PDA

View Full Version : Reds Outfield: '09 vs '08



TheNext44
03-21-2009, 04:15 PM
This is from Justin Inaz's Reds Blog:

http://jinaz-reds.blogspot.com/2009/03/is-2009-reds-opening-day-outfield-worse.html


Monday, March 16, 2009
Is the 2009 Reds opening day outfield worse than last year's?

The Reds are a faster team this year, most notably in the outfield where they might open the year with Dickerson/Taveras/Bruce after beginning last season with Dunn/Patterson/Griffey. Offensively, the latter combination is better than we we have this season. But can the speed of the 2009 trio make up for this loss in offense?

Here's a quick study to that end, inspired by an e-mail exchange.

Hitting

2008:
Dunn: +28.2 runs/150 g
Patterson: -38.9 runs/150 g
Griffey: + 4.6 runs/150 g
Total: -6.1 runs

Granted, I'm counting one of the worst seasons in recent memory here with Patterson. But he was the opening day center fielder, and for all intents and purposes was the CF starter for much of 2008. Who else should we use here?

2009 projected:
Dickerson: -15 runs/150 g
Taveras: -22 runs/150 g
Bruce: +4 runs/150 g
Total: -33 runs/150 g

Obviously, we're losing a lot of sock this year, even taking into account the pure misery of Patterson's season.

Baserunning

2008 baserunning using Dan Fox's stats:

Dunn: -2.5 runs/150 g
Patterson: +1.0 runs/150 g
Griffey: -5.4 runs/150 g
Total: -6.9 runs/150 g

2009 "projections" (average of 2007 & 2008 stats/150 g for Taveras...For Bruce and Dickerson I extrapolated from their 2008 performances, but then regressed half-way to zero in recognition of the small sample sizes on both of them) using Dan Fox's stats:

Dickerson: -1.1 runs/150 g
Taveras: +9.8 runs/150 g
Bruce: -0.1 runs/150 g
Total: +8.6 runs/150 g

That's a difference of 15.5 runs per 150 g in baserunning.

Fielding

Here is the projected runs per 150 games for the 2009 trio of outfielders vs. what the 2008 Reds did according to bUZR:

2008:
Dunn: -19.8 runs/150 g in LF
Patterson: -1.4 runs/150 g in CF
Griffey: -20.6 runs/150 g in RF
Total: -41.8 runs/150 g

2009 projected:
Dickerson: +3 runs/150 g in LF
Taveras: +3 runs/150 g in CF
Bruce: +2 runs/150 g in RF
Total: +8 runs/150 g

That's a difference of almost exactly 50 runs, due to the change in defense in the outfield between opening day last year and opening day this year. Staggering.


Hitting + Baserunning+Fielding:

For the 2008 opening day squad, I have them as -6.1 runs on offense, -6.9 runs in baserunning, and a mind-blowing -41.8 runs in the field for a total production of 55 runs below average.

For the 2009 opening day squad (assuming Dickerson is in LF), I have them as a miserable -33 runs/150g on offense, +8.6 runs/150 g baserunning, and +8 runs per season in the field for a total projected production of 16 runs below average.

...

So, what these data indicate is that our speed-focused outfield combination of Dickerson/Taveras/Bruce is projected to more productive--on the order of 40 runs and ~4 wins--than the combination we started with last season of Dunn/Patterson/Griffey. I certainly didn't expect the difference to be this large, and wasn't sure it would even be in this direction.

There are all kinds of potential critiques you might levy here, of course. The biggest is that 2008 saw Patterson have one of the worst seasons in reent memory, far below his 2008 projection. And therefore, what we got from our 2008 outfielders might be below their true talent levels.

So let's make Patterson a replacement player and take 20 runs off the difference. Even then, we're talking about a projected 2-win improvement over last year's opening day squad, despite the substantial offensive dropoff.

Maybe there are other changes that you'd make...but can you come up with reasons to subjectively shift the data another 20 runs toward the 2008 team's ledger? Even at that point, you'd only make the 2008 outfield the equals of the 2009 outfield.

If you ask the typical saber-leaning fan, I doubt you'll find many that would believe that our outfield might be at least as good, if not demonstrably better, than it was opening day last season. But that's what these data indicate, and I'm finding the numbers pretty compelling. It's all about improved baserunning and (especially) improved fielding. It makes a huge difference.

This is an excellent analysis of the Reds starting outfield in '08 and '09. Justin always does a great job, I highly recommend reading his blog, I always learn something from it.

I just wanted to expand it to the Reds entire outfield in '08 and '09. I think this gives a better view of each season's overall value in the outfield, since no one actually logged 150 games for the Reds, but 4 logged over 100 games.

Anyway, here are my offensive projections in Runs Created for the entire Reds outfield in '09, using the simple Runs Created Formula.

Gomes 45
Dickerson 55
Taveras 55
Bruce 100
Hairston 15
Ward 15

That is a total of 285 runs created, with the group totaling 2000 innings.

Last year the Reds outfield created 295 runs according to the simple Runs Created formula.

So I see the Reds outfield offensively creating around 10 less runs than last years.

Now for the defense.

Last year the Reds Outfield over UZR was -33.6

http://www.fangraphs.com/winss.aspx?team=Reds&pos=of&stats=fld&qual=0&type=0&season=2008&month=0

Here are projections for the '09 Reds outfield based on FanGraph's URZ and my estimate of innings played for each player.

Gomes -8.0 (350 inn)
Dickerson 3.7 (450)
Taveras 5.4 (600)
Bruce -7.3 (600)
Hairston 1.4 (100)
Ward -3.5 (doubt he will get many innings in the outfield, but this is assuming he gets around 100, worse case scenerio)

This totals -8.3.

So combine all the numbers and you get that the '08 Reds outfield in terms of offense and defense, created 261 runs

I have the '09 Reds outfield in terms of offense and defense, creating 277 runs.

I don't know how to figure out baserunning numbers in terms of runs, but I think that with the loss of Freel, and Jr. and the addition of Taveras, it will be at least as good as last year, if not significantly better.

So I project that in terms of offense and defense the Reds outfield this year will be around 16 runs better than it was last year, and if you factor in baserunning, even more.

ChatterRed
03-21-2009, 05:10 PM
I could have told you the outfield would be better without all that analysis. :D

JBChance
03-21-2009, 11:40 PM
Nice analysis. Kind of takes all areas into perspective.

The problem I have is that I wouldn't consider the defensive metrics as accurate to predict future performance as the offensive stats. That, and I wouldn't weight them the same.

In GAB, we all know that HR's rate are amplified. If our pitchers are struggling, a lot of balls will see the stands. All the defensive speed and prowess won't lessen that blow.

Ultimately, the success of our new defensive skill will be heavily dependent on the pitching. We will definitely need to see that massive improvement because of how much production we lost in Dunn.

We've already seen in ST the result of this loss: a bunch of 1 and 2 run offensive totals. So far, I know its early, but the pitching has not been up to the task in many games.

Your analysis does offer hope, though. My hope is that we see a rebound in the pitching and start to get more hitting out of Bruce, EdE, AGon, and Hairston/ Keppinger. As it is currently, I see a mid-70 win total.

BLEEDS
03-22-2009, 03:48 PM
Nice analysis. Kind of takes all areas into perspective.

The problem I have is that I wouldn't consider the defensive metrics as accurate to predict future performance as the offensive stats. That, and I wouldn't weight them the same.

In GAB, we all know that HR's rate are amplified. If our pitchers are struggling, a lot of balls will see the stands. All the defensive speed and prowess won't lessen that blow.


BINGO!!



Ultimately, the success of our new defensive skill will be heavily dependent on the pitching. We will definitely need to see that massive improvement because of how much production we lost in Dunn.

We've already seen in ST the result of this loss: a bunch of 1 and 2 run offensive totals. So far, I know its early, but the pitching has not been up to the task in many games.

Your analysis does offer hope, though. My hope is that we see a rebound in the pitching and start to get more hitting out of Bruce, EdE, AGon, and Hairston/ Keppinger. As it is currently, I see a mid-70 win total.

Agreed, and Dunn's defense in LF wasn't as horrible as everyone likes to speculate, esp. in 2008. The 2-3 times that Dickerson gets to a ball and/or doesn't miss the cutoff guy isn't going to make up for the loss of 25+ HRs...

70 wins out of this team would be a minor miracle with the current roster.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Ghosts of 1990
03-22-2009, 03:53 PM
Just my 2 cents but I'm gonna be an optimist and say this year will be better..

Bruce will have a nice year.... Taveras' defense and speed should help us. Dickerson will perform way beyond expectations and by year's end people will actually question whether he's a better major league prospect then Bruce. You watch.

mckrider
03-22-2009, 03:55 PM
I think Taveras is the big question mark whether or not they are better this year. Speed huge plus, power huge minus. But with these guys hopefully not putting up the amount of Strikeouts of last year and the better ability to move runners I think its gotta be better.

BLEEDS
03-22-2009, 04:13 PM
Just my 2 cents but I'm gonna be an optimist and say this year will be better..

Bruce will have a nice year.... Taveras' defense and speed should help us. Dickerson will perform way beyond expectations and by year's end people will actually question whether he's a better major league prospect then Bruce. You watch.

Tavares' defense isn't better than CP. His bat isn't currently either.
His .300 OBP will kill any potential that Dickerson brings to the table.

What I'd be questioning is WHY Dickerson isn't playing CF and we spent money on a REAL FA OF to play LF. That is what is sad...

PEACE

-BLEEDS

TheNext44
03-22-2009, 06:46 PM
Agreed, and Dunn's defense in LF wasn't as horrible as everyone likes to speculate, esp. in 2008. The 2-3 times that Dickerson gets to a ball and/or doesn't miss the cutoff guy isn't going to make up for the loss of 25+ HRs...

70 wins out of this team would be a minor miracle with the current roster.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

First of all, the numbers show that over a course of a year Dickerson will save the Reds around 25 runs with his defense instead of Dunn. That translates to around 30 more plays, not 2 or 3. Even if you add in Gomes in a platoon, the Reds save around 15 runs defensively vs Dunn. A Gomes/Dickerson platoon, using career numbers, offensively creates around 10 runs less than Dunn, so combined, Dickerson/Gomes should actually create and prevent more runs than Dunn.

Second, while I agree that these defensive stats are not as accurate as offensive ones (which aren't that accurate themselves, to be honest) they are accurate. Offensives ones are around 95% accurate, so lets say that defensive ones are only 75% accurate, which I think everyone would agree is very low. That would mean that at worst, Dickerson/Gomes platoon saves around 11 runs defensively vs Dunn. That would put them at about the same in terms of runs created and prevented combined vs. Dunn.

Thirdly, you bring up a great point by mentioning missing the cut off guy. UZR does not include outfield arms at all, let alone throwing to the right base. There are many aspects to fielding that are not covered by UZR or the other defensive metrics. Such as throwing to the right base, hitting the cutoff man, backing up the right base, being a good cutoff man. These aspects matter, and actually would make defensively strong fielders look even better.

Now I will add that I think that Dunn was strong in the fundamentals, so that would not effect his numbers all that much. But I do think that these new metrics probably underestimate the value of a good defender over a poor one, if anything.

ChatterRed
03-22-2009, 09:02 PM
I loved watching Dickerson in the OF last year. He turned so many doubles into singles. He got to balls that Dunn and Junior only dreamed of.

BLEEDS
03-23-2009, 08:06 AM
I loved watching Dickerson in the OF last year. He turned so many doubles into singles. He got to balls that Dunn and Junior only dreamed of.

I agree. I thought he was a good spark, who knows if he'll keep it up.

IMO, he would have fit beautifully in CF, then we could have spent some money on a real power Bat for LF, like Walt said was his #1 priority.
THAT would have been nice.

Now we're stuck with Tavares, who will be the death of us. Sure he's fast, but you can't steal first. He doesn't walk, so we better hope 65% of his bunt attempts are successful and he bats like .320.
I don't see it happening.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Rusty the Red
03-23-2009, 01:06 PM
Tavares' defense isn't better than CP. His bat isn't currently either.
His .300 OBP will kill any potential that Dickerson brings to the table.

What I'd be questioning is WHY Dickerson isn't playing CF and we spent money on a REAL FA OF to play LF. That is what is sad...

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Do you get paid to trash Tavares? Instead of only pointing out his weakness, it is possible to realize that he is a major league player with a track record. He has played in a World Series. He led MLB in steals last year. You make him out to be Homer Simpson and it just is not fair.

I think this outfield could be much better than last years. I expect Bruce to blossom and I have real hope that Dickerson will show that he belongs. I fully expect our new CF to be a force to be contended with - defensively, running the bases, scoring runs and being a spark for the offense that will need it.

Go Reds - each of you who wear the beautiful red, gray and white. I wish all of you well and always will.

$1 Hot Dog
03-23-2009, 01:06 PM
Tavares' defense isn't better than CP. His bat isn't currently either.
His .300 OBP will kill any potential that Dickerson brings to the table.

How can Tavares' bat not better than CP. If Taveras gets 4 hits this year his bat will be better than CP. He hit .252 last year and that was his worst year that he has had. You can't judge him on a .308 OBP either because that was also the worst of his career. The year before he hit .320 with a .367 OBP. He also basically steals every time he is on base and has a cannon. People should at least give him some sort of a chance before they hate this guy so much. Especially when he is still young and has only had one really bad year and it about to play only in his 5th season.

On a different note... with the stats aside.. There is no way the outfield this year will not be better than last years. Griffey and Patterson were both dead weight. Griffey hardly really did anything and Patterson went through like 55 1 for 75 slumps. Dunn hits 40 home runs every season, which we don't have now, but he barely drives runs in any other way. Bruce hit over 20 homeruns last year and he didn't start until memorial day, and went through some big slumps and still didn't end up hitting near his potential. Then you can subtract the 300 less strikeouts we will have from the 3 that are gone and I don't even know how this is an argument anymore. Bruce, Votto, Phillips, and Edwin, all have the POTENTIAL to hit 30 homeruns and Ramon Hernandez and AGon have more pop than who played their position last year and even Dickerson hit 6 homeruns in only about 100 AB's which is on pace to hit 30 in a full season ( which I doubt will happen).

5, 10, 15, 20 win difference this year, I have no idea. This team is better than last years team. Our offense isn't as powerful but I think will be way more consistent and I think will hit WAY better with runners on base because of the less strikeouts. Defense is also much better and add that to a most likely excellent starting rotation and a bullpen that was 3rd in the NL last year and is mostly in tact still. There is no way we won't improve.

BLEEDS
03-23-2009, 02:18 PM
Do you get paid to trash Tavares? Instead of only pointing out his weakness, it is possible to realize that he is a major league player with a track record. He has played in a World Series. He led MLB in steals last year. You make him out to be Homer Simpson and it just is not fair.

I think this outfield could be much better than last years. I expect Bruce to blossom and I have real hope that Dickerson will show that he belongs. I fully expect our new CF to be a force to be contended with - defensively, running the bases, scoring runs and being a spark for the offense that will need it.

Go Reds - each of you who wear the beautiful red, gray and white. I wish all of you well and always will.

I wish I did, then I'd be rich!
Seriously though, I'll stop beating that to death. It's just my opinion - one backed by stats and history, but an opinion nonetheless.

Personally, I like my leadoff hitter to get on base, call me silly.
When you are getting out 70% of the time, that's not something you want 150 games and 600 PA's from.
His only "good year" was because of a Ridiculous percentage of his bunts going in for hits - like 66% compared to his career 44%. That stat is an outlier and NOT repeatable. It was also for only 97 games.

To me, he's CP with much less D and better speed. They both suck as leadoff hitters, but at least CP had some pop. Tavares's OPS is like 10 points above his OBP, that is HORRIBLE!

I agree that Dickerson has potential, and Bruce circa 2009 should be better than Griffey 2008, but Tavares does nothing for this team that Dickerson, Stubbs, or any handful of other players could do, for league minimum.
His VORP (Value Over Replacement Player) is NEGATIVE. That is horrific.

That being said, I hope he hits .320 and OBP's .370 and steals 100 bases.
I also hope the Easter Bunny is real, that I can win the lottery and not pay taxes on it, and the Missouri river can start flowing chocolate.
Has about the same chance as happening IMO.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

RSNtransplant
03-23-2009, 02:34 PM
In GAB, we all know that HR's rate are amplified. If our pitchers are struggling, a lot of balls will see the stands. All the defensive speed and prowess won't lessen that blow.



Defensive speed and prowess will exactly lessen that blow. The more balls that are caught in the OF and fewer errors means less baserunners when a ball leaves the park and fewer opportunities to hit a ball out b/c you do not give the opposition those extra chances.

stock
03-23-2009, 03:15 PM
This is just a guess but I think Dickerson is rated a +3 defensively for the full year as a CF not a LF. He should be much better than average defensively as a LF and I could see projecting an additional 10 runs saved as a LF.

Secondly, someone mentioned that range is the only consideration in these defensive stats. I am not really sure how any of the others rate the 2009 OF vs. the 2008 but per Hot Dog (above) Taveras has a cannon and therefore a much better arm than Patterson. My grandma has a better arm than Dunn. If you add in arm strength as a defensive category (and I know Oswalt would have much preferred anyone in RF last night over Dunn when a Japanese player hit a shallow fly ball to RF with runners on the corners to score an easy run) the 2009 version of the Reds gains at least another 10 runs.

I think Dickerson will be much better offensively than projected by everyone. I would change the -15 to a -10. Please note how much Taveras worked the count in the WBC. He is also doing so in Florida. This is reason for optimism. Did someone turn the light on?

At any rate I think the 40 run improvement is conservative. In fact I think 50 is conservative, but Dickerson has to prove himself offensively first. Maybe even Taveras will approach an average CF.

RedsFanWC
03-23-2009, 07:50 PM
How can Tavares' bat not better than CP. If Taveras gets 4 hits this year his bat will be better than CP. He hit .252 last year and that was his worst year that he has had. You can't judge him on a .308 OBP either because that was also the worst of his career. The year before he hit .320 with a .367 OBP. He also basically steals every time he is on base and has a cannon. People should at least give him some sort of a chance before they hate this guy so much. Especially when he is still young and has only had one really bad year and it about to play only in his 5th season.

On a different note... with the stats aside.. There is no way the outfield this year will not be better than last years. Griffey and Patterson were both dead weight. Griffey hardly really did anything and Patterson went through like 55 1 for 75 slumps. Dunn hits 40 home runs every season, which we don't have now, but he barely drives runs in any other way. Bruce hit over 20 homeruns last year and he didn't start until memorial day, and went through some big slumps and still didn't end up hitting near his potential. Then you can subtract the 300 less strikeouts we will have from the 3 that are gone and I don't even know how this is an argument anymore. Bruce, Votto, Phillips, and Edwin, all have the POTENTIAL to hit 30 homeruns and Ramon Hernandez and AGon have more pop than who played their position last year and even Dickerson hit 6 homeruns in only about 100 AB's which is on pace to hit 30 in a full season ( which I doubt will happen).

5, 10, 15, 20 win difference this year, I have no idea. This team is better than last years team. Our offense isn't as powerful but I think will be way more consistent and I think will hit WAY better with runners on base because of the less strikeouts. Defense is also much better and add that to a most likely excellent starting rotation and a bullpen that was 3rd in the NL last year and is mostly in tact still. There is no way we won't improve.


I agree on Taveras. It amazing how everyone harps on the .308 obp ignoring both his career stats and the great year he had in 07. Using the same logic the Reds should have released Aaron Harang because there is no way you want a guy who is going to lose 17 games starting opening day.

Adam Dunn's age 26 season (which was how old Taveras was last year) was the worst of his career. He hit .234/.365/.490 with 194 strikeouts. He surprisingly didnt repeat those exact same stats the next year, instead he bounced back with a line of .264/.386/.554. Guys have bad years, it happens.

If people want to criticize Willy Taveras they should look at his career lines: .283/.331/.337. I dont expect his numbers to look like 07 but I think it is entirely realistic to see .285/.345/.350. If he puts up those numbers (which means adding a little more patience at the plate, which he has shown so far this spring) and steals 75 bases he will be a solid leadoff guy for this team.

JBChance
03-23-2009, 11:02 PM
Defensive speed and prowess will exactly lessen that blow. The more balls that are caught in the OF and fewer errors means less baserunners when a ball leaves the park and fewer opportunities to hit a ball out b/c you do not give the opposition those extra chances.

Agreed, but those HR's, solos or not, will kill a team that has a problem scoring and posting a lot of 1, 2, or 3 run efforts.

There's no arguing that the D won't be better, but it doesn't replace all the run creation. We will need a BIG step forward from Bruce and Dickerson for it to happen like that.

BLEEDS
03-24-2009, 08:30 AM
Agreed, but those HR's, solos or not, will kill a team that has a problem scoring and posting a lot of 1, 2, or 3 run efforts.

There's no arguing that the D won't be better, but it doesn't replace all the run creation. We will need a BIG step forward from Bruce and Dickerson for it to happen like that.

DING DING DING!!!

We Have a Winner!!!

You can't take that much offense out of a team and hope for it to be made up by Speed and Defense alone. You need OPS. We are in the bottom 20% in the entire MLB in OPS, and that was WITH 115 or so games with Adam Dunn.

It's going to be a LONG year without huge strides from like 4-5 players offensively.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

RSNtransplant
03-24-2009, 09:26 AM
Agreed, but those HR's, solos or not, will kill a team that has a problem scoring and posting a lot of 1, 2, or 3 run efforts.

There's no arguing that the D won't be better, but it doesn't replace all the run creation. We will need a BIG step forward from Bruce and Dickerson for it to happen like that.

By just considering the 3 runs or less efforts you mention I think you can see that you are assuming incorrectly the need to replace "all the run creation". Reds scored 3 runs or less in 49 of 109 games March through July, for ~45% of those games. August and September they score 3 or less in 25 of 53 games ~ 47%, with a marked improvement in September 9 of 25 games with 3 runs or less. Dunn's last game is 7/30th and the criteria for splitting the season as I have done.

Its a small sample, but in 2008 they scored 4 or more runs in 55% of their games with Dunn and Griffey and 4 or more runs 53% of their games without Dunn and Griffey. 2% difference over a 162 game schedule would be ~4 games. That is a negligible dropoff in runs created with respect to the type of games you refer to based on tangible facts, not conjecture. For them to score 4 or more runs in the same percentage of games in 2009 as they did in 2008 should only require that their is no significant drop off in production by the Offense.

JBChance
03-24-2009, 11:19 AM
By just considering the 3 runs or less efforts you mention I think you can see that you are assuming incorrectly the need to replace "all the run creation". Reds scored 3 runs or less in 49 of 109 games March through July, for ~45% of those games. August and September they score 3 or less in 25 of 53 games ~ 47%, with a marked improvement in September 9 of 25 games with 3 runs or less. Dunn's last game is 7/30th and the criteria for splitting the season as I have done.

Its a small sample, but in 2008 they scored 4 or more runs in 55% of their games with Dunn and Griffey and 4 or more runs 53% of their games without Dunn and Griffey. 2% difference over a 162 game schedule would be ~4 games. That is a negligible dropoff in runs created with respect to the type of games you refer to based on tangible facts, not conjecture. For them to score 4 or more runs in the same percentage of games in 2009 as they did in 2008 should only require that their is no significant drop off in production by the Offense.

We are going to have to agree to disagree.

What your are doing is zeroing in on a very small, specific grouping of facts and drawing some large conclusions. For example, out of those games you mention, how many games did they score 6 or more (often times needed for a win in GAB)? How many times did they score just one run or get shutout? How many wins were created by "good defense" after Dunn and KGJ were traded? How many losses happened due to errors or poor defense before and after? Were there other players, other than OF, that had an increase in production at the plate? Sometimes you can get locked in on a very specific sort of stats and conditions that you miss the overall picture - missing the forest through the trees, as it were.

We both agree on several things for the outfield guys. I agree that the defense will be better. We both agree that the offense will be less productive. We agree that they will be faster. We disagree on what that means. You proffer that the increased defense will negate the loss in offense. I believe that the offensive output, that was not replaced, will either be the cause of losses or have to be picked up by the IF guys. I say to you, also, that pitching performance will have a great effect on the defense.

In short, speed/ defense while a part of the picture, is not the largest part of the picture. Hitting and pitching are.

We can both agree on something else. Obviously, we both want to think that the offense, from the OF, will be OK. It could happen; Dickerson could step up, Nix could be a find, McDonald could be real and surprise, the light could come on for Bruce, Taveras could steal 100 and walk a a lot more. I would want all those things to happen and more. But, I don't consider all that likely to happen. And that's what were discussing here - what's likely to happen.

RSNtransplant
03-24-2009, 11:29 AM
What your are doing is zeroing in on a very small, specific grouping of facts a

What I did was elaborate on a very small specific group that you zero'd in on. You're(not your) the one who choose to make statements about the group of 1,2, and 3 run games.

Nasty_Boy
03-24-2009, 11:38 AM
First of all, Bleeds and JB.... :beerme:


Do you get paid to trash Tavares? Instead of only pointing out his weakness, it is possible to realize that he is a major league player with a track record. He has played in a World Series. He led MLB in steals last year. You make him out to be Homer Simpson and it just is not fair.



On a different note... with the stats aside.. There is no way the outfield this year will not be better than last years. Griffey and Patterson were both dead weight. Griffey hardly really did anything and Patterson went through like 55 1 for 75 slumps. Dunn hits 40 home runs every season, which we don't have now, but he barely drives runs in any other way. Bruce hit over 20 homeruns last year and he didn't start until memorial day, and went through some big slumps and still didn't end up hitting near his potential. Then you can subtract the 300 less strikeouts we will have from the 3 that are gone and I don't even know how this is an argument anymore. Bruce, Votto, Phillips, and Edwin, all have the POTENTIAL to hit 30 homeruns and Ramon Hernandez and AGon have more pop than who played their position last year and even Dickerson hit 6 homeruns in only about 100 AB's which is on pace to hit 30 in a full season ( which I doubt will happen).

My first question is what does playing in a World Series have to do with anything? Next, is his track record worthy of boasting or getting excited about? The ML leader in steals still only scored 64 runs (4 less than his SB total) even with guys like Holliday, Atkins, and Hawpe hitting behind him. I would say the main reason for this would be te .308 OBP that he posted.

As for the 2nd quote... what? Griffey was by no means great last season, and I have no doubt that Jay should be better than Jr's 2008. That being said Jay played 6 more games than Jr (as a Red) and their numbers were very similar. But I don't think I'd consider him dead weight.

As for Patterson, yes he was terrible but Willy doesn't project to be much better. He SLG less, get on base a little bit more, steal more bases, and play a little less defense. Not only that, but we have Brandon Phillips in the 4 hole that put up Corey Patterson numbers in the 2nd half of the season. Yes, he was that bad!

Now the subtracting 300 Ks is a good one... If Bruce and Dickerson both play full time they will both K over 150 times easily. Hell, Bruce K'd 110 times in 108 games last season which is approaching Dunn and Howard territory. I do agree that Bruce has all kinds of potential, but potential is just talent not realized. He's not the player everyone says he can be, hopefully he becomes that player this year but he's only 22.

As far the Dunn argument... seriously?! Don't you think he would drive in more runs if he hit higher in the lineup with better people (i.e. not BP) in front of him? Not to mention, the man scored runs! We don't have anybody (maybe Votto) that could score 100 runs to lead their team from the freaking 5-6 hole. We don't have a 100 run scorer in the OF, let alone a 100 RBI player. I think Bruce is still a year or two from being that player.

The last part of the statement is where I mostly agree. Bruce, Phillips, Votto, and Edwin can hit 30 HRs... although I think BP hitting 30 HRs would mean him sacrificing what little OBP he is capable of producing. I think Votto and Bruce will almost certainly hit 30, but Votto's overall production will be much better. Edwin's HR power is not something I'm worried about because his OPS will be solid without hitting 30 HRs. If he were hitting 4th like he should be, he would probably end up with some very impressive numbers. Hernandez could hit lefthanded and produce more than the jokers that caught last season. Who knows how much we'll get out of Gonzo? I don't expect him to hit like he did in 2007, but if he can pick it I don't mind what he's doing at the plate unless Dusty pulls the SS hits 2nd card.


This outfield will no doubt be better defensively, but it's going to take Bruce making big strides and Willy learning how to walk for this offense to take a step forward. And there is no way in hell that Dickerson is 25 "!RUNS!" better than Dunn in LF. I just don't think defensive metrics are conclusive or consistent enough to make such claims.

757690
03-24-2009, 12:16 PM
I think that Next44 showed with accurate stats that it is possible for the Reds to replace Dunn's offensive production win better defense. Objecters have done nothing to refute that other than to say "No they can't".
But the real problem is that the Reds outfield last year was not very good, and in order to compete they need to improve it greatly.

Nasty_Boy
03-24-2009, 12:41 PM
Reds outfield last year was not very good, and in order to compete they need to improve it greatly.

Which they did not do.

From the ORG...


Rival executives continue to suggest the Reds blew it by signing center fielder Willy Taveras to a two-year, free-agent contract. The Reds instead could have alternated Chris Dickerson and Jerry Hairston in center and pursued a right-handed hitting left fielder such as Josh Willingham in a trade or Ty Wigginton as a free agent. Willingham would make sense in a platoon with Dickerson ...


The problem with what Inaz has to say is that its based on the projection Dickerson can repeat/or have some sort of last years success. The hopes that Bruce goes nuts this season, and the thought that anyone with a pulse is better than Patterson. Not only that but the fielding bible had Dunn as an above average LF last season.

So yes, this years outfield (with defense considered) should be better than last years. I just can't help but think how good it could be with Bruce in RF, Dickerson/Hairston in CF, and Dunn in LF.

JBChance
03-24-2009, 02:31 PM
What I did was elaborate on a very small specific group that you zero'd in on. You're(not your) the one who choose to make statements about the group of 1,2, and 3 run games.

Sorry about the typo - typing at work in between different things is very hectic. Obviously, it makes my argument less plausible. I'll get the secretary to proofread my posts, from here on out ;)

I'm wasn't intending to be specific with those run totals. I gave an simple example of what the OF having less run production can bring. We lost our best run scorer/ rbi guy and did not replace him. The OF offensive will be worse unless Bruce and Dickerson really turn it on.

Last year, since you brought it up, were 7 games under .500 when Dunn and KGJ were traded. We ended up 14 games under .500. And that was with Votto turning it on and going from .350 to .394 from before the ASB to after. Without his production mitigating the OF offensive loss, who knows where we would have ended. Now, there are other factors, including pitching and IF defense/ hitting, that caused the slide, too. I'm not talking about those now.

I'm arguing that the OF's offense being downgraded will not be offset by the defensive upgrade. You're (see - got it ;)) arguing that it does. And if you believe that the offense will be the same or better, I'd like to see how that happens. They did have an opportunity to accomplish that goal, but didn't do it. I'm far from the only person that believes so.

I'm greedy and wanted them to upgrade the OF defense and offense. At least keeping the OF offense the same would have improved the club.

RSNtransplant
03-24-2009, 03:05 PM
You're (see - got it ;)) arguing that it does. And if you believe that the offense will be the same or better, I'd like to see how that happens.

I disagree, I was arguing that Defense will help b/c of less runners and less extra opportunities for HR with runners on. To which you stated something about HR will hurt them regarless b/c this(09) offense will have 1,2 or 3 runs efforts with less runs created, to which I pointed out that they scored 3 runs or less in about the same percentage of games pre and post Dunn trade.

BLEEDS
03-25-2009, 09:56 AM
I think that Next44 showed with accurate stats that it is possible for the Reds to replace Dunn's offensive production win better defense. Objecters have done nothing to refute that other than to say "No they can't".

That is preposterous. The term "accurate" and "defensive stats" should never be used in the same sentenace.



But the real problem is that the Reds outfield last year was not very good, and in order to compete they need to improve it greatly.

Yes, agreed. And, they haven't.

Willy Tavares, plain and simple, is NOT a good baseball player. He's BELOW VORP - meaning you could pick at random any player from AAA and he's WORSE!

From the Org:
"""
No offense, but I think you want him to be player X, while he's clearly never been player X at any point in his career. To be blunt:


He's never been considered a good defender.
He cannot SLG worth half a.. well he's got no power
He's OBP challenged, with one season that SCREAMS aberration.
He's slotted into a position he's ill-suited for, leadoff.
He was never a NEED for the Cincinnati Reds

I cannot put it any plainer than that. Willie T is not a good baseball player. not great, he can't approach great. He's flat not good. He's taking the place of a player that was far better defensively (Patterson) and keeping from a player that is better defensively and offensively (Dickerson).

Everyone that shares this opinion wants desperately to be wrong. History says no chance.
"""
Can't put it any more clearly than that.

All this from a guy who "lived in Texas 26 years. I follow the Astros and Rangers pretty well." and knows him some Willy T from watching him over the years.

That is the biggest problem Reds FO and Reds fan have - they find "young" (even if they are 27 years old) guys with potential (though they are way past time to reach it), who may or may not have had a small sample size outlier, and think they are going to turn into something they are NOT, despite all historical evidence to the contrary.
Then, said fans will pick and choose bits and pieces of career numbers, project them to be replicated, and add that "well the 5-6 other guys on the team will make up for the loss of X, Y, and Z that ONE guy used to provide, along with this other new guy who projects to suck really bad at as well".

Geez, if ONE guy takes 5-6 guys to make up for him, wouldn't it be easier to keep ONE guy? Or, perhaps we could go get a GOOD player and hope he is GREAT, other than getting a TERRIBLE player and hoping he becomes Average?!?! And, to top it off, let's overpay for this terrible guy, and sign him to a longer contract than necessary.

UGH! :bang:

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Nasty_Boy
03-25-2009, 11:17 AM
Then, said fans will pick and choose bits and pieces of career numbers, project them to be replicated, and add that "well the 5-6 other guys on the team will make up for the loss of X, Y, and Z that ONE guy used to provide, along with this other new guy who projects to suck really bad at as well".

Geez, if ONE guy takes 5-6 guys to make up for him, wouldn't it be easier to keep ONE guy? Or, perhaps we could go get a GOOD player and hope he is GREAT, other than getting a TERRIBLE player and hoping he becomes Average?!?! And, to top it off, let's overpay for this terrible guy, and sign him to a longer contract than necessary.



:jump::bowrofl::bowrofl::bowrofl::notworthy: :clap::clap::clap::clap:

BLEEDS
03-25-2009, 12:39 PM
Yes, and in case it wasn't inferred, those 5-6 players to make up for the one guy - are ALL making huge strides/having career years in every category, with nobody regressing...

CWAZY!!

PEACE

-BLEEDS