PDA

View Full Version : The definitive Jay Bruce thread



Pages : 1 2 3 [4] 5

Tommyjohn25
09-02-2010, 10:49 AM
Please...calm down. Please?

medford
09-02-2010, 10:57 AM
I don't know if its been mentioned here, or got lost in the shuffle, but on the TV broadcast, either Tom or the Creeper indicated that they expect Bruce to miss Friday's game (lefty vs lefty) but be ready to go saturday, made it sound like it it wasn't Garcia going on Friday night, Bruce would be going friday as well.

membengal
09-02-2010, 10:57 AM
Sounds like a good plan from the Reds. Give Jay an extra day, and he's available to pinch hit if need be.

medford
09-02-2010, 12:01 PM
Sounds like a good plan from the Reds. Give Jay an extra day, and he's available to pinch hit if need be.

Its been Dusty's MO since at least he took over here. Get a guy healthy enough to play, then give them an extra day or 2 just to be sure. A lot of people freaked when he didn't play yesterday (or at least some people anyways) but no one should have been surprised that Bruce wasn't in the game. However, with that said, hopefully what Tom & Chris said last night was/is true and not just a smoke screen from the Reds.

VR
09-02-2010, 12:09 PM
I don't know if its been mentioned here, or got lost in the shuffle, but on the TV broadcast, either Tom or the Creeper indicated that they expect Bruce to miss Friday's game (lefty vs lefty) but be ready to go saturday, made it sound like it it wasn't Garcia going on Friday night, Bruce would be going friday as well.

No need to rush him. It's an 8 game lead. :cool:

Chip R
09-02-2010, 12:12 PM
Please...calm down. Please?


http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_B1yu82jZSVs/Su4yi_Q77xI/AAAAAAAANUE/xMfuCZKpI50/s400/animal-house-remain_calm1.jpg

OnBaseMachine
09-04-2010, 03:43 PM
From John Fay:

Baker said Bruce probably won't play tomorrow either. #Reds are looking at adding an outfielder. Sappelt is a possibility.

http://twitter.com/johnfayman

It sucks that Wladimir Balentien got injured. He was tearing it up and would have been the obvious guy to call up. Danny Dorn is another possibility. He's hitting .307 with a .961 OPS in Louisville.

Ghosts of 1990
09-04-2010, 04:56 PM
So in the end, I wasn't exactly wrong. Bruce is hurt worse then the Reds are letting on and it's anyone's guess as to when or if he'll be back at all.

fearofpopvol1
09-04-2010, 05:03 PM
So in the end, I wasn't exactly wrong. Bruce is hurt worse then the Reds are letting on and it's anyone's guess as to when or if he'll be back at all.

This has always been the Reds MO. Nothing new. They wouldn't be looking to call up another outfielder if Bruce was going to be ready to go on Monday.

Ghosts of 1990
09-04-2010, 05:06 PM
This has always been the Reds MO. Nothing new. They wouldn't be looking to call up another outfielder if Bruce was going to be ready to go on Monday.

Every day it's been "He's fine. He'll be ready to go tomorrow. He'll be able to play tomorrow." In fact the night that he say out first, Bruce told CTR that it was nothing.

Raisor
09-04-2010, 05:09 PM
Every day it's been "He's fine. He'll be ready to go tomorrow. He'll be able to play tomorrow." In fact the night that he say out first, Bruce told CTR that it was nothing.

I think you should start picketing Great American Ballpark demanding an apology

westofyou
09-04-2010, 05:29 PM
MLB owes us nothing concerning injuries, players are made out of flesh just like the rest of us, expect the grey areas more often than not... the surprise that Bruce hasn't appeared since the roster expanded and the Reds lead leaped over 5 games is probably a tad dramatic, I tend to think they feel comfortable enough to let him heal due to the current situation.

cincrazy
09-04-2010, 08:24 PM
So in the end, I wasn't exactly wrong. Bruce is hurt worse then the Reds are letting on and it's anyone's guess as to when or if he'll be back at all.

It said "probably" won't play tomorrow. Even with Bruce available, we still need another outfielder on this roster. With an 8 game lead, there's no reason for the Reds to not give Bruce all the time in the world. Especially because these injuries tend to linger. I remember Pujols had a similar problem not too long ago.

Ghosts of 1990
09-04-2010, 09:25 PM
So realistically when can we expect
him back? A few weeks?

Caveat Emperor
09-04-2010, 09:27 PM
So realistically when can we expect
him back? A few weeks?

I'd be shocked if it goes longer than a few more days.

RFS62
09-04-2010, 09:31 PM
So realistically when can we expect
him back? A few weeks?



I'd say they'll bring him back exactly when he's ready. And not a moment before.

It's not like we have to sprint to the finish. We need to get ourselves healthy.

I don't mean let up. I mean let the utility players get some at bats and the regulars rest as much as possible.

bucksfan2
09-04-2010, 09:40 PM
So realistically when can we expect
him back? A few weeks?

2011

TheNext44
09-04-2010, 09:44 PM
If the Cards were a few games back going into this series, I can guarantee that Bruce would have played in every game.

His not playing had nearly everything to do with the Reds' eight game lead, and very little to do with his ability to play.

edabbs44
09-04-2010, 09:51 PM
I'd say they'll bring him back exactly when he's ready. And not a moment before.

It's not like we have to sprint to the finish. We need to get ourselves healthy.

I don't mean let up. I mean let the utility players get some at bats and the regulars rest as much as possible.

Yep, I think he should come back exactly one day after he becomes 100%. Teams with 8 game leads don't need to risk anything.

Chip R
09-04-2010, 11:04 PM
So realistically when can we expect
him back? A few weeks?

Take it easy, Champ. Why don't you sit this next one out, stop talking for a while.

OnBaseMachine
09-05-2010, 02:17 PM
From Mark Sheldon:


*Jay Bruce is improving from his sore right side injury, but he likely won't be available through Monday's game vs. the Rockies. When Bruce can return remains unknown. Because they're so thin in the outfield, Miguel Cairo has been taking fly balls in both left and right field. Cairo has 68 career games logged in the outfield over 15 seasons but none since 2008.

http://marksheldon.mlblogs.com/archives/2010/09/sundays_rubber_game.html

Mario-Rijo
09-05-2010, 03:43 PM
So realistically when can we expect
him back? A few weeks?

Seriously what difference does it make, it is what it is. I know you keep re-iterating it because it frustrates you (it frustrates alot of us) but it also frustrates the rest of us to hear you complain about something no one has any control over. We know your stance so if you must continue to write about it so as to get it off your chest just send it to me in a PM and I'll just delete it daily.

Ghosts of 1990
09-06-2010, 05:58 PM
http://cincinnati.com/blogs/reds/2010/09/06/notes-on-bruce-cueto-bailey


Tomorrow is a big day for Jay Bruce.

He wont be in the lineup but he will swing the bat.

Weve been trying to get him functional with everything but hitting, trainer Paul Lessard said. Hes done well with everything else. Tomorrow is graduation day.

If Bruce is OK swinging the bat, theres a possibility that he will be in the lineup Wednesday against the Rockies.

jojo
09-06-2010, 06:48 PM
Seriously what difference does it make, it is what it is. I know you keep re-iterating it because it frustrates you (it frustrates alot of us) but it also frustrates the rest of us to hear you complain about something no one has any control over. We know your stance so if you must continue to write about it so as to get it off your chest just send it to me in a PM and I'll just delete it daily.

Why not suggest the peanut gallery? There could be a battle royale with dueling posts to decide if it's Bruce or Homer that will cost the Reds the pennant... :cool:

Mario-Rijo
09-06-2010, 07:16 PM
Why not suggest the peanut gallery? There could be a battle royale with dueling posts to decide if it's Bruce or Homer that will cost the Reds the pennant... :cool:

That would suffice as well.

SirFelixCat
09-06-2010, 07:53 PM
Was at the game today and posted this about Bruce, "At the ballpark. Bruce shagging flies and looks to be moving well. I asked him if he planned on playing this series and he said, "I'm not sure, but we will see. Soon I hope". Also he did NOT take bp w/ the team."

The Operator
09-06-2010, 07:53 PM
Has John Fay ever heard of quotation marks?

Ghosts of 1990
09-06-2010, 08:35 PM
Was at the game today and posted this about Bruce, "At the ballpark. Bruce shagging flies and looks to be moving well. I asked him if he planned on playing this series and he said, "I'm not sure, but we will see. Soon I hope". Also he did NOT take bp w/ the team."

Thanks for the post. I'd settle for next series or the series in a week for that matter. I have a feeling he will test it out tomorrow and be shut down for the year. Just a gut feeling. This whole thing is too odd.

corkedbat
09-06-2010, 10:08 PM
Has John Fay ever heard of quotation marks?

He's a "jurnelist" (sic), what use would he have for quotation marks? :D

bucksfan2
09-06-2010, 10:09 PM
Thanks for the post. I'd settle for next series or the series in a week for that matter. I have a feeling he will test it out tomorrow and be shut down for the year. Just a gut feeling. This whole thing is too odd.

I think you should refrain from posting about Jay Bruce. They have hit a new level of rediculous.

sivman17
09-07-2010, 06:21 PM
http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20100906/SPT04/309060036/1071/SPT04/Chapman-not-down-after-first-hits-run

Today is supposed to be a big day for Bruce. He's swinging today, and could even possibly be in the lineup tomorrow. The thing that bugs me about this is that they aren't calling it an oblique stain, but simply a "muscle problem."

That's quite a diagnosis. Of all the medical books I've read I've never come across an injury simply called a "muscle problem." Kind of makes me hope they don't rush him back tomorrow if they don't even know what to call it.

BRM
09-07-2010, 06:34 PM
Per Fay:


Bruce took about 50 swings today off T. Felt fine will take BP tomorrow. "Biggest thing is how I bounce back.

Always Red
09-07-2010, 06:38 PM
http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20100906/SPT04/309060036/1071/SPT04/Chapman-not-down-after-first-hits-run

Today is supposed to be a big day for Bruce. He's swinging today, and could even possibly be in the lineup tomorrow. The thing that bugs me out this is that they aren't calling it an oblique stain, but simply a "muscle problem."

That's quite a diagnosis. Of all the medical books I've read I've never come across an injury simply called a "muscle problem." Kind of makes me hope they don't rush him back tomorrow if they don't even know what to call it.

The diagnosis that you are hearing about is not the diagnosis the Reds are hearing.

Professional sports teams have never liked to divulge their player's injuries, and HIPAA privacy laws make it easier for them to be vague or simply not discuss the issue.

reds44
09-07-2010, 06:40 PM
I really don't get why we are playing with 3 outfielders when we have expanded rosters. It makes no sense.

SirFelixCat
09-07-2010, 06:42 PM
Per Fay:

Oh please let him be ok and in the lineup tomorrow!:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

kaldaniels
09-07-2010, 06:44 PM
I really don't get why we are playing with 3 outfielders when we have expanded rosters. It makes no sense.

I don't get why Bruce is swinging the bat when Ghostsof1990 has him out for the year. :confused:

westofyou
09-07-2010, 06:46 PM
I think you should refrain from posting about Jay Bruce. They have hit a new level of rediculous.

I'm hoping Joey shows up in the hospital and tells jay (who is on his death bed) that he'll hit a dinger for him in tonights game.

Brutus
09-07-2010, 06:53 PM
I really don't get why we are playing with 3 outfielders when we have expanded rosters. It makes no sense.

I hate it too, but they have to first clear a roster spot and there's red tape they have to clear before doing that. I'd rather they use careful planning deciding what they're going to do before quickly dropping someone just to get another outfielder on the roster.

Brutus
09-07-2010, 06:55 PM
Oh please let him be ok and in the lineup tomorrow!:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

Based on precedent with this club, the first time you hear "he might be back in the lineup tomorrow," you can safely add another 5-7 days before getting back in the lineup.

OnBaseMachine
09-07-2010, 07:00 PM
I'm hoping Joey shows up in the hospital and tells jay (who is on his death bed) that he'll hit a dinger for him in tonights game.

:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

I doubt that happens though, Joey's probably too busy worrying about that fancy coffee and designer shirts. ;)

wolfboy
09-07-2010, 07:04 PM
I'm hoping Joey shows up in the hospital and tells jay (who is on his death bed) that he'll hit a dinger for him in tonights game.

That would be pretty freaking awesome of Joey. :)

wolfboy
09-07-2010, 07:04 PM
:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

I doubt that happens though, Joey's probably too busy worrying about that fancy coffee and designer shirts. ;)

Bummer. :(

Ghosts of 1990
09-07-2010, 08:33 PM
Whole situation has been frustrating and puzzling. Marty mentioned it on air two days ago that he feels the same way. Jay can continue to sit and hamstring the club with 3 guys who aren't every day players for all I care, but it doesn't make me a bad fan to point out that this situation has been a real head scratcher in a few areas. I'll be happy if/when he returns to the lineup but of course he probably has cooled off from one of the best stretches of his career. And as another poster pointed out, whenever the Reds say a guy is close he misses another 4 to 6 days. That's consistent with what has happened here.
Our beat writer says today was the big day for Bruce. In fact, today was
"Graduation Day" to get our big bopper back! He took 50 swings, all seems well...... Annnnnd more wait and see tomorrow. When he's back he's back at this point but if someone can't understand the frustration you're not trying to.

guttle11
09-07-2010, 08:52 PM
I think it comes down to this: It's September so there's no reason to DL him. If it were July he would have been DL'ed and we would have gotten a good report on just what the issue is and how long he will be out. With no reason at all to DL him, the Reds have no reason to disclose anything but what they choose.

Leave holes and conspiracy theorists will attempt to fill them.

dougdirt
09-07-2010, 09:05 PM
Drew Stubbs, Chris Heisey and Jonny Gomes are the starting outfielders until Bruce is back. Still, after that, Yonder Alonso played 30 games in the outfield in 2010. Juan Francisco didn't play there much this year, but has spent 20-30 games there since the end of last season (he spent some time in the outfield in the DWL).

Now you can't have a situation where Stubbs and Heisey collide and both leave the game, but if just one of them goes down, we will not be playing anyone way out of position for that one game.

oneupper
09-07-2010, 09:14 PM
In a pinch, Leake could go out there, Joey could play there, heck, even Dusty could probably play a decent LF. :)

WMR
09-07-2010, 09:59 PM
http://www.poster.net/fan-the/fan-the-the-fan-9909705.jpg

Big Klu
09-07-2010, 10:08 PM
In a pinch, Leake could go out there, Joey could play there, heck, even Dusty could probably play a decent LF. :)

Leake is on the DL.

Ghosts of 1990
09-07-2010, 11:45 PM
http://www.poster.net/fan-the/fan-the-the-fan-9909705.jpg

Great flick, I celebrate it in my collection :)

most non-baseball fans think it's poor work by De Niro somehow.

OnBaseMachine
09-09-2010, 03:36 PM
From John Fay:

Bruce took BP again today. He swung with more intensity. Probably will be back some time in the Pittsburgh series is my guess. #reds

http://twitter.com/johnfayman

fearofpopvol1
09-13-2010, 05:04 PM
Bruce back in the lineup tonight according to Sheldon...nice to see.

Now, if only we could get Heisey in LF more often...

westofyou
09-13-2010, 05:11 PM
Bruce back in the lineup tonight according to Sheldon...nice to see.

Now, if only we could get Heisey in LF more often...

Will it make him hit the ball any better?

That .507 OPS this month ain't gonna cut it.

fearofpopvol1
09-13-2010, 06:08 PM
Will it make him hit the ball any better?

That .507 OPS this month ain't gonna cut it.

Sounds like a small sample size to me. Let's look at the season...

Johnny Gomes Season WAR, -0.4
Chris Heisey Season WAR, 0.9

And that's with Gomes having 300+ more PAs. Gomes might have a chance at being a neutral player by season's end while Heisey has a chance to be a 3 win player over his first 600 Abs.

Yeah, I'll take Heisey over Gomes.

westofyou
09-13-2010, 06:10 PM
Sounds like a small sample size to me. Let's look at the season...

Johnny Gomes Season WAR, -0.4
Chris Heisey Season WAR, 0.9

And that's with Gomes having 300+ more PAs. Gomes might have a chance at being a neutral player by season's end while Heisey has a chance to be a 3 win player over his first 600 Abs.

Yeah, I'll take Heisey over Gomes.

Sounds like advanced scouting to me.

Brutus
09-13-2010, 06:15 PM
Sounds like a small sample size to me. Let's look at the season...

Johnny Gomes Season WAR, -0.4
Chris Heisey Season WAR, 0.9

And that's with Gomes having 300+ more PAs. Gomes might have a chance at being a neutral player by season's end while Heisey has a chance to be a 3 win player over his first 600 Abs.

Yeah, I'll take Heisey over Gomes.

Heisey with a chance at 3-wins? Based on what? He's trending downward with each passing plate appearance. He's in no position to be a 3 win player right now.

Does he have that potential in the future? Perhaps. But right now he's going the wrong direction with the bat.

Griffey012
09-13-2010, 06:18 PM
In honor of Jay's return to the lineup:

YouTube - Louie G - The Deal - FULL (Jay Bruce/Reds Anthem) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPZsn4CP1RU)

fearofpopvol1
09-13-2010, 06:25 PM
Heisey with a chance at 3-wins? Based on what? He's trending downward with each passing plate appearance. He's in no position to be a 3 win player right now.

Does he have that potential in the future? Perhaps. But right now he's going the wrong direction with the bat.

Heisey has been 0.9 WAR over 200 PAs. If you weigh that out over 600 PAs, he would be around a 3 win player.

True, he's hit a rough patch...and it's also true that his hot start wasn't sustainable...but I'm guessing his true performance level is somewhere in the middle of his hot start and his latest slump. That would mean that his WAR would not be headed downward, it would trend upward, just at a slower rate. I'm betting over his first 600 PAs with his glove, he will be at least 1.5 WAR, maybe even closer to 2. Let's just estimate on the lower side and say 1.5. That would already make him 1.5 WAR better than Gomes is.

I don't even see how it can be argued that Gomes is a better option than Heisey at this point is unless one is to expect that Gomes is mysteriously going to become a player he's never been and Heisey is going to fall further off the cliff.

Brutus
09-13-2010, 06:30 PM
Heisey has been 0.9 WAR over 200 PAs. If you weigh that out over 600 PAs, he would be around a 3 win player.

True, he's hit a rough patch...and it's also true that his hot start wasn't sustainable...but I'm guessing his true performance level is somewhere in the middle of his hot start and his latest slump. That would mean that his WAR would not be headed downward, it would trend upward, just at a slower rate. I'm betting over his first 600 PAs with his glove, he will be at least 1.5 WAR, maybe even closer to 2. Let's just estimate on the lower side and say 1.5. That would already make him 1.5 WAR better than Gomes is.

I don't even see how it can be argued that Gomes is a better option than Heisey at this point is unless one is to expect that Gomes is mysteriously going to become a player he's never been and Heisey is going to fall further off the cliff.

The problem is, that's based on continuing to hit like he was hitting earlier in the year. He's shown nothing remotely close to the likelihood he'll keep doing that, at least this year. He's gotten his extra PAs now and he's getting worse by the day.

I would argue Gomes is a better option right now. Not in next year or going forward, but right now in the smack dab of a pennant race, I'd MUCH rather have a veteran who doesn't go up there showing fear than Heisey, who has NO confidence at the plate. None whatsoever.

Forget WAR for a minute. In this case, I want guys who have experience and can deliver in a big at-bat. Heisey did have the big hit in Pittsburgh, but for the most part hasn't hit the broad side of a barn the last month.

Gomes hasn't been great with the bat. He's certainly not good with the glove. But I trust Gomes a whole heck of a lot more in a crucial situation at the plate than I do Heisey. Again... right now.

Next year, I'll be happy to concede that Heisey is probably a better option. I do believe he's psyched himself out and once he's over the frustration, will be a better option all around. But that player that might exist certainly is not playing for the Reds right now.

Gimme' Gomes down the stretch. In 2011, Heisey is fine by me.

Raisor
09-13-2010, 06:43 PM
maybe Bruce being back will bring Ghost back from the ledge.

fearofpopvol1
09-13-2010, 07:10 PM
The problem is, that's based on continuing to hit like he was hitting earlier in the year. He's shown nothing remotely close to the likelihood he'll keep doing that, at least this year. He's gotten his extra PAs now and he's getting worse by the day.

I would argue Gomes is a better option right now. Not in next year or going forward, but right now in the smack dab of a pennant race, I'd MUCH rather have a veteran who doesn't go up there showing fear than Heisey, who has NO confidence at the plate. None whatsoever.

Forget WAR for a minute. In this case, I want guys who have experience and can deliver in a big at-bat. Heisey did have the big hit in Pittsburgh, but for the most part hasn't hit the broad side of a barn the last month.

Gomes hasn't been great with the bat. He's certainly not good with the glove. But I trust Gomes a whole heck of a lot more in a crucial situation at the plate than I do Heisey. Again... right now.

Next year, I'll be happy to concede that Heisey is probably a better option. I do believe he's psyched himself out and once he's over the frustration, will be a better option all around. But that player that might exist certainly is not playing for the Reds right now.

Gimme' Gomes down the stretch. In 2011, Heisey is fine by me.

It's not assuming Heisey will continue hitting like he did after his callup. It's assuming he'll hit better than he has been lately, and given his dismal OPS for the month, I think it's very likely he is a better player than what he has shown as of late. I think Heisey can easily be a .750 OPS bat with a very good glove.

Also, Hesiey has NO confidence at the plate? What evidence do you have of that? Did you watch the game on Saturday? Heisey was the hero that tied the game in the 9th in a very tough spot.

You can't forget WAR. It's definitely 1 of the best systems out there to judge overall performance by position players. If you have or know of something better to point to, I'd love to see it. I'm personally not a big believer in the theory of "I'd rather have the veteran up there because he's a veteran" argument. I'd like to point to some actual statistics.

IslandRed
09-13-2010, 07:11 PM
Gimme' Gomes down the stretch. In 2011, Heisey is fine by me.

At the moment, I'd agree, not that I'm any particular fan of Gomes. But it's mid-September, and how a guy can be expected to perform over the long run is less of a relative consideration than how it looks like he'll perform over the next three weeks. Regression to the mean sometimes takes awhile.

But yeah, really happy to see Bruce back in the lineup.

Brutus
09-13-2010, 07:22 PM
It's not assuming Heisey will continue hitting like he did after his callup. It's assuming he'll hit better than he has been lately, and given his dismal OPS for the month, I think it's very likely he is a better player than what he has shown as of late. I think Heisey can easily be a .750 OPS bat with a very good glove.

Also, Hesiey has NO confidence at the plate? What evidence do you have of that? Did you watch the game on Saturday? Heisey was the hero that tied the game in the 9th in a very tough spot.

You can't forget WAR. It's definitely 1 of the best systems out there to judge overall performance by position players. If you have or know of something better to point to, I'd love to see it. I'm personally not a big believer in the theory of "I'd rather have the veteran up there because he's a veteran" argument. I'd like to point to some actual statistics.

He has one big hit and that makes up for the last 6 weeks of misery? Wow.

My evidence is simply watching him. Going up to the plate hacking at the first pitch for two at-bats in a row, then all of the sudden changing direction and watching three called strikes go by is the mark of a kid who is confused and overmatched at the plate. He's in such a funk right now he's grasping for something to work. I think anyone with any sense whatsoever can see he's not a confident hitter. One heroic groundball doesn't change that.

Statistics are nice. They're telling when used in the proper context. But they don't account for the basic fundamental truth that younger players are often affected by the emotion of the season's ups and downs more than veterans. When you've played the game long enough, you know you're going to go through slumps. The key is to not let the 2-for-20 become a 5-for-60. That's the kind of funk Heisey is in right now and his approach at the plate is pretty good evidence of that -- because he's all over the map.

cincrazy
09-13-2010, 07:30 PM
He has one big hit and that makes up for the last 6 weeks of misery? Wow.

My evidence is simply watching him. Going up to the plate hacking at the first pitch for two at-bats in a row, then all of the sudden changing direction and watching three called strikes go by is the mark of a kid who is confused and overmatched at the plate. He's in such a funk right now he's grasping for something to work. I think anyone with any sense whatsoever can see he's not a confident hitter. One heroic groundball doesn't change that.

Statistics are nice. They're telling when used in the proper context. But they don't account for the basic fundamental truth that younger players are often affected by the emotion of the season's ups and downs more than veterans. When you've played the game long enough, you know you're going to go through slumps. The key is to not let the 2-for-20 become a 5-for-60. That's the kind of funk Heisey is in right now and his approach at the plate is pretty good evidence of that -- because he's all over the map.

I understand your overall point. However, Brandon Phillips is one that you would consider a veteran player, and he's been even worse than Heisey lately IMO.

westofyou
09-13-2010, 07:40 PM
I understand your overall point. However, Brandon Phillips is one that you would consider a veteran player, and he's been even worse than Heisey lately IMO.

He's got a bum hand, plays GG IF on a team without a capable backup at 2B, what do you suggest they do?

_Sir_Charles_
09-13-2010, 07:44 PM
I understand your overall point. However, Brandon Phillips is one that you would consider a veteran player, and he's been even worse than Heisey lately IMO.

He's been injured, but even without that...he's at least got a history of success. I like Heisey and I think he's got a solid future as a 4th outfielder (very similar to Dickerson), but he's not showing me enough to justify starting other than in spots.

fearofpopvol1
09-13-2010, 07:58 PM
He has one big hit and that makes up for the last 6 weeks of misery? Wow.

My evidence is simply watching him. Going up to the plate hacking at the first pitch for two at-bats in a row, then all of the sudden changing direction and watching three called strikes go by is the mark of a kid who is confused and overmatched at the plate. He's in such a funk right now he's grasping for something to work. I think anyone with any sense whatsoever can see he's not a confident hitter. One heroic groundball doesn't change that.

Statistics are nice. They're telling when used in the proper context. But they don't account for the basic fundamental truth that younger players are often affected by the emotion of the season's ups and downs more than veterans. When you've played the game long enough, you know you're going to go through slumps. The key is to not let the 2-for-20 become a 5-for-60. That's the kind of funk Heisey is in right now and his approach at the plate is pretty good evidence of that -- because he's all over the map.

I believe you were the one that said he had no confidence at the plate, no? I think having a big hit 2 days ago in a big spot shows confidence at the plate, no?

Your evidence is "simply watching him". Are you a scout? With all due respect, I could take your assertions and apply them to any player. Scouting and opinions are nice, but they are just that. I would have an easier time following you if there were numbers that favored your position, but I don't see any of those.

Again, using your logic, veterans should always play over slumping rookies (especially ones with big slumps), no? If Jason Heyward has a big slump, will the Braves sit him? I would doubt that. Can you point to some conclusive evidence that rookies handle slumps worse than veterans? I understand what you're saying, but I think it's a blanket statement you've made and it does not apply to all players.

At the end of the day, I want whoever is going to give the Reds the best chance to win and right now, based on overall stats, that player is Heisey. I'll take his defense, his speed and his potential over Gomes and I think you'll see when he gets to 600 ABs that he will have been more valuable than Gomes was this season.

westofyou
09-13-2010, 08:07 PM
I believe you were the one that said he had no confidence at the plate, no? I think having a big hit 2 days ago in a big spot shows confidence at the plate, no?

Your evidence is "simply watching him". Are you a scout? With all due respect, I could take your assertions and apply them to any player. Scouting and opinions are nice, but they are just that. I would have an easier time following you if there were numbers that favored your position, but I don't see any of those.

Again, using your logic, veterans should always play over slumping rookies (especially ones with big slumps), no? If Jason Heyward has a big slump, will the Braves sit him? I would doubt that. Can you point to some conclusive evidence that rookies handle slumps worse than veterans? I understand what you're saying, but I think it's a blanket statement you've made and it does not apply to all players.

At the end of the day, I want whoever is going to give the Reds the best chance to win and right now, based on overall stats, that player is Heisey. I'll take his defense, his speed and his potential over Gomes and I think you'll see when he gets to 600 ABs that he will have been more valuable than Gomes was this season.

600 ab's?

The game is not played in vacuum, Heisey's stats in clutch situations says he's overmatched, in multiple pitch ab's - overmatched, in performance at the dish teh last 30 days, overmatched.

In short he's struggling and if he continues he'll be lucky to get 60 more ab's this season much alone the magic 600 that makes him what you want him to be now.

Brutus
09-13-2010, 08:10 PM
I believe you were the one that said he had no confidence at the plate, no? I think having a big hit 2 days ago in a big spot shows confidence at the plate, no?

Your evidence is "simply watching him". Are you a scout? With all due respect, I could take your assertions and apply them to any player. Scouting and opinions are nice, but they are just that. I would have an easier time following you if there were numbers that favored your position, but I don't see any of those.

Again, using your logic, veterans should always play over slumping rookies (especially ones with big slumps), no? If Jason Heyward has a big slump, will the Braves sit him? I would doubt that. Can you point to some conclusive evidence that rookies handle slumps worse than veterans? I understand what you're saying, but I think it's a blanket statement you've made and it does not apply to all players.

At the end of the day, I want whoever is going to give the Reds the best chance to win and right now, based on overall stats, that player is Heisey. I'll take his defense, his speed and his potential over Gomes and I think you'll see when he gets to 600 ABs that he will have been more valuable than Gomes was this season.

The numbers do favor my position. As WOY posted, he has a .500 OPS the past 2 weeks and .650 in the previous 4 weeks. Is that not pretty good evidence that perhaps he has no confidence at the plate right now? He's had two (2) multi-hit games dating back to August 4.

Yeah he had one big hit. What is that about blind squirrel and acorn? Any Major League player would be bound to have at least one big hit during a long stretch of time, even if they are struggling.

Contrary to popular belief, you don't have to be a scout to be able to see things watching baseball. There are a lot of good minds out there that know baseball pretty good that have never spent a single day on a professional payroll.

And no, veterans should not always get time over a slumping rookie. But this slumping rookie we're talking about is not Jason Heyward. He's not Jay Bruce. He's not even Drew Stubbs. He's a guy that has good but not great tools. He's got the ability to be a productive starter, but he's not a terrific enough talent to justify throwing out there in the midst of a stretch like this. Not during a pennant chase.

Heisey is not giving the Reds much of any chance right now. He's been a near automatic out the last several weeks. He plays good defense, but it's not the second-coming of Willie Mays. I'm not applying the logic that every veteran is automatically more trustworthy than every young player. But right now, I'll take a mediocre veteran with a ton more experience and less jerky at the plate than a mediocre young player who doesn't know from plate appearance to plate appearance whether he's a first pitch hitter, a patient hitter, a strikeout hitter, groundball hitter or the like. The kid is struggling to find himself right now. I'm not a scout, but you don't need to be a scout to see that.

Brutus
09-13-2010, 08:57 PM
Bruuuuuuuuuuceeeee!

membengal
09-13-2010, 09:23 PM
So I guess Bruce is fully recovered then...

The Voice of IH
09-13-2010, 09:24 PM
Holy Cow, Jay Bruce is awesome!

marcshoe
09-13-2010, 09:27 PM
So I guess Bruce is fully recovered then...

I dunno, I think they rushed him. :p:

fearofpopvol1
09-13-2010, 09:39 PM
600 ab's?

The game is not played in vacuum, Heisey's stats in clutch situations says he's overmatched, in multiple pitch ab's - overmatched, in performance at the dish teh last 30 days, overmatched.

In short he's struggling and if he continues he'll be lucky to get 60 more ab's this season much alone the magic 600 that makes him what you want him to be now.

I never said Hesiey will get 600 ABs this year. What I said was...Gomes likely will get 600 ABs this year. I said once Heisey gets to 600 ABs, I believe his production (with his glove) will outdo Gomes 600 ABs (and glove) this season.

How is Gomes better? Please, I'm all ears here.

Gomes has struggled and for longer. You can point to Heisey's struggles, but Gomes has struggled as well and for longer.

Let's look at Gomes' splits...OPS by month

April - .621
May - 1.056
June - .704
July - .673
August - .700
September - .676

So, outside of an awesome May, Gomes has been dismal with the bat this year. And the glove? Well, let's not even talk about the glove.

Heisey is younger, he's faster, has better range, a better arm, at least similar power and a I believe a better approach at the plate. Sure, he's a rookie, but he's shown me a lot. He's simply a better option based on his peripherals. You can not overlook the defensive value that Heisey provides over Gomes.

HokieRed
09-13-2010, 09:41 PM
My guess is next year's left fielder is not currently on the team.

fearofpopvol1
09-13-2010, 09:42 PM
The numbers do favor my position. As WOY posted, he has a .500 OPS the past 2 weeks and .650 in the previous 4 weeks. Is that not pretty good evidence that perhaps he has no confidence at the plate right now? He's had two (2) multi-hit games dating back to August 4.

Yeah he had one big hit. What is that about blind squirrel and acorn? Any Major League player would be bound to have at least one big hit during a long stretch of time, even if they are struggling.

Contrary to popular belief, you don't have to be a scout to be able to see things watching baseball. There are a lot of good minds out there that know baseball pretty good that have never spent a single day on a professional payroll.

And no, veterans should not always get time over a slumping rookie. But this slumping rookie we're talking about is not Jason Heyward. He's not Jay Bruce. He's not even Drew Stubbs. He's a guy that has good but not great tools. He's got the ability to be a productive starter, but he's not a terrific enough talent to justify throwing out there in the midst of a stretch like this. Not during a pennant chase.

Heisey is not giving the Reds much of any chance right now. He's been a near automatic out the last several weeks. He plays good defense, but it's not the second-coming of Willie Mays. I'm not applying the logic that every veteran is automatically more trustworthy than every young player. But right now, I'll take a mediocre veteran with a ton more experience and less jerky at the plate than a mediocre young player who doesn't know from plate appearance to plate appearance whether he's a first pitch hitter, a patient hitter, a strikeout hitter, groundball hitter or the like. The kid is struggling to find himself right now. I'm not a scout, but you don't need to be a scout to see that.

You've shown no evidence as to why Gomes is the better option, that's the problem. You're pointing to your own observations with no real facts. The stats simply show that Gomes has been bad this year. Real bad for a starting LF.

See the post I just made to WOY. It explains why Heisey is the better option.

Redhook
09-13-2010, 09:49 PM
My guess is next year's left fielder is not currently on the team.

I hope you're right. I can live with Janish/Cozart as SS if they get a decent LF.

Brutus
09-13-2010, 09:54 PM
You've shown no evidence as to why Gomes is the better option, that's the problem. You're pointing to your own observations with no real facts. The stats simply show that Gomes has been bad this year. Real bad for a starting LF.

See the post I just made to WOY. It explains why Heisey is the better option.

I'll say this for a third time... Heisey had a .675 OPS last month and has been progressively getting worse (.500 OPS this month). There are your facts. I stated that twice, you're just not seeing it.

I trust Gomes more than I trust Heisey. That part is instinct. Put the two together and that should be enough.

Brutus
09-13-2010, 09:55 PM
In the past month (essentially since tonight is his first game in September), Jay Bruce has a .430 OBP, over 1.150 slugging, 10 homers and 20 RBIs. WOW!

fearofpopvol1
09-13-2010, 10:02 PM
I'll say this for a third time... Heisey had a .675 OPS last month and has been progressively getting worse (.500 OPS this month). There are your facts. I stated that twice, you're just not seeing it.

I trust Gomes more than I trust Heisey. That part is instinct. Put the two together and that should be enough.

And I'll explain this to you again...that is an EXTREMELY small sample size. Gomes awful numbers have been over 500 PAs...not 200 like Heisey has.

I'll trust WAR on this one...Heisey is more valuable. You can trust your own observations.

Brutus
09-13-2010, 10:06 PM
And I'll explain this to you again...that is an EXTREMELY small sample size. Gomes awful numbers have been over 500 PAs...not 200 like Heisey has.

I'll trust WAR on this one...Heisey is more valuable. You can trust your own observations.

Forget sample size. Heisey is overmatched. That's where the stats breakdown. They don't account for when a player is in a huge funk. The kid is having a hard time. There is no reason to trust he'll even remotely provide a chunk of that so-called "WAR" right now because he's a mess at the plate.

It's not rocket science. If you can't see the frustration and self-doubt when he hits, I don't know what to tell you. He has very little value right now. His "WAR" is all theoretical because he's not the same hitter he was early in the year where most of that comes from. Heck, he hasn't hit a homer in a few months. What does that tell you?

WAR is wrong on this one. Sorry to tell you that it doesn't always work like we want it to. I like Heisey and I think he'll be fine down the line. Right now he's a trainwreck at the plate. He needs time off to regroup.

Ghosts of 1990
09-13-2010, 10:21 PM
Gutsy performance tonight by Bruce.

wheels
09-13-2010, 10:21 PM
Isn't this a thread about Bruce?

Dude just crushes two and people are too busy bickering over Heisey to notice.

Playoff Baseball. Catch the fever.

Brutus
09-13-2010, 10:24 PM
Isn't this a thread about Bruce?

Dude just crushes two and people are too busy bickering over Heisey to notice.

Playoff Baseball. Catch the fever.

You should go back and read the last several posts...because I actually did notice. I've made two separate posts about Bruce in this very thread since his homers tonight.

fearofpopvol1
09-13-2010, 10:29 PM
Forget sample size. Heisey is overmatched. That's where the stats breakdown. They don't account for when a player is in a huge funk. The kid is having a hard time. There is no reason to trust he'll even remotely provide a chunk of that so-called "WAR" right now because he's a mess at the plate.

It's not rocket science. If you can't see the frustration and self-doubt when he hits, I don't know what to tell you. He has very little value right now. His "WAR" is all theoretical because he's not the same hitter he was early in the year where most of that comes from. Heck, he hasn't hit a homer in a few months. What does that tell you?

WAR is wrong on this one. Sorry to tell you that it doesn't always work like we want it to. I like Heisey and I think he'll be fine down the line. Right now he's a trainwreck at the plate. He needs time off to regroup.

Stats don't need to factor in anything other than numbers. Numbers are what matter most. I'm aware that Heisey is struggling. I've never disputed that. What I'm saying is Gomes hasn't been much better over the time period where Heisey has struggled and when you factor in the glove, Heisey is the better option.

Your logic is simply flawed, that's the easiest way I can explain this to you. You're seeing and believing what you want to instead of looking at facts. Gomes has an edge with the bat, but not a drastic one and he's had a lot more ABs. Fair enough. You've continually overlooked the fact that Gomes has not been much better with the bat over the same period Heisey has struggled and you have not acknowledged how much worse Gomes is with the glove. Your reason for wanting Gomes to play over Heisey? He's a veteran and Heisey looks lost at the plate. Well, please tell me what you consider Gomes sub .700 OPS at the plate over the same period to be?

Defensively, according to UZR, Gomes is -14.7 for 2010 while Heisey has been a +3.9. That is a lot of runs difference.

So, to quote you, it's not "rocket science" here. Heisey is the better OVERALL player. If you are going to say WAR is wrong, then at least back it up with another system or other facts instead of your own "observations". WAR has a formula and one that factors many things into its equation. I'm still waiting on your formula or for you to disprove how WAR is wrong here.

fearofpopvol1
09-13-2010, 10:29 PM
Isn't this a thread about Bruce?

Dude just crushes two and people are too busy bickering over Heisey to notice.

Playoff Baseball. Catch the fever.

True dat. Bruce has looked sensational tonight...he hasn't missed a beat since his injury. Very very happy about that.

Brutus
09-13-2010, 10:39 PM
Stats don't need to factor in anything other than numbers. Numbers are what matter most. I'm aware that Heisey is struggling. I've never disputed that. What I'm saying is Gomes hasn't been much better over the time period where Heisey has struggled and when you factor in the glove, Heisey is the better option.

Your logic is simply flawed, that's the easiest way I can explain this to you. You're seeing and believing what you want to instead of looking at facts. Gomes has an edge with the bat, but not a drastic one and he's had a lot more ABs. Fair enough. You've continually overlooked the fact that Gomes has not been much better with the bat over the same period Heisey has struggled and you have not acknowledged how much worse Gomes is with the glove. Your reason for wanting Gomes to play over Heisey? He's a veteran and Heisey looks lost at the plate. Well, please tell me what you consider Gomes sub .700 OPS at the plate over the same period to be?

Defensively, according to UZR, Gomes is -14.7 for 2010 while Heisey has been a +3.9. That is a lot of runs difference.

So, to quote you, it's not "rocket science" here. Heisey is the better OVERALL player. If you are going to say WAR is wrong, then at least back it up with another system or other facts instead of your own "observations". WAR has a formula and one that factors many things into its equation. I'm still waiting on your formula or for you to disprove how WAR is wrong here.

The only thing flawed is that you're assigning any sort of value to a player that A) hasn't hit a homer since August 2, B) has had two multi-hit games in six weeks, C) has 26 Ks and just 5 walks in that period, D) has seen an OPS drop from 950 to 750 and E) can't even figure out within a game if he's a first-pitch hitter or going to watch 6 pitches go by without a swing. And the "WAR" you are referring to him having is all based on his first 178 at-bats in the minors (which is not even enough to assign an accurate WAR value anyhow).

WAR is wrong because it's not even had a chance to be right. The kid has fewer than 200 Major League plate appearances and in the last third of them, he's looked overmatched and overwhelmed. I don't need to prove anything wrong. It's common sense. He's not even in the ballpark when he hits.

In the last 30 games he's managed more than one hit only twice. That right there should tell you something. He's struggling. In that same timeframe, Jonny Gomes (who isn't tearing the cover off the ball) at least has 5 multi-hit games with 3 homers. His K:BB rate is 16:12 in that same time.

It's common sense. Right now, Gomes is a heck of a lot more steady to trust in the lineup.

HeatherC1212
09-13-2010, 10:56 PM
Jay Bruce is very good. :thumbup:

fearofpopvol1
09-13-2010, 11:00 PM
The only thing flawed is that you're assigning any sort of value to a player that A) hasn't hit a homer since August 2, B) has had two multi-hit games in six weeks, C) has 26 Ks and just 5 walks in that period, D) has seen an OPS drop from 950 to 750 and E) can't even figure out within a game if he's a first-pitch hitter or going to watch 6 pitches go by without a swing. And the "WAR" you are referring to him having is all based on his first 178 at-bats in the minors (which is not even enough to assign an accurate WAR value anyhow).

WAR is wrong because it's not even had a chance to be right. The kid has fewer than 200 Major League plate appearances and in the last third of them, he's looked overmatched and overwhelmed. I don't need to prove anything wrong. It's common sense. He's not even in the ballpark when he hits.

In the last 30 games he's managed more than one hit only twice. That right there should tell you something. He's struggling. In that same timeframe, Jonny Gomes (who isn't tearing the cover off the ball) at least has 5 multi-hit games with 3 homers. His K:BB rate is 16:12 in that same time.

It's common sense. Right now, Gomes is a heck of a lot more steady to trust in the lineup.

So we're going to cherrypick stats now, huh? I could personally care less how the player gets their numbers...as long as they get them.

Why don't we look at Gomes' overall numbers post all star break...since he is "a lot more steady" as you put it.

168 ABs / BA - .232 / OBP - .323 / SLG - .351 / OPS - .674. He's had 5 home runs during that span.

That's "a lot more steady"? It's better than Heisey over that stretch, but not by much and Gomes has had more PAs. You add in the fact that Gomes has much worse defense, and I can't make sense of your argument at all. Gomes has hurt the Reds more than Heisey has because the added value of his bat is offset by his putrid defense. Is that easier to understand?

Sorry, but in my opinion, there's no common sense in your posts on this topic.

Brutus
09-13-2010, 11:07 PM
So we're going to cherrypick stats now, huh? I could personally care less how the player gets their numbers...as long as they get them.

Why don't we look at Gomes' overall numbers post all star break...since he is "a lot more steady" as you put it.

168 ABs / BA - .232 / OBP - .323 / SLG - .351 / OPS - .674. He's had 5 home runs during that span.

That's "a lot more steady"? It's better than Heisey over that stretch, but not by much and Gomes has had more PAs. You add in the fact that Gomes has much worse defense, and I can't make sense of your argument at all. Gomes has hurt the Reds more than Heisey has because the added value of his bat is offset by his putrid defense. Is that easier to understand?

Sorry, but in my opinion, there's no common sense in your posts on this topic.

You're using a stat that assigns a value to a player based on, and largely accumulated from, his first 100 plate appearances in the majors. That's not cherry-picking? Come on.

Common sense is this: anyone that watches any amount of baseball can see this kid is overmatched. That's your common sense. Forget the numbers. The kid is absolutely struggling. He's got no idea what he's doing at the plate. I encourage you to watch him, though you now probably won't (justifiably) get much of a chance to see him with Bruce back in the lineup. Watch him from at-bat to at-bat. The kid is all over the place.

The Reds' need experienced, professional hitters down the stretch. Gomes has his warts and make no mistake he does. But right now he's a much stable option. Heisey is volatile and jittery. Bad combination for September playoff stretch.

OnBaseMachine
09-13-2010, 11:13 PM
Welcome back Jay Bruce. We missed you.

fearofpopvol1
09-13-2010, 11:16 PM
You're using a stat that assigns a value to a player based on, and largely accumulated from, his first 100 plate appearances in the majors. That's not cherry-picking? Come on.

Common sense is this: anyone that watches any amount of baseball can see this kid is overmatched. That's your common sense. Forget the numbers. The kid is absolutely struggling. He's got no idea what he's doing at the plate. I encourage you to watch him, though you now probably won't (justifiably) get much of a chance to see him with Bruce back in the lineup. Watch him from at-bat to at-bat. The kid is all over the place.

The Reds' need experienced, professional hitters down the stretch. Gomes has his warts and make no mistake he does. But right now he's a much stable option. Heisey is volatile and jittery. Bad combination for September playoff stretch.

What I have said and will say once more...Gomes and Heisey right now are close to being a wash offensively, with Gomes having a bit of an edge. Defensively, it's not even close. Heisey is a much much better defender. When you add in the plus value than Heisey adds with the glove compared to the very negative value that Gomes has with his glove, Heisey is the more valuable player, even right now with his struggles. Though let's not forget, Gomes is struggling mightily as well.

Honestly, I really don't have much more to say on this topic as I've stated my position many times. I don't want to ruin the Bruce thread either.

Mario-Rijo
09-13-2010, 11:24 PM
I agree with you Brutus I don't care about the numbers at this point Heisey is beyond lost, he's a mechanical nightmare. Right now he is a late inning defender, pinch runner, occasional pinch hitter when you are hoping for someone to run into one.

He's a guy who IMO is a project for the offseason and could be a solid answer for LF if he straightens out his game. I still believe in him but at this point in the year the Reds don't have time for him to figure it out.

Brutus
09-13-2010, 11:26 PM
I agree with you Brutus I don't care about the numbers at this point Heisey is beyond lost, he's a mechanical nightmare. Right now he is a late inning defender, pinch runner, occasional pinch hitter when you are hoping for someone to run into one.

He's a guy who IMO is a project for the offseason and could be a solid answer for LF if he straightens out his game. I still believe in him but at this point in the year the Reds don't have time for him to figure it out.

Yep. Agree 100% on the second 'graf. I definitely believe he can be a long-term contributor. Just think he's got himself so psyched out that he needs some time on the bench to regroup. Give him a spot start the next 3 weeks, some pinch hit appearances, and hopefully he will be able to contribute in the postseason. I imagine next year he'll enter camp with a fresh outlook, renewed confidence and will do just fine.

Mario-Rijo
09-13-2010, 11:28 PM
What I have said and will say once more...Gomes and Heisey right now are close to being a wash offensively, with Gomes having a bit of an edge. Defensively, it's not even close. Heisey is a much much better defender. When you add in the plus value than Heisey adds with the glove compared to the very negative value that Gomes has with his glove, Heisey is the more valuable player, even right now with his struggles. Though let's not forget, Gomes is struggling mightily as well.

Honestly, I really don't have much more to say on this topic as I've stated my position many times. I don't want to ruin the Bruce thread either.

This is where your wrong IMO and why your formula doesn't yield the correct answer. Right now they aren't real close offensively and you are of course over exaggerating Gomes defense, he's been fine out there for quite awhile actually. And while Heisey is faster Gomes is a fair baserunner probably due to his experience. Yeah neither is really helping a whole lot right now but Heisey just is caught in no mans land.

HokieRed
09-13-2010, 11:43 PM
Really should move this discussion over to the Bruce-Stubbs-Heisey thread.

Griffey012
09-13-2010, 11:52 PM
Bruce could be a huge X-factor heading into October. Wouldn't it be something if both him and Bailey played up to their potential as top prospects the rest of the way and hopefully into the playoffs if we make it.

Tommyjohn25
09-14-2010, 12:05 AM
Please keep the discussion to Bruce in this thread.

RedEye
09-14-2010, 12:09 AM
Can there be any doubt that they missed Jay's bat? Holy cow! If he keeps raking like this, we could be in for some darn fine October baseball (knock on wood).

Jpup
09-14-2010, 12:52 PM
Jay Bruce is becoming the guy everyone wants him to be. He is going to be a great player. He's one of the best outfielders in the game and his bat will be one of the best real soon. He's a joy to watch.

dougdirt
09-14-2010, 12:55 PM
Jay Bruce is pushing 4 wins right now. Not bad for a guy a lot of people wanted to send down in July.

Jpup
09-14-2010, 12:55 PM
MLB - Bruce joins Robinson

Jay Bruce hit his 20th HR of the season and now has at least 20 HR in each of his first 3 MLB seasons. He is the 2nd Reds player in franchise history to hit at least 20 HR in each of his first 3 MLB seasons. The other was Frank Robinson from 1956-58.

OnBaseMachine
09-14-2010, 12:56 PM
Can there be any doubt that they missed Jay's bat? Holy cow! If he keeps raking like this, we could be in for some darn fine October baseball (knock on wood).

Small sample size alert - they showed a stat on FSN Ohio last night that when Jay Bruce is in the lineup the Reds offense averages 5.0 runs per game compared to only 4.1 runs per game when Bruce is out of the lineup.

OnBaseMachine
09-14-2010, 01:02 PM
Jay Bruce:

.826 OPS, 119 OPS+, +14.0 UZR = 3.8 WAR

bucksfan2
09-14-2010, 01:03 PM
Small sample size alert - they showed a stat on FSN Ohio last night that when Jay Bruce is in the lineup the Reds offense averages 5.0 runs per game compared to only 4.1 runs per game when Bruce is out of the lineup.

I saw that and just kind of shook my head. Weird stat for them to throw out.

Homer Bailey
09-14-2010, 01:04 PM
wOBA up to .355 for the year. Just think if that awful July never happened.

bucksfan2
09-14-2010, 01:21 PM
Last night Jay's swings looked as good as they ever have. It almost looked like he wasn't swing hard at all. It was refreshing to see that for sure.

I do wonder what kind of impact a couple of different things have had on Bruce.

First off the Edmonds impact. It has been noted that Jay's offensive game has taken off since Edmonds was traded for. Now Jim isn't some kind of miracle worker, but he may have been able to relate to Jay. To explain what Jay was doing wrong in a way that clicked with Jay. IMO Edmonds is a similar hitter to Jay and that may have helped him out.

Secondly is Jay just sitting back and watching the games. Last season Jay finished the season off strong after coming back from an injury. He was awful in the beginning of the season but really seemed to come on strong. This year he had a monster game coming back from an injury. Whether or not this continues is a different story, but it may have done Jay well to watch and learn while sitting out with an injury.

RedsManRick
09-14-2010, 01:54 PM
Of Reds with at least 100 PA, Bruce has the 4th highest wOBA.



Name Pos BB% K% BB/K AVG OBP SLG OPS ISO Spd BABIP wRC wRAA wOBA
Joey Votto 1B 14.1% 22.5% 0.74 .321 .423 .594 1.017 .273 4.5 .356 122.7 54.8 .437
Scott Rolen 3B 9.4% 17.5% 0.61 .294 .367 .519 .886 .224 3.0 .313 78.9 22.4 .378
Ramon Hernandez C 8.0% 15.9% 0.57 .310 .373 .444 .817 .134 1.6 .349 45.5 9.6 .360
Jay Bruce OF 9.7% 26.0% 0.42 .278 .346 .479 .826 .202 4.6 .331 73.3 13.7 .355
Ryan Hanigan C 13.1% 11.1% 1.40 .278 .380 .406 .786 .128 1.0 .287 29.0 4.3 .347
Miguel Cairo 3B 7.5% 15.3% 0.56 .288 .352 .412 .764 .124 4.3 .315 26.5 3.3 .342
Laynce Nix OF 7.5% 23.4% 0.35 .291 .345 .462 .807 .171 3.3 .359 22.7 2.8 .342
Brandon Phillip 2B 6.5% 12.9% 0.55 .279 .333 .434 .767 .155 5.6 .297 77.8 6.4 .335
Paul Janish SS 10.0% 14.3% 0.80 .274 .354 .411 .765 .137 1.9 .295 24.5 1.5 .331
Drew Stubbs OF 8.5% 32.2% 0.30 .248 .315 .420 .735 .172 7.7 .322 62.3 2.7 .328
Jonny Gomes OF 7.5% 23.6% 0.36 .258 .327 .423 .750 .165 3.8 .298 60.1 1.6 .326
Chris Heisey OF 7.4% 28.1% 0.30 .247 .323 .427 .750 .180 4.4 .301 23.9 0.6 .325
Orlando Cabrera SS 5.4% 10.9% 0.54 .265 .306 .353 .659 .088 4.2 .285 44.7 -10.6 .294

Among MLB RF with at least 400 PA, Bruce is 9th of 29. Using WAR, he's 6th. For what it's worth.

Ghosts of 1990
09-14-2010, 03:06 PM
Watched all three of the strokes last night and jay's swings appear to be short, soft, and under control. He isn't swinging hard. Just throwing the head and letting the hands do the work.

Also I saw that only two Reds to have 20 HRs in their first 3 seasons are Jay Bruce and Frank Robinson.

RedsManRick
09-14-2010, 03:23 PM
Watched all three of the strokes last night and jay's swings appear to be short, soft, and under control. He isn't swinging hard. Just throwing the head and letting the hands do the work.

Also I saw that only two Reds to have 20 HRs in their first 3 seasons are Jay Bruce and Frank Robinson.

He really does have a beautiful swing. I know Junior's swing is sacrosanct, but Bruce's does remind me of it because (when he's going right) it looks so smooth and effortless.

As for his power, only Adam Dunn has more "No Doubts" homers in the NL this season. http://www.hittrackeronline.com/

Ghosts of 1990
09-14-2010, 03:47 PM
I thought his 2nd home run last night was going to hit that Tundra sign between the smoke stacks... I swore he had it. But it seems like it's never going to be reached.

Brutus
09-14-2010, 04:11 PM
I thought his 2nd home run last night was going to hit that Tundra sign between the smoke stacks... I swore he had it. But it seems like it's never going to be reached.

Just watch. Willie Bloomquist will nail it.

dougdirt
09-14-2010, 04:17 PM
I thought his 2nd home run last night was going to hit that Tundra sign between the smoke stacks... I swore he had it. But it seems like it's never going to be reached.
It has been hit before, just not while it was the Tundra sign. When Griffey was chasing 600 and his tracker was there, I saw it hit.

TRF
09-14-2010, 04:21 PM
Watched all three of the strokes last night and jay's swings appear to be short, soft, and under control. He isn't swinging hard. Just throwing the head and letting the hands do the work.

Also I saw that only two Reds to have 20 HRs in their first 3 seasons are Jay Bruce and Frank Robinson.

Dunn was 1 HR away from joining Robinson. Of course in his 1st season he only played in 66 games.


And now back to Jay Bruce, :)

OnBaseMachine
09-14-2010, 06:09 PM
I was just looking at the UZR ratings on Fangraphs and I noticed Jay Bruce has the seventh highest UZR of any player in baseball. The only players ahead of him are: Carl Crawford (LF, +22.0), Andres Torres (CF, +18.5), Brett Gardner (LF, +16.9), Ryan Zimmerman (3B, +15.9), Michael Bourn (CF, +14.3), and Chase Headley (3B, +14.1). Bruce is at +14.0, which is easily the best by a right fielder in baseball. The next closest? Ichiro at +9.8.

It will be a shame if Bruce doesn't win a Gold Glove this season.

_Sir_Charles_
09-14-2010, 07:31 PM
Agreed.

On a side note....I'd love to see them actually award GG's for left, center & right instead of just 3 OF'ers.

BRM
09-15-2010, 10:12 AM
On a side note....I'd love to see them actually award GG's for left, center & right instead of just 3 OF'ers.

Me too but what would you do with guys like Carlos Gonzalez (if he deserved one)? He's played quite a bit in all three spots.

membengal
09-15-2010, 11:27 PM
Thank you, Jay Bruce. Probably won't get a gold glove, but sure deserves one. Plays the finest RF I have seen in these parts since Paul O'Neill.

OnBaseMachine
09-15-2010, 11:29 PM
One of the best catches of the season. He deserves a Gold Glove just as much as anybody in the game.

sabometrics
09-15-2010, 11:29 PM
Scale of 1 to 10? I was in the car on the way home from the ballpark (work) and didn't see the play.

oregonred
09-15-2010, 11:31 PM
Bruce may have single handedly won the last two Reds wins and this one as a PH and defensive replacement. Having him back down the stretch is so huuugggeee. Don't think the 3-7 swoon would have happened with him in the lineup.

oregonred
09-15-2010, 11:32 PM
Scale of 1 to 10? I was in the car on the way home from the ballpark (work) and didn't see the play.

9.9 given the circumstance. Game tying HR to end the game. He seemed to have a bead on it all the way.

_Sir_Charles_
09-15-2010, 11:36 PM
Me too but what would you do with guys like Carlos Gonzalez (if he deserved one)? He's played quite a bit in all three spots.

I'd make it mandatory that they play a certain number of games at that position to be eligible for the award. If it's a guy who moves around alot...better luck next season.

LoganBuck
09-15-2010, 11:41 PM
MLB Network just gave Jay Bruce the Capital One Play of the Day!

Scrap Irony
09-15-2010, 11:56 PM
This year, I'd go with Bruce, Carlos Gonzalez, and either Andres Torres or Michael Bourn.

_Sir_Charles_
09-16-2010, 12:03 AM
This year, I'd go with Bruce, Carlos Gonzalez, and either Andres Torres or Michael Bourn.

Weren't you watching the game tonight? Did you NOT SEE that catch that Gomes made? How dare you snub the mohawk. :cool:

Ron Madden
09-16-2010, 04:00 AM
Thank you, Jay Bruce. Probably won't get a gold glove, but sure deserves one. Plays the finest RF I have seen in these parts since Paul O'Neill.

I was a huge fan of Paul O'Neill, loved his throwing arm but I believe Jay Bruce is the better defender of the two.

fearofpopvol1
09-16-2010, 04:36 AM
I didn't see Baseball Tonight, but I assume Bruce's catch was a web gem? I hope it was.

Ron Madden
09-16-2010, 04:50 AM
I didn't see Baseball Tonight, but I assume Bruce's catch was a web gem? I hope it was.

Jay Bruce's play was number 8 on SportsCenter's top ten plays of the day. :(

membengal
09-16-2010, 06:15 AM
I was a huge fan of Paul O'Neill, loved his throwing arm but I believe Jay Bruce is the better defender of the two.

I don't disagree with this. I have to go back to O'Neill to find anyone remotely in that class defensively in this organization in RF.

Edd Roush
09-16-2010, 08:09 AM
Jay Bruce's play was number 8 on SportsCenter's top ten plays of the day. :(

I was shocked to see that too. How did Phillips play get a better rating than Bruce's or Gomes's catch last night? I guess Phillips has the "Top Play" rep.

Ghosts of 1990
09-16-2010, 09:50 AM
Edit: Youtube link removed


Look at the amount of ground he covers

RedsManRick
09-16-2010, 09:57 AM
I love how it took him a few seconds to react after he caught it. He was so business like at first and then he saw his teammates.

bucksfan2
09-16-2010, 10:00 AM
Jay Bruce's play was number 8 on SportsCenter's top ten plays of the day. :(

It was a very good catch don't get me wrong. Its a catch that your better RF's should make. Jay often makes difficult catches look easy so that may be why it was ranked lower.

reds1869
09-16-2010, 10:38 AM
It was a very good catch don't get me wrong. Its a catch that your better RF's should make. Jay often makes difficult catches look easy so that may be why it was ranked lower.

Indeed. Edmonds had a better reputation than he deserved years ago because he made plays look tough. Sure, he was a great defender but probably not as good as he was given credit for. Bruce is the type of defender that makes the hard ones appear routine.

Hoosier Red
09-16-2010, 11:11 AM
I was a huge fan of Paul O'Neill, loved his throwing arm but I believe Jay Bruce is the better defender of the two.

There's really no question on this. Even if O'Neill had a stronger arm(which is debateable) Bruce's speed makes him far far more effective of an outfielder.

Between Stubbs and Bruce, I'm not sure the Reds couldn't rearrange the outfield to have RC and LC with an extra player playing infield. This would be especially effective because when a ball gets past Cabrera, the board would not say "Janish would have gotten that," they can instead say "Janish got that one."

;)

Homer Bailey
09-16-2010, 11:39 AM
Bruce has had a pretty amazing stretch of games. Has to be the greatest stretch I can recall from a Reds player. Only "problem" was it was interrupted by injury, but in this stretch he has:

A 3 homer game, a 2 homer game, 7 HR's in a 5 game stretch, a walkoff hit, and a walk-off home run robbing catch. I'm sure there are even more that I'm forgetting.

Chip R
09-16-2010, 11:58 AM
Bruce has had a pretty amazing stretch of games. Has to be the greatest stretch I can recall from a Reds player. Only "problem" was it was interrupted by injury, but in this stretch he has:

A 3 homer game, a 2 homer game, 7 HR's in a 5 game stretch, a walkoff hit, and a walk-off home run robbing catch. I'm sure there are even more that I'm forgetting.


It's right up there with Eric Davis' stretch in 85 or 86.

Ghosts of 1990
09-16-2010, 12:31 PM
It's right up there with Eric Davis' stretch in 85 or 86.

Do you remember the month or range of dates? I want to baseball-reference it for Davis

westofyou
09-16-2010, 12:42 PM
It's right up there with Eric Davis' stretch in 85 or 86.

4-12-87 - 4-18-87 or even 4-6 - 4-21 (with this line .469/.519/.898)

Chip R
09-16-2010, 12:48 PM
4-12-87 - 4-18-87 or even 4-6 - 4-21 (with this line .469/.519/.898)


I was thinking more along the time where he made those great catches. I'm fairly sure that was during the summer although he may not have been on a hot streak with the bat like he was then.

westofyou
09-16-2010, 12:50 PM
I was thinking more along the time where he made those great catches. I'm fairly sure that was during the summer although he may not have been on a hot streak with the bat like he was then.

Yeah, that was more middle of the season, got lots of ESPN time

Ghosts of 1990
09-16-2010, 03:21 PM
Am I reading a correct calculation, that Bruce is a 3.7 WAR at this point?

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=9892&position=OF

Raisor
09-16-2010, 03:35 PM
Am I reading a correct calculation, that Bruce is a 3.7 WAR at this point?

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=9892&position=OF

serious question, do you wish you hadn't changed your user name?

Homer Bailey
09-16-2010, 04:25 PM
Am I reading a correct calculation, that Bruce is a 3.7 WAR at this point?

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=9892&position=OF

Considering he was about a 3 win player when you were at the height of your complaining about him, it's not that difficult to believe he'd be at 3.7 now.

Ghosts of 1990
09-16-2010, 05:11 PM
serious question, do you wish you hadn't changed your user name?

Not at all my friend... 1990 was when/why I became a Reds fan. I just registered for this board very quickly when I found it and it was around the time Bruce was our #1 prospect. I think I was bad luck for him ;)

Ghosts of 1990
09-16-2010, 05:21 PM
Considering he was about a 3 win player when you were at the height of your complaining about him, it's not that difficult to believe he'd be at 3.7 now.

Now wait a minute. At the 'height of me complaining about him' he went about 200 at-bats, and 52 games with 1 home run, 3 extra base hits, 55 K to 14 walks; he OPS'd .618 in that stretch. He hit .238 over that stretch; piggy-backing off .223 last year.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.cgi?n1=bruceja01&t=b&year=2010&share=2.56#272-323-sum:batting_gamelogs

First off, I thought he was capable of more than that. He's proven me to be wise in that regard.

Secondly, I was hardly his only detractor during that time. What's the hang-up?

Homer Bailey
09-16-2010, 05:38 PM
Now wait a minute. At the 'height of me complaining about him' he went about 200 at-bats, and 52 games with 1 home run, 3 extra base hits, 55 K to 14 walks; he OPS'd .618 in that stretch. He hit .238 over that stretch; piggy-backing off .223 last year.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.cgi?n1=bruceja01&t=b&year=2010&share=2.56#272-323-sum:batting_gamelogs

First off, I thought he was capable of more than that. He's proven me to be wise in that regard.

Secondly, I was hardly his only detractor during that time. What's the hang-up?

Yet he was still around a 3 win player to date. You chose to minimalize the sample instead of looking at the big picture.

jojo
09-17-2010, 06:01 PM
First off, I thought he was capable of more than that. He's proven me to be wise in that regard.

Sorry but this just made me spit pepsi max all over my monitor....

Phhhl
09-18-2010, 02:15 AM
I don't think this is off topic. At a time when every single member of the starting lineup appears to be fatigued and in desperate need of a day off, why is the 24 year old kid who just came off two weeks of rest suddenly being platooned when he was in the lineup every single day from April through July? Jay Bruce was struggling against everyone early in the season and couldn't buy a hit, yet kept getting run out there. He came off his side injury to homer twice against a left handed pitcher in his first game back, and has done nothing but offer quality at bats ever since while saving one critical game with a spectacular catch. And yet, now he sits against lefties...

Even if he was not hitting, he is one of the best defensive right fielders in the National League and should probably be playing on that merit alone. As hot as Bruce was coming off his injury and before, it might have even been an opportunity to rest Votto and insert jay in the number three slot for that Sunday game against Brian Burres, or another game of Dusty's choosing. This team is running on fumes, and yet the one player who has shown that he may be maturing and providing a boost of energy to an otherwise lethargic lineup is suddenly treated like Brad Hawpe.

I don't understand it. Jay Bruce is providing outstanding ab's against pitchers of both persuasion right now. This club desperately needs the type of daily energy he has been providing, and yet he is being reserved. It would not be nearly as comfounding had he not been basically abused for the early part of this season, during which he struggled.

Don't give me Willie Bloomquist. Bruce needs to collect at least 4 ab's every game the remainder of the season against both lefties and righties if the Reds are going to win.

oregonred
09-18-2010, 02:18 AM
makes zero sense to me. With BP obviously still hurt, Rolen not 100%, why would you sit your #2 offensive weapon?

Hopefully 25% of the lead disappearing in 36 hours will serve as a wakeup call to the organization. This team is playing its worst baseball of the season over the last 2+ weeks.

Phhhl
09-18-2010, 02:20 AM
makes zero sense to me. With BP obviously still hurt, Rolen not 100%, why would you sit your #2 offensive weapon?

Hopefully 25% of the lead disappearing in 36 hours will serve as a wakeup call to the organization. This team is playing its worst baseball of the season over the last 2+ weeks.

Thank you.

Brutus
09-18-2010, 02:49 AM
Thank you.

Bruce was 1-for-17 lifetime against Wandy. I think he had something like 10 ks.

Phhhl
09-18-2010, 03:13 AM
Bruce was 1-for-17 lifetime against Wandy. I think he had something like 10 ks.

Yeah, but what I am talking about is that he didn't even start against Joe Friggin' Saunders Wednesday night. Bruce has a recharged battery, and all of a sudden Dusty is resting him while just about every other position player is operating on fumes? It makes absolutely no sense, considering the way they rode Jay early in the season in the face of his struggles. Dusty didn't even pretend to protect Jay then, but now that his skillset is desperately needed the manager is going to impose some kind of curfew on his talent? It is bizarre. In Jay Bruce we are talking about an incinderary kinderbox of baseball ability that was somehow both abused and ignored within the very same baseball season in 2010. The Reds run the danger of exemplifying the very definition of incompetence by their treatment of Jay right now. At worst, he is an extremely gifted young athlete who has not been worn down in recent weeks by the penant race. At best, he is the type of offensive weapon that can carry a team to heights that it would not have dared to dream of. I truly believe this guy is THAT kind of talent.

Every time I see a lineup without Jay Bruce from now until the end of the 2010 season takes a piece of my heart with it as a die hard Reds fan. The kid is still the key to the future.

Brutus
09-18-2010, 03:32 AM
Yeah, but what I am talking about is that he didn't even start against Joe Friggin' Saunders Wednesday night. Bruce has a recharged battery, and all of a sudden Dusty is resting him while just about every other position player is operating on fumes? It makes absolutely no sense, considering the way they rode Jay early in the season in the face of his struggles. Dusty didn't even pretend to protect Jay then, but now that his skillset is desperately needed the manager is going to impose some kind of curfew on his talent? It is bizarre. In Jay Bruce we are talking about an incinderary kinderbox of baseball ability that was somehow both abused and ignored within the very same baseball season in 2010. The Reds run the danger of exemplifying the very definition of incompetence by their treatment of Jay right now. At worst, he is an extremely gifted young athlete who has not been worn down in recent weeks by the penant race. At best, he is the type of offensive weapon that can carry a team to heights that it would not have dared to dream of. I truly believe this guy is THAT kind of talent.

Every time I see a lineup without Jay Bruce from now until the end of the 2010 season takes a piece of my heart with it as a die hard Reds fan. The kid is still the key to the future.

Bruce is still hurting pretty bad. I think Dusty has made that clear. I see nothing wrong with giving him rest against LHP since he is hurting. Heck, I wish they'd give Phillips more days off.

I can understand the argument that they're playing Phillips when he's hurt, so why not Jay... but given we don't know the extent of their injuries, we're not in complete position to critique that choice.

Phhhl
09-18-2010, 04:05 AM
If Jay is actually hurting I have no problem with what is happening. But, this guy is definately needed to finish off the Cardinals if he is in any way cabable of physically contributing in September. Talent like this is rare and it is what seperates Champions.

Ghosts of 1990
09-18-2010, 04:41 AM
This organization is sometimes weird, Dusty is weird, and this entire situation is weird. I agree with you. Something isn't adding up about the whole Jay Bruce scenario. The amount of time he spent injured and since the return. It just feels weird.

Thanks for saying what I would have been flamed for; it makes no sense to do this before we've clinched.

GAC
09-18-2010, 04:58 AM
He's obviously not quite 100% or else he would be in their consistently.

RFS62
09-18-2010, 07:33 AM
Bruce is still hurting pretty bad. I think Dusty has made that clear. I see nothing wrong with giving him rest against LHP since he is hurting. Heck, I wish they'd give Phillips more days off.

I can understand the argument that they're playing Phillips when he's hurt, so why not Jay... but given we don't know the extent of their injuries, we're not in complete position to critique that choice.


He's obviously not quite 100% or else he would be in their consistently.



Yeah, this is my take too.

We really don't know the whole story, but this makes sense to me.

RedsBaron
09-18-2010, 08:38 AM
why is the 24 year old kid who just came off two weeks of rest suddenly being platooned when he was in the lineup every single day from April through July?

Bruce is actually a mere 23.
That was about the only part of your post with which I disagreed. Unless Bruce really is more seriously injured than we know, I do not understand why he isn't playing more.

cincrazy
09-18-2010, 09:19 AM
I think it's obvious that Bruce is still in pain. I don't think Dusty would give him days off otherwise. After fouling off a Lindstrom pitch yesterday, Bruce took a few moments to collect himself and was stretching constantly. It seemed to me that he tweaked it. He's probably going to be in pain the rest of the season and is just going to have to deal with it. But a day off, especially against a tough lefty, with a substantial lead in the division... why not.

mth123
09-18-2010, 09:32 AM
My take is its fine to go easy on these guys for now. Its not over, but they can hit the gas later if the Cards show life. I'd keep getting guys over their bumps and bruises over the next week to 10 days and play the starters the last 5 days or so to get on a roll. Add Bruce' record with Wandy and its ok by me that he sat that one out.

The battle isn't over, but its under control. Time to replenish and conserve resources for the war.

Scrap Irony
09-18-2010, 10:36 AM
Bruce really twists his upper body on inside fastballs and lunges on the outside balls. It's worse against lefties. With an injured side, it makes sense to sit him against southpaws.

PuffyPig
09-18-2010, 11:08 AM
Bruce really twists his upper body on inside fastballs and lunges on the outside balls. It's worse against lefties. With an injured side, it makes sense to sit him against southpaws.

No, that can't be true, because that means there is no conspiracy and that would mean this tread is lame.

VR
09-18-2010, 11:19 AM
Did the Reds ever say how he got injured, and what he injured?
I've been away quite a bit, haven't seen anything.

Tommyjohn25
09-18-2010, 11:28 AM
No, that can't be true, because that means there is no conspiracy and that would mean this tread is lame.

Unnecessary.

Ghosts of 1990
09-18-2010, 11:37 AM
This was Bruce's 2nd home run of the night the other evening

http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=12030527

Look at him grimace in pain as he rounds the bases. He's definitely still in pain. I don't doubt that. I think that their fear is one swing and he is done for the year. So they're trying to limit the number of swings that he takes.

He really is similar to Roy Hobbs now.

westofyou
09-18-2010, 11:57 AM
I've watched a lot of playoff hockey that end with the revelation that a guy has been playing with a major injury, but still playing in certain instances. I've watched a lot of baseball where a manager sits a guy against a pitcher that owns him, mostly to make sure
he doesn't get thrown off his groove.

Those scenarios are real, and likely occurring in front of our eyes.

It doesn't mean anyone is stupid, it doesn't mean anyone is hiding something, it doesn't mean the world is going to end, it means that someone in the know is playing their cards, the way they think they should be played.

pedro
09-18-2010, 12:38 PM
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:yT-frBXdsg_wQM:http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e143/scott98321/dr_strangelove-763806.jpg&t=1
"Well, that would not be necessary Mr. Jocketty. It could easily be accomplished with a computer. And a computer could be set and programmed to accept factors from youth, health, sexual fertility, intelligence, and a cross section of necessary skills. Of course it would be absolutely vital that our top government and military men be included to foster and impart the required principles of leadership and tradition. Naturally, they would breed prodigiously, eh? There would be much time, and little to do. But ah with the proper breeding techniques and a ratio of say, ten females to each male, I would guess that they could then work their way back to the World Series within say, twenty years."

edabbs44
09-18-2010, 01:32 PM
This was Bruce's 2nd home run of the night the other evening

http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=12030527

Look at him grimace in pain as he rounds the bases. He's definitely still in pain. I don't doubt that. I think that their fear is one swing and he is done for the year. So they're trying to limit the number of swings that he takes.

He really is similar to Roy Hobbs now.

So Gomes shot him in the celebration now?

jojo
09-18-2010, 02:33 PM
So Gomes shot him in the celebration now?

If Gomes would've tried, he likely would've missed.

Ghosts of 1990
09-18-2010, 04:13 PM
The next walk off the Reds had after the infamous Bruce was when Votto went walk-off this past weekend.

Watch the mannerisms during the celebration: http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=11977613

Seems like they were acting as if they should be careful during it. Maybe someone got hurt during prior a walk off celebration perhaps?

Raisor
09-18-2010, 04:25 PM
http://theliberaloc.com/prevatt/blackhelicoptersbelieve.jpg

Mario-Rijo
09-18-2010, 05:38 PM
The next walk off the Reds had after the infamous Bruce was when Votto went walk-off this past weekend.

Watch the mannerisms during the celebration: http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=11977613

Seems like they were acting as if they should be careful during it. Maybe someone got hurt during prior a walk off celebration perhaps?

Go back to Bruces walk off and watch Rolen. I think being careful is a preventative measure they have tried to incorporate for some time.

VR
09-18-2010, 07:40 PM
Just checkin back in....what was the official injury and how did it happen?

jojo
09-18-2010, 09:45 PM
Just checkin back in....what was the official injury and how did it happen?

He tweaked his superstaranemius muscle by being too good. :cool:

Brutus
09-18-2010, 09:46 PM
He tweaked his superstaranemius muscle by being too good. :cool:

I had that happen once. It hurts for a while, but you gotta be tough enough to suck it up.

WebScorpion
09-19-2010, 02:53 AM
He really is similar to Roy Hobbs now.

Nope. Josh Hamilton was Roy Hobbs...there will never be another like him. ;)

dougdirt
09-19-2010, 05:06 AM
Jay Bruce. Still good at baseball.

TheNext44
09-19-2010, 05:32 AM
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:yT-frBXdsg_wQM:http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e143/scott98321/dr_strangelove-763806.jpg&t=1
"Well, that would not be necessary Mr. Jocketty. It could easily be accomplished with a computer. And a computer could be set and programmed to accept factors from youth, health, sexual fertility, intelligence, and a cross section of necessary skills. Of course it would be absolutely vital that our top government and military men be included to foster and impart the required principles of leadership and tradition. Naturally, they would breed prodigiously, eh? There would be much time, and little to do. But ah with the proper breeding techniques and a ratio of say, ten females to each male, I would guess that they could then work their way back to the World Series within say, twenty years."

:clap::clap::clap:

wheels
09-19-2010, 12:35 PM
George called him "The Beaumont Bomber" last night.

I like it.

BoydsOfSummer
09-19-2010, 11:26 PM
The Beaumont Bomber. That's sweet.

WVRedsFan
09-19-2010, 11:34 PM
George called him "The Beaumont Bomber" last night.

I like it.Yeah, but he called Travis Wood, "Woody." I guess taking that as an example. would Bruce be "Brucie?"

George is good with nicknames, so we'll go with Beaumont Bomber and Woody and see how the players feel about it.

BoydsOfSummer
09-19-2010, 11:52 PM
Your baseball nick name depends on the syllables in your last name. If you have one syllable Like Wood or Bruce, you become Woody and Brucie. More than one syllable and you get shortened: Casey= Case, Larkin= Lark

It's in the rule book. :D

Ghosts of 1990
09-20-2010, 09:34 AM
FWIW Grande didn't make up the "Beaumont Bomber".

It's been on Bruce's wikipedia page since 2008.

Brutus
09-20-2010, 03:31 PM
FWIW Grande didn't make up the "Beaumont Bomber".

It's been on Bruce's wikipedia page since 2008.

How do you know George Grande isn't the one that edited the page and put it there in 2008? Got you there, huh?

:D

wheels
09-20-2010, 04:28 PM
FWIW Grande didn't make up the "Beaumont Bomber".

It's been on Bruce's wikipedia page since 2008.

Stalker!:D

OnBaseMachine
09-20-2010, 04:31 PM
Jay Bruce, he of the .831 OPS vs LHP, is now being platooned, or so it seems.

membengal
09-20-2010, 04:39 PM
Yeah, and I don't get it. This is happening about one half second after he got red hot against lefties.

I hope it is Dusty protecting the sore side as opposed to a platoon. If it's a platoon, it's a real puzzler to me.

Brutus
09-20-2010, 04:39 PM
Jay Bruce, he of the .831 OPS vs LHP, is now being platooned, or so it seems.

Or more likely, if he's not yet fully healthy, which has been hinted over and again, Dusty is using him in the situations he's most likely to succeed until he does get healthy.

lollipopcurve
09-20-2010, 04:41 PM
hope it is Dusty protecting the sore side as opposed to a platoon. If it's a platoon, it's a real puzzler to me.

It's the former -- bank on it.

edabbs44
09-20-2010, 04:42 PM
Or more likely, if he's not yet fully healthy, which has been hinted over and again, Dusty is using him in the situations he's most likely to succeed until he does get healthy.

Personally, I'd rather see him blow out his oblique against Capuano tonight than have him available for the playoffs.

- Charlie Manuel

membengal
09-20-2010, 04:42 PM
It's the former -- bank on it.

I will. But it would be nice if Fay might inquire.

Brutus
09-20-2010, 04:46 PM
I will. But it would be nice if Fay might inquire.

It's already been written about several times. Fay has stated on at least a few occasions that Bruce won't be 100% until after the season.

OnBaseMachine
09-20-2010, 04:46 PM
So if Dusty is being extra cautious with Bruce, then why is he still running Phillips out there every day?

RedsManRick
09-20-2010, 04:47 PM
I'm guessing it goes back to keeping his side healthy. But that explanation really makes one wonder about his handling of Phillips. Why has his slump/injury been pretty much ignored by Fay, Hal and company?

Brutus
09-20-2010, 04:48 PM
So if Dusty is being extra cautious with Bruce, then why is he still running Phillips out there every day?

Perhaps Phillips hasn't been as forthcoming about the extent of the pain associated with it.

Either way, both situations are different. I think Phillips is clearly banged up and unproductive right now, but one has nothing to do with the other.

membengal
09-20-2010, 04:48 PM
It's already been written about several times. Fay has stated on at least a few occasions that Bruce won't be 100% until after the season.

I get that, and yet, a clarification question about resting Bruce against lefties, which has NOT been asked that I know of, might be relevant at this point.

Again, if it's not too much trouble.

Brutus
09-20-2010, 04:51 PM
I get that, and yet, a clarification question about resting Bruce against lefties, which has NOT been asked that I know of, might be relevant at this point.

Again, if it's not too much trouble.

Clarification of what? He's not 100%, thereby he's not playing every day. So it's natural, I would think, if he's not going to play everyday, wouldn't you rest him against the people he's less likely to be successful against? What exactly are you looking to get clarified. Seems pretty self-explanatory.

membengal
09-20-2010, 04:54 PM
Brutus, I sometimes think you have a personal problem with me. Bruce is .831 OPS against lefties, which is pretty darn successful, but, whatever.

I get it, even though it hasn't been specifically asked of Dusty regarding resting against lefties, you think it SOOOOOO self evident that it doesn't need to be asked.

Fine. You must be right. I apologize for wondering if it could be asked. And I apologize for stepping into this thread.

My bad.

Brutus
09-20-2010, 05:06 PM
Brutus, I sometimes think you have a personal problem with me. Bruce is .831 OPS against lefties, which is pretty darn successful, but, whatever.

I get it, even though it hasn't been specifically asked of Dusty regarding resting against lefties, you think it SOOOOOO self evident that it doesn't need to be asked.

Fine. You must be right. I apologize for wondering if it could be asked. And I apologize for stepping into this thread.

My bad.

What is it with you and the overreactions everytime someone doesn't agree with you? Stop taking everything so personally. It's nothing personal.

All I'm saying is that even considering how guarded the Reds are with injuries, they've practically spelled out that Bruce ain't healthy. From there, it shouldn't take a Masters to figure out why they're treating the situation as they are. If he's not fully healthy and not ready to play everyday, how else would you treat it? Wouldn't you start him in games where he's more likely to be successful? He's hitting LHP better this year than in the past, but does anyone prefer he sat against RHP in favor of LHP? Is that your suggestion?

membengal
09-20-2010, 05:09 PM
I am NOT disagreeing with what the Reds are doing, necessarily. What I was wondering is if anyone has specifically asked Dusty or Walt if they are sitting Bruce against lefties specifically to protect his side. That's all. And, as near as I can tell from what I have read, they have not. That's all I was asking, simply seeking information. And you have chosen to cudgel that, for whatever reason. God forbid people seek information on this board.

As for the rest of it with you, please take it off the board and PM. It is personal with you as to me, and it seems strange to me.

edabbs44
09-20-2010, 05:12 PM
I'm guessing it goes back to keeping his side healthy. But that explanation really makes one wonder about his handling of Phillips. Why has his slump/injury been pretty much ignored by Fay, Hal and company?

Maybe he isn't injured.

Brutus
09-20-2010, 05:25 PM
I am NOT disagreeing with what the Reds are doing, necessarily. What I was wondering is if anyone has specifically asked Dusty or Walt if they are sitting Bruce against lefties specifically to protect his side. That's all. And, as near as I can tell from what I have read, they have not. That's all I was asking, simply seeking information. And you have chosen to cudgel that, for whatever reason. God forbid people seek information on this board.

As for the rest of it with you, please take it off the board and PM. It is personal with you as to me, and it seems strange to me.

There's nothing personal, so there's no reason to take it to PM. It's all in your head.

You're more than welcome to seek information on this board. And others are more than welcome to point out it's practically been spelled out as to what the situation is. Nothing more, nothing less.

wheels
09-20-2010, 06:27 PM
I think it's a perfectly reasonable question to ask.

I've not seen anything quoted or written to suggest that resting him against lefties has anything to do with Jay's injury.

I'd think his recent performance might suggest he's healthier than, say Phillips.

I think it's a very valid question, and I've raised my eyebrows more than once when I've seen the lineups of late.

It reminds me of when Lou would sit Paul O'niell because he didn't think he could hit lefties. We all know how that turned out.

Sometimes a manager can outsmart himself.

Oh, and Brutus... Could you point out to us dummies the quote from Dusty alluding to this? I really can't come up with anything.

RedsManRick
09-20-2010, 06:35 PM
I'm with wheels and membengal here, Brutus. I assume it's injury related, but he's also been spotted against tough lefties in the past. Consider how well he's played lately and in contrast to how BP is being handled, it's worth an inquiry -- unless you've read something we haven't that lays out the situation more clearly.

Brutus
09-20-2010, 06:41 PM
I'm with wheels and membengal here, Brutus. I assume it's injury related, but he's also been spotted against tough lefties in the past. Consider how well he's played lately and in contrast to how BP is being handled, it's worth an inquiry -- unless you've read something we haven't that lays out the situation more clearly.

It's already been said. People just want it flashed in big letters and spray painted on billboards throughout the city.

From Mark Sheldon on September 12:


"We're targeting Tuesday," Reds manager Dusty Baker said. "They said he won't completely heal 100 percent until the winter. Waiting a couple of more weeks is going to help but it's not going to ... so we may have to space him. He's very close. He let it out pretty good yesterday. He swung pretty good."

http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/jay-bruce-out-since-august-30-expected-to-return-tuesday.php

Seems pretty transparent. The comment about "space him" implies spreading out his starts. Putting two and two together, it's not hard to figure out what Dusty has in mind here.

wheels
09-20-2010, 06:42 PM
I'm with wheels and membengal here, Brutus. I assume it's injury related, but he's also been spotted against tough lefties in the past. Consider how well he's played lately and in contrast to how BP is being handled, it's worth an inquiry -- unless you've read something we haven't that lays out the situation more clearly.

I suspect it's conjecture, because I still haven't found any quotes.

I would just love it if Fay or Marty, or anyone asked Dusty straight up "Why do you platoon Bruce against lefties? He seems to be seeing the ball well against them of late".

What would be the harm in that?

wheels
09-20-2010, 06:44 PM
It's already been said. People just want it flashed in big letters and spray painted on billboards throughout the city.

From Mark Sheldon on September 12:



http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/jay-bruce-out-since-august-30-expected-to-return-tuesday.php

Seems pretty transparent.

Doesn't really answer the real question, though.

Why does Dusty think Jay can't hit lefties?

Brutus
09-20-2010, 06:45 PM
Doesn't really answer the real question, though.

Why does Dusty think Jay can't hit lefties?

This isn't rocket science. It has nothing to do with Dusty thinking he can't hit lefties.

If Dusty wants to "space him" i.e. giving him days off, doesn't it make more sense to play him against righties than lefties? I mean statistically, he's got a better chance of being successful against RHP than LHP. This isn't about thinking he can't hit left-handed pitching... it's about needing to find him days off, and since you have to sit him some, it's better to do it against LHP.

edabbs44
09-20-2010, 06:48 PM
Doesn't really answer the real question, though.

Why does Dusty think Jay can't hit lefties?

I don't think that's the case.

wheels
09-20-2010, 06:51 PM
This isn't rocket science. It has nothing to do with Dusty thinking he can't hit lefties.

If Dusty wants to "space him" i.e. giving him days off, doesn't it make more sense to play him against righties than lefties? I mean statistically, he's got a better chance of being successful against RHP than LHP. This isn't about thinking he can't hit left-handed pitching... it's about needing to find him days off, and since you have to sit him some, it's better to do it against LHP.


Giving him a day off here and there is fine, but to almost religiously "rest" him against lefties smacks of dogmatic nonsense.

Oh, and please give your little comments a rest. They add nothing to the discussion.

Brutus
09-20-2010, 07:02 PM
Giving him a day off here and there is fine, but to almost religiously "rest" him against lefties smacks of dogmatic nonsense.

Oh, and please give your little comments a rest. They add nothing to the discussion.

Religiously? Dusty has given Bruce 175 plate appearances against LHP this year. And now, when he says he's spacing the guy out because he's not 100%, he's religiously resting him? That doesn't really make any sense. I'm sorry if that's one of my "little comments" but people are overreacting.

Also, when do you rest Bruce? If Dusty is trying to space him out, as he's said, what is your suggestion? Do you have a better one or do you just want to complain he's religiously resting him against lefties? Should Dusty instead bench him against a RHP to give him rest just to make everyone feel better? If he's going to rest Bruce, wouldn't you rather he do it in situations that maximize Bruce's success? Do you have a better plan? If so, I genuinely would like to hear it. So far no one has offered a better solution.

Homer Bailey
09-20-2010, 07:07 PM
FWIW, I'm with Brutus on this 100%.

Just wish they'd take the same approach with BP (I do realize it's not an apples to apples comparison).

RedsManRick
09-20-2010, 07:09 PM
It's already been said. People just want it flashed in big letters and spray painted on billboards throughout the city.

From Mark Sheldon on September 12:



http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/jay-bruce-out-since-august-30-expected-to-return-tuesday.php

Seems pretty transparent. The comment about "space him" implies spreading out his starts. Putting two and two together, it's not hard to figure out what Dusty has in mind here.

No need to get snippy. Some people may have missed that article or the in which it was initially cited. It would have been much easier to simply point back to this article the first time the question was raised today.

I appreciate that you mind find it a bit annoying to feel like you're repeating yourself or point out the obvious. But a little more edification and a little less condescension goes a long way.

edabbs44
09-20-2010, 07:14 PM
No need to get snippy. Some people may have missed that article or the in which it was initially cited. It would have been much easier to simply point back to this article the first time the question was raised today.

Even if you didn't see the quote, why is the default reaction "Dusty doesn't think Bruce can hit lefties?". I guess I know the answer to that, but that doesn't have to be the standard reaction.

membengal
09-20-2010, 07:16 PM
I don't think that was the default reaction. I know, for my part, I was asking if anyone had specifically asked Dusty if the resting was going to be concentrated against lefties.

Which, it appears to be. And which no writer has apparently asked Dusty.

There may be reasons for that such as it potentially aggravates the injury more for Bruce to swing against lefties. If so, I get that. If it is a default rest because he isn't strong against lefties, I don't get that quite as much.

For my part.

edabbs44
09-20-2010, 07:25 PM
I don't think that was the default reaction. I know, for my part, I was asking if anyone had specifically asked Dusty if the resting was going to be concentrated against lefties.

Which, it appears to be. And which no writer has apparently asked Dusty.

There may be reasons for that such as it potentially aggravates the injury more for Bruce to swing against lefties. If so, I get that. If it is a default rest because he isn't strong against lefties, I don't get that quite as much.

For my part.

I guess I don't see the reason why anyone needs to ask him the question b/c it is fairly obvious. I know some think that Dusty is a bumbling idiot, but I am pretty sure that he realizes that Bruce is better than Heisey vs LHP. And I am willing to bet that we see Bruce in the lineup vs Hamels, Zito or any other LHP they face in the playoffs. Barring injury, of course.

wheels
09-20-2010, 07:28 PM
Religiously? Dusty has given Bruce 175 plate appearances against LHP this year. And now, when he says he's spacing the guy out because he's not 100%, he's religiously resting him? That doesn't really make any sense. I'm sorry if that's one of my "little comments" but people are overreacting.

Also, when do you rest Bruce? If Dusty is trying to space him out, as he's said, what is your suggestion? Do you have a better one or do you just want to complain he's religiously resting him against lefties? Should Dusty instead bench him against a RHP to give him rest just to make everyone feel better? If he's going to rest Bruce, wouldn't you rather he do it in situations that maximize Bruce's success? Do you have a better plan? If so, I genuinely would like to hear it. So far no one has offered a better solution.

It would make more sense to me if they had a righty option that could make a difference against a lefty.

Rest him whenever, handedness of the opposing pitcher shouldn't matter all that much at this point.

Do they have anyone that hits lefties at an .800 plus OPS clip to replace him? Or even replacement level for that matter?

Worried about something flaring up? Fine. Replacing him against almost any lefty that comes down the pike? I'm a little iffy about that methodology.

Brutus
09-20-2010, 07:31 PM
No need to get snippy. Some people may have missed that article or the in which it was initially cited. It would have been much easier to simply point back to this article the first time the question was raised today.

I appreciate that you mind find it a bit annoying to feel like you're repeating yourself or point out the obvious. But a little more edification and a little less condescension goes a long way.

You're right the reaction was a tad overboard since not everyone had seen the quote. That's my bad.

At first it seemed like no one denied Dusty had said it, thereby making it feel like no further clarification should be necessary. When it was clear not everyone saw it, I should have kept that in mind and discussed that as if it were completely from square one.

But it just feels like if we all know now that Dusty's intention is to give Bruce days off, wondering whether or not the intention is to do it against LHP is probably just stating the obvious and will be ammunition to find something to complain about. Even though Bruce might need to rest every few days, people will be offended if it's against LHP just because they want to imply that means Dusty has no faith in Bruce, even if it's truly just playing the odds.

Brutus
09-20-2010, 07:34 PM
It would make more sense to me if they had a righty option that could make a difference against a lefty.

Rest him whenever, handedness of the opposing pitcher shouldn't matter all that much at this point.

Do they have anyone that hits lefties at an .800 plus OPS clip to replace him? Or even replacement level for that matter?

Worried about something flaring up? Fine. Replacing him against almost any lefty that comes down the pike? I'm a little iffy about that methodology.

OK but if you concede that Dusty is going to have to rest Bruce, wouldn't you rather it be against LHP than RHP? The methodology is about getting him rest, not whether someone else gives them a better chance against LHP.

I agree, at this point, no one they would put in (i.e. Heisey) would give them a better chance against LH pitching. But that's not the issue. The issue is that Dusty feels like Bruce isn't able/ready to play everyday, so if you have to pick your spots to rest him, why not do it in games where he is less inclined to have success?

If Edmonds & Nix were more healthy, I think it's an easier choice to sit Bruce against the occasional right-hander instead, as you have a suitable replacement. But neither is healthy, so unfortunately Dusty's options are limited. I don't see any better choices.

wheels
09-20-2010, 07:37 PM
You're right the reaction was a tad overboard since not everyone had seen the quote. That's my bad.

At first it seemed like no one denied Dusty had said it, thereby making it feel like no further clarification should be necessary. When it was clear not everyone saw it, I should have kept that in mind and discussed that as if it were completely from square one.

But it just feels like if we all know now that Dusty's intention is to give Bruce days off, wondering whether or not the intention is to do it against LHP is probably just stating the obvious and will be ammunition to find something to complain about. Even though Bruce might need to rest every few days, people will be offended if it's against LHP just because they want to imply that means Dusty has no faith in Bruce, even if it's truly just playing the odds.

Meh.

Sometimes the lines between discussion or light critique and downright complaining can be blurred over the internet.

I've been pretty supportive of Dusty during his tenure. It doesn't mean that I won't have a few questions.

Now... If I were to have said "That stinking Dusty...Always sticking it to the young guys". That should be deemed as unwarranted bickering.

wheels
09-20-2010, 07:38 PM
OK but if you concede that Dusty is going to have to rest Bruce, wouldn't you rather it be against LHP than RHP? The methodology is about getting him rest, not whether someone else gives them a better chance against LHP.

I agree, at this point, no one they would put in (i.e. Heisey) would give them a better chance against LH pitching. But that's not the issue. The issue is that Dusty feels like Bruce isn't able/ready to play everyday, so if you have to pick your spots to rest him, why not do it in games where he is less inclined to have success?

If Edmonds & Nix were more healthy, I think it's an easier choice to sit Bruce against the occasional right-hander instead, as you have a suitable replacement. But neither is healthy, so unfortunately Dusty's options are limited. I don't see any better choices.

Oh, you're right.

There aren't any good choices either way. They aren't exactly deep out there.

It is what it is, I suppose.

Ghosts of 1990
09-20-2010, 08:54 PM
So if Dusty is being extra cautious with Bruce, then why is he still running Phillips out there every day?

This is what doesn't add up to me. And while he's sat Rolen a little bit; he's been running him out there pretty regularly. And he's ran Votto out there every day, Alonso is yet to get his first start.

Something smells fishy about the whole Bruce thing, I've said it since the beginning. At the very least, it's frustrating.

Brutus
09-20-2010, 08:55 PM
This is what doesn't add up to me. And while he's sat Rolen a little bit; he's been running him out there pretty regularly. And he's ran Votto out there every day, Alonso is yet to get his first start.

Something smells fishy about the whole Bruce thing, I've said it since the beginning. At the very least, it's frustrating.

You said from the beginning he was more hurt than they were leading on, right? That's pretty much been confirmed, though not to the extreme you were saying. Not really anything fishy, he's just not 100%

Ghosts of 1990
09-20-2010, 09:01 PM
You said from the beginning he was more hurt than they were leading on, right? That's pretty much been confirmed, though not to the extreme you were saying. Not really anything fishy, he's just not 100%

I think the whole thing can be deduced to this; the torque on his swing against LHP might cause more risk for re-injury than righties. That has to be Dusty's thinking. Not that he can't hit lefties and such.

I just want to know what the thinking is here... I mean is he going to get every other night off in the playoffs too? And of course as others have speculated, rest of the team running on fumes and they're trotted out every day. Why so careful with Bruce when he's been swinging it as well as he has in his MLB career?

IslandRed
09-21-2010, 12:27 AM
And of course as others have speculated, rest of the team running on fumes and they're trotted out every day. Why so careful with Bruce when he's been swinging it as well as he has in his MLB career?

Those other guys didn't miss two weeks at the beginning of the month for a problem that hasn't completely gone away. I get that some of them need rest to have full tanks for the playoffs, and I suspect they'll get it after the clinch, but one of these situations weighs more on the caution scale than the others.

Ron Madden
09-21-2010, 05:06 AM
I think it's a perfectly reasonable question to ask.

I've not seen anything quoted or written to suggest that resting him against lefties has anything to do with Jay's injury.

I'd think his recent performance might suggest he's healthier than, say Phillips.

I think it's a very valid question, and I've raised my eyebrows more than once when I've seen the lineups of late.

It reminds me of when Lou would sit Paul O'niell because he didn't think he could hit lefties. We all know how that turned out.

Sometimes a manager can outsmart himself.

Oh, and Brutus... Could you point out to us dummies the quote from Dusty alluding to this? I really can't come up with anything.

Very articulate post, nice job Wheels! :beerme:

Ron Madden
09-21-2010, 05:41 AM
Religiously? Dusty has given Bruce 175 plate appearances against LHP this year. And now, when he says he's spacing the guy out because he's not 100%, he's religiously resting him? That doesn't really make any sense. I'm sorry if that's one of my "little comments" but people are overreacting.

Also, when do you rest Bruce? If Dusty is trying to space him out, as he's said, what is your suggestion? Do you have a better one or do you just want to complain he's religiously resting him against lefties? Should Dusty instead bench him against a RHP to give him rest just to make everyone feel better? If he's going to rest Bruce, wouldn't you rather he do it in situations that maximize Bruce's success? Do you have a better plan? If so, I genuinely would like to hear it. So far no one has offered a better solution.

All we are saying is, if Dusty feels it necessary to rest Bruce because of injury why doesn't he think it's necessary to sit Brandon every now and the because of injury?

Some of you guys always try to twist any question or concern others may have about the Reds into Dusty or front office bashing.

Almost like there's a higher class of Reds Fan than those of us who voice our concerns and don't always agree with every single move made.

Sure, there has been plenty of front office/manager bashing in the past but that is clearly not the case here.

Go ahead and flame on me if it inflates your Internet bully confidence, won't bother me a bit because I don't really care about such nonsense.

mth123
09-21-2010, 07:39 AM
My take on this is:

1. Phillips injury isn't going to be compounded by playing. Personally, I think he'd benefit from a couple days off. Not just his injury, but it would probably freshen his legs, his mind and freshen him in general going into October, but I'm guessing his injury is not really the type that requires taking it easy on him. Its simply a matter of how much pain he's willing to put up with until things heal up.

2. Bruce won't be 100% again this year and taking it easy on him or "spacing him out" makes it reasonable to plan his off days when lefty pitching is on the mound. I can't see any reason to do otherwise. If no lefties were sheduled to appear against the Reds, I'm sure he'd get an off day against RHP every few days, but since lefty pitching is schedlued, why not do it then?

3. His small sample splits in the big leagues don't show it, but its better for Heisey to spot him in versus lefty pitching as opposed to RHP. As a minor leaguer, Heisey had a .921 OPS in 449 AB versus LHP as opposed to a .799 in in 1341 versus AB versus RHP. If Heisey has a future in any type of regular role in an OF corner, its likely going to be hitting LHP that will secure it.

edabbs44
09-21-2010, 07:54 AM
I'm still wondering if Phillips is truly injured. Here's a guy who was hitting well above his typical numbers and has encountered a rough patch which had now brought him back into line with his normal levels.

Why can't this just be a slump?

Ghosts of 1990
09-21-2010, 10:16 AM
My take on this is:

1. Phillips injury isn't going to be compounded by playing. Personally, I think he'd benefit from a couple days off. Not just his injury, but it would probably freshen his legs, his mind and freshen him in general going into October, but I'm guessing his injury is not really the type that requires taking it easy on him. Its simply a matter of how much pain he's willing to put up with until things heal up.

2. Bruce won't be 100% again this year and taking it easy on him or "spacing him out" makes it reasonable to plan his off days when lefty pitching is on the mound. I can't see any reason to do otherwise. If no lefties were sheduled to appear against the Reds, I'm sure he'd get an off day against RHP every few days, but since lefty pitching is schedlued, why not do it then?

3. His small sample splits in the big leagues don't show it, but its better for Heisey to spot him in versus lefty pitching as opposed to RHP. As a minor leaguer, Heisey had a .921 OPS in 449 AB versus LHP as opposed to a .799 in in 1341 versus AB versus RHP. If Heisey has a future in any type of regular role in an OF corner, its likely going to be hitting LHP that will secure it.

I think your takes are all right on.

Most of the discussion I believe is derived from a simple principle. We've been waiting for a long time for Jay Bruce to look like he has 'arrived' so to speak. To see a return on the promise that we heard Jay Bruce had, and this year we saw it many times and on a more consistent basis; but the one thing holding him back is this.... "side problem" which has been mysterious.

lollipopcurve
09-21-2010, 10:20 AM
"side problem" which has been mysterious.

It's isn't mysterious. It's a muscle strain somewhere in his side. Who cares whether it's his oblique or not. He's playing intermittently to minimize the chance he reinjures himself. That's really all there is to it.

westofyou
09-21-2010, 10:28 AM
I'm still wondering if Phillips is truly injured. Here's a guy who was hitting well above his typical numbers and has encountered a rough patch which had now brought him back into line with his normal levels.

Why can't this just be a slump?

Did he not get hit on the hand and miss some games?

Is not the hand a big part of hitting?

Has his hitting declined since he was injured and came back?

edabbs44
09-21-2010, 11:07 AM
Did he not get hit on the hand and miss some games?

Is not the hand a big part of hitting?

Has his hitting declined since he was injured and came back?

Yes, yes and yes. But that is pretty much all circumstantial.

Quote from Dusty yesterday:


It started out with his hand, Reds manager Dusty Baker said. Then it went to pitch selection. Then it went into hitting the ball hard and not getting anything to show for it. As long as, hes hitting the ball hard youd like him to mix in some walks that goes back to pitch selection.

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/reds/2010/09/20/notes-on-phillips-bailey/

Here are some other thoughts.

Phillips' OPS by year:

2008 - .754
2009 - .776
2010 - .745

Kind of consistent, even with this slump. Maybe it is just his numbers evening out?

Phillips' OPS on day he got hit: .801. Phillips OPS today: .745. Drop of .056 in 20 or so games.

Phillips' OPS on July 7 of this year: .855. Phillips' OPS on July 26 of this year: .792. Drop of .063 in 15 or so games.

The truth is that Phillips' numbers were steadily dropping from a high water mark of .855 OPS on July 7th. He was at .801 when he got hit. The hand probably didn't help at the time, but I'm not sure that these guys would be so dense to keep playing him if he was really injured. We sit here and look at his stats and say "Well of course he is injured, look at his numbers", but Dusty is seeing him day in and day out and recognizes that he is hitting the ball hard. As we know, numbers aren't the whole story.

IslandRed
09-21-2010, 11:19 AM
“It started out with his hand,” Reds manager Dusty Baker said. “Then it went to pitch selection. Then it went into hitting the ball hard and not getting anything to show for it. As long as, he’s hitting the ball hard — you’d like him to mix in some walks — that goes back to pitch selection.”

That'll make some people's heads explode. :cool: Oh well, a subject for another thread.

westofyou
09-21-2010, 12:54 PM
Yes, yes and yes. But that is pretty much all circumstantial.

Quote from Dusty yesterday:



http://cincinnati.com/blogs/reds/2010/09/20/notes-on-phillips-bailey/

Here are some other thoughts.

Phillips' OPS by year:

2008 - .754
2009 - .776
2010 - .745

Kind of consistent, even with this slump. Maybe it is just his numbers evening out?

Phillips' OPS on day he got hit: .801. Phillips OPS today: .745. Drop of .056 in 20 or so games.

Phillips' OPS on July 7 of this year: .855. Phillips' OPS on July 26 of this year: .792. Drop of .063 in 15 or so games.

The truth is that Phillips' numbers were steadily dropping from a high water mark of .855 OPS on July 7th. He was at .801 when he got hit. The hand probably didn't help at the time, but I'm not sure that these guys would be so dense to keep playing him if he was really injured. We sit here and look at his stats and say "Well of course he is injured, look at his numbers", but Dusty is seeing him day in and day out and recognizes that he is hitting the ball hard. As we know, numbers aren't the whole story.

His game is swing the bat, he could be going through a massive correction plus a regression of the temporary nature.



Overall

Pitches Seen 2332

Taken 1117 48%
Swung At 1215 52%

Pitches Taken
Taken for a Strike 290 26%

Called a ball 827 74%

Pitches Taken by Pitch Location

In Strike Zone 290 26%
High 188 17%
Low 248 22%
Inside 121 11%
Outside 260 23%

Swung At
Missed 232 19%
Fouled Off 451 37%
Put in Play 532 44%
Swung At by Pitch Location

In Strike Zone 767 64%
High 63 5%
Low 160 13%
Inside 65 5%
Outside 148 12%

Nasty_Boy
09-21-2010, 01:27 PM
"side problem" which has been mysterious

You have to be trying to get people fired up... You pull/strain a muscle and it hurts. A strain in the rib cage/oblique area is going to hurt a guy that swings the bat more than a guy that sits behind a desk. I think the first 4 months of the season showed that if Jay is healthy then he'll be in the lineup. Obviously the guy wasn't able to go and is still struggling with the injury from time to time.

westofyou
09-21-2010, 01:49 PM
It's only mysterious if you make it your business, since it's really not your business the only mystery is in why it bothers some so much.

Doesn't life throw enough curves at one to fret over in real life?

LoganBuck
09-21-2010, 02:06 PM
You have to be trying to get people fired up... You pull/strain a muscle and it hurts. A strain in the rib cage/oblique area is going to hurt a guy that swings the bat more than a guy that sits behind a desk. I think the first 4 months of the season showed that if Jay is healthy then he'll be in the lineup. Obviously the guy wasn't able to go and is still struggling with the injury from time to time.

Agree with this.

Also is there anything wrong with trying to give Chris Heisey some at bats to try and work out of his horrible slump? I would kind of like to see him heat up a little before the playoffs. I am not too eager to see Jay Bruce batting against Cole Hamels, or Johnathon Sanchez. It doesn't look good when he is healthy.

Cedric
09-21-2010, 02:41 PM
Agree with this.

Also is there anything wrong with trying to give Chris Heisey some at bats to try and work out of his horrible slump? I would kind of like to see him heat up a little before the playoffs. I am not too eager to see Jay Bruce batting against Cole Hamels, or Johnathon Sanchez. It doesn't look good when he is healthy.

You aren't going to see one second of Heisey in the playoffs if Bruce is healthy. No matter what he looked like against Hamels or Sanchez in the past.

He has to play every game.

edabbs44
09-21-2010, 02:48 PM
Agree with this.

Also is there anything wrong with trying to give Chris Heisey some at bats to try and work out of his horrible slump? I would kind of like to see him heat up a little before the playoffs. I am not too eager to see Jay Bruce batting against Cole Hamels, or Johnathon Sanchez. It doesn't look good when he is healthy.

Heisey has the 7th most ABs (45) on the team in September. He has posted a .200/.217/.289 line with a 16/0 K/BB ratio.

At this point, I think I'd rather see Bruce get up from the right side against Hamels than see Heisey at the plate.

OnBaseMachine
09-21-2010, 03:39 PM
Jay Bruce now has a 4.0 WAR this season. Drew Stubbs is at 2.5 despite having a UZR rating well below what it should be, IMO.

Brutus
09-21-2010, 04:38 PM
All we are saying is, if Dusty feels it necessary to rest Bruce because of injury why doesn't he think it's necessary to sit Brandon every now and the because of injury?

Some of you guys always try to twist any question or concern others may have about the Reds into Dusty or front office bashing.

Almost like there's a higher class of Reds Fan than those of us who voice our concerns and don't always agree with every single move made.

Sure, there has been plenty of front office/manager bashing in the past but that is clearly not the case here.

Go ahead and flame on me if it inflates your Internet bully confidence, won't bother me a bit because I don't really care about such nonsense.

Already hashed things out with wheels, so really uncool of you to try and bait me with the "internet bully confidence" stuff. What the heck is internet bully confidence anyhow? Lame. Seems like you're trying to pick a fight with this.

All I'm going to say is I have no problems with criticizing a manager. But doing so when he flat tells you why he's doing something and you still go out of your way to assume something that isn't there, you're going out of your way to bash him. There's a history of that around here. I've made it clear I'm not a big Dusty fan and there's plenty that's fair game about him. But this holds no water. The stats and his comments both suggest this is all injury related. He said so. Bruce's plate appearances versus LHP says so.

Your "internet bully" stuff aside, I have no desire to take your bait.

PuffyPig
09-21-2010, 05:13 PM
Heisey has been absolutely horrible vs. LH pitching this year.

Bruce should be starting in RF in any meaningful game vs. any pitcher.

Ron Madden
09-22-2010, 04:21 AM
Already hashed things out with wheels, so really uncool of you to try and bait me with the "internet bully confidence" stuff. What the heck is internet bully confidence anyhow? Lame. Seems like you're trying to pick a fight with this.

All I'm going to say is I have no problems with criticizing a manager. But doing so when he flat tells you why he's doing something and you still go out of your way to assume something that isn't there, you're going out of your way to bash him. There's a history of that around here. I've made it clear I'm not a big Dusty fan and there's plenty that's fair game about him. But this holds no water. The stats and his comments both suggest this is all injury related. He said so. Bruce's plate appearances versus LHP says so.

Your "internet bully" stuff aside, I have no desire to take your bait.

I wasn't baiting you and you know it. As you are one of the master baiters around here I'm sure you can tell the difference.

I'll move on now, maybe you should do the same.

Brutus
09-22-2010, 05:17 AM
I wasn't baiting you and you know it. As you are one of the master baiters around here I'm sure you can tell the difference.

I'll move on now, maybe you should do the same.

Yeah you really took the high road. Saying I'm one of the master baiters and then saying you're moving on. That's kind of amusing.

Tommyjohn25
09-22-2010, 09:09 AM
Really? Both of you. Stop it.

Ghosts of 1990
09-22-2010, 09:02 PM
http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20100922/COL03/309220112/Face-of-the-Reds-Jay-Bruce-

Is Jay Bruce the face of the Reds?
Daugherty: Bruce is who the Reds have been and will be

Great article. Give it a read.

RedEye
09-22-2010, 09:37 PM
Thanks for the link to the Daugherty piece. Always liked reading his prose--except for backhanded comments like this:


Now, hes good. Hes very good, actually. Bruce leads the league in something called Range Factor (putouts plus assists, divided by games played) and is second-best in something equally arcane, if informative, Total Zone Rating. TZR measures how many runs a player has saved or cost his team. Dont ask how.

Anyway, I like that he's using "new" stats to prove his point here, even if he can't quite admit that they are, well, useful to prove a point. I suppose we can give him a few more years on that.

Brutus
09-22-2010, 09:39 PM
Thanks for the link to the Daugherty piece. Always liked reading his prose--except for backhanded comments like this:



Anyway, I like that he's using "new" stats to prove his point here, even if he can't quite admit that they are, well, useful to prove a point. I suppose we can give him a few more years on that.

If he doesn't believe in them, that's his prerogative. Not everyone thinks they're useful. No harm in that, right?