PDA

View Full Version : Does Teixeira signing free up some outfielders?



RedEye
12-23-2008, 06:07 PM
Joel Sherman (http://blogs.nypost.com/sports/st/archives/2008/12/yanks_sign_teix.html) thinks so (per MLBTR):


2:55pm: Olney now agrees it's an eight-year, $180MM deal ($22.5MM per year). Bill Madden says Teixeira told the Yankees he preferred them all along, after the Angels and Red Sox backed off. Ha. Joel Sherman says the Yankees made this decision with the 2010 season in mind, given the weak free agent market. He says they'll now attempt to trade one of Johnny Damon, Hideki Matsui, Xavier Nady, and Nick Swisher.

At least the last two look like interesting names for the Reds to pursue, no?

Jpup
12-23-2008, 06:14 PM
I don't see the Yankees trading any of those guys. They lost Giambi and are replacing him with Teixeira. I don't see the logic. BTW, I would like to have any of those guys.

M2
12-23-2008, 07:06 PM
I don't see the Yankees trading any of those guys. They lost Giambi and are replacing him with Teixeira.

I don't see why they would either. Depth is good.

Tom Servo
12-23-2008, 07:21 PM
Won't Teixeria play 1st with Damon, Swisher, and Nady in the outfield and Matsui DH'ing?

M2
12-23-2008, 07:28 PM
Won't Teixeria play 1st with Damon, Swisher, and Nady in the outfield and Matsui DH'ing?

Melky Cabrera's in the mix too, but he's just another reason to make sure you've got OF depth.

red-in-la
12-23-2008, 07:29 PM
Ome article I read earlier today actually said the Yankees were in cost cutting mode....:rolleyes:

So the point was that they would trade one of the guys listed to cut costs.....:laugh:

So here's to the noble, right mimded Yankees.......:clap:----:barf:

Vada Pinson Fan
12-23-2008, 07:37 PM
Won't Teixeria play 1st with Damon, Swisher, and Nady in the outfield and Matsui DH'ing?

That's what I thought too but Melkey Cabrerra is still a Yankee also after the Cabrerra for Mike Cameron trade fell through with Milwaukee. I think Xavier Nady would fit nicely in LF for the Reds.

Always Red
12-23-2008, 07:58 PM
That's what I thought too but Melkey Cabrerra is still a Yankee also after the Cabrerra for Mike Cameron trade fell through with Milwaukee. I think Xavier Nady would fit nicely in LF for the Reds.

Sign me up for Xavier Nady.

Highlifeman21
12-23-2008, 08:46 PM
Sign me up for Nick Swisher.

Although the Yankees will most likely want to get rid of Matsui and his contract before Damon, Nady or Swisher.

HeatherC1212
12-23-2008, 09:36 PM
I would take Swisher or Nady for our OF in a heartbeat but I don't want any part of Damon, Cabrera, or Matsui.

mth123
12-24-2008, 08:03 AM
I'm guessing that the Yankees will try to get some one to take Damon's $13 Million off of their hands and will probably throw in Melky and Ian Kennedy to make it happen. They may even include a guy like Phil Hughes if Pettitte is really coming back. None of Damon, Swisher or Nady can play CF and Damon can only play LF these days unless the off season did wonders for his arm. Nady has the arm for RF. Not sure about Swisher.

The Yankees need some help in the pen and a legit CF option. Its possible they'd take a starter and leave Joba in the pen. I'm not a trade Arroyo fan like many on here are, but I'd be willing to deal him for any one of Damon, Nady or Swisher if the Reds could get Hughes as well (Damon would be my last choice of the three and may require another middling prospect the Reds way). The Yankees would use Arroyo as their 5th starter and put Joba in the pen. I wouldn't deal Arroyo for any of those OF unless Hughes was included as well, Cabrera and/or Kennedy wouldn't be enough.

Another possibility would be dealing the rights to Weathers arbitration case for Nady and his probable arbitration case. Weathers might make sense for the middle of the Yankees pen and the Reds seem to have a lot of possibilities in the pen. Nady and Weathers are likely to make about the same amount of Money in 2009. I'd take Swisher instead, but he is signed through 2011 and has a limited No Trade clause. Not sure if that would complicate things.

blumj
12-24-2008, 08:23 AM
I don't think acquiring Johnny Damon is necessarily a bad idea for a team managed by Dusty Baker, but it would obviously depend on the cost. You wouldn't want to pay him $13M, and you might not want to play him in CF, either. But it would put an end to the unbearably unsuitable leadoff hitter nightmare for as long as he's on the team and not on the DL.

WebScorpion
12-24-2008, 10:09 AM
I don't think acquiring Johnny Damon is necessarily a bad idea for a team managed by Dusty Baker, but it would obviously depend on the cost. You wouldn't want to pay him $13M, and you might not want to play him in CF, either. But it would put an end to the unbearably unsuitable leadoff hitter nightmare for as long as he's on the team and not on the DL.
Well, make up your mind...If you move him out of CF, he's not leading off for Dusty is he? ...then that problem is back, eh?
:laugh:

Caveat Emperor
12-24-2008, 11:23 AM
Ome article I read earlier today actually said the Yankees were in cost cutting mode....:rolleyes::

Actually, if you look at all the contract money they had coming off the books from Giambi, Mussina, Pavano, Pettite (who might come back at a more reasonable deal) and Abreu, the Yankees appear to be heading towards a smaller payroll than last season.

LoganBuck
12-24-2008, 01:59 PM
I wouldn't mind a run at Nady, Matsui, or Swisher. Nady interests me most, he mashed the Reds and was known to make comments about how much he enjoyed hit in the GABP(perhaps most importantly off of Reds pitching).

Matsui interests me quite a bit. He had a knee problem that was taken care of after the season. His splits show exactly when the knee became a problem in June. Before that he was mashing. He is a free agent after the 2009 season. I don't think it will take a king's ransom to get him.

redsmetz
12-24-2008, 02:16 PM
Actually, if you look at all the contract money they had coming off the books from Giambi, Mussina, Pavano, Pettite (who might come back at a more reasonable deal) and Abreu, the Yankees appear to be heading towards a smaller payroll than last season.

I also saw a Times article that mentioned that the Yankees their costs for the new ballpark get deducted from the payroll, so their tax will not be so high. Of course, now I can't find the article.

marcshoe
12-24-2008, 02:58 PM
The first name that caught my eye was Nady, who would be a good fit, but the more I think about it, the more I wonder if Swisher isn't the more likely target. He was pegged to play a lot of first, I think, so if anyone becomes expendable, he does. Getting Swisher would also be a nice case of buying low, and who knows, maybe his area roots (born in Columbus, calls Parkersburg, WV, (His dad's birthplace) his hometown, college at Ohio State) would make him want to stick around.

OnBaseMachine
12-24-2008, 03:10 PM
From Fay:

E-mail bag:

From Red: MLB Trade Rumors reports that the Yankees might be looking to deal one of their outfielders. Xavier Nady is 30, right-handed, relatively healthy, and could be had for a reasonable price. I wonder how others would feel about him being the RH bat and playing LF or RF? Personally, I think he'd be a great fit in Cincy. Wondering what you and other readers would think.

Answer: No argument here. I know people in the organization thought he was the perfect fit post-Adam Dunn. Whether the Reds can get a deal done is impossible to say. I don't expect anything to happen until after Christmas. Walt Jocketty's in Florida on vacation. I read on reds.com that nothing's changed. Jerry Hairston, Willy Taveras and Rocco Baldelli are still being pursued. (I missed Jocketty's call yesterday. We're having my family tonight and the wife's tomorrow. So unless the Reds swoop in and steal Mark Teixeira from the Yankees, I'm not working for the next couple of days).

http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=blog07&plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3ae57bcc87-152a-4f72-96fb-cc08b1f396efPost%3aba5054be-dc3f-4067-9dc3-92980fcdd723&sid=sitelife.cincinnati.com

SteelSD
12-24-2008, 03:20 PM
Xavier Nady? Ewww...

Raisor
12-24-2008, 03:21 PM
Xavier Nady? Ewww...

Last three years

.289 .343 .481 .824

Much better then Willy T of course.

RedsManRick
12-24-2008, 03:26 PM
Last three years

.289 .343 .481 .824

Much better then Willy T of course.

My feelings exactly. I wouldn't jump for joy over a Nady acquisition, but it sure beats some of the alternatives.

SteelSD
12-24-2008, 03:40 PM
Last three years

.289 .343 .481 .824

Much better then Willy T of course.

For the bench, sure, but not as a starting player. Nady has some of the poorest plate discipline (he's Brandon Phillips-esque in swinging at balls out of the strike zone) in baseball and he's at least as likely to post a sub-.800 OPS as he is something in the low-.800 range assuming a normalized BABIP (2008 wasn't that for sure). The only reason his OBP looks even marginally acceptable is that he has a penchant for stepping in front of pitched baseballs. Over his MLB career, he's been hit by pitch 46 times while drawing a grand total of 131 unintentional BB.

Raisor
12-24-2008, 03:42 PM
Steel, I'm not optimistic that the Reds are going to get anyone better then Nady.

SteelSD
12-24-2008, 03:44 PM
Steel, I'm not optimistic that the Reds are going to get anyone better then Nady.

Then Walt can go as long as he takes Bavasi with him.

Ron Madden
12-24-2008, 03:46 PM
Steel, I'm not optimistic that the Reds are going to get anyone better then Nady.

Sad, aint it?

:(

Raisor
12-24-2008, 03:47 PM
then walt can go as long as he takes bavasi with him.

deeeeeeeeeeeeepooooooo~!

Will M
12-24-2008, 03:54 PM
Nady is a solid major league player. He would be just fine to play LF, RF or 1B.

I would prefer a guy like Nady over Dye, Burrell, Bradley,Abreu, etc.
Younger than most of these guys and a better defender than all of them.
I was annoyed last year when the Yankees stole him from the Bucs.

LoganBuck
12-24-2008, 04:12 PM
For the bench, sure, but not as a starting player. Nady has some of the poorest plate discipline (he's Brandon Phillips-esque in swinging at balls out of the strike zone) in baseball and he's at least as likely to post a sub-.800 OPS as he is something in the low-.800 range assuming a normalized BABIP (2008 wasn't that for sure). The only reason his OBP looks even marginally acceptable is that he has a penchant for stepping in front of pitched baseballs. Over his MLB career, he's been hit by pitch 46 times while drawing a grand total of 131 unintentional BB.

I agree but I am getting a little desperate over here.

I keep seeing names like Tavares, Hairston, and Baldelli. They must have someone better, who can play everyday. Nady qualifies. I know the bar is low, but I dread seeing 2/3 of an outfield with Dickerson/Hairston in left, and Tavares in center. That is a get away day special, not something we must be forced to watch daily.

Ron Madden
12-24-2008, 04:20 PM
Nady is a solid major league player. He would be just fine to play LF, RF or 1B.

I would prefer a guy like Nady over Dye, Burrell, Bradley,Abreu, etc.
Younger than most of these guys and a better defender than all of them.
I was annoyed last year when the Yankees stole him from the Bucs.

If the Reds are going to deal with the Yanks, I'd rather get Nick Swisher.

Caveat Emperor
12-24-2008, 04:43 PM
Then Walt can go as long as he takes Bavasi with him.

In Walt's defense, other than Abreu, Dunn, and Burrell there isn't much else out there worth having on the FA market -- and I don't know that the Reds have the proper chips to cash in for a wart-free major leaguer via trade.

dougdirt
12-24-2008, 04:48 PM
Man, some of you are entirely too difficult to please. Xavier Nady is brought up and he has an OPS over .820 the last three seasons and he is a bench player? Yeah, maybe if he could only play first base.

I know we all want .900 OPS guys at every position, but aren't we getting awful picky when a guy with an .820 OPS over the last three years is being labeled as a bench player?

Highlifeman21
12-24-2008, 04:53 PM
If the Reds are going to deal with the Yanks, I'd rather get Nick Swisher.

You and me both.

If we're dealing Homer Bailey (since his name's been thrown out there a couple times this offseason), I'd much rather have Nick Swisher than Jermaine Dye.

Plus, with Hughes and Bailey in the same organization, they can answer the question as to who's the bigger bust. My vote is currently Bailey, but Hughes' lack of health colors me less than impressed with him.

dougdirt
12-24-2008, 04:55 PM
You and me both.

If we're dealing Homer Bailey (since his name's been thrown out there a couple times this offseason), I'd much rather have Nick Swisher than Jermaine Dye.

Plus, with Hughes and Bailey in the same organization, they can answer the question as to who's the bigger bust. My vote is currently Bailey, but Hughes' lack of health colors me less than impressed with him.

And the idea of referring to either Bailey or Hughes as a bust at this point in time is ridiculous. Both are going to start next season at age 22.

TRF
12-24-2008, 04:55 PM
Man, some of you are entirely too difficult to please. Xavier Nady is brought up and he has an OPS over .820 the last three seasons and he is a bench player? Yeah, maybe if he could only play first base.

I know we all want .900 OPS guys at every position, but aren't we getting awful picky when a guy with an .820 OPS over the last three years is being labeled as a bench player?

How about at 1 position? Right now the only .900+ OPS bat I see is Votto. EE and Bruce could be one, but both need to mature a bit more at the plate. BP will NEVER be one, and might never be an .800 OPS bat again. Dickerson is probably a sub .800 OPS bat.

man this offense is meh.

Highlifeman21
12-24-2008, 04:58 PM
Man, some of you are entirely too difficult to please. Xavier Nady is brought up and he has an OPS over .820 the last three seasons and he is a bench player? Yeah, maybe if he could only play first base.

I know we all want .900 OPS guys at every position, but aren't we getting awful picky when a guy with an .820 OPS over the last three years is being labeled as a bench player?

Keeping Adam Dunn (instead of trading him for peanuts) would have pleased plenty of us around these parts.

Instead, we're left with a big hole in LF, and all the names bandied about in the off-season have fallen into the collective void of suck.

That being said, Xavier Nady is a step in the right direction, but he's no Adam Dunn. But thankfully he's also no Willy Taveras, or Juan Rivera.

Plus, it would be nice to have ONE player putting up a .900 OPS at any position. Last time I checked we have a big squadoosh in that department, currently.

dougdirt
12-24-2008, 04:58 PM
How about at 1 position? Right now the only .900+ OPS bat I see is Votto. EE and Bruce could be one, but both need to mature a bit more at the plate. BP will NEVER be one, and might never be an .800 OPS bat again. Dickerson is probably a sub .800 OPS bat.

man this offense is meh.

And just like when Dunn was here, it wasn't his fault the other teams hitters aren't all that good. If Nady were brought in and puts up an .820 OPS, it wouldn't be his fault either. So declining the idea of Nady because other people on this team might suck offensively is a dumb baseball move.

Build a good offense by being average or better across the board. Nady is that. Don't decline him because our shortstop can't hit.

Highlifeman21
12-24-2008, 04:59 PM
And the idea of referring to either Bailey or Hughes as a bust at this point in time is ridiculous. Both are going to start next season at age 22.

And Bailey can't find the strike zone, and Hughes has spent far too much time on the DL.

Right now, they are barely above Drew Stubbs in the bust category.

dougdirt
12-24-2008, 04:59 PM
Keeping Adam Dunn (instead of trading him for peanuts) would have pleased plenty of us around these parts.

Instead, we're left with a big hole in LF, and all the names bandied about in the off-season have fallen into the collective void of suck.

That being said, Xavier Nady is a step in the right direction, but he's no Adam Dunn. But thankfully he's also no Willy Taveras, or Juan Rivera.


Except Adam Dunn was a free agent at the end of the year anyways, so it still wouldn't matter and people would still be throwing a fit because he is gone. I mean heck, I wish we could have Eric Davis back.... but why talk about whats not going to happen?

Highlifeman21
12-24-2008, 05:01 PM
And just like when Dunn was here, it wasn't his fault the other teams hitters aren't all that good. If Nady were brought in and puts up an .820 OPS, it wouldn't be his fault either. So declining the idea of Nady because other people on this team might suck offensively is a dumb baseball move.

Build a good offense by being average or better across the board. Nady is that. Don't decline him because our shortstop can't hit.

So should we just aptly decline Xavier Nady b/c he can't hit?

dougdirt
12-24-2008, 05:01 PM
And Bailey can't find the strike zone, and Hughes has spent far too much time on the DL.

Right now, they are barely above Drew Stubbs in the bust category.

And yet none of them are close to the bust category.

Raisor
12-24-2008, 05:01 PM
I know we all want .900 OPS guys at every position,


I'd take one at this point.

dougdirt
12-24-2008, 05:03 PM
So should we just aptly decline Xavier Nady b/c he can't hit?

Nady can't hit? Thats news to me. The guy was basically Adam Dunn last season at the plate (Dunn had a 129 OPS+ and Nady sported a 128 OPS+).

OnBaseMachine
12-24-2008, 05:03 PM
And Bailey can't find the strike zone, and Hughes has spent far too much time on the DL.

Right now, they are barely above Drew Stubbs in the bust category.

So, Drew Stubbs is already a bust too? Good gosh. Talk about beating a dead horse.

dougdirt
12-24-2008, 05:04 PM
I'd take one at this point.

I would too, but I am not going to just refuse good hitters because they aren't very good hitters when my team needs all the good hitters they can get.

Highlifeman21
12-24-2008, 05:04 PM
Except Adam Dunn was a free agent at the end of the year anyways, so it still wouldn't matter and people would still be throwing a fit because he is gone. I mean heck, I wish we could have Eric Davis back.... but why talk about whats not going to happen?

Walt made a choice.

Get some warm bodies (and Micah Owings is warmer than the other 2 saps, but that's not saying much) rather than Adam Dunn walk for free. He made that choice. As a business move, I understand it.

However, if Walt's serious about Pat the Bat (perhaps the biggest FA name the Reds have remotely been associated with this off-season), he'll have to pay him the same money it would have taken to keep Dunn.

So, who would you rather have? Pat the Bat, or Adam Dunn?

There's only 1 answer to that question, and it ain't Pat the Bat.




Ever since Walt let Adam Dunn leave town, I've been disappointed with the moves to reshape this sorry franchise. Ramon Hernandez? That's your big move this offseason? C'mon.

Highlifeman21
12-24-2008, 05:08 PM
And yet none of them are close to the bust category.

On the bust scale, Hughes isn't as close as Bailey, and isn't as close as Stubbs, but Stubbs and Bailey are there in my book, and Hughes is 1 season away from joining them, IMO.

Hughes is different, b/c he's going down the "I'm a bust b/c I've been injured" route. Whereas Bailey and Stubbs are on the similar "I'm a bust b/c I haven't lived up to the hype" path, while Stubbs clearly is on the "I'm a bust b/c I was picked waaaaaaaaaay too high in the 1st Round so I won't ever meet the expectations of where I was drafted" path.

Either way, none of them have remotely set the world on fire, and the clock's ticking against them.

Raisor
12-24-2008, 05:09 PM
I would too, but I am not going to just refuse good hitters because they aren't very good hitters when my team needs all the good hitters they can get.

I think I'm going to get whip lash from reading this sentance.

:thumbup:

Highlifeman21
12-24-2008, 05:09 PM
So, Drew Stubbs is already a bust too? Good gosh. Talk about beating a dead horse.

If you read other team boards, those fans are always pumping up their own prospects and over hyping them. Reds fans are the exact opposite. If you haven't won a Cy Young or MVP by age 22 then you're a bust.

C'mon OBM, convince me how Drew Stubbs is anything but a bust at this stage of his career.

Devin Mesoraco's next. And there shouldn't be much argument about that, either.

dougdirt
12-24-2008, 05:12 PM
Walt made a choice.

Get some warm bodies (and Micah Owings is warmer than the other 2 saps, but that's not saying much) rather than Adam Dunn walk for free. He made that choice. As a business move, I understand it.

However, if Walt's serious about Pat the Bat (perhaps the biggest FA name the Reds have remotely been associated with this off-season), he'll have to pay him the same money it would have taken to keep Dunn.

So, who would you rather have? Pat the Bat, or Adam Dunn?

There's only 1 answer to that question, and it ain't Pat the Bat.

Ever since Walt let Adam Dunn leave town, I've been disappointed with the moves to reshape this sorry franchise. Ramon Hernandez? That's your big move this offseason? C'mon.

The idea that somehow Adam Dunn is an answer while Pat Burrell isn't is so ridiculous of a concept its not funny. They are nearly the same player. Burrell makes a little more contact, Dunn has a little more power, Burrell gets on base slightly more and both play crappy defense.

SteelSD
12-24-2008, 05:23 PM
And just like when Dunn was here, it wasn't his fault the other teams hitters aren't all that good. If Nady were brought in and puts up an .820 OPS, it wouldn't be his fault either. So declining the idea of Nady because other people on this team might suck offensively is a dumb baseball move.

Build a good offense by being average or better across the board. Nady is that. Don't decline him because our shortstop can't hit.

Xavier Nady is one of those low IsoD hitters folks keep warning others about, but for some reason people continue to be fascinated by them. Here's Nady:

2006: .790 OPS
2007: .806 OPS
2008: .867 OPS

Looks good until we realize that his 2008 BABIP (.337 overall) saw a boost from his time in Pittsburgh and it's simply not repeatable. After joining the Yankees, he returned to his normal .794 level and his RAP dropped by 2 Runs after the trade. That's pretty much what he is- a near-.800 OPS bat with no plate discipline and who loses a decent chunk of his OBP if thrown pitches don't find their way to his body. I don't want to see the Reds spend resources for that unless he's slotted in as a 4th OF who can help with decent pop off the bench. But as a starter, he's just too volatile and the actual upside sans a heaping helping of BABIP luck just isn't that good.

dougdirt
12-24-2008, 05:31 PM
Its not 'fascinated' its just seeing that there is more to baseball than high walk players. The guy is a fine player. He isn't very good or great and no one is claiming he is. However he is better than our current option of absolutely no one in left field and he is better than some of the other options talked about by the Reds as well. If he can put up his typical .800 OPS, he is an addition to this lineup.

Raisor
12-24-2008, 05:35 PM
I would be dissapointed with Nady, I just wouldn't be as dissapointed as with Willy T.

dougdirt
12-24-2008, 05:40 PM
I would be dissapointed with Nady, I just wouldn't be as dissapointed as with Willy T.

Let me ask this. Pretend that Jay Bruce and Joey Votto both give you a .900 OPS next year. Nady still disappoint you?

Raisor
12-24-2008, 05:44 PM
Let me ask this. Pretend that Jay Bruce and Joey Votto both give you a .900 OPS next year. Nady still disappoint you?

Yes.

Because there are other, better players available.

Sure, good seasons from Bruce and Votto can help "carry" other players, but the way to have a really good team (which should be the goal) is to have as many high level players as you can.

Dunn and Burrell are both available, and the only thing they're going to cost is money.

dougdirt
12-24-2008, 05:46 PM
Yes.

Because there are other, better players available.

Sure, good seasons from Bruce and Votto can help "carry" other players, but the way to have a really good team (which should be the goal) is to have as many high level players as you can.

Dunn and Burrell are both available, and the only thing they're going to cost is money.

So bringing in a good, but not the best option is basically why you would be disappointed?

Raisor
12-24-2008, 05:47 PM
So bringing in a good, but not the best option is basically why you would be disappointed?

Until the best options are gone, I'm not ready to settle yet.

TRF
12-24-2008, 05:48 PM
Let me ask this. Pretend that Jay Bruce and Joey Votto both give you a .900 OPS next year. Nady still disappoint you?

I'll bite.

Yes he does. Because signing him now means Walt overlooked better players. Plus you want to pretend that Jay Bruce is going to have a 150 point jump in his OPS. I'd love for that to happen, but if I were the GM, I sure as hell wouldn't COUNT on it.

BTW, Burrell does not get on base more than Dunn. .381 OBP to Burrell's .367.

Basically Dunn does everything better than Burrell except get more singles, and even that doesn't outweigh the difference in BB's

Raisor
12-24-2008, 05:50 PM
I'll bite.

Yes he does. Because signing him now means Walt overlooked better players.

I have trained you well, my Padawan.

dougdirt
12-24-2008, 05:51 PM
I'll bite.

Yes he does. Because signing him now means Walt overlooked better players. Plus you want to pretend that Jay Bruce is going to have a 150 point jump in his OPS. I'd love for that to happen, but if I were the GM, I sure as hell wouldn't COUNT on it.

BTW, Burrell does not get on base more than Dunn. .381 OBP to Burrell's .367.

Basically Dunn does everything better than Burrell except get more singles, and even that doesn't outweigh the difference in BB's

I don't think Bruce is likely to OPS .900, but its certainly possible. I don't think anyone was counting on it, I was just trying to gauge whether Raisor would be disappointed because of the player or because of the other guys on the Reds not being able to produce.

And as for Burrell getting on base more than Dunn, while he might not for his career, I am not all too concerned about what happened more than4 years ago when trying to figure out what a guy will do next year. Over the last 4 years Burrell has a 5 point OBP advantage over Dunn. So yeah, he does get on base more than Dunn does, at least in the most recent history that actually matters.

Always Red
12-24-2008, 05:56 PM
C'mon folks, it's Christmas Eve; can we be a little more optimistic and cheerful?? :D


Man, some of you are entirely too difficult to please. Xavier Nady is brought up and he has an OPS over .820 the last three seasons and he is a bench player? Yeah, maybe if he could only play first base.

I know we all want .900 OPS guys at every position, but aren't we getting awful picky when a guy with an .820 OPS over the last three years is being labeled as a bench player?

I agree with Doug, and I have to tell you, when I hear Xavier Nady and Nick Swisher I am a lot happier than when I hear Wigginton, Hairston, Taveras or Baldelli. Yeah, Baldelli has a brand new, more hopeful diagnosis, but the fact remains that he still has been sick, no matter what label you put on his disease. I do not put any eggs in that basket yet.

Adam Dunn>>Xavier Nady. I don't think that's even debatable.

But we don't have Dunn anymore.

The Reds got rid of Dunn because they could not afford him. They are not going to be able to pay for one man to replace what he did. If they could- they would have just kept Adam.

League average, at a minimum, at every position. That's what I would love to see, as a minimum starting point. Work from there. The Reds have some great young talent in the field and on the mound. Xavier Nady (or Nick Swisher) would be a solid addition to this ball club. Swisher may even be more available than Nady, given his down year last year, and the addition of Tex.

Merry Christmas, RZ'ers! :beerme:

Raisor
12-24-2008, 05:56 PM
2006-08
a. 254 .385 .504 .889

b. 244 .379 .518 .897

With the age differences, I'd guess player b has the better chance of maintaining or improving.

I wouldn't kick either off the team.

dougdirt
12-24-2008, 05:58 PM
2006-08
a. 254 .385 .504 .889

b. 244 .379 .518 .897

With the age differences, I'd guess player b has the better chance of maintaining or improving.

I wouldn't kick either off the team.
The differences are very minimal. I will take either, but player B isn't an option regardless of how much some people want him to be.

TRF
12-24-2008, 06:01 PM
I don't think Bruce is likely to OPS .900, but its certainly possible. I don't think anyone was counting on it, I was just trying to gauge whether Raisor would be disappointed because of the player or because of the other guys on the Reds not being able to produce.

And as for Burrell getting on base more than Dunn, while he might not for his career, I am not all too concerned about what happened more than4 years ago when trying to figure out what a guy will do next year. Over the last 4 years Burrell has a 5 point OBP advantage over Dunn. So yeah, he does get on base more than Dunn does, at least in the most recent history that actually matters.

Except Dunn is what, 3 years younger than Burrell? Now, how many years will it take for him to be signed? 3? 4? 2 won't get it done. So now you are looking at 10+ million going to a 36-37 year old LF that plays worse defense than Dunn. BTW, that 5 points of OBP is MORE than offset by Dunn's power. The three year splits give Burrell a .006 point advantage in OBP, but Dunn gets a .008 point advantage in OPS, and out HR's him and out BB's him and even has more RBI's (Marty would be so proud) Dunn is in his age prime years and Burrell is leaving his.

Seriously, I know you aren't a fan of Dunn's game, but it really isn't close based on age and recent performance coupled with contract length and the likelyhood of sustaing current performance.

SteelSD
12-24-2008, 07:16 PM
Its not 'fascinated' its just seeing that there is more to baseball than high walk players.

High IsoD players don't just project better than low IsoD players because they'll walk more, doug. It's that higher BB rates are evidence of better pitch recognition skill sets. Players with low-grade pitch recognition skill sets are high risk unless they possess a special at least one special skill set or a combination of skill sets that project to overcome a lack of recognition and/or selectivity at the plate. Xavier Nady possesses none of these skill sets. He's not fast. His contact rates both within the zone (86.8% 2005-to-2008) and outside of the zone (55.2%) aren't special. The guy doesn't have the kind of power skill set that translates to being dangerous outside the zone and his history doesn't demonstrate a rare ability to reproduce higher-than-normal Line Drive rates.

Because of all that, he needs to be viewed as a high-risk, highly-volatile commodity. When things are going well, his performance relies on BABIP luck and when they're going badly, he's a total black hole offensively because he doesn't have anything resembling a solid secondary on-base skill set. He's exactly the kind of player the Reds should be running away from (and fast) right now if he's to be viewed as a starting OF. I have no issue with him as a 4th OF, but that means a better option needs to be slotted in LF. The Reds simply don't have enough at other positions to compensate for the slight negative Run value versus average Nady most likely represents.

And the point isn't just to be average or near-average at as many positions as possible. It's to be that AND be above average at as many positions as possible. Considering how the rest of the offensive unit looks, an acquisition of Nady does nothing to help the Reds reach the real goal.

dougdirt
12-24-2008, 07:59 PM
Nowhere has anyone said he would be highly projectable (unless one considers an .800-.820 OPS highly projectable). The guy is highly likely to fall into that .800-.820 range though. His OPS+ over the last 4 years were 102, 104, 107 and 128. He isn't likely to just fall flat on his face and go Corey Patterson simply because he doesn't walk a lot. The fact that he doesn't walk a lot doesn't mean he can't be a good hitter, it just really limits the fact that he will be a very good or even a great hitter. No one is saying he will be either of those. Odds are he will be a good one though.

Caveat Emperor
12-24-2008, 08:01 PM
I agree with Doug, and I have to tell you, when I hear Xavier Nady and Nick Swisher I am a lot happier than when I hear Wigginton, Hairston, Taveras or Baldelli.

...in much the same way I'd be happier to hear "15-20" instead of "Life without parole."

There's no sensible reason to give talent up for him (just as was the case with Jermaine Dye) when Burrell, Dunn or Abreu can be had for money alone.

*BaseClogger*
12-24-2008, 09:29 PM
I'd love to have Dunn back, but it ain't happening. They said Swisher was available earlier in the offseason (and indeed he was ;)) and he was the guy I was most excited to see the Reds acquire. Then, Ty Wigginton was released and he was the guy I wanted. Now that I have read once more that Nick Swisher might again be available he's the guy I'd want the most, but I would still rather sign Wigginton than trade for Xavier Nady...

marcshoe
12-24-2008, 09:41 PM
fwiw, MLB.com has an article featuring this same conversation--and focusing on Swisher and Nady--about the Giants.

Will M
12-24-2008, 11:16 PM
I'd love to have Dunn back, but it ain't happening. They said Swisher was available earlier in the offseason (and indeed he was ;)) and he was the guy I was most excited to see the Reds acquire. Then, Ty Wigginton was released and he was the guy I wanted. Now that I have read once more that Nick Swisher might again be available he's the guy I'd want the most, but I would still rather sign Wigginton than trade for Xavier Nady...

sure. Wigginton costs only money whereas Nady costs talent.

Highlifeman21
12-25-2008, 12:24 AM
Let me ask this. Pretend that Jay Bruce and Joey Votto both give you a .900 OPS next year. Nady still disappoint you?

Given that Nady plays a corner OF spot, if he's under an .850 OPS that's a significant downgrade based on what we've had since 2002.

Truth be told, Nady needs to OPS at least .850, or his bat is worthless at a corner OF spot.

So yes, if in fantasy land where Votto and Bruce both OPS .900 next year (and for the record I only think Votto has a chance to do so), I will be disappointed if Nady's our LF.

dougdirt
12-25-2008, 12:29 AM
Given that Nady plays a corner OF spot, if he's under an .850 OPS that's a significant downgrade based on what we've had since 2002.

Truth be told, Nady needs to OPS at least .850, or his bat is worthless at a corner OF spot.

So yes, if in fantasy land where Votto and Bruce both OPS .900 next year (and for the record I only think Votto has a chance to do so), I will be disappointed if Nady's our LF.

Regardless of what we have had in LF in the past, the idea that an .850 OPS is somehow the baseline between acceptable and worthless is absolutely wacky.

Breakdown by position played in MLB in 2008


Split BA OBP SLG
as C .257 .325 .390
as 1B .272 .353 .464
as 2B .276 .338 .409
as 3B .266 .336 .436
as SS .272 .327 .391
as LF .269 .344 .442
as CF .268 .334 .420
as RF .276 .347 .451
as DH .255 .338 .433
as P .139 .177 .175


So last year left fielders were good for a .786 OPS, but anything below .850 for the Reds is 'worthless'?

TRF
12-25-2008, 12:42 AM
Regardless of what we have had in LF in the past, the idea that an .850 OPS is somehow the baseline between acceptable and worthless is absolutely wacky.

Breakdown by position played in MLB in 2008


Split BA OBP SLG
as C .257 .325 .390
as 1B .272 .353 .464
as 2B .276 .338 .409
as 3B .266 .336 .436
as SS .272 .327 .391
as LF .269 .344 .442
as CF .268 .334 .420
as RF .276 .347 .451
as DH .255 .338 .433
as P .139 .177 .175
So last year left fielders were good for a .786 OPS, but anything below .850 for the Reds is 'worthless'?

Yes because the Reds run differential was atrocious with a .900 OPS bat in LF. DOWNGRADING the position isn't going to help.

cincrazy
12-25-2008, 12:49 AM
This is what I think about the Adam Dunn discussions on Redszone nowadays... :deadhorse

p.s. Merry Christmas everyone!

dougdirt
12-25-2008, 03:01 AM
Yes because the Reds run differential was atrocious with a .900 OPS bat in LF. DOWNGRADING the position isn't going to help.

Well then you need to be upset if the Reds aren't upgrading the positions where they were below average at last year, mainly shortstop, catcher and center field. Two of those three are very likely to be better off regardless of what we get, much less if we actually get some production.

A downgrade from Dunn does make a bit of a difference, but you seem to be wanting to replace Dunn with another bat just like Dunn, then if its just a solid guy for the position, hate it because the other bats suck around that one. Don't hate moves because the other spots suck and that won't make enough of a difference. Hate the moves that are retaining bad bats in the lineup (which two of the three terrible spots in the lineup have been replaced already).

Here is how the Reds positions stacked up against the Major League Averages


P mAVG mOBP mSLG mOPS rAVG rOBP rSLG rOPS Difference
c .257 .325 .390 .715 .234 .330 .351 .681 -.034
1b .272 .353 .464 .817 .292 .366 .493 .859 .042
2B .276 .338 .409 .747 .256 .305 .416 .721 -.026
3b .266 .336 .436 .772 .250 .339 .453 .792 .020
SS .272 .327 .391 .718 .272 .321 .368 .689 -.029
LF .269 .344 .442 .786 .247 .361 .500 .861 .075
CF .268 .334 .420 .754 .249 .299 .401 .700 -.054
RF .276 .347 .451 .798 .243 .331 .433 .764 -.034
P .139 .177 .175 .352 .114 .139 .146 .285 -.067


So really, the Reds were below average everywhere but 3B, 1B and LF. The Reds offense has problems, but we still need to add talent across the board. Simply because someone is going to post an .850+ OPS doesn't mean we should avoid him like the plague. We need to add as many league average or better bats to the line up as we can.

kpresidente
12-25-2008, 06:26 AM
If you bring Dunn back, what are you going to do when Alonso's ready? Trade him? Trade Votto?

So you end up keeping the 30+ year old with a big contract and trading the youngster making 1/2 mil. per year? That's not how small-market teams (well, mid-market) should be operating.

Of course, I realize all the Dunn talk is coming from the Burrell rumors. But that's why I hate the idea of Pat, too. We need a short-term answer here. If they give somebody a big contract long-term, we're in trouble, because that means Walt dealt Dunn, not because he was going to be a FA, but because of his "attitude" or some other ridiculous reason. That means we've got a bad GM on our hands.

nate
12-25-2008, 09:34 AM
If you bring Dunn back, what are you going to do when Alonso's ready? Trade him? Trade Votto?

Yes.


So you end up keeping the 30+ year old with a big contract and trading the youngster making 1/2 mil. per year? That's not how small-market teams (well, mid-market) should be operating.

It's actually exactly how should they operate: trading positions of depth to fill weaknesses. If you could turn Alonso into a nice SS or C, that would be pretty sweet.


Of course, I realize all the Dunn talk is coming from the Burrell rumors. But that's why I hate the idea of Pat, too. We need a short-term answer here. If they give somebody a big contract long-term, we're in trouble, because that means Walt dealt Dunn, not because he was going to be a FA, but because of his "attitude" or some other ridiculous reason. That means we've got a bad GM on our hands.

I'm not sure I agree with that line of reasoning.

Jpup
12-25-2008, 11:05 AM
I would love for the Reds to get Matsui or Damon but they both hit left handed and I am afraid Walt would not even consider it.

kpresidente
12-25-2008, 11:57 AM
It's actually exactly how should they operate: trading positions of depth to fill weaknesses. If you could turn Alonso into a nice SS or C, that would be pretty sweet.


Why not just sign a SS or C with the money you save from Dunn? Generally free agency will be a larger pool than the trade market.

Falls City Beer
12-25-2008, 12:06 PM
I would love for the Reds to get Matsui or Damon but they both hit left handed and I am afraid Walt would not even consider it.

Matsui costs even more than Dye. And Dye has more power.

RedEye
12-25-2008, 01:33 PM
If the Reds got Swisher and Baldelli, I might actually go from depressed to slightly intrigued about 2009.

wheels
12-25-2008, 03:38 PM
If the Reds got Swisher and Baldelli, I might actually go from depressed to slightly intrigued about 2009.

Not gonna happen. Makes too much sense.

Highlifeman21
12-25-2008, 04:20 PM
Yes because the Reds run differential was atrocious with a .900 OPS bat in LF. DOWNGRADING the position isn't going to help.

See, TRF gets it.

If you're replacing a .900 OPS bat with anything South of a .900 OPS, you're downgrading.

Once you consider that Chris Dickerson will at best OPS .775, you'll need Jay Bruce to hopefully not experience any Soph. Slump, while your other corner OF needs to now OPS North of .900 to make up for Dickerson coming back to Earth.

Highlifeman21
12-25-2008, 04:22 PM
I would love for the Reds to get Matsui or Damon but they both hit left handed and I am afraid Walt would not even consider it.

That and they are both old, make some ridiculously serious coin, play horrible D and are LHB (if we care about handedness of the batter).

Did I mention they're both really old and really expensive?

remdog
12-25-2008, 04:22 PM
Not gonna happen. Makes too much sense.

How does it make sense? Baldelli is a major risk despite the spin his agents have put on a new diagnosis. From what I've read it's trying to put a smile on a bad situation. If he were healthy that would be something else. OTOH, if he were healthy he probably wouln't be available.

Swisher, from what little I've seen of him, hasn't impressed me although I'm open to being impressed sometime in the future.

Rem

TRF
12-25-2008, 05:49 PM
Well then you need to be upset if the Reds aren't upgrading the positions where they were below average at last year, mainly shortstop, catcher and center field. Two of those three are very likely to be better off regardless of what we get, much less if we actually get some production.

A downgrade from Dunn does make a bit of a difference, but you seem to be wanting to replace Dunn with another bat just like Dunn, then if its just a solid guy for the position, hate it because the other bats suck around that one. Don't hate moves because the other spots suck and that won't make enough of a difference. Hate the moves that are retaining bad bats in the lineup (which two of the three terrible spots in the lineup have been replaced already).

Here is how the Reds positions stacked up against the Major League Averages


P mAVG mOBP mSLG mOPS rAVG rOBP rSLG rOPS Difference
c .257 .325 .390 .715 .234 .330 .351 .681 -.034
1b .272 .353 .464 .817 .292 .366 .493 .859 .042
2B .276 .338 .409 .747 .256 .305 .416 .721 -.026
3b .266 .336 .436 .772 .250 .339 .453 .792 .020
SS .272 .327 .391 .718 .272 .321 .368 .689 -.029
LF .269 .344 .442 .786 .247 .361 .500 .861 .075
CF .268 .334 .420 .754 .249 .299 .401 .700 -.054
RF .276 .347 .451 .798 .243 .331 .433 .764 -.034
P .139 .177 .175 .352 .114 .139 .146 .285 -.067
So really, the Reds were below average everywhere but 3B, 1B and LF. The Reds offense has problems, but we still need to add talent across the board. Simply because someone is going to post an .850+ OPS doesn't mean we should avoid him like the plague. We need to add as many league average or better bats to the line up as we can.

Here is the problem with this line of thinking. The Reds cannot upgrade to league average at every position. So replacing Dunn with anything beneath Dunn is a downgrade. You live with the offense BP gives you at 2B because of his D. EE is fine and a good bet to get better, same thing with Votto. Bruce and Dickerson might be better than their positions were last year, Dickerson almost certainly just bacause of who he is replacing.

So we have POTENTIAL addition by subtraction in RF and CF. C has been upgraded. SS is a black hole that has NOT been addressed in any way. But LF is going to be a huge downgrade. And a minimum of .100 OPS drop in OPS, with the potential to be as much as .180-.200 point drop is a chunk to be balanced out by potential from the other OF positions.

I prefer certainty a bit more. I'm willing to hope Dickerson can OPS .775+ and that Bruce can OPS .850+ if I KNOW my LF will OPS .900+.

dougdirt
12-25-2008, 07:51 PM
The problem isn't with my line of thinking, its with the talent on this team. If the Reds have a left fielder who can post an .800-.820 OPS he isn't part of the problem. While I would like something more than that, I won't complain about it either. The Reds have a lot more pressing concerns to worry about if they have a left fielder who can give them 600 PA of an .800 OPS. Like you said, the SS position is a black hole still and the defense is still pretty questionable. That said, until they show me otherwise (signing Taveras), then I have to imagine they have improved both catcher and center already over last year.

OnBaseMachine
12-25-2008, 08:05 PM
I love Dunner, but he's not coming back. I wish we could all just accept that and move on.

TRF
12-25-2008, 08:06 PM
The problem isn't with my line of thinking, its with the talent on this team. If the Reds have a left fielder who can post an .800-.820 OPS he isn't part of the problem. While I would like something more than that, I won't complain about it either. The Reds have a lot more pressing concerns to worry about if they have a left fielder who can give them 600 PA of an .800 OPS. Like you said, the SS position is a black hole still and the defense is still pretty questionable. That said, until they show me otherwise (signing Taveras), then I have to imagine they have improved both catcher and center already over last year.

I'm not really disagreeing accept in regards to HOW MUCH Dunn's departure hurts this offense. The Reds haven't had a player like him, one that consistently put up big power numbers, played as many games as he did each year, and did it while injured. Dude was beyond just a gamer. His absence is a void not filled by an .800 OPS guy that doesn't walk.

And IMO LF is the new Red Herring of the Reds PR machine. Kind of like 3B was last year. Most fans with more than a passing interest knew 3B, while perhaps not ideal, was not the real problem, SS was. The same thing is happening again this year. All we hear about is this magic RH bopper that plays LF. never mind the fact that there might not be a true SS in the whole damn system.

BTW, despite our disagreements, Merry Christmas doug.

Highlifeman21
12-25-2008, 11:14 PM
I love Dunner, but he's not coming back. I wish we could all just accept that and move on.

While I can't, and won't, speak for anyone else, the fact that Adam Dunn most likely isn't coming back only compounds the fact that the Reds WILL be worse offensively in 2009 than they were in 2008.

I've accepted the fact Adam Dunn won't be a Red in 2009, while I've also accepted the fact that the Reds will suck offensively in 2009, and they probably won't be too much better in the pitching department either.

So, what does this mean? It means that unless the Reds sign someone as good or better than Dunn to play LF, they are downgrading. If they are downgrading, their offense will be worse. If their offense will be worse in 2009 than 2008, that only puts more pressure on the pitching to be that much better in 2009 than they were in 2008. Sure, it's possible, but it's not very probably.

I want the Reds to bank on improving, rather than creating big holes and not filling them.

dougdirt
12-26-2008, 12:01 AM
Highlife you are completely making the assumption that the Reds 2008 offense is going to be the Reds 2009 offense minus Adam Dunn. Thats not even close to being accurate.

Blitz Dorsey
12-26-2008, 12:57 AM
Highlife you are completely making the assumption that the Reds 2008 offense is going to be the Reds 2009 offense minus Adam Dunn. Thats not even close to being accurate.

Yep. With no Griffey, no Patterson, a better Bruce (hopefully), more of the same or perhaps even better from Votto (hopefully), Phillips more of the '07 version than '08 version (hopefully), Hernandez/Hanigan instead of Ross/Bako, hopefully someone like Jermaine Dye in LF, maybe Alex Gonzalez at SS, hopefully a career year out of Encarnacion, and hopefully a solid year out of Dickerson in CF, I think the '09 offense is going to be better. How much better? Hard to say, but I think almost solid. Will still drive us crazy at times but will be better.

TRF
12-26-2008, 02:44 AM
Yep. With no Griffey, no Patterson, a better Bruce (hopefully), more of the same or perhaps even better from Votto (hopefully), Phillips more of the '07 version than '08 version (hopefully), Hernandez/Hanigan instead of Ross/Bako, hopefully someone like Jermaine Dye in LF, maybe Alex Gonzalez at SS, hopefully a career year out of Encarnacion, and hopefully a solid year out of Dickerson in CF, I think the '09 offense is going to be better. How much better? Hard to say, but I think almost solid. Will still drive us crazy at times but will be better.

I counted four hopefullys in your post.

That doesn't fill me with hope.

SMcGavin
12-26-2008, 03:05 AM
I counted four hopefullys in your post.

That doesn't fill me with hope.

Actually, I counted six.

Right now, among the careers of all its members, the projected 2009 offense has accounted for exactly one .840+ OPS season (Joey Votto's 2008). Doesn't mean guys like Encarnacion and Bruce aren't capable of doing it, or guys like Hernandez/Hanigan and Dickerson aren't capable of jumping up and putting together a league average year with the bat, but a lot of things would have to go right for this offense to be even average. Individually all those little maybes are definitely feasible, but odds are they aren't all going to come true.

Highlifeman21
12-26-2008, 10:11 AM
Highlife you are completely making the assumption that the Reds 2008 offense is going to be the Reds 2009 offense minus Adam Dunn. Thats not even close to being accurate.

Here's my assumptions:

1. Dickerson will come back to Earth, and over the course of the full 2009 season will not OPS North of .800. I'll put him in the .775 range, and that's a stretch.

2. Ramon Hernandez and Ryan Hanigan are upgrades from Paul Bako and David Ross, so we'll see more production from the C position, but I honestly don't think we'll see legendary improvement.

3. Votto had a great 2008, and he's near his prime years, but I'm not going to write in pen that Votto will duplicate or improve upon his 2008 for 2009. Votto's the least of my skepticism, but I still have skepticism. He's only appeared in 175 career G so while I'd love for him to OPS .875, I'll be satisfied with anything North of .850.

4. BP is a hacker. Hasn't met a pitch he doesn't like. Since he's now convinced he's a 30/30 man thanks to that 2007 outlier season, IMO he'll continue to be more like the 2006 and 2008 OPSing around .750 version of BP. So, I guess it's best to hope for the status quo from BP.

5. Who's gonna be our SS? Janish? Keppinger? Gonzalez? Yuck yuck and yuck. Hope and pray for league average from this trio, b/c IMO we probably won't get it.

6. EE is a bright spot for the Reds, along with Votto. EE will OPS North of .800 for the Reds. EE's actually a guy that I feel confident saying that he will continue to get better.

7. Jay Bruce. He OPS'd .767 last year. He'll probably OPS North of .800, but I'd only project him as high as .825. So, while there will be some improvement, I don't think it would be enough to make that much of an impact.

8. LF. Who's gonna be our LF? Laynce Nix? Norris Hopper? As I've already stated, if we obtain a bat that OPS's less than .900, it's a downgrade from what we've had since 2002. However, combined with the improvement @ C, an OPS of .850 from the LF would still be a lateral move, and anything less than an .850 OPS is still a downgrade.

So, there are all my assumptions. We had a .900 OPS bat in LF, and our offense sucked. So why would I assume that if we add a less than .900 OPS bat to LF that combined with the rest of the offense, we'd be any better for 2009 than we were in 2008?

Scrap Irony
12-26-2008, 12:14 PM
Even using your pessimstic assumptions, the Reds offense improves.

Highlifeman21
12-26-2008, 10:18 PM
Even using your pessimstic assumptions, the Reds offense improves.

How do they improve?

Scrap Irony
12-26-2008, 11:33 PM
Here's my assumptions:

1. Dickerson will come back to Earth, and over the course of the full 2009 season will not OPS North of .800. I'll put him in the .775 range, and that's a stretch.

2. Ramon Hernandez and Ryan Hanigan are upgrades from Paul Bako and David Ross, so we'll see more production from the C position, but I honestly don't think we'll see legendary improvement.

3. Votto had a great 2008, and he's near his prime years, but I'm not going to write in pen that Votto will duplicate or improve upon his 2008 for 2009. Votto's the least of my skepticism, but I still have skepticism. He's only appeared in 175 career G so while I'd love for him to OPS .875, I'll be satisfied with anything North of .850.

4. BP is a hacker. Hasn't met a pitch he doesn't like. Since he's now convinced he's a 30/30 man thanks to that 2007 outlier season, IMO he'll continue to be more like the 2006 and 2008 OPSing around .750 version of BP. So, I guess it's best to hope for the status quo from BP.

5. Who's gonna be our SS? Janish? Keppinger? Gonzalez? Yuck yuck and yuck. Hope and pray for league average from this trio, b/c IMO we probably won't get it.

6. EE is a bright spot for the Reds, along with Votto. EE will OPS North of .800 for the Reds. EE's actually a guy that I feel confident saying that he will continue to get better.

7. Jay Bruce. He OPS'd .767 last year. He'll probably OPS North of .800, but I'd only project him as high as .825. So, while there will be some improvement, I don't think it would be enough to make that much of an impact.

8. LF. Who's gonna be our LF? Laynce Nix? Norris Hopper? As I've already stated, if we obtain a bat that OPS's less than .900, it's a downgrade from what we've had since 2002. However, combined with the improvement @ C, an OPS of .850 from the LF would still be a lateral move, and anything less than an .850 OPS is still a downgrade.

So, there are all my assumptions. We had a .900 OPS bat in LF, and our offense sucked. So why would I assume that if we add a less than .900 OPS bat to LF that combined with the rest of the offense, we'd be any better for 2009 than we were in 2008?

One guy drops (Dickerson)
08 C + 08 LF = 09 C + 09 LF
Phillips and Votto stay about the same
Bruce, EdE, and SS trio improve (with SS trio at "league average" v. 08 SS decidedly below average)

Net, offensive improvement.

dougdirt
12-27-2008, 12:25 AM
How do they improve?

The upgrade to a .775 OPS (say .350/.425) in CF over what Patterson in just 392 PA is worth an upgrade of 29 RC.

The upgrade at catcher to just a .730 OPS (say .330/.400 line) is worth another 8 RC over just 511 PA given to Ross/Bako.

Jay Bruce getting 411 PA of just say .330/.490 is worth an additional 10 RC.

Dickerson is likely to see more PT than that, so is the catcher position and Bruce will also see more PT than that. Still, just your guesses give the Reds an additional 47 RC without accounting for additional playing time.

Lets assume Dunn would give the Reds a .380/.520 line next year for 650 PA.... the downgrade to a guy giving the Reds a .350/.450 line is only a drop of about 26 RC. If the Reds get anything better than that .800 OPS, even by your numbers, its about a 20 run improvement.

Highlifeman21
12-27-2008, 07:04 AM
One guy drops (Dickerson)
08 C + 08 LF = 09 C + 09 LF
Phillips and Votto stay about the same
Bruce, EdE, and SS trio improve (with SS trio at "league average" v. 08 SS decidedly below average)

Net, offensive improvement.

Dickerson drops.
C improves.
Phillips stays in the .750 range.
Votto stays the same.
Bruce marginally improves.
EE marginally improves.
I don't see the SS trio improving (I said I don't see league average from the SS position).
Big ? in LF.

So, by not knowing who will be the LF, we can't have a net improvement from 2008 to 2009.

Once we know the LF, then the projection will be a tad more accurate.

Ltlabner
12-27-2008, 08:21 AM
BP is a hacker. Hasn't met a pitch he doesn't like. Since he's now convinced he's a 30/30 man thanks to that 2007 outlier season, IMO he'll continue to be more like the 2006 and 2008 OPSing around .750 version of BP. So, I guess it's best to hope for the status quo from BP.

Shame is, if we had a manager with half a lick-of-sense, BP would be hitting the ball instead of trying to jack the ball.

I am firmly convinced that if he just went up there and tried to stroke a hit, instead of trying to be a "power hitter" he'd still get plenty of homers. Especially inside GABP. He's got the bat speed and strength to do it. Combined with his speed he could be a great hitter if he was just guided in the the right direction.

Nope. Instead we have a guy who struggles to resist the temptation swing at everything (and try to launch it also) combined with a manager who actively pushes players to swing at everything.

Sad really, because I think with the right coaching BP could really be something special. Instead The Dusty is making him "more aggressive".

Makes me want to barf.

edabbs44
12-27-2008, 10:03 AM
Shame is, if we had a manager with half a lick-of-sense, BP would be hitting the ball instead of trying to jack the ball.

I am firmly convinced that if he just went up there and tried to stroke a hit, instead of trying to be a "power hitter" he'd still get plenty of homers. Especially inside GABP. He's got the bat speed and strength to do it. Combined with his speed he could be a great hitter if he was just guided in the the right direction.

Nope. Instead we have a guy who struggles to resist the temptation swing at everything (and try to launch it also) combined with a manager who actively pushes players to swing at everything.

Sad really, because I think with the right coaching BP could really be something special. Instead The Dusty is making him "more aggressive".

Makes me want to barf.

Do you really see Baker as the cause of Phillips' "aggressiveness" at the plate? He had a higher walk rate in '08 than in '07.

RedsManRick
12-27-2008, 11:47 AM
With Phillips, almost the entire difference between his 2007 and 2008 seasons is due to his drop in LD% leading to a drop in BABIP leading to a drop in AVG (and subsequent OBP/SLG).

Now I can't say with any confidence that his lowered contact quality was due to his plate approach and not just random variance. But my amateur scouting attempts say that Phillips started trying to pull everything, including that notorious outside slider.

Interestingly, Encarnacion suffered the same malady -- and saw similar regression in his performance. Was it at Dusty's urging? I don't know. But from the way Dusty talked, he wasn't a huge fan of patience at the plate and driving the ball the other way -- especially for guys who he wanted to be "RBI guys".

Ltlabner
12-27-2008, 12:41 PM
Do you really see Baker as the cause of Phillips' "aggressiveness" at the plate? He had a higher walk rate in '08 than in '07.

The Dusty talked early and often about being more aggressive at the plate both after becoming the Reds skipper that throughout history. The famous "base clogging" quote comes to mind there.

Do you think he was just kidding about that?


YEAR NAME PA OBP OUTR SB%
2008 Brandon Phillips 609 .312 0.66831 69.7%
2007 Brandon Phillips 702 .331 0.65242 80.0%
2006 Brandon Phillips 587 .324 0.66440 92.6%

In 2008, The Dusty's first year as Reds skipper, we see Brandon's OBP at it's lowest, his out rate at his highest and his stolen base percentage plummet far below the effective rate.

I don't believe in coincidences.

dougdirt
12-27-2008, 01:03 PM
After todays news, I take back everything I said in this thread about an improved offense.

LoganBuck
12-27-2008, 03:25 PM
After todays news, I take back everything I said in this thread about an improved offense.

They would have to trade Homer Bailey straight up for Albert Pujols to just break even.

IslandRed
12-27-2008, 07:15 PM
The Dusty talked early and often about being more aggressive at the plate both after becoming the Reds skipper that throughout history. The famous "base clogging" quote comes to mind there.

Do you think he was just kidding about that?

He also said, in the same preseason article that caused so many people to freak out when he said Votto needed to be more aggressive, that he thought Phillips swung at too much crap.

Adjustments aren't one-size-fits-all.