PDA

View Full Version : Not DL'ing Ramon hurt us last night



brm7675
07-09-2010, 10:20 AM
For whatever reason, the stupidity of the Reds to not put Ramon H. on the DL really hurt us last night. He was unavailable to even PH, they couldh't use Janish because he was the emergency catcher so we basically played with 23 men last night. Sad....:confused:

GIDP
07-09-2010, 10:21 AM
For whatever reason, the stupidity of the Reds to not put Ramon H. on the DL really hurt us last night. He was unavailable to even PH, they couldh't use Janish because he was the emergency catcher so we basically played with 23 men last night. Sad....:confused:

They dont exactly have any options right now...

brm7675
07-09-2010, 10:24 AM
Yes they do, call up Ryan Hannigan, problem solved....


They dont exactly have any options right now...

GIDP
07-09-2010, 10:26 AM
Yes they do, call up Ryan Hannigan, problem solved....

He was out with a stiff neck last night in AAA...

brm7675
07-09-2010, 10:35 AM
Then you call up another catcher, you CAN NOT go with just 1 catcher on the major league roster, this is not brain surgery, your DL your injured catcher and you bring up a backup who if needed can put on the gear and catch.

GIDP
07-09-2010, 10:37 AM
Then you call up another catcher, you CAN NOT go with just 1 catcher on the major league roster, this is not brain surgery, your DL your injured catcher and you bring up a backup who if needed can put on the gear and catch.

What catcher do you call up? Who do you DFA to make room for that catcher?

texasdave
07-09-2010, 10:53 AM
You could open up a roster spot by moving a player from the 15-day DL to the 60-day DL.
Mike Lincoln would be a prime candidate or maybe Homer Bailey (depending on how long you think it will take him to be ready to pitch in the majors again). Players on the 60-day DL do not count against your 40-man roster. There are no limits to the amount of players you can stash on the 60-day DL. At least, according to the following link there isn't.

Here is a link that discusses the options: http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/index.php?action=printpage;topic=31218.0

Also, while trying to find that answer, I gathered that clubs have to file a daily roster report with the league office. And if you list the status of a player as day-to-day you can retroactively (up to 10 days) put them on the DL. That being the reason you hear that term used so often.

There may be more to it than just that. But that is what I found. Take it with a grain of salt.

brm7675
07-09-2010, 10:59 AM
Well put Mike Lincoln on the 60 day DL works for me...


What catcher do you call up? Who do you DFA to make room for that catcher?

The Voice of IH
07-09-2010, 11:02 AM
Well put Mike Lincoln on the 60 day DL works for me...

that is a fantastic idea....what catcher we calling up to fill the spot?

NeilHamburger
07-09-2010, 12:26 PM
I don't really think it hurt us last night. The problem is the entire offense didn't click last night. Unless you're saying that in the 12th they could've pinch hit Janish or whoever you would've called up to hit for Jordan Smith, and then that person would've hit a home run to give the Reds the lead. Hell, Corky hit a big double, it's the others who failed to get him in.

Right now Rolen is having his first struggles of the year, I don't believe he's hit a home run since the first game against the Phillies 2 weeks ago. That's going to catch up with the Reds, and is one of the big reasons the offense has really struggled the last 3 games.

In order for this offense to continue like it has they NEED Scott to be the player he was up until now. If this was a mirage, and he goes back to his last 3 years, then, well, Cincy we got a problem.

Reds
07-09-2010, 12:32 PM
So if Hannigan has a stiff neck, and Ramon isn't good to play.. who does that leave us with? I am not familiar with our minor league catchers, who's considered the most ready to play down there?

Reds42MLB
07-09-2010, 12:38 PM
Yea that really cost us the game! :rolleyes:

This place melts down faster than Mickelson at Winged Foot after every loss. It's embarrassing.

Vottomatic
07-09-2010, 12:50 PM
Yea that really cost us the game! :rolleyes:

This place melts down faster than Mickelson at Winged Foot after every loss. It's embarrassing.

29 posts and suddenly you're an expert regarding Redszone?

Gimme a break. :rolleyes:

BuckWild03
07-09-2010, 12:56 PM
What about Wilkin Castillo?

Hey Meat
07-09-2010, 01:10 PM
Yes they do, call up Ryan Hannigan, problem solved....

I thought he was still on the DL or at least rehabing.

brm7675
07-09-2010, 01:11 PM
So you think it's okay to basically have to play with a 23 man roster while the team your playing has 25 is okay?


I don't really think it hurt us last night. The problem is the entire offense didn't click last night. Unless you're saying that in the 12th they could've pinch hit Janish or whoever you would've called up to hit for Jordan Smith, and then that person would've hit a home run to give the Reds the lead. Hell, Corky hit a big double, it's the others who failed to get him in.

Right now Rolen is having his first struggles of the year, I don't believe he's hit a home run since the first game against the Phillies 2 weeks ago. That's going to catch up with the Reds, and is one of the big reasons the offense has really struggled the last 3 games.

In order for this offense to continue like it has they NEED Scott to be the player he was up until now. If this was a mirage, and he goes back to his last 3 years, then, well, Cincy we got a problem.

texasdave
07-09-2010, 01:22 PM
I think when a 34-year old (which is old for a) catcher hurts his knee. The same knee that he had surgery on in the off-season. I think the wise move is to just go ahead and put him on the 15-day DL and bring somebody else up. Especially with a 3-day break for that ASG coming up. You just tell Hernandez to stay at home and rehab and rest and recharge those batteries and get ready for the second half of the season because we are gonna need you and see you in 15 days. Sure a team may miss out on having him ready a couple days earlier. But is that worth playing 2 men short for a week or so? I don't know. Maybe it is six of one and half a dozen of another. Maybe it is much ado about nothing. But that's what I would have done.

bigred97
07-09-2010, 01:32 PM
that is a fantastic idea....what catcher we calling up to fill the spot?

What about Devin Mesoraco? I know he is probably not ready yet, but he is the most talented we have.

Mr Larkin
07-09-2010, 02:04 PM
Yea that really cost us the game! :rolleyes:

This place melts down faster than Mickelson at Winged Foot after every loss. It's embarrassing.

I agree, fully. This board thinks the Reds are meant to win every game. Its like some have never followed baseball before.

The old quote, commonly given to Tommy LaSorta I believe, is that every baseball team will win a third of their games (even bad teams), lose a third of their games (even good teams), but the difference is in what a team does with the final third.

Last night, we played hard and got it to extra innings and the best team in the NL for the last two years won the game. That is not shocking in any way.

Mr Larkin
07-09-2010, 02:08 PM
So you think it's okay to basically have to play with a 23 man roster while the team your playing has 25 is okay?

If needed - sure. It has been done before and it will be done again.

Now, I want to test the memory of some of you. Remember when there was great dismay in the last two, possibly three, years when the Reds carried three catchers - how stupid that was and that created a shortage of "quality" bench players? That move, that was so divisive in the past sounds like a pretty good idea right now.

Mr Larkin
07-09-2010, 02:09 PM
What about Wilkin Castillo?

If a move were to be make that would make the most sense. Last I heard he was starting in AAA, correct?

brm7675
07-09-2010, 02:10 PM
You are missing the point. We were at a disadvantage due to poor managing and management. It's not that we lost, but that we were not allowed to play on an equal footing as the Phils. We lost due to bad decisions of our own mag't, not because the Phils beat us.:thumbdown


I agree, fully. This board thinks the Reds are meant to win every game. Its like some have never followed baseball before.

The old quote, commonly given to Tommy LaSorta I believe, is that every baseball team will win a third of their games (even bad teams), lose a third of their games (even good teams), but the difference is in what a team does with the final third.

Last night, we played hard and got it to extra innings and the best team in the NL for the last two years won the game. That is not shocking in any way.

brm7675
07-09-2010, 02:11 PM
Buzz wrong again. you carry 2 healthy catchers, not 3, 2. Last night we had 1 healthy catcher. What happens if he got hurt in say the 4th inning, who catches those next 7+ innings?


If needed - sure. It has been done before and it will be done again.

Now, I want to test the memory of some of you. Remember when there was great dismay in the last two, possibly three, years when the Reds carried three catchers - how stupid that was and that created a shortage of "quality" bench players? That move, that was so divisive in the past sounds like a pretty good idea right now.

Mr Larkin
07-09-2010, 02:19 PM
Buzz wrong again. you carry 2 healthy catchers, not 3, 2. Last night we had 1 healthy catcher. What happens if he got hurt in say the 4th inning, who catches those next 7+ innings?

You have an emergency catcher - Janish in our case, on an emergency situation only. No big deal.

You act as if the management of the team is unaware of this. It is my guess that Walt J has underwear older than you. He knows what he is doing and if we need to call up another catcher he will do it. If not we will make due until the All-star break.

This in not rocket science and we did not lose because of bad caoching/management last night - we lost because one of their players hit a homer in the bottom of the 12th - period. The reliever who hit I understand hit it hard and deep, who is to say the other person on the bench would have done any better.

Some of you are quite silly.

brm7675
07-09-2010, 02:31 PM
Your kidding right, you want Janish as your catcher? Okay what happens if say Orlando gets hurt? WE WERE PLAYING WITH A NON FULL ROSTER. There is no excuse for that, you have a DL for a reason and a minor league system for a reason.


You have an emergency catcher - Janish in our case, on an emergency situation only. No big deal.

You act as if the management of the team is unaware of this. It is my guess that Walt J has underwear older than you. He knows what he is doing and if we need to call up another catcher he will do it. If not we will make due until the All-star break.

This in not rocket science and we did not lose because of bad caoching/management last night - we lost because one of their players hit a homer in the bottom of the 12th - period. The reliever who hit I understand hit it hard and deep, who is to say the other person on the bench would have done any better.

Some of you are quite silly.

sabometrics
07-09-2010, 02:52 PM
29 posts and suddenly you're an expert regarding Redszone?

Gimme a break. :rolleyes:

Save the post count elitism man. Looks like he joined this forum before you did.

Mr Larkin
07-09-2010, 02:53 PM
Your kidding right, you want Janish as your catcher? Okay what happens if say Orlando gets hurt? WE WERE PLAYING WITH A NON FULL ROSTER. There is no excuse for that, you have a DL for a reason and a minor league system for a reason.

No, I'm not kidding. Jocketty will make the right move. He knows what he is doing - he is the general manager of a major league baseball team.

I, on the other hand, am sitting at my desk working on a sermon for Sunday. I think I know a little about baseball, but it would never enter my thought process to think that I know more than Walt J. Teams play short for short periods often, even WS teams - it happens and it is never the end of the world.

Again, we didn't lose because Hernandez was unavailable - we lost because we didn't score enough runs - bottom line.

brm7675
07-09-2010, 02:56 PM
Who pinch hit for Smith in the top of 12th? WOW it was Smith the pitcher himself...and Why? Because there was no one left on the bench because Dusty couldn't chance using Janish to PH in case Miller went down, so the pitcher had to hit. Hmm what if we had a backup catcher available...hmm then we can actually have a hitter go up there and hit. So yes this move put us in a lesser chance to win the game. Sorry Jocketty and Dusty screwed up.:thumbdown


No, I'm not kidding. Jocketty will make the right move. He knows what he is doing - he is the general manager of a major league baseball team.

I, on the other hand, am sitting at my desk working on a sermon for Sunday. I think I know a little about baseball, but it would never enter my thought process to think that I know more than Walt J. Teams play short for short periods often, even WS teams - it happens and it is never the end of the world.

Again, we didn't lose because Hernandez was unavailable - we lost because we didn't score enough runs - bottom line.

bounty37h
07-09-2010, 04:01 PM
Who pinch hit for Smith in the top of 12th? WOW it was Smith the pitcher himself...and Why? Because there was no one left on the bench because Dusty couldn't chance using Janish to PH in case Miller went down, so the pitcher had to hit. Hmm what if we had a backup catcher available...hmm then we can actually have a hitter go up there and hit. So yes this move put us in a lesser chance to win the game. Sorry Jocketty and Dusty screwed up.:thumbdown

I wonder if Janish could have hit it as far as Smith did though? I was more surprised didnt put Owings in to hit and then take over pitching, but guess we were running out of players on the bench and the pen.

Girevik
07-09-2010, 04:09 PM
What catcher do you call up? Who do you DFA to make room for that catcher?

Who says it has to be a catcher? You could DL Hernandez and bring up someone else to be a pinch hitter. You still have Janish as your emergency catcher and at least have another bat off the bench. It's not a great situation but better than what they had last night.

malcontent
07-09-2010, 04:20 PM
Save the post count elitism man. Looks like he joined this forum before you did.
It's not elitism if it's true. ;)

...eh, still working on post count envy theme...

brm7675
07-09-2010, 04:21 PM
who cares how far you hit it if it doesn't get you on base.:cool:


I wonder if Janish could have hit it as far as Smith did though? I was more surprised didnt put Owings in to hit and then take over pitching, but guess we were running out of players on the bench and the pen.

bounty37h
07-09-2010, 04:32 PM
Who cares whos pinch hitting if they dont play much cause they are known to not hit very well?

BuckWild03
07-09-2010, 04:45 PM
If a move were to be make that would make the most sense. Last I heard he was starting in AAA, correct?

Yeah he's in AAA and while he's certainly not going to blow anyone away, he has been descent in his very limited time with the Reds. Enough to think he could back up Corky Miller.

scott91575
07-09-2010, 06:41 PM
NM

Kingspoint
07-09-2010, 07:05 PM
You could open up a roster spot by moving a player from the 15-day DL to the 60-day DL.
Mike Lincoln would be a prime candidate or maybe Homer Bailey (depending on how long you think it will take him to be ready to pitch in the majors again). Players on the 60-day DL do not count against your 40-man roster. There are no limits to the amount of players you can stash on the 60-day DL. At least, according to the following link there isn't.

Here is a link that discusses the options: http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/index.php?action=printpage;topic=31218.0

Also, while trying to find that answer, I gathered that clubs have to file a daily roster report with the league office. And if you list the status of a player as day-to-day you can retroactively (up to 10 days) put them on the DL. That being the reason you hear that term used so often.

There may be more to it than just that. But that is what I found. Take it with a grain of salt.

If all that is true, I'd be curious what the reason is for not putting Homer on the 60-day DL. They've known for quite a while that he'd be out for 60+ days. Wouldn't having an open roster spot on the 40-man roster give the team a positive tool? It seems like it would be good to put someone like Daryl Thompson back on the 40-man roster.

I don't know how any of this stuff works, so it's more just questions here to learn some more about it.

Is there a disadvantage of having Daryl Thompson on the 40-man roster? It's my understanding that anyone on the 40-man roster has more protection.

GIDP
07-09-2010, 07:20 PM
Thompson isnt on the 40 man.

Kingspoint
07-09-2010, 07:24 PM
Thompson isnt on the 40 man.


Right. I was wondering if there would be an advantage to putting him on the 40-day roster, or anyone else. Could the REDS have more flexibility over the next 4-6 weeks while Homer Bailey recovers if they added a player to the 40-man roster?

Mr Larkin
07-09-2010, 10:16 PM
Who is to say that any pinch hitter would have done better than Smith? He put a jolt into it. Really, this is not that big of a deal.

Girevik
07-10-2010, 08:51 AM
I
Is there a disadvantage of having Daryl Thompson on the 40-man roster? It's my understanding that anyone on the 40-man roster has more protection.

Mostly that you'd have to release someone from the 40-man to make room, which I think makes them open to other teams to claim.

Quatitos
07-10-2010, 09:43 AM
Right. I was wondering if there would be an advantage to putting him on the 40-day roster, or anyone else. Could the REDS have more flexibility over the next 4-6 weeks while Homer Bailey recovers if they added a player to the 40-man roster?
I would assume they are waiting to put Homer on the 60 day for when Volquez returns? I assume he is still on the 60 day as well so a roster spot will have to be opened up for him after the all star break.

brm7675
07-10-2010, 03:00 PM
Who is to say that any pinch hitter would have done better than Smith? He put a jolt into it. Really, this is not that big of a deal.

Then losing is not a big deal to you.:thumbdown

Mr Larkin
07-10-2010, 11:34 PM
Then losing is not a big deal to you.:thumbdown

Again, its 162 game schedule, one game does not a season make.:)