Positives about the 2009 Reds [Archive] - RedsZone.com - Cincinnati Reds Fans' Home for Baseball Discussion

Kc61

01-22-2009, 01:46 PM

Somebody posted a thread like this on the Sun Deck. I do see positives.

Guys who did really poorly last year have been replaced. The main fifth starters had a 7 plus ERA. The centerfielder had a .238 OBP. The main catcher hit .217 with an OBP of .299. The replacements aren't necessarily all world beaters but should do better.

Cueto and Volquez have experience under their belts and the Reds now have four very good arms in the rotation with some good candidates for the fifth slot.

The team will have better all around speed with Taveras and Dickerson. Obviously, there is less power than last year but the speed will help defensively and maybe help to compensate a little on offense.

The bench should be better. Assuming Dickerson starts, the team will have Gomes, Kepp, Hairston, Hanigan, and one other guy on the bench. Probably a lefty hitter. Last year's bench wasn't as good.

More of the core will be young players. Votto, Bruce, Volquez, Cueto, Burton, Bray, Dickerson, Hanigan, all should get considerable playing time. EE, Owings, Massett, Ramirez (if he's on the roster) and Taveras are still young too. And, over the season, others will be getting ready at AAA -- Valaika, Bailey, Roenicke to name three.

Team should no longer lose as much against lefty pitching. Hernandez, Gomes, new righty bats with some power.

So there are some good things to watch for. Maybe you can think of others.

IowaRed

01-22-2009, 01:51 PM

hopefully we are 1 year closer to seeing the departure of Dusty Baker as manager, rather than 1 year closer to him being extended/resigned

flyer85

01-22-2009, 01:55 PM

addition by subtraction

dfs

01-22-2009, 02:13 PM

They are going to save a ton of money on fireworks that they can then turn around and invest in player development?

yeah, I don't really have anything either.

BuckeyeRedleg

01-22-2009, 02:16 PM

A high 2010 draft pick?

Chip R

01-22-2009, 02:19 PM

RedsZone won't have to worry about crashing at the trading deadline.

SMcGavin

01-22-2009, 02:30 PM

I'm looking forward to watching Bruce and Cueto get better. Danny Ray Herrera will be a fun guy to watch if he makes the squad. But really, if Bruce gets hurt or something, this team is going to be really hard to watch.

Team should no longer lose as much against lefty pitching.

Not trying to pick on you, I know the media says it all the time, but it's competely wrong.

Reds 2008 vs LHP: 30-25
Reds 2008 vs RHP: 44-63

membengal

01-22-2009, 02:37 PM

I'll be rooting for EE and Votto to make leaps to .900 OPS kind of anchors. Bruce to .850 would be nice.

Kc61

01-22-2009, 02:41 PM

I'm looking forward to watching Bruce and Cueto get better. Danny Ray Herrera will be a fun guy to watch if he makes the squad. But really, if Bruce gets hurt or something, this team is going to be really hard to watch.

Not trying to pick on you, I know the media says it all the time, but it's competely wrong.

Reds 2008 vs LHP: 30-25
Reds 2008 vs RHP: 44-63

IMO the team may hit lefty pitching better with this new group. Gomes and Hernandez do add two potentially good bats against lefties. I was aware that the w-l record vs. lefties turned out pretty well last year overall.

Falls City Beer

01-22-2009, 02:48 PM

We'll get to see if Walt Jocketty can win with a Montreal Expos budget. I know the overwhelming opinion is that he's lost it, never had it to begin with, buoyed exclusively by the Cards' $90 million budgets, etc. That will be interesting to me to see if he can re-invent himself.

deltachi8

01-22-2009, 02:51 PM

They aren't the Pirates?

cumberlandreds

01-22-2009, 03:14 PM

They may have just saved me from switching from DISH to DirecTv so I could buy MLBEI. At the moment I don't feel like going through the trouble of switching so I can watch 100 loss team play all summer.

cumberlandreds

01-22-2009, 03:17 PM

They aren't the Pirates?

But are they the Royals?

Hoosier Red

01-22-2009, 03:37 PM

I'll be rooting for EE and Votto to make leaps to .900 OPS kind of anchors. Bruce to .850 would be nice.

If those three things happen, the Reds will score enough runs to win 85+ games.

I was looking at the OPS we could reasonably expect from the lineup;
Taveras .700(PLEASE)
LF Platoon .850(Gomes is a career .870 vs. Lefties, and Dickerson crushed Righties)
Bruce .850
Encarnacion .900
Votto .900
Phillips .820
Hairston .820(A big drop off from where he was, but still recognizing he's been solid enough when healthy.)
Hernandez .730

Call me crazy, but I don't see the black holes you guys do. There are two, but they'll likely be less of a black hole than last year. And the guys who are getting better could likely get a lot better.

wolfboy

01-22-2009, 03:39 PM

Relatively cheap entertainment in a bad economy.

*BaseClogger*

01-22-2009, 03:42 PM

There will be lots of $1 hot dogs?

membengal

01-22-2009, 03:43 PM

If those three things happen, the Reds will score enough runs to win 85+ games.

I was looking at the OPS we could reasonably expect from the lineup;
Taveras .700(PLEASE)
LF Platoon .850(Gomes is a career .870 vs. Lefties, and Dickerson crushed Righties)
Bruce .850
Encarnacion .900
Votto .900
Phillips .820
Hairston .820(A big drop off from where he was, but still recognizing he's been solid enough when healthy.)
Hernandez .730

Call me crazy, but I don't see the black holes you guys do. There are two, but they'll likely be less of a black hole than last year. And the guys who are getting better could likely get a lot better.

That's why I only said I was "rooting" for it. I am sure not expecting it. That is a TON of a leap in production for three young players. Maybe one can make that kind of leap. Maybe. All three? A much higher degree of difficulty.

But, I am a fan, and IF this team is to remotely decent, that is what I will have to root for. That, and health. G-d help this team if one of those three gets hurt...

George Anderson

01-22-2009, 03:43 PM

A really cool, new scoreboard!!!!!!:beerme:

I can't wait for Opening Day!!!!!!

corkedbat

01-22-2009, 03:44 PM

They will eventually become the 2010 Cincinnati Reds and more youngsters should be ready. Taveras will (hopefully) be relegated to the bench by then and one year closer to gone.

2009? Fierce competition with the Pirates for 6th place and a titanic struggle to reach 72 wins.

Top 10 picks again in the 2009 & 2010 drafts. Not the TB model exactly, but getting close.

remdog

01-22-2009, 03:52 PM

I am, by nature, a generally positive person. So, when it comes to the '09 version of the Reds, I'm pretty certain that they will suck as currently constituted.

Rem

corkedbat

01-22-2009, 03:56 PM

I am, by nature, a generally positive person. So, when it comes to the '09 version of the Reds, I'm positive that they will suck as currently constituted.

Rem

Being a positive-type person Rem, I fixed it for you. :beerme:

Strikes Out Looking

01-22-2009, 03:58 PM

They have four strong starting pitchers and a decent bullpen. They have become defensively better especially in the outfield.

I'm just not as down on this team as most--and I also think that the other teams in the NL Central did not improve, so while the Cubs may be the best team in the division they still have holes (except they do have a better manager), there are no juggernauts in the division and other teams have question marks as big if not bigger than the Reds.

LoganBuck

01-22-2009, 04:11 PM

The Reds will be reducing their carbon footprint, by reducing vehicle traffic to and from the ballpark.

remdog

01-22-2009, 04:27 PM

Being a positive-type person Rem, I fixed it for you. :beerme:

:thumbup: Thanks.

I didn't want to be 'overly positive'. :thumbup:

Rem

Tom Servo

01-22-2009, 04:28 PM

This thread immediately makes me think of one that always makes me laugh, the "Bob Boone Supporters, Chime in Please!" thread. I wasn't around for it, but it's archived and everyone's 'reasons' for supporting/keeping Bob make me laugh.

He hasn't killed anyone yet - that we know of.

Aaron's bimbo may refuse to marry him if his dad is not a manager.

I like the way Bob Boone says "points" instead of runs.

He's such an intellectual.

Matt700wlw

01-22-2009, 04:29 PM

Besides the Cubs, the rest of the division hasn't done much to help themselves...and you know what we say about the Cubs...

RFS62

01-22-2009, 04:31 PM

They haven't been cursed by a goat. At least, as far as we know.

TRF

01-22-2009, 04:38 PM

They haven't been cursed by a goat. At least, as far as we know.

Marge was kind of an old goat. So was Lindner.

Chip R

01-22-2009, 04:43 PM

You shouldn't have to wait too long in line when you are walking up for tickets. :thumbup:

dfs

01-22-2009, 04:51 PM

If you're planning on working the concession booths you won't have to worry about too many rushes?

C'mon I'm really trying here.

_Sir_Charles_

01-22-2009, 05:12 PM

membengal

01-22-2009, 05:35 PM

Sir Charles, do you still think it is going to be an open competition in camp for the CF job??

KronoRed

01-22-2009, 05:36 PM

Sir Charles, do you still think it is going to be an open competition in camp for the CF job??

According to king Dusty the competition is over and Taveras is the man.

Ltlabner

01-22-2009, 05:42 PM

I'm positive I don't care about this team anymore.

membengal

01-22-2009, 05:42 PM

Indeed.

TRF

01-22-2009, 05:52 PM

Sir Charles, do you still think it is going to be an open competition in camp for the CF job??

I was waiting for someone to ask him that.

RollyInRaleigh

01-22-2009, 06:38 PM

I'm excited about seeing Votto and Bruce develop. I'm excited to see what kind of catcher and hitter Hernandez will be with as good a starting staff and the friendly confines of GAB. I'm hoping Harang can bounce back and have a good season. I'm excited to see if Volquez and Cueto can keep on developing. I haven't been a big EE fan, but this could be a breakout year for him, both in the field and at the plate. Phillips is a lot of fun to watch in the field and I'm hoping he gets back to being a gap to gap hitter. I'm not going to give up on this bunch of players. At least there is some youth and room for development. I hope they can mesh as a team and play like one.

WMR

01-22-2009, 07:00 PM

hopefully we are 1 year closer to seeing the departure of Dusty Baker as manager, rather than 1 year closer to him being extended/resigned

Razor Shines

01-22-2009, 07:51 PM

We'll get some new catch phrases from BCast. Like "The losing stops!! 72 times a season."

Roy Tucker

01-22-2009, 08:06 PM

I've heard the Reds are kind to their mothers.

They have nice personalities.

They flush the toilet after using it.

And they pick up their rooms and clear the dinner dishes.

KronoRed

01-22-2009, 08:42 PM

I've heard the Reds are kind to their mothers.

They have nice personalities.

They flush the toilet after using it.

And they pick up their rooms and clear the dinner dishes.

They also put the toilet seat down.

Gainesville Red

01-22-2009, 08:46 PM

They play baseball.

And baseball's cool.

lollipopcurve

01-22-2009, 08:57 PM

Much more speed on the bases and in the field than they've had in a while -- particularly when Hairston and Dickerson are in the lineup.

Again, with Dickerson playing they should cover the gaps nicely -- unlike in the last several years.

_Sir_Charles_

01-22-2009, 09:16 PM

Sir Charles, do you still think it is going to be an open competition in camp for the CF job??

In some respects...yes. I think Dickerson will get some time in center, I think Stubbs will get a solid look too. And unless they're planning on cutting Hopper, he'll also get some time there. Unless there's some more roster changes coming (which looks extremely doubtful), Taveras will get the lion's share of the starts there during the season, but ST is a different animal. And despite what many here say (repeatedly...to the point where my eyes start bleeding) I think Taveras will be fine for us in center. I look at Wily as a stop-gap until the kids are ready and that's exactly what we needed IMO.

Does anybody here seriously think that Stubbs, Dickerson, Hopper, etc won't get some ab's and some playing time in center during spring training? If stubbs steps up and smacks the cover off the ball and forces the team to make a decision...or if some other kid steps up and forces the Reds' hand in making some other positional changes (EE to LF, Votto to LF, etc which then pushes Dickerson more into the CF mix)...as I've said many times, ST will determine a lot IMO.

And just to be fair, when I was saying that it would be an open competition...everyone still thought we were going to get a new starting LF'er which IMO pushed Dickerson into a solid CF competition. With that off the table, it'll take something else to force that change.

WMR

01-22-2009, 09:34 PM

In some respects...yes. I think Dickerson will get some time in center, I think Stubbs will get a solid look too. And unless they're planning on cutting Hopper, he'll also get some time there. Unless there's some more roster changes coming (which looks extremely doubtful), Taveras will get the lion's share of the starts there during the season, but ST is a different animal. And despite what many here say (repeatedly...to the point where my eyes start bleeding) I think Taveras will be fine for us in center. I look at Wily as a stop-gap until the kids are ready and that's exactly what we needed IMO.

Does anybody here seriously think that Stubbs, Dickerson, Hopper, etc won't get some ab's and some playing time in center during spring training? If stubbs steps up and smacks the cover off the ball and forces the team to make a decision...or if some other kid steps up and forces the Reds' hand in making some other positional changes (EE to LF, Votto to LF, etc which then pushes Dickerson more into the CF mix)...as I've said many times, ST will determine a lot IMO.

And just to be fair, when I was saying that it would be an open competition...everyone still thought we were going to get a new starting LF'er which IMO pushed Dickerson into a solid CF competition. With that off the table, it'll take something else to force that change.

Who cares about Spring Training?

membengal

01-22-2009, 09:37 PM

Give me a break, Sir. That discussion was NOT about who got what at-bats in spring training. Good gravy. There's spin, and then there's that. Gracious.

WMR

01-22-2009, 09:39 PM

Give me a break, Sir. That discussion was NOT about who got what at-bats in spring training. Good gravy. There's spin, and then there's that. Gracious.

:lol:

_Sir_Charles_

01-22-2009, 09:56 PM

Give me a break, Sir. That discussion was NOT about who got what at-bats in spring training. Good gravy. There's spin, and then there's that. Gracious.

What in the world are you talking about? I was always talking about spring training competition. And that's what I just now said again. That's not spin. I'm not trying to talk my way out of anything. The Reds wouldn't have invited Stubbs to spring training unless they were going to take a look at what he's got. They're not going to keep Hopper on the roster unless they're going to see what he's got post-injury. If anyone steps up during ST and turns some heads...things can change. But with us not bringing in a new LF'er, yeah, Taveras is nearly a lock for the starting CF job. That original discussion was back when we thought for sure that Walt was going to bring in a new LF'er. If that were to have happened...you now throw Dickerson into that CF mix. And I stand by my statement back then...it would've been an open competition. How that's spin is beyond me.

IowaRed

01-22-2009, 10:21 PM

_Sir_Charles_

01-22-2009, 10:29 PM

Like Patterson last year, the minute Tavares was signed he became Baker's opening day CF and leadoff hitter. He has already said as much and I'm not sure anybody really thinks there is an open competition for CF. Sure guys will get looks in CF and AB's but it's last year all over again. The only question is will the SS, regardless of who it is, bat 2nd

I agree with that...and I also don't have a problem with it though. If Stubbs (or whoever) isn't ready for prime-time...then we needed a stop-gap. I know Taveras' stats from last year have been beaten into the ground, but I just don't buy it that he'll even be close to that bad this year. Every young player has a bad season, sometimes a thing as simple as a change of scenery can be the tipping point to turning things around. I don't think anybody doubts that Taveras has the tools to be successful in the bigs.

IowaRed

01-22-2009, 10:39 PM

I agree with that...and I also don't have a problem with it though. If Stubbs (or whoever) isn't ready for prime-time...then we needed a stop-gap. I know Taveras' stats from last year have been beaten into the ground, but I just don't buy it that he'll even be close to that bad this year. Every young player has a bad season, sometimes a thing as simple as a change of scenery can be the tipping point to turning things around. I don't think anybody doubts that Taveras has the tools to be successful in the bigs.

it's possible that he will be able to get on base with more regularity than last year but I think Dickerson has the same tools (actually better), less speed-more power, and is his equal or better in the field and at a fraction of the cost. That's the way I would have liked to have seen the Reds go

SteelSD

01-22-2009, 10:49 PM

I agree with that...and I also don't have a problem with it though. If Stubbs (or whoever) isn't ready for prime-time...then we needed a stop-gap. I know Taveras' stats from last year have been beaten into the ground, but I just don't buy it that he'll even be close to that bad this year. Every young player has a bad season, sometimes a thing as simple as a change of scenery can be the tipping point to turning things around. I don't think anybody doubts that Taveras has the tools to be successful in the bigs.

Even though the one time he shot the production moon Taveras was still a below-average Center Fielder? The guy has to look up at Skip Schumaker for goodness sakes (with binoculars).

The only positive out of that is that at least the Reds didn't spend much of their offseason budget on a bad player...oh...wait...

Redhook

01-22-2009, 10:51 PM

I'm looking forward to a 12-pack of the beer of my choice when the Reds don't win 86 games this game. My friend, God love him, thinks the Reds will win 86 games this year. I obviously bet the under. I actually feel somewhat guilty about because it's not a fair bet. I would've made the same bet at 80, or 76 for that matter.

I also have a $20 bet with another friend that believes the Reds will score 125 more runs than they did last year (704). That's just comical right there. There's a pretty good chance they won't even match last year's total, let alone score 3/4 of a run more a game.

So, while the Reds are going to stink something fierce this year, I at least have $20 and a 12-pack coming my way in September.

There's my positive.

WMR

01-22-2009, 11:22 PM

*BaseClogger*

01-22-2009, 11:23 PM

Is there anybody on RZ who would like to bet me a 6-pack the Reds don't win 86 games? :D

WMR

01-22-2009, 11:30 PM

Is there anybody on RZ who would like to bet me a 6-pack the Reds don't win 86 games? :D

A six pack of coca cola I'm assuming, Mr. 18 Year Old? :evil:

*BaseClogger*

01-22-2009, 11:42 PM

A six pack of coca cola I'm assuming, Mr. 18 Year Old? :evil:

Well I wasn't talking about my abs... ;)

OnBaseMachine

01-23-2009, 12:33 AM

There's plenty of positives.

I look forward to watching Jay Bruce, Joey Votto, and Edwin Encarnacion grow as hitters. I really think Jay Bruce is going to develop into a superstar and is going to provide plenty of excitement in Cincinnati.

I look forward to watching Johnny Cueto mature as a pitcher.

I look forward to watching Edinson Volquez baffles hitters with a 96 mph fastball and a tantalizing changeup.

I look forward to sitting in GABP on a warm summer night and watching the Reds. There's nothing like it.

I look forward to seeing Aaron Harang return to his 2005-2007 form.

I'm looking forward to seeing some of our top prospects like Yonder Alonso, Todd Frazier, and Drew Stubbs making their major league debuts (hopefully) sometime during the 2009 season.

nate

01-23-2009, 12:57 AM

I look forward to the game chat.

KronoRed

01-23-2009, 01:36 AM

I'm looking forward to many "it's not as bad as we think it is"

Followed a few weeks later with "Holy cow it's as bad as we think it is"

;)

WebScorpion

01-23-2009, 09:21 AM

I don't think I've ever expected less from a Reds team going into Spring Training, so there's nowhere to go but up from here. :D

I'm really straining my brain to come up with something positive to say...I was always taught, 'If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all.'
<pin drop>
http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-signs015.gif (http://www.freesmileys.org)

Jpup

01-23-2009, 09:44 AM

Getting the chance to watch Jay, Joey, Edinson, Johnny, Harang, and Phillips.

corkedbat

01-23-2009, 11:09 AM

I will say I look forward to a warm Summer evening in the Moondeck with one of Monty Inn's pulled pork sandwiches, saratoga chips and a beverage of choice.

It doesn't matter who they are playing or what misgivings I might have about this team, I have to admit I'm looking forward to my next evening at the GAB.

deltachi8

01-23-2009, 11:50 AM

The trading deadline is just a bit over 6 months away!

remdog

01-23-2009, 11:56 AM

I will say I look forward to a warm Summer evening in the Moondeck with one of Monty Inn's pulled pork sandwiches, saratoga chips and a beverage of choice.

They serve Saratoga Chips from Mongomery Inn at the GAB?

Well, if they do, that's a positive IMO. ;)

Rem

_Sir_Charles_

01-23-2009, 11:59 AM

Even though the one time he shot the production moon Taveras was still a below-average Center Fielder? The guy has to look up at Skip Schumaker for goodness sakes (with binoculars).

The only positive out of that is that at least the Reds didn't spend much of their offseason budget on a bad player...oh...wait...

If he ends up being attrocious and an absolutely horrible player for the Reds, then I'll admit to being wrong. But until he does so, you guys can't admit to being right beforehand. Let it play out, it's not like anything we do or say is going to change the direction of the club. So as a fan, take what we get dealt. I personally still like some of the things he brings to the table. I would've preferred someone else, sure, but I think everybody's over-reacting in regards to Taveras.

_Sir_Charles_

01-23-2009, 12:01 PM

it's possible that he will be able to get on base with more regularity than last year but I think Dickerson has the same tools (actually better), less speed-more power, and is his equal or better in the field and at a fraction of the cost. That's the way I would have liked to have seen the Reds go

Same here. And if not for the budget constraints I think it still may have happened. Not getting that LF'er is what put us in this position IMO. Because had we gotten one, if Taveras ended up struggling then we could've moved Dickerson right into that slot. But either way, we needed the depth in the OF.

TRF

01-23-2009, 12:02 PM

TRF

01-23-2009, 12:03 PM

If he ends up being attrocious and an absolutely horrible player for the Reds, then I'll admit to being wrong. But until he does so, you guys can't admit to being right beforehand. Let it play out, it's not like anything we do or say is going to change the direction of the club. So as a fan, take what we get dealt. I personally still like some of the things he brings to the table. I would've preferred someone else, sure, but I think everybody's over-reacting in regards to Taveras.

Well, he was atrocious as a Rockie and atrocious as an Astro.

TRF

01-23-2009, 12:05 PM

Same here. And if not for the budget constraints I think it still may have happened. Not getting that LF'er is what put us in this position IMO. Because had we gotten one, if Taveras ended up struggling then we could've moved Dickerson right into that slot. But either way, we needed the depth in the OF.

ugh. backwards thinking. Had they NOT gotten Taveras, it's more money that could have been used for a real offensive difference maker in LF. Instead we get depth in the form of Gomes and Nix.

cool.

_Sir_Charles_

01-23-2009, 12:08 PM

Sir, you clearly stated ST was an open competition for CF during the regular season. backpeddaling now to say Dickerson and Stubbs will get innings at CF in ST is silly. Of course they will. Days off and split squad games practically guarantee it. But Taveras is the CF and leadoff hitter, just like everyone on this board except you knew was the case the moment he was signed. No one is forcing him out of the role either. Dickerson will outplay him in every facet of the game, but because there is NO ONE to play LF if he goes to CF, It won't happen.

I've railed about how I thought Krivsky set the Reds back 5 years by passing on Lincecum and taking Stubbs instead. Walt set the Reds back 2 years minimum with the Taveras signing. He's taking a gamble with SS with no backup plan, or at least no credible one.

I agree. I'm not backpeddling. I'm adjusting to the new situation. It was assumed (rather incorrectly we now see) that we'd be getting a new LF'er. If we had one, then I truly belived that it would be an open competition in center between Taveras & Dickerson with Stubbs/Hopper/etc getting an outside look (with Taveras having a pre-ST edge due to experience). With that LF window closed, yeah, Taveras is it. I don't deny that. But I don't think the Taveras signing has set the Reds back one single day. If the Reds don't think Stubbs is ready everyday, then he's not ready. Taveras is a fairly inexpensive 2 year stop-gap. If in that 2 years we see that another OF'er is ready for the bigs, then we've still got options of having Taveras as a bench player or as a platoon partner for whomever. Shortstop, however, is another beast altogether.

corkedbat

01-23-2009, 12:09 PM

They serve Saratoga Chips from Mongomery Inn at the GAB?

Well, if they do, that's a positive IMO. ;)

Rem

Yeah, got both for $8.95 last year. They were still hot too. I didn't think that was bad, considering ballpark prices. :thumbup:

_Sir_Charles_

01-23-2009, 12:12 PM

ugh. backwards thinking. Had they NOT gotten Taveras, it's more money that could have been used for a real offensive difference maker in LF. Instead we get depth in the form of Gomes and Nix.

cool.

Hindsight. At the time, the market was horrible (still is) and they needed someone locked up for this coming season. Before he was signed we had 3 OF'ers...period. And that was us counting on an injured Hopper and Dickerson who also has a very long list of injury history. Getting Taveras didn't stop us from getting another LF'er. Nobody here has the inside information on what those "difference makers" were asking or if they were even interested in playing in Cincy. Walt had to make the best call he could with the info he had (and no, I'm no Walt fan...I prefered Krivsky).

remdog

01-23-2009, 12:13 PM

Yeah, got both for $8.95 last year. They were still hot too. I didn't think that was bad, considering ballpark prices. :thumbup:

OK! Well, in case we ever get together at the GAB a plate of those chips could fill in for that beer you mentioned. :)

Rem

corkedbat

01-23-2009, 12:19 PM

OK! Well, in case we ever get together at the GAB a plate of those chips could fill in for that beer you mentioned. :)

Rem

You gotta deal! I'll even throw in a sandwich and a drink of your choice! :thumbup:

TRF

01-23-2009, 12:43 PM

I agree. I'm not backpeddling. I'm adjusting to the new situation. It was assumed (rather incorrectly we now see) that we'd be getting a new LF'er. If we had one, then I truly belived that it would be an open competition in center between Taveras & Dickerson with Stubbs/Hopper/etc getting an outside look (with Taveras having a pre-ST edge due to experience). With that LF window closed, yeah, Taveras is it. I don't deny that. But I don't think the Taveras signing has set the Reds back one single day. If the Reds don't think Stubbs is ready everyday, then he's not ready. Taveras is a fairly inexpensive 2 year stop-gap. If in that 2 years we see that another OF'er is ready for the bigs, then we've still got options of having Taveras as a bench player or as a platoon partner for whomever. Shortstop, however, is another beast altogether.

A player is ready, Dickerson. He's likely the best defender in CF in the entire system. Stubbs MIGHT be better in CF based on tools, but Dickerson has him at this point on polish. It's likely a wash. Taveras is a downgrade defensively in CF from Dickerson, Stubbs and especially Patterson. Defensively, he's not even close to the other three, though I do think the smaller OF in GABP works to his advantage.

Offensively, he's a black hole of suck. It's been stated ad nauseum that his best year was below replacement level. Taveras is at his best right now. his skillset hasn't improved at the plate, but I do believe he's a better base stealer now than 4 years ago. too bad the rules don't allow him to steal 1st.

Dickerson improved his skillset. He still has upside, and if his cup of coffee was indeed his ceiling, then his average productiuon is light years past anything Taveras will accomplish. I'm POSITIVE of that.

So instead of dealing with the problems of this team we get sleight of hand. "We desperately need a SS, so we'll talk up needing a RH run producer in LF."

"We desperately need a RH run producer in LF, so we'll sign a weak hittinf CF instead. Plus we'll put the best defender on the 25 man roster in the least demanding defensive position negating some of his value in the process."

awe. some. squared.

_Sir_Charles_

01-23-2009, 01:28 PM

A player is ready, Dickerson. He's likely the best defender in CF in the entire system. Stubbs MIGHT be better in CF based on tools, but Dickerson has him at this point on polish. It's likely a wash. Taveras is a downgrade defensively in CF from Dickerson, Stubbs and especially Patterson. Defensively, he's not even close to the other three, though I do think the smaller OF in GABP works to his advantage.

Yes, I think Dickerson is ready too. But even if we had put him in center and given him the starting job...we still had a major hole in left. At the time, it didn't look good for us getting a LF'er so Walt grabbed Taveras while he could. Dickerson was an option in left or center...but he couldn't cover both at the same time. When Walt picked up Taveras, I'm sure he also thought he had money enough to get another OF'er (besides Gomes).

Offensively, he's a black hole of suck. It's been stated ad nauseum that his best year was below replacement level. Taveras is at his best right now. his skillset hasn't improved at the plate, but I do believe he's a better base stealer now than 4 years ago. too bad the rules don't allow him to steal 1st.

But he's a better option than an injured Hopper. And at the time, that was our other option. If later this year we find another OF'er or one develops to being MLB ready...then fine, we'll move things around. But for now, he's our best option.

Dickerson improved his skillset. He still has upside, and if his cup of coffee was indeed his ceiling, then his average productiuon is light years past anything Taveras will accomplish. I'm POSITIVE of that.

So instead of dealing with the problems of this team we get sleight of hand. "We desperately need a SS, so we'll talk up needing a RH run producer in LF."

"We desperately need a RH run producer in LF, so we'll sign a weak hittinf CF instead. Plus we'll put the best defender on the 25 man roster in the least demanding defensive position negating some of his value in the process."

awe. some. squared.

Okay, I get it. But if we didn't sign Taveras...(and remember, we hadn't gotten Hairston either yet)...who should we have gotten? And remember, it had to actually be feasible...and the fan-site speculation isn't fact. These other OF'ers whom everyone seems to prefer are most likely asking much more than we were willing to offer. I'm not defending the Taveras signing per se...rather understanding it.

TRF

01-23-2009, 01:59 PM

Yes, I think Dickerson is ready too. But even if we had put him in center and given him the starting job...we still had a major hole in left. At the time, it didn't look good for us getting a LF'er so Walt grabbed Taveras while he could. Dickerson was an option in left or center...but he couldn't cover both at the same time. When Walt picked up Taveras, I'm sure he also thought he had money enough to get another OF'er (besides Gomes).

That's as contradictory a paragraph as any I've ever read. Either they could or they couldn't get a LF, not both.

_Sir_Charles_

01-23-2009, 02:50 PM

wheels

01-23-2009, 03:36 PM

Does Willy Patterson live where it's snowy?

There's always a snow shoveling accident possibility, and there are still some snowy weeks ahead.

You have to stay positive and hope for the best.

gonelong

01-23-2009, 03:41 PM

Positive about the 2009 Reds?

Hmmm .....

The gonelong family will come in significantly under budget on our baseball expenditures for the year.

GL

Ltlabner

01-23-2009, 04:47 PM

I am positive I'm going to catch up on my reading list this Summer.

TRF

01-23-2009, 04:55 PM

How so? When we got Taveras, it looked like there was still money left to be used towards a LF'er. However, the current look of the LF'ers were that they were asking high amounts, but it was believed that the amounts would go down once some guys started signing. But with nothing currently on the burner...he got Taveras. Now that it's obvious that they're done...Dickerson get's penciled in for left.

"Either they could or they couldn't get a LF, not both". At that time it didn't look good, but there was still a good chance later on. So yes, both. They couldn't then, but they still could down the road. Now it's changed.

Were there fewer LF's available then? Did more suddenly become available after the Reds signed Taveras?

Since Taveras WAS NEVER NEEDED in any way shape or form, signing him was a distraction. "Ooh... he steals lots of bases, we shored up the OF. Except of course the OF wasn't shored up at all. It was made weaker by Taveras presence, and never addressed the true area of need, LF.

As for the original topic, it's not being positive, but I am looking forward to 2009's play by EE, Votto, Bruce and Dickerson (who I hope gets 500 AB's). I'm really looking forward to year two of a promising rotation with a better 5th starter.

Falls City Beer

01-23-2009, 05:22 PM

I don't have to watch Griffey field. Have I mentioned that one yet?

*Big* positive.

backbencher

01-23-2009, 07:04 PM

Kc61

01-23-2009, 08:22 PM

Improvement more likely than not: C, 1B, SS, 3B, RF, 3 starters (Harang, Cueto, fifth slot), bullpen, overall bench, overall defense

Push: 2B, Arroyo, Volquez

Decline much more likely than not: CF

Decline certain: LF

Sure, not everyone who could improve will improve. Injuries will happen. The incremental improvements are all "mights" while the decline in LF is certain. But the depth/baseline of the team - the fifth starter(s), the middle relievers, the bench - should be improved. That's something.

As much as many RedsZoners dislike the Taveras acquisition, how does CF decline this year?

Patterson had a .238 OBP last year in 366 at bats in centerfield. In his worst season Taveras had something like .308 OBP and he has been as high as .370 OBP. Yes, Patterson is an elite fielder but Taveras can handle the relatively small CF in GABP.

I'm not saying Taveras is a world beater, but he likely will OBP one hundred points higher than CP did last year. Where is the decline?

Falls City Beer

01-23-2009, 08:24 PM

As much as RedsZone hates the Taveras acquisition, how does CF decline this year?

Patterson had a .238 OBP last year in 366 at bats in centerfield. In his worst season Taveras had something like .308 OBP and he has been as high as .370 OBP. Yes, Patterson is an elite fielder but Taveras can handle the relatively small CF in GABP.

I'm not saying Taveras is a world beater, but he likely will OBP one hundred points higher than CP did last year. Where is the decline?

Offensively, Taveras would have to be worse than just about every CF in the game over the last decade to be worse than Patterson next year.

I don't see the decline either.

Raisor

01-23-2009, 09:06 PM

Offensively, Taveras would have to be worse than just about every CF in the game over the last decade to be worse than Patterson next year.

I don't see the decline either.

As a group last year, the Reds put up a 700 OPS in CF.

I'd be amazed frankly if Willy beats that.

Falls City Beer

01-23-2009, 09:10 PM

As a group last year, the Reds put up a 700 OPS in CF.

I'd be amazed frankly if Willy beats that.

I'm guessing that Willy will OPS .700.

Raisor

01-23-2009, 09:14 PM

I'm guessing that Willy will OPS .700.

When the hope is that you're CF might break 700, it's not exactly an example of awesomness.

666
671
749
604

RedsManRick

01-24-2009, 11:27 AM

A .700 OPS from Willy is basically the same as a .300 average. That's the magic point as which his offensive game doesn't do damage.

Raisor

01-24-2009, 11:32 AM

A .700 OPS from Willy is basically the same as a .300 average. That's the magic point as which his offensive game doesn't do damage.

except that it IS damage when you consider that he's still way below average at 700.

Falls City Beer

01-24-2009, 11:36 AM

except that it IS damage when you consider that he's still way below average at 700.

But the argument was whether CF takes a hit compared to last year; I don't think it does.

Raisor

01-24-2009, 11:46 AM

But the argument was whether CF takes a hit compared to last year; I don't think it does.

And like I said before, I'd be real surprised if WT breaks 700.

When you have to beat your career OPS by 32 points to reach 700, that's a pretty long stretch.

Hope he can pull it off.

RedsManRick

01-24-2009, 11:56 AM

except that it IS damage when you consider that he's still way below average at 700.

I guess it depends on how you define damage. For me, damage is producing less value than a free replacement. Once you're above replacement, it's just a question of whether you earn your paycheck. If Taveras puts up a 700 OPS, that's above replacement at the plate. Factor in that his defense is above average and his speed legitimately adds runs and he'd actually be getting paid appropriately.

He's not being paid like an average CF, so I'm not sure it's reasonable to hold him to the standard of one. That the Reds decided to add, and pay accordingly, a guy who is likely be below average is on them. But he's only doing damage, in my book, if he's producing negative value relative replacement (a distinct possibility).

jojo

01-24-2009, 11:57 AM

Things to look forward to:

We get to see Harang, Volquez and Cueto pitch a lot. We get to see Bruce every day. The only disappointing thing about Votto so far is that his last name doesn't end in V (it would be the same said forward and backwards!). Phillips is a legit plus defender-web gems are cool.

Opportunities for drinking games abound. For instance, two beers for every time Gomes homers and 1 beer every time he Ks (take a shot every time a ball bounces off of his forehead).

What's more, there are plenty of underdogs to root for (Gomes/Dickerson in left, EE's defense, Hannigan, Owings etc).

And then there is that 5% chance.....

Caveat Emperor

01-24-2009, 12:06 PM

What's more, there are plenty of underdogs to root for (Gomes/Dickerson in left, EE's defense, Hannigan, Owings etc).

That's basically where I'm at this season -- I'm rooting for a lot of my favorite players and some of the underdogs to really step it up.

I'd like to see Owings grab the #5 starter spot and come back to his rookie year with a sub-4.50 ERA season, and also contribute with the bat as well.

I'd like to see Dickerson play well in LF.

I'd like to see Drew Stubbs continue to step it up in AAA and force playing time for himself at the ML-level in CF, pushing Taveras out the door after 1 year.

I'd like to see Votto and Bruce both hit 30 HR.

I want to see Johnny Cueto and Edinson Volquez dueling it out for the team lead in Ks.

I want to see Homer Bailey finally grow up and start pitching like he wants to have a future that doesn't involve wearing camouflage.

Stuff like that is the only thing to look forward to, IMO.

Always Red

01-24-2009, 08:39 PM

I found a positive:

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%3ab3f63038-a13c-47f8-9249-d8b1d2f21f89&sid=sitelife.cincinnati.com

Gonzalez to be 100 percent for spring

Reds Medical Director Dr. Timothy Kremchek today examined shortstop Alex Gonzalez in Miami.

President of Baseball Operations and General Manager Walt Jocketty said, “Tim put Alex through a series of tests and agility drills and was very pleased with what he saw. We expect Alex to be ready to participate at 100 percent in all drills on Day 1 of spring training.”

Gonzalez missed the 2008 season with a compression fracture in his left knee.

KronoRed

01-24-2009, 10:32 PM

Is that a positive? it means Hairston will be the starting LF ;)

OnBaseMachine

01-24-2009, 10:33 PM

It would be huge if Gonzalez could return and play at least average defense and OPS in the .740 area.

IslandRed

01-24-2009, 10:53 PM

As a group last year, the Reds put up a 700 OPS in CF.

I'd be amazed frankly if Willy beats that.

Lord knows what the CF production would have been last year if it hadn't been propped up by Jay Bruce's hot streak.

It's a safe bet Taveras will be better than Patterson was, but that's not exactly the same thing as being good.

Always Red

01-25-2009, 07:04 AM

Is that a positive? it means Hairston will be the starting LF ;)

Well, maybe. And I certainly hope not!

But at least in my own little perfect world, it means that Hairston and Keppinger both are now bench players- versatile guys who can come off the bench, play OK defense at a number of spots, and hit a little bit. But not starters.

MWM

01-25-2009, 05:00 PM

The positives? They're still playong baseball in Cincy, and no matter what I still love baseball. There will be things to enjoy no matter what. But 2009 team has the ability to be the worst team we've seen in the Queen City since the early 80s. If Harang bounces back, Arroyo has a solid entire season, Volquez has a year similar to last year, AND Cueto takes a nice leap forward in his development, then they could get close to .500. But I think they're staring at 92-95 losses. It's going to be ugly.

_Sir_Charles_

01-25-2009, 06:20 PM

Were there fewer LF's available then? Did more suddenly become available after the Reds signed Taveras?

Since Taveras WAS NEVER NEEDED in any way shape or form, signing him was a distraction. "Ooh... he steals lots of bases, we shored up the OF. Except of course the OF wasn't shored up at all. It was made weaker by Taveras presence, and never addressed the true area of need, LF.

As for the original topic, it's not being positive, but I am looking forward to 2009's play by EE, Votto, Bruce and Dickerson (who I hope gets 500 AB's). I'm really looking forward to year two of a promising rotation with a better 5th starter.
So, I take it that you think that if we hadn't signed Taveras that we'd have more money available to sign a BETTER LF'er? Is that what you're leaning towards? It kind of looks like it. Well, I certainly don't see any FA left fielders who were going to sign for our alloted money regardless of the Taveras signing or not. Oh wait, I forgot, Dunn will resign with us for 5 million a year...right? *rolls eyes*

Let it go people, let it GO! Dunn is gone, he won't resign here. It's over and done with, move on. <---not directed at you, just a general rant.

How is it that Taveras was never needed? How is it that you're seeing that? Because I sure as hell don't. When he was signed, we had Bruce, Dickerson and .... ummm.... that's it. Hopper possibly, but I'm not even sure if they knew if he was over his injury yet. But let's assume that they did know. So now you're going to automatically pencil in Dickerson as the heir-apparent? After only 102 at bats? After his unusually lengthy injury history? I'm not down on Chris, I think he'll be excellent this year. But to say that Taveras wasn't needed is basing your entire season on the hope that you'll be able to sign one of those high-priced free agents. And of course hamstringing your options in the future with yet another big contract on the books.

remdog

01-25-2009, 06:25 PM

Juan Riveria could have been had within our budget (if Castellini wasn't lying) for not all that much more than Tavaras and would have filled that 'void' that you mentioned.

Rem

_Sir_Charles_

01-25-2009, 06:30 PM

Is that a positive? it means Hairston will be the starting LF ;)

If Dickerson is hitting like he was last season, and Taveras is hitting like HE did last season, it'll probably push Wily to the bench and not Chris. We can speculate all we want, but there are no numbers and no stat that will tell us what these players WILL do next year. So Gonzo healthy...it ain't nothing but a positive. More options are always a good thing.

*BaseClogger*

01-25-2009, 06:31 PM

How is it that Taveras was never needed? How is it that you're seeing that? Because I sure as hell don't. When he was signed, we had Bruce, Dickerson and .... ummm.... that's it.

Taveras was essentially a replacement-level player that was given a multi-year, $6M contract. There were an infinite number of alternate possibilities, even if we only had two to three outfielders...

*BaseClogger*

01-25-2009, 06:33 PM

If Dickerson is hitting like he was last season, and Taveras is hitting like HE did last season, it'll probably push Wily to the bench and not Chris. We can speculate all we want, but there are no numbers and no stat that will tell us what these players WILL do next year. So Gonzo healthy...it ain't nothing but a positive. More options are always a good thing.

Sir Charles, in your estimation, what is the probability that Taveras outperforms Dickerson next year?

pahster

01-25-2009, 06:34 PM

How is it that Taveras was never needed? How is it that you're seeing that? Because I sure as hell don't.

Career: .283/.331/.337/OPS+ 72

2008: .251/.308/.296/OPS+ 56

_Sir_Charles_

01-25-2009, 06:41 PM

Sir Charles, in your estimation, what is the probability that Taveras outperforms Dickerson next year?

That depends upon what you consider performance. Power? Avg? Defense? Durability? Ability to affect the game? I don't know. If Chris gets injured again (far from a hard to imagine scenerio), he could rather easily out perform him. If 2008 was Dickerson's career year (he hasn't been THAT great in the minors), he could plummet stat-wise and Taveras could again easily out perform him. I just don't think that there's much chance of Taveras repeating his 2008 performance. I like the options he brings to the table. However, if he struggles at the plate like last season, bench him. I don't base my decisions on what a player "might" do, but rather what he IS doing. And like I said, there is no stat out there that will tell any of you guys here what Wily Taveras or Chris Dickerson WILL do next year. You're all guessing...whether the sabre-heads will admit it or not.

_Sir_Charles_

01-25-2009, 06:43 PM

Career: .283/.331/.337/OPS+ 72

2008: .251/.308/.296/OPS+ 56

Cool, more stats. Okay, those are Wily's...here's our CF stats before we signed him.

.000/.000/.000/ hmmm...I'm not sure how that'd figure out for the OPS+ but I'm sure somebody here could figure it out.

Either way, I'm pretty sure that Wily's are better than those ones I just posted. :O)

And by the way, when a players' weakness is hitting for power, why is it that his power stats are always the ones that people post. Oh yeah, to put him in the worst light possible. You do know that it IS possible to have a HUGE impact on the game and to not hit a single home run all season long, right? Look, I'm not trying to defend Taveras or to say he was a good signing. I'm just sick of the slamming of the guy before he's even given a freaking chance to show us what he can do. 6 million for 2 years is NOT a big contract in today's day and age. I just think that many here are expecting us to get a "steal of the century" with every signing.

*BaseClogger*

01-25-2009, 06:47 PM

That depends upon what you consider performance. Power? Avg? Defense? Durability? Ability to affect the game? I don't know. If Chris gets injured again (far from a hard to imagine scenerio), he could rather easily out perform him. If 2008 was Dickerson's career year (he hasn't been THAT great in the minors), he could plummet stat-wise and Taveras could again easily out perform him. I just don't think that there's much chance of Taveras repeating his 2008 performance. I like the options he brings to the table. However, if he struggles at the plate like last season, bench him. I don't base my decisions on what a player "might" do, but rather what he IS doing. And like I said, there is no stat out there that will tell any of you guys here what Wily Taveras or Chris Dickerson WILL do next year. You're all guessing...whether the sabre-heads will admit it or not.

Well, obviously a projection has an inherent amount of uncertainty involved since after all that is the definition of a projection. When I asked about performance I was referring to overall value or contributions to the team. I understand that Dickerson's injury risk should be considered. However, you seem to think that there is no risk involved with Taveras. He is owed $6M over the next two years while Dickerson will make league minimum. And sure, if Taveras is really good that would be a bonus. But what "IS" Taveras doing? And why wouldn't you be concerned with what they "might" do? That's how decisions are made.

And I think every "sabre-head" would be willing to admit there is a lot of uncertainty involved with projections. However, they are much more accurate than one RedsZone poster's hunch...

*BaseClogger*

01-25-2009, 06:53 PM

_Sir_Charles_

01-25-2009, 07:03 PM

Well, obviously a projection has an inherent amount of uncertainty involved since after all that is the definition of a projection. When I asked about performance I was referring to overall value or contributions to the team. I understand that Dickerson's injury risk should be considered. However, you seem to think that there is no risk involved with Taveras. He is owed $6M over the next two years while Dickerson will make league minimum. And sure, if Taveras is really good that would be a bonus. But what "IS" Taveras doing? And why wouldn't you be concerned with what they "might" do? That's how decisions are made.

And I think every "sabre-head" would be willing to admit there is a lot of uncertainty involved with projections. However, they are much more accurate than one RedsZone poster's hunch...

If they both performed as they did last season, sure, Dickerson would be a much better value. But that's not the question. 6 million over the next 2 years...if not Taveras, then who? And if not Taveras, then for HOW MUCH and HOW LONG? All these other guys that everyone here wanted us to get instead would've taken a lot more money and most likely a much longer contract. Is there anybody here who wanted us to get another huge contract pulling down our club's options and payroll flexibility like Junior's?

And I know there's a risk with Taveras...good lord, look at his stats from last season. There's a huge risk there. But there's also a lot of talent there too. And the potential for a LOT of upside. He's never going to hit for power, I think that's a given. But he could still provide a TON of value. So while I am concerned with what he "might" do from a fan's perspective, I want the manager/gm to make their determinations based on what the player IS doing. If another player out-plays Wily in ST, then re-think your stance as a GM/Manager. I don't think any player should be "written in" as a starter before they do anything on the field.

As for the "hunch" comment...even your sabre projections have Wily bouncing back from his dismal 2008. Same as my "hunch". Accuracy has no point in it as I haven't said what he WILL do, unlike his many projections. Personally, I'm still waiting for one of those projections to actually come out correct. :O) I'm sure there were projections saying that the Rays would win the AL east, or that the Phils would win the WS, or that Detroit would finish 74-88. If I recall correctly, a good portion of those projections had the Tigers winning it all. Yikes.

Highlifeman21

01-25-2009, 07:13 PM

pahster

01-25-2009, 07:13 PM

Cool, more stats. Okay, those are Wily's...here's our CF stats before we signed him.

.000/.000/.000/ hmmm...I'm not sure how that'd figure out for the OPS+ but I'm sure somebody here could figure it out.

Either way, I'm pretty sure that Wily's are better than those ones I just posted. :O)

The Reds have one Chris Dickerson on the roster. They also have Norris Hopper around and now have Jerry Hairston on the roster again. Hairston wasn't resigned yet when Taveras was brought on board, but the Reds were obviously making the strongest push of any team to get him.

The Reds needed an OF. Did the need a CF? Probably not. Did they need a really poor player? Of course not. Did they need to sign said poor player for two years and about $6 million? No.

It's never a good idea to bring in terrible players to fill starting roles.

And by the way, when a players' weakness is hitting for power, why is it that his power stats are always the ones that people post. Oh yeah, to put him in the worst light possible. You do know that it IS possible to have a HUGE impact on the game and to not hit a single home run all season long, right? Look, I'm not trying to defend Taveras or to say he was a good signing. I'm just sick of the slamming of the guy before he's even given a freaking chance to show us what he can do. 6 million for 2 years is NOT a big contract in today's day and age. I just think that many here are expecting us to get a "steal of the century" with every signing.

I put up all of his rate stats. Note that his (nausea inducing) OBP is included as well. But yeah, his SLG is up there as well, and it should be. When a guy struggles to hit the ball out of the infield it deserves to be pointed out.

$6 million over two years for a player of Taveras' caliber is ridiculous. Especially when you consider that the Reds are crying poor now. There's a reason people are waving torches and pitchforks at this signing: it was a terrible idea. Even if Taveras reverts to his career norms (and I expect he'll come close to them) he's still a very poor player. The Reds had other (and likely better) options available to them for the major league minimum. The Reds don't have to get the Greatest Bargain of All Time in each of their contracts, but that certainly doesn't mean they should just flush money down the toilet.

*BaseClogger*

01-25-2009, 07:14 PM

If they both performed as they did last season, sure, Dickerson would be a much better value. But that's not the question. 6 million over the next 2 years...if not Taveras, then who? And if not Taveras, then for HOW MUCH and HOW LONG? All these other guys that everyone here wanted us to get instead would've taken a lot more money and most likely a much longer contract. Is there anybody here who wanted us to get another huge contract pulling down our club's options and payroll flexibility like Junior's?

You make some good points, but as another poster mentioned earlier, Juan Rivera could have been had for about the same amount. My personal preferences, Nick Swisher and Ty Wigginton, wouldn't have been too much more expensive either. Just not spending the the Taveras money and playing youngsters would have been a better choice too IMO.

And I know there's a risk with Taveras...good lord, look at his stats from last season. There's a huge risk there. But there's also a lot of talent there too. And the potential for a LOT of upside. He's never going to hit for power, I think that's a given. But he could still provide a TON of value. So while I am concerned with what he "might" do from a fan's perspective, I want the manager/gm to make their determinations based on what the player IS doing. If another player out-plays Wily in ST, then re-think your stance as a GM/Manager. I don't think any player should be "written in" as a starter before they do anything on the field.

What is Taveras' LOT of upside and TON of value? I don't see it. I agree with the last things you say.

As for the "hunch" comment...even your sabre projections have Wily bouncing back from his dismal 2008. Same as my "hunch". Accuracy has no point in it as I haven't said what he WILL do, unlike his many projections. Personally, I'm still waiting for one of those projections to actually come out correct. :O) I'm sure there were projections saying that the Rays would win the AL east, or that the Phils would win the WS, or that Detroit would finish 74-88. If I recall correctly, a good portion of those projections had the Tigers winning it all. Yikes.

If your hunch is the same as Willy's projections you should be just as against the Taveras signing as everybody else. ;)

You're right, you win. No projection system is perfect. But that's not the point. You can't just pick the most extreme examples and call shenanigans. The point is that they get most of their projections right...

Ltlabner

01-25-2009, 07:17 PM

I'm just sick of the slamming of the guy before he's even given a freaking chance to show us what he can do.

He's had 4 years worth of chances to show us what he can do.

What he does is stink.

Ltlabner

01-25-2009, 07:19 PM

He's never going to hit for power, I think that's a given. But he could still provide a TON of value.

Ok, you are obviously quite passionate about the subject.

How, exactly, will he provide this 2,000Lbs of value?

GAC

01-25-2009, 07:22 PM

You shouldn't have to wait too long in line when you are walking up for tickets. :thumbup:

Scalpers will be laid-off by the AS break.

_Sir_Charles_

01-25-2009, 07:22 PM

Chris Dickerson is more than capable of playing center field.

True, but is he capable of playing both centerfield AND left field at the same time? Hmmmmm... I'm not so sure that he's THAT good.

His power numbers are posted because that is a huge part of any baseball player's offensive game.

But not his. His is a different skill set and posting those stats ignore what he DOES do. It's kind of like posting a pitchers W/L, Strikeouts, CG only....when he's a relief pitcher. Stats are usually decieving because they can be spun anyway the poster wants to to make his point.

Huh?

Let's say he hits for a .280 average, steals 60 bases, scores 90+ runs, hits 30 doubles & 10 triples, breaks up lots of DP's, causes pitchers to lose focus to batters by distracting them on the basepaths, increases the odds of the batters behind him seeing more grooved pitches due to distraction...hmmm...and I didn't even mention a HR there...or OBP or walks. But it still looks like a ton of impact on the game.

Our best guess is that he isn't going to help, and that is the best we can do. And that little $6M contract contributes to the handcuffs currently around Jocketty's hands...

Well, our best guess hasn't seen him play in Cincy for a full season yet. It hasn't seen him in a Dusty Baker lineup before. And it doesn't have the experience that a MLB club does in assessing talent. Our best guess is pretty much useless hot air and speculation.

jojo

01-25-2009, 07:24 PM

You do know that it IS possible to have a HUGE impact on the game and to not hit a single home run all season long, right?

Fair enough about his lack of power. What about his lack of on base skills?

I'm just sick of the slamming of the guy before he's even given a freaking chance to show us what he can do.

Fair enough about the pessimism being a turn off too, but it's not like he's an unopened pack of baseball cards and we can't see who is inside the wrapper.

pahster

01-25-2009, 07:25 PM

Highlifeman21

01-25-2009, 07:30 PM

Let's say he hits for a .280 average, steals 60 bases, scores 90+ runs, hits 30 doubles & 10 triples, breaks up lots of DP's, causes pitchers to lose focus to batters by distracting them on the basepaths, increases the odds of the batters behind him seeing more grooved pitches due to distraction...hmmm...and I didn't even mention a HR there...or OBP or walks. But it still looks like a ton of impact on the game.

He might hit for .280.
He might steal 60.
He won't score 90+. Most he's ever scored was 83 in a season. Remember, ya gotta 1, get on base, then 2, score. Willy's very challenged with #1, and given his teammates being offense challenged, even if and when he's on base they certainly won't plate him.
He won't hit 30 doubles. He's hit exactly 60 in 4 seasons, so for 2009 he's gonna hit 30? Not hardly...
I suppose he could hit 10 triples, but he only has 13 for his career and hit all of 4 of them in 2 years in Coors, so odds are against him.
As for breaking up DPs, you need to be on base to break up DPs. And since he'll be stealing 60+ bases, he'll already have avoided a DP situation, right?

So, this ton of impact on the game is nothing more than smoke and mirrors. .280 AVG and 60 SB are the only 2 things that look remotely legit. All the rest are pipe dreams.

*BaseClogger*

01-25-2009, 07:34 PM

True, but is he capable of playing both centerfield AND left field at the same time? Hmmmmm... I'm not so sure that he's THAT good.

Come on, that's horse poop and you know it. Any of the other guys that have been mentioned already are better players than Willy Taveras.

Let's say he hits for a .280 average, steals 60 bases, scores 90+ runs, hits 30 doubles & 10 triples, breaks up lots of DP's, causes pitchers to lose focus to batters by distracting them on the basepaths, increases the odds of the batters behind him seeing more grooved pitches due to distraction...hmmm...and I didn't even mention a HR there...or OBP or walks. But it still looks like a ton of impact on the game.

Whew... take a deep breath BC, you can do it.

...

The BA means nothing without knowing his OBP. SB means nothing without knowing his CS. Runs, doubles, and triples means nothing without knowing PA (by the way, he has never reached any of those benchmarks). Breaks up DP's? That must have a lot of value. And, finally, the theory that a fast baserunner can distract a pitcher more than a normal baserunner has been refuted by studies such as the one done in Baseball Between the Numbers.

Well, our best guess hasn't seen him play in Cincy for a full season yet. It hasn't seen him in a Dusty Baker lineup before. And it doesn't have the experience that a MLB club does in assessing talent. Our best guess is pretty much useless hot air and speculation.

We can do statisticy things like adjust for home park using park ratings. A Dusty Baker lineup? Our best guess is useless?

:thumbup:

_Sir_Charles_

01-25-2009, 07:35 PM

Ok, so if you're basing your decisions on what a player IS doing, then how on Earth can you be optimistic about Willy Taveras?

His career numbers are suck, suck and more suck.

But that's not what he IS doing, it's what he's done in other places, in other lineups, with other coaches and other managers. And to be clear, I'm not optimistic about Wily Taveras...I'm optimistic about the TEAM. He brings a part to the whole.

And his numbers are not suck, suck and more suck.

.291, .278, .320 batting averages for 3 straight seasons. Far from suck.
34, 33, 33, 68 stolen bases for 4 straight seasons. Far from suck.
592, 529, 372, 479 ab's in 4 straight seasons. Quite durable and far from suck.
82, 83, 64, 64 runs scored in 4 straight seasons. Only 3 reds had more than 64 runs scored last season...THREE. Far from suck.

Okay, you don't like him. And to you he may suck. But his numbers don't. His POWER numbers and his OBP however...but there's more to baseball than just OBP & SLG. Much, MUCH more.

*BaseClogger*

01-25-2009, 07:37 PM

^^Okay, I'm done...

_Sir_Charles_

01-25-2009, 07:37 PM

If he did all of that he wouldn't be Willy Taveras.

But he could. Those things aren't even a far reach for his potential. And I was really just pointing out that a player could have a huge impact without using power numbers.

jojo

01-25-2009, 07:38 PM

Stats are usually decieving because they can be spun anyway the poster wants to to make his point.

Sorry, but this criticism is a real pet peeve of mine. Don't blame the stats....blame the person formulating the argument.

Let's say he hits for a .280 average, steals 60 bases, scores 90+ runs, hits 30 doubles & 10 triples, breaks up lots of DP's, causes pitchers to lose focus to batters by distracting them on the basepaths, increases the odds of the batters behind him seeing more grooved pitches due to distraction...hmmm...and I didn't even mention a HR there...or OBP or walks. But it still looks like a ton of impact on the game.

The context is Taveras right? I ask because that above player isn't Taveras.

Well, our best guess hasn't seen him play in Cincy for a full season yet. It hasn't seen him in a Dusty Baker lineup before. And it doesn't have the experience that a MLB club does in assessing talent. Our best guess is pretty much useless hot air and speculation.

I disagree with the notion that a player's true talent level can't be reliably estimated. We can estimate the effect of changing environments. As for how Dusty might use him, well, that's probably going to be a regular thread starter.

pahster

01-25-2009, 07:39 PM

Okay, you don't like him. And to you he may suck. But his numbers don't. His POWER numbers and his OBP however...but there's more to baseball than just OBP & SLG. Much, MUCH more.

There's not a whole lot more when it comes to run production.

Ltlabner

01-25-2009, 07:40 PM

Let's say he hits for a .280 average, steals 60 bases, scores 90+ runs, hits 30 doubles & 10 triples, breaks up lots of DP's, causes pitchers to lose focus to batters by distracting them on the basepaths, increases the odds of the batters behind him seeing more grooved pitches due to distraction...

YEAR NAME AVG PA SB R 2B 3B
2008 Willy Taveras .251 538 68 64 15 2
2007 Willy Taveras .320 408 33 64 13 2
2006 Willy Taveras .278 587 33 83 19 5
2005 Willy Taveras .291 635 34 82 13 4

One small problem. He's only topped .280 BA twice, only stolen more than 60 bases once, never once scored more than 90 runs, never hit 30 doubles and never gotten close to 10 triples.

And now he's playing in a park that rewards SLG (which is why it's mentioned) and suppresses the doubles and triples you claim will add "a ton" of value.

If you want to bet that after 2168 PA's he's suddenly figured it all out, or that being in Dusty Bakers line ups will somehow vault him to career heights never before reached thats your business. I just don't see it as a sensible bet.

pahster

01-25-2009, 07:41 PM

But he could. Those things aren't even a far reach for his potential. And I was really just pointing out that a player could have a huge impact without using power numbers.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/t/taverwi01.shtml

Look at his numbers. After you've done so, explain to me why you think he's going to hit 30 doubles and 10 triples in one season, especially now that he's playing in a park the supresses singles, doubles, and triples. He's hit 60 doubles and 13 triples in his career. Unless he learns to find first base more often, he's probably not going to score 90+ runs.

jojo

01-25-2009, 07:45 PM

YEAR NAME AVG PA SB R 2B 3B
2008 Willy Taveras .251 538 68 64 15 2
2007 Willy Taveras .320 408 33 64 13 2
2006 Willy Taveras .278 587 33 83 19 5
2005 Willy Taveras .291 635 34 82 13 4

One small problem. He's only topped .280 BA twice, only stolen more than 60 bases once, never once scored more than 90 runs, never hit 30 doubles and never gotten close to 10 triples.

And now he's playing in a park that rewards SLG (which is why it's mentioned) and suppresses the doubles and triples you claim will add "a ton" of value.

If you want to bet that after 2168 PA's he's suddenly figured it all out, or that being in Dusty Bakers line ups will somehow vault him to career heights never before reached thats your business. I just don't see it as a sensible bet.

Quoted for truth. Bolded for fershizzle.

I'd only add that he'll also be batting in a spot in the lineup that will exacerbate his OBP weakness.

_Sir_Charles_

01-25-2009, 07:51 PM

Come on, that's horse poop and you know it. Any of the other guys that have been mentioned already are better players than Willy Taveras.

But would ANY of those guys have signed with Cincy and for an appropriate amount & length of time? There are lots of guys better than Taveras. There are also lots of guys better than Jay Bruce. What's your point? We needed another body for the OF at that time and we filled that void cheaply, for the short-term, and with a young kid with potential who needed a change of scenery. Sure, we could've done better, but it's not the team killer that everyone is slitting their wrists about.

The BA means nothing without knowing his OBP. SB means nothing without knowing his CS. Runs, doubles, and triples means nothing without knowing PA (by the way, he has never reached any of those benchmarks). Breaks up DP's? That must have a lot of value. And, finally, the theory that a fast baserunner can distract a pitcher more than a normal baserunner has been refuted by studies such as the one done in Baseball Between the Numbers.

I know that one stat is meaningless without others to correlate with them. That's a given. And I don't deny that. But OBP/SLG/OPS doesn't mean everything without all the other numbers either. That was my point about only posting those 3 stats in regards to a non-power hitter. And BA doesn't mean "nothing". It's still a useful stat regardless of how looked down upon it is here. OBP shows you how often you're getting on base. BA, however, will show you how often you're doing that with your BAT and not just your eyes or a pitchers poor control. Far from a meaningless stat that it's made out to be here. I hate to burst a bubble here, but Bill James is not a god. By the way, sorry if some of this reply seems rant-like, but I'm trying to keep track of who I'm replying too and I'm losing track. :O)

We can do statisticy things like adjust for home park using park ratings. A Dusty Baker lineup? Our best guess is useless?:thumbup:

Yes, it is useless. Because it's still just a guess. Your best guess is based on that players' performance in a completely different lineup. A young, energetic team can alter a player's performance in a myriad of ways. As can a fresh start on a new team. If he ends up stinking up the joint, pull him. But until we have a better option, one that's proven he a better option against MLB opposition, he plays.

Caveat Emperor

01-25-2009, 07:52 PM

Okay, you don't like him. And to you he may suck. But his numbers don't. His POWER numbers and his OBP however...but there's more to baseball than just OBP & SLG. Much, MUCH more.

So, SC -- let's dig a little deeper into this debate:

(and I apologize in advance, I'm nowhere near the level of Cyclone or Steel in these types of conversations)

http://www.hardballtimes.com/images/uploads/dlf_ops1.JPG

This is a run correlation chart -- it measures the rate at which a given offensive statistic correlates with run production. You can thank Cyclone for this one -- I've kept it bookmarked since the day he posted it almost 3 years ago.

You say that there is more to baseball than OBP & SLG. Defensively, you're certainly right. However, when it comes to Offense, you can see on this chart that there is a .955 correlation between OPS and offensive production. If you recall from intro to prob stat in high school, correlations coefficients range from -1 to 1 -- with a "1" being a perfect correlation (if this, then X), "-1" being a perfect negative-correlation (if this, then not X) and "0" being no correlation whatsoever (this has no relationship to that). The number for OPS is pretty darn close to 1, while the number for items like Batting Average is much further from 1.

Are we ever going to get a statistic that lines up perfectly with offensive production? Probably not -- because you're right, there are little things and human factors that come into play that are impossible to truly quantify with any regularity. However, they get pretty darned close on this chart -- and they're using the very numbers you dismiss.

So, my question to you is this: what do you think is important to look at to measure a player's value that these items in this chart misses?

Highlifeman21

01-25-2009, 07:57 PM

But that's not what he IS doing, it's what he's done in other places, in other lineups, with other coaches and other managers. And to be clear, I'm not optimistic about Wily Taveras...I'm optimistic about the TEAM. He brings a part to the whole.

And his numbers are not suck, suck and more suck.

.291, .278, .320 batting averages for 3 straight seasons. Far from suck.
34, 33, 33, 68 stolen bases for 4 straight seasons. Far from suck.
592, 529, 372, 479 ab's in 4 straight seasons. Quite durable and far from suck.
82, 83, 64, 64 runs scored in 4 straight seasons. Only 3 reds had more than 64 runs scored last season...THREE. Far from suck.

Okay, you don't like him. And to you he may suck. But his numbers don't. His POWER numbers and his OBP however...but there's more to baseball than just OBP & SLG. Much, MUCH more.

So how come you're ignoring his awesome 2008?

Regardless, when your OBP is as AVG driven as Taveras, you need to make your 2007 season happen every year to have any value.

Durable is nice and all, but durable and suck is a dangerous combination. The sad part is that in 2006 and 2008, Willy Taveras combined for 1008 ABs in 282 G of pure suck.

... and I'm glad you brought up SB and R. Willy Taveras steals bases, which is great. ...but, with those SB he's not enhancing or increasing his R totals. 168 SB in 4 seasons = good. Only 293 R in those same 4 seasons = not so good. So we're looking at an average of 42 SB and 73 R per season, which isn't legendary by any stretch of the imagination, and seeing as Willy Taveras is a leadoff hitter, 73 R/season is just plain pathetic. As I've already mentioned, his career high R for a season is 83. Awe.some.

So, to recap, when he gets on base (and that doesn't happen too often) he steals bases. Those SB, however, are wasted since he doesn't turn those SB in the R. The fact that he's durable is nice and all, but he's basically a pulse wearing a uniform since he doesn't offer much in the production department.

Willy Taveras doesn't get on base and he doesn't score runs, and those 2 things are kinda important for leadoff men, don't cha' think? So, while his SLG isn't important to me in the least, his OBP is, and his R certainly are as well.

... and they should matter to you as well.

jojo

01-25-2009, 08:06 PM

BTW, Sir Charles, lest you think people are gang tackling you, I admire your gusto.

_Sir_Charles_

01-25-2009, 08:07 PM

Sorry, but this criticism is a real pet peeve of mine. Don't blame the stats....blame the person formulating the argument.

I agree. I don't blame the stats, only the person posting only parts of them.

The context is Taveras right? I ask because that above player isn't Taveras.

No, not really. That was more just an example of how a player can impact the game without using power. That's all. But I also don't think those types of numbers are unreachable by Taveras. Unlikely (especially in a one-season turnaround), but possible. Denying that is just closing your mind to his skills.

I disagree with the notion that a player's true talent level can't be reliably estimated. We can estimate the effect of changing environments. As for how Dusty might use him, well, that's probably going to be a regular thread starter.

Fair enough. But I disagree with the notion that a players' projection makes him crap. That's the assessment I see on here quite a bit. A player's career numbers show us that he'll do this year in and year out and it's just unacceptable for our team as it's below replacement level numbers. Well, replacement level numbers fluctuate every year. And those replacement level numbers don't account for how a specific player fits into the whole of the team. This whole discussion has become a bashing of me in the fact that I don't hate the Taveras acqusition like the rest of the board (multiple PM's on the fact). I don't know how many times I have to say the fact that I don't really like Taveras and that I hope another player beats him out of the job. The simple fact that I understood the need to get him seemed to put me under the "wily-lover" tag. It's possible to like an acqusition without liking the individual player.

_Sir_Charles_

01-25-2009, 08:11 PM

There's not a whole lot more when it comes to run production.

Yes there is. There's the rest of the team. You could be a player who has an OBP of freaking .500, but if nobody knocks you in...your run production is squat. Getting on base is great, and I'd love it if he was better at it. But I don't hate the fact that when he does get on base, he's got the wheels to make his teammate's hits count more often.

pahster

01-25-2009, 08:20 PM

Yes there is. There's the rest of the team. You could be a player who has an OBP of freaking .500, but if nobody knocks you in...your run production is squat. Getting on base is great, and I'd love it if he was better at it. But I don't hate the fact that when he does get on base, he's got the wheels to make his teammate's hits count more often.

I like him just fine when he gets on base. He's great when he's on. The problem is that he makes outs at a sickening rate. Can't score if you can't get on base.

_Sir_Charles_

01-25-2009, 08:27 PM

So, my question to you is this: what do you think is important to look at to measure a player's value that these items in this chart misses?

Nothing, and I wasn't arguing that they were. I've got nothing against sabre stats. I just hate the fact that many saber-heads think that all there is to the game IS stats. I've never said that avg is a better stat than OBP. I've never said that SLG or OPS weren't useful stats. What I was saying in this thread is that in regards to Taveras' skill set, the SLG & OPS stats don't help you illustrate what Taveras CAN do. It only shows what he CAN'T do. I'm not dismissing sabre stats, I'm only stating that there is more to baseball than those little numbers and that however effective a tool those numbers are, they still can't predict the future or take into account unknown variables. But apparently, because I didn't praise the Jamesian theology...I'm a heretic. Oh well.

If it comes down to a numbers debate, I'll lose. Without a doubt. I'll be buried under an avalanche of stats. But I'll still watch the game with my eyes and ears and not a sliderule.

RedsManRick

01-25-2009, 08:29 PM

Nothing, and I wasn't arguing that they were. I've got nothing against sabre stats. I just hate the fact that many saber-heads think that all there is to the game IS stats. I've never said that avg is a better stat than OBP. I've never said that SLG or OPS weren't useful stats. What I was saying in this thread is that in regards to Taveras' skill set, the SLG & OPS stats don't help you illustrate what Taveras CAN do. It only shows what he CAN'T do. I'm not dismissing sabre stats, I'm only stating that there is more to baseball than those little numbers and that however effective a tool those numbers are, they still can't predict the future or take into account unknown variables. But apparently, because I didn't praise the Jamesian theology...I'm a heretic. Oh well.

If it comes down to a numbers debate, I'll lose. Without a doubt. I'll be buried under an avalanche of stats. But I'll still watch the game with my eyes and ears and not a sliderule.

I get where you're coming from Sir Charles, but it begs the questions. If the things Taveras can do well don't really correlate much with scoring runs, then why should we care if he can do them well?

This sort of reasoning that justifies his signing and Dusty's general predilection to building teams around players who aren't all that great. He can run! He can bunt! He hustles! He plays the game the "right way". Those things are great and all, they just aren't a substitute for run production. Now, if Taveras was to be used primarily as a pinch runner or designated bunter, we could easily examine those things in detail to figure out how well he'd fit that role. But as a guy who's going to get 600+ PA if he plays everyday, we need to look at his broader skill set to understand his value.

He does a few things well, I'll concede. But imagine if we were talking about a pitcher with a world class curveball but who walked every other batter and was homer prone -- and who had a 5.60 career ERA. We would put up with a manager who said he was signed to be our primary set up guy and that he'd be awesome for those times when we were facing Wily Mo Pena? At the end of the day, he needs to prevent runs from scoring, period; talking about his curveball is sort of a waste of time.

Willy Taveras runs fast, we get it. He steals lots of bases and might have a batting average of .290. But those things are meaningless in isolation. They only have meaning in the context of producing runs. Unless he's being used in a way in which all he has to do is run fast, his speed to needs to be put in the proper context.

Ltlabner

01-25-2009, 08:30 PM

What I was saying in this thread is that in regards to Taveras' skill set, the SLG & OPS stats don't help you illustrate what Taveras CAN do. It only shows what he CAN'T do.

I agree with your last sentence.

The stats show very clearly that he can't get on base, and creates a lot of outs.

That strikes me as relatively important for a lead-off hitter.

Highlifeman21

01-25-2009, 08:31 PM

I agree with your last sentence.

The stats show very clearly that he can't get on base, and creates a lot of outs.

That strikes me as relatively important for a lead-off hitter.

I thought Taveras was just here for OF depth.. :confused:

WMR

01-25-2009, 08:33 PM

These Taveras threads are going to be gold, Jerry, gold to go back and read 7-8 months from now.

_Sir_Charles_

01-25-2009, 08:37 PM

So how come you're ignoring his awesome 2008?

Regardless, when your OBP is as AVG driven as Taveras, you need to make your 2007 season happen every year to have any value.

Durable is nice and all, but durable and suck is a dangerous combination. The sad part is that in 2006 and 2008, Willy Taveras combined for 1008 ABs in 282 G of pure suck.

... and I'm glad you brought up SB and R. Willy Taveras steals bases, which is great. ...but, with those SB he's not enhancing or increasing his R totals. 168 SB in 4 seasons = good. Only 293 R in those same 4 seasons = not so good. So we're looking at an average of 42 SB and 73 R per season, which isn't legendary by any stretch of the imagination, and seeing as Willy Taveras is a leadoff hitter, 73 R/season is just plain pathetic. As I've already mentioned, his career high R for a season is 83. Awe.some.

So, to recap, when he gets on base (and that doesn't happen too often) he steals bases. Those SB, however, are wasted since he doesn't turn those SB in the R. The fact that he's durable is nice and all, but he's basically a pulse wearing a uniform since he doesn't offer much in the production department.

Willy Taveras doesn't get on base and he doesn't score runs, and those 2 things are kinda important for leadoff men, don't cha' think? So, while his SLG isn't important to me in the least, his OBP is, and his R certainly are as well.

... and they should matter to you as well.

What in the hell are you talking about? Where, please, show me...where have I ignored his 2008 suckfest? I've stated numerous times about how horrible he was last year.

As for the SB and runs scored...I know all about the correlations of the two and the fact that with his SB's his R's scored should be higher. But that RS stat is wholly dependant upon his teammates. And low and behold, he's got a whole new set of 'em this year. Will that mean he'll be better or worse? Who knows. I don't. But then again, neither do any of you. Everyone here is jumping on the "I hate Wily T" bandwagon and piling on the stats to prove that he'll be a huge pile of suckitude in 2009, but none of you have a shred of proof...just guesses and projections. Isn't anyone willing to give the kid a chance and let him show it on the field? He's already on the team, how about a little support for the home team....a bit of optimism. Is that too much to ask for? Good grief.

And this is the kind of thing I'm talking about.."Those SB, however, are wasted since he doesn't turn those SB in the R." HE doesn't turn them into runs, his teammates do. Somehow, people here are turning his low R total into his fault for not cashing in his SB's more.

_Sir_Charles_

01-25-2009, 08:38 PM

BTW, Sir Charles, lest you think people are gang tackling you, I admire your gusto.

Thank you sir...I always like a good lively debate. Hard to have one sided ones. :O)

jojo

01-25-2009, 08:39 PM

These Taveras threads are going to be gold, Jerry, gold to go back and read 7-8 months from now.

Dunn who? Actually, Taveras kind of the anti-Dunn.

*BaseClogger*

01-25-2009, 08:40 PM

And this is the kind of thing I'm talking about.."Those SB, however, are wasted since he doesn't turn those SB in the R." HE doesn't turn them into runs, his teammates do. Somehow, people here are turning his low R total into his fault for not cashing in his SB's more.

Not directed towards you, Sir Charles, but that is a microcosm of much of the Dunn debate...

_Sir_Charles_

01-25-2009, 08:40 PM

I like him just fine when he gets on base. He's great when he's on. The problem is that he makes outs at a sickening rate. Can't score if you can't get on base.

I'm behind you 100%. Here's to hoping he hits well this season. Hell, here's to hoping the whole team hits well.

2008 was his low point, he's got noplace to go but up....right? *crosses fingers*

*BaseClogger*

01-25-2009, 08:42 PM

Thank you sir...I always like a good lively debate. Hard to have one sided ones. :O)

I'll send some respect your way too, Sir Charles. We might not agree but I gotta give you credit for defending your side. It's too bad these things turn into gang wars...

:thumbup:

pahster

01-25-2009, 08:44 PM

I'm behind you 100%. Here's to hoping he hits well this season. Hell, here's to hoping the whole team hits well.

2008 was his low point, he's got noplace to go but up....right? *crosses fingers*

I'm sure he'll play better this year (barring injury, of course). The problem is that I just don't see how he can perform at an acceptable rate. He was quite good in 2007, but his performance that year was driven by an unsustainable success rate on bunt hit attempts. Someone posted the data several weeks ago; I wanna say he was successful in about 81% of his attempts. Looking at historical data, it appears that the best bunters tend to be successful about half that often. That's bad news for Taveras and, by tacit, the Reds.

_Sir_Charles_

01-25-2009, 08:47 PM

I get where you're coming from Sir Charles, but it begs the questions. If the things Taveras can do well don't really correlate much with scoring runs, then why should we care if he can do them well?

No, they HAVEN'T correlated well with scoring runs. We've seen he can hit for a decent average. We know he can swipe bases. Now we just have to have his teammates knock him in when he does get on. And we need to work with him on leveraging his positive skills to offset his negative ones. Change his batting stance or approach to lead to more walks or to hit more ground balls.

This sort of reasoning that justifies his signing and Dusty's general predilection to building teams around players who aren't all that great. He can run! He can bunt! He hustles! He plays the game the "right way". Those things are great and all, they just aren't a substitute for run production. Now, if Taveras was to be used primarily as a pinch runner or designated bunter, we could easily examine those things in detail to figure out how well he'd fit that role. But as a guy who's going to get 600+ PA if he plays everyday, we need to look at his broader skill set to understand his value.

He does a few things well, I'll concede. But imagine if we were talking about a pitcher with a world class curveball but who walked every other batter and was homer prone -- and who had a 5.60 career ERA. We would put up with a manager who said he was signed to be our primary set up guy and that he'd be awesome for those times when we were facing Wily Mo Pena? At the end of the day, he needs to prevent runs from scoring, period; talking about his curveball is sort of a waste of time. Willy Taveras runs fast, we get it. But unless he's being used in a way in which all he has to do is run fast, his speed to needs to be put in the proper context.

I fully agree that he needs to be used correctly. I don't like the fact that Dusty has already annoited him the starting CF'er and leadoff man. I think he (and all the other players) should have to earn it with their play on the field. But regardless of where Dusty plays him, he does have value for our team and he does have talent. It's now up to us to use it correctly. If it doesn't work out, so be it. It's only a 2 year deal and that's fine because in 1 to 2 years, we'll have 3-5 different kids near to ready to fill the OF voids.

Ltlabner

01-25-2009, 08:51 PM

HE doesn't turn them into runs, his teammates do. Somehow, people here are turning his low R total into his fault for not cashing in his SB's more.

He's played on two different teams in the World Series. Are you suggesting that the 2009 Reds will do a better job of knocking him in than they did?

RedsManRick

01-25-2009, 08:58 PM

No, they HAVEN'T correlated well with scoring runs. We've seen he can hit for a decent average. We know he can swipe bases. Now we just have to have his teammates knock him in when he does get on. And we need to work with him on leveraging his positive skills to offset his negative ones. Change his batting stance or approach to lead to more walks or to hit more ground balls.

I fully agree that he needs to be used correctly. I don't like the fact that Dusty has already annoited him the starting CF'er and leadoff man. I think he (and all the other players) should have to earn it with their play on the field. But regardless of where Dusty plays him, he does have value for our team and he does have talent. It's now up to us to use it correctly. If it doesn't work out, so be it. It's only a 2 year deal and that's fine because in 1 to 2 years, we'll have 3-5 different kids near to ready to fill the OF voids.

I agree with almost all of this. To get the most out of his offensive game, he needs to keep the ball on the ground. Like any hitter, he'd benefit from turning some outs in to walks. He does have value and the contract isn't onerous. But unless he makes those adjustments you've described, the way Dusty intends to use him is likely to result in very little value, if any.

I'm actually in the group that think Taveras will essentially earn his salary, producing about a win's worth of runs over the course of the year. My frustration is that signing him didn't really make us better and didn't really fill a need. It frustrates the he represents a managerial approach, in the front office and the dugout, that ignores the best forward thinking of my generation. Cyclone's quote in my sig sort of sums it up. That's what Willy Taveras means to me.

Hoosier Red

01-25-2009, 09:02 PM

THe one positive I see from Tavares last year was the stolen bases went through the roof, even as he was getting on base less often.

If he can bat .280, and/or get on base somewhere around .330 to .340. He'll have enough value to earn his keep.

It's a big if though.

Highlifeman21

01-25-2009, 09:03 PM

What in the hell are you talking about? Where, please, show me...where have I ignored his 2008 suckfest? I've stated numerous times about how horrible he was last year.

This is what you posted, yet failed to post his 2008 stats when mentioning his 3 straight seasons. His 2008 stats are a big part of what he'll do in 2009, don't cha' think? Or, are you just going to cherry-pick stats to somehow support your claim that Willy Taveras brings value to this team?

Originally Posted by _Sir_Charles_
But that's not what he IS doing, it's what he's done in other places, in other lineups, with other coaches and other managers. And to be clear, I'm not optimistic about Wily Taveras...I'm optimistic about the TEAM. He brings a part to the whole.

And his numbers are not suck, suck and more suck.

.291, .278, .320 batting averages for 3 straight seasons. Far from suck.
34, 33, 33, 68 stolen bases for 4 straight seasons. Far from suck.
592, 529, 372, 479 ab's in 4 straight seasons. Quite durable and far from suck.
82, 83, 64, 64 runs scored in 4 straight seasons. Only 3 reds had more than 64 runs scored last season...THREE. Far from suck.

Okay, you don't like him. And to you he may suck. But his numbers don't. His POWER numbers and his OBP however...but there's more to baseball than just OBP & SLG. Much, MUCH more.

As for the SB and runs scored...I know all about the correlations of the two and the fact that with his SB's his R's scored should be higher. But that RS stat is wholly dependant upon his teammates. And low and behold, he's got a whole new set of 'em this year. Will that mean he'll be better or worse? Who knows. I don't. But then again, neither do any of you. Everyone here is jumping on the "I hate Wily T" bandwagon and piling on the stats to prove that he'll be a huge pile of suckitude in 2009, but none of you have a shred of proof...just guesses and projections. Isn't anyone willing to give the kid a chance and let him show it on the field? He's already on the team, how about a little support for the home team....a bit of optimism. Is that too much to ask for? Good grief.

And this is the kind of thing I'm talking about.."Those SB, however, are wasted since he doesn't turn those SB in the R." HE doesn't turn them into runs, his teammates do. Somehow, people here are turning his low R total into his fault for not cashing in his SB's more.

You're absolutely right, Willy Taveras has a brand new set of teammates for 2009, and they are worse than the ones he had the last 2 years, so that doesn't give me much hope that his new teammates will magically make Willy Taveras better for 2009...

So projections don't mean squat to you? You'd rather wait until October 2009 to have this discussion as to how badly Willy Taveras sucked in 2009, as opposed to having the discussion now as to how badly Willy Taveras will suck in 2009? I'm all for letting Willy Taveras show us what he can do on the field, but my hopes are very low as to what he'll produce. He's done nothing in his career to make me feel otherwise.

I love the Reds, which is why I hate when they bring in guys like Willy Taveras and make him the leadoff man.

_Sir_Charles_

01-25-2009, 09:11 PM

He's played on two different teams in the World Series. Are you suggesting that the 2009 Reds will do a better job of knocking him in than they did?

I'm suggesting that they're totally different teams and lineups and that they'll knock him in in different ways. At least that's what I'm hoping I see. They certainly look to be building a small-ball club in many respects, so I'm thinking we'll see more of that type of run producing. Of course, ideally, he'd be in a different spot in the line up than leading off. Unless he changes his approach at the plate, he should NOT be leading off.

_Sir_Charles_

01-25-2009, 09:16 PM

I agree with almost all of this. To get the most out of his offensive game, he needs to keep the ball on the ground. Like any hitter, he'd benefit from turning some outs in to walks. He does have value and the contract isn't onerous. But unless he makes those adjustments you've described, the way Dusty intends to use him is likely to result in very little value, if any.

I'm actually in the group that think Taveras will essentially earn his salary, producing about a win's worth of runs over the course of the year. My frustration is that signing him didn't really make us better and didn't really fill a need. It frustrates the he represents a managerial approach, in the front office and the dugout, that ignores the best forward thinking of my generation. Cyclone's quote in my sig sort of sums it up. That's what Willy Taveras means to me.

When I see Taveras, the first thing that pops into my head is having Dusty out there at batting practice telling him to do pushups for popping up the ball. Wily Mays Hayes Taveras. :O) But seriously, if he makes contact at a decent rate, his batting average will get there. I just want him to lay off the bunt attempts. If they come too often, the d will expect it and they're far less effective. He can beat out choppers with his wheels just as easily as bunts.

I also like the suggestion someone made about cutting the infield grass shorter at GABP and making the homeplate dirt areas harder. Those are two little changes that can really help this team create runs I think.

Emin3mShady07

01-25-2009, 09:19 PM

But not his. His is a different skill set and posting those stats ignore what he DOES do. It's kind of like posting a pitchers W/L, Strikeouts, CG only....when he's a relief pitcher. Stats are usually decieving because they can be spun anyway the poster wants to to make his point.

Slugging is the part of the game, so you can't ignore it when discussing a hitter, regardless of what type of a player he is.

So, I was intrigued by the benefits of Taveras's stolen bases and I found that 57 of his 68 SBs came in situations where it would there would be negligible difference between a double and a single with a stolen base. So I added 57 total bases to his total right off the bat. In the other situations, I felt that his SBs still had some value so I credited those with a a quarter of a total base thus adding roughly 4 more bases to his total base count.

then I looked at CSes. 6 of the 7 CSs came where Taveras getting caught stealing would have been the same as making an out altogether so I subtracted 6 bases from his total bases and took 6 hits/walks away from his OBP. In the other case, his slugging made a difference, so I left his total base total intact and just subtracted another hit/walk from his with these adjusted totals, Taveras had an adjusted OBP of .296 and an adjusted slugging of .436 giving him an adjusted OPS of .732, not stellar, but not as putrid as his .604 OPS this past season.

So maybe Taveras's style of play is not based around slugging, but his production is still very poor.

_Sir_Charles_

01-25-2009, 09:28 PM

This is what you posted, yet failed to post his 2008 stats when mentioning his 3 straight seasons. His 2008 stats are a big part of what he'll do in 2009, don't cha' think? Or, are you just going to cherry-pick stats to somehow support your claim that Willy Taveras brings value to this team?

Really? 2008 wasn't there? I just opened up his stats from ESPN and went straight from that. Oh, wait...now I see what you mean. I didn't post his BA from 2008. Well, I wasn't cherry picking...just showing that he does have the skills. He was obviously very bad last season, but he's shown that he CAN get it done.

You're absolutely right, Willy Taveras has a brand new set of teammates for 2009, and they are worse than the ones he had the last 2 years, so that doesn't give me much hope that his new teammates will magically make Willy Taveras better for 2009...

No, they are younger and more inexperienced that the ones he had the last 2 years. I don't think they're worse. Not at all. I see a team full of players on the rise during their careers and heading towards their peak years. Magical things can happen when a group of guys do that together at the same time. Whether they will or not remains to be seen.

So projections don't mean squat to you? You'd rather wait until October 2009 to have this discussion as to how badly Willy Taveras sucked in 2009, as opposed to having the discussion now as to how badly Willy Taveras will suck in 2009? I'm all for letting Willy Taveras show us what he can do on the field, but my hopes are very low as to what he'll produce. He's done nothing in his career to make me feel otherwise.

I love the Reds, which is why I hate when they bring in guys like Willy Taveras and make him the leadoff man.

Projections are just something to talk about and debate about at the watercooler. You have no clue if Taveras will suck come Oct 2009...none at all. He had a VERY poor 2008. So, does he continue that downward spiral, or does he bounce back to redeem himself? No projection is going to tell you that, is it? I guess the one good thing about having zero expectations is that you'll be either dead on, or pleasantly surprised...never disappointed. Kind of a depressing outlook on things though, don't ya think? I mean if you're going to look at it like that going in...why even watch at all?

_Sir_Charles_

01-25-2009, 09:32 PM

Slugging is the part of the game, so you can't ignore it when discussing a hitter, regardless of what type of a player he is.

So, I was intrigued by the benefits of Taveras's stolen bases and I found that 57 of his 68 SBs came in situations where it would there would be negligible difference between a double and a single with a stolen base. So I added 57 total bases to his total right off the bat. In the other situations, I felt that his SBs still had some value so I credited those with a a quarter of a total base thus adding roughly 4 more bases to his total base count.

then I looked at CSes. 6 of the 7 CSs came where Taveras getting caught stealing would have been the same as making an out altogether so I subtracted 6 bases from his total bases and took 6 hits/walks away from his OBP. In the other case, his slugging made a difference, so I left his total base total intact and just subtracted another hit/walk from his with these adjusted totals, Taveras had an adjusted OBP of .296 and an adjusted slugging of .436 giving him an adjusted OPS of .732, not stellar, but not as putrid as his .604 OPS this past season.

So maybe Taveras's style of play is not based around slugging, but his production is still very poor.

Interesting, but you've still got to remember that this was his worst year BY FAR. I'd like to think he'll improve in 2009 considerably. I'm not expecting him to set the league on fire...just not to stink up the joint. Batting him 7th or 8th would be a step in the right direction I'd think...but I don't see it happening.

OUReds

01-25-2009, 09:33 PM

Nothing, and I wasn't arguing that they were. I've got nothing against sabre stats. I just hate the fact that many saber-heads think that all there is to the game IS stats.

When you say things like this, you've created a stereotype of many posters that is overly simplistic at best, and highly insulting at worst.

Raisor

01-25-2009, 09:38 PM

When you say things like this, you've created a stereotype of many posters that is overly simplistic at best, and highly insulting at worst.

Yep.

_Sir_Charles_

01-25-2009, 09:39 PM

When you say things like this, you've created a stereotype of many posters that is overly simplistic at best, and highly insulting at worst.

True, it wasn't meant that way and I appologize. Let's just say that a good portion of the posters I've encountered who follow the Bill James way of thinking as a gospel, tend to overlook the big picture. Obviously not true of all...just a large portion of the ones' I've had contact with. They'll look only at the numbers and ignore what their eyes tell them.

SteelSD

01-25-2009, 09:41 PM

Sir Charles, folks have offered you outs during this debate. At this point, I'm not sure why you haven't taken them.

Boss-Hog

01-25-2009, 09:41 PM

Let's get this thread back on topic instead of yet another Wily Taveras thread or it will be closed. Thank you.

Raisor

01-25-2009, 09:45 PM

They'll look only at the numbers and ignore what their eyes tell them.

ah, here we go.

I also noticed the "slide rule" comment up thread.

Bringing out all the classics.

If your eyes can't tell you that Willy T is a bad player, you might want to get your prescription checked.

Highlifeman21

01-25-2009, 09:48 PM

No, they are younger and more inexperienced that the ones he had the last 2 years. I don't think they're worse. Not at all. I see a team full of players on the rise during their careers and heading towards their peak years. Magical things can happen when a group of guys do that together at the same time. Whether they will or not remains to be seen.

I mean if you're going to look at it like that going in...why even watch at all?

I watch b/c I love the Reds, I love baseball, and part of me wants to feel that every game I watch I have the chance to see history. We never know when the game we attend or watch on TV could be a perfect game, or a 4 HR game by a player, or a pitcher Ks 20+, or a triple play, etc...

Unfortunately I fear that when I'm watching the Reds in 2009 the only history I'll most likely see is from the other team, or something futile from the Reds. Willy Taveras will be part of that equation.

Now, as for the younger, more magical team, I love your optimism, but my skepticism and bitterness as a suffering Reds fan gets the best of me. I just can't let myself get sucked into believing this team is anything more than a .500 team, at best.

_Sir_Charles_

01-25-2009, 09:50 PM

Sir Charles, folks have offered you outs during this debate. At this point, I'm not sure why you haven't taken them.

Well, personally, I'm still wondering why people think I need an "out" of my own opinion. Quite puzzling. I guess if my opinion differs, I should just shut the hell up. Nice.

And to Boss...my appologies, I'll stop replying to posts directed at me off the topic...but my original intent was to be positive about the Reds and the Taveras signing. We digressed. Sorry.

_Sir_Charles_

01-25-2009, 09:52 PM

Now, as for the younger, more magical team, I love your optimism, but my skepticism and bitterness as a suffering Reds fan gets the best of me. I just can't let myself get sucked into believing this team is anything more than a .500 team, at best.

I understand that as I've suffered through this lost decade as it's been dubbed too. But it never fails...when spring training rolls around...optimism springs eternal. :O)

Highlifeman21

01-25-2009, 09:54 PM

I'm hoping EE puts up numbers in 2009 like he did in 2006 or 2007.

I'm hoping Bruce doesn't have a sophomore slump.

... or Votto, for that matter...

AmarilloRed

01-26-2009, 12:00 AM

TRF

01-26-2009, 11:00 AM

I'm not going to continue the Sir Charles gang beat down. He's not getting it and as woy might say its wasting 1's and 0's.

Some one posted looking forward to Cueto and Volquezt duking it out for the team lead in K's. I see no reason not to throw Harang into this mix. 200+ IP and 200+ K's from Harang once again. In fact, despite his down season, I expect him to be the OD starter.

This is the year EE becomes David Wright offensively. I also think he plays the entire year at 3B and posts a career low in errors with 14. Yup, put it in the archives. Offensively I see .291 .370 .550, 30+ HR's. Might even be an All-Star.

Danny Dorn is going to demolish AAA pitching and force the Reds hand. Dickerson will OPS .800+ and a platoon in LF of Gomes/Dorn happens as Taveras is DFA'd (please, please, please).

AGon plays 130 games at SS.

Ok these might just be hopes and not positives. But it's all i got.

wheels

01-26-2009, 11:21 AM

It bears repeating that the club has an intriguing core of youngsters and virtually anything can happen with them. They should be fun to watch.

If the top guys on the pitching staff all take steps forward they will be the club's main attraction.

Votto, Bruce, Encarnacion.....If they all rake they will be a joy to watch. If Dickerson kicks the door in, and CoreyII struggles we can look back at all of this and laugh. That's what I'm rooting for the most.

I'd also love to see them kick the tires on Dorn later on.

If the right guys can give them enough of a push to be in the thing come deadline time, maybe Walt can swing a deal for another stick or a shortstop.

It's asking a ton for the young guys to be good enough to wake the dudes in the front office from their collective slumber, though.

I have a feeling that if Dusty wasn't at the helm, we'd be talking about a different animal entirely.

Emin3mShady07

01-27-2009, 12:36 AM

Is there anybody on RZ who would like to bet me a 6-pack the Reds don't win 86 games? :D

I will, being a closet optimist is kinda my thing.

*BaseClogger*

01-27-2009, 12:59 AM

I will, being a closet optimist is kinda my thing.

If only you had the legal authority to purchase a 6-pack... ;)

Ron Madden

01-27-2009, 01:37 AM

If everything goes just right the Reds could win 80 games.

:)

lollipopcurve

01-27-2009, 09:32 AM

Felt like a dose of optimism about the Reds, so starting flipping through this thread....

Only to find a pages-long argument over Taveras.

Yuck.

princeton

01-27-2009, 09:52 AM

Harang stands a good chance of improving on last year.

Cueto and Volquez are good young pitchers

Cordero will finish things off in the 9th

The catching position will be improved

Gonzalez will help the infield defense and our offense-if healthy

Votto and Bruce should improve

We should get a good fifth starter between Owings and Ramirez

good summary. that's pretty much how I see it. I don't know who the 5 starter will be, but I assume that the Reds will do better there than they have in several years. I also think that the Reds might have pitching to trade, which always makes things potentially interesting

one final thing that I've noticed is that Reds prospects aren't stalling at all. Rather, they seem to improve steadily every year and get very close to their ceilings. there are very few injuries, and very few examples where a kid is just over his head. and this is occuring across the entire organization, with really only a single notable exception: Homer Bailey.

IF it keeps up, and if Reds are aggressive about trading off pricier assets and trusting the replacement kids, then good things could happen.

TRF

01-27-2009, 10:13 AM

IF it keeps up, and if Reds are aggressive about trading off pricier assets and trusting the replacement kids, then good things could happen.

I agree with this idea, but wonder if the Reds do. I could handle 2009 with Burton/Bray as co-closers. Cordero is tradeable IMO as he does have 2 years left on his contract.

I could deal with a rotation minus Arroyo with Owings as #4 and Ramirez #5 at the ASB, if it brought in a good SS prospect. A surplus of young SP's at AAA is a handy thing to have. AAA looks to have Bailey, LeCure, Maloney, one of Owings/Ramirez, Viola. That's decent depth and all are at least interesting.

Emin3mShady07

01-27-2009, 11:55 AM

^^Dennys reyes is also still a free agent if the reds wanted to add another quality reliever if they traded cordero, my only concern is that he appears to be too much of LOOGY and the reds already have that in Rhodes.

_Sir_Charles_

01-27-2009, 11:55 AM

I would think Thompson's in that Louisville rotation, so I'm not sure who'll be looking in from the outside...maybe leCure or Viola.

TRF

01-27-2009, 12:10 PM

Forgot about Thompson.

Louisville's rotation is loaded. Offensively, not so much. Carolina looks fantastic on offense, but the rotation might be a question mark. it's an interesting dynamic of depth/support for the MLB team, especially if you follow princeton's rule of coddle thy pitchers, challenge thy hitters. Nobody at AAA should be too overmatched if pressed into MLB service. The hitters at AA might be a tad overmatched, but could also step up if properly protected in the lineup.

Depth is the one thing I am optimistic about.

Big Klu

01-27-2009, 04:04 PM

LoganBuck said that I should add this info to this thread. (I originally posted it in the Reds Caravan thread.)

Last Thursday on their way to Vienna, Thom's bus (which included Walt Jocketty, Jeff Keppinger, and Chris Valaika) stopped in Cambridge for a private luncheon with local media. At the luncheon they announced that that a local radio station, AM-1270 WILE Cambridge, has been added to the Reds Radio Network. While this doen't mean much to most of you, it was really big news to Reds fans in my area who have been relegated to second-class status behind the Tribe in recent years by the local media. 700 WLW often doesn't come in clearly around here, and the next closest affiliate, AM-1240 WHIZ in Zanesville, is over 30 miles away and powered by a hamster in a wheel, so we can't pick up their signal.

So anyway, it's got to be good news that the Reds are adding a radio affiliate. Right?

redsmetz

01-27-2009, 04:12 PM

Kc61

01-27-2009, 05:20 PM

I agree with this idea, but wonder if the Reds do. I could handle 2009 with Burton/Bray as co-closers. Cordero is tradeable IMO as he does have 2 years left on his contract.

I could deal with a rotation minus Arroyo with Owings as #4 and Ramirez #5 at the ASB, if it brought in a good SS prospect. A surplus of young SP's at AAA is a handy thing to have. AAA looks to have Bailey, LeCure, Maloney, one of Owings/Ramirez, Viola. That's decent depth and all are at least interesting.

There's depth, but I think the team is hurt badly if Arroyo and Cordero aren't on the roster. Burton was hurt last year, didn't look good at the end. Bray's numbers don't show him to be a closer. Owings, etc., are ok for fifth starter but I don't see your list as providing a fourth and fifth both.

The Reds brought up many kids last year and let them play. If warranted, they will do the same this year. For example, if Roenicke dominates at AAA, I'm sure they will find a spot for him after an injury or if someone else falters.

I'm less agreeable to forcing the issue. It's one thing to play kids who seem ready to succeed. It's another to run a tryout camp during the major league season and just plug guys in because of youth.

Meanwhile, I do think Arroyo or Harang could get traded at the deadline, when teams are most desperate and tend to trade off more talent. But I don't see a need to trade them off right now - or Cordero - to make room for prospects.

mth123

01-28-2009, 02:56 AM

Front of the rotation: Volquez, Harang, Arroyo, Cueto
Middle of the Order: Votto, Encarnacion, Bruce
Back of the Bullpen: Cordero, Burton, Weathers and Bray

Those elements, IMO, are the most essential pieces for a contending foundation. If Gonzalez really can come all the way back, guys like Dickerson, Taveras and Hairston can find a way to get on base at a reasonable clip and Phillips and Hernandez can add some power to the lower portion of the order, this could be a reasonably competitive team. I think the team has enough depth of decent pitching options for the lower leverage roles with guys like Roenicke, Owings, Ramirez and Thompson probably stepping forward and guys like Rhodes and Lincoln in the middle of the pen. The Reds can add and acquire reinforcements in-season by tapping into the minor league depth. Somebody will emerge as an offensive addition (maybe Danny Dorn and Johnny Gomes would make a pretty good platoon to add serious power to the #6 hole by mid-season) and the team can trade or utilize the flock of young pitchers on the verge to backfill or deal for help. This may be the year that Daryl Thompson moves to the pen at the major league level and emerges as an 8th inning force.