PDA

View Full Version : Weathers, Reds avoid arbitration with $3.9M deal



oneupper
01-29-2009, 03:41 PM
CINCINNATI (AP)—David Weathers and the Cincinnati Reds have avoided salary arbitration by agreeing to a one-year contract that guarantees him $3.9 million.

The 39-year-old reliever has spent the last four years in Cincinnati, where he was 4-6 with a 3.25 ERA last season in 72 appearances. His deal Wednesday includes a $3.5 million salary this year and a $3.7 million club option for 2010 with a $400,000 buyout.

Weathers made $3.3 million last season. He asked for $4.6 million in arbitration and the club offered $3 million.

Sea Ray
01-29-2009, 04:01 PM
Seems like a fair deal. I like Stormy. I understand that his smoke and mirrors may blow up any day now but he's really been great for this bullpen is recent years. He's done any role he's been asked to do and has done it fearlessly. He throws strikes and is very durable. Kind of a throwback to the rubber arm guys of yesteryear, think Rick Mahler. If guys like Reonicke can supplant him, fine but as of right now, Weathers is worthy of a spot in this bullpen.

corkedbat
01-29-2009, 04:03 PM
They could have just about added Dye or Abreu for what we spent on Weathers, Lincoln and Taveras (plus the little pad left) and done just as well with youngsters at there spot. Oh well, hopeefully he'll get off to a decent start and someone will be willing to deal any kind of prospect for a veteran BP arm around the trade deadline.

oneupper
01-29-2009, 04:11 PM
I think Walt just made a bad bet. He thought Weathers would sign elsewhere, so he offered him arbitration to pick up the draft pick.

Once it went to arbitration it was a matter of limiting the potential damage.

corkedbat
01-29-2009, 04:15 PM
Yeah, I really can't complain that much (but I will) :D. i would have taken the same gamble. Stormy (and his agent) were just one of the few in FA that made the right call.

Will M
01-29-2009, 05:40 PM
I think Walt just made a bad bet. He thought Weathers would sign elsewhere, so he offered him arbitration to pick up the draft pick.



you'd think but based on a lot of what Walt said it sounds like he wanted Weathers back all along. he had a shiny ERA which hid the ugly WHIP.

membengal
01-29-2009, 05:49 PM
4 million here---Weathers

2 million there---Taveras

Another 2 million over there---Hairston

Another several million in across the way---Rhodes

Man, it sure adds up quickly, doesn't it? Before you know it, you can't afford a difference-making bat in a market where difference making bats are ripe for the taking with a reasonable contract.

Rats.

Highlifeman21
01-29-2009, 05:58 PM
4 million here---Weathers

2 million there---Taveras

Another 2 million over there---Hairston

Another several million in across the way---Rhodes

Man, it sure adds up quickly, doesn't it? Before you know it, you can't afford a difference-making bat in a market where difference making bats are ripe for the taking with a reasonable contract.

Rats.

Using your numbers, 4+2+2, that's at least 8 Million we could have spent on something important like, oh I dunno... offense?

And that doesn't even take into account Rhodes.

Weathers + Taveras + Hairston = huge burned pile o cash.

Sea Ray
01-29-2009, 06:38 PM
I think Walt just made a bad bet. He thought Weathers would sign elsewhere, so he offered him arbitration to pick up the draft pick.

Once it went to arbitration it was a matter of limiting the potential damage.

I agree with Will. I think Walt was fine getting him back at basically what he was paid last year. I think he wants his veteran presence in the bullpen and his versatility.

I don't think Walt risked arbitration because he he coveted type B FA compensation. I think he genuinely likes the guy and compared to what he's paying folks like Lincoln and Taveras, he's not a bad value

Sea Ray
01-29-2009, 06:45 PM
Using your numbers, 4+2+2, that's at least 8 Million we could have spent on something important like, oh I dunno... offense?

And that doesn't even take into account Rhodes.

Weathers + Taveras + Hairston = huge burned pile o cash.

I hear you but in defense of Walt this organization had to pick up a couple OFs from somewhere. The farm system is not flush with "ready for the show" outfielders.


In particular they needed a CF. I don't think we wanted a Dickerson/Hopper platoon there

corkedbat
01-29-2009, 06:46 PM
Using your numbers, 4+2+2, that's at least 8 Million we could have spent on something important like, oh I dunno... offense?

And that doesn't even take into account Rhodes.

Weathers + Taveras + Hairston = huge burned pile o cash.

We needed a LHer n the pen and I might have preferred another, but I'm OK with Rhodes. I'm OK with Hairston too. Weathers, Taveras and Lincoln represent about $8;5Mthat could have been better spent elsewhere, IMO.

As it probably stands now:

1B Votto
2B Phillips
SS A. Gonzalez
3B Encarnacion
LF Dickerson
CF Taveras
RF Bruce
CA Hernanadez

UT Hairston
UT Keppinger
Of Gomes
OF Hopper (or maybe) L Gonzalez
CA Hannigan

Volquez
Harang
Arroyo
Cueto
Owings
Massett/Ramirez
Lincoln
Bray
Weathers
Rhodes
Burton
Cordero

Move Dickerson into Taveras' spot in CF (sharing time with Hairston or Hopper), replace Dickerson in LF with Abreu or Dye (or even Swisher for that matter), give Massett Stormy's spot and substitute Roenicke or Fisher for Lincoln. They still might not be odds on favorites for the division (or even the WildCard), but they'd be much more interesting.

If Taveras' D is gonna make this team that much better, a ball better not touch the OF grass when the Reds are in the field.

Emin3mShady07
01-29-2009, 07:43 PM
Taveras is worse than Patterson on defense

*BaseClogger*
01-29-2009, 08:20 PM
I hear you but in defense of Walt this organization had to pick up a couple OFs from somewhere. The farm system is not flush with "ready for the show" outfielders.


In particular they needed a CF. I don't think we wanted a Dickerson/Hopper platoon there

I think you have been spot-on with your analysis of what Walt wanted, but a Dickerson/Hopper platoon would have been just as effective IMO...

Highlifeman21
01-29-2009, 10:19 PM
I hear you but in defense of Walt this organization had to pick up a couple OFs from somewhere. The farm system is not flush with "ready for the show" outfielders.


In particular they needed a CF. I don't think we wanted a Dickerson/Hopper platoon there

IMO they will probably have their CF play LF in a platoon, and IMO they still need a CF.

The sad part is I actually like the Gomes ST invite, and IMO he could be a great bargain, but that smell coming from GABP this year will be that pile o cash we're burning on Taveras in CF.

I'm sure some will disagree with me, but Walt burned the cash on Taveras b/c Drew Stubbs isn't ready, and probably won't be ready until 2010 at the very earliest. IMO, he probably won't be ready until 2011. If Stubbs wasn't progressing at a snail's pace (given that he played 3 years of NCAA baseball), Walt could have spent money on a LF...

... but you're absolutely right that the Reds lack "ready now" OF. The Reds lack "ready now" guys at multiple positions, which is probably why Keith Law ranked the farm #26...

I think it says a lot about the state of the Reds when we're already having multiple discussions about Votto's athleticism as a determining factor about projecting his ability to play LF to make room for Alonso to play 1B. If we had guys that could actually play LF or other OF positions, we wouldn't have to shift an athletic 1B to play LF...

OnBaseMachine
01-29-2009, 10:22 PM
I think it says a lot about the state of the Reds when we're already having multiple discussions about Votto's athleticism as a determining factor about projecting his ability to play LF to make room for Alonso to play 1B. If we had guys that could actually play LF or other OF positions, we wouldn't have to shift an athletic 1B to play LF...

Danny Dorn? Todd Frazier? And what would you plan on doing with Alonso and Votto then? Play them both at first base?

Highlifeman21
01-29-2009, 10:25 PM
We needed a LHer n the pen and I might have preferred another, but I'm OK with Rhodes. I'm OK with Hairston too. Weathers, Taveras and Lincoln represent about $8;5Mthat could have been better spent elsewhere, IMO.

As it probably stands now:

1B Votto
2B Phillips
SS A. Gonzalez
3B Encarnacion
LF Dickerson
CF Taveras
RF Bruce
CA Hernanadez

UT Hairston
UT Keppinger
Of Gomes
OF Hopper (or maybe) L Gonzalez
CA Hannigan

Volquez
Harang
Arroyo
Cueto
Owings
Massett/Ramirez
Lincoln
Bray
Weathers
Rhodes
Burton
Cordero

Move Dickerson into Taveras' spot in CF (sharing time with Hairston or Hopper), replace Dickerson in LF with Abreu or Dye (or even Swisher for that matter), give Massett Stormy's spot and substitute Roenicke or Fisher for Lincoln. They still might not be odds on favorites for the division (or even the WildCard), but they'd be much more interesting.

If Taveras' D is gonna make this team that much better, a ball better not touch the OF grass when the Reds are in the field.

The only strong feelings I have about Rhodes is that he's on the wrong side of 30. Other than that, we did need to replace Affeldt.

... so that's why I didn't bother to look up Rhodes' $ when looking at how much money we've burned on garbage this offseason. Giving Weathers almost $4 Mil is ridiculous, when we could easily have one of our young pups take his place. We have a handful of youngsters that could use some on the job training at the MLB level, but instead we're giving Weathers almost $4 Mil. Sure, on paper $2 Mil for a CF doesn't seem like much, but when you look at the fact we gave $2 Mil to a UT, it makes me raise an eyebrow. (you got some 'splainin to do Walt)

Wayne irked me with his wasteful spending, and so far this offseason Walt's proved to be no better than Wayne in that same regard.

Highlifeman21
01-29-2009, 10:28 PM
Danny Dorn? Todd Frazier? And what would you plan on doing with Alonso and Votto then? Play them both at first base?

Danny Dorn will need to be platooned (which is fine, but is he MLB ready now? I'm gonna have to say no on that one), and Frazier isn't an OF (unless we wanna label him as "athletic" and stick him in LF).

Votto's our 1B right now, and Alonso needs to force the issue to make the discussion of moving Votto to LF a reality. I hope Alonso does, but as of right now, Alonso's in the minors and a question mark.

OnBaseMachine
01-29-2009, 10:32 PM
Frazier isn't an OF (unless we wanna label him as "athletic" and stick him in LF).


Actually, Baseball America says Frazier is a good athlete for his size and has looked solid in left field. He can play either position and his future home depends on where the Reds need him most.

Highlifeman21
01-29-2009, 10:36 PM
Actually, Baseball America says Frazier is a good athlete for his size and has looked solid in left field. He can play either position and his future home depends on where the Reds need him most.

Warning - Dunn reference about to happen - Warning

Dunn's a good athlete for his size, yet he doesn't play a good LF.

The Reds need a SS the most, so does that mean Frazier's gonna play there?

... b/c IMO, he sure as heck isn't a MLB SS...

I hope for the Reds' sake and Todd Frazier's sake that both parties figure out his BEST position and get him the maximum available reps in AAA before he pours that 1st cup of coffee with the big club.

OnBaseMachine
01-29-2009, 10:50 PM
Warning - Dunn reference about to happen - Warning

Dunn's a good athlete for his size, yet he doesn't play a good LF.

The Reds need a SS the most, so does that mean Frazier's gonna play there?

... b/c IMO, he sure as heck isn't a MLB SS...

I hope for the Reds' sake and Todd Frazier's sake that both parties figure out his BEST position and get him the maximum available reps in AAA before he pours that 1st cup of coffee with the big club.

Frazier is no where near the size of Dunn. It's not even close. And who said anything about shortstop? His future is at third base or left field, depending on where the Reds need him the most.

Highlifeman21
01-30-2009, 06:43 AM
Frazier is no where near the size of Dunn. It's not even close. And who said anything about shortstop? His future is at third base or left field, depending on where the Reds need him the most.

I said SS b/c you said "where the Reds need him the most", and that's SS.

... but he ain't a SS, and we have a 3B, so that means LF is his future destination?

So if Frazier is "athletic for his size" as you said, then how athletic is he really?

redsbuckeye
01-30-2009, 09:14 AM
4 million here---Weathers

2 million there---Taveras

Another 2 million over there---Hairston

Another several million in across the way---Rhodes

Man, it sure adds up quickly, doesn't it? Before you know it, you can't afford a difference-making bat in a market where difference making bats are ripe for the taking with a reasonable contract.

Rats.

To be fair, Weathers was a gamble that busted on the fifth card.

The other guys?....well.....

Highlifeman21
01-30-2009, 09:54 AM
To be fair, Weathers was a gamble that busted on the fifth card.

The other guys?....well.....

I hope Walt doesn't continue to chase to the river...

It was bad enough we saw the flop and the turn re: Weathers...

redsbuckeye
01-30-2009, 10:04 AM
I hope Walt doesn't continue to chase to the river...

It was bad enough we saw the flop and the turn re: Weathers...

Man my gambling references are awful, I was going for blackjack.

It's funny that best value the Reds could have gotten out of Weathers was him leaving. Yet here they are stuck with him again.

Sea Ray
01-30-2009, 10:22 AM
Giving Weathers almost $4 Mil is ridiculous, when we could easily have one of our young pups take his place.

Are you projecting Weathers to take a big dive from last year? I don't think his money was wasted last year...do you? And he's pretty much making the same money he has in recent years and IMO he's been somewhat of a bargain. I agree there is a risk that age will catch up to this veteran at some point and turn him into a RH version of Stanton or Frenchy. I think Walt is gambling that he can squeeze another year's worth of pitches out of Weathers' arm.

As of right now we don't have a young pup that can take his place. Perhaps Roenicke or Fisher but we don't have a major league track record to base that on.

Big Klu
01-30-2009, 10:22 AM
The vast majority of RedsZone was calling for the Reds to offer Weathers arbitration, so that he could refuse it, and earn for the club a precious compensatory "draft pick". When he actually accepted their offer, the vast majority of RedsZone then howled its displeasure at ever offering arbitration. You can't have it both ways.

Highlifeman21
01-30-2009, 10:42 AM
Are you projecting Weathers to take a big dive from last year? I don't think his money was wasted last year...do you? And he's pretty much making the same money he has in recent years and IMO he's been somewhat of a bargain. I agree there is a risk that age will catch up to this veteran at some point and turn him into a RH version of Stanton or Frenchy. I think Walt is gambling that he can squeeze another year's worth of pitches out of Weathers' arm.

As of right now we don't have a young pup that can take his place. Perhaps Roenicke or Fisher but we don't have a major league track record to base that on.

I don't care what we paid Weathers last year, ya know? Weathers was probably worth his money in 2008, but that's not my point.

I care about what he's paid in 2009, and what he's likely to do. That's my contention. I'd rather us save money and bring up a Roenicke or a Fisher or any of the other guys that we need to see what they can do at the MLB level, than to burn $4 Mil on David Weathers in 2009. Will Weathers really outpitch any of them when you factor in money?

redsmetz
01-30-2009, 10:43 AM
The vast majority of RedsZone was calling for the Reds to offer Weathers arbitration, so that he could refuse it, and earn for the club a precious compensatory "draft pick". When he actually accepted their offer, the vast majority of RedsZone then howled its displeasure at ever offering arbitration. You can't have it both ways.

I, for one, saw offering Weathers arbitration as a No Lose situation. You have to know there's a chance the player will accept. As Sea Ray noted, this contract is essentially little different than last year's and gives the club the ability to part ways at season's end if things don't work out.

All this hand wringing over the Weathers contract gets old. Folks have been predicting that he was set to blow up any day now hasn't occurred. Yes, I fully understand that age ultimately catches up with players, but others have shown they could continue to be effective into their 40's (he'll turn 40 late in the season). Some of his appearances were dicey last season, but he was effective nonetheless.

membengal
01-30-2009, 11:14 AM
I don't care what age he is. That kind of jack spent on a set-up guy, in light of this team's needs, thereby making it so they couldn't meet those needs, is frustrating. The Reds, as they are quick to tell us, are NOT the Yankees. And yet the Reds have spent on their bullpen like they are. Between Cordero/Weathers/Rhodes/Lincoln they are approaching $20 million. That's insane.

I didn't mind the money on Cordero (but understand why others have), but think they should have gone with less expensive in-house options in front of Cordero. So, yeah, the Weathers money was an odd choice for this team in light of what they now maintain their budget is.

Again, as I wrote elsewhere on another thread, either:

1. Jock was NOT aware of the true budget when he spent that kind of coin, thinking he had more back to make a run at an Abreu or Burrell or whomever; or

2. Jock WAS aware of the true budget and has committed GM malpractice this off-season.

BuckeyeRedleg
01-30-2009, 11:16 AM
I don't care what age he is. That kind of jack spent on a set-up guy, in light of this team's needs, thereby making it so they couldn't meet those needs, is frustrating. The Reds, as they are quick to tell us, are NOT the Yankees. And yet the Reds have spent on their bullpen like they are. Between Cordero/Weathers/Rhodes/Lincoln they are approaching $20 million. That's insane.

I didn't mind the money on Cordero (but understand why others have), but think they should have gone with less expensive in-house options in front of Cordero. So, yeah, the Weathers money was an odd choice for this team in light of what they now maintain their budget is.

Again, as I wrote elsewhere on another thread, either:

1. Jock was NOT aware of the true budget when he spent that kind of coin, thinking he had more back to make a run at an Abreu or Burrell or whomever; or

2. Jock WAS aware of the true budget and has committed GM malpractice this off-season.

Yep.

WebScorpion
01-30-2009, 12:08 PM
To be fair, Weathers was a gamble that busted on the fifth card.

The other guys?....well.....

If only we could 'split' him into two 20-year old pitchers... hmm, would they both have 3.25 ERAs, or 1.73 each?! :D

SMcGavin
01-30-2009, 12:09 PM
The vast majority of RedsZone was calling for the Reds to offer Weathers arbitration, so that he could refuse it, and earn for the club a precious compensatory "draft pick". When he actually accepted their offer, the vast majority of RedsZone then howled its displeasure at ever offering arbitration. You can't have it both ways.

I think you might be confusing two different camps. I wanted Jocketty to offer him arb, so I did not blame Walt when Weathers accepted. I'm just hoping his thought process was the same as mine, that offering arb was a gamble that didn't work out, and not that Jocketty actually wanted Weathers back at $4M.

What I do blame Jocketty for is signing Lincoln while the arb offer was still on the table to Weathers. Signing Lincoln would have been fine if Weathers was gone. But now they are both coming back and there is no room in the bullpen for some cheap kids like Roenicke/Herrera. All the payflex the Reds had this offseason got spent in the bullpen, which was the best part of the team in 08.

Sea Ray
01-30-2009, 12:26 PM
What I do blame Jocketty for is signing Lincoln while the arb offer was still on the table to Weathers. Signing Lincoln would have been fine if Weathers was gone. But now they are both coming back and there is no room in the bullpen for some cheap kids like Roenicke/Herrera. All the payflex the Reds had this offseason got spent in the bullpen, which was the best part of the team in 08.

You make a good point. I don't think signing both Lincoln and Weathers was warranted. Cordero was certainly a splurge but it did fill a need. I have no problem with the Rhodes signing. We did not have any in house options to fill that role. The problem here was signing both Weathers and Lincoln to multimilliondollar deals.

blumj
01-30-2009, 12:26 PM
I don't care what age he is. That kind of jack spent on a set-up guy, in light of this team's needs, thereby making it so they couldn't meet those needs, is frustrating. The Reds, as they are quick to tell us, are NOT the Yankees. And yet the Reds have spent on their bullpen like they are. Between Cordero/Weathers/Rhodes/Lincoln they are approaching $20 million. That's insane.

I didn't mind the money on Cordero (but understand why others have), but think they should have gone with less expensive in-house options in front of Cordero. So, yeah, the Weathers money was an odd choice for this team in light of what they now maintain their budget is.

Again, as I wrote elsewhere on another thread, either:

1. Jock was NOT aware of the true budget when he spent that kind of coin, thinking he had more back to make a run at an Abreu or Burrell or whomever; or

2. Jock WAS aware of the true budget and has committed GM malpractice this off-season.
By my count, the Yankees and Reds bullpens will each cost about $21M in 2009. The Red Sox bullpen could get into that neighborhood only if Saito earns all his $7M in incentives and bonus. The Mets will spend more than $27M on theirs, but Wagner's taking up $10M of that.

REDREAD
01-30-2009, 01:47 PM
4 million here---Weathers

2 million there---Taveras

Another 2 million over there---Hairston

Another several million in across the way---Rhodes

Man, it sure adds up quickly, doesn't it? Before you know it, you can't afford a difference-making bat in a market where difference making bats are ripe for the taking with a reasonable contract.

Rats.

Yeah, but on the flip side, the Reds desperately needed 3 relievers, and a catcher. One can make a reasonable argument that Taveras and Hairston weren't needed, but if you subtract Hernandez and the 3 relievers from this squad (roughly 10 or 11 million) and add Dye, the team is still going to be a mess. Not only that, you have to cross your fingers that Dickerson can play every game in CF. You also are stuck with Keppinger at SS. Still a very bad team.

REDREAD
01-30-2009, 01:59 PM
Wayne irked me with his wasteful spending, and so far this offseason Walt's proved to be no better than Wayne in that same regard.

Not sure I'd go that far.

It was a mistake to offer Weathers arb, but the majority of the board agreed with the decision at the time. IMO, Weathers' fair value is 2 million.. waste of 1.9 million.

Now, I know Tavares is almost universally blasted here. I think he might earn his 2 million next year. However, I think even the most cynical would say that Tavares is worth 1 million/year.. So worst case, the waste factor here is 4 million over the next 2 years, possibly less.

Not even close to the money Wayne flushed on Castro, Stanton, AGon, Freel, Cormier, Hat in 2008,etc.

kpresidente
01-30-2009, 02:06 PM
Yeah, but on the flip side, the Reds desperately needed 3 relievers, and a catcher. One can make a reasonable argument that Taveras and Hairston weren't needed, but if you subtract Hernandez and the 3 relievers from this squad (roughly 10 or 11 million) and add Dye, the team is still going to be a mess. Not only that, you have to cross your fingers that Dickerson can play every game in CF. You also are stuck with Keppinger at SS. Still a very bad team.

Gonzo is the SS. Any difference between Kepp and Hairston is negligible.

Dickerson can't be worse than Taveras, in any aspect of the game. Plus, if we don't get Hernandez, we'd still have Freel, and a Freel/Dickerson platoon is much better than Taveras.

Catcher? We didn't need a catcher. We have Hanigan. Hernandez is a career .750 OPS hitter on the downside of his career meaning he probably won't even hit that figure. I guarantee you Hanigan could at least get close enough to that number to make the move pointless compared to adding Dye (and play better defense to boot).

The relievers would be Roenicke and Herrera, plus one or two of the losers in the 5th starter battle. Maybe it would be a slight rush on Herrera, but I bet he'd be fine and Roenicke is ML ready. Now we're just holding him back.

REDREAD
01-30-2009, 02:10 PM
Man my gambling references are awful, I was going for blackjack.

It's funny that best value the Reds could have gotten out of Weathers was him leaving. Yet here they are stuck with him again.

That's why it's a bad gamble, IMO.

Never offer arbitration to someone you don't want back unless you are 100% certain they can get big bucks somewhere else. This is the same reason we didn't offer Greg Vaugh arb but did offer Juan Guzman arb after 1999.

It seemed pretty obvious that Weathers was going to get paid more in arb than the open market. Not trying to toot my own horn, but I said that at the time.

Highlifeman21
01-30-2009, 02:30 PM
Not sure I'd go that far.

It was a mistake to offer Weathers arb, but the majority of the board agreed with the decision at the time. IMO, Weathers' fair value is 2 million.. waste of 1.9 million.

Now, I know Tavares is almost universally blasted here. I think he might earn his 2 million next year. However, I think even the most cynical would say that Tavares is worth 1 million/year.. So worst case, the waste factor here is 4 million over the next 2 years, possibly less.

Not even close to the money Wayne flushed on Castro, Stanton, AGon, Freel, Cormier, Hat in 2008,etc.

You're right that it's not close to Wayne's financial flushing, but Walt's going down the same path, IMO. I was hoping the switch from Wayne to Walt would eliminate wasteful spending on suck.

REDREAD
01-30-2009, 02:36 PM
What I do blame Jocketty for is signing Lincoln while the arb offer was still on the table to Weathers. Signing Lincoln would have been fine if Weathers was gone. But now they are both coming back and there is no room in the bullpen for some cheap kids like Roenicke/Herrera. All the payflex the Reds had this offseason got spent in the bullpen, which was the best part of the team in 08.


Right now the pen is Weathers, Bray, Codero, Burton, Lincoln, Rhodes. Am I forgeting someone?

There's an open spot in the fifth slot in the rotation for a kid. If a bullpen kid really earns a spot in spring training, they can carry 12 pitchers. It's not as if the bench is packed with talent on the position player front. Someone like Rhodes or Lincoln is very tradable at the deadline if the Reds suddenly find themselves with a young bullpen kid knocking down the door.

I guess my point is that there's no reason to rush up Roenicke and the other kids. Another half season of AAA isn't going to kill them, even if they are ready.

If the Reds didn't sign Lincoln (or a vet like him), then they are forced to either go with a kid (ready or not) or they will have to scramble for an arm in spring training, which probably leads to another Josh Fogg.

Very seldom does a team make it through an entire season without someone in the bullpen going on the DL as well.

The point is that the kids really aren't blocked. They aren't going to get a job handed to them, but there's wiggle room to add a kid that is ready. That is a great position to be in. The kids aren't forced to be rushed.

REDREAD
01-30-2009, 02:44 PM
Gonzo is the SS. Any difference between Kepp and Hairston is negligible.

Dickerson can't be worse than Taveras, in any aspect of the game. Plus, if we don't get Hernandez, we'd still have Freel, and a Freel/Dickerson platoon is much better than Taveras.

Catcher? We didn't need a catcher. We have Hanigan. Hernandez is a career .750 OPS hitter on the downside of his career meaning he probably won't even hit that figure. I guarantee you Hanigan could at least get close enough to that number to make the move pointless compared to adding Dye (and play better defense to boot).

The relievers would be Roenicke and Herrera, plus one or two of the losers in the 5th starter battle. Maybe it would be a slight rush on Herrera, but I bet he'd be fine and Roenicke is ML ready. Now we're just holding him back.

Freel is a bigger waste of cash than Tavares is. He is OBP challenged as well, and generally stupid. Tavares has a chance to be better than Freel (not a given, but a chance to be better), at 1/2 the price in 2009.

We get Harriston and Tavares in 2009 for what Freel would cost us, and Freel might not even be healthy to play next year. It was brillant to dump Freel.

The team needed to add OF, do you not agree with that? It also needed another body at SS. What if Keppinger gets hurt? There goes your backup at every infield position.

Hannigan can't play every game. Another catcher was needed. We get Hernandez for about what it would've cost to retain Valentine (maybe 500-800k more). That is a no brainer.

Herrera is not a major league reliever. He's emergency filler. He's not being held down in AAA because Walt is stupid. He's not ML talent.

If Roenocke is ready, there's room for him. I'm glad we're not forced to call him up.

In summary, a lot depends on AGon, Dickerson, and Hannigan. You are more optimistic than I am. But I can guarantee that if you put in three youngsters instead of Weathers, Lincoln, and Rhodes, the bullpen would be a huge liability. I'm with you that the Reds should've not offered Weathers arb and found another solution.. but Rhodes and Lincoln were solid, cheap signings.

REDREAD
01-30-2009, 02:46 PM
You're right that it's not close to Wayne's financial flushing, but Walt's going down the same path, IMO. I was hoping the switch from Wayne to Walt would eliminate wasteful spending on suck.

We'll have to revisit this at the end of the season and see how well Taveres and Weathers earn their pay.

In all honesty, if Weathers can repeat his last season's performance, I'm not going to complain at all, even if he does it by dancing the tightrope.

IMO, if Tavares can OBP .335 and keep his outstanding baserunning up, he earns his 2 million.

SMcGavin
01-30-2009, 02:52 PM
Right now the pen is Weathers, Bray, Codero, Burton, Lincoln, Rhodes. Am I forgeting someone?

There's an open spot in the fifth slot in the rotation for a kid. If a bullpen kid really earns a spot in spring training, they can carry 12 pitchers. It's not as if the bench is packed with talent on the position player front. Someone like Rhodes or Lincoln is very tradable at the deadline if the Reds suddenly find themselves with a young bullpen kid knocking down the door.

I guess my point is that there's no reason to rush up Roenicke and the other kids. Another half season of AAA isn't going to kill them, even if they are ready.

If the Reds didn't sign Lincoln (or a vet like him), then they are forced to either go with a kid (ready or not) or they will have to scramble for an arm in spring training, which probably leads to another Josh Fogg.

Very seldom does a team make it through an entire season without someone in the bullpen going on the DL as well.

The point is that the kids really aren't blocked. They aren't going to get a job handed to them, but there's wiggle room to add a kid that is ready. That is a great position to be in. The kids aren't forced to be rushed.

I would be very surprised if the last bullpen spot didn't go to Masset, Owings, or Ramirez. The Reds have limited money, and they need to maximize the cheap assets they have so money is saved to spend elsewhere.

And I'm not just calling for youth for the sake of youth - IMO Roenicke and Herrera are both pretty clearly ready for the bigs. They were dominant in AAA. Heck, Josh Roenicke turns 27 in August. Herrera is 24. I'm not asking for them to be rushed - they are ready. And deploying them correctly could have saved the team a significant amount of cash to use on upgrades elsewhere.

SMcGavin
01-30-2009, 02:54 PM
In all honesty, if Weathers can repeat his last season's performance, I'm not going to complain at all, even if he does it by dancing the tightrope.


Nobody would. The point is that it's unlikely to happen.

durl
01-30-2009, 03:07 PM
Nobody would. The point is that it's unlikely to happen.

Didn't many people say the same thing last year?

_Sir_Charles_
01-30-2009, 03:10 PM
Didn't many people say the same thing last year?

Yep. And we'll keep saying it until we're proven right. :O)

SMcGavin
01-30-2009, 03:15 PM
Didn't many people say the same thing last year?

Yeah I'm sure they did. But for me at least, if I flop a full house with 8-5 offsuit, the next time I get that hand I'm still going to fold.

Sea Ray
01-30-2009, 03:31 PM
Gonzo is the SS. Any difference between Kepp and Hairston is negligible.

Dickerson can't be worse than Taveras, in any aspect of the game. Plus, if we don't get Hernandez, we'd still have Freel, and a Freel/Dickerson platoon is much better than Taveras.

Catcher? We didn't need a catcher. We have Hanigan. Hernandez is a career .750 OPS hitter on the downside of his career meaning he probably won't even hit that figure. I guarantee you Hanigan could at least get close enough to that number to make the move pointless compared to adding Dye (and play better defense to boot).

The relievers would be Roenicke and Herrera, plus one or two of the losers in the 5th starter battle. Maybe it would be a slight rush on Herrera, but I bet he'd be fine and Roenicke is ML ready. Now we're just holding him back.


OK, then under your scenario the Reds are going with AGon, Hanigan and Dickerson as starters with Roenicke and Herrera penciled into the 'pen. I don't know that I like the sound of that roster either. Under Walt's team most of those guys are backups. If Agon, Dickerson or Hanigan falter (either by injury or performance) we're left with very little depth to cover it and it's all in the name of a LF like Dye or Abreu.

All in all, I think Walt might be overpaying a million here or there but really not enough to get me steamed. Nothing like the millions OB and WK blew...yet

Willy Taveras has gotten a lot of abuse around here and that's fine and it may turn out to be warranted but if he improves the leadoff spot on this team and plays a good CF then I hope Walt will get a few kudos, because he spent $4mill to fill a void that definitely needed to be addressed from last year.

I'm a big Dickerson fan and I want him to be given a chance to earn more playing time but as the GM I would not have gone into Spring Training expecting him to be my CF and leadoff hitter.

OnBaseMachine
01-30-2009, 04:35 PM
I said SS b/c you said "where the Reds need him the most", and that's SS.

... but he ain't a SS, and we have a 3B, so that means LF is his future destination?

So if Frazier is "athletic for his size" as you said, then how athletic is he really?

I think it was pretty obvious I meant either third base or left field.

Frazier is an above average athlete. Scouts have said he profiles as a solid left fielder or third baseman. Which of those two positions he ends up at is to be determined.

OnBaseMachine
01-30-2009, 04:37 PM
I think you might be confusing two different camps. I wanted Jocketty to offer him arb, so I did not blame Walt when Weathers accepted. I'm just hoping his thought process was the same as mine, that offering arb was a gamble that didn't work out, and not that Jocketty actually wanted Weathers back at $4M.

What I do blame Jocketty for is signing Lincoln while the arb offer was still on the table to Weathers. Signing Lincoln would have been fine if Weathers was gone. But now they are both coming back and there is no room in the bullpen for some cheap kids like Roenicke/Herrera. All the payflex the Reds had this offseason got spent in the bullpen, which was the best part of the team in 08.

I agree. Brining Lincoln AND Weathers back was a bad move, IMO. I didn't mind re-signing one of the two, but not both. I was hoping they would keep a spot open for Josh Roenicke.

Highlifeman21
01-30-2009, 04:38 PM
I think it was pretty obvious I meant either third base or left field.

Frazier is an above average athlete. Scouts have said he profiles as a solid left fielder or third baseman. Which of those two positions he ends up at is to be determined.

I apologize, I didn't know you mean either 3B or LF.

So this begs the question...

If Frazier turns out to be as good as advertised, and Alonso turns out to be as good as advertised, what happens with EE and Votto?

redsmetz
01-30-2009, 04:44 PM
1. Jock was NOT aware of the true budget when he spent that kind of coin, thinking he had more back to make a run at an Abreu or Burrell or whomever; or

2. Jock WAS aware of the true budget and has committed GM malpractice this off-season.

I think the more likely scenario is a third one - Jocketty knew what the budget was at the start of the off season, but that, despite their statement that they wouldn't be affected by the financial crisis, the club decided prudence was probably the best course and the budget shrank. We've seen some considerable contraction of the economy since the close of the 2008 season and it certainly is having an impact on baseball now.

Mario-Rijo
01-30-2009, 05:45 PM
I apologize, I didn't know you mean either 3B or LF.

So this begs the question...

If Frazier turns out to be as good as advertised, and Alonso turns out to be as good as advertised, what happens with EE and Votto?

Well if EE doesn't shore up his defense this year Frazier will be knocking on the door with EE's FA closing in. I'd say that means EE could be on his way out the door, heck he might be on his way out regardless. If he straightens out his defense enough to be considered respectable and has a big year with the bat maybe they trade he or Frazier in the offseason for a SS, who knows. I'm guessing though that the odds Frazier is dealt is a lot less likely given he helps allow the future re-signing of our core. EE and BP are almost destined to be dealt eventually IMO. Unless the dollars start rolling in somehow.

_Sir_Charles_
01-30-2009, 05:57 PM
At some point in time, these corner guys are going to have to be dealt. There's simply no way around this. With EE, you've got Frazier coming up...but that's not all he's got to worry about. Francisco has been ripping the cover off the ball and he's said to have a cannon for an arm. His biggest flaw as been his failure to take a walk, but this winter he's shown strides in addressing that. If he fixes that...Juan might be EE's biggest immediate threat. Frazier has multiple positions so they can be a bit more flexible with him I'd think. But even if EE wades through that minor league wave...he's got Neftali Soto on the horizon too.

In regards to Votto/Alonzo, this is the one I'm simply not worried about. 1B is Votto's spot until someone rips it from his grasp. With Alonzo already showing his desire for the almighty dollar (draft signing period build up for coin), it wouldn't surprise me if the Reds started dangling Yonder later this year and this coming off season to other clubs. While I'd love to hang onto all our great young talent, one of the biggest bonuses of a good farm system is it's use in trading those excesses to fill the holes in the big league club. But one of the things I haven't seen the Reds do that I'd like to see them start doing is looking to trade our excess talent in the minors for areas of need in the minors, trading kids for kids.

Highlifeman21
01-30-2009, 06:36 PM
Well if EE doesn't shore up his defense this year Frazier will be knocking on the door with EE's FA closing in. I'd say that means EE could be on his way out the door, heck he might be on his way out regardless. If he straightens out his defense enough to be considered respectable and has a big year with the bat maybe they trade he or Frazier in the offseason for a SS, who knows. I'm guessing though that the odds Frazier is dealt is a lot less likely given he helps allow the future re-signing of our core. EE and BP are almost destined to be dealt eventually IMO. Unless the dollars start rolling in somehow.

Will Frazier give us better D than EE, and will Frazier give us a better bat than EE?

Those 2 questions need answered before we give Frazier the 3B gig, ya know?

Mario-Rijo
01-30-2009, 06:43 PM
Will Frazier give us better D than EE, and will Frazier give us a better bat than EE?

Those 2 questions need answered before we give Frazier the 3B gig, ya know?

I certainly believe he is more than capable but no we don't know. But what I do know is that if Edwin doesn't fix his problems at 3rd base before he becomes a FA he's gone. Because we ain't gonna pay him 3rd basemans money to play LF, unless his bat does indeed go up a notch or two in the meantime which frankly I'm not yet convinced of either.

durl
01-30-2009, 11:09 PM
Yeah I'm sure they did. But for me at least, if I flop a full house with 8-5 offsuit, the next time I get that hand I'm still going to fold.

We can't compare the ability of an athlete to the luck of a draw.

I realize some people think Weathers has survived on luck. Regardless of what you call it, he's been a solid pitcher for several years now. If he is "lucky," he's sure good at replicating it on a consistent basis.

Big Klu
01-30-2009, 11:56 PM
At some point in time, these corner guys are going to have to be dealt. There's simply no way around this. With EE, you've got Frazier coming up...but that's not all he's got to worry about. Francisco has been ripping the cover off the ball and he's said to have a cannon for an arm. His biggest flaw as been his failure to take a walk, but this winter he's shown strides in addressing that. If he fixes that...Juan might be EE's biggest immediate threat. Frazier has multiple positions so they can be a bit more flexible with him I'd think. But even if EE wades through that minor league wave...he's got Neftali Soto on the horizon too.

In regards to Votto/Alonzo, this is the one I'm simply not worried about. 1B is Votto's spot until someone rips it from his grasp. With Alonzo already showing his desire for the almighty dollar (draft signing period build up for coin), it wouldn't surprise me if the Reds started dangling Yonder later this year and this coming off season to other clubs. While I'd love to hang onto all our great young talent, one of the biggest bonuses of a good farm system is it's use in trading those excesses to fill the holes in the big league club. But one of the things I haven't seen the Reds do that I'd like to see them start doing is looking to trade our excess talent in the minors for areas of need in the minors, trading kids for kids.

I have thought since the day he was drafted that Yonder Alonso is to the Reds what Matt LaPorta was to the Brewers.

Danny Serafini
01-31-2009, 12:07 AM
David Weathers may be the most underappreciated Red of this decade. All he's done since he came to Cincinnati is allow runs at a rate significantly lower than the league average, yet some people treat him as if he's carrying the bubonic plague. He may walk a tightrope at times, but he still gets to the other side.

Mario-Rijo
01-31-2009, 04:36 PM
I have thought since the day he was drafted that Yonder Alonso is to the Reds what Matt LaPorta was to the Brewers.

I also have felt this way. If Votto has another season as good or better than the last I am not so sure that Alonso will ever wear cincy red.

Mario-Rijo
01-31-2009, 04:38 PM
David Weathers may be the most underappreciated Red of this decade. All he's done since he came to Cincinnati is allow runs at a rate significantly lower than the league average, yet some people treat him as if he's carrying the bubonic plague. He may walk a tightrope at times, but he still gets to the other side.

I do agree and he seems to really help those around him, the Burtons, Brays etc.

SMcGavin
01-31-2009, 11:20 PM
David Weathers may be the most underappreciated Red of this decade. All he's done since he came to Cincinnati is allow runs at a rate significantly lower than the league average, yet some people treat him as if he's carrying the bubonic plague. He may walk a tightrope at times, but he still gets to the other side.

David Weathers has given the Reds great results for the past three seasons. No doubt about it. If I met the man, I'd shake his hand and thank him for a job well done.

However, as reasoned out many times by many people on this board, he's not a good bet to produce those good results in the future. So I don't want him on the 2009 team. I think it's a pretty reasonable stance to take.

RedsManRick
01-31-2009, 11:45 PM
Yep. You pay a guy for the results he's going to give you. He's already been compensated for the work he's given us so far.

redsmetz
02-01-2009, 12:10 AM
David Weathers has given the Reds great results for the past three seasons. No doubt about it. If I met the man, I'd shake his hand and thank him for a job well done.

However, as reasoned out many times by many people on this board, he's not a good bet to produce those good results in the future. So I don't want him on the 2009 team. I think it's a pretty reasonable stance to take.

I think you miss the point entirely. This sentiment has been echoed on RZ for nearly the whole time Weathers has been back and he's done the job. Yes, ultimately time will catch up to him. But hear Redszone say it, he's been expected to fail for the past several years.

Highlifeman21
02-01-2009, 12:26 AM
I think you miss the point entirely. This sentiment has been echoed on RZ for nearly the whole time Weathers has been back and he's done the job. Yes, ultimately time will catch up to him. But hear Redszone say it, he's been expected to fail for the past several years.

Ok, so through 2008, we've all been wrong about David Weathers...

This is 2009, and I have no doubt that we'll all be right about David Weathers.

redsmetz
02-01-2009, 07:30 AM
Ok, so through 2008, we've all been wrong about David Weathers...

This is 2009, and I have no doubt that we'll all be right about David Weathers.

Since every ballplayer ages and ultimately their skills diminish, you're bound to be right about this at some point. And you might even be right this year, but it doesn't hurt to acknowledge that just saying it, doesn't make it so. I'm inclined to stay in the camp that Weathers new contract is not a bad one and isn't necessarily in and of itself a detriment to the club's season.

But I do acknowledge that you'll ultimately be right some day.

Boss-Hog
02-01-2009, 09:35 AM
Since every ballplayer ages and ultimately their skills diminish, you're bound to be right about this at some point. And you might even be right this year, but it doesn't hurt to acknowledge that just saying it, doesn't make it so. I'm inclined to stay in the camp that Weathers new contract is not a bad one and isn't necessarily in and of itself a detriment to the club's season.

But I do acknowledge that you'll ultimately be right some day.
Well said.

Highlifeman21
02-01-2009, 09:36 AM
Since every ballplayer ages and ultimately their skills diminish, you're bound to be right about this at some point. And you might even be right this year, but it doesn't hurt to acknowledge that just saying it, doesn't make it so. I'm inclined to stay in the camp that Weathers new contract is not a bad one and isn't necessarily in and of itself a detriment to the club's season.

But I do acknowledge that you'll ultimately be right some day.

And this is a great point. Alone, the $ burned on Weathers doesn't hurt the Reds. But, combined with the money wasted on Hairston and Taveras, the $ burned on the three of them combined is significant.

I hope Weathers proves me wrong, he's certainly done so his entire time in Cincinnati. I just fear that the closer he is to 40, he'll stop proving me wrong.

Chip R
02-01-2009, 10:04 AM
Well if EE doesn't shore up his defense this year Frazier will be knocking on the door with EE's FA closing in. I'd say that means EE could be on his way out the door, heck he might be on his way out regardless. If he straightens out his defense enough to be considered respectable and has a big year with the bat maybe they trade he or Frazier in the offseason for a SS, who knows. I'm guessing though that the odds Frazier is dealt is a lot less likely given he helps allow the future re-signing of our core. EE and BP are almost destined to be dealt eventually IMO. Unless the dollars start rolling in somehow.


If Dusty makes it through 2009, there's no way in hell he's going with Todd Frazier over EE at 3rd, I don't care how many errors EE makes. Unless EE gets hurt for a significant portion of the season and Frazier comes in and fills in for him, he's not going to be starting at 3rd come 2010. Even if EE gets hurt, all they will do is slide Keppinger in there. Another thing is that the Reds have to find a position for Frazier. Last year he played 3 or 4 different positions. MLB is not the place for on the job training. Usually, if a guy hasn't found a steady position it means he's probably not that good defensively. Frazier may come up and make us long for the glory days when EE was there. Gonzo will more than likely be gone after 2009 so that means that the Reds will have to get a veteran via trade or free agency or they are going to have to go with someone like Janish or Valaika. How many people think Dusty's going to go with an all rookie left side of the infield?

jojo
02-01-2009, 11:25 AM
Since every ballplayer ages and ultimately their skills diminish, you're bound to be right about this at some point. And you might even be right this year, but it doesn't hurt to acknowledge that just saying it, doesn't make it so. I'm inclined to stay in the camp that Weathers new contract is not a bad one and isn't necessarily in and of itself a detriment to the club's season.

But I do acknowledge that you'll ultimately be right some day.

Lets look at it from a different standpoint-completely ignoring age. Weathers now has a below average K rate (about 1.5 ks/9 lower!) and walk rate for a reliever. He's still got ground ball tendencies but they aren't nearly as pronounced as they once were. Just assuming Weathers puts up identical peripherals in '09, the Reds just shelled out $4M to a below-average reliever. That's not a positive.

Now look at his '08 LOB% and we see that he stranded an unsustainably high number of runners (81.5%). If that swings back to normal, he's in for some brutal innings.

It's pretty tough to be optimistic about Weather's in '09.

Jpup
02-01-2009, 12:22 PM
Lets look at it from a different standpoint-completely ignoring age. Weathers now has a below average K rate (about 1.5 ks/9 lower!) and walk rate for a reliever. He's still got ground ball tendencies but they aren't nearly as pronounced as they once were. Just assuming Weathers puts up identical peripherals in '09, the Reds just shelled out $4M to a below-average reliever. That's not a positive.

Now look at his '08 LOB% and we see that he stranded an unsustainably high number of runners (81.5%). If that swings back to normal, he's in for some brutal innings.

It's pretty tough to be optimistic about Weather's in '09.

and '08, and '07, and '06. If there is one guy on the team that I'm not worried about, it's David Weathers. He finds a way to be pretty good every year.

jojo
02-01-2009, 12:34 PM
He's kind of running out of ways.

RedsManRick
02-01-2009, 12:35 PM
and '08, and '07, and '06. If there is one guy on the team that I'm not worried about, it's David Weathers. He finds a way to be pretty good every year.

Just for reference, from fangraphs.


ERA K/9 BB/9 K/BB HR/9 BABIP LOB% FIP
2005 3.94 7.07 3.36 2.10 0.81 .288 71.6 3.82
2006 3.54 6.11 4.15 1.47 1.47 .237 82.3 5.37
2007 3.59 5.56 3.13 1.78 0.46 .269 70.7 3.91
2008 3.25 5.97 3.89 1.53 0.78 .319 81.5 4.26

_Sir_Charles_
02-01-2009, 01:01 PM
I also have felt this way. If Votto has another season as good or better than the last I am not so sure that Alonso will ever wear cincy red.

I agree....and I also have no problem with that what so ever. Let Yonder develop a bit, give Joey time to settle in, then deal Yonder to fill a weakness...or two.

redsmetz
02-01-2009, 04:27 PM
I agree....and I also have no problem with that what so ever. Let Yonder develop a bit, give Joey time to settle in, then deal Yonder to fill a weakness...or two.

Is it correct to assume that this season, both at the ML club and in the minors, that we're going to start seeing what we have to trade? If Frazier and Valaika do well; if Alonso progresses and Votto and Bruce continue to grow (or maintain what they did), if EE and Phillips continue, then we ultimately have significant surplus to start moving some chips. Now I know that's alot of "ifs", but best case scenario says we'll have to start making some decisions. And not all of these guys will necessarily continue to be Reds. It's a good problem to have, if everything falls right. And that's without even mentioning the staff. This season might be nothing to write home about for the big club, but I'm liking the future's potential.

Mario-Rijo
02-01-2009, 05:13 PM
If Dusty makes it through 2009, there's no way in hell he's going with Todd Frazier over EE at 3rd, I don't care how many errors EE makes. Unless EE gets hurt for a significant portion of the season and Frazier comes in and fills in for him, he's not going to be starting at 3rd come 2010. Even if EE gets hurt, all they will do is slide Keppinger in there. Another thing is that the Reds have to find a position for Frazier. Last year he played 3 or 4 different positions. MLB is not the place for on the job training. Usually, if a guy hasn't found a steady position it means he's probably not that good defensively. Frazier may come up and make us long for the glory days when EE was there. Gonzo will more than likely be gone after 2009 so that means that the Reds will have to get a veteran via trade or free agency or they are going to have to go with someone like Janish or Valaika. How many people think Dusty's going to go with an all rookie left side of the infield?

Well if the losing doesn't stop someone has to get canned and that someone isn't at all likely to be good 'ole boy Walt. Perhaps they think they will get away with canning Jacoby at some point and lay the blame at his feet, who knows. But Dusty is no lock although I could certainly see reasons why Bob might keep him, seeing as how Bob knows little. That said money walks and you know the rest. And Edwin especially if he has a big season with the bat will be due for another big increase next offseason and the offseason after that he'll be a FA (right?). Money will force him out the door regardless. And if Frazier can get some meaningful time at 3B this season he's a certain lock for 3rd (plus any other open spot) next season. He has enough experience at SS and has the kind of intangibles that could equate to a rather quick move to 3rd.

I'm not saying it's a lock but I'd lean heavily in that direction. SS who knows, but I doubt that decision will have much to do with the other in reality.

Danny Serafini
02-02-2009, 09:40 AM
Ok, so through 2008, we've all been wrong about David Weathers...

This is 2009, and I have no doubt that we'll all be right about David Weathers.

The problem is people had no doubt he'd fall apart in 2008. And 2007. And 2006. Oops. It's almost become the boy who cries wolf at this point. Sooner or later he'll fade away, but he hasn't given me reason to believe he's going to fall off a cliff in 2009. I don't want to lock somebody at his age up long term, but a one year deal at a salary that isn't exorbitant doesn't bother me one bit.

membengal
02-02-2009, 09:50 AM
Even if he doesn't have a drop-off, the money spent on him (and the others in the pen) have crippled this team. That's a problem.

jojo
02-02-2009, 10:01 AM
The problem is people had no doubt he'd fall apart in 2008. And 2007. And 2006. Oops. It's almost become the boy who cries wolf at this point. Sooner or later he'll fade away, but he hasn't given me reason to believe he's going to fall off a cliff in 2009. I don't want to lock somebody at his age up long term, but a one year deal at a salary that isn't exorbitant doesn't bother me one bit.

Weathers has had below average peripherals for a reliever really since 2006. In '06 he had a shiny ERA due to an unusually low BABIP and high strand rate. In '07, similar peripherals and another lower than normal BABIP. In '08 same story but another higher-than-normal strand rate.

So the problem isn't that Weathers "has proved" naysayers wrong by looking better than his peripherals. The problem is that the Reds are paying Weathers for something that is out of his control rather than for a repeatable skill. Meanwhile his velocity continues to drop.

Even if the argument that Weathers could control BABIP and LOB% was valid (it's not), in order for Weathers to replicate his last several years, one would have to bank on him being dramatically better than his career norms in either one or both parameters. Why would one expect that?

princeton
02-02-2009, 10:09 AM
The problem is people had no doubt he'd fall apart in 2008. And 2007. And 2006.

I thought he was done in 1999. I haven't discounted him since

Stormy's interesting. He'll look horrendous for 6 weeks, then do some really great work for several months. eventually he'll be done, but it'll be hard to know when.

but if the Reds had known their February budget and the February market, Reds would have passed on Stormy.

blumj
02-02-2009, 10:10 AM
Even if he doesn't have a drop-off, the money spent on him (and the others in the pen) have crippled this team. That's a problem.
Exactly. It's not who, it's what. They could all be Mariano Rivera and it still wouldn't make sense to spend 25% of their total payroll on relief pitchers unless they were loaded with inexpensive talent everywhere else.

membengal
02-02-2009, 10:40 AM
That's it in a nutshell, blum. When they were spending-spreeing through Weather/Rhodes/Lincoln, I assumed that there was plenty more where that came from to address the other needs on the team. Apparently not. And, since it was apparently not, again, if Jock knew about the limited budget as he was burning through that money on the 'pen, it is GM malpractice of the first order.

ETA: It's looking more like 30% of their total payroll on the pen. Which is simply insane.

REDREAD
02-02-2009, 11:59 AM
Exactly. It's not who, it's what. They could all be Mariano Rivera and it still wouldn't make sense to spend 25% of their total payroll on relief pitchers unless they were loaded with inexpensive talent everywhere else.

But most of that money is spent on Cordero.

2 million each for Lincoln and Rhodes is a good investment. Does anyone dispute that? I guess some people would rather throw kids into the fire, but IMO, that is not wise. The team had to sign some veterans to fill out the pen.

I agree that it was a mistake to offer Weathers arb.

I guess I don't see how spending money on the bullpen this winter has crippled the team. I can see the argument that Cordero is an expensive luxury for this team, but that decision was not made this winter.

The scenerio where the Reds don't sign Lincoln, Rhodes, Weathers, Gomez, and Tavares, don' trade for Hernandez, and then somehow use that money to give Abreau a one year deal would still result in a pretty bad team. IMO, the Abreu option team would be much worse than what we have now, because the bullpen would be a major liablity. Also, relying on Dickerson and Hannigan to carry a significant load is not wise, IMO.

bucksfan2
02-02-2009, 12:20 PM
But most of that money is spent on Cordero.

2 million each for Lincoln and Rhodes is a good investment. Does anyone dispute that? I guess some people would rather throw kids into the fire, but IMO, that is not wise. The team had to sign some veterans to fill out the pen.

I agree that it was a mistake to offer Weathers arb.

I guess I don't see how spending money on the bullpen this winter has crippled the team. I can see the argument that Cordero is an expensive luxury for this team, but that decision was not made this winter.

The scenerio where the Reds don't sign Lincoln, Rhodes, Weathers, Gomez, and Tavares, don' trade for Hernandez, and then somehow use that money to give Abreau a one year deal would still result in a pretty bad team. IMO, the Abreu option team would be much worse than what we have now, because the bullpen would be a major liablity. Also, relying on Dickerson and Hannigan to carry a significant load is not wise, IMO.

I think the decision to offer Weathers arb was a good decision. I just don't think the Reds thought this FA market would turn south so quickly. Look at Affeldt. He signed a good contract right off the bat. I am willing to bet that many of the current FA's are kicking themselves because they didn't act quickly or turned down good deals.

A bullpen without Lincoln, Weathers, and Rhodes could be a disaster. Relying on young guys to pitch well right off the bat is a recipe for disaster. If the young guys pitch well they will pitch.

I wonder what really happened for the Reds to say most of the signing is done. Maybe it was poor season ticket sales. Maybe it was low advertising money coming in. Maybe the overall ticket sales for this year are much lower than expected.

Caveat Emperor
02-02-2009, 12:59 PM
Even if he doesn't have a drop-off, the money spent on him (and the others in the pen) have crippled this team. That's a problem.

On the other hand, not having a set of "solid veteran arms" in the bullpen would pretty all but ensure that the starting pitching would be abused by Dusty. It's one thing to put some kids out there and tell Dusty "these are your guys" -- it's another thing for him to actually use them, as opposed to running the starter out for pitch 110+. Guys like Weathers, Rhodes and Cordero are guys Dusty will give the ball to. I'd honestly prefer to see Cueto and Volquez healthy than bellyache about whether Weathers was worth (say that 4 times fast) the dollars spent.

Besides, as has been said before, every time someone has cried "Weathers is cooked!" he's come back and pitched effectively. At this point, I'm putting down the magic 8-ball and just waiting to see what happens.

blumj
02-02-2009, 01:23 PM
The Reds need a $20M bullpen to prevent their $10M manager from abusing assets which are of significantly greater value to the Reds than both the $20M bullpen and the $10M manager? Okay, fine, but it's still nuts.

membengal
02-02-2009, 01:24 PM
CE: I am not saying "Weathers is cooked". I am saying that whether it was Weathers, or some other arm, that $4 million was a luxury that this team apparently didn't have to spend on a bullpen arm this off-season. I hear your point on Dusty and arm protection of the starters, though, and think it's a good one. But it still doesn't justify the kind of % of salary that this team has spent on the pen, in my estimation.

Redread: I think with Burton and Bray, you have your bridges to Cordero. That's already in-house. Then you can fill in with Roenicke and Herrera before that. It's not ideal, perhaps, but given the economic realities of the Reds' budget, it's a better use of their treasure than what they did, in my view.

I actually still am okay with the Cordero contract and the stablization he brought to the back of the pen. But being who Cincy is, budget-wise, that signing means having to go a bit shorter somewhere else, by definition. I would rather them have gone cheaper in parts of the pen, than where they chose to go cheaper.

REDREAD
02-02-2009, 02:08 PM
Redread: I think with Burton and Bray, you have your bridges to Cordero. That's already in-house. Then you can fill in with Roenicke and Herrera before that. It's not ideal, perhaps, but given the economic realities of the Reds' budget, it's a better use of their treasure than what they did, in my view.


I don't think Burton and Bray are enough. Bray just isn't very reliable, and is injury prone. Even if Bray and Burton are both solid, that's a lot of innings you are asking them to pitch. Herrera is not a major league pitcher. He would quickly be exposed and relegated to mop up. Reonicke may or may not be ready. If he's ready, they can make room for him.

Here's what I foresee if we go with the kids. Cordero and Burton are the only pitchers that are trusted when the game is close. Bray is pretty erratic, and based on his track record, he really doesn't deserve to take on a setup role.
Cordero is the closer, so you will see Burton in a lot of games.

2 million each for Lincoln and Rhodes is a good idea. I really don't see how that 4 million could make a bigger impact if spent elsewhere. They are both likely to see a lot of work this season (as is Weathers).

Weathers was overpaid, but it's really not worth getting that upset about.

I just don't think the Reds have enough talent at this point to give 2 or 3 bullpen spots to kids. Even if you think Herrara and Roenicke are ready, you still have to sign one vet.. and then you are bare at AAA if an injury happens.

fearofpopvol1
02-02-2009, 02:15 PM
I really think the Reds offered him arb with the hope of him bouncing and acquiring a pick, it just didn't work out that way.

IslandRed
02-02-2009, 02:17 PM
I think the decision to offer Weathers arb was a good decision. I just don't think the Reds thought this FA market would turn south so quickly.

I agree. The Reds knew it was a possibility he would accept arbitration, but at the time I don't think they believed he would be back.

Sea Ray
02-02-2009, 03:09 PM
I really think the Reds offered him arb with the hope of him bouncing and acquiring a pick, it just didn't work out that way.

It's my recollection that the Reds were negotiating with Weathers before they offered arbitration. Anyone else remember if that was the case? If they were indeed negotiating with him then that shows they did want him back. The only issue is at what price. Seeing as he signed for about what he's made recently for the Reds, I don't think the team is floored at what Weathers is going to cost them.

Ron Madden
02-03-2009, 03:42 AM
I don't think the team is floored at what Weathers is going to cost them.

Relief Pitchers are very volatile year to year, you just can't count on'em to be very consistent.

The Reds have spent a ton of money on below average arms in the bullpen the past few years. Money that (IMHO) could very well have been spent on productive players.

We could say Weathers has been productive and that could very well be true.

We could say Weathers has been very lucky and that could very well be true.

nate
02-03-2009, 09:47 AM
It's my recollection that the Reds were negotiating with Weathers before they offered arbitration. Anyone else remember if that was the case? If they were indeed negotiating with him then that shows they did want him back. The only issue is at what price. Seeing as he signed for about what he's made recently for the Reds, I don't think the team is floored at what Weathers is going to cost them.

Is "floored" good or bad in this instance?

membengal
02-03-2009, 09:52 AM
I think he means it as a good thing.

And the simple fact remains that Cincy's payroll balance is ridiculous with respect to the bullpen. If they are indeed fine with that, if Walt really made those signings knowing full well what the ultimate budget would be and how much he was burning on the pen, well, I firmly agree to disagree with his approach.

OnBaseMachine
07-08-2009, 10:28 PM
Sorry for bumping this but I didn't want to start another thread.

Will someone please explain to me why Dusty Baker continues to use David Weathers in crucial situations? He's simply not an eighth inning pitcher. He throws 88 mph fastballs and a flat slider. I think Dusty Baker is the only person in baseball who thinks Weathers is a high leverage arm. Use Masset in the 8th inning, he's a much better option.

I'm looking forward to the day David Weathers is no longer a Red. Nothing against the guy, he seems like a great guy, but I'm just so tired of seeing him misused by the Reds. He's fine as a 7th inning guy but he doesn't belong in the setup role.

Joseph
07-08-2009, 10:36 PM
Weathers has a use, and unfortunately we've seen Dusty trust in the vets in those situations. Honestly his management of the pen hasn't bothered me a whole lot this season. Now the line up.....

TheNext44
07-08-2009, 10:44 PM
David Weather's career BABIP is a respectable .310. What you would expect.

This year, it's .213. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what is going to happen in Weather's future appearances this year.

OBM is right, he needs to be pitching the 6th and 7th. He's not the guy you want pitching with the game on the line and the team's best hitters coming up. He relies too much on luck. That is not a role he is suited for.

I would love to see Masset in that role from now on.

Kc61
07-08-2009, 11:27 PM
Nothing wrong with Weathers in the eighth. Problem is not his inning. He could mess up a game in the sixth too. Or he could succeed in the sixth or the eighth.

Tonight Dusty kept him out there too long. Weathers pitched out of Rhodes' trouble in the eighth. You can't expect him to pitch out of trouble again in the ninth. I don't like Weathers for longer stints, but especially when he faces trouble multiple times.

I think Dusty was trying to get away with one tonight, his pen is worn thin, he was facing extra innings. So he tried to go longer with Weathers and it backfired.

jojo
07-09-2009, 06:57 AM
David Weather's career BABIP is a respectable .310. What you would expect.

This year, it's .213. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what is going to happen in Weather's future appearances this year.

OBM is right, he needs to be pitching the 6th and 7th. He's not the guy you want pitching with the game on the line and the team's best hitters coming up. He relies too much on luck. That is not a role he is suited for.

I would love to see Masset in that role from now on.

He needs to be pitching on another team..... i'd trade him fast and furiously.

edabbs44
07-09-2009, 07:49 AM
David Weather's career BABIP is a respectable .310. What you would expect.

This year, it's .213. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what is going to happen in Weather's future appearances this year.

OBM is right, he needs to be pitching the 6th and 7th. He's not the guy you want pitching with the game on the line and the team's best hitters coming up. He relies too much on luck. That is not a role he is suited for.

I would love to see Masset in that role from now on.

Masset's BABIP is .207 this year, with a career BABIP of .316.

redsmetz
07-09-2009, 08:14 AM
Nothing wrong with Weathers in the eighth. Problem is not his inning. He could mess up a game in the sixth too. Or he could succeed in the sixth or the eighth.

Tonight Dusty kept him out there too long. Weathers pitched out of Rhodes' trouble in the eighth. You can't expect him to pitch out of trouble again in the ninth. I don't like Weathers for longer stints, but especially when he faces trouble multiple times.

I think Dusty was trying to get away with one tonight, his pen is worn thin, he was facing extra innings. So he tried to go longer with Weathers and it backfired.

The fact is, the visiting team is going to lose the game tied in the 9th inning more times than not. Ironically, our chances of not losing were better with runners on first and second with two outs (55% of the time, the home team wins) than with the bases empty (62%).

http://winexp.walkoffbalk.com/expectancy/search

You said it rather succinctly. Sometimes Weathers will get the job done, sometimes not. Even as folks have come around to Weathers succeeding, it's still a tight rope act and he'll never not be that type of pitcher. A fresh arm might have been nice, but I agree we still were faced with extra innings and needing guys for then. You roll the dice and see what happens.

Roy Tucker
07-09-2009, 08:21 AM
Nothing wrong with Weathers in the eighth. Problem is not his inning. He could mess up a game in the sixth too. Or he could succeed in the sixth or the eighth.

Tonight Dusty kept him out there too long. Weathers pitched out of Rhodes' trouble in the eighth. You can't expect him to pitch out of trouble again in the ninth. I don't like Weathers for longer stints, but especially when he faces trouble multiple times.

I think Dusty was trying to get away with one tonight, his pen is worn thin, he was facing extra innings. So he tried to go longer with Weathers and it backfired.

I still like Weathers, but I think Kc61's post was spot-on. He's not a multi-inning pitcher any more. Whether its age and fatigue takes something off his pitches more quickly now, batters discern his patterns and pitches more, or whateer, he seems still fairly effective for 1 inning, but no more.

When I saw he was coming out for the 9th, I went "uh-oh". I'll also admit that he seems a good guy and a good teammate and that probably colors my judgement some. I'm always a sucker for good character.

bucksfan2
07-09-2009, 08:30 AM
The Reds got beat last night the same way the Phillies got beat the night before. It happens in baseball. For the season Weathers has done his job pretty damn well. The pitch that Victorino hit IMO was a good pitch. It was down on the outside corner of the zone that Victorino managed to get his bat on. Weathers lost the game last night but to say he is a bad pitcher and needs to go is a gross overreaction.

RedRoser
07-09-2009, 09:19 AM
Gotta agree with OnBaseMachine. Weathers time has passed. Remember Mike Stanton? Don't let things regress to a similar situation.

edabbs44
07-09-2009, 09:24 AM
Gotta agree with OnBaseMachine. Weathers time has passed. Remember Mike Stanton? Don't let things regress to a similar situation.

If there was a significantly better option I would agree. But there isn't.

redsmetz
07-09-2009, 09:24 AM
Gotta agree with OnBaseMachine. Weathers time has passed. Remember Mike Stanton? Don't let things regress to a similar situation.

But this has been the manta on Redszone since he returned to the Reds, hasn't it? Certainly every players time runs out, but Weathers continues to get it done overall. He's not Mike Stanton, IMO.

hebroncougar
07-09-2009, 09:36 AM
Mike Stanton had two seasons of ERA as LOW as Weathers is right now. Just because he blew a game last night doesn't mean he's washed up. Heck, his ERA his 2.76, and his whip is 1.16. I know his BABIP is low, but give the guy a break.

edabbs44
07-09-2009, 09:47 AM
But this has been the manta on Redszone since he returned to the Reds, hasn't it? Certainly every players time runs out, but Weathers continues to get it done overall. He's not Mike Stanton, IMO.

Masset's the flavor of the month. He'll get moved to the 8th and then, when he runs his course, they will be calling for his head as well.

Kc61
07-09-2009, 09:51 AM
Just keep in mind that if Bruce hits a fly ball during the fourth inning rally, the Reds have three runs and Cordero pitches the ninth.

Or if Nix ran the bases better to prevent the double play.

That was where the game was lost last night. Bruce hits tons of fly balls, but not there. I'm not sure Nix could have prevented the DP but he didn't make it close.

Yeah, Weathers was out there too long and gave it up. But the real reason for the loss was the failure to cash in during a rally when the opposing pitcher was on the ropes.

KoryMac5
07-09-2009, 10:29 AM
Sorry for bumping this but I didn't want to start another thread.

Will someone please explain to me why Dusty Baker continues to use David Weathers in crucial situations? He's simply not an eighth inning pitcher. He throws 88 mph fastballs and a flat slider. I think Dusty Baker is the only person in baseball who thinks Weathers is a high leverage arm. Use Masset in the 8th inning, he's a much better option.

I'm looking forward to the day David Weathers is no longer a Red. Nothing against the guy, he seems like a great guy, but I'm just so tired of seeing him misused by the Reds. He's fine as a 7th inning guy but he doesn't belong in the setup role.

Your quote is nonsense to me, its like people being upset at Phillips because Dusty continues to bat him clean up. Weathers has no control over whether Dusty brings him out in the 7th or 8th inning, he takes the ball when the manager gives it to him. I mean this is the same David Weathers sporting a 2.76 ERA and .202 BA against.

In looking at your quotes over the years Weathers has been here I can see that there is a pretty long pattern of disdain directed at the guy from you. Everyone bashes Willy T, some like to bash McDonald, I guess Weathers is your guy. Personally I think when you factor in all his faults and the ups and downs this guy has had he has and continues to be a pretty good option out in the bullpen to call on in the 7th or 8th inning.

Homer Bailey
07-09-2009, 10:30 AM
Your quote is nonsense to me, its like people being upset at Phillips because Dusty continues to bat him clean up. Weathers has no control over whether Dusty brings him out in the 7th or 8th inning, he takes the ball when the manager gives it to him. I mean this is the same David Weathers sporting a 2.76 ERA and .202 BA against.

In looking at your quotes over the years Weathers has been here I can see that there is a pretty long pattern of disdain directed at the guy from you. Everyone bashes Willy T, some like to bash McDonald, I guess Weathers is your guy. Personally I think when you factor in all his faults and the ups and downs this guy has had he has and continues to be a pretty good option out in the bullpen to call on in the 7th or 8th inning.

His comments were more directed towards Dusty's misuse of him, and his disdain for the fact that we have guys on our roster that continue and will continue to be misused by our incompetent manager.

KoryMac5
07-09-2009, 10:32 AM
His comments were more directed towards Dusty's misuse of him, and his disdain for the fact that we have guys on our roster that continue and will continue to be misused by our incompetent manager.

It doesn't matter how Dusty uses him OBM has always had a thing for Weathers. :luvu:

westofyou
07-09-2009, 10:33 AM
His comments were more directed towards Dusty's misuse of him, and his disdain for the fact that we have guys on our roster that continue and will continue to be misused by our incompetent manager.

Incompetent eh?

Just like all the Reds managers since 1995 eh?

Yawn....... bigger problems than Dusty, much bigger

edabbs44
07-09-2009, 10:34 AM
His comments were more directed towards Dusty's misuse of him, and his disdain for the fact that we have guys on our roster that continue and will continue to be misused by our incompetent manager.

How was he misused last night? The guy had a bad outing. He is allowed to have a hiccup. He has been realy good this year.

Cyclone792
07-09-2009, 10:51 AM
This is moreso an indictment of the entire bullpen rather than strictly Weathers, though Weathers is certainly contributing to this, but the walks allowed by the relievers are getting out of hand.

Cordero, Rhodes and Weathers each have a BB/9 rate around 4, and their combined BB/9 rate is 4.05. They're all having nice seasons other than the walk rates - their home run rates are particularly nice - but if those walk rates don't come down a bit from their current levels then those sparkling ERAs are likely to spike up in the second half and we'll start seeing more games like we saw last night.

FWIW, Reds relievers as a whole have a BB/9 rate of 4.40 - that's brutal.

nate
07-09-2009, 10:51 AM
I was wondering why Dusty didn't use Cordero in the 9th.

Blitz Dorsey
07-09-2009, 11:19 AM
I will say that Weathers' low ERA and WHIP always surprise me because his stuff looks pedestrian at best. But you can't argue with the long-term results.

However, every time they send him out there in a crucial situation, I am much-more nervous than I am when Rhodes, Masset or Cordero are on the mound. Maybe it's because I believe I could actually hit Weathers (which of course I couldn't, but keep in mind I'm not that intelligent).

OnBaseMachine
07-09-2009, 11:25 AM
Just keep in mind that if Bruce hits a fly ball during the fourth inning rally, the Reds have three runs and Cordero pitches the ninth.

Or if Nix ran the bases better to prevent the double play.

That was where the game was lost last night. Bruce hits tons of fly balls, but not there. I'm not sure Nix could have prevented the DP but he didn't make it close.

Yeah, Weathers was out there too long and gave it up. But the real reason for the loss was the failure to cash in during a rally when the opposing pitcher was on the ropes.

Bruce obviously didn't get the job done, but Nix made two baserunning blunders that cost the Reds a run. The first one was on the sac fly by Ramon Hernandez when Werth threw the ball home for some reason. Nix could have walked to second base but stayed at first. The second blunder was during the DP that you mentioned. Dusty didn't seem too happy about that after the game. That's about the third time a Reds baserunner has done that this season.

I agree with your last sentence. The problem last night was clearly the offense, like it is most nights.

TheNext44
07-09-2009, 11:55 AM
Masset's BABIP is .207 this year, with a career BABIP of .316.

Good point. Maybe Masset is not any better than Weathers for the 8th inning.

But Masset only has 144 IP in his career, and most of his stats were acquired when he was still figuring things out. Possibly he's more like the guy he was in Texas and Chicago, and will revert back to that. Or possibly he has figured out how to pitch, and will continue to pitch like he has this season. He might be able to sustain a low BABIP, like many good relievers. We just don't know.

We know all we need to know about Weathers. And the most important fact we know about him is that he is the type of pitcher who goes up there, throws strikes and lets the hitters get themselves out. That relies on luck. 70% of the time, they will make outs, but 30% of the time, they'll get on base. There will be times, which he can not control, when a team will get a bunch of that 30% at one time and score a run.
That is why he is best suited for the 6th or 7th inning. The game is rarely on the line, if he gives a run, there is time to get it back.
When he pitches in the 8th and 9th inning, the game is one the line, and if he gives up a run, the game is basically over. Also, you want your 8th inning guy to be able to get an out, particularly a strike out, when he needs it, usually against the teams best hitters.
Not sure Masset is that guy, but I know for sure that Weathers is not.

Boss-Hog
07-09-2009, 11:56 AM
The Reds got beat last night the same way the Phillies got beat the night before. It happens in baseball. For the season Weathers has done his job pretty damn well. The pitch that Victorino hit IMO was a good pitch. It was down on the outside corner of the zone that Victorino managed to get his bat on. Weathers lost the game last night but to say he is a bad pitcher and needs to go is a gross overreaction.


But this has been the manta on Redszone since he returned to the Reds, hasn't it? Certainly every players time runs out, but Weathers continues to get it done overall. He's not Mike Stanton, IMO.


Mike Stanton had two seasons of ERA as LOW as Weathers is right now. Just because he blew a game last night doesn't mean he's washed up. Heck, his ERA his 2.76, and his whip is 1.16. I know his BABIP is low, but give the guy a break.


Masset's the flavor of the month. He'll get moved to the 8th and then, when he runs his course, they will be calling for his head as well.

I agree with all of the above. While I understand that eventually, Weathers will be "done", just like all players, and I never feel completely comfortable with him in the game, more often the not, the guy gets the job done. Many people here have been predicting each year would be the end of the road for him, yet he's proved them wrong by turning in solid season after solid season.

Falls City Beer
07-09-2009, 11:59 AM
Yeah, this loss was on the offense, absolutely positively no question about it. It's inarguable.

Sea Ray
07-09-2009, 12:03 PM
Mike Stanton had two seasons of ERA as LOW as Weathers is right now. Just because he blew a game last night doesn't mean he's washed up. Heck, his ERA his 2.76, and his whip is 1.16. I know his BABIP is low, but give the guy a break.

I wouldn't even go so far as to say he blew the game. He got the Reds out of the 8th inning and in the ninth a 2 out hit against him scord a run. These things happen.

Chip R
07-09-2009, 12:12 PM
I was wondering why Dusty didn't use Cordero in the 9th.


Probably because even if the Reds took the lead in the 10th the Phillies still had to bat.

OnBaseMachine
07-09-2009, 12:14 PM
Another huge play in the game was the obvious missed call at first base in the 9th inning. Laynce Nix was clearly safe. Not sure what the umpire was looking at there. The Reds should have had the lead off man on first base with the pitcher working out of the stretch.

Homer Bailey
07-09-2009, 12:34 PM
How was he misused last night? The guy had a bad outing. He is allowed to have a hiccup. He has been realy good this year.

He's not a nails 8th inning guy. He's more suited for the 6th or 7th inning. In NO WAY should be counted on to pitch more than one inning. He doesn't have any stuff, and relies on luck, which has been illustrated in this thread. Everyone got so excited about the season he was having because he relies on luck, and now the luck is starting to turn on him. He has no out pitch, and his slider, even when he doesn't back it up to the middle of the plate, has no major bite to it anymore. Masset is a much better 8th inning RH option, as he misses bats, and doesn't walk as many batters. He is on the rise in his career, while Weathers is clearly on the decline in his career. Dusty has it in his head that Weathers is the perfect set up man though, so that is what we will see for the rest of the season, and we will see his numbers continue to regress to the norms, which could be scary once those hits really start falling.

KoryMac5
07-09-2009, 12:58 PM
He's not a nails 8th inning guy. He's more suited for the 6th or 7th inning. In NO WAY should be counted on to pitch more than one inning. He doesn't have any stuff, and relies on luck, which has been illustrated in this thread. Everyone got so excited about the season he was having because he relies on luck, and now the luck is starting to turn on him. He has no out pitch, and his slider, even when he doesn't back it up to the middle of the plate, has no major bite to it anymore. Masset is a much better 8th inning RH option, as he misses bats, and doesn't walk as many batters. He is on the rise in his career, while Weathers is clearly on the decline in his career. Dusty has it in his head that Weathers is the perfect set up man though, so that is what we will see for the rest of the season, and we will see his numbers continue to regress to the norms, which could be scary once those hits really start falling.

I think it is a misrepresentation to say Weathers doesn't have any stuff and relies on luck. If that was the case he would have been out of the league years ago. Granted he won't blow anyone away with his pitches, but the guy knows how to paint the corners.

jojo
07-09-2009, 01:08 PM
Weathers is largely a guy who relies upon his defense.

edabbs44
07-09-2009, 01:18 PM
He's not a nails 8th inning guy. He's more suited for the 6th or 7th inning. In NO WAY should be counted on to pitch more than one inning. He doesn't have any stuff, and relies on luck, which has been illustrated in this thread. Everyone got so excited about the season he was having because he relies on luck, and now the luck is starting to turn on him. He has no out pitch, and his slider, even when he doesn't back it up to the middle of the plate, has no major bite to it anymore. Masset is a much better 8th inning RH option, as he misses bats, and doesn't walk as many batters. He is on the rise in his career, while Weathers is clearly on the decline in his career. Dusty has it in his head that Weathers is the perfect set up man though, so that is what we will see for the rest of the season, and we will see his numbers continue to regress to the norms, which could be scary once those hits really start falling.

He has let up runs in 4 of his last 17 appearances. I am sure that many relievers would love to hae that stat.

Homer Bailey
07-09-2009, 01:52 PM
He has let up runs in 4 of his last 17 appearances. I am sure that many relievers would love to hae that stat.

How many times did he allow inherited runners to score? How many times did other pitchers get him out of jams? I don't know the answers to these questions, but looking at how many runs a reliever is charged with is a pretty faulty stat. Although he's not charged with all of them, he technically gave up four runs on ONE SWING to one Albert Pujols (in arguably the biggest game of the year) because he was brought in despite being absolutely owned by Pujols. And do you think he will allow 4 runs in next 17 appearances? Or would you say that he's been VERY fortunate to only have given up 4 runs.

TheNext44
07-09-2009, 04:26 PM
I think it is a misrepresentation to say Weathers doesn't have any stuff and relies on luck. If that was the case he would have been out of the league years ago. Granted he won't blow anyone away with his pitches, but the guy knows how to paint the corners.

The majority of successful middle relievers rely on luck and defense. It is not a slight to say that of a pitcher. It's just an accurate description.

If you throw strikes, and let the batters make contact, you will be successful as a middle reliever in the majors. One out of three will get a hit, based on luck alone. If you don't walk anyone, most of the time, no one will score in an inning. It takes more than two hits, or at least one extra base hit for the other team to score, if you don't walk anyone.

That is what Weather relies on. He is putting his faith in his defense and letting luck play itself out. Most of the time that will yield good results.

However, that is not the philosophy a setup man or closer should have. He needs to be able to get outs (K's) when he needs them, and not rely on luck. That is why I think Weathers needs to pitch more in the 6th inning than the 8th.

Scrap Irony
07-09-2009, 04:32 PM
That's a great philosophy, but not one all successful teams employ. Many playoff and World Series teams use a veteran arm or two as set-up guys or closers who rely more on guile and less on stuff.

Weathers does use guile, location, and everything else he can to get the job done. For the most part-- this season and over his Red career-- he has done just that.

He does not look good doing it at times. As a result, he gets grief.

Ron Madden
07-10-2009, 03:38 AM
Weathers is largely a guy who relies upon his defense.

Weathers is largely dependent on defense and IMHO has been very lucky.

Maybe the chickens are coming home to roost.

jojo
07-10-2009, 07:12 AM
Weathers is largely dependent on defense and IMHO has been very lucky.

Maybe the chickens are coming home to roost.

Well what we hope doesn't come home to roost is his BABIP/HR:FB/LOB%.....

edabbs44
07-10-2009, 08:18 AM
How many times did he allow inherited runners to score? How many times did other pitchers get him out of jams? I don't know the answers to these questions, but looking at how many runs a reliever is charged with is a pretty faulty stat.

Is it as faulty as bringing up that possibility and not backing it up? Here's another stat...batters had a .502 OPS against him in June. So, on average, he faced someone worse than Willy Taveras every at-bat.


Although he's not charged with all of them, he technically gave up four runs on ONE SWING to one Albert Pujols (in arguably the biggest game of the year) because he was brought in despite being absolutely owned by Pujols.

Nothing to be ashamed about. Pujols is a pretty good ballplayer, last time I checked.


And do you think he will allow 4 runs in next 17 appearances? Or would you say that he's been VERY fortunate to only have given up 4 runs.

Probably somewhere in between. He's been a solid reliever.

Kc61
07-10-2009, 08:37 AM
I've been focused on the production of the Reds outfield this year. Taveras, Bruce, Nix. Just a guess, but I doubt there is any outfield in major league baseball with so little offensive production this year.

David Weathers isn't perfect, but he really doesn't warrant a thread criticizing him. He's been a mainstay for 4 or 5 years now and generally does very well. Rhodes, Weathers and Cordero have been the backbone of the team this year IMO.

The Reds' offense -- particularly in the outfield -- is so poor that it overwhelms any possible complaint we may have about a set up man like Weathers.

jojo
07-10-2009, 08:41 AM
I've been focused on the production of the Reds outfield this year. Taveras, Bruce, Nix. Just a guess, but I doubt there is any outfield in major league baseball with so little offensive production this year.

David Weathers isn't perfect, but he really doesn't warrant a thread criticizing him. He's been a mainstay for 4 or 5 years now and generally does very well. Rhodes, Weathers and Cordero have been the backbone of the team this year IMO.

The Reds' offense -- particularly in the outfield -- is so poor that it overwhelms any possible complaint we may have about a set up man like Weathers.

Playing devils advocate here but maybe the same thinking that leads to Weathers being acquired and used as a high leverage arm leads to outfields like the Reds have?

nate
07-10-2009, 08:47 AM
I've been focused on the production of the Reds outfield this year. Taveras, Bruce, Nix. Just a guess, but I doubt there is any outfield in major league baseball with so little offensive production this year.

David Weathers isn't perfect, but he really doesn't warrant a thread criticizing him. He's been a mainstay for 4 or 5 years now and generally does very well. Rhodes, Weathers and Cordero have been the backbone of the team this year IMO.

The Reds' offense -- particularly in the outfield -- is so poor that it overwhelms any possible complaint we may have about a set up man like Weathers.

NL outfielders OPS: .767
Reds outfielders OPS: .690

I think it's fair to talk about Weathers' usage. I agree that he somehow manages to get the job done most of the time. However, his relies on defense along with Rhodes and Cordero without their ability to miss bats and a worrisome BABIP.

I guess as long as he has a good supply of mandrake root / manna, he'll be OK though.

:cool:

Ron Madden
07-11-2009, 02:59 AM
God Bless David Weathers. I hope his luck holds out.

Weathers is a pitch to contact kinda guy, He throws the ball and most of the time somebody hits it hard right at a defender.

Scares the heck outta me.

Homer Bailey
07-11-2009, 10:09 AM
Is it as faulty as bringing up that possibility and not backing it up? Here's another stat...batters had a .502 OPS against him in June. So, on average, he faced someone worse than Willy Taveras every at-bat.

This was in response to your cherry picked stat saying he allowed 4 runs in his last 17 appearances. I don't know how to lookup that stat. I did notice that in high leverage situations, Weathers has walked 11 and K'd 9, and hitters have a .393 OBP in that same situation. Thus supporting my claim that he is not the man suited for high leverage situations, such as coming in with the bases loaded to face Pujols (which is where this entire argument started).




Nothing to be ashamed about. Pujols is a pretty good ballplayer, last time I checked.

Didn't say he should be ashamed about it. Fact is he shouldn't have been put in that situation. He doesn't have the stuff to get Pujols out, and it's been proven year after year.




Probably somewhere in between. He's been a solid reliever.

Yes he has. He's just not a set up man. I never want him in the situation he was in last Friday on the Cardinals. That is not a knock on Weathers, but simply the manager, who is favoring the veteran in this situation.



Weathers has been really lucky so far. If he continues to pitch to contact the rest of the season (and considering he has no choice, he will), he is going to start giving up some runs. ERA's aren't as low as Weathers's ERA without a much better strikeout rate. It's an indication of a significant amount of luck. Sure you can look at his ERA and say he's been great (and I have no major complaints about his performance), but the fact is he has been lucky, and we are in some trouble if we (and Dusty) expect him to continue that pace.

redsfandan
07-11-2009, 11:16 AM
NL outfielders OPS: .767
Reds outfielders OPS: .690

I think it's fair to talk about Weathers' usage. I agree that he somehow manages to get the job done most of the time. However, his relies on defense along with Rhodes and Cordero without their ability to miss bats and a worrisome BABIP.

I guess as long as he has a good supply of mandrake root / manna, he'll be OK though.

:cool:
Taveras (.575) & McDonald (.475) kinda skew that OPS just a little.

Weathers will be gone after the season although he's one player I'd make VERY available in any trade talks since he's not in the plans for 2010.

nate
07-11-2009, 11:35 AM
Taveras (.575) & McDonald (.475) kinda skew that OPS just a little.

Taveras and McDonald are and were a part of the Reds outfield.

It's an accurate measure.

durl
07-11-2009, 11:47 AM
Weathers is largely a guy who relies upon his defense.

So is every pitcher who doesn't manage 27 Ks per game. Or 15, for that matter.

Weathers' isn't an overpowering pitcher but you don't have to be overpowering to be successful. I believe we should be thrilled to have a pitcher in the bullpen with his stats.

westofyou
07-11-2009, 11:48 AM
Amazing how a guy can be so bad and yet have appeared in so many games.

redsfandan
07-11-2009, 12:09 PM
Taveras and McDonald are and were a part of the Reds outfield.

It's an accurate measure.
Accurate yes but, and I'm just sayin', it seems the rest just seem to be thought of in more of a negative light then they should be. But that's for a different thread or a pm.

As far as the thread topic....

Weathers has appeared in 34 games and has allowed any runs to score (earned or unearned) in only 7 of them. He's never been thought of as one of the best relievers for good reason but that doesn't mean he hasn't done a decent job. The only problem I have with him is that was alot of money for a reliever that isn't a closer. But then our closer makes too much for my tastes as well.

jojo
07-11-2009, 07:46 PM
Amazing how a guy can be so bad and yet have appeared in so many games.

Weathers at this point in his career is thin ice and he has been since '06.

It's great the Reds haven't drowned yet but that doesn't mean they should be driving an SUV out there and building an ice fishing cabin....

westofyou
07-11-2009, 11:38 PM
Weathers at this point in his career is thin ice and he has been since '06.

It's great the Reds haven't drowned yet but that doesn't mean they should be driving an SUV out there and building an ice fishing cabin....

You mean a late 30's pitcher has a small and diminishing future?

Who would have thunk it?

Jpup
07-12-2009, 02:36 AM
Weathers at this point in his career is thin ice and he has been since '06.

...or you have been wrong about him for a long time. He knows how to get it done and usually does.

jojo
07-12-2009, 08:33 AM
You mean a late 30's pitcher has a small and diminishing future?

Who would have thunk it?

Apparently not the team that has given him a significant raise every year since '06.

jojo
07-12-2009, 08:34 AM
...or you have been wrong about him for a long time. He knows how to get it done and usually does.

He's happily bounced between unsustainable levels of luck metrics.

We're not seeing a skill.

mth123
07-12-2009, 09:15 AM
He's happily bounced between unsustainable levels of luck metrics.

We're not seeing a skill.

I'm not convinced JoJo.

In 2006 David Weathers Had a 6.11 K/9, a 4.15 BB/9. His BABIP was .237. His FIP was 5.37 while his ERA was 3.54. He was fairly dominant in the second half. After the season, I was all over this board proclaiming that he was not going to repeat and it was all BABIP. The Reds signed him and many (including me) were predicting doom.

In 2007, Weathers K/9 dropped down to 5.56 while his walks/9 improved to 3.13 and his HR/9 really improved to .46. His BABIP was a still low .269. His ERA was 3.59 while his FIP suggested 3.91. This time he had a low HR/FB rate of 3.8% so again, after the season I was with the group that was against the Reds retaining him and predicting doom.

In 2008, Weathers stats were virtually the same with a 5.97 K/9, a 3.89 BB/9 and a .78 HR/9. His BABIP was .319 and his HR/FB rate was 8.2%. His ERA was a slightly better 3.25 even though his BABIP took a big jump along with his HR rate. His FIP was 4.36. After '08, I gave up. I think Weathers has a higher than normal ability to control batted balls and just isn't a guy who can be captured by the numbers. I gave up predicting gloom and doom and accept that he's OK out there.

So far in 2009, his K/9, BB/9 and HR/9 are all in similar territory. His BABIP is again low at .227 as is his HR/FB rate at 5.4%. His ERA is at 2.76 and his FIP is 4.05. Those BABIP, HR/FB and FIP numbers would suggest a negative correction is around the corner, but it never seems to happen with this guy.

If the Reds are waving the white flag on 2009, then Weathers should be the first to go. The team has lots of young pen arms to sort through and Weathers probably will bring something back. But, if the team intends to continue competing, Weathers should stay until the predictions become reality. The predictions just aren't ever right with him.

redsfandan
07-12-2009, 09:55 AM
I agree that Weathers is a little underrated. He's not flashy but he just continues to put up pretty good seasons. If we're not in the playoff hunt let him go to someone that will be. I just wouldn't ask for that much for him.

jojo
07-12-2009, 10:39 AM
I'm not convinced JoJo.

In 2006 David Weathers Had a 6.11 K/9, a 4.15 BB/9. His BABIP was .237. His FIP was 5.37 while his ERA was 3.54. He was fairly dominant in the second half. After the season, I was all over this board proclaiming that he was not going to repeat and it was all BABIP. The Reds signed him and many (including me) were predicting doom.

In 2007, Weathers K/9 dropped down to 5.56 while his walks/9 improved to 3.13 and his HR/9 really improved to .46. His BABIP was a still low .269. His ERA was 3.59 while his FIP suggested 3.91. This time he had a low HR/FB rate of 3.8% so again, after the season I was with the group that was against the Reds retaining him and predicting doom.

In 2008, Weathers stats were virtually the same with a 5.97 K/9, a 3.89 BB/9 and a .78 HR/9. His BABIP was .319 and his HR/FB rate was 8.2%. His ERA was a slightly better 3.25 even though his BABIP took a big jump along with his HR rate. His FIP was 4.36. After '08, I gave up. I think Weathers has a higher than normal ability to control batted balls and just isn't a guy who can be captured by the numbers. I gave up predicting gloom and doom and accept that he's OK out there.

So far in 2009, his K/9, BB/9 and HR/9 are all in similar territory. His BABIP is again low at .227 as is his HR/FB rate at 5.4%. His ERA is at 2.76 and his FIP is 4.05. Those BABIP, HR/FB and FIP numbers would suggest a negative correction is around the corner, but it never seems to happen with this guy.

If the Reds are waving the white flag on 2009, then Weathers should be the first to go. The team has lots of young pen arms to sort through and Weathers probably will bring something back. But, if the team intends to continue competing, Weathers should stay until the predictions become reality. The predictions just aren't ever right with him.

Here's really why I'm such a Weathers agnostic (BTW, I think Weathers is actually a nice guy and likely a good influence in the club):

His peripherals are below average for the pen. Well, they're below average for a major league pitcher, period.

His "luck metrics" (or randomness metrics if one prefers; LOB%, HR/FB, BABIP) are screaming in that they have all been significantly better than his career norms but not in a consistent pattern belying an underlying skill that might be "controlling" them.

Finally, turning off the computer and using the eyes also reveals a guy that is less than inspiring.

He's the perfect storm.... and I'm very hesitant to believe that he's weathered it by possessing a skill that is subtle enough to escape the numbers and the eyes when there is an explanation (randomness).

Like I said, it's great that he's given the Reds innings. It's not so great that the Reds couldn't figure out another way.

mth123
07-12-2009, 10:56 AM
Here's really why I'm such a Weathers agnostic (BTW, I think Weathers is actually a nice guy and likely a good influence in the club):

His peripherals are below average for the pen. Well, they're below average for a major league pitcher, period.

His "luck metrics" (or randomness metrics if one prefers; LOB%, HR/FB, BABIP) are screaming in that they have all been significantly better than his career norms but not in a consistent pattern belying an underlying skill that might be "controlling" them.

Finally, turning off the computer and using the eyes also reveals a guy that is less than inspiring.

He's the perfect storm.... and I'm very hesitant to believe that he's weathered it by possessing a skill that is subtle enough to escape the numbers and the eyes when there is an explanation (randomness).

Like I said, it's great that he's given the Reds innings. It's not so great that the Reds couldn't figure out another way.

I get the logic. But its been 3 and a half seasons now where his performance numbers say he should be getting killed and his luck numbers say he's lucky. I think its something else.

jojo
07-12-2009, 11:00 AM
I get the logic. But its been 3 and a half seasons now where his performance numbers say he should be getting killed and his luck numbers say he's lucky. I think its something else.

He should bottle it and sell it.... :cool:

Unfortunately given his age he's going to implode just as a fact of life so there are no answers to this debate by looking forward.

Weathers production is what it is.

:beerme:

westofyou
07-12-2009, 11:33 AM
Apparently not the team that has given him a significant raise every year since '06.

A yearly raise used to be an American institution, as is performing ones job consistently in a less than flashy way.

Warren Spahn describes it better:

"A pitcher needs two pitches, one they're looking for and one to cross them up."

"Hitting is timing. Pitching is upsetting timing."

And then

“Consistency requires you to be as ignorant today as you were a year ago.”

Bernard Berenson

jojo
07-12-2009, 11:42 AM
A yearly raise used to be an American institution, as is performing ones job consistently in a less than flashy way.

Warren Spahn describes it better:

"A pitcher needs two pitches, one they're looking for and one to cross them up."

"Hitting is timing. Pitching is upsetting timing."

And then

“Consistency requires you to be as ignorant today as you were a year ago.”

Bernard Berenson

I've stated my case pretty clearly (and it goes much deeper than "flashiness") and I seriously doubt anyone on either side is going to move at this point.

edabbs44
07-12-2009, 11:42 AM
He should bottle it and sell it.... :cool:

Unfortunately given his age he's going to implode just as a fact of life so there are no answers to this debate by looking forward.

Weathers production is what it is.

:beerme:

All pitchers will implode at some point...however, he has given Cincy 4.5 years of sub-4.00 ERA relief pitching while predictions of his implosion have all fallen to the wayside.

We can start the "Lincecum will implode" discussion now and, at some point, we will have predicted it accurately.

jojo
07-12-2009, 11:43 AM
All pitchers will implode at some point...however, he has given Cincy 4.5 years of sub-4.00 ERA relief pitching while predictions of his implosion have all fallen to the wayside.

We can start the "Lincecum will implode" discussion now and, at some point, we will have predicted it accurately.

I think you completely missed the point of that post.

I will say this though, discussions about Weathers have been less about implosion and more about true skill.

westofyou
07-12-2009, 11:59 AM
I've stated my case pretty clearly (and it goes much deeper than "flashiness") and I seriously doubt anyone on either side is going to move at this point.

yeah, but it's fun.

Weathers is like the guy who does his job with a tool he invented, one day that tool will break. Then he'll have to go home.