PDA

View Full Version : Do you believe that injuries are to blame for 09's failures?



Tom Servo
08-24-2009, 04:40 PM
So I read this article on Reds.com...


PITTSBURGH -- Before Sunday's game, Reds manager Dusty Baker could show a disbelieving smile and even be a little philosophical about the squad's seemingly ever-worsening injury situation.

After the game -- a win at that -- however, Baker wasn't even able to crack a smile -- though he did keep a sense of humor about things, albeit with a straight face.

"We'll have all of Louisville up here soon," Baker said of Cincinnati's Triple-A affiliate Bats after watching two more regulars leave Sunday's game with injuries. "We have half of it here now."

Outfielder Chris Dickerson (severely sprained left ankle) and catcher Ryan Hanigan (mild concussion) were only the latest in a long line of Reds players to be forced out of action due to injuries or other ailments.

Baker said leadoff hitter Dickerson will be placed on the disabled list before the Reds' road trip continues with the first of three games against the Brewers in Milwaukee on Tuesday. Suffering a somewhat gruesome-looking twist while trying to get back before being picked off at first in the third inning Sunday, Dickerson would become the 10th player on the Reds' crowded DL.

It was just learned Sunday that ace Aaron Harang was lost for the season after he underwent emergency appendectomy surgery late Saturday night.

"It's an epidemic," starter Homer Bailey said. "I'm considering just wrapping up in pads, looking like the Michelin Man."

Hopefully, Hanigan is not out for long. He will be monitored in the coming days. But he already was the Reds' backup catcher. Ramon Hernandez is out after undergoing left knee surgery.

In addition to Opening Day starter Harang and Hernandez, also currently on the DL for the Reds are outfielders Jay Bruce and Willy Taveras -- each of whom was in the Opening Day lineup -- reliever Mike Lincoln (also on the Opening Day roster), starters Edinson Volquez and Johnny Cueto, infielder Danny Richar and catcher Wilkin Castillo.

Harang, Volquez, Castillo and Richar will not play again this season. Dickerson makes it 17 Reds players who have made 18 trips to the DL this season.

"This has been hell, ain't it?" Baker said, forcing a smile.

The Reds' injury luck has been so bad that only two days after acquiring five-time All-Star third baseman Scott Rolen in a trade with the Toronto Blue Jays, he was hit by a pitch in the head and the resulting concussion landed him on the disabled list.

"Like I was telling my players yesterday, you think as you get older you're not going to have any more problems, [but] you just learn how to deal with them better," Baker said. "And each problem that you go through, it's like the worst problem that you ever had until you get to the next problem, you know what I mean? So you just deal with it and try to make the best of it."

The injuries surely have helped facilitate the team's 10-26 record since the All-Star break that has seen the Reds fall from 5 1/2 games out of first to a season-high 18 1/2 out. Cincinnati fell into last place for a day after losing seven of eight before Sunday's 4-1 win over Pittsburgh.

In his 16th season as a Major League manager, Baker said this is the worst he has seen a team be inflicted by injuries, long ago surpassing his 1996 Giants and 2006 Cubs, also walking-wounded teams.

"Whoever made up that saying 'Injuries are no excuse' was lying," Baker said. "This is beyond ridiculous here."
http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20090823&content_id=6569300&vkey=news_cin&fext=.jsp&c_id=cin


...and I apparently the general jist is that the Reds would have been fine if not for the injuries. Now obviously Edinson Volquez's injury was effectively a crippling blow, but the losing didn't really kick in until Bruce broke his wrist. So I ask you, fellow RedsZoners, do you believe that the injuries are a valid excuse as for why the 2009 Reds have been so terrible?

bucksfan2
08-24-2009, 04:45 PM
...and I apparently the general jist is that the Reds would have been fine if not for the injuries. Now obviously Edinson Volquez's injury was effectively a crippling blow, but the losing didn't really kick in until Bruce broke his wrist. So I ask you, fellow RedsZoners, do you believe that the injuries are a valid excuse as for why the 2009 Reds have been so terrible?

I thought the Votto injury really put this team behind the 8 ball. Votto was a legit, middle of the order, bat that missed an extended period of time during the season. Couple the Votto injury with 0 production out of 3b and you have a big reason why the Reds started their decline.

The way I look at it, if Votto has stayed healthy for the entire season the Reds would have been in much better position at the all star break, maybe around 4-5 games over .500. IMO the season could have changed drastically at that point.

Ltlabner
08-24-2009, 04:55 PM
I believe the injuries will be used by the FO and others to explain away a bad season.

BRM
08-24-2009, 04:56 PM
I believe the injuries will be used by the FO and others to explain away a bad season.

Agreed.

I think injuries certainly played a role. But I think injuries simply turned them from bad to horrible. A healthy version of the '09 Reds was still a losing bunch.

Hoosier Red
08-24-2009, 04:57 PM
I think injuries are what kept the team from having a reasonable .500 record. They are not what kept the team from winning the central.

traderumor
08-24-2009, 04:57 PM
I guess we will see next year, assuming that the key members are able to come back, which should be the case except for Volquez.

icehole3
08-24-2009, 04:58 PM
I thought the Votto injury really put this team behind the 8 ball. Votto was a legit, middle of the order, bat that missed an extended period of time during the season. Couple the Votto injury with 0 production out of 3b and you have a big reason why the Reds started their decline.

The way I look at it, if Votto has stayed healthy for the entire season the Reds would have been in much better position at the all star break, maybe around 4-5 games over .500. IMO the season could have changed drastically at that point.

I agree Votto was near .400 before his setbacks, I also feel Volquez was a huge injury that sort of took its toll on the the starting staff.

Unassisted
08-24-2009, 04:58 PM
I think injuries are what kept the team from having a reasonable .500 record. They are not what kept the team from winning the central.My sentiments exactly.

redsmetz
08-24-2009, 05:02 PM
I think injuries are what kept the team from having a reasonable .500 record. They are not what kept the team from winning the central.

I think this is a fair assesment. I've been mulling this over for the last week before the latest spate of injuries. I thought we had a chance to be competitive, but having so many injuries and for so long, really have hurt. I'm not saying we may have taken the division, but I said all along if most everything went right, we could be in it. Nearly everything has gone wrong, to say the least.

But I do think you can't discount the effect of 80% of both your starting rotation and your projected starting lineup going down, it's very hard to compete. That can't be discounted.

HeatherC1212
08-24-2009, 05:03 PM
I agree Votto was near .400 before his setbacks, I also feel Volquez was a huge injury that sort of took its toll on the the starting staff.

I agree. Those two guys were huge holes that the team wasn't totally prepared to weather this year and I think both of their injuries started some of the downfalls with the team. The other injuries have certainly made things a lot worse than it possibly could have been had the revolving DL door been even just half of what it's been, but I don't think all the injuries caused the team's downward spiral. It definitely hasn't helped them any though and I can't even imagine how frustrated and disappointed the guys are with their season right now. :(


But I do think you can't discount the effect of 80% of both your starting rotation and your projected starting lineup going down, it's very hard to compete. That can't be discounted.


I agree with this too though. That added a lot of stress and pressure onto the healthy guys and that didn't help things either. They certainly have had every thing that could go wrong, go wrong for the team this year. :eek:

hebroncougar
08-24-2009, 05:09 PM
That's why you have depth. Just excuse, after excuse, after excuse. This team is broken, I don't care if the whole team is healthy. It's laughable they mention Mike Lincoln, Taveras, Castillo, and Richar, all of those are major losses. :confused:

nate
08-24-2009, 05:14 PM
Current Record 52 71 0.423
with Votto 38 55 0.409
without Votto 14 16 0.467

I think the sum of all the injuries have kept the team from being better, for sure.

BRM
08-24-2009, 05:16 PM
I think injuries are what kept the team from having a reasonable .500 record. They are not what kept the team from winning the central.

.500 might have been achievable without the injuries but that's still pretty sorry. It's just further proof that this team needs work. I truly hope the FO doesn't use the injury excuse and fail to go out and acquire the much needed pieces for this team to compete. When your squad needs to avoid the injury bug just to get to mediocrity, it's a clear sign that a lot of work still needs to be done.

redsmetz
08-24-2009, 05:41 PM
That's why you have depth. Just excuse, after excuse, after excuse. This team is broken, I don't care if the whole team is healthy. It's laughable they mention Mike Lincoln, Taveras, Castillo, and Richar, all of those are major losses. :confused:

No team has depth enough to overcome the injuries the Reds had this year. Four of our five starting pitchers and 7 out 9 (figuring Dickerson as part of a LF platoon). And that's leaving EE and Rolen counting as one for the position. Look at the Mets this season, who have had near as many injuries as we have. But you take any major league club and take away 7 of 8 position starters and 4 of 5 of your starting staff and they're not going anywhere.

_Sir_Charles_
08-24-2009, 05:41 PM
I think the injuries had a HUGE impact. Sure, Bruce and Edwin and others struggled. But if Edwin had been healthy from the outset? If we hadn't had Edinson go down? If Bray hadn't been out nearly all season? If Joey hadn't been out for so long? If Ramon hadn't gone down? Those things take a HUGE toll. Not just in the fact that a specific player is out, but also in the way it changes the way OTHERS try to force things to happen in their absence.

I firmly believe that if the Reds had been healthy all year long, they'd be at the top of the division or at least right in the hunt. Now if we can just get Dusty to learn how to fill out a lineup card and I'll be a happy camper. :O)

Reds1
08-24-2009, 05:51 PM
When you have a team with a smaller payroll injuries become magnified. The minors system is getting better, but not enough to make up for what was lost. The biggest injury was Edison Volquez. The whole Joey Votto situation made it difficult in the beginning. This team never had the offense to win consistantly, but the the injuries gave the Reds no chance in 2009. The biggest bummer of all the injuries now is that guys like Bruce and now Dickerson can't get experience by missing ABs. I do think the Reds team learned a lot about their players. Like Taverez and the fact that Cueto may not be the can't miss starter people thought. Also, they turned the page on EE. Our bench and starting outfield and lack of big bopper in the middle really show. We never replaced Dunn. Dunn in the middle of this line up would have been nice. With injuries the defense never got much better. One nice thing is Bailey can continue to grow and now Stubbs gets some experience. Hope Hannigan is ok and Bruce gets healthy and they can get some games in. Also, like to see what Rolen does and I guess we'll see Janish full time and hopefully they can say either Yes or probably NO to him. I answered Yes, but this team and more than injuries that hurt them this year. The right people were not in place, but losing Votto, Bruce, Hernandez, et al - didn't do this team any favors. I do think the Reds had a very nice BP in place and to that extent if the starters stayed healthy that was nice. They improved the defense, but with EE coming back and injuries and more playing time for Nix and Gomes that was hurt. I have seen some improvement in Votto at 1st so it's not a lost year - this is a young team. Add a big name SS and one outfielder and this team could get interesting if they stay healthy.

mbgrayson
08-24-2009, 05:53 PM
.500 might have been achievable without the injuries but that's still pretty sorry. It's just further proof that this team needs work. I truly hope the FO doesn't use the injury excuse and fail to go out and acquire the much needed pieces for this team to compete. When your squad needs to avoid the injury bug just to get to mediocrity, it's a clear sign that a lot of work still needs to be done.

I agree with this.

We shouldn't let Dusty and/or Walt or Castellini evade all responsibility by blaming injuries.

Look at the Los Angelos Angels this year. They have had a large number of injuries also(and the death of one starting pitcher), and yet they are in first place. The difference is in depth, strong management, and in payroll. The Reds haven't paid for and don't have major league quality depth. And mostly, the players called up from the minors have under-performed.

But it also goes to planning for contingencies and covering holes when they come up. I suspect that on average, an average MLB team will have two or three front line position players miss part of any given season, and lose a starting pitcher or two for a while.

In this sense, the Reds have certainly exceeded the normal number of injuries. I also think these injuries have cost them wins. How many? Impossible to say, but I think certainly no more than needed to finish at .500.

Homer Bailey
08-24-2009, 05:59 PM
I just realized our 3 best pitchers are on the DL. I'm really glad Dusty Baker is managing this team.

BRM
08-24-2009, 06:00 PM
No team has depth enough to overcome the injuries the Reds had this year. Four of our five starting pitchers and 7 out 9 (figuring Dickerson as part of a LF platoon). And that's leaving EE and Rolen counting as one for the position. Look at the Mets this season, who have had near as many injuries as we have. But you take any major league club and take away 7 of 8 position starters and 4 of 5 of your starting staff and they're not going anywhere.

When a chunk of those starters are bordering on replacement level, I fail to see the huge impact. Losing players like Gonzalez and Taveras don't hurt much. Losing Bruce's bat wasn't a giant setback either. Votto was the only position player that really stung when he went down. Now for the SP injuries, I agree with you.

Bottom line for me is this, the Reds were a mediocre club when 100% healthy. A team that may play .500 ball. The injury bug just took them from bad to worse.

nate
08-24-2009, 06:05 PM
I just realized our 3 best pitchers are on the DL. I'm really glad Dusty Baker is managing this team.

I don't think he has anything to do with that.

WVRedsFan
08-24-2009, 06:22 PM
Votto's injury was devastating to a team with little offense, no doubt. Gonzo played well defensively, but hit like a pitcher. No loss. Encarnacion (now batting .186 and having committed 3 errors in 16 games) offered needed offense, but not this year. No loss. Taveras--no loss. The pitchers? big loss. So, yes and no. But when you put a pitiful offensive team on the field, you can't recover from pitching losses. You also can't expect that staff to be perfect every night either. There's enough blame to go around without saying injuries ruined 2009.

Highlifeman21
08-24-2009, 06:30 PM
I believe the injuries will be used by the FO and others to explain away a bad season.

There needed to be a "Hell No" option for this poll.

As Ltlabner's appropriately stated, injuries will be the excuse(s) as to the stellarness of 2009.

This team was crappy before injuries. Injuries just exposed our lack of depth.

Spring~Fields
08-24-2009, 06:31 PM
I think the impressive stats guys on this board could tell us quite effeciently if this team coming out of spring training had the talent to over come the RS RA Differential and to be a quality team.

Of course so many injuries did not help anything.

But did the talent on this team have it to really compete coming out spring training? Well stats guys?

Highlifeman21
08-24-2009, 06:39 PM
I think the injuries had a HUGE impact. Sure, Bruce and Edwin and others struggled. But if Edwin had been healthy from the outset? If we hadn't had Edinson go down? If Bray hadn't been out nearly all season? If Joey hadn't been out for so long? If Ramon hadn't gone down? Those things take a HUGE toll. Not just in the fact that a specific player is out, but also in the way it changes the way OTHERS try to force things to happen in their absence.

I firmly believe that if the Reds had been healthy all year long, they'd be at the top of the division or at least right in the hunt. Now if we can just get Dusty to learn how to fill out a lineup card and I'll be a happy camper. :O)

if you firmly believe the Reds aren't at the top of the division or in the hunt b/c of their lack of health, then I can only firmly shake my head in disbelief.

It took an injury by Taveras for The Dusty to not write his name on the lineup card. Pretty sure it was an injury to Hernndez that netted Hanigan some much deserved more playing time. It took an injury to get rid of Lincoln.

So, if anything, injuries have actually helped us and made us better at some positions.

WMR
08-24-2009, 06:42 PM
Define 'failure.'

This was always a below .500 mediocre squad... the injuries turned them into the worst team in MLB. I'm sure Dusty believes, however, that if everyone had stayed healthy we'd be right in the race. :rolleyes:

WMR
08-24-2009, 06:45 PM
I think the impressive stats guys on this board could tell us quite effeciently if this team coming out of spring training had the talent to over come the RS RA Differential and to be a quality team.

Of course so many injuries did not help anything.

But did the talent on this team have it to really compete coming out spring training? Well stats guys?

No. Unless 6-8 guys had absolute monster career years, which is apparently what the Reds were banking on. :rolleyes:

GAC
08-24-2009, 06:46 PM
I already posted this the other day......


Well... look at it this way. Once Baker IS gone, Mr Excuse Maker will have his excuse.

"I didn't win because I didn't have the talent."

or

"It wasn't my team. It was Castellini's."

Of course this is the same guy that said his "name presence" would draw quality players to Cincy, and stated "We're close".

So add injuries to the excuse list too.

It's obviously not any manger's fault when injuries occur. And every team has them in some sort of capacity during the year. Some more severe then others.

And be wary of a manager or FO that tells you the reason they didn't compete was primarily because of injury. Not saying that can't occur; but not with this roster. The talent is not there. But they can then bring back that same roster the following year claiming if healthy they'll win.

TheNext44
08-24-2009, 06:51 PM
I'm not a stat guy, and it's hard to say what a team will do coming out of spring training,

however...

The Reds projected to be just a bit under .500 coming out of spring training, using projections, RC and the Pythag. I think it was something in the range of 77-80 wins.

And if you plug in the players who were injured career numbers for the players that replaced them, you get that the Reds would be around 8 wins better than they are now. (Volquez 3 wins, Votto 2 wins, EE 2 wins, everyone else combined 1 win.) That would put the Reds at 60-63, right about where they were projected to be. Not very good, but better than they've been in a while. Projects to 79 wins which would be the second highest since 2000.

I would answer that injuries are the biggest reason why the Reds are terrible, but not the biggest reason why they are bad and not in contention. As others have mentioned, the lack of depth in the organization has been the main reason why this team has not been above .500 in nearly a decade.

mth123
08-24-2009, 06:54 PM
The GM traded the best player they've had this decade for a lousy starting pitcher, a sore armed minor leaguer and a catcher who can't catch. He replaced him by signing the worst player in baseball to play CF and moved the judy hitting, but useable, CF who was already on hand to LF and installed him as a run producer. The rest of the playflex created by the removal of the decade's best player was spent on Middle Relievers when the team had a number of viable candidates for those jobs in the system. The GM completely ignored the glaring need at SS throughout the off-season and acquired no one to provide any power in the middle of the order. He went with a roster that was so thin and dependent on major improvements from so many players that any slight mis-hap sent the team into a tailspin.

The Manager encouraged the 2 core members of his pitching staff to abuse their arms by disdaining proper rest and recovery and to pitch nearly year-round in winter ball. He places players who can't get on base at the top of the order in the off chance they may be able to steal, bunt or some other normally useless play as far as scoring runs goes and refuses to remove the worst player in baseball from his line-up.

This team is now a farce due to lack of talent. The injuries have surely contributed to some of that, but, IMO, the root cause of it all is that the brain-trust of this franchise is clueless.

Brutus
08-24-2009, 06:55 PM
I voted 'yes,' but with the caveat that I think they were trending to be a decent baseball team this season before everything went south. Once the gates were opened with a few injuries, the lack of depth caused an outright flash flood of mediocrity. I don't think this team had enough to stay over the hump and make the playoffs this season, but I do think it was not a 'terrible' team until things just simply unraveled - mostly (not all) due to injuries.

TheNext44
08-24-2009, 06:56 PM
I will add that if this team had stayed perfectly healthy, which is nearly impossible to do, that they might have been in contention enough, that they might have been able to trade for Rolen earlier and he might have made enough of a difference for them compete. But that is a lot of "mights" and "ifs."

WMR
08-24-2009, 06:59 PM
The GM traded the best player they've had this decade for a lousy starting pitcher, a sore armed minor leaguer and a catcher who can't catch. He replaced him by signing the worst player in baseball to play CF and moved the judy hitting, but useable, CF who was already on hand to LF and installed him as a run producer. The rest of the playflex created by the removal of the decade's best player was spent on Middle Relievers when the team had a number of viable candidates for those jobs in the system. The GM completely ignored the glaring need at SS throughout the off-season and acquired no one to provide any power in the middle of the order. He went with a roster that was so thin and dependent on major improvements from so many players that any slight mis-hap sent the team into a tailspin.

The Manager encouraged the 2 core members of his pitching staff to abuse their arms by disdaining proper rest and recovery and to pitch nearly year-round in winter ball. He places players who can't get on base at the top of the order in the off chance they may be able to steal, bunt or some other normally useless play as far as scoring runs goes and refuses to remove the worst player in baseball from his line-up.

This team is now a farce due to lack of talent. The injuries have surely contributed to some of that, but, IMO, the root cause of it all is that the brain-trust of this franchise is clueless.

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

RACK HIM.

Brutus
08-24-2009, 07:09 PM
:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

RACK HIM.

Sounds like we have some clones in the house.

WMR
08-24-2009, 07:14 PM
Sounds like we have some clones in the house.

:lol:

Sometimes I can tolerate and enjoy his show, other times it's like nails on a chalkboard.

StillFunkyB
08-24-2009, 07:15 PM
Biggest reason? No way.

I voted no, but I don't think it's irrelevant.

Homer Bailey
08-24-2009, 07:33 PM
I don't think he has anything to do with that.

Everything to do with it? No. But anything to do with it? C'mon. This isn't just one big coincidence.

Homer Bailey
08-24-2009, 07:35 PM
The GM traded the best player they've had this decade for a lousy starting pitcher, a sore armed minor leaguer and a catcher who can't catch. He replaced him by signing the worst player in baseball to play CF and moved the judy hitting, but useable, CF who was already on hand to LF and installed him as a run producer. The rest of the playflex created by the removal of the decade's best player was spent on Middle Relievers when the team had a number of viable candidates for those jobs in the system. The GM completely ignored the glaring need at SS throughout the off-season and acquired no one to provide any power in the middle of the order. He went with a roster that was so thin and dependent on major improvements from so many players that any slight mis-hap sent the team into a tailspin.

The Manager encouraged the 2 core members of his pitching staff to abuse their arms by disdaining proper rest and recovery and to pitch nearly year-round in winter ball. He places players who can't get on base at the top of the order in the off chance they may be able to steal, bunt or some other normally useless play as far as scoring runs goes and refuses to remove the worst player in baseball from his line-up.

This team is now a farce due to lack of talent. The injuries have surely contributed to some of that, but, IMO, the root cause of it all is that the brain-trust of this franchise is clueless.

I've been searching for a way to describe this clueless organization, and I honestly think this is perfect.

Stormy
08-24-2009, 07:40 PM
Aside from Volquez, not even mildly. I saw how this team performed when ALL of the everyday components were healthy (aka when Votto and EdE returned, 4/5 of the rotation was intact etc...) and it was every bit as miserable as the current product.

Votto returned June 23rd, followed by EdE the next week, and the team proceeded to go on an 11-22 run between that date and August 1st. During that span we had access to virtually every regular on the team (other than Bruce which actually got Gomes bat in the lineup) , and the entire pitching staff, and they were wretched. They were designed to perform in that manner, so it's no surprise that it eventually caught up with them. Harang, Dickerson, Cueto etc... going down late were an afterthought.

Brutus
08-24-2009, 07:42 PM
Everything to do with it? No. But anything to do with it? C'mon. This isn't just one big coincidence.

Harang had an appendectomy. I know my formal medical training was limited by that one incident I had in Med school ( :cool: ), but I don't think Dusty could have caused that.

Volquez has been an injury waiting to happen. I don't think anyone is to blame but physics, but if there's any blame to be placed, I suppose the overuse in winter ball is a place that could have some fault.

Cueto averaged right around 100 pitches per start, even excluding his last two injury-shortened appearances. Not a light workload, but certainly way short of abuse (considering Zambrano and some other guys have averaged 115-120 consistently).

fargo55
08-24-2009, 07:43 PM
I agree Votto was near .400 before his setbacks, I also feel Volquez was a huge injury that sort of took its toll on the the starting staff.

I would agree, having seen Votto when he was working out with my son in the pre-season, he looked ready to be an MVP candidate. The guy works his butt off, and he deserved a great season as much as the Reds fans did.

Stormy
08-24-2009, 07:49 PM
The GM traded the best player they've had this decade for a lousy starting pitcher, a sore armed minor leaguer and a catcher who can't catch. He replaced him by signing the worst player in baseball to play CF and moved the judy hitting, but useable, CF who was already on hand to LF and installed him as a run producer. The rest of the playflex created by the removal of the decade's best player was spent on Middle Relievers when the team had a number of viable candidates for those jobs in the system. The GM completely ignored the glaring need at SS throughout the off-season and acquired no one to provide any power in the middle of the order. He went with a roster that was so thin and dependent on major improvements from so many players that any slight mis-hap sent the team into a tailspin.

The Manager encouraged the 2 core members of his pitching staff to abuse their arms by disdaining proper rest and recovery and to pitch nearly year-round in winter ball. He places players who can't get on base at the top of the order in the off chance they may be able to steal, bunt or some other normally useless play as far as scoring runs goes and refuses to remove the worst player in baseball from his line-up.

This team is now a farce due to lack of talent. The injuries have surely contributed to some of that, but, IMO, the root cause of it all is that the brain-trust of this franchise is clueless.

Great stuff. That sums it up pretty nicely. Walt's next major positive, astute move will be the first of his tenure.

mbgrayson
08-24-2009, 07:57 PM
Baeball Prospectus did an article (http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=9229)back on July 13th that went through all the teams, and discussed how much injuries had impacted each team. I can't reprint the entire article because it is paid content, but here is a "fair use' excerpt on the Reds at that time:


Team: Cincinnati Reds (8 injuries)
Days Lost: 224
Dollars Lost: $1,841,108.70
Injury Cost: $6,651,083.33
Biggest Loss (Value): Edwin Encarnacion IC= $2,899,722.22
+/- from 2008: -314 days (15 injuries)

A struggling Cincinnati offense had been without two of its important bats for much of the season. Encarnacion had been out since late April with a fractured wrist before returning from the disabled list last week, while Joey Votto missed nearly a month with dizziness and stress-related issues. The Reds have also had to make do without their best starter from a year ago in Edinson Volquez. It's hard to say that the injuries, while costly, can remain at this low a level, especially given the issues with the pitching staff and Jay Bruce's wrist.


The 'days lost' number will certainly go way up since 7/13/09, with injuries to Taveras, Cueto, Hanigan, Harang, Rolen, and Dickerson, in addition to the already known injuries to Bruce, EE, Votto, and Volquez.

It will be interesting to see what the final 'days lost' and value lost numbers are when the season ends. This is a much better way to try to quantify and compare the impact of injuries among teams, and year to year. It allows a smart fan (or owner!) to put the lie to a manager's attempt to blame a terrible season on injuries(ie: bad luck).

RedEye
08-24-2009, 08:11 PM
Injuries aren't the reason this team is losing, but the FO will claim they are in order to explain away another off-season of inactivity. Come the Winter Meetings, expect to hear Walt saying things like "We're standing pat. We think we could have been good last year if not for all the injuries."

RedsManRick
08-24-2009, 08:15 PM
What mth said...

Injuries are the reason we're in last place instead of 4th or 5th. Delusional management and insufficient talent is the reason we were never a playoff caliber team to begin with.

alloverjr
08-24-2009, 08:22 PM
What mth said...

Injuries are the reason we're in last place instead of 4th or 5th. Delusional management and insufficient talent is the reason we were never a playoff caliber team to begin with.

yep

Raisor
08-24-2009, 08:27 PM
MTH forgot one important factor.

We ticked off this guy.

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

Spring~Fields
08-24-2009, 08:43 PM
The GM traded the best player they've had this decade for a lousy starting pitcher, a sore armed minor leaguer and a catcher who can't catch. He replaced him by signing the worst player in baseball to play CF and moved the judy hitting, but useable, CF who was already on hand to LF and installed him as a run producer. The rest of the playflex created by the removal of the decade's best player was spent on Middle Relievers when the team had a number of viable candidates for those jobs in the system. The GM completely ignored the glaring need at SS throughout the off-season and acquired no one to provide any power in the middle of the order. He went with a roster that was so thin and dependent on major improvements from so many players that any slight mis-hap sent the team into a tailspin.

The Manager encouraged the 2 core members of his pitching staff to abuse their arms by disdaining proper rest and recovery and to pitch nearly year-round in winter ball. He places players who can't get on base at the top of the order in the off chance they may be able to steal, bunt or some other normally useless play as far as scoring runs goes and refuses to remove the worst player in baseball from his line-up.

This team is now a farce due to lack of talent. The injuries have surely contributed to some of that, but, IMO, the root cause of it all is that the brain-trust of this franchise is clueless.

Well said.

He did bring in Rolen though. Don't know how long the guy can play in a given season though, but I don't think he can match this other guys numbers at his age.

Scott Rolen Age 34 Salary 2009: $11,625,000
OBP SLG OPS
2005 StL .323 .383 .706
2006 StL .369 .518 .887
2007 StL .331 .398 .729
2008 Tor .349 .431 .780
2009 Tor .370 .476 .846
2009 Cin .286 .353 .639
2009 ---- .365 .470 .835

Adam Dunn Age 29 Salary 2009: $8,000,000
OBP SLG OPS
2005 Cin .387 .540 .927
2006 Cin .365 .490 .855
2007 Cin .386 .554 .940
2008 Cin .373 .528 .901
2008 Ari .417 .472 .889
2008 ---- .386 .513 .899
2009 Was .422 .586 1.008

How much do the Reds have to pay for Mr. Rolen next year?

nate
08-24-2009, 09:18 PM
Everything to do with it? No. But anything to do with it? C'mon. This isn't just one big coincidence.

I think even Art Bell would have a hard time drawing the line between Dusty Baker, the shadow people and Aaron Harang's appendix.

westofyou
08-24-2009, 09:39 PM
I think even Art Bell would have a hard time drawing the line between Dusty Baker, the shadow people and Aaron Harang's appendix.

When in doubt blame the Grey's.

Some folk's need to find a reason why bad luck happens, randomness is boring and vanilla.

TheNext44
08-24-2009, 09:55 PM
Well said.

He did bring in Rolen though. Don't know how long the guy can play in a given season though, but I don't think he can match this other guys numbers at his age.

Scott Rolen Age 34 Salary 2009: $11,625,000
OBP SLG OPS
2005 StL .323 .383 .706
2006 StL .369 .518 .887
2007 StL .331 .398 .729
2008 Tor .349 .431 .780
2009 Tor .370 .476 .846
2009 Cin .286 .353 .639
2009 ---- .365 .470 .835

Adam Dunn Age 29 Salary 2009: $8,000,000
OBP SLG OPS
2005 Cin .387 .540 .927
2006 Cin .365 .490 .855
2007 Cin .386 .554 .940
2008 Cin .373 .528 .901
2008 Ari .417 .472 .889
2008 ---- .386 .513 .899
2009 Was .422 .586 1.008

How much do the Reds have to pay for Mr. Rolen next year?

The Reds are on the hook for $2.6M for Rolen this year and next, when you factor in EE's salary and the money they received from the Jays.

And though it is close, Rolen is actually a better value than Dunn contract wise this year, when you factor in defense. (1.9 over to 1.7 over)

Always Red
08-24-2009, 09:58 PM
The GM traded the best player they've had this decade for a lousy starting pitcher, a sore armed minor leaguer and a catcher who can't catch. He replaced him by signing the worst player in baseball to play CF and moved the judy hitting, but useable, CF who was already on hand to LF and installed him as a run producer...

You had me at the very first sentence.

Just beautiful.

Sad, but beautiful.

:cry::cry:

Jpup
08-24-2009, 10:12 PM
It's certainly not Dusty's fault. Last year, it wasn't "his guys." This year it's the injuries. Injuries are a good excuse for a terrible front office, coaching staff, and minor league system.

cincrazy
08-24-2009, 11:07 PM
I think it's a very poorly built team, injuries or not. Volquez wasn't on fire before going down. Bruce wasn't hitting before getting hurt. Harang hasn't been an ace this year. It's not like the injured palyers we've lost have been huge blows. None of them really have, with the exception of Votto.

Spring~Fields
08-25-2009, 02:42 AM
I think it's a very poorly built team, injuries or not. Volquez wasn't on fire before going down. Bruce wasn't hitting before getting hurt. Harang hasn't been an ace this year. It's not like the injured palyers we've lost have been huge blows. None of them really have, with the exception of Votto.

The whole season and continued downward spiral is so surreal. I never imagined it to be this way on my worst pragmatic or pessimistic day. Each year I thought that the management would adjust and adapt along the way toward a gradual forward growth and development. It has been unbelievable.

Ron Madden
08-25-2009, 02:51 AM
Votto's injury was devastating to a team with little offense, no doubt.

I love Joey Votto and wish he could play everyday, but to tell the truth the season took a nose dive after he returned not during his absence.

Poor pitching and a weak offense is to blame, and would be to blame if everyone could have stayed healthy. This club was on course for 76 wins before the season started, and that was if everyone remained healthy and everything else went right.

JMHO

bucksfan2
08-25-2009, 08:35 AM
I love Joey Votto and wish he could play everyday, but to tell the truth the season took a nose dive after he returned not during his absence.

Poor pitching and a weak offense is to blame, and would be to blame if everyone could have stayed healthy. This club was on course for 76 wins before the season started, and that was if everyone remained healthy and everything else went right.

JMHO

I don't necessarily disagree with you. But when I went back and looked at the Reds early season time line on May 26th the Reds were 6 games over .500 and playing good baseball. It looks like that around May 6th Votto started having his problems, but didn't go on the DL, but didn't exactly play every day. At that point in the season he was playing like one of the best 1b in the game. If Votto doesn't have to miss an extended period of time, what effect does that have on the club? Are they able to extend to 10 games over .500? Do they play .500 baseball for another month and enter the all star break at 6 games over .500?

The Reds nosedive happened right around the all star break. Does that nose dive happen if the Reds are in contention? Does that nose dive happen if the team doesn't give up?

I guess my belief is that if Votto isn't forced to miss an extended period of time the Reds would have been able to push their record higher when they were playing good baseball. If they had been playing better baseball, I don't think the nosedive would have happened right around the all star break. Again is purely speculative, but IMO the Votto injury crippled the team this year, the same way a Pujols injury would cripple StL.

RANDY IN INDY
08-25-2009, 09:03 AM
I don't think anyone can say what would have happened had they not had all the injuries. You can speculate, but it is only speculation. Personally, I don't think any team has the depth to withstand the number of injuries to it's lineup and pitching that the Reds have experienced this season.

Roy Tucker
08-25-2009, 10:12 AM
Having managed a lot of projects, one rule of thumb I have is "things will always go worse than what you think".

You can hope for good luck, breakthroughs on issues, no unforeseen problems, etc etc, but the school of hard knocks has taught me they *always* happen.

And if you don't plan on them happening and have contingency plans, you are very foolish and very possibly will fail.

I think the Reds had a paper-thin barely-.500 team going into this season and all of those misfortune things that usually happen to a team during the course of the season were not planned for and caused the crash of 2009. So I voted no. The biggest reason for the failure is lack of planning by the front office.

_Sir_Charles_
08-25-2009, 10:56 AM
if you firmly believe the Reds aren't at the top of the division or in the hunt b/c of their lack of health, then I can only firmly shake my head in disbelief.

It took an injury by Taveras for The Dusty to not write his name on the lineup card. Pretty sure it was an injury to Hernndez that netted Hanigan some much deserved more playing time. It took an injury to get rid of Lincoln.

So, if anything, injuries have actually helped us and made us better at some positions.

I said that injuries had a huge impact. Not that they were the ONLY impact. We had several players slump for extended periods of time. Worse than anyone ever expected. That included Taveras, Bruce, Encarnacion, Gonzales, etc. I'm not insinuating that these guys are great players (although I think Jay WILL become one), but rather that they played unexpectedly worse than imagined.

Taveras played very well the first quarter of the year or so. I know he's had some nagging hammy injuries, but I seriously don't think that had anything to do with his horrible performance. His lack of running is the big thing that stunned me this season.

Lincoln...well, I was against the Lincoln (and Weathers) signings in the spring. So losing him really didn't affect us. Him being healthy and pitching...well, who knows what would've happened with him. He was quite good last year for a long stretch...but I personally think it was smoke & mirrors, much like Weathers.

As for Hernandez, he started off poorly in regards to results. But I don't think anybody was more snakebit than Ramon early in the season. He was smoking the ball, but right at guys. His play when Joey went down was fantastic, so him going down I think WAS a hinderance. Hanigan is slowing down dramatically now due to overwork...yet another reason we miss Ramon.

OnBaseMachine
08-25-2009, 11:14 AM
I think injuries are what kept the team from having a reasonable .500 record. They are not what kept the team from winning the central.

I agree with this.

flyer85
08-25-2009, 11:14 AM
a dearth of talent is the real issue.

Highlifeman21
08-25-2009, 11:42 AM
I said that injuries had a huge impact. Not that they were the ONLY impact. We had several players slump for extended periods of time. Worse than anyone ever expected. That included Taveras, Bruce, Encarnacion, Gonzales, etc. I'm not insinuating that these guys are great players (although I think Jay WILL become one), but rather that they played unexpectedly worse than imagined.

Taveras played very well the first quarter of the year or so. I know he's had some nagging hammy injuries, but I seriously don't think that had anything to do with his horrible performance. His lack of running is the big thing that stunned me this season.

Lincoln...well, I was against the Lincoln (and Weathers) signings in the spring. So losing him really didn't affect us. Him being healthy and pitching...well, who knows what would've happened with him. He was quite good last year for a long stretch...but I personally think it was smoke & mirrors, much like Weathers.

As for Hernandez, he started off poorly in regards to results. But I don't think anybody was more snakebit than Ramon early in the season. He was smoking the ball, but right at guys. His play when Joey went down was fantastic, so him going down I think WAS a hinderance. Hanigan is slowing down dramatically now due to overwork...yet another reason we miss Ramon.

The players that slumped weren't very good in the first place (although the jury is certainly still out on Bruce, and I'd rather just forget about EE since he just never fully put it together as a Red).

So, bad players slumping and putting up numbers less than their already sub-par career norms is the product of a pathetic FO putting a crappy product on the field.

Like I said, injuries actually helped this team, b/c it got some of our crappy regulars off the field, so we can get an extended look at what we've got (or probably in our case don't got) throughout the rest of our organization.

So, what have we learned?

The Reds severely lack depth, as well as severely lack talented players in general.

Combine that with slumps and injuries, and that's how teams lose 100 games.

savafan
08-25-2009, 12:29 PM
The GM traded the best player they've had this decade for a lousy starting pitcher, a sore armed minor leaguer and a catcher who can't catch. He replaced him by signing the worst player in baseball to play CF and moved the judy hitting, but useable, CF who was already on hand to LF and installed him as a run producer. The rest of the playflex created by the removal of the decade's best player was spent on Middle Relievers when the team had a number of viable candidates for those jobs in the system. The GM completely ignored the glaring need at SS throughout the off-season and acquired no one to provide any power in the middle of the order. He went with a roster that was so thin and dependent on major improvements from so many players that any slight mis-hap sent the team into a tailspin.

The Manager encouraged the 2 core members of his pitching staff to abuse their arms by disdaining proper rest and recovery and to pitch nearly year-round in winter ball. He places players who can't get on base at the top of the order in the off chance they may be able to steal, bunt or some other normally useless play as far as scoring runs goes and refuses to remove the worst player in baseball from his line-up.

This team is now a farce due to lack of talent. The injuries have surely contributed to some of that, but, IMO, the root cause of it all is that the brain-trust of this franchise is clueless.

That pretty much says it all right there.

Scrap Irony
08-25-2009, 01:03 PM
The players that slumped weren't very good in the first place (although the jury is certainly still out on Bruce, and I'd rather just forget about EE since he just never fully put it together as a Red).

So, bad players slumping and putting up numbers less than their already sub-par career norms is the product of a pathetic FO putting a crappy product on the field.

Like I said, injuries actually helped this team, b/c it got some of our crappy regulars off the field, so we can get an extended look at what we've got (or probably in our case don't got) throughout the rest of our organization.

So, what have we learned?

The Reds severely lack depth, as well as severely lack talented players in general.

Combine that with slumps and injuries, and that's how teams lose 100 games.


While it's certainly true that poor players had poor years, so too did good players. Only Joey Votto and perhaps Ryan Hanigan has had a suprisingly effective 2009 offensively. Everyone else took at least a small step backward. Two (Encarnacion and Bruce) were expected to help carry the team; instead, they helped carry it to the bottom of the standings.

That said, this team, as contructed, had little chance for error. The injuries took care of any chance at competing. With normal injuries, this is probably a .500 team or so. (This is a weak NL Central, so I'd probably go with .500 or a game or two over.)

For 2010, it looks like more of the same (assuming payroll restrictions are legit).

Yeah.

_Sir_Charles_
08-25-2009, 03:26 PM
The players that slumped weren't very good in the first place (although the jury is certainly still out on Bruce, and I'd rather just forget about EE since he just never fully put it together as a Red).

So, bad players slumping and putting up numbers less than their already sub-par career norms is the product of a pathetic FO putting a crappy product on the field.

Like I said, injuries actually helped this team, b/c it got some of our crappy regulars off the field, so we can get an extended look at what we've got (or probably in our case don't got) throughout the rest of our organization.

So, what have we learned?

The Reds severely lack depth, as well as severely lack talented players in general.

Combine that with slumps and injuries, and that's how teams lose 100 games.

Well, it's fairly obvious that we're not going to agree on this one. We've got talent on this club. It's just that the majority of it is YOUNG talent. That'll take time to develop on the big stage.

I don't think anybody expected Bruce to hit for such a paltry average (most especially Jay himself). Give him a more expected output and it changes things on offense. Same goes for Joey being out for such an extended period of time (and even when he was here, he wasn't FULLY here mentally I'd say). Edwin, while I've never been a fan of his, I think most here fully expected him to at least match his production from last year. Those 3 things alone would put this team close to .500 if not at it. Toss in some healthy starters and now it's a ballgame.

Did I think we would win the division? No. But if were healthy, I thought we had a solid shot at competing for the wild card. I also never thought St. Louis would get the guys they added or that thier starting pitching would hold up anywhere CLOSE to it has. But I digress. I expected improvement this season. Nothing more and nothing less. Had the injuries not occurred...I think we would've seen just that. Improvement.

As for depth, we may not have it at certain positions, but I'd say this club has plenty of depth. And solid depth at that. I just don't think it's reasonable to expect ANY MLB club to supply enough high-quality depth to replace 70-80% of your entire starting roster. And that's nearly what we've had to do this season. Other than the bullpen, this club has been a walking MASH unit all season long. I personally am going to cut them a little slack for THIS season.

dfs
08-25-2009, 03:52 PM
The GM traded the best player they've had this decade for a lousy starting pitcher, a sore armed minor leaguer and a catcher who can't catch. He replaced him by signing the worst player in baseball to play CF and moved the judy hitting, but useable, CF who was already on hand to LF and installed him as a run producer. The rest of the playflex created by the removal of the decade's best player was spent on Middle Relievers when the team had a number of viable candidates for those jobs in the system. The GM completely ignored the glaring need at SS throughout the off-season and acquired no one to provide any power in the middle of the order. He went with a roster that was so thin and dependent on major improvements from so many players that any slight mis-hap sent the team into a tailspin.

The Manager encouraged the 2 core members of his pitching staff to abuse their arms by disdaining proper rest and recovery and to pitch nearly year-round in winter ball. He places players who can't get on base at the top of the order in the off chance they may be able to steal, bunt or some other normally useless play as far as scoring runs goes and refuses to remove the worst player in baseball from his line-up.

This team is now a farce due to lack of talent. The injuries have surely contributed to some of that, but, IMO, the root cause of it all is that the brain-trust of this franchise is clueless.

It's always a pleasure to read my thought coming out of somebody else's keyboard.

cincrazy
08-25-2009, 03:56 PM
While it's certainly true that poor players had poor years, so too did good players. Only Joey Votto and perhaps Ryan Hanigan has had a suprisingly effective 2009 offensively. Everyone else took at least a small step backward. Two (Encarnacion and Bruce) were expected to help carry the team; instead, they helped carry it to the bottom of the standings.

That said, this team, as contructed, had little chance for error. The injuries took care of any chance at competing. With normal injuries, this is probably a .500 team or so. (This is a weak NL Central, so I'd probably go with .500 or a game or two over.)

For 2010, it looks like more of the same (assuming payroll restrictions are legit).

Yeah.

The bolded part above is poor planning. Edwin had never shown throughout his career that he was capable of helping carry a club offensively, and Bruce is a young pup who should be counted on to hit about 7th in the lineup and that's it.

Realistically, he should probably just now be making his ML debut. But the Reds suck. And when you suck you rush top prospects to get an uptick in ticket sales.

Same old recipe for disaster.

Highlifeman21
08-25-2009, 04:28 PM
Well, it's fairly obvious that we're not going to agree on this one. We've got talent on this club. It's just that the majority of it is YOUNG talent. That'll take time to develop on the big stage.

I don't think anybody expected Bruce to hit for such a paltry average (most especially Jay himself). Give him a more expected output and it changes things on offense. Same goes for Joey being out for such an extended period of time (and even when he was here, he wasn't FULLY here mentally I'd say). Edwin, while I've never been a fan of his, I think most here fully expected him to at least match his production from last year. Those 3 things alone would put this team close to .500 if not at it. Toss in some healthy starters and now it's a ballgame.

Did I think we would win the division? No. But if were healthy, I thought we had a solid shot at competing for the wild card. I also never thought St. Louis would get the guys they added or that thier starting pitching would hold up anywhere CLOSE to it has. But I digress. I expected improvement this season. Nothing more and nothing less. Had the injuries not occurred...I think we would've seen just that. Improvement.

As for depth, we may not have it at certain positions, but I'd say this club has plenty of depth. And solid depth at that. I just don't think it's reasonable to expect ANY MLB club to supply enough high-quality depth to replace 70-80% of your entire starting roster. And that's nearly what we've had to do this season. Other than the bullpen, this club has been a walking MASH unit all season long. I personally am going to cut them a little slack for THIS season.

You really think this team has young talent? Alonso's about the only thing remotely resembling someone that'll have a significant positive impact on our 25 man roster. I don't see the question marks we have in the minors magically figuring it out on the big stage and turning into something of which they're not projected.

Are you going to cut this team slack next year when they struggle to sniff .500?

Bottomline, this team just lack talent and depth, and until we start to address either of those, The Lost Decade's going to turn into The Lost Decades.

Hoping kids in our minor leagues develop into something they don't currently project seems like a losing proposition, and not actively doing anything to address the 25 man roster seems like just putting up the white flag.

I want the Reds to be better. I refuse to believe that all our problems will be solved by unproven kids in our minors.

Scrap Irony
08-25-2009, 04:44 PM
The bolded part above is poor planning. Edwin had never shown throughout his career that he was capable of helping carry a club offensively, and Bruce is a young pup who should be counted on to hit about 7th in the lineup and that's it.

Hindsight. By the end of 2008, EdE looked like a middle of the order bat just entering his prime years. Most figured an 850 OPS bat and almost all had him around 100 OPS+ at worst.

I don't think that was poor planning; I think that was a poor year. No one should have looked at his past offensive performance and had another plan in place just in case.

Bruce is much the same. He hit well last season in his first time through the league. The prognosticators around the league foresaw good things in his immediate future. I don't know anyone that would have seen his struggles this year, nor any team that would have had a better plan in place than Gomes, Nix, and other AAAA minor league free agents.

No, these two aren't on Jocketty. They're on the respective player (and subsequent injuries suffered).

Rojo
08-25-2009, 05:18 PM
I don't think anyone can say what would have happened had they not had all the injuries. You can speculate, but it is only speculation. Personally, I don't think any team has the depth to withstand the number of injuries to it's lineup and pitching that the Reds have experienced this season.

Of their starting eight, seven went on the DL this season: Tavaras, Dickerson, Hernandez, Votto, Gonzalez, Encarnacion and Bruce.

Of their starting rotation, four went on the DL: Volquez, Cueto, Owings and Harang.

Their bullpen's been largely healthy and, voila, pretty good.

Yeah, injuries are an excuse --- a damn good one.

_Sir_Charles_
08-25-2009, 05:50 PM
You really think this team has young talent? Alonso's about the only thing remotely resembling someone that'll have a significant positive impact on our 25 man roster. I don't see the question marks we have in the minors magically figuring it out on the big stage and turning into something of which they're not projected.

Yes, I do. Frazier, Cozart, Alonso, Heisey, Francisco, Valiaka, Stubbs, Soto, Rodriquez & Duran among others in regards to the position players. I can EASILY see half of those guys making contributions as early as next year (some with this years' sept. callups). Pitching-wise we've got some live arms too. I was pretty upset with the Rolen deal as I felt we gave away WAAAAAY too much for a aging player with a ton of injury history, but that's over and done with so I'd rather look at what we still DO have. Bailey has shown great strides this year. Sure, he'll still have that one bad inning occasionally that inflates his ERA, but overall he's looked VERY solid and I see him as a top of the rotation kind of pitcher in the next 2 or 3 years. We're still young with Cueto & Edinson, and several other starters look quite promising either for the Reds or as trade bait (Maloney).

I guess I just don't know what you're looking for in regards to young talent. If you're expecting everyone to have the tools like Alonso at the dish...you're begging to be disappointed. Overall, the farm system is the best I've seen it in a LONG time (other than right when Cueto/Bruce/Votto were coming up).


Are you going to cut this team slack next year when they struggle to sniff .500?

You're assuming that this is going to be the case. I don't. If they're around .500 next year and they've still short-handed (due to injuries), then sure. As long as the team as a whole is moving in the right direction...or at least attempting to do so. Yeah. I'll cut 'em some slack. But if they deal off a bunch of young kids for aging vets like Rolen...I'll be on them pretty quick.


Hoping kids in our minor leagues develop into something they don't currently project seems like a losing proposition, and not actively doing anything to address the 25 man roster seems like just putting up the white flag.

I want the Reds to be better. I refuse to believe that all our problems will be solved by unproven kids in our minors.

Well, I certainly don't see the ownership doubling the payroll, so a small market club like the Reds simply HAVE to develop from within. The past 5 years or so has seen a marked improvement in that area. It hasn't paid off yet. But it's starting to. 10-15 years of mismanagement of the farm system crippled this club for a long time. I hope Jocketty doesn't do what i fear he may do. Sell the farm for immediate short-term help. Some of that is fine, but you've got to keep the young and old somewhat balanced. I haven't seen him do that in the past. And I haven't seen him do much of anything since he's come to the Reds.

cincrazy
08-25-2009, 05:59 PM
Hindsight. By the end of 2008, EdE looked like a middle of the order bat just entering his prime years. Most figured an 850 OPS bat and almost all had him around 100 OPS+ at worst.

I don't think that was poor planning; I think that was a poor year. No one should have looked at his past offensive performance and had another plan in place just in case.

Bruce is much the same. He hit well last season in his first time through the league. The prognosticators around the league foresaw good things in his immediate future. I don't know anyone that would have seen his struggles this year, nor any team that would have had a better plan in place than Gomes, Nix, and other AAAA minor league free agents.

No, these two aren't on Jocketty. They're on the respective player (and subsequent injuries suffered).

I disagree with you. Bruce tore up the league for two weeks last year upon his arrival, and the rest of the season was clearly and adjustment period. Anyone that thought he was going to hit .300 with 30 HR's was severely mistaken.

And if I can see that Edwin Encarnacion is not a "middle of the order bat," then our GM with the world championship ring on his finger should see the same. Edwin, at times, was an above average hitter. But a middle of the order bat? Not even remotely close.

cincrazy
08-25-2009, 06:00 PM
Yes, I do. Frazier, Cozart, Alonso, Heisey, Francisco, Valiaka, Stubbs, Soto, Rodriquez & Duran among others in regards to the position players. I can EASILY see half of those guys making contributions as early as next year (some with this years' sept. callups). Pitching-wise we've got some live arms too. I was pretty upset with the Rolen deal as I felt we gave away WAAAAAY too much for a aging player with a ton of injury history, but that's over and done with so I'd rather look at what we still DO have. Bailey has shown great strides this year. Sure, he'll still have that one bad inning occasionally that inflates his ERA, but overall he's looked VERY solid and I see him as a top of the rotation kind of pitcher in the next 2 or 3 years. We're still young with Cueto & Edinson, and several other starters look quite promising either for the Reds or as trade bait (Maloney).

I guess I just don't know what you're looking for in regards to young talent. If you're expecting everyone to have the tools like Alonso at the dish...you're begging to be disappointed. Overall, the farm system is the best I've seen it in a LONG time (other than right when Cueto/Bruce/Votto were coming up).



You're assuming that this is going to be the case. I don't. If they're around .500 next year and they've still short-handed (due to injuries), then sure. As long as the team as a whole is moving in the right direction...or at least attempting to do so. Yeah. I'll cut 'em some slack. But if they deal off a bunch of young kids for aging vets like Rolen...I'll be on them pretty quick.



Well, I certainly don't see the ownership doubling the payroll, so a small market club like the Reds simply HAVE to develop from within. The past 5 years or so has seen a marked improvement in that area. It hasn't paid off yet. But it's starting to. 10-15 years of mismanagement of the farm system crippled this club for a long time. I hope Jocketty doesn't do what i fear he may do. Sell the farm for immediate short-term help. Some of that is fine, but you've got to keep the young and old somewhat balanced. I haven't seen him do that in the past. And I haven't seen him do much of anything since he's come to the Reds.

The farm system has looked so good lately because it was so historically bad for so long, as you mentioned in your post. The farm system right now is average. It's not horrible, but it isn't filled with kids that are going to come up and make an immediate impact. When you're a franchise like the Reds, that's what you need. And they don't have it.

A few of these guys might hit. But most of them will miss by a mile, and most of the holes that are on this team in 2009 will still be there a few years down the road.

Scrap Irony
08-25-2009, 06:38 PM
I disagree with you. Bruce tore up the league for two weeks last year upon his arrival, and the rest of the season was clearly and adjustment period. Anyone that thought he was going to hit .300 with 30 HR's was severely mistaken.

And if I can see that Edwin Encarnacion is not a "middle of the order bat," then our GM with the world championship ring on his finger should see the same. Edwin, at times, was an above average hitter. But a middle of the order bat? Not even remotely close.

I didn't say Bruce was going to go for .300 and 30. But virtually all of Redszone and a good number of experts across the game thought he'd be much better than he was. ZiPS said .256 and 26. Aggregate OPS of the three forecasters had him at an 800 OPS+, with an outside shot at 850.

ZiPS also forecast Encarnacion's OPS at an 800 OPS, with a good chance at improving to mid-850's.

It wasn't just me, Dude. Almost everyone thought both Bruce and EdE would hit. They didn't.

ochre
08-25-2009, 06:49 PM
I don't necessarily disagree with you. But when I went back and looked at the Reds early season time line on May 26th the Reds were 6 games over .500 and playing good baseball. It looks like that around May 6th Votto started having his problems, but didn't go on the DL, but didn't exactly play every day. At that point in the season he was playing like one of the best 1b in the game. If Votto doesn't have to miss an extended period of time, what effect does that have on the club? Are they able to extend to 10 games over .500? Do they play .500 baseball for another month and enter the all star break at 6 games over .500?

The Reds nosedive happened right around the all star break. Does that nose dive happen if the Reds are in contention? Does that nose dive happen if the team doesn't give up?

I guess my belief is that if Votto isn't forced to miss an extended period of time the Reds would have been able to push their record higher when they were playing good baseball. If they had been playing better baseball, I don't think the nosedive would have happened right around the all star break. Again is purely speculative, but IMO the Votto injury crippled the team this year, the same way a Pujols injury would cripple StL.
Through May 26, the Reds had played 45 games. In 14 of those games they played against teams that are currently over .500. That means that the other 31 games were against teams that have played/are playing losing baseball this season.

From May 27 through July 12, they played 42 games. 20 of those games were against teams that are currently above .500.


May 26 record: 25-20
July 12 record: 42-45
I believe that means they went 17-25 (.405) over those 42 games with nearly half of those games being against teams that are currently >.500.

Granted, those >.500 teams might have slightly inflated win % if the Reds were truly impacted by the loss of Votto and others, but in general, I think the schedule got a bit tougher around that time, which would be a fairly significant factor in the Reds diminishing record in this period.

ochre
08-25-2009, 06:57 PM
From another angle, any team that goes into the season counting on a pitcher to be one of their top bats off the bench, probably isn't built for the long haul.

cincrazy
08-25-2009, 07:03 PM
I didn't say Bruce was going to go for .300 and 30. But virtually all of Redszone and a good number of experts across the game thought he'd be much better than he was. ZiPS said .256 and 26. Aggregate OPS of the three forecasters had him at an 800 OPS+, with an outside shot at 850.

ZiPS also forecast Encarnacion's OPS at an 800 OPS, with a good chance at improving to mid-850's.

It wasn't just me, Dude. Almost everyone thought both Bruce and EdE would hit. They didn't.

I'm definitely not trying to single you out, so my apologies if that's how you felt. And you're right, most did expect Bruce and Edwin to contribute a ton, and that's why this team stinks right now. No, nobody was saying Bruce would hit .300 with 30 HR's, but if this team was going to compete, that's what it needed. It didn't need a .250 average from him, it needed a breakout year. And that was a mistake on the Reds part, to put so much into him.

And Edwin... the argument has been tossed back and forth a thousand times, I'd rather not get into it. Some of us expected big things from him, a breakout year, and some of us expected him to play below expectations (although not THAT bad).

GAC
08-25-2009, 07:29 PM
All I know is that we're all getting together this weekend in Cincy for two games and it looks like we're gonna be watching the Riverbats! :D

cincrazy
08-25-2009, 08:01 PM
All I know is that we're all getting together this weekend in Cincy for two games and it looks like we're gonna be watching the Riverbats! :D

I wish. At least the Bats are in first place :).

Highlifeman21
08-25-2009, 08:27 PM
Yes, I do. Frazier, Cozart, Alonso, Heisey, Francisco, Valiaka, Stubbs, Soto, Rodriquez & Duran among others in regards to the position players. I can EASILY see half of those guys making contributions as early as next year (some with this years' sept. callups). Pitching-wise we've got some live arms too. I was pretty upset with the Rolen deal as I felt we gave away WAAAAAY too much for a aging player with a ton of injury history, but that's over and done with so I'd rather look at what we still DO have. Bailey has shown great strides this year. Sure, he'll still have that one bad inning occasionally that inflates his ERA, but overall he's looked VERY solid and I see him as a top of the rotation kind of pitcher in the next 2 or 3 years. We're still young with Cueto & Edinson, and several other starters look quite promising either for the Reds or as trade bait (Maloney).

I guess I just don't know what you're looking for in regards to young talent. If you're expecting everyone to have the tools like Alonso at the dish...you're begging to be disappointed. Overall, the farm system is the best I've seen it in a LONG time (other than right when Cueto/Bruce/Votto were coming up).



You're assuming that this is going to be the case. I don't. If they're around .500 next year and they've still short-handed (due to injuries), then sure. As long as the team as a whole is moving in the right direction...or at least attempting to do so. Yeah. I'll cut 'em some slack. But if they deal off a bunch of young kids for aging vets like Rolen...I'll be on them pretty quick.



Well, I certainly don't see the ownership doubling the payroll, so a small market club like the Reds simply HAVE to develop from within. The past 5 years or so has seen a marked improvement in that area. It hasn't paid off yet. But it's starting to. 10-15 years of mismanagement of the farm system crippled this club for a long time. I hope Jocketty doesn't do what i fear he may do. Sell the farm for immediate short-term help. Some of that is fine, but you've got to keep the young and old somewhat balanced. I haven't seen him do that in the past. And I haven't seen him do much of anything since he's come to the Reds.

If I drank the same kool-aid as you, then I'd have some optimism about our farm.

But I don't, therefore I don't.

As cincrazy pointed out, when the farm's sucked something awful for so long, and then you produce a couple of impact players in a short time, all of a sudden you think all of the kids can turn out to be impact players.

The problem is, not all of them will, and for the Reds current "sit and wait" plan to come to fruition we need all of those kids you listed to be impact players.

Again, not all of them will be an impact player. Of the 10 position players you rattled off, maybe, and I mean maybe, 2 of them will become an impact player. Unfortunately, we need at least 6 of those 10 to become impact players for the Reds.

So, pardon me if I'm skeptically pessimistic about the state of our farm.

KronoRed
08-26-2009, 12:05 PM
Nope, injuries are why this team might finish last, they are bad even at full strength

BRM
08-26-2009, 12:06 PM
Nope, injuries are why this team might finish last, they are bad even at full strength

Injuries took them from 4th place to last.

dfs
08-26-2009, 12:13 PM
Frazier, Cozart, Alonso, Heisey, Francisco, Valiaka, Stubbs, Soto, Rodriquez & Duran among others in regards to the position players. I can EASILY see half of those guys making contributions as early as next year (some with this years' sept. callups)

wow. No offense intended, but I'll have whatever Sir_C is drinking.

I don't mean none of them will ever be major league players, but there's no way five of those guys will be contributing to the major league roster next year.

The only two of those guys that I can see making a significant contribution to next year's team are Stubbs and Francisco, and I don't think Francisco is very likely. Maybe one of the other guys will surprise me, but counting on any of those guys but Stubbs seems absurd.

REDREAD
08-28-2009, 11:40 AM
I think injuries are what kept the team from having a reasonable .500 record. They are not what kept the team from winning the central.

That's my opinion too. If this team was healthy, they had a shot at 500.
By my definition, 500 is not terrible.

Mario-Rijo
08-28-2009, 03:31 PM
That's my opinion too. If this team was healthy, they had a shot at 500.
By my definition, 500 is not terrible.

I agree with that. And if Bruce had broke out they had a real chance to compete for a playoff spot and then luck, timing and other things can take off from there. But the injuries for sure made us "terrible".