PDA

View Full Version : Correlation? Causation? You Make the Call.



Pages : [1] 2

Rojo
05-13-2009, 03:05 PM
Record with Encarnacion: 10-9
Record with Rosales: 9-4


Teeny sample to be sure, but interesting nonetheless.

thatcoolguy_22
05-13-2009, 03:10 PM
Its like saying a mosquito bite on a giants back caused him to beat his wife. Yeah its there but...

BRM
05-13-2009, 03:14 PM
Record when Alex Gonzalez starts: 9-12
Record when Alex Gonzalez is out of the lineup: 10-2

CTA513
05-13-2009, 03:14 PM
I would guess its helped that players not named Votto have finally started to hit.

durl
05-13-2009, 03:21 PM
I would guess its helped that players not named Votto have finally started to hit.

Now, if we start letting common sense dominate our thinking where will we end up??

thatcoolguy_22
05-13-2009, 03:23 PM
Now, if we start letting common sense dominate our thinking where will we end up??

Definitely not with a job as a sportswriter :D

CarolinaRedleg
05-13-2009, 03:25 PM
If that's the case, games with Joey Votto out of action in 2009: 3-0.

Strange I don't hear anybody calling for Joey's replacement. Not sticking up for EE or Gonzo, but I'm just saying you can skew numbers to say most anything.

HotCorner
05-13-2009, 03:26 PM
Teeny sample to be sure, but interesting nonetheless.

Actually no.

But here's another for you.

Record with Votto in the lineup: 16-14
Record w/o Votto in the lineup: 3-0

Mario-Rijo
05-13-2009, 03:32 PM
I certainly don't think it's a mystery, sure it's small sample but a legit opinion as well. EE stands up there having no idea when to swing and Gonzo swings plenty but does little when he does. Hairston and Rosales have better and more productive AB's and they are more versatile to begin with. Some people will say that they got hot and I say yeah they did it's because they got to play regularly. I'd also say when did either of the other 2 come anywhere close to being hot?

I don't neccessarily believe Hairston and Adam are the answer for our woes but they are doing a better job than their predecessors were doing. As soon as you stick EE and Gonzo back in that lineup you can pretty much expect the runs per game to go down for the most part, at least consistently anyway.

Rojo
05-13-2009, 03:47 PM
So we keep winning with Adam and EdE's back in fightin' form. Easy call?

TRF
05-13-2009, 03:48 PM
Record with Encarnacion: 10-9
Record with Rosales: 9-4


Teeny sample to be sure, but interesting nonetheless.

Yeah, because if EE had two hands instead of one with a broken wrist/injury that had been nagging him since ST, he'd have been hitting .127.

Really we need more threads like this. Sorry, but it's not interesting at all.

traderumor
05-13-2009, 04:44 PM
Jerry Hairston is back on the team this year because of this type of thinking, good or bad.

Ltlabner
05-13-2009, 04:54 PM
You can never have too many guys who "know how to win".

Because apparently it's very easy to forget how to win at the game of baseball and it's good to have someone around to remind you.

Strikes Out Looking
05-13-2009, 05:05 PM
Reds record when I root for them: 19-14
Reds record when I don't root for them: 0-0

I guess I should keep rooting for them. Seriously, I don't think any of the numbers in the thread have much to do with anything. EE was likely hurt most of the games he played, thereby cutting down on his production. Gonzo came back too early to start the season (after missing most of spring training due to injuries). And Votto being out and the Reds being 3-0 is a sign that others have heated up.

osuceltic
05-13-2009, 05:12 PM
Jerry Hairston is back on the team this year because of this type of thinking, good or bad.

Call me crazy, but ... good.

Rojo
05-13-2009, 05:23 PM
You can never have too many guys who "know how to win".

Because apparently it's very easy to forget how to win at the game of baseball and it's good to have someone around to remind you.

BP snark macros are fun.

Scrap Irony
05-13-2009, 05:24 PM
You're crazy. (You told me to do it.)

I do think Hairston and Rosales bring something to the table that may be unquantifiable. Call it what you will, it is nice to see the Reds have it.

Rojo
05-13-2009, 05:30 PM
I do think Hairston and Rosales bring something to the table that may be unquantifiable. Call it what you will, it is nice to see the Reds have it.

I agree but so far Rosales has been quantifiably better on defense and offense. And the Reds are winning. But out come the heart-and-hustle strawmen. I expected no less.

I never expected much from Rosales, I think he might settle into a decent part-time player. But if this keeps up, what do you do? I'm seeing some LF in EdE's rehab assignment.

BRM
05-13-2009, 05:32 PM
FTR, I was just screwing around with my Gonzo post. I agree with those who think these types of "stats" are meaningless.

Ltlabner
05-13-2009, 05:33 PM
BP snark macros are fun.

I have no idea what this means. What does British Petroleum have to do with anything?

REDREAD
05-13-2009, 05:56 PM
Call me crazy, but ... good.

I agree. Harriston at 2 million to occasionally spell SS, 3b, and LF was a smart move. He's not a superstar, and probably won't hit like last year, but he's likely to earn his paycheck, given how valuable he is on this roster. (On a team with a solid LF and a reliable SS, he'd be less valuable.. but he's a great fit for the Reds).

traderumor
05-13-2009, 06:00 PM
I agree. Harriston at 2 million to occasionally spell SS, 3b, and LF was a smart move. He's not a superstar, and probably won't hit like last year, but he's likely to earn his paycheck, given how valuable he is on this roster. (On a team with a solid LF and a reliable SS, he'd be less valuable.. but he's a great fit for the Reds).Only problem, he was brought in to be the RH part of the LF platoon. He is the above only out of necessity. So, the Reds fell into it, from what I see, rather than it being a smart move. I love what he is doing right now...who wouldn't, but I only wish the Reds intentions were what your's are. Then they'd look a whole lot smarter.

TRF
05-13-2009, 06:03 PM
I agree but so far Rosales has been quantifiably better on defense and offense.

no he hasn't. EE's been injured the whole year thus far, so compare EE's April 2008 to Rosales' April 2009, and it isn't even close.

Defensively, Rosales could easily have 4 errors had it not been for some homer friendly scoring.

A healthy EE at the plate > Rosales. I like Rosales a lot, thought he was not getting promoted properly in the minors where all he did was hit, hit, hit.

But EE's ceiling is a .900+ OPS beast. Rosales ceiling likely goes no higher than .830. That makes him a damn fine player.

But comparing the hot start of a rookie to an injured but young player that hit 26 HR's last year and had 3 months of offensive brilliance is setting the rook up a bit high IMO.

camisadelgolf
05-13-2009, 06:07 PM
2009
Runs scored per game with Encarnacion:
Cincinnati 3.79
Opponents 4.42

Runs scored per game with Rosales:
Cincinnati 5.15
Opponents 4.00

Do you think it's possible that the difference between Rosales and Encarnacion is anywhere near 1.78 runs per game? I don't. :)

thatcoolguy_22
05-13-2009, 06:09 PM
no he hasn't. EE's been injured the whole year thus far, so compare EE's April 2008 to Rosales' April 2009, and it isn't even close.

Defensively, Rosales could easily have 4 errors had it not been for some homer friendly scoring.

A healthy EE at the plate > Rosales. I like Rosales a lot, thought he was not getting promoted properly in the minors where all he did was hit, hit, hit.

But EE's ceiling is a .900+ OPS beast. Rosales ceiling likely goes no higher than .830. That makes him a damn fine player.

But comparing the hot start of a rookie to an injured but young player that hit 26 HR's last year and had 3 months of offensive brilliance is setting the rook up a bit high IMO.


I've said it before... a healthy EE's floor is just barely below the ceiling of Rosales.

EE can OPS .750 in his sleep and could easily mature into a .900 bat. Rosales will struggle to stay above .750 and by september would be surprised with himself to be above .800.

Homer Bailey
05-13-2009, 06:23 PM
But EE's ceiling is a .900+ OPS beast. Rosales ceiling likely goes no higher than .830. That makes him a damn fine player.

EE's best full season OPS is .871 in 2003 in High A ball. His best major leage OPS is .831. What makes you think he can OPS .900+? And Rosales's career minor league OPS is .060 points higher.

_Sir_Charles_
05-13-2009, 06:23 PM
Only problem, he was brought in to be the RH part of the LF platoon. He is the above only out of necessity. So, the Reds fell into it, from what I see, rather than it being a smart move. I love what he is doing right now...who wouldn't, but I only wish the Reds intentions were what your's are. Then they'd look a whole lot smarter.

I disagree with that. I say he was brought back because of his versatility. Period. The situation in ST leant itself to Jerry getting the majority of his AB's as part of a multipronged LF platoon. But I'd say it's a pretty certain bet that him getting AB's at multiple positions was the plan from the outset.

_Sir_Charles_
05-13-2009, 06:29 PM
EE's best full season OPS is .871 in 2003 in High A ball. His best major leage OPS is .831. What makes you think he can OPS .900+? And Rosales's career minor league OPS is .060 points higher.

I've gotta agree with Homer here. I like EE. I'd like him a whole lot better if he got off of 3rd base. But he's done nothing thus far to suggest he's a 900 OPS hitter. And as for Rosales, it's not like he doesn't have power guys. The kids got some fine pop in his bat. His bat has never been the problem, it's been the glove as we've seen thus far at 3rd. Adam's ceiling is quite a bit higher than many here think. Just like Edwin's is probably substantially lower than many would wish.

I just think that Edwin's had 3 years to "get it" at third. He still hasn't. I don't care how many "tools" a kid has, if they can't put them to effective use, its time for a change in tack. If Edwin's gotten 3 years to "prove it", why not offer at least a substantial shot to Adam? Time for some OF ball shagging Edwin.

Ltlabner
05-13-2009, 06:30 PM
Please people....can we at least get a year of solid performance out of the kid before we proclaim him the next great savior from Louisville?

Rojo
05-13-2009, 06:32 PM
could easily mature into a .900 bat.

Leftfield could help the process.

TRF
05-13-2009, 06:37 PM
EE's best full season OPS is .871 in 2003 in High A ball. His best major leage OPS is .831. What makes you think he can OPS .900+? And Rosales's career minor league OPS is .060 points higher.

Rosales spent 5 years in the minors, getting his big break this year at age 26. EE spent 5 years in the minors making his debut at age 22, midseason 2005. All he was doing at AAA was posting a .946 OPS.

Last year, EE had three months of .900+ OPS production, and an abysmal May that was so far outside his norm it screams injury. And yes, shortly after May ended he was indeed put on the DL. All signs pointed to 2009 as his breakthrough year at the plate, and by breakthrough I mean 30-35 HR's and an OPS near .900.

EE's physical tools dwarf Rosales.

_Sir_Charles_
05-13-2009, 06:45 PM
EE's physical tools dwarf Rosales.

That part, I fully agree with. But what has EE ever shown us that hints that he'll ever be consistent enough to ever .900 OPS? I can't recall a player as streaky as EE has been. Offensively AND defensively.

My reason for pushing for Rosales to have a shot isn't because he's better than Edwin. It's because Edwin has gotten his shot at putting his foot on the neck of the 3rd base position and he's failed at that miserably. But his bat and his abilities are still needed on this club. Just not at 3rd. So if we take Edwin out of the 3b picture...Adam deserves the next lengthy shot to see if he's got what it takes. We've got several other 3b candidates down on the farm and if one of them steps it up this year, then give them a cup of coffee. But I don't think Edwin's done anything AT THIRD that warrents pushing Adam off the spot when he comes back from the injury. Kind of the same way that nobody in the LF situation currently has put a stranglehold on that spot. Let's see if Edwin can do it.

RANDY IN INDY
05-13-2009, 06:49 PM
Rosales spent 5 years in the minors, getting his big break this year at age 26. EE spent 5 years in the minors making his debut at age 22, midseason 2005. All he was doing at AAA was posting a .946 OPS.

Last year, EE had three months of .900+ OPS production, and an abysmal May that was so far outside his norm it screams injury. And yes, shortly after May ended he was indeed put on the DL. All signs pointed to 2009 as his breakthrough year at the plate, and by breakthrough I mean 30-35 HR's and an OPS near .900.

EE's physical tools dwarf Rosales.

He's going to have to start getting the most of those skills. You can't live on the hype forever. I hope it happens for EE. It would certainly be a boost for this ball club.

nate
05-13-2009, 06:53 PM
That part, I fully agree with. But what has EE ever shown us that hints that he'll ever be consistent enough to ever .900 OPS? I can't recall a player as streaky as EE has been. Offensively AND defensively.

...


My reason for pushing for Rosales to have a shot isn't because he's better than Edwin. It's because Edwin has gotten his shot at putting his foot on the neck of the 3rd base position and he's failed at that miserably. Hyperbole. He hasn't "failed miserably." No, he hasn't been Scott Rolen or Mike Schmidt either. He's had a poor start to the season most likely caused by a broken bone in his hand.

To say he's "failed miserably" is pretty farfetched.

_Sir_Charles_
05-13-2009, 06:59 PM
...

Hyperbole. He hasn't "failed miserably." No, he hasn't been Scott Rolen or Mike Schmidt either. He's had a poor start to the season most likely caused by a broken bone in his hand.

To say he's "failed miserably" is pretty farfetched.

Defensively...yeah, he's failed miserably. He's got great range, great instincts, a nice arm...but none of that matters once his feet get involved. If you look at his errors alone (and that's not counting all the errors that get tagged to the first basemen because they fail do dig his errant throws out), he's had 23 in 2008 (2nd worst in the majors), 16 in 2007 (8th worst in the majors), and 25 in 2006 (Worst in the majors). Not just the national league...all of MLB. If that's not failing to get it together defensively at one position, I don't know what is.

And as for progressing, in limited action this year...3 errors in 19 games. That works out to another 25 error season. Could the injury have led to those...possibly. But I haven't seen anything from Edwin to warrent giving him the benefit of the doubt on that count. Heck, even look at this year's spring training. 7 errors in 15 games. SEVEN. Yep, I'd say it's well after time to give someone else a shot at third.

Homer Bailey
05-13-2009, 07:00 PM
Rosales spent 5 years in the minors, getting his big break this year at age 26. EE spent 5 years in the minors making his debut at age 22, midseason 2005. All he was doing at AAA was posting a .946 OPS.

Last year, EE had three months of .900+ OPS production, and an abysmal May that was so far outside his norm it screams injury. And yes, shortly after May ended he was indeed put on the DL. All signs pointed to 2009 as his breakthrough year at the plate, and by breakthrough I mean 30-35 HR's and an OPS near .900.

EE's physical tools dwarf Rosales.

Every year it's a different excuse for EE. The fact is that he has been incredibly inconsistent his entire career. I'm not saying Rosales is the answer and the future after 2 weeks. I just don't think EE is capable of .900 OPS. What he OPS'd in AAA at age 22 means nothing to me compared to almost 2,000 MLB at bats in which he has OPS'd .789.

bucksfan2
05-13-2009, 07:05 PM
EE's physical tools dwarf Rosales.

We used to have a former GM who loved physical tools. He loved those players who had 5 tools. The problem is that because you have better tools doesn't mean you are able to put those tools to use.

Fact of the matter is Rosales has out produced Edwin so far this season. You can blame it on an injury but you can't take those games back. You don't get a mulligan after the season is over because one of your players was injured at the start of the season.

The way the Reds going right now I would keep inserting Rosales in the lineup until he fails. I am willing to take less production than the potential of a player such as Edwin who has shown the inability to put it together for an entire season.

nate
05-13-2009, 07:07 PM
Defensively...yeah, he's failed miserably. He's got great range, great instincts, a nice arm...but none of that matters once his feet get involved. If you look at his errors alone (and that's not counting all the errors that get tagged to the first basemen because they fail do dig his errant throws out), he's had 23 in 2008 (2nd worst in the majors), 16 in 2007 (8th worst in the majors), and 25 in 2006 (Worst in the majors). Not just the national league...all of MLB. If that's not failing to get it together defensively at one position, I don't know what is.

To me, a miserable failure is someone like Eric Milton. To say EE is a miserable failure is like so much hyperbole.

I'll put it this way, there's probably a chance a team would trade for EE.

CTA513
05-13-2009, 07:10 PM
no he hasn't. EE's been injured the whole year thus far, so compare EE's April 2008 to Rosales' April 2009, and it isn't even close.

Defensively, Rosales could easily have 4 errors had it not been for some homer friendly scoring.

A healthy EE at the plate > Rosales. I like Rosales a lot, thought he was not getting promoted properly in the minors where all he did was hit, hit, hit.

But EE's ceiling is a .900+ OPS beast. Rosales ceiling likely goes no higher than .830. That makes him a damn fine player.

But comparing the hot start of a rookie to an injured but young player that hit 26 HR's last year and had 3 months of offensive brilliance is setting the rook up a bit high IMO.

:thumbup:

nate
05-13-2009, 07:11 PM
We used to have a former GM who loved physical tools. He loved those players who had 5 tools. The problem is that because you have better tools doesn't mean you are able to put those tools to use.

Fact of the matter is Rosales has out produced Edwin so far this season. You can blame it on an injury but you can't take those games back. You don't get a mulligan after the season is over because one of your players was injured at the start of the season.

No, but don't you think that bad start was affected by the injury?


The way the Reds going right now I would keep inserting Rosales in the lineup until he fails. I am willing to take less production than the potential of a player such as Edwin who has shown the inability to put it together for an entire season.

That's an interesting thought. How will we know if Rosales has failed or succeeded?

_Sir_Charles_
05-13-2009, 07:12 PM
To me, a miserable failure is someone like Eric Milton. To say EE is a miserable failure is like so much hyperbole.

I'll put it this way, there's probably a chance a team would trade for EE.

Of course they would. He's got a great bat. I'm not disputing his offensive capabilities (although I don't see him as a .900 OPS, but still damned good). Just his defensive ones. And because of his offensive inconsistancies...they don't offset his defensive shortcomings. I was saying that AT THIRD....he's a miserable failure. His bat is fine. He's got the skills to play solid defense, but he's PROVEN that he can't do it at third over the long haul. One season, I'll give you another chance. Two seasons of futility and I start working you at another positions. 3 seasons of crud...you're not seeing that position on my team ever again. Offense is great...but defense DOES matter.

_Sir_Charles_
05-13-2009, 07:15 PM
:thumbup:

I agree that Rosales should've had more errors tagged to him that game. And I'm also not saying Adam's a better defender than Edwin. Just that Adam hasn't gotten a long enough shot to prove if he can do it or not.

I think everybody could see that Adam was EXTREMELY hyped up with his MLB experience. Give him more time to settle down and then we'll see what we've got. Edwin got 3 years to "settle" into his position. A few months for Adam are a worthwhile investment IMO.

thatcoolguy_22
05-13-2009, 07:15 PM
I stand corrected on my previous post. Much apologies ;)




EE............................Rosales

age OPS...................age OPS
23 .831 (mlb)............23 .689(A+) .747(A)
24 .794 (mlb)............24 .881(A+) .926(AA)
25 .807 (mlb)............25 .802(AAA)


Throughout his entire career EE has shown months of brilliance at the plate. Why would you give the starting 3B gig away when he is still 2 years away from his prime with an average over .800 OPS, while in his youth? And for someone with just as much trouble with the glove, same age with nothing proven on a MLB level and because of a bad month where EE played with a broken bone in his hand? Someone explain the logic to me, please.

EDIT: when EE was 22 he still managed a .744 OPS over 234 PA! AT 22!!!

Razor Shines
05-13-2009, 07:17 PM
Its like saying a mosquito bite on a giants back caused him to beat his wife. Yeah its there but...

:laugh::laugh: You're a funny dude.

Razor Shines
05-13-2009, 07:19 PM
For single seasons, From 1901 to 2009, From Age 18 to 26, Played 80% of games at 3B, (requiring OPS>=900 and Qualified for league batting title), sorted by greatest OPS
.
.
.
My search on baseball reference for any 3B 18 to 26 to OPS >= 900.


No one has accomplished the feat while having enough AB's to qualify for the league batting title.

Just to have to possibility and tools required is enough of a reason to let him continue to develop.

EE............................Rosales

age OPS...................age OPS
23 .831 (mlb)............23 .689(A+) .747(A)
24 .794 (mlb)............24 .881(A+) .926(AA)
25 .807 (mlb)............25 .802(AAA)


Throughout his entire career EE has shown months of brilliance at the plate. Why would you give the starting 3B gig away when he is still 2 years away from his prime with an average over .800 OPS, while in his youth? And for someone with just as much trouble with the glove, same age with nothing proven on a MLB level and because of a bad month where EE played with a broken bone in his hand? Someone explain the logic to me, please.

Dude it's easy. Two words: Pete Rosales.

kaldaniels
05-13-2009, 07:21 PM
For single seasons, From 1901 to 2009, From Age 18 to 26, Played 80% of games at 3B, (requiring OPS>=900 and Qualified for league batting title), sorted by greatest OPS
.
.
.
My search on baseball reference for any 3B 18 to 26 to OPS >= 900.


No one has accomplished the feat while having enough AB's to qualify for the league batting title.

Just to have to possibility and tools required is enough of a reason to let him continue to develop.

EE............................Rosales

age OPS...................age OPS
23 .831 (mlb)............23 .689(A+) .747(A)
24 .794 (mlb)............24 .881(A+) .926(AA)
25 .807 (mlb)............25 .802(AAA)


Throughout his entire career EE has shown months of brilliance at the plate. Why would you give the starting 3B gig away when he is still 2 years away from his prime with an average over .800 OPS, while in his youth? And for someone with just as much trouble with the glove, same age with nothing proven on a MLB level and because of a bad month where EE played with a broken bone in his hand? Someone explain the logic to me, please.

EDIT: when EE was 22 he still managed a .744 OPS over 234 PA! AT 22!!!

Am I missing something...David Wright looks like he has done what you say never happened...

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?playerId=6035

thatcoolguy_22
05-13-2009, 07:24 PM
Dude it's easy. Two words: Pete Rosales.

:laugh::laugh::laugh:

Maybe Rosales could have a career running a daycare. I hear high energy is very much in need in that career field :)

_Sir_Charles_
05-13-2009, 07:26 PM
People keep pointing to Edwin's offense. Let's ignore his offense for a second.

What has he done over these past 3+ years to show that he can handle the hot corner defensively?

I don't want to lose that bat's potential in the lineup. So lets move him to LF where we seem to have a rather gaping hole. Does anybody doubt that Edwin has the speed, glove & athleticism to man the OF?

I'm not wanting to have Rosales replace Edwin. I'm wanting Edwin to replace Dickerson/Nix/McDonald/Hairston in left. Dickerson can be the 4th outfielder. Nix can be a PH'er. McDonald can go back to the minors. And Hairston can be the utility infielder like he should be. If it turns out Rosales can't cut it...Hairston/Gonzo/Janish (some combination of those) should be able to fill the hole until one of the young kids from the minors steps up to take the 3rd base reigns.

thatcoolguy_22
05-13-2009, 07:29 PM
Am I missing something...David Wright looks like he has done what you say never happened...

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?playerId=6035

maybe I made a mistake with the baseball reference search... uhhh ;)

actually I screwed up royally somehow. Rolen did it as well. An amazing season, being able to OPS over .900 before what is considered to be your prime years.

I will edit my previous post


Also unless the game goes into extras Zimmerman's streak just ended at 30

Homer Bailey
05-13-2009, 07:35 PM
My search on baseball reference for any 3B 18 to 26 to OPS >= 900.


No one has accomplished the feat while having enough AB's to qualify for the league batting title.


David Wright anyone? That's not really a fair comparison, but:


Year Age Tm Lg G PA AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA OBP SLG OPS OPS+ TB GDP HBP SH SF IBB Pos Awards
2004 21 NYM NL 69 283 263 41 77 17 1 14 40 6 0 14 40 .293 .332 .525 .857 118 138 7 3 0 3 0 5
2005 22 NYM NL 160 657 575 99 176 42 1 27 102 17 7 72 113 .306 .388 .523 .912 139 301 16 7 0 3 2 *5 MVP-19
2006 23 NYM NL 154 661 582 96 181 40 5 26 116 20 5 66 113 .311 .381 .531 .912 133 309 15 5 0 8 13 *5/D AS,MVP-9
2007 24 NYM NL 160 711 604 113 196 42 1 30 107 34 5 94 115 .325 .416 .546 .963 150 330 14 6 0 7 6 *5 AS,MVP-4,GG,SS
2008 25 NYM NL 160 735 626 115 189 42 2 33 124 15 5 94 118 .302 .390 .534 .924 141 334 15 4 0 11 5 *5/D AS,MVP-7,GG,SS
2009 26 NYM NL 32 141 123 22 39 8 3 3 18 5 6 17 37 .317 .397 .504 .901 133 62 3 0 0 1 2 *5

thatcoolguy_22
05-13-2009, 07:36 PM
People keep pointing to Edwin's offense. Let's ignore his offense for a second.

What has he done over these past 3+ years to show that he can handle the hot corner defensively?

I don't want to lose that bat's potential in the lineup. So lets move him to LF where we seem to have a rather gaping hole. Does anybody doubt that Edwin has the speed, glove & athleticism to man the OF?

I'm not wanting to have Rosales replace Edwin. I'm wanting Edwin to replace Dickerson/Nix/McDonald/Hairston in left. Dickerson can be the 4th outfielder. Nix can be a PH'er. McDonald can go back to the minors. And Hairston can be the utility infielder like he should be. If it turns out Rosales can't cut it...Hairston/Gonzo/Janish (some combination of those) should be able to fill the hole until one of the young kids from the minors steps up to take the 3rd base reigns.

I'm fine with moving EE off the corner but I do not think Pete Rosale's glove can handle the position either over a full season. I have no doubt his athleticism could play LF but how long would he have to learn it? Figure coming off the DL he could get about 2 weeks worth of rehab starts in the minors. Is that long enough? I doubt it.

I don't think WJ or Dusty have even given the thought more than a couple minutes of their time. It is an interesting idea none the less.


Here is an off the wall idea...

Votto moves to 3rd next year
EE to LF
Alonso comes up to man 1B

I firmly believe Votto and EE could both play the position if given a full offseason and spring to learn it. Solves 3 problems instantly and gives the 2010 lineup more than enough pop to carry a Janish type defender at SS

thatcoolguy_22
05-13-2009, 07:38 PM
David Wright anyone? That's not really a fair comparison, but:


Year Age Tm Lg G PA AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA OBP SLG OPS OPS+ TB GDP HBP SH SF IBB Pos Awards
2004 21 NYM NL 69 283 263 41 77 17 1 14 40 6 0 14 40 .293 .332 .525 .857 118 138 7 3 0 3 0 5
2005 22 NYM NL 160 657 575 99 176 42 1 27 102 17 7 72 113 .306 .388 .523 .912 139 301 16 7 0 3 2 *5 MVP-19
2006 23 NYM NL 154 661 582 96 181 40 5 26 116 20 5 66 113 .311 .381 .531 .912 133 309 15 5 0 8 13 *5/D AS,MVP-9
2007 24 NYM NL 160 711 604 113 196 42 1 30 107 34 5 94 115 .325 .416 .546 .963 150 330 14 6 0 7 6 *5 AS,MVP-4,GG,SS
2008 25 NYM NL 160 735 626 115 189 42 2 33 124 15 5 94 118 .302 .390 .534 .924 141 334 15 4 0 11 5 *5/D AS,MVP-7,GG,SS
2009 26 NYM NL 32 141 123 22 39 8 3 3 18 5 6 17 37 .317 .397 .504 .901 133 62 3 0 0 1 2 *5

you guys already caught me and I updated the previous post. I still believe EE could be that bat withing the next 2 years. Whether he does it as a 3B, LF or, even with the Reds, remains to be seen.

traderumor
05-13-2009, 07:39 PM
I disagree with that. I say he was brought back because of his versatility. Period. The situation in ST leant itself to Jerry getting the majority of his AB's as part of a multipronged LF platoon. But I'd say it's a pretty certain bet that him getting AB's at multiple positions was the plan from the outset.The lineups when every one was healthy say different. His versatility was likely a consideration, but his role was cast as RH bat in LF, competing with Gomes for the job. That was said both by Dusty and Walt when they signed him.

_Sir_Charles_
05-13-2009, 07:39 PM
Here is an off the wall idea...

Votto moves to 3rd next year
EE to LF
Alonso comes up to man 1B

I firmly believe Votto and EE could both play the position if given a full offseason and spring to learn it. Solves 3 problems instantly and gives the 2010 lineup more than enough pop to carry a Janish type defender at SS

Hmmm....that DOES have posibilities. If Yonder proves to be what everyone thinks he'll be...that IS an intriguing idea. Me likey.

traderumor
05-13-2009, 07:42 PM
I imagine Votto at 3B would remind the old timers of Tony Perez, make us beg for Rosales D there, and remember EE as a gold glove candidate compared what I would expect Votto's work at 3B would look like. Why would you take two guys and make them learn a new position? Sounds like a D disaster to me, and something that Bowden would try (remember Austin Kearns)

_Sir_Charles_
05-13-2009, 07:43 PM
The lineups when every one was healthy say different. His versatility was likely a consideration, but his role was cast as RH bat in LF, competing with Gomes for the job. That was said both by Dusty and Walt when they signed him.

Just staying positive for the media. Did you expect them to point out the unknowns of LF, SS, 3B and Taveras coming off the season he did? If everyone did their job...then yes, Jerry was the LF platoon half. I don't think for a second though that Walt/Dusty thought that everything would go smoothly.

_Sir_Charles_
05-13-2009, 07:48 PM
I imagine Votto at 3B would remind the old timers of Tony Perez, make us beg for Rosales D there, and remember EE as a gold glove candidate compared what I would expect Votto's work at 3B would look like. Why would you take two guys and make them learn a new position? Sounds like a D disaster to me, and something that Bowden would try (remember Austin Kearns)

Adam is NOT as bad of a defender as he's shown this past week. I firmly believe those numerous miscues are the result of nerves. He's always been a solid defender in the minors. Not flashy, not fantastic...solid. Great arm, solid footwork & fundamentals. Even HE says it's nerves.

thatcoolguy_22
05-13-2009, 07:49 PM
I imagine Votto at 3B would remind the old timers of Tony Perez, make us beg for Rosales D there, and remember EE as a gold glove candidate compared what I would expect Votto's work at 3B would look like. Why would you take two guys and make them learn a new position? Sounds like a D disaster to me, and something that Bowden would try (remember Austin Kearns)

haha sounds true but Kearns was never trumpeted as someone who puts max effort into making his team and his own game better. Look at Kevin Youkilis. A very hard worker who has logged games at 1B, 3B, LF and, even 2B. Votto is a better athlete than Youk and just as dedicated to his team. I think it wouldn't his first season would be below league average but, Votto will show improvements the longer he plays. He is the anti EE when it comes to learning on the job. :D

Homer Bailey
05-13-2009, 07:49 PM
I'm fine with moving EE off the corner but I do not think Pete Rosale's glove can handle the position either over a full season. I have no doubt his athleticism could play LF but how long would he have to learn it? Figure coming off the DL he could get about 2 weeks worth of rehab starts in the minors. Is that long enough? I doubt it.

I don't think WJ or Dusty have even given the thought more than a couple minutes of their time. It is an interesting idea none the less.


Here is an off the wall idea...

Votto moves to 3rd next year
EE to LF
Alonso comes up to man 1B

I firmly believe Votto and EE could both play the position if given a full offseason and spring to learn it. Solves 3 problems instantly and gives the 2010 lineup more than enough pop to carry a Janish type defender at SS

So you want to move two guys to positions that they've never played before? And EE to a position he's never played before, Despite not really proving himself as a plus bat after 4 seasons? Odds are stacked heavily against two guys "learning" a brand new position during one single offseason. I was an infielder my whole life, and when I had to play outfield, I was absolutely lost. Playing outfield is a lot harder than it looks.

Votto has been an absolute stud at 1B defensively, why move him?


you guys already caught me and I updated the previous post. I still believe EE could be that bat withing the next 2 years. Whether he does it as a 3B, LF or, even with the Reds, remains to be seen.


Super slow internet connection at work so I didn't see that.

thatcoolguy_22
05-13-2009, 07:50 PM
Adam is NOT as bad of a defender as he's shown this past week. I firmly believe those numerous miscues are the result of nerves. He's always been a solid defender in the minors. Not flashy, not fantastic...solid. Great arm, solid footwork & fundamentals. Even HE says it's nerves.

I would to, if I was fighting for a starting position...

thatcoolguy_22
05-13-2009, 07:56 PM
So you want to move two guys to positions that they've never played before? And EE to a position he's never played before, Despite not really proving himself as a plus bat after 4 seasons? Odds are stacked heavily against two guys "learning" a brand new position during one single offseason. I was an infielder my whole life, and when I had to play outfield, I was absolutely lost. Playing outfield is a lot harder than it looks.

Votto has been an absolute stud at 1B defensively, why move him?


Anyone reading my last couple weeks worth of posts will show I am in favor if removing Alonso from the picture via trade. However if his bat lives up to full potential and his athleticism is as bad as some of the reports I have read... Then moving Votto to 3B could be a solution. Thats where I am getting at. I would much rather trade from a position of strength to shore up a weakness but if the goal is to get max bats into the everyday, then that would be an option. I think Votto moving to thrid would be a lot easier than some are realizing.

On a sidenote I played 2B from little league through highschool and when I got to college I was told I would be a CF. It is incredibly difficult to switch, i agree. My collegiate career will back that statement up entirely :D

_Sir_Charles_
05-13-2009, 08:06 PM
I'm with TCG_22 on this one. I personally think we should dangle Yonder out there and see what kind of bites we get. Votto looks to me like a future all star & gold glove firstbaseman. But, and this is a big BUT, if the Reds decide NOT to move Yonder and he DOES live up to his potential...then moving Joey looks to be a foregone conclusion. (I'm still irritated by the whole "yonder can only play 1B thing") Joey to third could be just as easy as Joey to the OF IMO.

And I'm not in favor of moving both Joey & Edwin at the same time. That's a recipe for disaster IMO. Edwin should start moving now. If, IF, Yonder forces the move...THEN we start Joey's switch.

GAC
05-13-2009, 09:09 PM
I can't believe we're making defensive comparisons between Aro and EE. Prior to Aro arriving, and for the last few years, EE's defensive inconsistency has always been the hot topic of discussion among fans. The only aspect of his game that has made many kind of overlook that and "tolerate" the kid is his bat.

My problem with EE is - how many chances is this kid going to get? And I don't say that to imply throwing him over for an Aro either. Only that I question his commitment to the game, and his effort to reach that potential everyone says this kid possesses. First off - he seems to have emotional ups and downs that contribute to his inconsistencies. He seems to have spells where he suffers from "Kearnsism" - a lacksidasical approach that has people wondering "Where's your head at?"

A player like Adam "Lewis" Rosales is contagious right now among the fans because of his enthusiasm, hustling play, and attitude of "Man! I'm so happy to be here!"

How many of those players have we seen pass through Cincy?

I don't know what we're going to get from Aro. But IMO, it's "what you see is what you're gonna get" from EE. And I don't think it's going to get any better. Just my take.

Chip R
05-13-2009, 09:13 PM
Adam is NOT as bad of a defender as he's shown this past week. I firmly believe those numerous miscues are the result of nerves. He's always been a solid defender in the minors. Not flashy, not fantastic...solid. Great arm, solid footwork & fundamentals. Even HE says it's nerves.


You know, I'd buy that if it were his first game. I'd even buy it if it were his first week. But he was up here last year and he's been up here over two weeks. I think he's past nervous. It could be he's just too hyper.

jojo
05-13-2009, 09:44 PM
People keep pointing to Edwin's offense. Let's ignore his offense for a second.

When discussing the overall value of a player, why would ya do that?

Considering both his bat and glove, EE was an average major leaguer last season. He's projected to be that again this year.

We all get by now that EE isn't going to be Wright and certainly not Longoria. His defense is likely to never be anything other than minus.

That said, he's an average major leaguer. That may not be sexy but it's has intrinsic value. He should lose his job when he's pushed off of third. Moving him to left isn't a nobrainers no no, but right now he's the best option for third and left field really could be stop gapped with a decent platoon. Really, it could.

_Sir_Charles_
05-13-2009, 10:22 PM
When discussing the overall value of a player, why would ya do that?

Considering both his bat and glove, EE was an average major leaguer last season. He's projected to be that again this year.

We all get by now that EE isn't going to be Wright and certainly not Longoria. His defense is likely to never be anything other than minus.

That said, he's an average major leaguer. That may not be sexy but it's has intrinsic value. He should lose his job when he's pushed off of third. Moving him to left isn't a nobrainers no no, but right now he's the best option for third and left field really could be stop gapped with a decent platoon. Really, it could.

The reason I was saying to ignore the offense for a minute was because in my mind, the question about Edwin is his defense. I don't want his bat out of the lineup. Period. But his defense at third is simply unacceptable. So we've GOT to find a spot for him where he can succeed. Third ain't it.

I wasn't trying to discuss his overall value like we were debating whether to deal him or whether he was worthy to have on the club. Just his position. His bat is a positive over the course of a season, but after 3 seasons...the lightswitch is NOT going to turn on suddenly for him at third. Fish or cut bait in regards to his position.

Ron Madden
05-14-2009, 05:53 AM
It's like clockwork, every time the Reds sign or call up a decent utility man to come off the bench, this fan base wants to sign him long term to be an everyday player.


:)

Mario-Rijo
05-14-2009, 06:06 AM
I can't believe we're making defensive comparisons between Aro and EE. Prior to Aro arriving, and for the last few years, EE's defensive inconsistency has always been the hot topic of discussion among fans. The only aspect of his game that has made many kind of overlook that and "tolerate" the kid is his bat.

My problem with EE is - how many chances is this kid going to get? And I don't say that to imply throwing him over for an Aro either. Only that I question his commitment to the game, and his effort to reach that potential everyone says this kid possesses. First off - he seems to have emotional ups and downs that contribute to his inconsistencies. He seems to have spells where he suffers from "Kearnsism" - a lacksidasical approach that has people wondering "Where's your head at?"

A player like Adam "Lewis" Rosales is contagious right now among the fans because of his enthusiasm, hustling play, and attitude of "Man! I'm so happy to be here!"

How many of those players have we seen pass through Cincy?

I don't know what we're going to get from Aro. But IMO, it's "what you see is what you're gonna get" from EE. And I don't think it's going to get any better. Just my take.

Spot on! EE is definitely off my untouchable list, he just really shows no signs of major progression. Seems like he is still just happy to be here...and collecting a check. Like clockwork he'll get hot at some point and then he won't be heard of again much thereafter. I have washed my hands of defending him.

All that said if he shows some real progression I'll take it all back.

Topcat
05-14-2009, 07:32 AM
Record with Encarnacion: 10-9
Record with Rosales: 9-4


Teeny sample to be sure, but interesting nonetheless.

both players I want on roster and a healthy EE will be an added bonus.

nate
05-14-2009, 09:55 AM
The reason I was saying to ignore the offense for a minute was because in my mind, the question about Edwin is his defense. I don't want his bat out of the lineup. Period. But his defense at third is simply unacceptable. So we've GOT to find a spot for him where he can succeed. Third ain't it.

I wasn't trying to discuss his overall value like we were debating whether to deal him or whether he was worthy to have on the club. Just his position. His bat is a positive over the course of a season, but after 3 seasons...the lightswitch is NOT going to turn on suddenly for him at third. Fish or cut bait in regards to his position.

How do you know? We haven't even seen him play healthy this season.

Jpup
05-14-2009, 10:20 AM
I'm all for Rosales playing well and he's not been horrible, but I'll take Edwin 7 days a week. It's not even fair to Rosales to compare them.

I wish Rosales would relax. I seriously feel embarrassed for him. He's a decent ballplayer, but I really think he would be better suited to quit sprinting everywhere he goes. It's a gimmick that was funny once, but now it's getting a little old. I honestly would put one in his earhole if he sprinted around the bases if I was pitching. It seems to me that is as bad as standing there admiring it. It's just goofy IMO.

TRF
05-14-2009, 10:40 AM
How do you know? We haven't even seen him play healthy this season.

I was about to post the same thing.

What would be an acceptable number of errors for EE? 15? 12?

RANDY IN INDY
05-14-2009, 10:42 AM
And I believe if someone stuck it in his earhole, he would continue to do it. I have no problem with it and find it somewhat refreshing as opposed to the "I'm so cool that I don't care," attitude that most big leaguers have today. Sabo was refreshing when he came up. Votto hustles to first on every single and makes the big turn. I've seen him take the extra base when the other team goes to sleep or goes through the motions. Hustles is no replacement for talent, but putting the two together is a nice combination that contributes to winning baseball games. From what I understand, Rosales has always played that way. I don't have a problem with it.

westofyou
05-14-2009, 10:50 AM
Rosales?

5 ebh in 80 career at bats I'll hold off before I hand him a FT job at the expense of one of the real power threats on the team.

If this team had more power then it could be considered.

As for moving a 1b in a trade (Yonder)

Why???

He's owned outright right now and an asset, why trade him before that asset matures, and on that note if EE's defense is a question (and let's just get to the point it is, no matter how quick he is) then fixing that position won't be accomplished by moving a 1b there, especially since he was moved from catcher to 1st early in his career, I'm certain they already crossed the 3b possibility off the list.

RANDY IN INDY
05-14-2009, 11:08 AM
Time for Encarnacion to step it up. If he can't fit the Reds needs, move him for something. I agree, that the kid has a lot of upside, but he needs to start showing that he can do something with it and try to become the consistent force that this lineup desperately needs from someone. Glimpses of excellence followed by periods of struggle has been his calling card. As far as his defense, I think it is the same story. He takes his hitting problems with him to the field and seems to be somewhere else a lot of the time. I wish he would mature into his potential, but I'm starting to have my doubts. A change of scenery could be the best thing for Encarnacion.

I agree, WOY, about Alonso, and Votto should never be moved to third, unless I'm missing something.

Homer Bailey
05-14-2009, 11:50 AM
I'm all for Rosales playing well and he's not been horrible, but I'll take Edwin 7 days a week. It's not even fair to Rosales to compare them.

I wish Rosales would relax. I seriously feel embarrassed for him. He's a decent ballplayer, but I really think he would be better suited to quit sprinting everywhere he goes. It's a gimmick that was funny once, but now it's getting a little old. I honestly would put one in his earhole if he sprinted around the bases if I was pitching. It seems to me that is as bad as standing there admiring it. It's just goofy IMO.

He's done that at every level of ball he's ever played, and that got him to the Major Leagues. To change it after reaching the majors would be like asking Jack Bauer to stop torturing people.

westofyou
05-14-2009, 11:54 AM
Pete Rose was slammed for that "Gimmick"

RANDY IN INDY
05-14-2009, 11:55 AM
Yep! When Whitey Ford crowned him, "Charlie Hustle," it wasn't a kind thing.

OnBaseMachine
05-14-2009, 11:59 AM
I'm all for Rosales playing well and he's not been horrible, but I'll take Edwin 7 days a week. It's not even fair to Rosales to compare them.

I wish Rosales would relax. I seriously feel embarrassed for him. He's a decent ballplayer, but I really think he would be better suited to quit sprinting everywhere he goes. It's a gimmick that was funny once, but now it's getting a little old. I honestly would put one in his earhole if he sprinted around the bases if I was pitching. It seems to me that is as bad as standing there admiring it. It's just goofy IMO.

I don't get this at all. He's played this way his whole life. There's nothing wrong with it. I don't see why people think he should be punished for busting his butt at his job.

RANDY IN INDY
05-14-2009, 12:03 PM
I don't get this at all. He's played this way his whole life. There's nothing wrong with it. I don't see why people think he should be punished for busting his butt at his job.

Me neither.

Chip R
05-14-2009, 12:16 PM
I don't get this at all. He's played this way his whole life. There's nothing wrong with it. I don't see why people think he should be punished for busting his butt at his job.


Not everyone knows that though. If some pitcher who doesn't know him from - pardon the pun - Adam gives up a home run to him and sees him sprint around the bases, he might think Adam's showing him up. I think in this day and age a ball to the earhole isn't going to happen but he may get one in the ribs.

I don't think anyone wants him to stop hustling on something like a ground ball to 2nd. Even sprinting to 1st on a walk is probably O.K. but sprinting around the bases on a home run is really hot-dogging it. Sprinting out of the box is fine but once he knows it's gone, no one's going to mind him taking it down a notch.

osuceltic
05-14-2009, 12:20 PM
Not everyone knows that though. If some pitcher who doesn't know him from - pardon the pun - Adam gives up a home run to him and sees him sprint around the bases, he might think Adam's showing him up. I think in this day and age a ball to the earhole isn't going to happen but he may get one in the ribs.

I don't think anyone wants him to stop hustling on something like a ground ball to 2nd. Even sprinting to 1st on a walk is probably O.K. but sprinting around the bases on a home run is really hot-dogging it. Sprinting out of the box is fine but once he knows it's gone, no one's going to mind him taking it down a notch.

So he can't run too slow, and he can't run too fast, but he better run fast at the beginning, because running slow at the beginning is really bad, and ... you know what? I'm going to leave him alone.

Cooper
05-14-2009, 12:28 PM
Sloppy foot work is EE's problem -what bothers me is that can be corrected and after 8 years it still goes on. Why would one think he is going to go out of his way to correct it now.

That leaves 3 options:

1. Hang with EE and hope his bat has enough value to overcome his glove.

2. Make the change now and put EE in left/right field and play him there for 3 weeks. Hopefully he improves enough with the bat that he he becomes a B- OFer. Right now he is a C+ 3rd baseman.

3. Decide what to do with the 8 other 1st baseman utility types in the minors (ala Todd Frazier). I'm not sure the organization did EE any favors by playing him at shortstop. Granted you must learn footwork at SS, but you also make a good many off balance throws. I'm wondering if those off balance throws began bad habits for EE. Maybe, he just has really slow feet and can't get set up. At this point, I'm not sure it matters....he's shown that he cannot or will not get any better. I see better than i hear.

As for Rosalas. He is coming out of his defensive stance waay tooo early. When you are jacked up you or nervous -you tend to stand up in your stance. You can get away with that if the ball is hit left/right of you, but if it is hit right at you- it causes problems because he isn't staying down. It might be better to tell him to sacrifice some range to his left/right so he can get into a good defensive stance (even if it's a little on his heels). Just guessing, but if he played SS or 2nd he'd probably look a little better fielding his position- you can get away with being a little bit more upright at those 2 postions.

jojo
05-14-2009, 12:34 PM
The Reds are 0-1 in games in which they failed to score and 6-0 in games in which their opponents have failed to score.

bucksfan2
05-14-2009, 12:34 PM
Not everyone knows that though. If some pitcher who doesn't know him from - pardon the pun - Adam gives up a home run to him and sees him sprint around the bases, he might think Adam's showing him up. I think in this day and age a ball to the earhole isn't going to happen but he may get one in the ribs.

I don't think anyone wants him to stop hustling on something like a ground ball to 2nd. Even sprinting to 1st on a walk is probably O.K. but sprinting around the bases on a home run is really hot-dogging it. Sprinting out of the box is fine but once he knows it's gone, no one's going to mind him taking it down a notch.

No matter what level you play any sport at you can always spot an Adam Rosales early. They are they guys who drive you crazy because they are always hustling and running around like a chicken with their head cut off. I don't think any opposing player, or even a fan would be surprised to see Rosales sprinting around the bases on a home run. If a pitcher decides to put one in his rib cage Rosales will get up and sprint to first base.

He is the type of player you come to appreciate when they are on your team but despise when they are on the opposing team. Heck the opposing pitcher would probably be embarrassed to give up a HR to a player like Rosales.

RANDY IN INDY
05-14-2009, 12:36 PM
No matter what level you play any sport at you can always spot an Adam Rosales early. They are they guys who drive you crazy because they are always hustling and running around like a chicken with their head cut off. I don't think any opposing player, or even a fan would be surprised to see Rosales sprinting around the bases on a home run. If a pitcher decides to put one in his rib cage Rosales will get up and sprint to first base.

He is the type of player you come to appreciate when they are on your team but despise when they are on the opposing team. Heck the opposing pitcher would probably be embarrassed to give up a HR to a player like Rosales.

:beerme:

jojo
05-14-2009, 12:44 PM
I don't care what tatoos a guy has under his uni and I don't care if Rosales sprints to first on a walk.

Chip R
05-14-2009, 12:45 PM
No matter what level you play any sport at you can always spot an Adam Rosales early. They are they guys who drive you crazy because they are always hustling and running around like a chicken with their head cut off. I don't think any opposing player, or even a fan would be surprised to see Rosales sprinting around the bases on a home run. If a pitcher decides to put one in his rib cage Rosales will get up and sprint to first base.

He is the type of player you come to appreciate when they are on your team but despise when they are on the opposing team. Heck the opposing pitcher would probably be embarrassed to give up a HR to a player like Rosales.


You're right. But no matter how high Rosales wears his socks or how much he hustles he's eventually - even by the most die hard fans of that kind of play - going to be judged by his stats or he's just going to end up being a gimmick player. The multitudes turned on Ryan Freel and Chris Stynes before him.

marcshoe
05-14-2009, 12:51 PM
The Reds are 0-1 in games in which they failed to score and 6-0 in games in which their opponents have failed to score.


Small sample size. By the end of the year they'll win a few games when they fail to score and lose a few when their opponents fail to score. It'll even out. :p:

osuceltic
05-14-2009, 01:06 PM
You're right. But no matter how high Rosales wears his socks or how much he hustles he's eventually - even by the most die hard fans of that kind of play - going to be judged by his stats or he's just going to end up being a gimmick player. The multitudes turned on Ryan Freel and Chris Stynes before him.

If he's Ryan Freel or Chris Stynes, you're right. If he's Chris Sabo, you're wrong. Time will tell. But just because he wears his socks high and hustles doesn't make him a gimmick player. The guy has some minor league production under his belt, and he's doing a pretty good job in his first extending big league opportunity. No one is counting the days until EE returns.

Chip R
05-14-2009, 01:15 PM
If he's Ryan Freel or Chris Stynes, you're right. If he's Chris Sabo, you're wrong.

People turned on Sabo too when he couldn't hit anymore.


Time will tell. But just because he wears his socks high and hustles doesn't make him a gimmick player. The guy has some minor league production under his belt, and he's doing a pretty good job in his first extending big league opportunity. No one is counting the days until EE returns.


If all he does is hustle and wear his socks high and he doesn't produce, then he's a gimmick player.

He is doing a pretty good job so far but it's far too early to make him the regular 3rd baseman when EE gets back.

osuceltic
05-14-2009, 01:41 PM
People turned on Sabo too when he couldn't hit anymore.




If all he does is hustle and wear his socks high and he doesn't produce, then he's a gimmick player.

He is doing a pretty good job so far but it's far too early to make him the regular 3rd baseman when EE gets back.

So if he's producing like he is right now and the team continues to win, you want Dusty Baker to walk into that clubhouse and say, "I don't care if he's playing well, I don't care if he's winning, I'm putting Edwin and his lousy defense and sub-Mendoza bat at third base every day."

That may happen, but it's a tough sell.

The truth is, these things seem to work themselves out over time. Someone gets hurt, someone slumps, whatever.

TRF
05-14-2009, 01:44 PM
So if he's producing like he is right now and the team continues to win, you want Dusty Baker to walk into that clubhouse and say, "I don't care if he's playing well, I don't care if he's winning, I'm putting Edwin and his lousy defense and sub-Mendoza bat at third base every day."

That may happen, but it's a tough sell.

The truth is, these things seem to work themselves out over time. Someone gets hurt, someone slumps, whatever.


ugh. EE's bat isn't sub-Mendoza. He wasn't hitting while he was injured. He's the starter at 3B, and once he's healed and done his rehab assignment, the job is his. period. That's not a tough sell in any clubhouse.

nate
05-14-2009, 01:47 PM
So if he's producing like he is right now and the team continues to win, you want Dusty Baker to walk into that clubhouse and say, "I don't care if he's playing well, I don't care if he's winning, I'm putting Edwin and his lousy defense and sub-Mendoza bat at third base every day."

EE, of course, played the first month injured.

The one area I think Dusty excels in is dealing with his players. In that regard, I'm sure he'll approach it in the right manner.


That may happen, but it's a tough sell.

I guess one would have to see how the team and Rosales are doing when it comes time to make the decision.

bucksfan2
05-14-2009, 01:48 PM
ugh. EE's bat isn't sub-Mendoza. He wasn't hitting while he was injured. He's the starter at 3B, and once he's healed and done his rehab assignment, the job is his. period. That's not a tough sell in any clubhouse.

Actually right now Edwin's bat is sub-Mendoza which every way you spin it.


IMO until Edwin proves that this wrist injury is the prime reason his hitting has been so bad this year he doesn't get the benefit of the doubt. If I were the manager Edwin would have to prove to me that he is capable of being an every day 3b in the major leagues. Up until now he hasn't done that. Whether or not it is an excuse given or an injury used Edwin's potential have carried him far above his actual performance on the field.

Chip R
05-14-2009, 01:50 PM
So if he's producing like he is right now and the team continues to win, you want Dusty Baker to walk into that clubhouse and say, "I don't care if he's playing well, I don't care if he's winning, I'm putting Edwin and his lousy defense and sub-Mendoza bat at third base every day."

That may happen, but it's a tough sell.

The truth is, these things seem to work themselves out over time. Someone gets hurt, someone slumps, whatever.


Did you forget that Edwin had a bit of a problem with his wrist? A bad wrist may have had something to do with that sub-Mendoza bat. Of course Phillips, Hernandez, Hairston and Gonzo were all kept in the lineup despite their poor hitting. I guess Edwin doesn't get a chance to turn it around.

westofyou
05-14-2009, 01:52 PM
IMO until Edwin proves that this wrist injury is the prime reason his hitting has been so bad this year he doesn't get the benefit of the doubt. If I were the manager Edwin would have to prove to me that he is capable of being an every day 3b in the major leagues. Up until now he hasn't done that. Whether or not it is an excuse given or an injury used Edwin's potential have carried him far above his actual performance on the field.

He didn't get that 2 year contract because they want him to prove to them he belongs.

nate
05-14-2009, 01:53 PM
IMO until Edwin proves that this wrist injury is the prime reason his hitting has been so bad this year he doesn't get the benefit of the doubt.

I think he already got a note from his doctor.


If I were the manager Edwin would have to prove to me that he is capable of being an every day 3b in the major leagues. Up until now he hasn't done that. Whether or not it is an excuse given or an injury used Edwin's potential have carried him far above his actual performance on the field.

WOY beat me to it...thunderstealer!

TRF
05-14-2009, 01:55 PM
IMO until Edwin proves that this wrist injury is the prime reason his hitting has been so bad this year he doesn't get the benefit of the doubt. If I were the manager Edwin would have to prove to me that he is capable of being an every day 3b in the major leagues. Up until now he hasn't done that. Whether or not it is an excuse given or an injury used Edwin's potential have carried him far above his actual performance on the field.


26 HR's last year.

offensively, what does he need to "prove"?

osuceltic
05-14-2009, 01:55 PM
Did you forget that Edwin had a bit of a problem with his wrist? A bad wrist may have had something to do with that sub-Mendoza bat. Of course Phillips, Hernandez, Hairston and Gonzo were all kept in the lineup despite their poor hitting. I guess Edwin doesn't get a chance to turn it around.

Wally Pipp was screwed.

(And before anyone goes nuts, no I'm not comparing Adam Rosales to Lou Gehrig. Lighten up.)

Like I said, these things have a way of working themselves out. But if Rosales is still producing and the team is winning, it's going to be a tough sell. Comparing EE's age-22 OPS to Rosales's age-22 OPS in A ball isn't going to cut it.

Chip R
05-14-2009, 01:55 PM
IMO until Edwin proves that this wrist injury is the prime reason his hitting has been so bad this year he doesn't get the benefit of the doubt.


How is he going to do that on the bench?

BRM
05-14-2009, 01:58 PM
Did you forget that Edwin had a bit of a problem with his wrist? A bad wrist may have had something to do with that sub-Mendoza bat. Of course Phillips, Hernandez, Hairston and Gonzo were all kept in the lineup despite their poor hitting. I guess Edwin doesn't get a chance to turn it around.

And Gonzo is going right back in there starting tomorrow night. Which means someone who is currently producing (Rosales, Hairston or Nix) goes back to the bench.

Chip R
05-14-2009, 02:00 PM
And Gonzo is going right back in there starting tomorrow night. Which means someone who is currently producing (Rosales, Hairston or Nix) goes back to the bench.


Gonzo may hit 3 home runs and drive in 10 runs tomorrow.

_Sir_Charles_
05-14-2009, 02:01 PM
It's like clockwork, every time the Reds sign or call up a decent utility man to come off the bench, this fan base wants to sign him long term to be an everyday player.


:)

Not me. Rosales is a stopgap IMO. As long as he's playing well, leave him out there. Once he starts to struggle, we've got Janish/Gonzo/Hairston to fill in there. Edwin I move to left and leave him there to learn it. Once a 3rd sacker in the minors proves he's ready...bring 'em up.

osuceltic
05-14-2009, 02:03 PM
One more thing ... EE has OPSed higher than Rosales's current OPS exactly once in his career. Yes, it's a small sample size. But I keep reading about EE as this .900 OPS monster with a floor higher than Rosales's ceiling when that just doesn't seem to be the case.

Look, Rosales doesn't get the job for life either. But even if EE comes back and turns things around, chances are that production will not be as good as Rosales's current production. So I'll say it again IF Rosales continues to produce like this and IF the Reds continue to win, I see no reason to switch back to EE. None. And I doubt that clubhouse will see one either.

westofyou
05-14-2009, 02:04 PM
Wally Pipp was screwed.


Nope he was hit in the head, was 33 years old, had problems with Ruth (slapped him in the dugout) and he had this line when he was hit

.242/.294/.370

He had run his course.. the only logical thing was to trade him to Reds so he could start for them.

_Sir_Charles_
05-14-2009, 02:04 PM
How do you know? We haven't even seen him play healthy this season.

How do I know the lightswitch isn't going to come on? Seriously? 2 full seasons of suckitude at third. A full spring training this year of suckitude. When did the injury happen? Anybody know? If it happened 2 1/2 years ago, I retract my argument. If it happened a month or so ago...on that HBP....then yeah, it ain't coming on.

osuceltic
05-14-2009, 02:07 PM
Nope he was hit in the head, was 33 years old, had problems with Ruth (slapped him in the dugout) and he had this line when he was hit

.242/.294/.370

He had run his course.. the only logical thing was to trade him to Reds so he could start for them.

Other than the age and the Ruth incident (and Edwin has had his own issues in the past), I'd say this pretty well describes the Encarnacion situation.

And, of course, Rosales is no Lou Gehrig. But the "he had run his course" statement resonates with me in regard to EE.

_Sir_Charles_
05-14-2009, 02:11 PM
Did you forget that Edwin had a bit of a problem with his wrist? A bad wrist may have had something to do with that sub-Mendoza bat. Of course Phillips, Hernandez, Hairston and Gonzo were all kept in the lineup despite their poor hitting. I guess Edwin doesn't get a chance to turn it around.

Is there anybody here who wants us to BENCH Edwin in favor of Rosales? I sure haven't seen that. What we want is for the Reds to MOVE Edwin to a new position and BENCH our struggling LF crew.

BRM
05-14-2009, 02:12 PM
Is there anybody here who wants us to BENCH Edwin in favor of Rosales? I sure haven't seen that. What we want is for the Reds to MOVE Edwin to a new position and BENCH our struggling LF crew.

So you are in favor of benching Hairston and Nix. Because that's your LF crew now that Gonzalez is back at SS.

_Sir_Charles_
05-14-2009, 02:14 PM
So you are in favor of benching Hairston and Nix. Because that's your LF crew now that Gonzalez is back at SS.

No, I'm in favor of having Hairston split time in LF and at SS with Edwin (LF) and Gonzo (SS). Nix is a bench player, he's got a nice bat, but only against certain handed pitching. Dickerson is a fourth OF'er the way he's struggling right now. Either than or he needs to go back to Louisville to get heavier playing time.

westofyou
05-14-2009, 02:15 PM
Other than the age and the Ruth incident (and Edwin has had his own issues in the past), I'd say this pretty well describes the Encarnacion situation.

And, of course, Rosales is no Lou Gehrig. But the "he had run his course" statement resonates with me in regard to EE.

Age isn't the only factor (it's by far the largest) but losing power on team without power isn't a smart move based on tiny sample sizes.

TRF
05-14-2009, 02:25 PM
No, I'm in favor of having Hairston split time in LF and at SS with Edwin (LF) and Gonzo (SS). Nix is a bench player, he's got a nice bat, but only against certain handed pitching. Dickerson is a fourth OF'er the way he's struggling right now. Either than or he needs to go back to Louisville to get heavier playing time.

You want the RH hitting Hairston to split time in LF with the RH hitting EE? And you want the RH hitting Hairston to split time with the RH hitting AGon?

ok.

Chip R
05-14-2009, 02:29 PM
Is there anybody here who wants us to BENCH Edwin in favor of Rosales? I sure haven't seen that. What we want is for the Reds to MOVE Edwin to a new position and BENCH our struggling LF crew.


That's what I'm understanding because I seriously doubt anyone besides the fans are interested in Edwin learning a new position in the middle of the season.

It's also a self defeating prophesy. You move a guy like EE out to LF and when he screws up, you can lead the battle cry to bench him because his defense is awful. Kind of neat how that works.

If you are serious about keeping Rosales in the lineup, put him out in LF since he has played out there before. Get a platoon going like the Reds had in RF in 1999 when they platooned Hammonds, Young and Tucker. Drove the fans crazy that McKeon couldn't settle on one to play every day but they won 96 games with that platoon.

jojo
05-14-2009, 02:31 PM
If you are serious about keeping Rosales in the lineup, put him out in LF since he has played out there before. Get a platoon going like the Reds had in RF in 1999 when they platooned Hammonds, Young and Tucker. Drove the fans crazy that McKeon couldn't settle on one to play every day but they won 96 games with that platoon.

That kind of goes to the heart of it because it certainly doesn't look like Rosales is a significant defensive upgrade over EE at third.

_Sir_Charles_
05-14-2009, 02:31 PM
You want the RH hitting Hairston to split time in LF with the RH hitting EE? And you want the RH hitting Hairston to split time with the RH hitting AGon?

ok.

Yeah. Simply because I don't care as much about handedness. If a guy is hitting well, he'll get success against his poor split sometimes. If he's struggling...play the other guy. Ride the hot bat. I'm not talking about a platoon strictly speaking. Just giving guys days off from time to time to allow others to get some work in. Gonzo should be getting a few days off every week as far as I'm concerned. If Edwin goes to Left...then it's the same for him. On his off days have him going over video with a coach to learn the OF trade. Have him doing extra shagging. Whatever. I'm just not a fan of sitting a hot player because a "regular" is back and is making more money. Is there anybody here who thinks Edwin or Gonzo are swinging hotter bats than Rosales & Hairston? It's "possible", and I'd like to work them in to see how they're doing...just not an All-or-nothing approach.

_Sir_Charles_
05-14-2009, 02:34 PM
If you are serious about keeping Rosales in the lineup, put him out in LF since he has played out there before. Get a platoon going like the Reds had in RF in 1999 when they platooned Hammonds, Young and Tucker. Drove the fans crazy that McKeon couldn't settle on one to play every day but they won 96 games with that platoon.

And that addresses the edwin defense at 3rd situation...how?

It's not about keeping Rosales in the lineup. If they decide to bench Adam, fine. He's a rook. He hasn't earned a thing. It's about doing something about Edwin & his defense. Period. Rosales is just the best option for 3rd if you take edwin out of the equation.

Chip R
05-14-2009, 02:42 PM
And that addresses the edwin defense at 3rd situation...how?

It's not about keeping Rosales in the lineup. If they decide to bench Adam, fine. He's a rook. He hasn't earned a thing. It's about doing something about Edwin & his defense. Period. Rosales is just the best option for 3rd if you take edwin out of the equation.


Rosales hasn't shown he's any better out there except in his throws to 1st. You have to pick your poison. You want a guy who's going to play the ball off his chest or a guy who's going to make an errant throw every now and then?

PuffyPig
05-14-2009, 02:47 PM
I certainly don't think it's a mystery, sure it's small sample but a legit opinion as well. EE stands up there having no idea when to swing and Gonzo swings plenty but does little when he does. Hairston and Rosales have better and more productive AB's and they are more versatile to begin with. Some people will say that they got hot and I say yeah they did it's because they got to play regularly. I'd also say when did either of the other 2 come anywhere close to being hot?



EE(career) >Rosales (likely career).

nate
05-14-2009, 03:03 PM
How do I know the lightswitch isn't going to come on? Seriously? 2 full seasons of suckitude at third.

The hyperbole is lame.


A full spring training this year of suckitude. When did the injury happen? Anybody know?

Yes (http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20090428&content_id=4464978&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb).

RANDY IN INDY
05-14-2009, 03:26 PM
Edwin will get his chance when he comes back from the injury, and I hope he reacts to the challenge and produces, but I don't think the rope is as long as it used to be.

cincrazy
05-14-2009, 03:28 PM
Edwin will get his chance when he comes back from the injury, and I hope he reacts to the challenge and produces, but I don't think the rope is as long as it used to be.

Perfect summary of the situation.

Chip R
05-14-2009, 03:30 PM
Edwin will get his chance when he comes back from the injury, and I hope he reacts to the challenge and produces, but I don't think the rope is as long as it used to be.


I don't know about that. I think that rope is a little longer considering they signed him to a 2 year deal before the season started.

osuceltic
05-14-2009, 03:40 PM
I don't know about that. I think that rope is a little longer considering they signed him to a 2 year deal before the season started.

No one is on scholarship this season. For the first time in a long time, it's about winning games. EE will not continue to trot out there if he doesn't produce and they have a guy like Rosales ready.

RANDY IN INDY
05-14-2009, 03:40 PM
He can be moved. He is young and talented enough for someone to covet. I think that he may flourish somewhere else, but have my doubts that it will ever happen in Cincinnati. I sincerely hope it does, but I'm not holding my breath. If he doesn't, and the Reds can package him for a "need," I'm all for it.

Chip R
05-14-2009, 03:42 PM
No one is on scholarship this season. For the first time in a long time, it's about winning games. EE will not continue to trot out there if he doesn't produce and they have a guy like Rosales ready.


Exhibit 1: Alex Gonzalez.

Chip R
05-14-2009, 03:46 PM
He can be moved. He is young and talented enough for someone to covet. I think that he may flourish somewhere else, but have my doubts that it will ever happen in Cincinnati. I sincerely hope it does, but I'm not holding my breath. If he doesn't, and the Reds can package him for a "need," I'm all for it.


If he starts to hit like he has for his career, they won't want to move him. If he doesn't, they won't be able to.

RANDY IN INDY
05-14-2009, 03:57 PM
No one is on scholarship this season. For the first time in a long time, it's about winning games. EE will not continue to trot out there if he doesn't produce and they have a guy like Rosales ready.

I think you are right, and the right attitude is not hurting Rosales any. He may not be the answer or have the overall talent to become a fixture at third but he certainly has a lot of "positive energy" coming off him for the moment. That's one of the things that the team is feeding on right now and is part of what I see as a signal of a "different attitude." That attitude seems to be replacing the "indifferent, lackadaisical, losing is OK" type of attitude and play that has been a characteristic of the team for some time now. As a Reds fan, I think it's exciting. With this core group, losing cannot be acceptable any more, and regardless of how talented you might be, you're going to be left behind if you aren't willing to get on the wagon.

_Sir_Charles_
05-14-2009, 03:59 PM
Rosales hasn't shown he's any better out there except in his throws to 1st. You have to pick your poison. You want a guy who's going to play the ball off his chest or a guy who's going to make an errant throw every now and then?

As far as I'm concerned, Adam's having a case of nerves in the field. He's always been known as a VERY solid defender. He's got no history of problems in the field. None.

My point is this. Edwin's had 3 years worth of a "chance", is it too much to ask that we let Adam have a "chance" too? At least a month or so? If you don't think he should be the guy, fine. But whomever you choose, somethings GOT to be done with Edwin one way or the other. He's simply NOT going to improve defensively at third. It would've happened long ago if it was going to.

_Sir_Charles_
05-14-2009, 04:02 PM
The hyperbole is lame.



Yes (http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20090428&content_id=4464978&vkey=news_mlb&fext=.jsp&c_id=mlb).

What hyperbole? Where? Are you saying that Edwin's been fine defensively at third? Seriously? Because if you're going to bring up his offensive abilities, then you're not reading my posts.

And if that's TRULY where the injury occured...then you can count the first month of this season and this spring training as an example of his poor defense. 7 during ST and 3 more in the first month. If that's hyperbole...then I'm a bearded chicken.

RANDY IN INDY
05-14-2009, 04:02 PM
If he starts to hit like he has for his career, they won't want to move him. If he doesn't, they won't be able to.

I wouldn't be so sure of that, given his age and what he might be able to bring to the table. For a lot of teams, he could be a nice little incentive in a package deal. We will just have to agree to disagree on that one.

Personally, I hope Encarnacion matures into what a lot of people think he can be, and having Rosales and his high energy game to push him, could be a good thing. The flip side is, it could be the thing that causes him to brood more and finally puts him under.

Chip R
05-14-2009, 04:07 PM
As far as I'm concerned, Adam's having a case of nerves in the field. He's always been known as a VERY solid defender. He's got no history of problems in the field. None.



He's been in the big leagues at least a couple of weeks this year and had some time up here last year. For his sake, I hope it isn't nerves.

Ltlabner
05-14-2009, 04:12 PM
IMO until Edwin proves that this wrist injury is the prime reason his hitting has been so bad this year he doesn't get the benefit of the doubt. .

I want you to prove you can be an MLB player so I'm benching you until you can show me.

Ltlabner
05-14-2009, 04:19 PM
You're right. But no matter how high Rosales wears his socks or how much he hustles he's eventually - even by the most die hard fans of that kind of play - going to be judged by his stats or he's just going to end up being a gimmick player. The multitudes turned on Ryan Freel and Chris Stynes before him.

Bingo. If he produces he can run to first on his hands for all I care.

But too many people make the mistake of equating running around like a spaz with "hard work" and "passion". Chances are pretty good that the spaz is a hard worker but one doesn't necessarily lead to the other. Meanwhile the guy who is at the ballpark early, spends extra time with the coaches, eats up film, studies each time, trains religiously, etc get's no props because these fans don't see him running around like a loon.

ARo is fun. It's refreshing to see him be excited about playing a game we all only wish we could play. But ultimately he better produce.

TRF
05-14-2009, 04:23 PM
What hyperbole? Where? Are you saying that Edwin's been fine defensively at third? Seriously? Because if you're going to bring up his offensive abilities, then you're not reading my posts.

And if that's TRULY where the injury occured...then you can count the first month of this season and this spring training as an example of his poor defense. 7 during ST and 3 more in the first month. If that's hyperbole...then I'm a bearded chicken.

Not all of EE's defensive issues can be laid at his feet. He's had some AWFUL defenders directly to his left. 2007 was his best year, 16 errors and a healthy AGon next to him.

RANDY IN INDY
05-14-2009, 04:25 PM
Not all of EE's defensive issues can be laid at his feet. He's had some AWFUL defenders directly to his left. 2007 was his best year, 16 errors and a healthy AGon next to him.

So the bad throws are a result of the guys who are playing next to him? Don't buy it. I haven't noticed Edwin's range as a problem.

bucksfan2
05-14-2009, 04:28 PM
I want you to prove you can be an MLB player so I'm benching you until you can show me.

Yup because he has been tearing it up when he has been on the field. Look at what the Reds have done with Nix. Nix got his chance and proved that he deserves more PT. It is asinine to continue to run a player out there when saying he is struggling is being generous.

TRF
05-14-2009, 04:29 PM
So the bad throws are a result of the guys who are playing next to him? Don't buy it. I haven't noticed Edwin's range as a problem.

Play off the line because your SS has lead feet. (Keppinger) then make the throw to 1st. I'm not excusing every throw, but the one year he had a decent defender next to him, he only had 16 errors.

Ltlabner
05-14-2009, 04:30 PM
Yup because he has been tearing it up when he has been on the field. Look at what the Reds have done with Nix. Nix got his chance and proved that he deserves more PT. It is asinine to continue to run a player out there when saying he is struggling is being generous.

How exactly does EE prove to you he's MLB caliber when he's riding the pine...have a really clean locker?

jojo
05-14-2009, 04:35 PM
Yup because he has been tearing it up when he has been on the field. Look at what the Reds have done with Nix. Nix got his chance and proved that he deserves more PT. It is asinine to continue to run a player out there when saying he is struggling is being generous.

This whole notion of "a player like Nix or Rosales proves that he deserves more playing time" is mostly a distraction.

The player with the greatest true skill level deserves the bulk of the playing time.

Otherwise the manager is reading tea leaves and chicken guts.

RANDY IN INDY
05-14-2009, 04:37 PM
Play off the line because your SS has lead feet. (Keppinger) then make the throw to 1st. I'm not excusing every throw, but the one year he had a decent defender next to him, he only had 16 errors.

Most of the time, the third baseman is playing off the line unless a dead pull hitter is up or it is late in the game. It's not like they don't have good scouting reports to position the players. I haven't noticed Edwin playing in the hole because the SS can't cover it. Third base is a reactionary position for the most part. I haven't noticed Edwin really having problems with catching the ball or range. It is the throws that kill him, and honestly, that is something he should be able to fix.

TRF
05-14-2009, 04:39 PM
All I know is what I stated. the ONLY year he had a decent defender at SS, was the year he only had 16 errors.

Now is that causation worthy of discussion?

RANDY IN INDY
05-14-2009, 04:39 PM
This whole notion of "a player like Nix or Rosales proves that he deserves more playing time" is mostly a distraction.

The player with the greatest true skill level deserves the bulk of the playing time.

Otherwise the manager is reading tea leaves and chicken guts.

In this particular situation, I would argue that the player that is producing, at the time, is the player that deserves the bulk of the playing time. "Greatest true skill level" is good if you can back it up on a consistent basis.

bucksfan2
05-14-2009, 04:40 PM
This whole notion of "a player like Nix or Rosales proves that he deserves more playing time" is mostly a distraction.

The player with the greatest true skill level deserves the bulk of the playing time.

Otherwise the manager is reading tea leaves and chicken guts.

I just can never get behind this. Just because a player has more skills or more tools doesn't mean he is a better ball player. Doesn't mean he doesn't make the team better. Edwin has much better tools than Rosales has but it doesn't mean that automatically Edwin will put those tools together and become a better player. We have seen numerous times of a player who is oozing tools to fall flat on his face because he can't grasp the nuances of baseball.

jojo
05-14-2009, 04:42 PM
In this particular situation, I would argue that the player that is producing, at the time, is the player that deserves the bulk of the playing time. "Greatest true skill level" is good if you can back it up on a consistent basis.

How do you decide who is producing without giving those who aren't empty PA's?

The best strategy is to play your most talented players and let the chips fall because guessing when a hand is going to get hot and when it's going to cool off is just that....guessing.

RANDY IN INDY
05-14-2009, 04:42 PM
All I know is what I stated. the ONLY year he had a decent defender at SS, was the year he only had 16 errors.

Now is that causation worthy of discussion?

Might be if it is truly a pattern. Could just as easily be a one year aberration.

RANDY IN INDY
05-14-2009, 04:44 PM
How do you decide who is producing without giving those who aren't empty PA's?

The best strategy is to play your most talented players and let the chips fall because guessing when a hand is going to get hot and when it's going to cool off is just that....guessing.

I think Encarnacion will get his PA's, and he better make the most of it. Competition is a great thing.

jojo
05-14-2009, 04:57 PM
I just can never get behind this. Just because a player has more skills or more tools doesn't mean he is a better ball player. Doesn't mean he doesn't make the team better. Edwin has much better tools than Rosales has but it doesn't mean that automatically Edwin will put those tools together and become a better player. We have seen numerous times of a player who is oozing tools to fall flat on his face because he can't grasp the nuances of baseball.

Let me try to illustrate it this way using projection systems to estimate "true skill" in terms of production. This is just an illustration and not an argument that projection systems are fate or destiny or make the eyes obsolete etc. It's just using projection systems to illustrate a point (and it doesn't really matter if it's wOBA or OPS or whatever...).

The ZIPS system forecasts Rosales to post a wOBA of .317 the rest of the way. It projects EE to post a wOBA of .356. AAssuming both are healthy and in game shape EE is the appropriate choice because he's most likely to produce at a higher level.

bucksfan2
05-14-2009, 04:59 PM
How do you decide who is producing without giving those who aren't empty PA's?

The best strategy is to play your most talented players and let the chips fall because guessing when a hand is going to get hot and when it's going to cool off is just that....guessing.

When has Edwin proven that he is uber-talented to demand a spot in the lineup when he returns from injury? This isn't the second coming of Mike Schmidt or Scott Rolen in his prime. We are talking about a guy who has been painfully inconsistent over the course of a season. This isn't Joey Votto returning from injury or even a good defender returning from injury. Inserting Edwin back into the starting lineup is putting in a higher ceiling but a lower floor guy into a lineup that is currently rolling along nicely.

_Sir_Charles_
05-14-2009, 04:59 PM
Not all of EE's defensive issues can be laid at his feet. He's had some AWFUL defenders directly to his left. 2007 was his best year, 16 errors and a healthy AGon next to him.

I'll give you that. But you've also got to admit that the vast majority of Edwin's errors are of his own doing. Coming on the throw. And what's more, they're coming on throws when he's got time to make the throw. It's carelessness, nothing more, nothing less.

Another thing to consider, with Agon next to him...is it possible that Edwin had fewer chances for errors? Haven't checked, just tossing out an idea.

westofyou
05-14-2009, 05:04 PM
When has Edwin proven that he is uber-talented to demand a spot in the lineup when he returns from injury?


NATIONAL LEAGUE
CAREER
2006-2008
3B
PLATE APPEARANCES displayed only--not a sorting criteria

RUNS CREATED/GAME DIFF PLAYER LEAGUE PA
1 Chipper Jones 4.62 9.86 5.24 1611
2 Miguel Cabrera 3.32 8.63 5.31 1356
3 David Wright 2.83 8.07 5.24 2107
4 Aramis Ramirez 1.87 7.11 5.24 1863
5 Garrett Atkins 1.28 6.53 5.25 2043
6 Edwin Encarnacion 0.57 5.80 5.24 1601
7 Scott Rolen 0.47 5.79 5.32 1035
8 Mark Reynolds 0.29 5.48 5.18 1027
9 Ryan Zimmerman -.07 5.19 5.26 1870
10 Kevin Kouzmanoff -.46 4.73 5.19 1202
11 Pedro Feliz -1.43 3.83 5.26 1697

He's played above the league in hitting for the past 3 years, that's a resume. AR is a rookie from AAA with no power, he's the one who has to take the job away, they won't be taking it from EE, only he can do that.

Big Klu
05-14-2009, 05:06 PM
EE(career) >Rosales (likely career).

What I'm worried about is EE (likely career) = Willie Greene (career).

westofyou
05-14-2009, 05:09 PM
What I'm worried about is EE (likely career) = Willie Greene (career).
And who took his job away?

Aaron Boone, Adam Rosales with power.

Chip R
05-14-2009, 05:10 PM
When has Edwin proven that he is uber-talented to demand a spot in the lineup when he returns from injury? This isn't the second coming of Mike Schmidt or Scott Rolen in his prime.


If we had the second coming of Mike Schmidt or Scott Rolen available, I'd agree.

_Sir_Charles_
05-14-2009, 05:12 PM
Just out of curiosity, why is it that a lot of people are perfectly fine with moving Votto to LF to make room for Yonder Alonso, but nobody wants to move Edwin off of third? Moving a player off a position shouldn't affect his bat...just his glovework.

I don't think anyone here is advocating benching/trading Edwin in favor of Adam Rosales.

jojo
05-14-2009, 05:16 PM
Just out of curiosity, why is it that a lot of people are perfectly fine with moving Votto to LF to make room for Yonder Alonso, but nobody wants to move Edwin off of third? Moving a player off a position shouldn't affect his bat...just his glovework.

I don't think anyone here is advocating benching/trading Edwin in favor of Adam Rosales.

You have to be careful not to conflate those who want to move Votto with those who don't want to move EE.

westofyou
05-14-2009, 05:16 PM
I don't think anyone here is advocating benching/trading Edwin in favor of Adam Rosales.

Really?

I see at least 2-3 mentions of that in this thread

Move him that's fine, it worked for Tony.

traderumor
05-14-2009, 05:17 PM
I would say that Rosales would be the better candidate to "try" LF if we are looking to get both in the lineup, if that is what you are getting at. He has a strong arm but is obviously not the most confident at picking it in the infield.

bucksfan2
05-14-2009, 05:21 PM
Let me try to illustrate it this way using projection systems to estimate "true skill" in terms of production. This is just an illustration and not an argument that projection systems are fate or destiny or make the eyes obsolete etc. It's just using projection systems to illustrate a point (and it doesn't really matter if it's wOBA or OPS or whatever...).

The ZIPS system forecasts Rosales to post a wOBA of .317 the rest of the way. It projects EE to post a wOBA of .356. AAssuming both are healthy and in game shape EE is the appropriate choice because he's most likely to produce at a higher level.

But it goes back to projections. Projections seem to love Edwin. They love the tools he has. They love the potential he shows. But he has yet to put it all together for an entire season. This has been the third year in a row in which Reds fans have been waiting for Edwin to break out. I just don't know if it will happen in a Reds uniform.

JoJo I see what you are saying. On paper it looks like a no brainer to plug Edwin into the lineup every day because he gives the team the best chance to win. Unfortunately, more often than not, the paper lies when it comes to Edwin.

nate
05-14-2009, 05:23 PM
Just out of curiosity, why is it that a lot of people are perfectly fine with moving Votto to LF to make room for Yonder Alonso, but nobody wants to move Edwin off of third? Moving a player off a position shouldn't affect his bat...just his glovework.

That's a bit of a strawman because those two groups might not include the same members. It's not like membership in the "people are perfectly fine" group are automatically enrolled in the "nobody wants to" group.

My guess is that no one moves during the season. That's just a guess but I would think steadiness and consistency is a good thing for a ballplayer. My further guess is that EE goes back to 3B when he comes back. After that, I'm out of guesses until they see how he plays.

As to whether a positional shift should or shouldn't affect one's bat, it would be nice to think that. I believe the reality for each individual however, varies greatly.

jojo
05-14-2009, 05:25 PM
But it goes back to projections. Projections seem to love Edwin. They love the tools he has. They love the potential he shows. But he has yet to put it all together for an entire season. This has been the third year in a row in which Reds fans have been waiting for Edwin to break out. I just don't know if it will happen in a Reds uniform.

JoJo I see what you are saying. On paper it looks like a no brainer to plug Edwin into the lineup every day because he gives the team the best chance to win. Unfortunately, more often than not, the paper lies when it comes to Edwin.

That's the rub though....the projections are largely based upon past performance.

_Sir_Charles_
05-14-2009, 05:25 PM
Really?

I see at least 2-3 mentions of that in this thread

Move him that's fine, it worked for Tony.

My appologies. I must've overlooked them. I just think that 3 years is long enough. Every spring people kept saying "this is the year Edwin breaks out offensively and finally gets it together with the glove". At some point in time, you've got to realize that a player won't live up to that "potential" tag they got stuck to their forehead.

westofyou
05-14-2009, 05:28 PM
My appologies. I must've overlooked them. I just think that 3 years is long enough. Every spring people kept saying "this is the year Edwin breaks out offensively and finally gets it together with the glove". At some point in time, you've got to realize that a player won't live up to that "potential" tag they got stuck to their forehead.

3 years of having above league average offense, let's just say that.

Not three years of below average performance.



YEAR TEAM G AB R H 2B 3B HR HR% RBI BB SO SB CS AVG SLG OBA OPS
TOTALS 402 1414 201 384 87 3 57 4.03 216 141 266 15 4 .272 .458 .351 .809
LG AVERAGE 1384 194 374 77 8 44 3.19 185 139 260 25 9 .271 .434 .341 .775
POS AVERAGE 1393 197 381 84 6 52 3.72 210 145 268 12 5 .274 .454 .345 .799


Maybe some expect too much?

GAC
05-14-2009, 05:28 PM
I would say that Rosales would be the better candidate to "try" LF if we are looking to get both in the lineup, if that is what you are getting at. He has a strong arm but is obviously not the most confident at picking it in the infield.

That is an interesting notion. He has played some OF while at A/AA ball; but it very limited time.

When EE comes back, he should be the 3Bman on this team. But a roster move is going to to have to be made right? Maybe dump Ol'McDonald for Aro?

_Sir_Charles_
05-14-2009, 05:28 PM
That's a bit of a strawman because those two groups might not include the same members. It's not like membership in the "people are perfectly fine" group are automatically enrolled in the "nobody wants to" group.

My guess is that no one moves during the season. That's just a guess but I would think steadiness and consistency is a good thing for a ballplayer. My further guess is that EE goes back to 3B when he comes back. After that, I'm out of guesses until they see how he plays.

As to whether a positional shift should or shouldn't affect one's bat, it would be nice to think that. I believe the reality for each individual however, varies greatly.

Sorry, I wasn't trying to say that they were the same groups of people. I was trying to comment more about the feeling I get that many here aren't opposed to moving Votto to make room for Yonder. Yet I see quite a bit of resistance in regards to moving Edwin.

Boy, I sure am phrasing things poorly today. Sorry guys.

_Sir_Charles_
05-14-2009, 05:29 PM
3 years of having above league average offense, let's just say that.

Not three years of below average performance.
Maybe some expect too much?

Offensively....I'm ONLY referring to defensively. I've got ZERO problems with Edwin's bat.

Chip R
05-14-2009, 05:29 PM
Maybe dump Ol'McDonald for Aro?


Depends on how close McDonald and Dusty's daughter are at the time. ;)

nate
05-14-2009, 05:31 PM
Sorry, I wasn't trying to say that they were the same groups of people. I was trying to comment more about the feeling I get that many here aren't opposed to moving Votto to make room for Yonder. Yet I see quite a bit of resistance in regards to moving Edwin.

Boy, I sure am phrasing things poorly today. Sorry guys.

Quite honestly, I don't have a problem moving EE or even trading him. I just have a problem with calling him a miserable failure.

Chip R
05-14-2009, 05:34 PM
My appologies. I must've overlooked them. I just think that 3 years is long enough.


I'm glad the Indians felt the same way about Brandon Phillips.

TRF
05-14-2009, 05:34 PM
He broke out last year IMO. with a minimum of 450 PA's EE was 10th in MLB in OPS, 7th in HR's at 3B. 2009 was the year he builds on that breakout. Of course that was pre injury.

westofyou
05-14-2009, 05:35 PM
Offensively....I'm ONLY referring to defensively. I've got ZERO problems with Edwin's bat.

As a fielder he makes one ponder a move yes, but Adam Rosales is not otherworldly. That said weak corners are more acceptable if they aren't both corners. The worst thing about how bad a 3rd baseman Tony Perez was was how unexciting a fielder Lee May was, put both on the corners and the infield is weak. Votto has surprised, his defense makes EE's easier to swallow when looking at the whole package.

TRF
05-14-2009, 05:35 PM
My appologies. I must've overlooked them. I just think that 3 years is long enough. Every spring people kept saying "this is the year Edwin breaks out offensively and finally gets it together with the glove". At some point in time, you've got to realize that a player won't live up to that "potential" tag they got stuck to their forehead.


Offensively....I'm ONLY referring to defensively. I've got ZERO problems with Edwin's bat.

except when you do.

BTW, There are years when David Wright had 19 errors and Miguel Cabrera had well over 20. IS EE in their class offensively? no, but he's in the group just below, and has the potential to join them.

I said the same thing about Votto in regards to Pujols/Berkman.

Ltlabner
05-14-2009, 05:39 PM
Didn't we learn from The Jeff Keppenger Experience?

He came up, hit well for a while, and then was totally exposed with full time play. In some ways that was forced due to injury, but in other ways it was exactly what the fans were clamoring for.

bucksfan2
05-14-2009, 05:43 PM
That's the rub though....the projections are largely based upon past performance.

Past performances as well as age as well as other trends, correct?

JoJo have the projections over the past two years been accurate with Edwin?

osuceltic
05-14-2009, 05:46 PM
Didn't we learn from The Jeff Keppenger Experience?

He came up, hit well for a while, and then was totally exposed with full time play. In some ways that was forced due to injury, but in other ways it was exactly what the fans were clamoring for.

We learned that injury is a legitimate excuse for Edwin Encarnacion but isn't for Jeff Keppinger.

TRF
05-14-2009, 05:47 PM
We learned that injury is a legitimate excuse for Edwin Encarnacion but isn't for Jeff Keppinger.

We also learned Keppinger can't hit for power like EE.

Rojo
05-14-2009, 05:54 PM
Didn't we learn from The Jeff Keppenger Experience?

He came up, hit well for a while, and then was totally exposed with full time play. In some ways that was forced due to injury, but in other ways it was exactly what the fans were clamoring for.

I learned that sometimes what appears to be 4-A fodder can give you some nice production for a while.

I haven't heard anyone proclaim Rosales the second coming. I doubt he'll be a major league starter. But we've replaced a black hole with a fair enough place-holder and the club's winning.

Yes, EdE's hurt. But even healthy he's an error-machine with mediocre range and a career OPS+ of 100. EdE's entered Juan Samuel territory -- some skills but where do you play him?

osuceltic
05-14-2009, 05:57 PM
We also learned Keppinger can't hit for power like EE.

.877 OPS in '07, .939 this season and .819 last season before he got hurt. He manages to produce without the HRs.

Sure, EE upped his power last season--and his average dropped almost 40 points, his OBP dropped 16 points and his strikeouts went way up. The net result is he's a streaky .800 OPS guy with a terrible glove. That's what he is. If you're OK with that, fine. But I've watched him blow a hole in the Reds' lineup for a solid month while the team floundered a few too many times.

cincrazy
05-14-2009, 06:03 PM
Didn't we learn from The Jeff Keppenger Experience?

He came up, hit well for a while, and then was totally exposed with full time play. In some ways that was forced due to injury, but in other ways it was exactly what the fans were clamoring for.

Well, I'm not going nutso for Rosales, but he does have more power than Keppinger. The guy has a chance to be a productive major league player. I don't think he should be automatically granted the 3B job due to his hot start and Edwin's struggles, but I do think he should be given a chance to compete for it.

_Sir_Charles_
05-14-2009, 06:09 PM
except when you do.

I wasn't in that group that was saying "this is edwin's year...etc". Bolding that part in my quote but ignoring the fact I was referring to others is kinda like putting words in my mouth. I don't have a problem with Edwin's bat. It's inconsistant as all get out, but over the course of the year, he'll have some potent offensive numbers. But those numbers would be just as potent from LF, correct?

_Sir_Charles_
05-14-2009, 06:11 PM
Quite honestly, I don't have a problem moving EE or even trading him. I just have a problem with calling him a miserable failure.

As a ballplayer, Edwin is FAR from a failure. VERY far. He's quite good IMO. But as a defensive thirdbaseman...yep, miserable failure IMO.

nate
05-14-2009, 06:13 PM
.877 OPS in '07, .939 this season and .819 last season before he got hurt. He manages to produce without the HRs.

In some 50 ABs in about half of his team's games. That was one of the other downsides of Kep: he gets injured. And often. The other downside is that he had poor range and plays a position where you can't hide that.


Sure, EE upped his power last season--and his average dropped almost 40 points, his OBP dropped 16 points and his strikeouts went way up. The net result is he's a streaky .800 OPS guy with a terrible glove. Actually coming into this year, his OBP, SLG and K-rate had been remarkably steady over the past three years all while being in "average" territory. His walk rate has gone up as has his ISO. Last year, his BABIP dropped pretty sharply which would explain both the average and OBP. He also addressed the BABIP issue indirectly by talking about how he felt pressure to pull the ball for power last year. That's show in his increased FB rate.

So, who knows what he might've done this year had he not been injured. We'll find out when he comes back. It may turn out that he's gone longer because of the arm problems he said he had during ST.

jojo
05-14-2009, 06:20 PM
Past performances as well as age as well as other trends, correct?

JoJo have the projections over the past two years been accurate with Edwin?

In '07 he was forecast to OPS roughly at .830 and he put up and OPS of .794.

Last year a survey of projection systems suggested EE would put up an OPS of .830 again. He actually produced one of .807.

Rojo
05-14-2009, 08:43 PM
But those numbers would be just as potent from LF, correct?

That's the problem, his numbers are a B+ at third but C in left-field.

My hope is that -- minus the pressure of third base -- he turns into the 900 OPS guy that so many see when they squint.

Move him, find someone who can play a better third and OPS around .750 (I don't know if Rosales is that guy) and you've essentially traded subpar production from left field with subpar production at third while improving the infield defense and getting more production at of EdE.

mth123
05-15-2009, 04:03 AM
I think the .900 OPS projections for EdE are a little nuts. If those are the expectations, then yeah, he's a disappointment. Personally, if EdE produces a season exactly like the one he put up in 2008, he'll be one of the top 2 or 3 bats on the team and no one else in the 3B or LF mix would come close to that. Really only Votto or Bruce is likely to top the production that EdE put up in 2008. Phillips, maybe, in a good year.

Ron Madden
05-15-2009, 04:29 AM
I think you are right, and the right attitude is not hurting Rosales any. He may not be the answer or have the overall talent to become a fixture at third but he certainly has a lot of "positive energy" coming off him for the moment. That's one of the things that the team is feeding on right now and is part of what I see as a signal of a "different attitude." That attitude seems to be replacing the "indifferent, lackadaisical, losing is OK" type of attitude and play that has been a characteristic of the team for some time now. As a Reds fan, I think it's exciting. With this core group, losing cannot be acceptable any more, and regardless of how talented you might be, you're going to be left behind if you aren't willing to get on the wagon.

All of that sounds wonderful but it amounts to nothing more than spit and shine,

IT'S THE PITCHING that's made the difference so far.

;)

jojo
05-15-2009, 09:56 AM
I think the .900 OPS projections for EdE are a little nuts. If those are the expectations, then yeah, he's a disappointment. Personally, if EdE produces a season exactly like the one he put up in 2008, he'll be one of the top 2 or 3 bats on the team and no one else in the 3B or LF mix would come close to that. Really only Votto or Bruce is likely to top the production that EdE put up in 2008. Phillips, maybe, in a good year.

To me, EE's offense hasn't been an issue-basically he looked to be something like an average bat for a third baseman. It's his defense that has been the frustrating part of his game because the eyes say he should develop/be something better than he is with the leather.

As it stands, EE looks to be an average major leager.

RANDY IN INDY
05-15-2009, 10:09 AM
All of that sounds wonderful but it amounts to nothing more than spit and shine,

IT'S THE PITCHING that's made the difference so far.

;)

And it is having an effect on the team and the overall attitude. The young nucleus, Votto, Bruce, Volquez and Cueto seems to be taking hold and it seems to be fusing a bit of excitement into the rest of the team. I like that. The attitude needed a change and it seems to be happening. The pitching? Votto and Bruce? Nice start by Taveres? The aggressiveness? Whatever the reason(s), things seems to be looking up and the attitude much different.

jojo
05-15-2009, 10:19 AM
And it is having an effect on the team and the overall attitude. The young nucleus, Votto, Bruce, Volquez and Cueto seems to be taking hold and it seems to be fusing a bit of excitement into the rest of the team. I like that. The attitude needed a change and it seems to be happening. The pitching? Votto and Bruce? Nice start by Taveres? The aggressiveness? Whatever the reason(s), things seems to be looking up and the attitude much different.

To the extent that chemistry is the root cause, it's muscle chemistry.

traderumor
05-15-2009, 10:23 AM
To the extent that chemistry is the root cause, it's muscle chemistry.Just because it can't be quantified doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

RANDY IN INDY
05-15-2009, 10:24 AM
Nobody said that chemistry is the root cause, but it is part of the disease when you lose for so long.

bucksfan2
05-15-2009, 10:27 AM
In '07 he was forecast to OPS roughly at .830 and he put up and OPS of .794.

Last year a survey of projection systems suggested EE would put up an OPS of .830 again. He actually produced one of .807.

So basically the forecasts were either a little bullish or EE failed to live up to expectations. I guess it isn't that much of a big deal since the projections aren't for an OPS of .900 and he puts up a .794.

I agree with you that his defense is the primary problem. His defense to me just adds to the frustration. He has been a little underwhelming with his bat but his defense makes it tougher to swallow.

_Sir_Charles_
05-15-2009, 10:29 AM
That's the problem, his numbers are a B+ at third but C in left-field.

My hope is that -- minus the pressure of third base -- he turns into the 900 OPS guy that so many see when they squint.

Move him, find someone who can play a better third and OPS around .750 (I don't know if Rosales is that guy) and you've essentially traded subpar production from left field with subpar production at third while improving the infield defense and getting more production at of EdE.

I've never been a fan of comparing a players stats at a position to that of others at that position in the league. I really don't care if Edwin's bat figures out to be less productive in Left than at Third. I care if it's an improvement on OUR team. And if you look at what we currently trot out there in left...Edwin's bat is an improvement.

RedsManRick
05-15-2009, 10:29 AM
Nobody said that chemistry is the root cause, but it is part of the disease when you lose for so long.

I don't think anybody doubts the existence of chemistry. The question is whether it is the disease (or a significant part thereof) or merely a symptom.

I would argue that the Reds chemistry is better because they're winning baseball games due largely to better pitching and defense. They aren't winning because they have good chemistry.

Maybe having good chemistry helps young players realize their potential on the field, but if that's the case, then we can measure it. It then becomes a question of attribution.

jojo
05-15-2009, 10:36 AM
Just because it can't be quantified doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Which is more important?

Cyclone792
05-15-2009, 10:46 AM
I'm not sure I've ever seen so much venom directed toward a league average player who makes little money as I've seen with Encarnacion.

The Reds have averaged 6.15 runs per game in May without Encarnacion. Sure it's wonderful, but it's not going to last, not even close. Enjoy the hot stretch while it occurs and win as many games as possible, but sooner or later this team's going to need Encarnacion's bat to help score enough runs to remain in a pennant chase. Most likely, this team is going to need Encarnacion's bat plus another bat in left field to remain in the chase.

This has nothing to do with Adam Rosales either. He's a nice asset to have this season if used correctly, which is as a utility player who can fill in for injury. McDonald's the guy that has to go when Encarnacion returns, and Rosales should stay on the roster. However, the Reds will be at their best starting Encarnacion at third and then using Rosales as a utility backup rather than starting Rosales and benching Encarnacion.

westofyou
05-15-2009, 10:57 AM
I'm not sure I've ever seen so much venom directed toward a league average player who makes little money as I've seen with Encarnacion.

To get a pass in Reds country it helps to be a local guy, superstar or look like a dude who should be delivering pizza or changing oil and yet he can still OPS .750

Everyone else is subjects for the shooting gallery, because there is only room for so many player types to categorize.

RANDY IN INDY
05-15-2009, 10:57 AM
I don't think anybody doubts the existence of chemistry. The question is whether it is the disease (or a significant part thereof) or merely a symptom.

I would argue that the Reds chemistry is better because they're winning baseball games due largely to better pitching and defense. They aren't winning because they have good chemistry.

Maybe having good chemistry helps young players realize their potential on the field, but if that's the case, then we can measure it. It then becomes a question of attribution.

I am not implying that they were winning solely because of good chemistry.


The pitching? Votto and Bruce? Nice start by Taveres? The aggressiveness? Whatever the reason(s), things seems to be looking up and the attitude much different.

It usually takes a physical change, be it "good play" that wins ball games or an infusion of new players and talent to change a lingering attitude that cultivates lackadaisical play and an acceptance of losing.

I'm not really sure why things have to be made so difficult. I'm just happy with the change that I'm seeing with this team, both in their play and in the attitude that they are playing with. Having sat in many dugouts with both winning teams and losing teams, I have seen the difference that a winning attitude can bring to a ballclub. It's a totally different feel. No panic. No thought of losing. An overall confidence that is infectious that allows players, from great ones to average ones, to relax in difficult situations which many times results in production. Winning teams that I have coached and played on also seem to have very short memory and don't concern themselves too much with the last at bat, the last error, the last loss, or their individual stats. They get lost in the team. Everyone has that "Don't worry, I'll pick you up," attitude. These teams can weather a slump and usually come back stronger.

Losing attitudes are just the opposite, and all about the individual. You see the guys in the end of the dugout talking about their 0 for 3 and worrying about their stats, more than they are concerned about winning a ball game. Someone struggling strikes out with RISP and everybody has that look of "Well, you knew that was going to happen."

I realize that this makes no sense at all to some of you folks, and if so, blow me off as someone who has no clue about what he is talking about. No problem here. For those of you who might understand what I am saying, take it for what it is worth.

Sea Ray
05-15-2009, 11:23 AM
I would argue that the Reds chemistry is better because they're winning baseball games due largely to better pitching and defense. They aren't winning because they have good chemistry.




From what can see, they had good chemistry before the winning started. There stories in Spring Training about the good chemistry on this team. I noticed a better attitude towards the game since Opening Day.

Sea Ray
05-15-2009, 11:25 AM
No problem here. For those of you who might understand what I am saying, take it for what it is worth.

Poppycock!

I'm putting you on ignore right now...

jojo
05-15-2009, 11:29 AM
I realize that this makes no sense at all to some of you folks

It's not that some folks don't understand that winning teams generally have a positive attitude and losing teams have something less than ideal dispositions-the vast majority of us folks have been teammates on many teams.

It's that some of us folks think that winning breeds a positive attitude while a positive attitude alone basically just makes losing a little easier to take.

In fact, I've seen losing teams/players get raked over the coals for displaying a positive attitude. If they're smiling and losing, they must not be trying hard enough......

This isn't an "us or them" issue that breaks along philosophical lines.

Make up is important to the extent that a player can deal with failure and it translates into work ethic. There's a reason that makeup isn't considered a tool though...

bucksfan2
05-15-2009, 12:36 PM
It's not that some folks don't understand that winning teams generally have a positive attitude and losing teams have something less than ideal dispositions-the vast majority of us folks have been teammates on many teams.

It's that some of us folks think that winning breeds a positive attitude while a positive attitude alone basically just makes losing a little easier to take.

In fact, I've seen losing teams/players get raked over the coals for displaying a positive attitude. If they're smiling and losing, they must not be trying hard enough......

This isn't an "us or them" issue that breaks along philosophical lines.

Make up is important to the extent that a player can deal with failure and it translates into work ethic. There's a reason that makeup isn't considered a tool though...

I tend to agree that winning teams always seem to have good chemistry and losing teams always seem to have something lacking. When you are winning its easier to over look the guy you think is a jerk or a guy you just flat out don't get along with.

IMO in baseball, more than any other sport, chemistry is very important. You are with your team every day from February until October. You are living in a foreign city, traveling all the time, playing a sport in which the season can drag along at times. Its a whole lot easier when you are winning, but it is a whole lot easier as a team when you like each other. When everyone is on the same page competing for a common goal.

What I have read it seems like the elephant is out of the room. I always found it interesting when Jay Bruce would say his idol growing up was Jr. I couldn't even imagine playing besides Barry Larkin (my idol growing up) as a 21 year old kid. I would be in awe and soak up ever moment of that. But a problem could arise. I would be hesitant to criticize anything Larkin would do. If I didn't like the way he was working or I thought he was dogging a play I would have a very difficult time speaking up. This is not meant to be an attack on Jr or any other player for that matter.

In most sports when a team turns from being poor into a contending team it seems like it has to be torn down before it is built back up.

RANDY IN INDY
05-15-2009, 03:36 PM
It's not that some folks don't understand that winning teams generally have a positive attitude and losing teams have something less than ideal dispositions-the vast majority of us folks have been teammates on many teams.

It's that some of us folks think that winning breeds a positive attitude while a positive attitude alone basically just makes losing a little easier to take.

In fact, I've seen losing teams/players get raked over the coals for displaying a positive attitude. If they're smiling and losing, they must not be trying hard enough......

This isn't an "us or them" issue that breaks along philosophical lines.

Make up is important to the extent that a player can deal with failure and it translates into work ethic. There's a reason that makeup isn't considered a tool though...

Thanks for filling me in.

RANDY IN INDY
05-15-2009, 03:47 PM
The Reds teams of the early 70's knew that they were good. They didn't always win. 1971 was one ugly season. Those guys, while very talented, could have folded and the finger pointing and me first attitude could have ensued. They didn't succumb to that. They were superior talents with superior attitudes. Nobody was going to push them around, and losing was not acceptable. They held each other accountable. There are plenty of talented players and teams, but they don't have the "swagger" that it takes to endure a 162 game season and hold it together. Team chemistry is not always about being "nicey, nicey." Sometimes its about holding each other accountable for the things that bring down the team, for not producing, for not putting the extra work in. For "dogging" it. Sparky Anderson often said the the Big Red Machine teams managed themselves, and I believe, in talking to many of the players that were on that team, that was the case. They didn't all like each other, but they had a common bond when it came time to go on the field. They all wanted to win, very badly. Losing and screwing up was not tolerated. Anderson got rid of anyone who challenged that and wanted to be an individual. Those guys didn't last long with the Reds. Swagger is something that you cannot measure, but you definitely know when it is there.

jojo
05-15-2009, 04:23 PM
The Reds teams of the early 70's knew that they were good. They didn't always win. 1971 was one ugly season. Those guys, while very talented, could have folded and the finger pointing and me first attitude could have ensued. They didn't succumb to that. They were superior talents with superior attitudes. Nobody was going to push them around, and losing was not acceptable. They held each other accountable. There are plenty of talented players and teams, but they don't have the "swagger" that it takes to endure a 162 game season and hold it together. Team chemistry is not always about being "nicey, nicey." Sometimes its about holding each other accountable for the things that bring down the team, for not producing, for not putting the extra work in. For "dogging" it. Sparky Anderson often said the the Big Red Machine teams managed themselves, and I believe, in talking to many of the players that were on that team, that was the case. They didn't all like each other, but they had a common bond when it came time to go on the field. They all wanted to win, very badly. Losing and screwing up was not tolerated. Anderson got rid of anyone who challenged that and wanted to be an individual. Those guys didn't last long with the Reds. Swagger is something that you cannot measure, but you definitely know when it is there.

The thing about swagger though is that it always seems to lag behind success.

TheNext44
05-15-2009, 04:31 PM
Just for the record, I saw the Reds in spring training last year (08) for over a month, and thought they had great chemistry. They were smiling, and joking and pulling pranks, everyone was having fun. I think it lasted into the season as well, until they started losing.

Chemistry is great, but it doesn't make up for lack of talent. It can make a decent team into a really good team, or a really good team into a great team, but it can't make a below average team into a winner.

RANDY IN INDY
05-15-2009, 04:57 PM
The thing about swagger though is that it always seems to lag behind success.

Probably not important at all then.:beerme:

bucksfan2
05-15-2009, 05:00 PM
Just for the record, I saw the Reds in spring training last year (08) for over a month, and thought they had great chemistry. They were smiling, and joking and pulling pranks, everyone was having fun. I think it lasted into the season as well, until they started losing.

Chemistry is great, but it doesn't make up for lack of talent. It can make a decent team into a really good team, or a really good team into a great team, but it can't make a below average team into a winner.

Talent is the ultimate underlying factor. I don't think anyone is ignoring that aspect of baseball. The issue is Chemistry and I agree with you assessment. It can be the deciding factor between a good team being great or average. It could be the difference between a playoff team and a 3rd place team. Could it be the difference between an 81 or 85 win team? Sure and in some years that could be the difference between a WS Champ (St. Louis) and a October spent watching baseball on the tube.

The jokes and smiles are great in spring training. It would be hard not to be happy in spring. And I also agree that when a season starts to go south, quickly it becomes very difficult to correct that if you just don't have the talent. If your struggling and you answer to a 5 game swoon is Eric Milton your not good shape. Chemistry has more to do with a team attitude than anything. It has more to do with playing the game hard and the right way. If you screw up, you don't hustle, you make a stupid mistake, good teams worry much less about what the media or coach will say and more about what the team leader will say.

For example (no proof what so ever) lets say Phillips big leagues a line drive off the wall into a long single. He knows he screwed up and he has a talk with Dusty. After he exits the meeting with Dusty Votto comes up to Phillips and says that type of baseball is unacceptable on this team, don't do it again. Phillips is going to think twice about not busting his tail out of the box because he will have to stand up to his teammates again. Problem is I don't see Votto or Bruce or Phillips or anyone on the team being able to stand up and tell one of the greatest living ball players that. Not an indictment on Jr what so ever, just an opinion.

Mario-Rijo
05-15-2009, 06:37 PM
To get a pass in Reds country it helps to be a local guy, superstar or look like a dude who should be delivering pizza or changing oil and yet he can still OPS .750

Everyone else is subjects for the shooting gallery, because there is only room for so many player types to categorize.

It also helps to have positive results on the field. EE has been great at times horrible others but mostly somewhere slightly below avg. overall as a big leaguer. After so long it becomes frustrating to watch, he should have already progressed more than he seemingly has. That said as has been said several times no one believes Rosales is an overall upgrade but his consistency (with Hairston as well) is something this team needs right now for this offense to keep it going.

westofyou
05-15-2009, 07:19 PM
It also helps to have positive results on the field. EE has been great at times horrible others but mostly somewhere slightly below avg. overall as a big leaguer. A .

No wrong, he's been mostly above average offensively the proof is all over this thread.

Mario-Rijo
05-15-2009, 07:23 PM
No wrong, he's been mostly above average offensively the proof is all over this thread.

I said as an overall big leaguer and from a consistency standpoint.

nate
05-15-2009, 07:33 PM
I said as an overall big leaguer and from a consistency standpoint.

What's average "consistency" for a big leaguer?

westofyou
05-15-2009, 07:54 PM
I said as an overall big leaguer and from a consistency standpoint.

That's a vague statement that defines nothing because it's lacking a baseline.

Mario-Rijo
05-15-2009, 09:05 PM
What's average "consistency" for a big leaguer?

He consistently performs at a below average level overall. Take the hot streaks and massive slumps out of the equation and what you get is a below average overall player. His baserunning is poor & his defense has not improved to an acceptable level yet. So when he ain't hitting not only is he not helping us he is actually hurting us. And even when he is hitting he finds ways to hurt us. I have stuck up for him for long enough if he cannot pull it all together this year I am done giving him the benefit of the doubt that he will get it at some point.

Mario-Rijo
05-15-2009, 09:06 PM
That's a vague statement that defines nothing because it's lacking a baseline.

I would say there is a baseline but just because it's hard to quantify doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

jojo
05-15-2009, 09:32 PM
He consistently performs at a below average level overall. Take the hot streaks and massive slumps out of the equation and what you get is a below average overall player. His baserunning is poor & his defense has not improved to an acceptable level yet. So when he ain't hitting not only is he not helping us he is actually hurting us. And even when he is hitting he finds ways to hurt us. I have stuck up for him for long enough if he cannot pull it all together this year I am done giving him the benefit of the doubt that he will get it at some point.

I think I get what you're saying. Basically when you add the value of his bat and glove up at the end of the day, he's been a below average player?

However, though his offensive streakiness is maddening, at the end of the day (i.e. at the season's end) he's actually been amazingly consistent. Here's his production for '06 thru '08 normalized for playing time (600 PAs):


wOBA UZR/150 WAR/600
2006 0.357 -12 2.5
2007 0.35 -14 1.9
2008 0.351 -12 2.1


In actuality, EE has been the epitomy of league average from an overall value standpoint.

EE has been a valuable albeit unsexy member of the Reds roster. His minus defense is frustrating and his streakiness at the plate can be painful, but at the end of the day, EE has been a legitimate answer at third for the Reds.

Given EE projects to give more of the same, Rosales actually has a pretty high bar to rise above in order to chase EE from third IMHO.

Mario-Rijo
05-15-2009, 10:08 PM
I think I get what you're saying. Basically when you add the value of his bat and glove up at the end of the day, he's been a below average player?

A majority of the games he plays in, yes. In the Macro he's better than league average, in the micro he hurts the team more than he helps it.

westofyou
05-15-2009, 11:00 PM
I would say there is a baseline but just because it's hard to quantify doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

If you can't draw it how can I use it to see what you're talking about?

Ltlabner
05-15-2009, 11:42 PM
In the Macro he's better than league average, in the micro he hurts the team more than he helps it.

Forest meet trees.

Mario-Rijo
05-15-2009, 11:59 PM
If you can't draw it how can I use it to see what you're talking about?

Every player has slumps and every player has hot streaks. Good players slumps don't go on as long as EE, they don't have as many slumps as EE and they are more productive when those 2 things aren't happening. And i'm not talking about 1 aspect of his game alone, I'm talking about his overall game. Is there a baseline probably but I'm not quite sure how you quantify it.

Mario-Rijo
05-16-2009, 12:15 AM
Forest meet trees.

Can you please expound on this? I don't want to misinterpret it.

Will M
05-16-2009, 12:31 AM
No wrong, he's been mostly above average offensively the proof is all over this thread.

EE's career OPS+ is 100.

Mario-Rijo
05-16-2009, 12:50 AM
EE's career OPS+ is 100.

Yeah and I think it's very interesting that beyond a slight bump in BB rate he has not progressed at all. And with that improved BB rate came an increase in K rate. Sure he hit 26 HR's last season but his Slg% (and BA) was lower than his 2nd season. Basically he is no different a player in '09 than he was in '06.

But maybe I am being too hard on him he still is only 26 (I hope) which is why I said I would like to see what he does this season. Maybe he will never start swinging that bat right until he is moved away from 3B. I still don't think he sees the ball well either he takes more called strikes right down the heart of the plate than anyone I have ever seen.

Ltlabner
05-16-2009, 09:14 AM
Can you please expound on this? I don't want to misinterpret it.

You said in macro he's good but micro he stinks (paraphrasing).

That's missing the forest for the trees. You're saying you don't like his overall decent performance because in specific games he had issues. Who gives a rip? Would I rather he be the monster bat Edwin all the time (who figured out how to throw)? Of course. But if at the end of the year we have a 3B that is providing league average performance, at very low cost, that is a very valuable asset whether we recognize it or not.

Performances need to be measured over an entire year to actually gauge if a player has helped or hurt. Not a play, an inning, a game, a week or even couple of weeks.

nate
05-16-2009, 11:14 AM
He consistently performs at a below average level overall.

Which is what and how is it measured?


Take the hot streaks and massive slumps out of the equation and what you get is a below average overall player.

Couldn't the same be said for every player who plays poor defense?


His baserunning is poor & his defense has not improved to an acceptable level yet. So when he ain't hitting not only is he not helping us he is actually hurting us. And even when he is hitting he finds ways to hurt us. I have stuck up for him for long enough if he cannot pull it all together this year I am done giving him the benefit of the doubt that he will get it at some point.

I don't disagree with your conclusion that this is the year to make or break.

SMcGavin
05-16-2009, 11:22 AM
I'm a fan of EE, and I think gets the 3B job right back when he gets healthy. But I think calling him league average is a overestimate of his value.

Take last year, he had a .807 OPS. The average OPS for every player who started that game at 3B was .776. But that group includes starters, backups, guys who just played a couple of games there, etc. Unless EE is playing in every game (or really close to it) you can't compare him to the overall league average. And EE has never played 150 games in a season. I don't know what the average for a starting 3B is, maybe someone can help me out here, but I'd guess it's pretty close to EE's .807.

I'd call EE an average bat with significantly below average defense. Since he comes cheap that's not the end of the world, and still he has the potential to improve. But I think he needs to take a step forward to get to league average, and if it were up to me he would have tried out LF in the offseason.

westofyou
05-16-2009, 11:35 AM
Is there a baseline probably but I'm not quite sure how you quantify it.

In the Historical Baseball Abstract Bill James writes on Dale Ennis, "Some day I'm going to try and figure out how to track a players consistency, and if I do I believe that Dale Ennis will be seen as one of the most consistent players in the games history."

So in short according to James currently there is no baseline for that sort of study.

Therefore it reminds me of the time my buddy who was vendor was pulled over and had about 3K in cash from selling t-shirts. The cop was holding his cash and he said "I'm calling in the drug dog to see if there is any trace of drugs on this money." My friend replied.. "I hear that drug traces can be found on 95% of the money in circulation."

The cop got all mad and growled.. "That's just barroom talk."

And that's the way I feel about the "facts" that say EE is below average... because I've yet to see any evidence... just lot's of barroom talk.

nate
05-16-2009, 11:37 AM
I'm a fan of EE, and I think gets the 3B job right back when he gets healthy. But I think calling him league average is a overestimate of his value.

I think it's spot on.


Take last year, he had a .807 OPS. The average OPS for every player who started that game at 3B was .776. But that group includes starters, backups, guys who just played a couple of games there, etc. But that's the same for every other player and every other position. If it's good for EE, we can see that Albert Pujols isn't really that good because backups and guys who played a couple of games also play first base.


Unless EE is playing in every game (or really close to it) you can't compare him to the overall league average.Why?


And EE has never played 150 games in a season. I don't know what the average for a starting 3B is, maybe someone can help me out here, but I'd guess it's pretty close to EE's .807.Last year, he OPS .810 which was good for an OPS+ of 109 amongst his fellowl 3B.


I'd call EE an average bat with significantly below average defense. Since he comes cheap that's not the end of the world, and still he has the potential to improve. Or maybe this is what he is.


But I think he needs to take a step forward to get to league average, and if it were up to me he would have tried out LF in the offseason.I don't think that's up to the player. However, if he's not league average at 3B, I really don't think he'll be league average in LF.

westofyou
05-16-2009, 11:44 AM
150 games is a specious stat, it's not achieved across the board by every NL 3rd sacker. In just the last 3 seasons.


NATIONAL LEAGUE
2006-2008
3B
GAMES >= 150


T1 David Wright 3
T1 Garrett Atkins 3
T3 Pedro Feliz 2
T3 Ryan Zimmerman 2
T3 Miguel Cabrera 2
T6 Mark Reynolds 1
T6 Troy Glaus 1
T6 Freddy Sanchez 1
T6 Kevin Kouzmanoff 1
T6 Jorge Cantu 1
T6 Chad Tracy 1
T6 Aramis Ramirez 1


And their OPS


GAMES YEAR G OPS
1 Ryan Zimmerman 2007 162 .009
T2 Pedro Feliz 2006 160 -.076
T2 David Wright 2008 160 .159
T2 David Wright 2007 160 .185
5 Miguel Cabrera 2006 158 .213
T6 Ryan Zimmerman 2006 157 .037
T6 Miguel Cabrera 2007 157 .187
T6 Aramis Ramirez 2006 157 .127
T6 Garrett Atkins 2006 157 .180
T6 Garrett Atkins 2007 157 .075
T6 Freddy Sanchez 2006 157 .066
T12 Jorge Cantu 2008 155 .042
T12 Garrett Atkins 2008 155 .015
T14 Kevin Kouzmanoff 2008 154 -.033
T14 David Wright 2006 154 .127
T14 Chad Tracy 2006 154 .009
17 Mark Reynolds 2008 152 .013
18 Troy Glaus 2008 151 .090
19 Pedro Feliz 2007 150 -.070

SMcGavin
05-16-2009, 12:04 PM
I think it's spot on.

But that's the same for every other player and every other position. If it's good for EE, we can see that Albert Pujols isn't really that good because backups and guys who played a couple of games also play first base.

Why?

Last year, he OPS .810 which was good for an OPS+ of 109 amongst his fellowl 3B.

Or maybe this is what he is.

I don't think that's up to the player. However, if he's not league average at 3B, I really don't think he'll be league average in LF.

OK, use the common definition of league average. Collect a team with 8 "league average" starters. That team is going to score fewer runs than the league average.

Re: Edwin to LF - No kidding it's not up to the player, when did anyone say that? His bat gets less valuable with a move to LF, but I don't think that is true of his overall value. Instead of having his awful 3B glove weighing down his total value, I think he could be plenty capable with the leather in LF.

jojo
05-16-2009, 12:10 PM
150 games is a specious stat, it's not achieved across the board by every NL 3rd sacker. In just the last 3 seasons.


NATIONAL LEAGUE
2006-2008
3B
GAMES >= 150


T1 David Wright 3
T1 Garrett Atkins 3
T3 Pedro Feliz 2
T3 Ryan Zimmerman 2
T3 Miguel Cabrera 2
T6 Mark Reynolds 1
T6 Troy Glaus 1
T6 Freddy Sanchez 1
T6 Kevin Kouzmanoff 1
T6 Jorge Cantu 1
T6 Chad Tracy 1
T6 Aramis Ramirez 1


And their OPS


GAMES YEAR G OPS
1 Ryan Zimmerman 2007 162 .009
T2 Pedro Feliz 2006 160 -.076
T2 David Wright 2008 160 .159
T2 David Wright 2007 160 .185
5 Miguel Cabrera 2006 158 .213
T6 Ryan Zimmerman 2006 157 .037
T6 Miguel Cabrera 2007 157 .187
T6 Aramis Ramirez 2006 157 .127
T6 Garrett Atkins 2006 157 .180
T6 Garrett Atkins 2007 157 .075
T6 Freddy Sanchez 2006 157 .066
T12 Jorge Cantu 2008 155 .042
T12 Garrett Atkins 2008 155 .015
T14 Kevin Kouzmanoff 2008 154 -.033
T14 David Wright 2006 154 .127
T14 Chad Tracy 2006 154 .009
17 Mark Reynolds 2008 152 .013
18 Troy Glaus 2008 151 .090
19 Pedro Feliz 2007 150 -.070

The point of 150 g is just so everyone is compared across the same playing time. Very few players play 162 games consistently so 150 g is set as a baseline for "full season".

EE's production in his playing time made him an average major leaguer for that amount of playing time.

SMcGavin
05-16-2009, 12:34 PM
EE's production in his playing time made him an average major leaguer for that amount of playing time.

Completely true. But since the backups got a good amount of playing time too, that means the Reds have received below average production from 3B over that time.

My point is that to have an average offensive team, your starters need to be better than league average.

nate
05-16-2009, 12:46 PM
OK, use the common definition of league average.

OK!

What is the common definition of league average?


Collect a team with 8 "league average" starters. That team is going to score fewer runs than the league average.How so? How are we measuring that?

Sorry to be pedantic and it may be obvious to you what you're saying but I have no idea what your scale is calibrated to. Are we talking OPS? RC? WARP? QB Rating?


Re: Edwin to LF - No kidding it's not up to the player, when did anyone say that? I thought that's what you meant when you said he should've "tried out."


His bat gets less valuable with a move to LF, but I don't think that is true of his overall value. Instead of having his awful 3B glove weighing down his total value, I think he could be plenty capable with the leather in LF.But I thought he was slow. How would he be better in LF with longer routes to the ball? If his arm is the problem, how are longer throws going to improve his accuracy?

To me, the bottom line is, EE is an average ML player who production is remarkably consistent from year to year. He's not been a good defender at 3B mainly due to throwing errors. Although his D doesn't look like it's improved, I want to see him for, at the least, the trading deadline before the Reds start moving him around or trading him.

jojo
05-16-2009, 12:52 PM
Completely true. But since the backups got a good amount of playing time too, that means the Reds have received below average production from 3B over that time.

My point is that to have an average offensive team, your starters need to be better than league average.

I don't think this is necessarily true. For instance:

The Reds had better than league average overall production from 3b every year that EE was the primary starter (based upon their OPS from 3b versus the NL league average OPS).

Just considering production relative to position, in two of the three years that EE has been the starter, their OPS from 3b was greater than the average OPS of just third basemen.

SMcGavin
05-16-2009, 01:13 PM
Nate, it is a simple hypothetical exercise. Imagine a team with 8 starters who are league average for their position in every possible statistic. If each one of those players played 162 games, that team would score exactly the league average in runs.

But in reality, that won't happen. You have days off, injuries, etc. And the backups who play when those things happen are going to be below average players. So at the end of the season, the team of "league average" bats has scored fewer runs than average.

By the way, I never called Edwin slow. And your conclusion that EE's problems on defense are all due to his arm are incorrect - he had the worst UZR of all MLB third basemen last year.

SMcGavin
05-16-2009, 01:31 PM
Just considering production relative to position, in two of the three years that EE has been the starter, their OPS from 3b was greater than the average OPS of just third basemen.

I really don't have a problem with EE's bat. But I think this helps make my point. Here are the OPS numbers over those three years:

2006:
EE .831
Total Reds 3B .840 (skewed upward because Aurillia raked at 3B this year)
NL Average 3B .826

2007:
EE .794
Total Reds 3B .775
NL Average 3B .805

2008:
EE .807
Total Reds 3B .792
NL Average 3B .776

Totals over that time:
EE .809
Total Reds 3B .802
NL Average 3B .802

So yes, in the games EE played, he gave the Reds above average offense at 3B. But since he doesn't play every game, over his three seasons as the starter the Reds have gotten exactly league average OPS from the the third base position. When you factor in the defense, the Reds have gotten below average production from 3B over the last three years. I believe that was the stance I took on EE in my first post in this thread - average offense, below average defense.

This exercise shows why evaluating a starter by just comparing to league average is misleading. The difference would be a lot more than 7 points of OPS between EE and the Total Reds 3B, but Rich Aurillia got 39 starts at 3B in 2006 and he killed the ball.

nate
05-16-2009, 01:39 PM
Nate, it is a simple hypothetical exercise. Imagine a team with 8 starters who are league average for their position in every possible statistic. If each one of those players played 162 games, that team would score exactly the league average in runs.

Yes. That's what I was saying.


But in reality, that won't happen. You have days off, injuries, etc. And the backups who play when those things happen are going to be below average players. So at the end of the season, the team of "league average" bats has scored fewer runs than average.

I think there are a lot more variables that go into this.


By the way, I never called Edwin slow. And your conclusion that EE's problems on defense are all due to his arm are incorrect - he had the worst UZR of all MLB third basemen last year.

I said his errors are mainly of the throwing variety and that moving to LF with longer throws isn't going to improve that. If you're saying that his range is poor at 3B, I don't see how moving to LF is going to improve that either.

SMcGavin
05-16-2009, 02:48 PM
I think there are a lot more variables that go into this.


Like what? There are always exceptions but in the vast majority of cases, a team's average production from a position is going to be less than the primary starter's production. The only way that won't be the case is if the starter plays every game or the guys playing there when he's out are better than him.

jojo
05-16-2009, 03:09 PM
I really don't have a problem with EE's bat. But I think this helps make my point. Here are the OPS numbers over those three years:

2006:
EE .831
Total Reds 3B .840 (skewed upward because Aurillia raked at 3B this year)
NL Average 3B .826

2007:
EE .794
Total Reds 3B .775
NL Average 3B .805

2008:
EE .807
Total Reds 3B .792
NL Average 3B .776

Totals over that time:
EE .809
Total Reds 3B .802
NL Average 3B .802

So yes, in the games EE played, he gave the Reds above average offense at 3B. But since he doesn't play every game, over his three seasons as the starter the Reds have gotten exactly league average OPS from the the third base position. When you factor in the defense, the Reds have gotten below average production from 3B over the last three years. I believe that was the stance I took on EE in my first post in this thread - average offense, below average defense.

This exercise shows why evaluating a starter by just comparing to league average is misleading. The difference would be a lot more than 7 points of OPS between EE and the Total Reds 3B, but Rich Aurillia got 39 starts at 3B in 2006 and he killed the ball.

It's not misleading when the definition of league average is an actual league average major leaguer.

EE's bat plus glove has been such that he has been an average major league player.

nate
05-16-2009, 03:10 PM
The Reds are 1-2 when I don't watch any of the game on TV this year.

Mario-Rijo
05-16-2009, 03:22 PM
You said in macro he's good but micro he stinks (paraphrasing).

That's missing the forest for the trees. You're saying you don't like his overall decent performance because in specific games he had issues. Who gives a rip? Would I rather he be the monster bat Edwin all the time (who figured out how to throw)? Of course. But if at the end of the year we have a 3B that is providing league average performance, at very low cost, that is a very valuable asset whether we recognize it or not.

Performances need to be measured over an entire year to actually gauge if a player has helped or hurt. Not a play, an inning, a game, a week or even couple of weeks.

No basically what I'm saying is in the Macro he's good enough to be on the team and starting to this point. However in moving forward he can no longer be that guy and continue to be a starter on this team if he doesn't progress soon. Now I know I hadn't gotten to that point just yet but that is where I was heading with it. I just believe if we are to be a perennial contender at this point we can't depend on EE as a critical piece of the puzzle if he doesn't at least give us consistent PA's (don't swing at junk, but please EE swing at meatballs really it's ok) and consistent defense. Especially when we have the inconsistent Gonzo, BP, WT etc. If he does those 2 things he will be worthy if he doesn't we gotta move on.

SMcGavin
05-16-2009, 03:28 PM
It's not misleading when the definition of league average is an actual league average major leaguer.

EE's bat plus glove has been such that he has been an average major league player.

And a team full of starters just like him would be a below average team.

jojo
05-16-2009, 04:28 PM
And a team full of starters just like him would be a below average team.

A team full of league average starters would probably be something like league average.

Ltlabner
05-16-2009, 06:51 PM
I'd call EE an average bat.....

The numbers say otherwise.


Rank YEAR NAME PA EqA OBP SLG OUTR VORP RAR RAP
7 (24) 2008 E Encarnacion 582 .273 .340 .466 0.64605 20.5 26.3 1.8
8 (27) 2007 E Encarnacion 560 .268 .356 .438 0.62143 20.5 21.3 -0.3

For the past two years, our nearly league minimum salaried third baseman ranked in the top 10 of NL 3B's with at least 100 PAs when rated by VORP. 7th out of 24 or 8th out of 27 isn't an "average" bat. A guy giving you +20 VORP or Runs Above Replacement isn't an "average" bat.

No argument regarding his defense, it drags down his total value. But people want to forget about his production versus his cost in the rush to run him out of town.

Interesting that Mr. Inconsistent put up nearly identical EQA, VORP and RAP over the course of two years. OBP and Outrates and Runs Above Position are pretty near each other also.

OUReds
05-16-2009, 07:55 PM
The numbers say otherwise.


Rank YEAR NAME PA EqA OBP SLG OUTR VORP RAR RAP
7 (24) 2008 E Encarnacion 582 .273 .340 .466 0.64605 20.5 26.3 1.8
8 (27) 2007 E Encarnacion 560 .268 .356 .438 0.62143 20.5 21.3 -0.3

For the past two years, our nearly league minimum salaried third baseman ranked in the top 10 of NL 3B's with at least 100 PAs when rated by VORP. 7th out of 24 or 8th out of 27 isn't an "average" bat. A guy giving you +20 VORP or Runs Above Replacement isn't an "average" bat.

No argument regarding his defense, it drags down his total value. But people want to forget about his production versus his cost in the rush to run him out of town.

Interesting that Mr. Inconsistent put up nearly identical EQA, VORP and RAP over the course of two years. OBP and Outrates and Runs Above Position are pretty near each other also.

A replacement player in VORP is not an average player though.

Most VORP formulas consider the difference between a replacement bat and an average bat to be about 80%.

Thus Edwin's value over an average bat is around +16. Once you normalize for park factor and give back the defensive runs, he's looking more and more like a league average to slightly above league average player to me.

That's fine when he's making the league minimum, but that just won't be the case for long.

I do know your point is that Edwin is an above average bat. No arguing with that. It's his total value as a third baseman that is the problem.

Mario-Rijo
05-16-2009, 08:48 PM
The numbers say otherwise.


Rank YEAR NAME PA EqA OBP SLG OUTR VORP RAR RAP
7 (24) 2008 E Encarnacion 582 .273 .340 .466 0.64605 20.5 26.3 1.8
8 (27) 2007 E Encarnacion 560 .268 .356 .438 0.62143 20.5 21.3 -0.3

For the past two years, our nearly league minimum salaried third baseman ranked in the top 10 of NL 3B's with at least 100 PAs when rated by VORP. 7th out of 24 or 8th out of 27 isn't an "average" bat. A guy giving you +20 VORP or Runs Above Replacement isn't an "average" bat.

Just so we are clear here doesn't VORP in this case represent the value of a player offensively speaking over that of a player who is below average offensively? I mean just because he has value over a replacement level player doesn't mean he is above average, correct? Yeah apparently he is a better than average 3rd bagger but that is merely a consolation if the drop off after the 1st 3-4 guys is steep. Not trying to be a wise guy here but just want better clarification to the question. Should we be looking at RC's, OPS or what?


No argument regarding his defense, it drags down his total value. But people want to forget about his production versus his cost in the rush to run him out of town.

That's not a part of the argument I think we are all in agreement he has been worth what he has been paid but that's coming to halt as we move forward. No one is looking for him to go anywhere right now from what I have read.


Interesting that Mr. Inconsistent put up nearly identical EQA, VORP and RAP over the course of two years. OBP and Outrates and Runs Above Position are pretty near each other also.

So you are saying that because he has been consistently inconsistent it means something? I'd argue that this is the crux of the argument he isn't progressing and if he were you could see it in those areas you listed above.

But again he is just 26 perhaps it would be beneficial for me not to be overly concerned just yet. But I just don't want us to ignore it if it continues.

Mario-Rijo
05-16-2009, 08:53 PM
A replacement player in VORP is not an average player though.

Most VORP formulas consider the difference between a replacement bat and an average bat to be about 80%.

Thus Edwin's value over an average bat is around +16. Once you normalize for park factor and give back the defensive runs, he's looking more and more like a league average to slightly above league average player to me.

That's fine when he's making the league minimum, but that just won't be the case for long.

I do know your point is that Edwin is an above average bat. No arguing with that. It's his total value as a third baseman that is the problem.

He's not making the minimum anymore.

But I wanted to ask what his VORP is after it's normalized for PF? I can't even find VORP rankings anywhere. I looked at THT, FG's, BR I just don't know where to look.

jojo
05-16-2009, 08:56 PM
VORP is the offensive value of a player above replacement level as adjusted for park, league and position.

Rojo
05-16-2009, 08:59 PM
That's fine when he's making the league minimum, but that just won't be the case for long.

According to ESPN he's making $2.4 million this year. Not a lot but not nothing. And round these parts, it doesn't much more than that to generate a big bunch of bellyaching.

nate
05-16-2009, 09:00 PM
VORP is the offensive value of a player above replacement level as adjusted for park, league and position.

Is there any place that tracks what replacement level is in terms of stats? IOW, replacement level 3B means BA .xxx, OBP .yyy, etc.