badly and they might bite on a package of a youngish EE plus Bailey plus something else for a guy like Andrus though they might like their chances with Davis/Whittleman long term. Actually, the Rangers might be more willing to part with one of their catching studs which would probably be even better.

So there's a little bit for everyone. There's a nod to defense (which I've obviously championed quite often) but without the risk that offense might be sacrificed (i.e. you don't have to count on a guy to duplicate career numbers amassed over a very short time but rather you could leverage a role player until you're sure he's not just a role player). There's a nod to offense. There's a nod to those who want payroll to be raised come heck or high water. There's a nod to trying to solve the black hole at short/catcher.

Like I said above though, the devil is in the details. But it's a proposal mostly borne from a philosophy that the Reds should be chasing real, significant improvements meant to substantially close the gap between them and the teams above them in '09.

Out of curiosity, if hypothetically you were forced to play Dickerson in the OF next year, which of Scott and Winn would you choose to acquire and how would you align the defense?

jojo
09-08-2008, 04:36 PM
Out of curiosity, if hypothetically you were forced to play Dickerson in the OF next year, which of Scott and Winn would you choose to acquire and how would you align the defense?

Scott. LF-Scott, CF-Dickerson, RF-Bruce. That said, I think Winn is obtainable. I kind of doubt Scott realistically would be.