PDA

View Full Version : Reds sign Willy Taveras to 2 year deal....



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5

jesusfan
12-27-2008, 01:37 PM
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%3a90e78894-ab6b-4a79-9817-43f5723758b1&sid=sitelife.cincinnati.com

http://hotstove.mlblogs.com/archives/2008/12/reds_sign_taveras.html

So says John Fay and hot stove MLB blog....I guess we have our lead-off man now...

Krusty
12-27-2008, 01:39 PM
Here's the release:

CINCINNATI - Cincinnati Reds President of Baseball Operations and General Manager Walt Jocketty today announced the signing of free agent OF Willy Taveras to a two-year contract through the 2010 season.

"Willy Taveras fills two significant needs for our ball club, a speed base stealing threat at the top of the order and superior defense in center field," said Jockettty.

Taveras, 27, in 133 games last season for the Colorado Rockies hit .251 and led the Major Leagues with 68 stolen bases and a .907 stolen base percentage (68-for-75).

His .907 stolen base percentage in 2008 was the highest by a Major League player, with a minium of 60 stolen bases, since those statistics have been compiled (since 1920 in the American League, since 1951 in the National League). The previous stolen base percentage record of .896 was established by the Pirates' Tony Womack in 1997 (60-for-67).

"With the addition of Willy Taveras and Ramon Hernandez, along with Alex Gonzalez and Brandon Phillips, our defense substantially improves up the middle," said Jocketty.



Since 2005, Taveras leads the majors with 207 infield hits and ranks fifth in stolen bases with 168. In 2005 he won the The Sporting News' National League Rookie of the Year Award and finished second to Philadelphia's Ryan Howard in the BBWAA Rookie of the Year Award voting.

Comments (1) | Permanent Link

RedsManRick
12-27-2008, 01:41 PM
Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgggggggggggggghhhhhhhh!!!!!

I am embarrassed to be a fan of this team. Time to exercise the opt out clause in my fan contract.

Mr. Dickerson, welcome to the party of underutilized talent. Brady Clark will show you to your seat.

But then again, who needs to actually win baseball games when you get guys who run really fast.

Krusty
12-27-2008, 01:42 PM
For Redzoners, you have your 2009 Whipping Boy as a replacement for the now departed Cory Patterson.

IMO, the Reds could have done worse and traded for the guy. A two year deal allows time for Stubbs to develop and eventually take over centerfield.

Now about that righthanded hitter for the middle of the order, Walt.....

Rounding Third
12-27-2008, 01:42 PM
Ruined my Christmas

Ltlabner
12-27-2008, 01:43 PM
Ugh.

Well...here's to 2010.

westofyou
12-27-2008, 01:44 PM
The Dominican Chuck Carr

jesusfan
12-27-2008, 01:44 PM
okay so now we have the following...

1. Willy Taveras
2. Brandon Phillips
3. Joey Votto
4. LF please...
5. Jay Bruce
6. Edwin Encarnacion
7. Ramon Hernandez
8. Alex Gonzalez

Not bad if we can add a solid right handed bat for the 4 slot...

Krusty
12-27-2008, 01:44 PM
Take a deep breath everyone. Breathe in, breathe out. Pass the paper bag around if you like because when you wake up tomorrow this won't be like the old tv series, Dallas, and find out this was just a bad dream.

Krusty
12-27-2008, 01:46 PM
okay so now we have the following...

1. Willy Taveras
2. Brandon Phillips
3. Joey Votto
4. LF please...
5. Jay Bruce
6. Edwin Encarnacion
7. Ramon Hernandez
8. Alex Gonzalez

Not bad if we can add a solid right handed bat for the 4 slot...

I got Jermaine Dye still coming to us. It will cost us Homer Bailey and probably another decent prospect especially if the White Sox are to pick up a portion of his contract.

SteelSD
12-27-2008, 01:47 PM
Ugh.

Well...here's to 2010.

2010? It's a two-year deal. Welcome to never-ever-land.

Way to smash your window of opportunity, Walt.

klw
12-27-2008, 01:48 PM
Do you really want a press release highlighting a record where the previously holder of the record was Tony Womack?

I guess I will withhold judgment until I see whether the $ amount is too high that Dickerson won't be able to replace him if he repeats 08 instead of 07. A plus to this is that at least they didn't trade anyone for him.

Tom Servo
12-27-2008, 01:50 PM
And there it is, the least suprsing deal ever.

Krusty
12-27-2008, 01:53 PM
Come on people.......really, who didn't see this coming? You had to see this coming back in November when the rumor was exposed that the Reds were talking to the Rockies about Taveras, Atkins and Torrealba. They had interest in all three players. Basically they got Taveras for cash without giving up a player.

If you can name me one free agent outfielder that we could have put in the leadoff spot, let me know. And while everyone is on the Chris Dickerson's band wagon, obviously the Reds front office isn't. And to annoint a player a starting job based on 100 ABs, that is risky IMO.

Taveras to me is the Omar Moreno of our generation. And Moreno was able to play centerfield and a few Pirates championship teams back in the 70s. When you get something for free and it only cost you cash, it isn't a horrible deal. Not great but not horrible either.

Rounding Third
12-27-2008, 01:54 PM
okay so now we have the following...

1. Willy Taveras
2. Brandon Phillips
3. Joey Votto
4. LF please...
5. Jay Bruce
6. Edwin Encarnacion
7. Ramon Hernandez
8. Alex Gonzalez

Not bad if we can add a solid right handed bat for the 4 slot...

So we have Tavares, Gonzo and Hernandez could easily have an OBP of around .300.

Phillips and Bruce could be around .330, if we get Dye then there is another .330.

No longer excited about this year

dougdirt
12-27-2008, 01:55 PM
This just made me sick for the rest of the day. Seriously, my entire weekend is ruined by this.

Rounding Third
12-27-2008, 01:56 PM
Come on people.......really, who didn't see this coming? You had to see this coming back in November when the rumor was exposed that the Reds were talking to the Rockies about Taveras, Atkins and Torrealba. They had interest in all three players. Basically they got Taveras for cash without giving up a player.

If you can name me one free agent outfielder that we could have put in the leadoff spot, let me know. And while everyone is on the Chris Dickerson's band wagon, obviously the Reds front office isn't. And to annoint a player a starting job based on 100 ABs, that is risky IMO.

Taveras to me is the Omar Moreno of our generation. And Moreno was able to play centerfield and a few Pirates championship teams back in the 70s. When you get something for free and it only cost you cash, it isn't a horrible deal. Not great but not horrible either.

The point is we didn't need a FA leadoff OF, like you said we had Dickerson.

jesusfan
12-27-2008, 01:58 PM
I look for Walt's next move to be Rocco Baldelli... if that happens we would definitely have some speed and quality outfield defense, IF he's healthy.

Baldelli, Taveras, Bruce roaming the outfield would be a ridiculous defensive improvement over Dunn, Bruce, Griffey...

Baldelli would probably hit 2nd or 6th in the order with Phillips manning the other spot... I guess that leaves Edwin for the 4 hole...

Krusty
12-27-2008, 01:59 PM
So we have Tavares, Gonzo and Hernandez could easily have an OBP of around .300.

Phillips and Bruce could be around .330, if we get Dye then there is another .330.

No longer excited about this year

Who would you rather have, Mark Teixeria? Would you have wanted the Reds to dish out 180 million on one ballplayer? Look at what the free agents are getting on the market with the Yankees setting the bar. Do you think the Reds can compete for some of the prime talent? Do you really want to pay 50 million for two years of Manny Ramirez?

You play the hand your dealt with. In defense of the Reds, they are buying Taveras when his stock is at an all-time low. His numbers will probably improve in 2009. There was no secret he was on the outs with manager Clint Hurdle in Colorado. He isn't the greatest leadoff hitter or centerfielder by far but this is the hand the Reds have to play.

SteelSD
12-27-2008, 02:02 PM
Come on people.......really, who didn't see this coming?

Seeing a train wreck coming makes it more expected but not any less brutal an experience.

This was a horrible acquisition for a team needing to rip chunks out of its Run Differential gap offensively.

Krusty
12-27-2008, 02:04 PM
I look for Walt's next move to be Rocco Baldelli... if that happens we would definitely have some speed and quality outfield defense, IF he's healthy.

Baldelli, Taveras, Bruce roaming the outfield would be a ridiculous defensive improvement over Dunn, Bruce, Griffey...

Baldelli would probably hit 2nd or 6th in the order with Phillips manning the other spot... I guess that leaves Edwin for the 4 hole...

Better yet, what if the Reds sign both Baldelli and traded for Jermaine Dye. Baldelli would be the fourth outfielder with Dickerson as the fifth outfielder. And suddenly what was a weakness on the roster becomes a strength. Baldelli could back up Taveras in center and still get plenty ABs while slowly increase his playing time as the season goes on.

You see......not everything is raining and gloomy.

corkedbat
12-27-2008, 02:05 PM
Oh well, maybe it'll work out...or maybe Castellini will just turn the team over to me and I can keep this kinda crap from happening in the future.

Womack, Patterson, Taveras...a fine tradition continues. :eek:

Krusty
12-27-2008, 02:06 PM
Seeing a train wreck coming makes it more expected but not any less brutal an experience.

This was a horrible acquisition for a team needing to rip chunks out of its Run Differential gap offensively.

It depends. It is only a two-year deal. If the Reds are paying more per season than what they paid Corey Patterson, I would be surprised. Plus, it didn't cost any personnel in regards to a trade.

As mentioned, I could see the Reds signing Baldelli and/or still trading for Jermaine Dye. Either way, the Reds aren't in rebuilding mode.

Rounding Third
12-27-2008, 02:06 PM
Who would you rather have, Mark Teixeria? Would you have wanted the Reds to dish out 180 million on one ballplayer? Look at what the free agents are getting on the market with the Yankees setting the bar. Do you think the Reds can compete for some of the prime talent? Do you really want to pay 50 million for two years of Manny Ramirez?

You play the hand your dealt with. In defense of the Reds, they are buying Taveras when his stock is at an all-time low. His numbers will probably improve in 2009. There was no secret he was on the outs with manager Clint Hurdle in Colorado. He isn't the greatest leadoff hitter or centerfielder by far but this is the hand the Reds have to play.

He isn't even the best leadoff hitter or CF on the Reds team before he was signed, so why waste the money. You have a younger, better defensively, better at getting on base and better power, and cheaper option already at your disposal.


Better yet, what if the Reds sign both Baldelli and traded for Jermaine Dye. Baldelli would be the fourth outfielder with Dickerson as the fifth outfielder. And suddenly what was a weakness on the roster becomes a strength. Baldelli could back up Taveras in center and still get plenty ABs while slowly increase his playing time as the season goes on.

You see......not everything is raining and gloomy.

Just because we have a lot of crap doesn't make it good. No thanks for Tavares or Dye.

Ltlabner
12-27-2008, 02:06 PM
Seeing a train wreck coming makes it more expected but not any less brutal an experience.

This was a horrible acquisition for a team needing to rip chunks out of its Run Differential gap offensively.

But he's fast man. Fast.

Krusty
12-27-2008, 02:10 PM
He isn't even the best leadoff hitter or CF on the Reds team before he was signed, so why waste the money. You have a younger, better defensively, better at getting on base and better power, and cheaper option already at your disposal.



Just because we have a lot of crap doesn't make it good. No thanks for Tavares or Dye.

Again, you don't see what I'm getting at. There is no way the Reds or pretty much any team can compete with the Yankees for star players when they deal out over $400 million for three ballplayers. And the free agent market isn't that great this year. You acquired a ballplayer that is coming off the worst season of his career. Odds are the numbers will be better than the 2008 season. There is no long term commitment and it buys time for the future centerfielder of the Reds, Stubbs, to develop and not be rushed.

Ltlabner
12-27-2008, 02:12 PM
You acquired a ballplayer that is coming off the worst season of his career. Odds are the numbers will be better than the 2008 season.

Yea. He might improve all the way up to just plain bad.

Krusty
12-27-2008, 02:14 PM
But he's fast man. Fast.


Who said we couldn't acquire fast Willy Mays Hayes from the movie, Major League?

AtomicDumpling
12-27-2008, 02:14 PM
Are the Reds such a pathetic loser of a franchise that we have to grab players cut and released by bad teams and put them in our starting lineup?

Are the Reds (A) a small-market team just barely able to stay afloat in a city that is lucky to even have a team, or are they (B) a medium-market team making $10-20 million in profit every year with an owner that has hundreds of millions of dollars?

Hint: the answer is not (A).

Why are the Reds snapping up rejects and castoffs when there are still top-notch outfielders like Abreu, Ramirez, Dunn, Burrell etc etc etc still available for the taking?

Why don't the fans revolt when we see a team raking in huge profits (and playing in an expensive ballpark for free) while fielding one of the worst teams in the league season after season? We just have a loser mentality in this city.

Rounding Third
12-27-2008, 02:18 PM
Again, you don't see what I'm getting at. There is no way the Reds or pretty much any team can compete with the Yankees for star players when they deal out over $400 million for three ballplayers. And the free agent market isn't that great this year. You acquired a ballplayer that is coming off the worst season of his career. Odds are the numbers will be better than the 2008 season. There is no long term commitment and it buys time for the future centerfielder of the Reds, Stubbs, to develop and not be rushed.

We have a CF right now that could possibly be the CF of the future in Chris Dickerson. Give me Dickerson every day over spending money to sign a worse player in every category, except speed, for 2 years.

Krusty
12-27-2008, 02:19 PM
Are the Reds such a pathetic loser of a franchise that we have to grab players cut and released by bad teams and put them in our starting lineup?

Are the Reds (A) a small-market team just barely able to stay afloat in a city that is lucky to even have a team, or are they (B) a medium-market team making $10-20 million in profit every year with an owner that has hundreds of millions of dollars?

Hint: the answer is not (A).

Why are the Reds snapping up rejects and castoffs when there are still top-notch outfielders like Abreu, Ramirez, Dunn, Burrell etc etc etc still available for the taking?

Why don't the fans revolt when we see a team raking in huge profits (and playing in an expensive ballpark for free) while fielding one of the worst teams in the league season after season? We just have a loser mentality in this city.

The Rockies released Taveras because they didn't want to risk losing in arbitration and have Taveras make more money than he did in the 2008 season. That is the reason why. Makes good business sense. Why pay a guy more for less production the previous year? Add to that, Spilborghs will be their centerfielder with Dexter Fowler their future centerfielder in waiting. Made all the sense in the world to release the guy when they found out that other teams wouldn't give up anything in a trade because they knew the Rockies would eventually release him.

_Sir_Charles_
12-27-2008, 02:19 PM
okay so now we have the following...

1. Willy Taveras
2. Brandon Phillips
3. Joey Votto
4. LF please...
5. Jay Bruce
6. Edwin Encarnacion
7. Ramon Hernandez
8. Alex Gonzalez

Not bad if we can add a solid right handed bat for the 4 slot...

That's pretty close to what I think it'll be, but I think Dickerson grabs the LF spot because I just don't see us pulling a rabbit out of the hat. Edwin'll break up Votto/Bruce.

1: Taveras
2: Dickerson
3: Votto
4: Encarnacion
5: Bruce
6: Phillips
7: Hernandez
8: Gonzales

If Kepp gets the nod at SS due to an AGon injury (not really unexpected)...

1: Taveras
2: Keppinger
3: Votto
4: Encarnacion
5: Bruce
6: Phillips
7: Hernandez
8: Dickerson

Az Red
12-27-2008, 02:19 PM
You see......not everything is raining and gloomy.

By my count, Krusty, 90% of ORG disagrees with you.

This is a small move. Wait for the contract numbers. If this is the ONLY outfielder acquired, big problem. If there is one more coming, I will withhold judgement until then.

Ron Madden
12-27-2008, 02:20 PM
Good God!!!

:angry::bang:

corkedbat
12-27-2008, 02:20 PM
But he's fast man. Fast.


So are Marsupials, but I wouldn't want one leading off. :D

We can always pray that Drew Stubbs has a fast start at Louisville, makes Taveras expendable and Jimbo takes him off our hands by the trade deadline. Oh bother.

AtomicDumpling
12-27-2008, 02:24 PM
The Rockies released Taveras because they didn't want to risk losing in arbitration and have Taveras make more money than he did in the 2008 season. That is the reason why. Makes good business sense. Why pay a guy more for less production the previous year? Add to that, Spilborghs will be their centerfielder with Dexter Fowler their future centerfielder in waiting. Made all the sense in the world to release the guy when they found out that other teams wouldn't give up anything in a trade because they knew the Rockies would eventually release him.

The Rockies released him because he is not a good enough player to make their team. Why risk arbitration with a guy that is not good enough to make your team?

The Reds are taking another bad team's reject and plugging him into the top of the starting lineup. Its a disgrace.:thumbdown

RedsManRick
12-27-2008, 02:24 PM
If praying that Willy Taveras can provide you positive value in CF is your solution the OF, then why spend the extra money on acquiring a one year solution in Ramon Hernandez?

Seriously, if Tavares is the answer, what is the question? The Reds are well on their way to wasting the cheap years of Votto & Bruce, let alone EE. The Reds are fairly well set up to push hard through a 2-3 year window and we're taking baby steps (at best). The window will close before we even get within arms reach.

Krusty
12-27-2008, 02:24 PM
We have a CF right now that could possibly be the CF of the future in Chris Dickerson. Give me Dickerson every day over spending money to sign a worse player in every category, except speed, for 2 years.

And Dickerson had 102 ABs and we are ready to annoint him an everyday position? Heck, he just had a cup of coffee in the majors with that many ABs. The pitchers didn't even had a chance to pitch to him in a second go around and seeing the initial scouting reports.

What happens if Dickerson struggles in spring training? You still want him in LF or CF on Opening Day? If he tears the cover off the ball in spring training, the Reds have depth and given the length of the season they have options if one of the starters goes down.

SteelSD
12-27-2008, 02:25 PM
It depends. It is only a two-year deal. If the Reds are paying more per season than what they paid Corey Patterson, I would be surprised. Plus, it didn't cost any personnel in regards to a trade.

Bringing in bad players isn't good even if they're cheap, just like buying shoes you can't wear isn't a fair deal even if they're 80% off. When you buy something at any price, it's only a good value if you get what you need out of your purchase. The Reds won't get that with Taveras.


Baldelli could back up Taveras in center and still get plenty ABs while slowly increase his playing time as the season goes on.

So the player with a career OPS+ of 102 "backs up" the guy with a career OPS+ of 72? How exactly does a team win ballgames while doing that?

RedsManRick
12-27-2008, 02:26 PM
Anybody have guesses on the $$? I'm going with $6.5M. Patterson all over again (except for the superb defense).

I'm excited to see his PECOTA (and comparing it to Dickerson's...)

Krusty
12-27-2008, 02:27 PM
The Rockies released him because he is not a good enough player to make their team. Why risk arbitration with a guy that is not good enough to make your team?

The Reds are taking another bad team's reject and plugging him into the top of the starting lineup. Its a disgrace.:thumbdown


Dude, the Rockies didn't want to go to arbitration with him. That is why he was non-tendered. Plus, they had cheaper options in Spilborghs and Fowler. It was business.

Always Red
12-27-2008, 02:27 PM
This team does everything it can to try to lose it's fan base, doesn't it?

ugh.

And Dusty will be in love with this guy, raving from now until the end of ST about Willie and his speed.

I'm just kind of speechless.

_Sir_Charles_
12-27-2008, 02:29 PM
Wow, what a depressing lot. Can NOBODY remain optimistic? Last year was Taveras' worst year. A down year. Why can't anybody see him making improvements? He's young, quick, has hit for a decent average normally, is an excellent baserunner. Yes, he has little to no power and he doesn't walk enough. But I don't see a SINGLE player on any team that doesn't have SOME flaws. What I'd prefer to look at are his GOOD aspects. Considering that it's only costing us cash and not prospects and it's only for 2 years, I like this move. I love Dickerson, but he's far from proven. Our other minor league options just simply aren't ready yet. And instead of rushing them, we've now got a stopgap until they are. I forsee a very solid year from Taveras this year....and a second place finish.

icehole3
12-27-2008, 02:29 PM
I dont get all the belly aching and I never will so please spare me all the saber metric stuff, I guess the argument is he doesnt get on base, he cant steal first, OK I get that, I understand that, but after watching 4 or 5 years of trying to slug their ways to wins, why cant people be at least a little patient with the Reds and let them try to win with defense, it won them a title in 1990, matter of fact as I was looking at the old 1990 Reds, I realized Billy Hatcher who's a beloved Reds hero had a .327OBP... "O my gosh!" Could it be you can have a leadoff hitter who has an OBP that low... no way.

Low OBPs that lead their teams to titles, not saying Taveras will do that, can he help lead the Reds to .500 because thats about where the Reds are headed if you wanna be realistic, why not?

2008 Willy Taveras .308

1990 Billy Hatcher .327
1995 Marquis Grissom .317
2001 Tony Womack .307
2002 Darin Erstad .313

http://www.sternfannetwork.com/forum/images/smilies/Sad/cry-baby.gif

Caveat Emperor
12-27-2008, 02:29 PM
I'm done with this team.

Really, if they don't want to win baseball games, why should I spend more than a minute of my time or a dollar of my money supporting them.

AtomicDumpling
12-27-2008, 02:30 PM
This team does everything it can to try to lose it's fan base, doesn't it?

ugh.

And Dusty will be in love with this guy, raving from now until the end of ST about Willie and his speed.

I'm just kind of speechless.

So will Marty.

The guys that love Norris Hopper will love Taveras as well. :rolleyes:

Caveat Emperor
12-27-2008, 02:31 PM
I dont get all the belly aching and I never will so please spare me all the saber metric stuff

That's like saying eating at McDonalds and saying "I don't understand all this belly aching over why the food is so bad, and spare me all the nutritional information."

Krusty
12-27-2008, 02:32 PM
If praying that Willy Taveras can provide you positive value in CF is your solution the OF, then why spend the extra money on acquiring a one year solution in Ramon Hernandez?

Seriously, if Tavares is the answer, what is the question? The Reds are well on their way to wasting the cheap years of Votto & Bruce, let alone EE. The Reds are fairly well set up to push hard through a 2-3 year window and we're taking baby steps (at best). The window will close before we even get within arms reach.

Please.....Votto, Bruce, Encarnacion and Phillips are the core of this club. The Reds will lock up the core to longterm deals. They already have done with Phillips. Hernandez, Rhodes and Taveras are complimentary players on this club. Two years from now they won't be here. There will be others in their place either through the farm system, free agency or trades.

I have never seen how one site over reacts to signing an average major league ballplayer at a two year deal that doesn't financially strap the franchise. Now if the Reds went out and signed Manny Ramirez to a four year deal for 100 million, I can understand the outrage.

WMR
12-27-2008, 02:33 PM
BLEEPING pathetic

WMR
12-27-2008, 02:35 PM
it depends. It is only a two-year deal. If the reds are paying more per season than what they paid corey patterson, i would be surprised. Plus, it didn't cost any personnel in regards to a trade.

As mentioned, i could see the reds signing baldelli and/or still trading for jermaine dye. Either way, the reds aren't in rebuilding mode.

ONLY TWO YEARS??!?!?!?!?!?!??

lmao

Patrick Bateman
12-27-2008, 02:35 PM
If you can name me one free agent outfielder that we could have put in the leadoff spot, let me know. And while everyone is on the Chris Dickerson's band wagon, obviously the Reds front office isn't. And to annoint a player a starting job based on 100 ABs, that is risky IMO.


So you hedge your bets with a career .668 OPS, coming off of a year of .604 OPS?

Okay, so it's not as risky anymore, instead it's just guaranteed suck.

The risk with Dickerson is that he might struggle and be as bad as Taveras. Now we have that in stone. We're supposed to be excited about that?

AtomicDumpling
12-27-2008, 02:35 PM
I dont get all the belly aching and I never will so please spare me all the saber metric stuff, I guess the argument is he doesnt get on base, he cant steal first, OK I get that, I understand that, but after watching 4 or 5 years of trying to slug their ways to wins, why cant people be at least a little patient with the Reds and let them try to win with defense, it won them a title in 1990, matter of fact as I was looking at the old 1990 Reds, I realized Billy Hatcher who's a beloved Reds hero had a .327OBP... "O my gosh!" Could it be you can have a leadoff hitter who has an OBP that low... no way.

Low OBPs that lead their teams to titles, not saying Taveras will do that, can he help lead the Reds to .500 because thats about where the Reds are headed if you wanna be realistic, why not?

2008 Willy Taveras .308

1990 Billy Hatcher .327
1995 Marquis Grissom .317
2001 Tony Womack .307
2002 Darin Erstad .313

http://www.sternfannetwork.com/forum/images/smilies/Sad/cry-baby.gif

Maybe if the Reds had Eric Davis, Barry Larkin, Chris Sabo, Marianno Duncan, Paul O'Neal and other great hitters and fielders surrounding Willy Taveras your argument would be applicable. Keep in mind also that 1990 was a different era when large astroturf fields and smaller players led to much less offense than is required in today's game of baseball.

You simply can't have an out machine at the top of the lineup if you want to score runs these days.

pahster
12-27-2008, 02:36 PM
Unacceptable.

icehole3
12-27-2008, 02:36 PM
That's like saying eating at McDonalds and saying "I don't understand all this belly aching over why the food is so bad, and spare me all the nutritional information."

When you eat at McD's you know going in that youre eating processed poison, who doesnt know that already? So getting Taveras the Reds are saying we're going to try something different, anytime you do that people will jump off the bandwagon and as soon as the first winning streak starts you and I will go "WOW."

_Sir_Charles_
12-27-2008, 02:37 PM
I dont get all the belly aching and I never will so please spare me all the saber metric stuff, I guess the argument is he doesnt get on base, he cant steal first, OK I get that, I understand that, but after watching 4 or 5 years of trying to slug their ways to wins, why cant people be at least a little patient with the Reds and let them try to win with defense, it won them a title in 1990, matter of fact as I was looking at the old 1990 Reds, I realized Billy Hatcher who's a beloved Reds hero had a .327OBP... "O my gosh!" Could it be you can have a leadoff hitter who has an OBP that low... no way.

Low OBPs that lead their teams to titles, not saying Taveras will do that, can he help lead the Reds to .500 because thats about where the Reds are headed if you wanna be realistic, why not?

2008 Willy Taveras .308

1990 Billy Hatcher .327
1995 Marquis Grissom .317
2001 Tony Womack .307
2002 Darin Erstad .313

http://www.sternfannetwork.com/forum/images/smilies/Sad/cry-baby.gif

Thank you. A bit of optimism. I agree that .308 is very poor, but it's also been his worst season to date.

2005: .325
2006: .333
2007: .367

Are any of those great? No, but considering his other attributes, I'd take it for a 2 year FA signing. If he does flame out, it's only cost us cash. But it's still bought us time for the kids to develop on the farm. And the defensive improvement can only bolster the development of our young pitching.

Patrick Bateman
12-27-2008, 02:37 PM
So the player with a career OPS+ of 102 "backs up" the guy with a career OPS+ of 72? How exactly does a team win ballgames while doing that?

Because Wily Taveras has proven he can handle hitting leadoff. If Baldelli tries that his head might explode.

WMR
12-27-2008, 02:37 PM
I dont get all the belly aching and I never will so please spare me all the saber metric stuff, I guess the argument is he doesnt get on base, he cant steal first, OK I get that, I understand that, but after watching 4 or 5 years of trying to slug their ways to wins, why cant people be at least a little patient with the Reds and let them try to win with defense, it won them a title in 1990, matter of fact as I was looking at the old 1990 Reds, I realized Billy Hatcher who's a beloved Reds hero had a .327OBP... "O my gosh!" Could it be you can have a leadoff hitter who has an OBP that low... no way.

Low OBPs that lead their teams to titles, not saying Taveras will do that, can he help lead the Reds to .500 because thats about where the Reds are headed if you wanna be realistic, why not?

2008 Willy Taveras .308

1990 Billy Hatcher .327
1995 Marquis Grissom .317
2001 Tony Womack .307
2002 Darin Erstad .313

http://www.sternfannetwork.com/forum/images/smilies/Sad/cry-baby.gif

:rolleyes:

Caveat Emperor
12-27-2008, 02:38 PM
I have never seen how one site over reacts to signing an average major league ballplayer at a two year deal that doesn't financially strap the franchise.

If you feel Willy Taveras is an "average" major league ballplayer, then the issue is with your ability to evaluate players and not with the reactions of the majority.

And, furthermore, even if we accepted your description of Taveras as such (which I don't for a second), this is a team that finished 100 runs down in the run differential last year AND lost their biggest run producer. They don't need average ballplayers, they need GOOD and GREAT ballplayers if they even want to touch a .500 record in the next decade.

This signing sucks, flat out.

pahster
12-27-2008, 02:38 PM
When you eat at McD's you know going in that youre eating processed poison, who doesnt know that already? So getting Taveras the Reds are saying we're going to try something different, anytime you do that people will jump off the bandwagon and as soon as the first winning streak starts you and I will go "WOW."

How is acquiring a crappy player "trying something different?" Seems awfully familiar to me.

RedEye
12-27-2008, 02:39 PM
When you eat at McD's you know going in that youre eating processed poison, who doesnt know that already? So getting Taveras the Reds are saying we're going to try something different, anytime you do that people will jump off the bandwagon and as soon as the first winning streak starts you and I will go "WOW."

No... the Reds should know that Taveras is the MLB equivalent of McDonald's, but they've fooled themselves into thinking he's Zagat rated somehow. Honestly, I would rather have seen them re-sign Corey Patterson than to sign Willy T. At least Corey plays defense well.

Krusty
12-27-2008, 02:39 PM
So you hedge your bets with a career .668 OPS, coming off of a year of .604 OPS?

Okay, so it's not as risky anymore, instead it's just guaranteed suck.

The risk with Dickerson is that he might struggle and be as bad as Taveras. Now we have that in stone. We're supposed to be excited about that?


Even if Dickerson tears the cover off the ball, this team badly lacked depth in the outfield. They took Freel and Patterson's contracts off the books. Now who the heck would you rather have.......Freel and Patterson for 2009 or a cheaper Dickerson/Taveras?

You put Dickerson out there with Bruce, you still need a third outfielder. And who are the backups? If acquiring Willy Taveras leads to the demise of the Cincinnati Reds, I will be gladly give up my love for baseball.

WMR
12-27-2008, 02:41 PM
LOL Taveras is the MLB equivalent of deliberately living under power lines when cancer already runs in both sides of your family.

WMR
12-27-2008, 02:41 PM
Even if Dickerson tears the cover off the ball, this team badly lacked depth in the outfield. They took Freel and Patterson's contracts off the books. Now who the heck would you rather have.......Freel and Patterson for 2009 or a cheaper Dickerson/Taveras?

You put Dickerson out there with Bruce, you still need a third outfielder. And who are the backups? If acquiring Willy Taveras leads to the demise of the Cincinnati Reds, I will be gladly give up my love for baseball.

woo hoo depth. who cares if the players are garbage, now we have depth

Caveat Emperor
12-27-2008, 02:42 PM
Thank you. A bit of optimism. I agree that .308 is very poor, but it's also been his worst season to date

Maybe if I post this here, someone else will read it.

Credit goes to Raisor (as credit should for all great developments in baseball thought and life):


How about if I can show that 08 was just Willy returning to his norm?

Let me use a slightly different number, RC per 100 PA.

05 11.01 (66.06 per 600 pa)
06 11.11 (66.66 per 600 pa)
07 14.09 (84.54 per 600 pa)
08 10.54 (63.24 per 600 PA)

westofyou
12-27-2008, 02:42 PM
Don Quixote had an easier job than the one Krusty is undertaking, equally fruitless, but easier.

Krusty
12-27-2008, 02:42 PM
If you feel Willy Taveras is an "average" major league ballplayer, then the issue is with your ability to evaluate players and not with the reactions of the majority.

And, furthermore, even if we accepted your description of Taveras as such (which I don't for a second), this is a team that finished 100 runs down in the run differential last year AND lost their biggest run producer. They don't need average ballplayers, they need GOOD and GREAT ballplayers if they even want to touch a .500 record in the next decade.

This signing sucks, flat out.
And who on this website is a great talent evalutor? I know I'm not. And probably the majority on this board. Are you telling me you're better than the baseball scouts that this organization pays a yearly salary? If you think so, I suggest getting away from the computer and start putting your resume together and submit it to the Cincinnati Reds Human Resources Department.

icehole3
12-27-2008, 02:42 PM
Maybe if the Reds had Eric Davis, Barry Larkin, Chris Sabo, Marianno Duncan, Paul O'Neal and other great hitters and fielders surrounding Willy Taveras your argument would be applicable. Keep in mind also that 1990 was a different era when large astroturf fields and smaller players led to much less offense than is required in today's game of baseball.

You simply can't have an out machine at the top of the lineup if you want to score runs these days.

What? So Hatchers outs didnt count? http://www.sternfannetwork.com/forum/images/smilies/Eyes/uh-oh.gif Youre calling those guys great, they were very good but I dont see any HOFs in that group other than Larkin, ED couldnt stay healthy or wouldve maybe made HOF, please dont discount Hatchers outs because theyre already in the books my friend.

guttle11
12-27-2008, 02:43 PM
Lots of drama queens in here. Save us Chris Denorfia, you're our only hope!

How I see it? We now have two guys who can play centerfield, and create with their speed when they get on base (BUT HE NEVER GETS ON BASE!!!11!!oneuno). Defense is looking pretty strong. Could be very strong based on how the SS position sorts itself out.

We also have a young, pretty good rotation, a good young core of hitters, and the makings of a pretty respectable bullpen. We have nice prospects waiting in the wings.

Come off the bridge, folks. It's not that bad.

Ltlabner
12-27-2008, 02:43 PM
Seriously, if Tavares is the answer, what is the question?

How can you make your team worse by giving away 500 PA's to a horrible baseball player?

RedEye
12-27-2008, 02:43 PM
Even if Dickerson tears the cover off the ball, this team badly lacked depth in the outfield. They took Freel and Patterson's contracts off the books. Now who the heck would you rather have.......Freel and Patterson for 2009 or a cheaper Dickerson/Taveras?

You put Dickerson out there with Bruce, you still need a third outfielder. And who are the backups? If acquiring Willy Taveras leads to the demise of the Cincinnati Reds, I will be gladly give up my love for baseball.

I think they'd do better to bring up Stubbs, Dorn, or Frazier a bit early. They'd be cheaper, hit for more power, and probably put up better OBP numbers as well. Willy Taveras adds nothing positive to this roster IMO.

WMR
12-27-2008, 02:44 PM
Lots of drama queens in here. Save us Chris Denorfia, you're our only hope!

How I see it? We now have two guys who can play centerfield, and create with their speed when they get on base (BUT HE NEVER GETS ON BASE!!!11!!oneuno). Defense is looking pretty strong. Could be very strong based on how the SS position sorts itself out.

We also have a young, pretty good rotation, a good young core of hitters, and the makings of a pretty respectable bullpen. We have nice prospects waiting in the wings.

Come off the bridge, folks. It's not that bad.

Except Taveras doesn't even play a good defensive centerfield.

This deal IS that bad.

And what's worse, it states unequivocally, YET AGAIN, that this franchise remains stuck ideologically in the 1960s.

RedEye
12-27-2008, 02:45 PM
How I see it? We now have two guys who can play centerfield, and create with their speed when they get on base (BUT HE NEVER GETS ON BASE!!!11!!oneuno). Defense is looking pretty strong. Could be very strong based on how the SS position sorts itself out.


Not sure if you are pointing out the weakness of your own argument in parentheses there... but you are right, HE NEVER GETS ON BASE. Speed cannot "create" anything unless it avoids outs.

Ltlabner
12-27-2008, 02:45 PM
Wow, what a depressing lot. Can NOBODY remain optimistic? Last year was Taveras' worst year. A down year. Why can't anybody see him making improvements?

The numbers have been posted time and time again. Even his "good" years are bad.

He's never scored more runs than an average Center Fielder. Never.

Jpup
12-27-2008, 02:46 PM
I'm glad the Yankees are my 2nd team. Walt Jocketty, more of the same.

Raisor
12-27-2008, 02:46 PM
Maybe if I post this here, someone else will read it.

Credit goes to Raisor (as credit should for all great developments in baseball thought and life):


Thanks for saving me the energy. I'm going to guess it gets ignored like the 15 other times I posted it.

Don't blame me, I voted for DePo.

Roy Tucker
12-27-2008, 02:46 PM
Oi vey.

I really wish they hadn't signed a 2 yr. deal. I can't imagine the market was hot for Taveras. He will get tons of playing time and will be given a lot of opportunity to prove himself. This just has Corey Patterson v2.0 written all over it.

So, I'm putting on my rose colored glasses and hoping against hope he does well. Maybe he'll find his 2007 stroke. Maybe he'll steal a lot of bases to make up for zero power. Maybe he'll play decent defense. Maybe pigs will fly.

Bah.

Krusty
12-27-2008, 02:47 PM
Don Quixote had an easier job than the one Krusty is undertaking, equally fruitless, but easier.

I'm just killing the time till the NFL games start tomorrow.

You know they don't call it the Hot Stove League for nothing. I'm just throwing the logs on the fire and stove is real hot right now.

RedEye
12-27-2008, 02:48 PM
No financial terms for the contract yet, right? Here's hoping it is no more than $1 million per year...

Always Red
12-27-2008, 02:49 PM
Because Wily Taveras has proven he can handle hitting leadoff. If Baldelli tries that his head might explode.

His mitochondria can't handle it.

Krusty
12-27-2008, 02:49 PM
I think they'd do better to bring up Stubbs, Dorn, or Frazier a bit early. They'd be cheaper, hit for more power, and probably put up better OBP numbers as well. Willy Taveras adds nothing positive to this roster IMO.

That's a real good idea.....rush the prospects and have baptism by fire.

icehole3
12-27-2008, 02:50 PM
I think they'd do better to bring up Stubbs, Dorn, or Frazier a bit early. They'd be cheaper, hit for more power, and probably put up better OBP numbers as well. Willy Taveras adds nothing positive to this roster IMO.

Then you'd complain that the Reds dont develop players if Stubbs came up and hit .110, obviously they conferred with their top player personnel folks and they all agreed Stubbs needs AAA time because he's not ready.

pahster
12-27-2008, 02:50 PM
No financial terms for the contract yet, right? Here's hoping it is no more than $1 million per year...

That would certainly make it slightly more palatable. Those kind of contracts are relatively easy to eat (which I'm sure the Reds will have to do at some point regardless of how much Taveras is being paid).

Raisor
12-27-2008, 02:50 PM
That's a real good idea.....rush the prospects and have baptism by fire.

Challange thy hitters especially instead of bringing in Willy T.

SteelSD
12-27-2008, 02:51 PM
How is acquiring a crappy player "trying something different?" Seems awfully familiar to me.

It's just a different verse of the same tired song.

And just so everyone knows what we're looking at, over his career Taveras has been worth -49.1 Runs Above Position and -13.59 RAP per 600 PA. To put that in perspective, since 2005 there have only been six 500+ PA non-Taveras seasons put up in CF with a RAP value more negative than -13.59 RAP. Generally, when a player stinks that badly offensively, they don't get a chance to put up that many PA.

IslandRed
12-27-2008, 02:52 PM
You see......not everything is raining and gloomy.


By my count, Krusty, 90% of ORG disagrees with you.

Well, I'm one of the 90% that doesn't like Tavares, but let's be honest here... if we're in the World Series three years from now, somewhere between 50% and 90% of the ORG will have spent the whole three years griping because it wasn't being done the way we think it should have been done. :p:

guttle11
12-27-2008, 02:52 PM
Not sure if you are pointing out the weakness of your own argument in parentheses there... but you are right, HE NEVER GETS ON BASE. Speed cannot "create" anything unless it avoids outs.

I think batting him leadoff is a mistake, but signing him alone is not that big of a deal. After all, the Rockies did make it to a World Series with the mountain of suck known as Wily Taveras in CF. This is a depth signing, one that shouldn't be a big deal to either side. Ho hum, Taveras is now a cog in the wheel.

I'm not thrilled with Taveras, but I'm not going to proclaim it a horrible move and making ridiculous threats of ending my fandom over it. The value of this deal is minimal either way. A little CF depth never hurt anyone, and if Taveras came on the cheap, then the move makes a bit of sense. The Reds will pass or fail this offseason based on the SS and LF spots, IMO.

Patrick Bateman
12-27-2008, 02:52 PM
Even if Dickerson tears the cover off the ball, this team badly lacked depth in the outfield. They took Freel and Patterson's contracts off the books. Now who the heck would you rather have.......Freel and Patterson for 2009 or a cheaper Dickerson/Taveras?

I was more than willing to give Dickerson the reigns as the primary starter in CF against righties. He can field and has good platoon splits. I was looking for the Reds to find a lefty hitting specialist. A guy like Baldelli would make for a formadable platoon and not break the bank. Bringing in Taveras on a 1 year deal to be a 5/6th OF wouldn't be a bad idea, but from the sounds of it, Taveras is going to be a key component of our 2008 CF. That's not acceptable when more ideal candidates were available without breaking the bank, especially when considering that I think there's a pretty good chance that Taveras cuts into the at-bats that Dickerson is likely to be superior in.



You put Dickerson out there with Bruce, you still need a third outfielder. And who are the backups?

This is the argument you should be using if I were suggesting the Reds sign no outfielders. I am arguing that Willy Taveras is a clear cut back-up OF'der that should be signed only to a 1 year deal, and only as a clear cut back-up.


If acquiring Willy Taveras leads to the demise of the Cincinnati Reds, I will be gladly give up my love for baseball.

No single player can lead to the demise of a team. You could theoretically use that argument to bac the signing of any player. But this team needed heavy improvements in numerous areas. They did not get that here, and if anything, actually managed to downgrade in a very thin position. This is one more position where we did not improve, and thus, incredible imporvements need to be made at the other holes for this team to sniff success.

Caveat Emperor
12-27-2008, 02:53 PM
Come off the bridge, folks. It's not that bad.

Tell me how it's not that bad?

This is a team that fell 100 runs short in the run differential last season AND lost it's biggest run producer.

This is a team in desperate need of good players, and they just signed one that could only be generously described as well below average.

icehole3
12-27-2008, 02:53 PM
I'm just killing the time till the NFL games start tomorrow.

You know they don't call it the Hot Stove League for nothing. I'm just throwing the logs on the fire and stove is real hot right now.

Dont worry Krusty

http://www.darkhorizons.com/news08/clonewars.jpg

Raisor
12-27-2008, 02:54 PM
"Walt, you have a visitor in the lobby".


http://www.gamerevolution.com/images/misc/galactus.jpg

_Sir_Charles_
12-27-2008, 02:54 PM
Maybe if I post this here, someone else will read it.

Credit goes to Raisor (as credit should for all great developments in baseball thought and life):

I wasn't saying that Taveras is a great player, or that he's the answer to our problems. But a career best year followed by a career worst year will tend to cause people here to exaggerate his flaws IMO. I'm not going to get into a debate about the numbers because I simply don't know enough about the saberstats as everyone else here. But this is a signing to improve the depth of the team that is drastically short on outfielders. This is a signing to give our young players time to develop. This is a signing to improve our outfield defense and team speed/baserunning, 2 areas that were so far beyond pathetic last year that I'm amazed it hasn't been focused on more.

Everyone seems to want us to replace the run production lost by Dunn leaving. I get that. But what I don't think everyone else gets is that Jocketty isn't looking to replace that. He's wanting to change the formula. Instead of increasing our run production, how about lowering the number of runs allowed instead? Increased defense alone will improve the results of our pitching staff. You can win with small ball if you've got great pitching. That's a given. But can we play effective small ball? That remains to be seen. But adding speed and defense is certainly a step in that direction wouldn't you agree?

Everyone seems to be griping that this is like some devastating move to the franchise and I just don't get that. We didn't lose anything with this signing. We didn't have a leadoff man, we didn't have enough OF'ers, and we didn't have a serious SB threat. Now we do and it didn't cost us anything other than some dough. Would I have preferred a BETTER player? Sure, but he is NOT Patterson. (this wasn't aimed at you...just ranting in general)

Krusty
12-27-2008, 02:57 PM
I got to run. Like I said I never seen such over-reaction to a free agent signing for a ballplayer that won't be here two years from now. But I have come to the conclusion on this site, no matter the name you throw out there; the trade proposal you post; or the free agent signing or trade the Reds make, it will never be right. Posters will find a reason not to like the acquisition before accepting it.

See eight years of losing does that to a fan base. Everything is negative. Instead of looking at the positives, it is easier to look at the negatives because it is easier to point the finger at a team's futility. There was a reason why Walt Jocketty was put in charge. His track record speaks for itself. I will give the man the benefit of doubt. Why? Because you hope one day things finally turns around.

Raisor
12-27-2008, 02:58 PM
But what I don't think everyone else gets is that Jocketty isn't looking to replace that. He's wanting to change the formula. Instead of increasing our run production, how about lowering the number of runs allowed instead? Increased defense alone will improve the results of our pitching staff. You can win with small ball if you've got great pitching.


If the Reds can somehow equal their Runs Scored from last year (and I don't think that's close to a given, but let's just hope) they would have to give up 200 less runs then last year to make the playoffs.
Be somewhere in the 590-600 RA area.

Yeah, I don't see that happening either.

dougdirt
12-27-2008, 02:58 PM
I wasn't saying that Taveras is a great player, or that he's the answer to our problems. But a career best year followed by a career worst year will tend to cause people here to exaggerate his flaws IMO. I'm not going to get into a debate about the numbers because I simply don't know enough about the saberstats as everyone else here. But this is a signing to improve the depth of the team that is drastically short on outfielders. This is a signing to give our young players time to develop. This is a signing to improve our outfield defense and team speed/baserunning, 2 areas that were so far beyond pathetic last year that I'm amazed it hasn't been focused on more.

Everyone seems to want us to replace the run production lost by Dunn leaving. I get that. But what I don't think everyone else gets is that Jocketty isn't looking to replace that. He's wanting to change the formula. Instead of increasing our run production, how about lowering the number of runs allowed instead? Increased defense alone will improve the results of our pitching staff. You can win with small ball if you've got great pitching. That's a given. But can we play effective small ball? That remains to be seen. But adding speed and defense is certainly a step in that direction wouldn't you agree?

Everyone seems to be griping that this is like some devastating move to the franchise and I just don't get that. We didn't lose anything with this signing. We didn't have a leadoff man, we didn't have enough OF'ers, and we didn't have a serious SB threat. Now we do and it didn't cost us anything other than some dough. Would I have preferred a BETTER player? Sure, but he is NOT Patterson. (this wasn't aimed at you...just ranting in general)

Patterson has a better career OPS+ than Taveras and its not all that close.

As for Taveras coming off his career worst with his career best before comment.... the problem is his career best still didn't make him an average major league center fielder. We just gave a 2 year deal to a guy whose career best year made him slightly below average at the second weakest hitting position on the field.

The_jbh
12-27-2008, 02:58 PM
I really don't have a major problem with the signing, unless we go with a starting OF of Dickerson Taveras and Bruce.... I don't think Walt is anywhere near done.

I think its a good deal if we plan on platooning Taveras and Dickerson. Dickerson struggles to stay healthy and is streaky... I think it would be good to have him only play against righties.


I think the major problem with this board's response is everyone has too big of a "pitched tent" for Chris Dickerson. He will be on the squad and will have the opportunity to play himself into the line up... but lets be honest here... hes a at best major league average OF... We've only seen him in limited time and I personally would have a major problem writing his name into the line up with a pen. He is just not someone I push all in on.

I see Taveras and Dickerson as the 3rd/4th OFs with another big deal for a LF.

icehole3
12-27-2008, 02:58 PM
Everyone seems to be griping that this is like some devastating move to the franchise and I just don't get that. We didn't lose anything with this signing. We didn't have a leadoff man, we didn't have enough OF'ers, and we didn't have a serious SB threat. Now we do and it didn't cost us anything other than some dough. Would I have preferred a BETTER player? Sure, but he is NOT Patterson. (this wasn't aimed at you...just ranting in general)


Thats basically my point, they seem to think Taveras has moved in with Dusty's daughter. They needed OFs and it beats rushing guys thru the system.

Always Red
12-27-2008, 03:00 PM
Tell me how it's not that bad?

This is a team that fell 100 runs short in the run differential last season AND lost it's biggest run producer.

This is a team in desperate need of good players, and they just signed one that could only be generously described as well below average.

This simple math above explains it all.

I'm not jumping off a bridge, but I am definitely not excited by this signing. The only good thing is that it cost the Reds nary a player in return.

Unless a big bat is added in LF (and I doubt it will at this point), this team is left with a lot of "hoping" in order to improve in 2009. As in hoping that Cueto progresses, Volquez repeats his fine year, and Harang returns to 2007 form. Hoping that Edwin continues to improve with the bat and has learned how to play 3B in the offseason. Hoping that Gonzalez is finally healthy, physically and emotionally. Hoping that Taveras returns to his 2007 numbers. Hoping the bullpen.... that's a lot of hope. :(

Good thing that hope springs eternal! :thumbup:

guttle11
12-27-2008, 03:00 PM
Tell me how it's not that bad?

This is a team that fell 100 runs short in the run differential last season AND lost it's biggest run producer.

This is a team in desperate need of good players, and they just signed one that could only be generously described as well below average.

And that keeps them from acquiring those good players how exactly?

The answer is that it doesn't. There are still options in LF, and options for the SS positions. They still have pieces to work a trade if they so choose. That will determine the Reds offseason, not signing a guy for a likely platoon in CF.

NC Reds
12-27-2008, 03:00 PM
Lather, rinse, repeat.

More AB's wasted at the top of the order. I can't wait to hear Dusty tout his speed.

icehole3
12-27-2008, 03:02 PM
Patterson has a better career OPS+ than Taveras and its not all that close.

As for Taveras coming off his career worst with his career best before comment.... the problem is his career best still didn't make him an average major league center fielder. We just gave a 2 year deal to a guy whose career best year made him slightly below average at the second weakest hitting position on the field.


Doug, youre well respected in my book, whats the difference between Taveras and Freel, if it's huge then I understand the belly ache, if not then its replacing Freel with Taveras in my book.

Raisor
12-27-2008, 03:02 PM
That will determine the Reds offseason, not signing a guy for a likely platoon in CF.
A) Can you point me to anything that says that Willy T will be a platoon player?

b) he doesn't have any kind of platoon split, he's equally horrible against both RHP and LHP.

Jpup
12-27-2008, 03:02 PM
Doug, youre well respected in my book, whats the difference between Taveras and Freel, if it's huge then I understand the belly ache, if not then its replacing Freel with Taveras in my book.

Freel got on base at a decent clip. You ever think that you might be wrong?

pahster
12-27-2008, 03:03 PM
Lather, rinse, repeat.

More AB's wasted at the top of the order. I can't wait to hear Dusty tout his speed.

He's no base clogger, dude.

icehole3
12-27-2008, 03:04 PM
This simple math above explains it all.

I'm not jumping off a bridge, but I am definitely not excited by this signing. The only good thing is that it cost the Reds nary a player in return.

Unless a big bat is added in LF (and I doubt it will at this point), this team is left with a lot of "hoping" in order to improve in 2009. As in hoping that Cueto progresses, Volquez repeats his fine year, and Harang returns to 2007 form. Hoping that Edwin continues to improve with the bat and has learned how to play 3B in the offseason. Hoping that Gonzalez is finally healthy, physically and emotionally. Hoping that Taveras returns to his 2007 numbers. Hoping the bullpen.... that's a lot of hope. :(

Good thing that hope springs eternal! :thumbup:

You thought we we're going to compete with the Yankees, did ya?

Krusty
12-27-2008, 03:04 PM
I wasn't saying that Taveras is a great player, or that he's the answer to our problems. But a career best year followed by a career worst year will tend to cause people here to exaggerate his flaws IMO. I'm not going to get into a debate about the numbers because I simply don't know enough about the saberstats as everyone else here. But this is a signing to improve the depth of the team that is drastically short on outfielders. This is a signing to give our young players time to develop. This is a signing to improve our outfield defense and team speed/baserunning, 2 areas that were so far beyond pathetic last year that I'm amazed it hasn't been focused on more.

Everyone seems to want us to replace the run production lost by Dunn leaving. I get that. But what I don't think everyone else gets is that Jocketty isn't looking to replace that. He's wanting to change the formula. Instead of increasing our run production, how about lowering the number of runs allowed instead? Increased defense alone will improve the results of our pitching staff. You can win with small ball if you've got great pitching. That's a given. But can we play effective small ball? That remains to be seen. But adding speed and defense is certainly a step in that direction wouldn't you agree?

Everyone seems to be griping that this is like some devastating move to the franchise and I just don't get that. We didn't lose anything with this signing. We didn't have a leadoff man, we didn't have enough OF'ers, and we didn't have a serious SB threat. Now we do and it didn't cost us anything other than some dough. Would I have preferred a BETTER player? Sure, but he is NOT Patterson. (this wasn't aimed at you...just ranting in general)

Amen brother. I couldn't have said it or posted any better.

_Sir_Charles_
12-27-2008, 03:04 PM
The numbers have been posted time and time again. Even his "good" years are bad.

He's never scored more runs than an average Center Fielder. Never.

Okay, but what center fielder on the Reds HAS? What FA out there with a shot of signing with us HAS? The list is pretty short.

And the amount of runs he scores is not wholly dependant upon him. There are others on the team. I'm not very familiar with Colorado, but his years in Houston...he was surrounded by Berkman and a bunch of blackholes at the plate. I fully believe that if he performed exactly as he did in his stint in Houston...he'll be considerably more productive in OUR lineup due to the players surrounding him.

Always Red
12-27-2008, 03:05 PM
You thought we we're going to compete with the Yankees, did ya?

Tough enough competing with the Cubs $

Raisor
12-27-2008, 03:05 PM
Doug, youre well respected in my book, whats the difference between Taveras and Freel, if it's huge then I understand the belly ache, if not then its replacing Freel with Taveras in my book.

Career OPS+

Freel 91

Willy T 72

BCubb2003
12-27-2008, 03:05 PM
There's definitely a school of thought at work here, that goes against the RedsZone grain, for the most part. So here are the questions I'd like to see asked and answered, by the media and Reds minds, to dig a little deeper behind the "speedy leadoff guy" stereotype:

1. Defense up the middle is important, especially in centerfield, so how does Taveras' defense rate: Excellent, above average, slightly above average, or overrated because of his speed and lack of offense?

2. Taveras' speed is highly touted, but there's this old school idea that "you can't steal first." Does Taveras get on base often enough for his speed to make a difference?

3. How would a scouting report compare Taveras with Dickerson and Patterson on offensive and defensive skills?

4. If Taveras is closer to Corey Patterson than Mike Cameron, will there be enough offense on the corners to make up for the light-hitting supposedly decent defense up the middle?

icehole3
12-27-2008, 03:05 PM
Freel got on base at a decent clip. You ever think that you might be wrong?

Dang, I didnt know Freel was so valuable, good gawd

Jpup
12-27-2008, 03:06 PM
Dang, I didnt know Freel was so valuable, good gawd

What does that supposed to mean?

I'll ask again. Is it possible that you are wrong?

TRF
12-27-2008, 03:06 PM
Even if Dickerson tears the cover off the ball, this team badly lacked depth in the outfield. They took Freel and Patterson's contracts off the books. Now who the heck would you rather have.......Freel and Patterson for 2009 or a cheaper Dickerson/Taveras?

You put Dickerson out there with Bruce, you still need a third outfielder. And who are the backups? If acquiring Willy Taveras leads to the demise of the Cincinnati Reds, I will be gladly give up my love for baseball.

Time to break out my Cubs/Nats hats.

Honestly? I'd rather have Freel/Patterson. Freel>Taveras. easily. Patterson likely has more power than Dickerson, but is Taveras-like in getting on base. Dickerson/Patterson is nearly a wash defensively, Freel/Taveras the same.

Actually it's the same damn thing. Hell at least the Nats are interesting.

dougdirt
12-27-2008, 03:06 PM
Doug, youre well respected in my book, whats the difference between Taveras and Freel, if it's huge then I understand the belly ache, if not then its replacing Freel with Taveras in my book.

Ryan Freel is an average center fielder when healthy. Willy Taveras is a well below average center fielder all the time.

The other difference is, Freel was a backup. Taveras is going to start EVERY day.

SteelSD
12-27-2008, 03:07 PM
Freel got on base at a decent clip. You ever think that you might be wrong?

Ryan Freel: +91 Adjusted OPS+
Willy Taveras: +72 Adjusted OPS+
Juan Castro: +56 Adjusted OPS+

When you're closer to Juan Castro than you are Ryan Freel, you're not good.

Caveat Emperor
12-27-2008, 03:08 PM
This is a signing to improve our outfield defense and team speed/baserunning, 2 areas that were so far beyond pathetic last year that I'm amazed it hasn't been focused on more.

Except it's been shown that he really isn't going to improve the defense -- especially not from what Corey Patterson provided last year (despite his glaring deficiencies at the plate, he was a plus defender in CF).

And, the Cubs stole 2 more bases than the Reds did last year. So, explain to me how stolen bases / baserunning was really the dealbreaker in the NL Central


We didn't lose anything with this signing. We didn't have a leadoff man, we didn't have enough OF'ers, and we didn't have a serious SB threat. Now we do and it didn't cost us anything other than some dough. Would I have preferred a BETTER player? Sure, but he is NOT Patterson. (this wasn't aimed at you...just ranting in general)

We didn't get anything either -- we still don't have a leadoff man, and our "SB threat" doesn't get on base enough to really give the opposition pause for concern more than 1 time per game. I suppose yes, he is an outfielder and the team does need more outfielders, but he isn't being brought in for depth -- he is being brought in to start and play everyday.

He also costs the team money, and PAs that could be given to better players.

Facts are facts -- the Reds signed a bad player and will give him enough playing time to remind us all why he was dropped unceremoniously from Colorado and why the market for him (outside of Cincinnati) was lukewarm at best.

Ltlabner
12-27-2008, 03:08 PM
I fully believe that if he performed exactly as he did in his stint in Houston...he'll be considerably more productive in OUR lineup due to the players surrounding him.

IIRC Colorado went to the World Series while Willy T was on the team. So was he surrounded by stiffs there too?

Yes, runs are dependent on your teammates, but you have to get on-base in order to score those runs. Additionally, once you are on-base you have to avoid running yourself into an out. With the exception of one year Willy T has never been an exceptional base-runner. So he doesn't get on-much and his much vaunted speed doesn't do much to enhance his value.

Ultimately he could be surrounded by the Big Red Machine. Doesn't change the fact that he individually is a bad player.

Raisor
12-27-2008, 03:10 PM
Ryan Freel: +91 Adjusted OPS+
Willy Taveras: +72 Adjusted OPS+
Juan Castro: +56 Adjusted OPS+

When you're closer to Juan Castro than you are Ryan Freel, you're not good.

As bad as Castro was, he never came close to getting 650 PA's at one time for the Reds. Most he ever stunk up the place was for 350 PA's.

Willy T might get 700.

TRF
12-27-2008, 03:10 PM
Amen brother. I couldn't have said it or posted any better.

It was a career best year followed by a return to career norms.


That's the problem.

_Sir_Charles_
12-27-2008, 03:10 PM
If the Reds can somehow equal their Runs Scored from last year (and I don't think that's close to a given, but let's just hope) they would have to give up 200 less runs then last year to make the playoffs.
Be somewhere in the 590-600 RA area.

Yeah, I don't see that happening either.

Okay, and neither do I. I don't see us making the playoffs this year. But I also don't see any CF signing that WOULD put us there, do YOU? I can see us surpassing our Runs Scored from last year...yes, even without Dunn. And with an improved defense and a more experienced staff I can see us improving substantially upon our runs allowed. I'm not forcasting a full-scale turnaround....just improvement.

RedsManRick
12-27-2008, 03:11 PM
Low OBPs that lead their teams to titles, not saying Taveras will do that, can he help lead the Reds to .500 because thats about where the Reds are headed if you wanna be realistic, why not?

2008 Willy Taveras .308

1990 Billy Hatcher .327
1995 Marquis Grissom .317
2001 Tony Womack .307
2002 Darin Erstad .313

http://www.sternfannetwork.com/forum/images/smilies/Sad/cry-baby.gif

Being on a team that wins and leading that team to victory are two very different things. Being a poor player on a great team doesn't make you any better a player.

Taveras might be a positive contributor for the next two years; it's a distinct possibility. But he may also produce negative value; also a distinct possibility. There's just no reason to acquire players who have low upsides and very low downsides.

Sure, I'm glad it didn't cost us a prospect. But the bigger issue is that in the event Taveras goes Patterson on us and fails to deliver his upside, we don't have a manager likely to utilize him accordingly. He'll suck up a ton of PA while doing worse than a cheap replacement.

I hope he starts bunting up a storm and putting up his infield single driven .360 OBP again. Because that's the only way he produces positive value. And if he doesn't do it while continuing to sit at the top of the lineup, scoring enough runs to be competitive is going to be virtually impossible.

icehole3
12-27-2008, 03:11 PM
What does that supposed to mean?

I'll ask again. Is it possible that you are wrong?

Is it possible you are wrong? It isnt got nothing to do with who's right or who's wrong... guys who crunch the numbers always think theyre right and guys who like to give the team fair shake think theyre right as well. We will find out together then at the end of the year we're still looking at a team thats around .500. Give me a break.

Jpup
12-27-2008, 03:12 PM
Is it possible you are wrong? It isnt got nothing to do with who's right or who's wrong... guys who crunch the numbers always think theyre right and guys who like to give the team fair shake think theyre right as well. We will find out together then at the end of the year we're still looking at a team thats around .500. Give me a break.

Sure, it's possible, but there is a mountain of evidence to suggest otherwise. You never did answer the question, so I'll take that to mean that you could not possibly be wrong.

Ltlabner
12-27-2008, 03:13 PM
1. Defense up the middle is important, especially in centerfield, so how does Taveras' defense rate: Excellent, above average, slightly above average, or overrated because of his speed and lack of offense?

Generally regarded as an average defender. Middle of the road.


2. Taveras' speed is highly touted, but there's this old school idea that "you can't steal first." Does Taveras get on base often enough for his speed to make a difference?

His SB% has hovered near 75% for three out of 4 years. 75% is generally regarded as the minimum acceptable rate. His EqA, a measure of his production including base running, has once only reached above .260. 260 EqA is considered average.

No. His speed does not offset his low OBP. In fact, it only make him less valuable because the few times he does get on base he runs himself into more outs.


4. If Taveras is closer to Corey Patterson than Mike Cameron, will there be enough offense on the corners to make up for the light-hitting supposedly decent defense up the middle?

Misses the point.

The Reds need additional offense. They can't afford to be carrying a player right now (especially since SS is likely to be another black-hole on the team).

guttle11
12-27-2008, 03:15 PM
A) Can you point me to anything that says that Willy T will be a platoon player?

b) he doesn't have any kind of platoon split, he's equally horrible against both RHP and LHP.

Dickerson against RH pitching last year: .309/.411/.654

I'm not praising the deal, I'm just trying to get the metaphorical guns out of everyone's hand. It's really not a big deal. People just love to overreact.

Caveat Emperor
12-27-2008, 03:16 PM
And that keeps them from acquiring those good players how exactly?

The answer is that it doesn't. There are still options in LF, and options for the SS positions. They still have pieces to work a trade if they so choose. That will determine the Reds offseason, not signing a guy for a likely platoon in CF.

The Reds could have made the decision to bring in a RF w/ pop and a LF w/ pop to play on either side of Jay Bruce in CF (while he's still young enough to man the position, defensively).

Instead, they brought in a judy-hitting CF w/o plus-defense skills (again, unlike the defense Patterson played last year), which now necessitates Bruce going to RF. Their options for bringing run producers to the ballclub now will either have to come in LF or SS. Last I looked, there weren't any run producing SS available via Free Agency -- and it'll cost more than the Reds have on the farm (likely) to bring one in via trade. So really, that means the only option left is to bring in a big LF bat....

...Which will put the Reds right back where they started last season before they traded Adam Dunn. And, that's assuming they get a LF bat that is as productive as Dunn was.

So, please, explain to me how this doesn't redefine "spinning one's wheels?"

icehole3
12-27-2008, 03:19 PM
Sure, it's possible, but there is a mountain of evidence to suggest otherwise. You never did answer the question, so I'll take that to mean that you could not possibly be wrong.

You dont know me. I'll admit when Im wrong. All I said is there's nothing to be wrong about at this point. I said Dunn will get signed for less than 10 million a year and if Im wrong I'll eat BBQed crow if thats what you want... you dont know me guy. I cant believe this place, guys here hated Patterson now they want him instead of Taveras. Give the dude a chance at least before you hate a person.

Raisor
12-27-2008, 03:20 PM
Dickerson against RH pitching last year: .309/.411/.654

and .286/.423/.429 vs LHP

Willy T isn't the answer to any question involving platooning/splits.




I'm not praising the deal, I'm just trying to get the metaphorical guns out of everyone's hand. It's really not a big deal. People just love to overreact.

When you're going to give 650-700 PA's (x2 years) to a stiff like Willy T, yeah, it's a big deal.

_Sir_Charles_
12-27-2008, 03:21 PM
Patterson has a better career OPS+ than Taveras and its not all that close.

As for Taveras coming off his career worst with his career best before comment.... the problem is his career best still didn't make him an average major league center fielder. We just gave a 2 year deal to a guy whose career best year made him slightly below average at the second weakest hitting position on the field.

I don't argue that. There are lots of players who have an OPS better than Taveras. There are also lots of players who play better defense than he does. And a VAST majority of those players are already inked with clubs or are overpriced or aren't interested in short term deals. OPS is a stat that directly points to the two biggest weaknesses of Taveras' game. He doesn't walk and he doesn't hit for power. Two flaws. Hmmm...I seem to recall a player who's looked upon as a near god on this site who had a few flaws too. Tons of K's, porous defense, can't hit for average...hmmm, who could THAT have been? Nobody's saying that this signing is going to change the future of the club. It's a short term FA signing. It gives us depth at a position we're desperately short at right now. And it's also a position that is very weak in the market right now.

Willie Bloomquist
Jim Edmonds
Gabe Kapler
Mark Kotsay
Scott Posednik

Not alot to choose from there. I'd rather take the shot on the 26 year old kid with lightning bolts for legs.

SteelSD
12-27-2008, 03:21 PM
As bad as Castro was, he never came close to getting 650 PA's at one time for the Reds. Most he ever stunk up the place was for 350 PA's.

Willy T might get 700.

If that happens, I'd expect a negative RAP near or slightly worse than -20. There's virtually no chance that Taveras will be able to repeat his 2007 BABIP (.371). Without that, 700 PA projects to -18.81 over his career and should he repeat 2008 it's -24.98. Basically, if he plays that much he'll do just about as much damage as Corey Patterson did in limited PT. When factoring in defense, it's probably a little worse.

I don't really think folks understand how bad this could get.

Spring~Fields
12-27-2008, 03:22 PM
I see the old boys budget network has struck again, all hale the budget. :notworthy

We use to have two baseball stars and no supporting cast, now we have what might someday be two baseball stars, and no supporting cast.


Willy Taveras .251 .308 .296 .604

vs. Left .266 .321 .313 .634
vs. Right .245 .303 .291 .594

3 Year Splits
vs. Left .290 .345 .352 .697
vs. Right .277 .330 .330 .660

Can this guy hit either handed pitching, I don't see it.

Raisor
12-27-2008, 03:22 PM
. I cant believe this place, guys here hated Patterson now they want him instead of Taveras. Give the dude a chance at least before you hate a person.
That's because, as bad as CP has been, Willy T has actually been WORSE.

That's right, the Reds found one of the only guys playing professional ball worse then CP. And they gave him a two year deal.

SteelSD
12-27-2008, 03:27 PM
OPS is a stat that directly points to the two biggest weaknesses of Taveras' game. He doesn't walk and he doesn't hit for power. Two flaws.

Dude, those two flaws? A players two primary offensive functions are to avoid outs (OBP) and acquire as many bases as possible while avoiding outs (SLG).

When your "two flaws" are that you stink at doing both of your main jobs? Well, running fast isn't going to make you an acceptable baseball player.

icehole3
12-27-2008, 03:27 PM
I just read the Reds press release and no where does it say he's going to get all the at bats in CF, he's just added to the mix, if he gets 700 at bats Im right there with you stat guys.

TRF
12-27-2008, 03:30 PM
You dont know me. I'll admit when Im wrong. All I said is there's nothing to be wrong about at this point. I said Dunn will get signed for less than 10 million a year and if Im wrong I'll eat BBQed crow if thats what you want... you dont know me guy. I cant believe this place, guys here hated Patterson now they want him instead of Taveras. Give the dude a chance at least before you hate a person.

We don't hate the player, just his game.

Patterson had power potential and plus defense.

Taveras has... speed.

While we are all blowing up over this, lets examine Taveras carefully.


He's a below average defender based on most modern defensive metrics.
He's a below average hitter in the power department.
He's below average at getting on base.
Except for his career year, he's about a .270 hitter that makes an out 70% of the time.
he's got a what, 75% career SB%? meh. His SB% did spike upward last year, making it an abnormality.

oh yeah... this is a great signing. I'm just glad there isn't a player option for a third year.

ochre
12-27-2008, 03:30 PM
Don Quixote had an easier job than the one Krusty is undertaking, equally fruitless, but easier.
I don't know. Windmills = alternative energy. Two year contracts to marginal/bad players = alternative GMing. Don Krusty may just be centuries ahead of us all... :)

Maybe Walt's found the market imbalance (bad players are undervalued) before BillyB this time!

Raisor
12-27-2008, 03:30 PM
I just read the Reds press release and no where does it say he's going to get all the at bats in CF, he's just added to the mix, if he gets 700 at bats Im right there with you stat guys.

I don't know, seems pretty clear cut to me






"Willy Taveras fills two significant needs for our ball club, a speed base stealing threat at the top of the order and superior defense in center field," said Jockettty.

mth123
12-27-2008, 03:31 PM
The Reds already have a guy who can do what Tavaras can do. His name is Norris Hopper. For the record, I think Hopper is a AAA player or last man on the bench. Signing Tavaras doesn't add anything. It simply pushes an interchangeable guy off the roster, costs money and locks us into whatever ABs Dusty will waste on the guy.

Corey Patterson was a superior defender, had more power, had similar speed and on base ability. If you thought last year was bad, wait until you get a load of the next two years with Taveras out there. Here is hoping that Taveras can replicate 2007, but don't hold your breath.

This does solve the LH bench bat problem. It appears that Mr. Dickerson will be filling that role.

The only way to recover from this would be to sign Manny for LF.

SteelSD
12-27-2008, 03:31 PM
I just read the Reds press release and no where does it say he's going to get all the at bats in CF, he's just added to the mix, if he gets 700 at bats Im right there with you stat guys.

Added to the mix? Here's what Jocketty said:

"Willy Taveras fills two significant needs for our ball club, a speed base stealing threat at the top of the order and superior defense in center field," said Jockettty.

That's not what you say when you add a 4th or 5th OF or utility type. That's what you say when you've just brought in a guy you want as a starting position player. We don't even have to read between the lines in the slightest to get that from the press release.

BuckeyeRedleg
12-27-2008, 03:31 PM
I wish they could have at least waited until February 2nd to make this signing.

That would have been appropriate.

RedLegSuperStar
12-27-2008, 03:31 PM
Bout Time Walt!

You made us wait long enough....

SteelSD
12-27-2008, 03:33 PM
I wish they could have at least waited until February 2nd to make this signing.

That would have been appropriate.

More appropriate would have been April 1st.

TRF
12-27-2008, 03:34 PM
More appropriate would have been April 1st.

No, that would have been cruel, because the next day, he'd still be leading off.

OnBaseMachine
12-27-2008, 03:34 PM
What a stupid, stupid move. This completely dampens my optimism for the 2009 season. Chris Dickerson is much better than Taveras. I've lost faith in Jocketty.

Remember when Krivsky was bludgeoned for signing Patterson? Well, this is much worse than the Patterson signing. At least Patterson could play defense and hit an occasional homer.

TRF
12-27-2008, 03:35 PM
I don't see the Reds signing a LF now. Dickerson isn't the bat off the bench, he's the LF.

The Reds replaced Adam Dunn with Chris Dickerson.

The Reds replaced Corey Patterson with Willy Taveras.

and got weaker at BOTH positions.

guttle11
12-27-2008, 03:35 PM
When you're going to give 650-700 PA's (x2 years) to a stiff like Willy T, yeah, it's a big deal.

That's a pretty big assumption. Assuming things causes panic.

SteelSD
12-27-2008, 03:36 PM
No, that would have been cruel, because the next day, he'd still be leading off.

True, but at least I could have spent some time legitimately thinking that it might just be a bad joke.

Raisor
12-27-2008, 03:36 PM
That's a pretty big assumption. Assuming things causes panic.








"Willy Taveras fills two significant needs for our ball club, a speed base stealing threat at the top of the order and superior defense in center field," said Jockettty.

RedsManRick
12-27-2008, 03:38 PM
Let's be generous and say Tavares replaces Freel. Who here would be happy if Walt came out and said "With Ryan Freel, we think we've found the answer to our CF and leadoff problem." Yeah, I didn't think so. Then you consider that offensively, Tavares is no Freel...

GADawg
12-27-2008, 03:38 PM
well, it wasn't a very exciting move. Expected and kinda boring and I personally am not really excited at the prospect of Tavares roaming CF(and less excited to read about him here daily).

I will say though that Krusty was on to something when talking about talent evaluation....'ole Walt has proven himself to be a winner in the past and since I've never actually built a winner(save my 1999 yahoo fantasy championship...yea baby!)I'm gonna give the 'ole dude the benefit of the doubt here and assume he's smarter than me and has some sort of plan...a method to his madness if you will.

I WAS kinda hoping that Hairston was coming back(though I doubt if he can live up to the bar he set for himself last season) but I'm guessing that would make this deal pointless....unless of course AGon has had his knee surgically removed and they're planning a SS platoon.

ochre
12-27-2008, 03:40 PM
What? So Hatchers outs didnt count? http://www.sternfannetwork.com/forum/images/smilies/Eyes/uh-oh.gif Youre calling those guys great, they were very good but I dont see any HOFs in that group other than Larkin, ED couldnt stay healthy or wouldve maybe made HOF, please dont discount Hatchers outs because theyre already in the books my friend.
Myers, Dibble, and Charlton.

Point me to those three on the current reds roster.

chicoruiz
12-27-2008, 03:40 PM
Hey, at least we bought low on this guy. If 2008 was an aberration, I'm OK with it; any of his other season totals would be just fine with me. We needed outfielders; we got a career .280 hitter with plus-plus speed and didn't give up a player to get him. I'm with Krusty; I don't see any reason for the multi-page crying jag here.

Screwball
12-27-2008, 03:42 PM
I just don't get it. How do you buid a perennial powerhouse that is the St. Louis Cardinals, and then decide that Willy Taveras is a good signing?? It really doesn't add up.

TRF
12-27-2008, 03:42 PM
2007 was the aberrration. 2008 was his career norm. All 2008 had was a gaudy SB total.

I loathe the Willy Taveras signing. ©

OnBaseMachine
12-27-2008, 03:42 PM
Just a stupid move. Dickerson could have provided better defense and offense at a cheaper price. The fact that it's a two year deal makes it even worse.

Raisor
12-27-2008, 03:44 PM
Hey, at least we bought low on this guy. If 2008 was an aberration, I'm OK with it; any of his other season totals would be just fine with me. We needed outfielders; we got a career .280 hitter with plus-plus speed and didn't give up a player to get him. I'm with Krusty; I don't see any reason for the multi-page crying jag here.



How about if I can show that 08 was just Willy returning to his norm?

Let me use a slightly different number, RC per 100 PA.

05 11.01 (66.06 per 600 pa)
06 11.11 (66.66 per 600 pa)
07 14.09 (84.54 per 600 pa)
08 10.54 (63.24 per 600 PA)

Tom Servo
12-27-2008, 03:44 PM
I just don't get it. How do you buid a perennial powerhouse that is the St. Louis Cardinals, and then decide that Willy Taveras is a good signing?? It really doesn't add up.
It's an inside job, Jocketty's still on the Cardinals payroll to take the Reds down from within.

OnBaseMachine
12-27-2008, 03:44 PM
Jocketty said the Reds remain in pursuit of a left fielder, “And we’re still trying to sign Jerry Hairston Jr. and he can play some out there in left.”

There was a story this week that Sammy Sosa says he wants to play major-league baseball this year and when Jocketty was kiddingly asked if the Reds were interested in Sosa, he said, “Don’t think so. And I don’t think (manager) Dusty Baker wants him.”

http://www.daytondailynews.com/o/content/shared-gen/blogs/dayton/cincinnatireds/

Tom Servo
12-27-2008, 03:45 PM
“And we’re still trying to sign Jerry Hairston Jr. and he can play some out there in left.”

........



:explode:

Screwball
12-27-2008, 03:46 PM
It's an inside job, Jocketty's still on the Cardinals payroll to take the Reds down from within.

It all comes together...

_Sir_Charles_
12-27-2008, 03:47 PM
Hey, at least we bought low on this guy. If 2008 was an aberration, I'm OK with it; any of his other season totals would be just fine with me. We needed outfielders; we got a career .280 hitter with plus-plus speed and didn't give up a player to get him. I'm with Krusty; I don't see any reason for the multi-page crying jag here.

That's what I think too. But since batting average doesn't mean ANYTHING...we're forced to ignore the .280 average. :rolleyes:

The way I look at it, his lack of power is compensated somewhat by his basestealing skills. Those singles are turned into doubles and triples after the SB's essentially. Sometimes I think people here put too much emphasis on the value of a walk. They'll put a higher value on a player who walks a lot but has a low BA than a player who walks very little but has a higher BA even if put together their OBP is identicle. *shrugs*

mth123
12-27-2008, 03:49 PM
I don't see the Reds signing a LF now. Dickerson isn't the bat off the bench, he's the LF.

The Reds replaced Adam Dunn with Chris Dickerson.

The Reds replaced Corey Patterson with Willy Taveras.

and got weaker at BOTH positions.

I like Dickerson a lot. But if he's the LF with Taveras in CF, then the Reds better be saving some dough for the first pick in the 2010 draft.

I think with this signing, the team was mathematically eliminated from play-off contention.

Personally, I'd still sign an IF and move EdE or Votto to LF at this point. Lost year, see if there is room for everyone with potential. I think an Eric Hinske/Jeff Keppinger platoon at 3B with EdE in LF wouldn't be bad. Hinske will probably OPS around .820 or so against RHP (maybe more with the move to the NL and GABP) and while I'm on record as being an anti-Kepp guy, he does kill lefties. Hinske is no great glove, but the defense at 3B will be improved a lot when he is in there against RHP (most of the time). It'll be worse against lefties with Kepp though, but Kepp could OPS .900 against lefties. A Hinske/Kepp platoon with EdE in LF may actually add more offense than anyone the team could realistically acquire. Having Dickerson around as a plus defender for late in the game is a nice safety net for trying one of those guys out there.

SteelSD
12-27-2008, 03:53 PM
That's what I think too. But since batting average doesn't mean ANYTHING...we're forced to ignore the .280 average.

The way I look at it, his lack of power is compensated somewhat by his basestealing skills. Those singles are turned into doubles and triples after the SB's essentially. Sometimes I think people here put too much emphasis on the value of a walk. They'll put a higher value on a player who walks a lot but has a low BA than a player who walks very little but has a higher BA even if put together their OBP is identicle. *shrugs*

Two questions:

1. Does Willy Taveras do a good job of avoiding Outs?

2. Does Willy Taveras acquire a lot of bases while avoiding Outs?

If the answer to both is "No", then you have a bad baseball player on your hands. And we know the answer to both is "No". Doesn't matter what your Batting Average is if you can't avoid outs at an acceptable clip unless you run into a luck-driven .371 BABIP.

blumj
12-27-2008, 03:54 PM
I like Dickerson a lot. But if he's the LF with Taveras in CF, then the Reds better be saving some dough for the first pick in the 2010 draft.

I think with this signing, the team was mathematically eliminated from play-off contention.

Personally, I'd still sign an IF and move EdE or Votto to LF at this point. Lost year, see if there is room for everyone with potential. I think an Eric Hinske/Jeff Keppinger platoon at 3B with EdE in LF wouldn't be bad. Hinske will probably OPS around .820 or so against RHP (maybe more with the move to the NL and GABP) and while I'm on record as being an anti-Kepp guy, he does kill lefties. Hinske is no great glove, but the defense at 3B will be improved a lot when he is in there against RHP (most of the time). It'll be worse against lefties with Kepp though, but Kepp could OPS .900 against lefties. A Hinske/Kepp platoon with EdE in LF may actually add more offense than anyone the team could realistically acquire. Having Dickerson around as a plus defender for late in the game is a nice safety net for trying one of those guys out there.

Eric Hinske's started 9 games at 3rd base since 2004.

Raisor
12-27-2008, 03:55 PM
They'll put a higher value on a player who walks a lot but has a low BA than a player who walks very little but has a higher BA even if put together their OBP is identicle. *shrugs*


"Ya'll" will put a higher value on a player that doesn't walk alot but has a high BA than a player who walks more but has a lower BA even if put together their OBP is identicle. *shrugs*

LoganBuck
12-27-2008, 03:57 PM
Is this a freaking joke?

How on earth can you possibly justify this? This team traded away Ryan Freel, and let Corey Patterson walk, and then went out and found the only player in the league that is a downgrade. Seriously did someone steal Walt's cellphone at a Christmas party?

The general public caught on to how bad Corey Patterson was, perhaps the masses will again get to share their displeasure. Especially given that Dickerson is a FAR superior player.

Screwball
12-27-2008, 03:59 PM
"Ya'll" will put a higher value on a player that doesn't walk alot but has a high BA than a player who walks more but has a lower BA even if put together their OBP is identicle. *shrugs*

You misspelled identikul.

mth123
12-27-2008, 03:59 PM
I just don't get it. How do you buid a perennial powerhouse that is the St. Louis Cardinals, and then decide that Willy Taveras is a good signing?? It really doesn't add up.

He traded for Mark McGwire and the HR chase that followed made the Cardinals a financial powerhouse. Then he stumbled into Albert Pujols to keep it going. It enabled bringing in the likes of Edmonds and Rolen.

I think FCB is right, this team is not going to spend big bucks right now and is filling in with cheap guys that will actually agree to play here (i.e. have few other options at this point). I'm starting to believe it is the real reason that Adam Dunn is no longer a Red. He didn't want to stay IMO. Hairston's limited success in 2008 opened some doors elsewhere and now apparantly he won't even come back.

The team really needs to find a way to keep all its best home grown guys and that may mean that position changes for EdE and Votto are in order to make room for Alonso and Frazier. I don't see impact acquisitions in this team's future unless it come from dealing Harang and Arroyo for young guys who turn out to be studs.

Raisor
12-27-2008, 04:00 PM
You know, I wish there was some stat that was easy to look at to get a good idea on how a player produces on offense. It would need to be something the common internet fan could find in about 30 seconds on ESPN.com if they wanted. It would also need to be really accurate (about 98% would work). It would pretty much include everything you needed to know about a player (inlcuding scrappy things like SB and CS).

TRF
12-27-2008, 04:02 PM
That's what I think too. But since batting average doesn't mean ANYTHING...we're forced to ignore the .280 average. :rolleyes:

The way I look at it, his lack of power is compensated somewhat by his basestealing skills. Those singles are turned into doubles and triples after the SB's essentially. Sometimes I think people here put too much emphasis on the value of a walk. They'll put a higher value on a player who walks a lot but has a low BA than a player who walks very little but has a higher BA even if put together their OBP is identicle. *shrugs*

When you have NO POWER, getting on base is your biggest weapon. You cannot steal 1st. The ability to take a walk is very important, and for a guy with Taveras game, he needs to BB 50+ times a season just to be freaking AVERAGE. Never mind the fact that despite what Jocketty says, all defensive metrics show him to be below average.

_Sir_Charles_
12-27-2008, 04:02 PM
"Ya'll" will put a higher value on a player that doesn't walk alot but has a high BA than a player who walks more but has a lower BA even if put together their OBP is identicle. *shrugs*

If by "Ya'll" you mean me, then the answer is yes. While the 2 get on base at the exact same pace in terms of OBP, I value the hit over the walk. The hit has more value. It advances runners, puts pressure on the defense and creates more options for the manager. But I don't undervalue the walk. Many here simply OVERvalue it. Just like many here OVERvalued Dunn.

pahster
12-27-2008, 04:02 PM
You know, I wish there was some stat that was easy to look at to get a good idea on how a player produces on offense. It would need to be something the common internet fan could find in about 30 seconds on ESPN.com if they wanted. It would also need to be really accurate (about 98% would work). It would pretty much include everything you needed to know about a player (inlcuding scrappy things like SB and CS).

Whatever are you talking about? :p:

OnBaseMachine
12-27-2008, 04:04 PM
Walt hasn't even sniffed fixing the biggest problem with this team: up the middle defense.

OUReds
12-27-2008, 04:04 PM
There are holes on this team large enough to run a semi through. SS, LF, infield defense, pathetic OB potential, take your pick.

Instead of addressing these, Walt comes up with a move that will almost certainly make the team worse.

There are no words.

BuckeyeRedleg
12-27-2008, 04:05 PM
How about if I can show that 08 was just Willy returning to his norm?

Let me use a slightly different number, RC per 100 PA.

05 11.01 (66.06 per 600 pa)
06 11.11 (66.66 per 600 pa)
07 14.09 (84.54 per 600 pa)
08 10.54 (63.24 per 600 PA)


That's mighty stinky.

I'd rather platoon Stubbs and Dickerson and see what they give us. I guarantee Stubbs would be more productive than Tavares (I know, not saying much) and we all know his defense in CF would be way better.

I don't see anything wrong with pushing our 24-year old former 1st round pick and seeing what he can do.

I'm amazed that someone gets paid to make these kind of baseball decisions. I was pretty cool with Walt, just like I was once with Krivsky, but this reminds me of the day Wayne traded for Juan Castro. Wayne was never the same in my eyes after that day.

Well, I guess now I'm forced to wonder if Walt is clueless as well.

Ron Madden
12-27-2008, 04:05 PM
That's what I think too. But since batting average doesn't mean ANYTHING...we're forced to ignore the .280 average. :rolleyes:
Sometimes I think people here put too much emphasis on the value of a walk. They'll put a higher value on a player who walks a lot but has a low BA than a player who walks very little but has a higher BA even if put together their OBP is identicle. *shrugs*


Nobody ever said that batting average doesn't mean anything.

All hitters have slumps. When a hitter with a BA driven OBP slumps he's just making outs.

When a hitter with a high walk rate slumps he can still avoid making outs by getting on base via a base on balls.

It aint that hard to understand.

;)

Raisor
12-27-2008, 04:05 PM
Whatever are you talking about? :p:

Well there has to be SOMETHING like that, don't you think?


Wait. Maybe something like this:


[(H + BB + HBP - CS - GIDP) times (Total bases + .26[BB - IBB + HBP] + .52[SH + SF + SB])] divided by (AB + BB + HBP + SH+ SF)

Nah, that's crazy talk.

Raisor
12-27-2008, 04:07 PM
It aint that hard to understand.

;)

:eek:

lollipopcurve
12-27-2008, 04:08 PM
I find it a little sad that the season will be nearly ruined for lots of regular posters because of this signing. It's a weird thing.

Personally, I find Tavares entertaining. Looking forward to seeing him play for the Reds.

icehole3
12-27-2008, 04:10 PM
I like Dickerson a lot. But if he's the LF with Taveras in CF, then the Reds better be saving some dough for the first pick in the 2010 draft.

I think with this signing, the team was mathematically eliminated from play-off contention.


you thought we we're going to the playoffs????

TRF
12-27-2008, 04:10 PM
I find it a little sad that the season will be nearly ruined for lots of regular posters because of this signing. It's a weird thing.

Personally, I find Tavares entertaining. Looking forward to seeing him play for the Reds.


Freel was entertaining. and he could get on base at least. He was a better defender too.

M2
12-27-2008, 04:11 PM
Hey, it was four years ago on Dec. 27 that the Reds signed Eric Milton.

Apparently the Reds are sending me a message by making insultingly stupid free agent signings on my birthday.

http://i241.photobucket.com/albums/ff214/jax4java/HappyBirthdayCakeFire.jpg

Go Team to Be Named Later.

Raisor
12-27-2008, 04:11 PM
I find it a little sad that the season will be nearly ruined for lots of regular posters because of this signing. It's a weird thing.

Personally, I find Tavares entertaining. Looking forward to seeing him play for the Reds.

He'll be really entertaining walking from the batter's box to between firstbase and back to the dugout almost 500 times in 09.

BuckeyeRedleg
12-27-2008, 04:11 PM
I find it a little sad that the season will be nearly ruined for lots of regular posters because of this signing. It's a weird thing.

Personally, I find Tavares entertaining. Looking forward to seeing him play for the Reds.

I'm more entertained by watching good baseball and good baseball players wear my team's uniform.

SteelSD
12-27-2008, 04:12 PM
Nobody ever said that batting average doesn't mean anything.

All hitters have slumps. When a hitter with a BA driven OBP slumps he's just making outs.

When a hitter with a high walk rate slumps he can still avoid making outs by getting on base via a base on balls.

It aint that hard to understand.

What I'm trying to figure out is the demand of BA being something we shouldn't ignore when a big chunk of the BA of the player in question (Taveras) is made up of bunt singles, which are effectively no different than a Base on Balls.

_Sir_Charles_
12-27-2008, 04:13 PM
Nobody ever said that batting average doesn't mean anything.

All hitters have slumps. When a hitter with a BA driven OBP slumps he's just making outs.

When a hitter with a high walk rate slumps he can still avoid making outs by getting on base via a base on balls.

It aint that hard to understand.

;)

Sorry, I just disagree. When a hitter with a BA driven OBP slumps...he's not "just making outs". Odds are, a player with a higher BA is able to put the bat on the ball. Those kind of players are just hitting them where they ARE when they slump. That can still advance runners. A player with a high walk rate...I guess when they slump they still walk at the exact same pace....riiiiiiight. Players don't walk more often and less often during a season. Nah, walkers are consistant. :rolleyes:

BuckeyeRedleg
12-27-2008, 04:16 PM
What I'm trying to figure out is the demand of BA being something we shouldn't ignore when a big chunk of the BA of the player in question (Taveras) is made up of bunt singles, which are effectively no different than a Base on Balls.

If Adam Dunn could have just learned how to lay down 120 bunts and avoided those damn walks every year.............

Ron Madden
12-27-2008, 04:17 PM
What I'm trying to figure out is the demand of BA being something we shouldn't ignore when a big chunk of the BA of the player in question (Taveras) is made up of bunt singles, which are effectively no different than a Base on Balls.



:confused:

Raisor
12-27-2008, 04:17 PM
Sorry, I just disagree. When a hitter with a BA driven OBP slumps...he's not "just making outs". Odds are, a player with a higher BA is able to put the bat on the ball. Those kind of players are just hitting them where they ARE when they slump. That can still advance runners. A player with a high walk rate...I guess when they slump they still walk at the exact same pace....riiiiiiight. Players don't walk more often and less often during a season. Nah, walkers are consistant. :rolleyes:


Before continuing, please do a thread search for OBP. Read them.

Thanks.

LoganBuck
12-27-2008, 04:18 PM
After letting this sink in more, I can not underscore how mad I am about this.

Go read the comments of the idiots on the Hal McCoy blog. They don't get it.
http://www.daytondailynews.com/o/content/shared-gen/blogs/dayton/cincinnatireds/entries/2008/12/27/reds_sign_willie_taveras.html#comments

_Sir_Charles_
12-27-2008, 04:18 PM
What I'm trying to figure out is the demand of BA being something we shouldn't ignore when a big chunk of the BA of the player in question (Taveras) is made up of bunt singles, which are effectively no different than a Base on Balls.

Not true. And I'm pretty sure you know that. Even if we assume that a large portion of his hits were bunt singles (which they weren't when I watched him in Houston), those bunt singles will STILL advance runners and force the defense to make a play. A walk will NOT do that no matter how much you guys seem to want it to. A walk is NEVER as valuable as a hit. ANY kind of hit.

icehole3
12-27-2008, 04:18 PM
If Adam Dunn could have just learned how to lay down 120 bunts and avoided those damn walks every year.............

Here we go with the Dunn references....

mth123
12-27-2008, 04:19 PM
you thought we we're going to the playoffs????

No, but that is the story that the owner has been selling. I would expect moves that help either A) in the short term B) in the long term or C) Both.

Singning Taveras is D) none of the above. Its the worst kind of move for a team like the Reds. It not only kills the team in 2009, but likely blocks guys like Stubbs, Dickerson or even Heisey from getting an audition. The Long Term was made worse IMO with no short term improvement. It was time to see if Dickerson can be an answer over the course of a season and it is what I like least about this move. Our best hope is that this is a cheap enough deal that Taveras can be painlessly jettisoned or sent to the end of the bench when the time comes (and it already has IMO).

Screwball
12-27-2008, 04:19 PM
Hey, it was four years ago on Dec. 27 that the Reds signed Eric Milton.

Apparently the Reds are sending me a message by making insultingly stupid free agent signings on my birthday.

Go Team to Be Named Later.

Insulted. Great term. Take my ticket/hot dog/mountain dew (now coke)/pizza/jersey/3-way/beer money, and go spend it on someone who will almost assuredly lose the Reds games while I'm there.

It's basically a slap in the face.

_Sir_Charles_
12-27-2008, 04:20 PM
If Adam Dunn could have just learned how to lay down 120 bunts and avoided those damn walks every year.............

If Dunn were to have bunted for 100 singles instead of 100 walks...yes, he'd be even more valuable. Somehow, whenever I talk about this, people seem to think that I think a walk is a bad thing. Hit > Walk > Out. Now that's a formula I can agree with everytime.

_Sir_Charles_
12-27-2008, 04:21 PM
Here we go with the Dunn references....

My bad. I think I started it this time. It's kind of hard to talk about walks and batting average without bringing up the posterboy. :O)

BuckeyeRedleg
12-27-2008, 04:22 PM
After letting this sink in more, I can not underscore how mad I am about this.

Go read the comments of the idiots on the Hal McCoy blog. They don't get it.
http://www.daytondailynews.com/o/content/shared-gen/blogs/dayton/cincinnatireds/entries/2008/12/27/reds_sign_willie_taveras.html#comments

Go to ESPN, CBS, MLB, or any of the other general fan sites and you'll see they don't.

It's scary.

lollipopcurve
12-27-2008, 04:24 PM
He'll be really entertaining walking from the batter's box to between firstbase and back to the dugout almost 500 times in 09.

In a way, he will be. To each his own.

_Sir_Charles_
12-27-2008, 04:25 PM
Before continuing, please do a thread search for OBP. Read them.

Thanks.

As soon as I get a free 10-month stretch, i'll do that. Seriously though, I have read a LOT of threads on that. What's your point? Are you seriously going to say that a walk-based OBP will remain high when a hitter slumps? Walks do not remain consistant throughout a season. They fluctuate just as hits do.

M2
12-27-2008, 04:27 PM
Even if OB is more math than you can personally digest, Taveras is a leadoff hitter who's never scored more than 83 runs in a season. He averages 88 runs per 162 games. In the simplest of terms, he's no good at his job.

mth123
12-27-2008, 04:28 PM
If Dunn were to have bunted for 100 singles instead of 100 walks...yes, he'd be even more valuable. Somehow, whenever I talk about this, people seem to think that I think a walk is a bad thing. Hit > Walk > Out. Now that's a formula I can agree with everytime.

In any given situation a hit is better than a walk. Walks are more consistent and more slump proof. And I'd rather have a walk than a "productive out." A team only has 27 outs to use up in a game and with few exceptions avoiding using one of those is better. There are situations where a sac fly or bunt are useful and preferred over a walk, but they are so few and far between that using that to justify making a lot of outs is non-sense IMO. Get me a better player that gets on base and I'll take my chances. The situations where the "productive out" is useful are always dependent on guys being on base, so getting guys that can do that should be priority number one and the "productive outs" should be a secondary concern. If the situation calls for a bunt, there are always guys on the bench (i.e. the pitching staff) that can do that.

TRF
12-27-2008, 04:29 PM
Sorry, I just disagree. When a hitter with a BA driven OBP slumps...he's not "just making outs". Odds are, a player with a higher BA is able to put the bat on the ball. Those kind of players are just hitting them where they ARE when they slump. That can still advance runners. A player with a high walk rate...I guess when they slump they still walk at the exact same pace....riiiiiiight. Players don't walk more often and less often during a season. Nah, walkers are consistant. :rolleyes:


everything about this post is flat wrong. walks never slump. buys with a consistent OBP of say around .380 despite fluctuating BA's still help their team by being on base.

Taveras has no real repeatable ability to get to 1B, BECAUSE he does not walk. In his non career year of 2007, his career OPS is BELOW .650. I'd like to point out that in his career year, he only played in 97 games. His exposure was limited and he certainly surprised with a .100 point increase in his OPS vs his career norm.

Taveras couldn't take advantage of a park made for hitters of all kinds. His doubles output was not affected by the deadening of the ball, but the question is why not? With his speed and the expanse of that park, he should have been a 40+ doubles guy. Speed never slumps right? His best weapon is the SB, but his percentage as been decidedly average accept for last year. Did he suddenly get faster? Or did, in what was an arbitration year, he realize he needed a counting stat to boost his argument? I dunno, but that is a possibility. He never had that many SB attempts before.

Taveras is best used as a pinch runner/25th man on the roster. Instead he'll be a black hole of suck for 1200 PA's over two freaking years.

SteelSD
12-27-2008, 04:29 PM
Sorry, I just disagree. When a hitter with a BA driven OBP slumps...he's not "just making outs". Odds are, a player with a higher BA is able to put the bat on the ball. Those kind of players are just hitting them where they ARE when they slump. That can still advance runners. A player with a high walk rate...I guess when they slump they still walk at the exact same pace....riiiiiiight. Players don't walk more often and less often during a season. Nah, walkers are consistant. :rolleyes:

You might want to put away the rolleyes emoticon. Over the last three seasons, by month, the correlation between Adam Dunn's monthly BA and IsoD (OBP minus BA) was -0.49 with an IsoD Standard Deviation of only .037. Dunn's two lowest IsoD months occurred when he hit .287 and .310. Dunn's three highest IsoD months happened when he hit .157, .217 and .161.

That's basically the "slump proofing" effect Ron's talking about and only once during any month did Dunn's OBP slip below .328. Only four times out of 18 months did Dunn produce an OBP lower than .352. BA-driven OBP players like Taveras don't have the ability to do that because they're doing nothing but making Outs when they slump. Ron's not wrong about this.

icehole3
12-27-2008, 04:31 PM
No, but that is the story that the owner has been selling. I would expect moves that help either A) in the short term B) in the long term or C) Both.

Singning Taveras is D) none of the above. Its the worst kind of move for a team like the Reds. It not only kills the team in 2009, but likely blocks guys like Stubbs, Dickerson or even Heisey from getting an audition. The Long Term was made worse IMO with no short term improvement. It was time to see if Dickerson can be an answer over the course of a season and it is what I like least about this move. Our best hope is that this is a cheap enough deal that Taveras can be painlessly jettisoned or sent to the end of the bench when the time comes (and it already has IMO).

If Dickerson gets buried on the bench and Taveras is hitting like all these geniuses think he will then the Reds will be buried in last place and Dusty will get his head chopped off by Bob Cast and Redszone will be like Emerald City and the stat guys around here will be running thru the poppys with Dorothy.

http://forbiddenplanet.co.uk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/Wizard%20of%20Oz%20Emerald%20City.jpg

Blitz Dorsey
12-27-2008, 04:33 PM
I need to know what the contract looks like before I know how I really feel about this. If we got him on the cheap, I can live with it. Especially if Baldelli and Dye are on the way. I know getting one of them is probably the maximum for the Reds, but I can dream. I would love some outfield depth where Baldelli could actually be the backup to all three OF spots (and possibly take over for Taveras in CF). That would give us an outfield of Dye in LF, Baldelli in CF and Bruce in RF with a bench of Taveras and Dickerson.

_Sir_Charles_
12-27-2008, 04:34 PM
everything about this post is flat wrong. walks never slump. buys with a consistent OBP of say around .380 despite fluctuating BA's still help their team by being on base.

BS. Simply put....BS. I don't have to look at numbers to prove it. I watch the games. Players will go a week without drawing a walk even if they normally walk at a high rate.

Raisor
12-27-2008, 04:37 PM
I need to know what the contract looks like before I know how I really feel about this. .

Willy T could be paying the Reds the next two years, and it wouldn't be worth it.

SteelSD
12-27-2008, 04:37 PM
Not true. And I'm pretty sure you know that. Even if we assume that a large portion of his hits were bunt singles (which they weren't when I watched him in Houston), those bunt singles will STILL advance runners and force the defense to make a play. A walk will NOT do that no matter how much you guys seem to want it to. A walk is NEVER as valuable as a hit. ANY kind of hit.

Walks don't advance Runners? Hmn...

In 2008, 202 Runs were scored during the MLB season when the hitter at the place walked with the bases loaded. Those walks advanced 606 Baserunners. Now, do you think that maybe a lot more Runners than that were advanced by bases on balls with Runners on 1st and/or 1st and 2nd?

How many Baserunners do you think were advanced by bunt Singles?

And exactly how does adding a Baserunner, either in addition to advancing one or by himself, not put "pressure" on a defense even if that base was acquired via Walk? Answer? Any on-base event pressures the opposition. That's why they're all so important.

icehole3
12-27-2008, 04:38 PM
BS. Simply put....BS. I don't have to look at numbers to prove it. I watch the games. Players will go a week without drawing a walk even if they normally walk at a high rate.

I agree, try going thru the Yankees rotation followed by Red Sox and then face the Angels rotation, that'll start a slump real fast.

OUReds
12-27-2008, 04:38 PM
BS. Simply put....BS. I don't have to look at numbers to prove it. I watch the games. Players will go a week without drawing a walk even if they normally walk at a high rate.

So you refuse to defend your position and refuse to believe the evidence presented against it? Nice.

Tom Servo
12-27-2008, 04:39 PM
--Are the Reds still interested in Jerry Hairston Jr.? "Yes. He could end up being the left fielder if we can't get that RBI man, which might be hard to do at this point. We may have a different type of team, where we rely on speed and defense and try to manufacture runs. We've still got some guys who can hit the ball out of the ballpark -- (Joey) Votto, (Jay) Bruce and (Edwin) Encarnacion. But we're going to a little bit different kind of team."


...

...

...

:bash::bash::bash:

TRF
12-27-2008, 04:39 PM
As soon as I get a free 10-month stretch, i'll do that. Seriously though, I have read a LOT of threads on that. What's your point? Are you seriously going to say that a walk-based OBP will remain high when a hitter slumps? Walks do not remain consistent throughout a season. They fluctuate just as hits do.

Actually over the course of a season, BB's are remarkably consistent.

Willy Taveras BB totals over the last 4 seasons: 25, 34, 21, 36.

Consistant and extremely poor. By comparison Adam Dunn, since someone brought him up: 114, 112, 101, 122.

Dunn had 6 more BB's last year than Taveras has in his career.

BB totals from month to month can fluctuate just like BA can. However, high BB guys are less susceptible to slumps, because even when they aren't hitting the secondary skillset of taking a BB is less affected. Taveras doesn't have that secondary skillset. Two things have to fail for a Dunn to hurt the club. All Taveras has to do is be Taveras. His whole game is BA. When that slumps, he's just an out machine that offers nothing on defense.

Raisor
12-27-2008, 04:39 PM
As soon as I get a free 10-month stretch, i'll do that. Seriously though, I have read a LOT of threads on that. What's your point? Are you seriously going to say that a walk-based OBP will remain high when a hitter slumps? Walks do not remain consistant throughout a season. They fluctuate just as hits do.

All I'm saying is that OBP > BA

Somewhere you have gotten the idea that OBP=walks.

it doesn't

icehole3
12-27-2008, 04:39 PM
Walks don't advance Runners? Hmn...

How many Baserunners do you think were advanced by bunt Singles?


I dont get this at all???

_Sir_Charles_
12-27-2008, 04:40 PM
You might want to put away the rolleyes emoticon. Over the last three seasons, by month, the correlation between Adam Dunn's monthly BA and IsoD (OBP minus BA) was -0.49 with an IsoD Standard Deviation of only .037. Dunn's two lowest IsoD months occurred when he hit .287 and .310. Dunn's three highest IsoD months happened when he hit .157, .217 and .161.

That's basically the "slump proofing" effect Ron's talking about and only once during any month did Dunn's OBP slip below .328. Only four times out of 18 months did Dunn produce an OBP lower than .352. BA-driven OBP players like Taveras don't have the ability to do that because they're doing nothing but making Outs when they slump. Ron's not wrong about this.

And that's pointing at ONE player. Dunn. I wasn't talking about one player or even two. But rather, in general. Dunn's walks were more consistant...he draws quite a few intentional walks (and even more intentional pitched around walks). Those don't have to do with plate discipline. Those have to do with his scary power and the fact that there was nobody surrounding him in the lineup that could effectively move a runner around. In general, walks fluctuate.

TRF
12-27-2008, 04:41 PM
BS. Simply put....BS. I don't have to look at numbers to prove it. I watch the games. Players will go a week without drawing a walk even if they normally walk at a high rate.

I once saw Juan Castro OPS over .900 for an entire month.

He was still a crap player that had a hot month.

icehole3
12-27-2008, 04:43 PM
--Are the Reds still interested in Jerry Hairston Jr.? "Yes. He could end up being the left fielder if we can't get that RBI man, which might be hard to do at this point. We may have a different type of team, where we rely on speed and defense and try to manufacture runs. We've still got some guys who can hit the ball out of the ballpark -- (Joey) Votto, (Jay) Bruce and (Edwin) Encarnacion. But we're going to a little bit different kind of team."


Its time to turn my computer off, this guy just went all bold, leave you guys to yourself.

Raisor
12-27-2008, 04:43 PM
Sir Charles,

What stat correlates to runs at a higher rate, batting average or On Base Percentage?

Always Red
12-27-2008, 04:44 PM
After letting this sink in more, I can not underscore how mad I am about this.

Go read the comments of the idiots on the Hal McCoy blog. They don't get it.
http://www.daytondailynews.com/o/content/shared-gen/blogs/dayton/cincinnatireds/entries/2008/12/27/reds_sign_willie_taveras.html#comments

Well, the first guy was pretty close, IMO:


Frickin’ wonderful. Corey Patterson 2.0

Then it went downhill from there.

TRF
12-27-2008, 04:45 PM
And that's pointing at ONE player. Dunn. I wasn't talking about one player or even two. But rather, in general. Dunn's walks were more consistant...he draws quite a few intentional walks (and even more intentional pitched around walks). Those don't have to do with plate discipline. Those have to do with his scary power and the fact that there was nobody surrounding him in the lineup that could effectively move a runner around. In general, walks fluctuate.

Wily Mo Pena may have more power than Dunn.

Never saw him BB 100 times in a season though.

You seem to think taking a BB is not a repeatable skill, but a circumstance of other things. You are incorrect.

_Sir_Charles_
12-27-2008, 04:47 PM
All I'm saying is that OBP > BA

Somewhere you have gotten the idea that OBP=walks.

it doesn't

No, I don't think that in the least. I think that if I see a player with a .350 OBP that's hitting at a .310 clip that people here will say he stinks because he doesn't get on base enough. Because they're thinking he "should" be at .400 OBP if he just learned how to take a walk. I just don't see that rationalization here when a player has a walk-driven OBP. Instead of saying he doesn't hit enough, they'll say his OBP is fine because it's "slump-proof" or they'll point to his other stats and ignore the BA. Is it right? No. But it's still there.

Kc61
12-27-2008, 04:48 PM
Thread is a rehash of years of debates with all the usual overstatement. By the way, Taveras wasn't released, he was nontendered. Rockies didn't want to arbitrate with him.

He will be pretty good defensively, will steal bases and drive the opposition crazy, will hit for no power. So the issue is whether he will get on base at an acceptable clip.

Some years he hasn't, some he has. We won't know until they play the games. Nobody knows the answer, not the genius baseball writers, nor anyone else.

_Sir_Charles_
12-27-2008, 04:53 PM
Sir Charles,

What stat correlates to runs at a higher rate, batting average or On Base Percentage?

OBP. I'm not arguing that. I'm not saying that OBP is a poor stat or a bad stat. I'm saying that OBP does NOT show the whole picture. I'm saying that every OBP point is not created equal and that's what many think. If I've got a man on second, player A gets a single and player B takes a walk. OBP gets adjusted the same for each...but which was more valuable? In general, player A was.

Wow, this got thrown off topic rather quickly. Big surprise.

camisadelgolf
12-27-2008, 04:54 PM
All of you are failing to see what Jocketty is doing here. He has stated that the Tampa Rays would be a good model to follow, so Jocketty is trying to get us in the best possible draft pick position for several years to come. The Rays won the pennant last year. The strategy is fool-proof.

Good job, Walt. :clap:

TRF
12-27-2008, 04:54 PM
No, I don't think that in the least. I think that if I see a player with a .350 OBP that's hitting at a .310 clip that people here will say he stinks because he doesn't get on base enough. Because they're thinking he "should" be at .400 OBP if he just learned how to take a walk. I just don't see that rationalization here when a player has a walk-driven OBP. Instead of saying he doesn't hit enough, they'll say his OBP is fine because it's "slump-proof" or they'll point to his other stats and ignore the BA. Is it right? No. But it's still there.

No. A player with a history of repeating .310/.350 I'd at least accept. Call me when Taveras does it more than once. He didn't do it more than once in a park designed for hitters.


Thread is a rehash of years of debates with all the usual overstatement. By the way, Taveras wasn't released, he was nontendered. Rockies didn't want to arbitrate with him.

He will be pretty good defensively, will steal bases and drive the opposition crazy, will hit for no power. So the issue is whether he will get on base at an acceptable clip.

Some years he hasn't, some he has. We won't know until they play the games. Nobody knows the answer, not the genius baseball writers, nor anyone else.

Not some years. once. once he had an acceptable OBP. one year in his entire career. He will not be pretty good defensively, because he's never been a good defender. And the Rockies didn't want to arbitrate with him because he wasn't worth it.

Raisor
12-27-2008, 04:55 PM
Three of Willy T's four seasons he was in the 65 RC territory. (per 600 PA's) One season he was in the 85 RC territory (still below average for a CF by the way).

Who wants to lay odds that he'll be in the 65 RC territory again?

If he quacks like a duck, and swims like a duck....

SteelSD
12-27-2008, 04:55 PM
And that's pointing at ONE player. Dunn. I wasn't talking about one player or even two. But rather, in general. Dunn's walks were more consistant...he draws quite a few intentional walks (and even more intentional pitched around walks). Those don't have to do with plate discipline. Those have to do with his scary power and the fact that there was nobody surrounding him in the lineup that could effectively move a runner around. In general, walks fluctuate.

Albert Pujols' has virtually no correlation between BA and IsoD (-0.37 correlation between high BA and high IsoD), which is contrary to your position. Lance Berkman does a better job of slump-proofing than Dunn (-0.60) and that's also not good for you. The one thing that's coming out of this isn't just that high IsoD hitters are more slump-proof than low IsoD hitters, but that some of the former actually appear to make up for lacking hits by pushing their IsoD numbers even higher to compensate while slumping. You might think that your position is intuitive, but it's also inaccurate.

And if you're getting pitched around, you still have to choose not to swing at those pitches. Trying to discount those isn't something you'll be able to do because worse hitters swing at those pitches.

camisadelgolf
12-27-2008, 04:56 PM
YES! YES! YES! thank you Cincinnati!

you've saved Jim Bowden from himself!

*does the "No-Taveras-In-DC" dance*

M2
12-27-2008, 04:56 PM
He will be pretty good defensively, will steal bases and drive the opposition crazy, will hit for no power. So the issue is whether he will get on base at an acceptable clip..

The real issue is can he score a lot of runs at the top of the lineup and there really isn't any "issue" there. He never has and he's almost guaranteed not to do it in a Reds uniform. OB is just the leading reason why he won't do it.

_Sir_Charles_
12-27-2008, 04:57 PM
Wily Mo Pena may have more power than Dunn.

Never saw him BB 100 times in a season though.

You seem to think taking a BB is not a repeatable skill, but a circumstance of other things. You are incorrect.

Not in the least. I know it's a repeatable skill. As is getting a base hit. And BOTH repeatable skills will fluctuate with proficiency throughout the season.

And regardless of which player (WMP or Dunn) has more power, Dunn causes more fear in opposing pitchers...hence more IBB and pitching around him. But both swing and miss a TON. Unfortunately, THAT'S a repeatable skill as well.

Raisor
12-27-2008, 04:57 PM
OBP. I'm not arguing that. I'm not saying that OBP is a poor stat or a bad stat. I'm saying that OBP does NOT show the whole picture. I'm saying that every OBP point is not created equal and that's what many think. If I've got a man on second, player A gets a single and player B takes a walk. OBP gets adjusted the same for each...but which was more valuable? In general, player A was.

.

OK, we are getting someplace now.

How big of a difference is there between a single and a walk? (We can measure this by the way, so there actually IS an answer)

_Sir_Charles_
12-27-2008, 05:00 PM
So you refuse to defend your position and refuse to believe the evidence presented against it? Nice.

The evidence was of one player. Hardly enough to cement an argument. I really don't think anyone here will say that walks don't come and go from time to time. A player with a high walk rate could go an entire week without taking one depending upon the situations, the pitchers, the lineup surrounding him, etc. Same goes for hitting. To argue differently is rather insane IMO.

camisadelgolf
12-27-2008, 05:01 PM
If you're a true Reds fan, you'll put together a fund to get me a good lawyer and put together a story that makes a great alibi. I won't reveal any details, but if anyone has a silencer or something really sharp, please send me a PM. Taveras hurts us only if he's on the field.

signing Taveras = winning suicide

camisadelgolf
12-27-2008, 05:04 PM
OK, we are getting someplace now.

How big of a difference is there between a single and a walk? (We can measure this by the way, so there actually IS an answer)

The answer to your question depends on who is on base. If you've got Taveras on second base, a single will be worth more than if you have Alex Gonzalez on base.

Taveras still sucks, but I'm just trying to play devil's advocate.

Will M
12-27-2008, 05:04 PM
in 2009 Chris Dickerson will be a 27 year old rookie. he also has had a fair share of injuries. to appoint him the everyday centerfielder is pretty dumb.

i see nothing wrong with signing Taveras. last time i looked we had two outfielders on the team. what would be wrong is to give him the CF job. its Dusty's job to tell both these guys that whoever performs best gets the ABs. if we get the 2008 version of Taveras its Dusty's job to make him the 5th outfielder.

i honestly believe even the 2008 version of Taveras has value as a defensive replacement and pinch runner. remember Owings is an extra bat on the bench.

_Sir_Charles_
12-27-2008, 05:05 PM
No. A player with a history of repeating .310/.350 I'd at least accept. Call me when Taveras does it more than once. He didn't do it more than once in a park designed for hitters.

Sorry, I wasn't referring to Taveras there...just throwing up some numbers at random. And again, I'm not calling Taveras a great or even a good player. I'm looking at the situation of the market, and I'm finding it acceptable. And mostly, I'm simply pointing out how shocked I am at the fire it's caused. I see this as a stopgap measure for the kids. Nothing more, nothing less. Is his defense worse than Pattersons? Of course. But it's better than what we currently had slotted for CF. Nothing.

camisadelgolf
12-27-2008, 05:06 PM
in 2009 Chris Dickerson will be a 27 year old rookie. he also has had a fair share of injuries. to appoint him the everyday centerfielder is pretty dumb.

i see nothing wrong with signing Taveras. last time i looked we had two outfielders on the team. what would be wrong is to give him the CF job. its Dusty's job to tell both these guys that whoever performs best gets the ABs. if we get the 2008 version of Taveras its Dusty's job to make him the 5th outfielder.

i honestly believe even the 2008 version of Taveras has value as a defensive replacement and pinch runner. remember Owings is an extra bat on the bench.

The fact that Owings could be available on the bench means that Taveras will be taking at-bats from one more player who is more worthy.

_Sir_Charles_
12-27-2008, 05:07 PM
Actually over the course of a season, BB's are remarkably consistent.

Willy Taveras BB totals over the last 4 seasons: 25, 34, 21, 36.

Consistant and extremely poor. By comparison Adam Dunn, since someone brought him up: 114, 112, 101, 122.

Dunn had 6 more BB's last year than Taveras has in his career.

BB totals from month to month can fluctuate just like BA can. However, high BB guys are less susceptible to slumps, because even when they aren't hitting the secondary skillset of taking a BB is less affected. Taveras doesn't have that secondary skillset. Two things have to fail for a Dunn to hurt the club. All Taveras has to do is be Taveras. His whole game is BA. When that slumps, he's just an out machine that offers nothing on defense.

Over the course of a season. You said it yourself. We were talking about SLUMPS. Players will have walk-slumps. That's all I was saying. That's it.

OUReds
12-27-2008, 05:08 PM
The evidence was of one player. Hardly enough to cement an argument. I really don't think anyone here will say that walks don't come and go from time to time. A player with a high walk rate could go an entire week without taking one depending upon the situations, the pitchers, the lineup surrounding him, etc. Same goes for hitting. To argue differently is rather insane IMO.

The evidence also says that what applies to that player, applies in general.

To say that a player with a high walk rate CAN go a week without a walk has very little to do with to point you are trying to make, namely that high walk rates are no more consistent then high batting averages.

TRF
12-27-2008, 05:09 PM
Three of Willy T's four seasons he was in the 65 RC territory. (per 600 PA's) One season he was in the 85 RC territory (still below average for a CF by the way).

Who wants to lay odds that he'll be in the 65 RC territory again?

If he quacks like a duck, and swims like a duck....

Sign it, because apparently it's duck season.


Not in the least. I know it's a repeatable skill. As is getting a base hit. And BOTH repeatable skills will fluctuate with proficiency throughout the season.

And regardless of which player (WMP or Dunn) has more power, Dunn causes more fear in opposing pitchers...hence more IBB and pitching around him. But both swing and miss a TON. Unfortunately, THAT'S a repeatable skill as well.

By this Dunn must have been IBB 70 times last year alone. It's a repeatable skill but he was pitched around all the time. Which is it? And ofcourse counting stats fluctuate. There are all kinds of factors for that to happen. but strangely enough BB's seem relatively unaffected. Lets look at Adam Dunn again from 2008.

BA and BB totals by month



Month BA BB's
April .232 23
May .284 20
June .161 22
July .310 10
August .217 26
Sept .227 20


I see a wildly fluctuating BA and a remarkably consistent BB totals.

SteelSD
12-27-2008, 05:10 PM
The evidence was of one player. Hardly enough to cement an argument. I really don't think anyone here will say that walks don't come and go from time to time. A player with a high walk rate could go an entire week without taking one depending upon the situations, the pitchers, the lineup surrounding him, etc. Same goes for hitting. To argue differently is rather insane IMO.

You've been given 54 months (nine seasons) of three high-IsoD hitters so far, yet you're the one using the rolleyes emoticons and calling the opposing position "insane". That's pretty strong for someone with no evidence to support their theory, don'tcha think?

Will M
12-27-2008, 05:10 PM
The fact that Owings could be available on the bench means that Taveras will be taking at-bats from one more player who is more worthy.

not so. the 2007 version of WT should get ABs. the 2008 version should not. again, this is Dusty's job to use him as a defensive sub or pinch runner if we get the 2008 version.

Kc61
12-27-2008, 05:13 PM
No. A player with a history of repeating .310/.350 I'd at least accept. Call me when Taveras does it more than once. He didn't do it more than once in a park designed for hitters.



Not some years. once. once he had an acceptable OBP. one year in his entire career. He will not be pretty good defensively, because he's never been a good defender. And the Rockies didn't want to arbitrate with him because he wasn't worth it.


More overstatement.

Taveras has a .331 lifetime OBP, which is decent.

Taveras is a good defender in centerfield. No, he's not a top centerfielder like Patterson, but I haven't heard anyone say he's "never been a good defender" except on Redszone.

Maybe the Rockies didn't want to arbitrate with him because he led the league in steals and might get a high salary in arbitration.

Let's see how it works out. Sorry, just not as sure of the future as some around here are.

_Sir_Charles_
12-27-2008, 05:14 PM
OK, we are getting someplace now.

How big of a difference is there between a single and a walk? (We can measure this by the way, so there actually IS an answer)

It depends wholly on the situation. You can obviously throw out some stat, but even that will depend upon the situations. To me, it's about creating opportunities. A single creates more options than a walk does in general. OBP does not distinguish between the two. There isn't a stat that determines momentum and the effect of a rally. Walks are a pause in a rally...a hit builds the momentum emotionally.

I understand the formulas, I understand their uses, but I also understand that there isn't a formula to encapsulate a player. Not completely and not in context to his fellow teammates. My eyes do. I place more faith in those.

camisadelgolf
12-27-2008, 05:15 PM
not so. the 2007 version of WT should get ABs. the 2008 version should not. again, this is Dusty's job to use him as a defensive sub or pinch runner if we get the 2008 version.

Well, we saw what happened when Dusty Baker was given Corey Patterson and Paul Bako--I don't have the faith that he'll have any idea what to do with Taveras. If used properly, Taveras has a small amount of value, but the sad part of that is that there's almost no chance that's going to happen. Even the Reds' GM has clearly implied that Taveras will play center field and lead off.

Raisor
12-27-2008, 05:15 PM
not so. the 2007 version of WT should get ABs. the 2008 version should not. again, this is Dusty's job to use him as a defensive sub or pinch runner if we get the 2008 version.

And, once again, the 2007 version was still a below average player.

The 2005, 2006, 2008 versions are too awful to even think about.

And he's signed to a two year deal. He's going to get 1200 PA's in those two years, and even at his best (and his best was so far over his head he could see Big Ben from up there) he's still BELOW AVERAGE.

An "average" NL CF is nothing to write home about.

durl
12-27-2008, 05:17 PM
Wow, Walt. It appears your reputation of building a World Series franchise have been destroyed with this single signing.

Let's go for an optimistic turn here:

What numbers would Taveras need to put up to be ACCEPTABLE to you naysayers on here? And let's try to keep the "it'll never happen" comments to a minimum. What's done is done so let's talk about what we need to see in order for the deal to be deemed a success.

TRF
12-27-2008, 05:18 PM
More overstatement.

Taveras has a .331 lifetime OBP, which is decent.

Taveras is a good defender in centerfield. No, he's not a top centerfielder like Patterson, but I haven't heard anyone say he's "never been a good defender" except on Redszone.

Maybe the Rockies didn't want to arbitrate with him because he led the league in steals and might get a high salary in arbitration.

Let's see how it works out. Sorry, just not as sure of the future as some around here are.

The lifetime OBP is spiked by a career year in 2007.

Everyone on Redszone saying he's a poor defender has been justifying that position with defensive metrics.

The Rockies aren't a small market team. they could have easily afforded Taveras. They didn't want him.

Well, personally I know a crap move when I see one.

Falls City Beer
12-27-2008, 05:22 PM
The lifetime OBP is spiked by a career year in 2007.


He only appeared in 97 games that year.

The Reds can still be good with Taveras on their roster, but it's going to be that much harder with him there.

Hap
12-27-2008, 05:23 PM
The 10 most similar players according to baseball-reference. (http://www.baseball-reference.com/friv/sp.cgi?I=taverwi01:Willy+Taveras)

I only recognize three names, and none of them ever scared anyone with the bat.

_Sir_Charles_
12-27-2008, 05:24 PM
You've been given 54 months (nine seasons) of three high-IsoD hitters so far, yet you're the one using the rolleyes emoticons and calling the opposing position "insane". That's pretty strong for someone with no evidence to support their theory, don'tcha think?

What theory? All I've said is that players do go stretches when they don't walk. Players who walk a lot still have stretches where they don't as much. They start struggling at the plate and start forcing things. They run up against a string of pitchers who have above average control. I never said that players who hit for average slump more or less than ones with high walk rates. Only that the ones with high walk rates ALSO slump. And that they slump in regards to hits AND to walks. Every player does. It's how long the slumps are that determine how effective a player they are IMO.

Someone just posted Dunn's monthly walk totals and lo and behold, that month of 10 walks stands out. The rest were fairly consistant, but in regards to walks...I'd call that a slump for taking walks.