PDA

View Full Version : Where do we go from here?



mth123
08-01-2010, 08:45 AM
The trade deadline has passed, the roster is overflowing with major league caliber role players while lacking a bit in top end guys needed to seal the deal for post-season play and short series competitiveness. So what now?

There is a serious numbers game going on in places that are in need of an upgrade. The Reds seem to be going with quantity over quality in the Pen, the Rotation and the OF, but w/o packaging several for one or two top end upgrades, the numbers problem has become fairly significant.

The Rotation:

Currently Cueto, Arroyo, Leake, Wood and Volquez are holding the rotation spots. Homer Bailey is rehabbing in AAA and is due back in 10 days or so. Aaron Harang is sidelined with back issues and there is no timetable for his return. Matt Maloney, Sam Lecure and Micah Owings are in AAA and probably won't be back until September if at all.

So how does it stack-up. I'm guessing that Cueto, Arroyo and Wood are in the rotation for the balance of the season. Mike Leake has a clear expiration date for 2010 and probably has about 8 starts left before hitting his innings limit (probably in early September). Volquez may be the one to go when Bailey returns.

The Pen

Cordero, Masset and Rhodes are locks. Ondrusek and Smith have pitched well and Carlos Fisher hasn't really done anything to deserve a demotion at this point. Bill Bray has been shakey. In AAA Chapman is getting ready and is the clear replacement for Bray. Jared Burton, Jason Isringhausen and Russ Springer are all possible additions. Volquez or Bailey may take one spot. Not sure how to fit them all.

The Outfield

All players are flawed. Gomes, Stubbs and Bruce are the shakey starters, Heisey and Nix have both been good off the bench. Chris Dickerson is lighting it up at AAA. None of these guys can play the IF so creating a spot by reducing an IF isn't an option (though I still wouldn't be shocked if Janish is optioned and Dickerson added). There is already a numbers game in the bullpen so dropping to 11 pitchers probably won't happen.

This was a team that not only had the chips to deal several role players for an upgrade but almost had to do it to manage its own roster. It will be interesting to see what happens but the only obvious moves may be subbing Chapman for Bray and swapping Bailey for Volquez if Volquez doesn't get it together. In September, the roster crunch will ease, but in October we'll probably regret not exchanging some quantity for quality.

REDblooded
08-01-2010, 09:40 AM
The overwhelming consensus that the Reds HAD to do SOMETHING/ANYTHING/OMGWHATRUDOING?!?!?! is laughable...

Again. Somebody show me how me how they took a step back. You can't... As far as the division is concerned, they're right in the thick of contention... If there weren't any realistic deals to be made that would improve the current club, while factoring in future payroll, then the best move was to not make a move...

It's not like Walt didn't make an attempt... The one player that he thought could really improve the squad went to another team based on the Mariners liking the Rangers package more than the Reds... How that's Walt's fault is beyond me...

This team could very soon have two potential T.O.R. arms coming up to bolster the pen (Bailey and Chapman)... The pitching staff is solid... The two major needs we had in SS and LF were blocked by the fact that there were no real viable options available in the trade market at those positions...

I'm pleased by the fact that Walt didn't weaken the future of the team by forcing the issue at the deadline.

Falls City Beer
08-01-2010, 09:53 AM
It may not make much of a difference to us--we may still see the future as bright and we might be right--but if this team tanks, then the narrative is going to be: "same old Reds--why should anyone buy season tickets for that, especially when [insert sports media person] said they didn't try to get anyone at the deadline?"

Sure, winning the division could make all the above moot, but stories like this die hard. Especially given the last ten years. Saying that doing nothing has NO risk is an ill-funded proposition. It does carry risk.

Falls City Beer
08-01-2010, 10:13 AM
What is the latest word on Harang? I would replace Volquez with him, not with Bailey. If Harang is still not well enough, I'd replace V with Maloney.

This team has more than enough defense to keep pitch to contact guys like Harang and Maloney in games. They can't do anything for guys who don't throw strikes however.

RedLegSuperStar
08-01-2010, 10:20 AM
What is the latest word on Harang? I would replace Volquez with him, not with Bailey. If Harang is still not well enough, I'd replace V with Maloney.

This team has more than enough defense to keep pitch to contact guys like Harang and Maloney in games. They can't do anything for guys who don't throw strikes however.

I think Harang threw a bullpen session yesterday as well as took batting practice with no pain.

Mark Sheldon:


*Aaron Harang (back) threw in another bullpen session today and said he felt OK. Harang also took batting practice and didn't seem to be favoring anything.

mth123
08-01-2010, 10:22 AM
Somebody show me how me how they took a step back.

Where in my post or in this thread was that stated?

mth123
08-01-2010, 10:32 AM
What is the latest word on Harang? I would replace Volquez with him, not with Bailey. If Harang is still not well enough, I'd replace V with Maloney.

This team has more than enough defense to keep pitch to contact guys like Harang and Maloney in games. They can't do anything for guys who don't throw strikes however.

Its already August and Harang hasn't even started a rehab. He'll likely be rehabbing until rosters expand and then step in for Leake when Leake hits his inning limit.

Bailey has one more rehab start and then will probably need to be activated. From a timing standpoint, Bailey for Volquez and Harang for Leake makes sense. If Volquez gets it together, Bailey may end-up in the pen for Fisher. Bailey and Volquez are cut from the same cloth. Its possible Bailey has the same control issues that EV has and if so, at that point I'd fall back to Maloney, but I'd give both Bailey and EV a chance to get it together first. If either can get everything working, they could put togther a run of dominance that could help the team in the post-season. Maloney is a nice serviceable back-end guy, but he offers no hope for post season match-ups like the others do.

RedLegSuperStar
08-01-2010, 10:34 AM
What is the latest word on Harang? I would replace Volquez with him, not with Bailey. If Harang is still not well enough, I'd replace V with Maloney.

This team has more than enough defense to keep pitch to contact guys like Harang and Maloney in games. They can't do anything for guys who don't throw strikes however.

Defense prevents runs you are correct.. but if Gomes, Stubbs, and Bruce struggles continue and this team depends on Votto and Rolen to carry the team then this team is going to lose more then it wins regardless of the steller defense.

Russ Springer has looked really good in his 7 games so far. Dickerson is looking like he is ready to come back. But how do you bring them in? Does Stubbs go down? Bray might be the only arm I could see worth replacing but he is a lefty and he hasn't been awful.

11larkin11
08-01-2010, 10:48 AM
The overwhelming consensus that the Reds HAD to do SOMETHING/ANYTHING/OMGWHATRUDOING?!?!?! is laughable...

Again. Somebody show me how me how they took a step back. You can't... As far as the division is concerned, they're right in the thick of contention... If there weren't any realistic deals to be made that would improve the current club, while factoring in future payroll, then the best move was to not make a move...

It's not like Walt didn't make an attempt... The one player that he thought could really improve the squad went to another team based on the Mariners liking the Rangers package more than the Reds... How that's Walt's fault is beyond me...

This team could very soon have two potential T.O.R. arms coming up to bolster the pen (Bailey and Chapman)... The pitching staff is solid... The two major needs we had in SS and LF were blocked by the fact that there were no real viable options available in the trade market at those positions...

I'm pleased by the fact that Walt didn't weaken the future of the team by forcing the issue at the deadline.

Finally, another voice of reason. Thank you sir.

REDblooded
08-01-2010, 11:07 AM
Where in my post or in this thread was that stated?

Where in my post did I directly aim that statement at you? It's a generalization... Seems to be the overall feel of discussion here since the deadline passed... That by not making a move, the Reds all but sealed their fate in that they won't be playing in the playoffs...

GAC
08-01-2010, 11:15 AM
In September, the roster crunch will ease, but in October we'll probably regret not exchanging some quantity for quality.

Should our decisions be based on more long term thinking, or short-term? And lets be honest here.... there wasn't a great flurry of trading going on to begin with around MLB. And especially when it came to not only quality, but more importantly - filling the Reds needs.

Jocketty was trying to work deals for bullpen help. But what relievers did he miss out on, or could have possibly had? And more importantly - at what asking price? None of us know.

I agree with him when he basically says that the potential returns were not worth the prices......http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100731&content_id=12865332&vkey=news_cin&fext=.jsp&c_id=cin


The Reds were seeking bullpen help the past few weeks but were largely unimpressed with the market and the high asking price. As a possible workaround, they recently signed veteran free-agent relievers Jason Isringhausen and Russ Springer to Minor League deals.

Jocketty also indicated that the club would take a closer look at some of its Triple-A pitchers, which presumably means Isringhausen, Springer, Jared Burton and Cuban lefty prospect Aroldis Chapman.

A few relievers changed teams on Saturday, including Kerry Wood going from the Indians to the Yankees, Octavio Dotel from the Pirates to Dodgers, Kyle Farnsworth from the Royals to the Braves and Chad Qualls from Arizona to Tampa Bay.

Farnsworth was the only one out of that lot I'd have been interested in. Dotel is an extreme flyball pitcher, not the flamethrower he once was, and is prone to give up the HR. He's a good fit possibly for Dodger Stadium, but not GABP IMO. And Wood and Qualls certainly aren't improvements over what we currently have.

Some lament our starting pitching, or that it won't hold out. That's possible, but based on a lot of pure speculation (and worry) IMO.

In July, this entire staff led the NL in ERA (3.10) and WHIP (1.14). As well as OB%, OPS, and BAA. They were 2nd in SLG% and in ERs (81). The opposition hit a paltry .216 against us. So I'm not overly concerned about this staff. At least not to the point of giving up valuable prospects for rentals that may/may not have helped us... AND ... when it comes to guys like Lee or Oswalt, we had very remote and/or slim chances of landing anyway. And when it comes to Oswalt, I don't think he's the same Oswalt, and the price tag was pretty hefty.

And according to Jocketty, the Reds did make a pretty substantial offer to the Ms for Lee. The Ms just liked the Texas offer better....http://cincinnati.com/blogs/reds/2010/07/09/jocketty-we-made-a-pretty-substantial-offer/

As far as any OF upgrades, or even SS for that matter? Where did we miss out?

mth123
08-01-2010, 11:22 AM
Where in my post did I directly aim that statement at you? It's a generalization... Seems to be the overall feel of discussion here since the deadline passed... That by not making a move, the Reds all but sealed their fate in that they won't be playing in the playoffs...

Well since it was post number two in a thread that I started about the Reds numbers crunch, it was a reasonable conclusion. Can't really see another post you could be responding to and if you were responding to posts in another thread, you should have made that post in that thread.

RedLegSuperStar
08-01-2010, 11:24 AM
Should our decisions be based on more long term thinking, or short-term? And lets be honest here.... there wasn't a great flurry of trading going on to begin with around MLB. And especially when it came to not only quality, but more importantly - filling the Reds needs.

Jocketty was trying to work deals for bullpen help. But what relievers did he miss out on, or could have possibly had? And more importantly - at what asking price? None of us know.

I agree with him when he basically says that the potential returns were not worth the prices......http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100731&content_id=12865332&vkey=news_cin&fext=.jsp&c_id=cin

Farnsworth was the only one out of that lot I'd have been interested in. Dotel is an extreme flyball pitcher, not the flamethrower he once was, and is prone to give up the HR. He's a good fit possibly for Dodger Stadium, but not GABP IMO. And Wood and Qualls certainly aren't improvements over what we currently have.

Some lament our starting pitching, or that it won't hold out. That's possible, but based on a lot of pure speculation (and worry) IMO.

In July, this entire staff led the NL in ERA (3.10) and WHIP (1.14). As well as OB%, OPS, and BAA. They were 2nd in SLG% and in ERs (81). The opposition hit a paltry .216 against us. So I'm not overly concerned about this staff.

As far as any OF upgrades, or even SS for that matter? Where did we miss out?

I think the Reds were looking at Aardsma and Downs.. just couldn't get deals done. Walt was on the record as to saying the players they were after were not dealt.

mth123
08-01-2010, 11:32 AM
Should our decisions be based on more long term thinking, or short-term? And lets be honest here.... there wasn't a great flurry of trading going on to begin with around MLB. And especially when it came to not only quality, but more importantly - filling the Reds needs.

Jocketty was trying to work deals for bullpen help. But what relievers did he miss out on, or could have possibly had? And more importantly - at what asking price? None of us know.

I agree with him when he basically says that the potential returns were not worth the prices......http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100731&content_id=12865332&vkey=news_cin&fext=.jsp&c_id=cin



Farnsworth was the only one out of that lot I'd have been interested in. Dotel is an extreme flyball pitcher, not the flamethrower he once was, and is prone to give up the HR. He's a good fit possibly for Dodger Stadium, but not GABP IMO. And Wood and Qualls certainly aren't improvements over what we currently have.

Some lament our starting pitching, or that it won't hold out. That's possible, but based on a lot of pure speculation (and worry) IMO.

In July, this entire staff led the NL in ERA (3.10) and WHIP (1.14). As well as OB%, OPS, and BAA. They were 2nd in SLG% and in ERs (81). The opposition hit a paltry .216 against us. So I'm not overly concerned about this staff.

As far as any OF upgrades, or even SS for that matter? Where did we miss out?

Maybe there wasn't anything, or maybe players weren't dealt because the team would not pull the trigger. I'm guessing its more for monetary reasons than anything. This team has a ton of interchangeale parts and dealing a few and backfilling with others wouldn't have had that big an impact on the future. I'm guessing many won't make the roster and will be lost in the numbers crunch as 6 year free agents, guys who run out of options or get dealt for a PTBNL to make a roster spot to pick-up a backfill for an injury at a spot where the depth is not so deep. Can't keep Matt Maloney and Sam Lecure in AAA as insurance forever and with no room on the big league roster, they'll eventually be lost for nothing. If you won't deal to address a need, what do you do with them?

GAC
08-01-2010, 11:36 AM
I think the Reds were looking at Aardsma and Downs.. just couldn't get deals done. Walt was on the record as to saying the players they were after were not dealt.

Yep. And we don't know why either. Maybe the teams dangling them weren't really serious, but were doing so to see what they could get in return, only to pull back.

I did like these two quotes from the article...


Unlike many of the other potential buyers, the Reds were in a tougher spot when it came to making potential trades. The top hitting team in the National League with a strong rotation, they have no glaring weaknesses. That made Jocketty hesitant to bring someone in unless they were head-and-shoulders better than a player already in-house.

Now to be fair, that is Sheldon saying the Reds have no glaring weakness, and not Jocketty. But RZ will have a field day with the statement regardless. :p:

Jocketty did say this though, and I agree with him......


"The one thing I've learned -- you have to have patience and you have to have discipline to prevent from making deals like that just to make a deal," Jocketty said. "Because a lot of times, you make a deal that you might regret later. I've had several experienced guys from the past that told me some of the times the best deals you make are the ones you don't make. Obviously there were clubs coming at us for some of our top young talent, but we just weren't going to trade for deals we didn't think would really change our club."

Slyder
08-01-2010, 11:42 AM
The overwhelming consensus that the Reds HAD to do SOMETHING/ANYTHING/OMGWHATRUDOING?!?!?! is laughable...

Again. Somebody show me how me how they took a step back. You can't... As far as the division is concerned, they're right in the thick of contention... If there weren't any realistic deals to be made that would improve the current club, while factoring in future payroll, then the best move was to not make a move...

It's not like Walt didn't make an attempt... The one player that he thought could really improve the squad went to another team based on the Mariners liking the Rangers package more than the Reds... How that's Walt's fault is beyond me...

This team could very soon have two potential T.O.R. arms coming up to bolster the pen (Bailey and Chapman)... The pitching staff is solid... The two major needs we had in SS and LF were blocked by the fact that there were no real viable options available in the trade market at those positions...

I'm pleased by the fact that Walt didn't weaken the future of the team by forcing the issue at the deadline.

The Angels seemed to be able to find moves to improve the now and the future with some of their trades.

Falls City Beer
08-01-2010, 11:46 AM
Finally, another voice of reason. Thank you sir.

Are we shooting for "reasonable" or are we shooting for "right?"

jojo
08-01-2010, 11:46 AM
The Angels seemed to be able to find moves to improve the now and the future with some of their trades.

The problem with the Haren trade for the Reds was that the Dbacks were stockpiling lefties and we all know the ones they would've wanted from the Reds didn't form a list with Maloney at the top.

GAC
08-01-2010, 11:54 AM
I'm guessing many won't make the roster and will be lost in the numbers crunch as 6 year free agents, guys who run out of options or get dealt for a PTBNL to make a roster spot to pick-up a backfill for an injury at a spot where the depth is not so deep. Can't keep Matt Maloney and Sam Lecure in AAA as insurance forever and with no room on the big league roster, they'll eventually be lost for nothing. If you won't deal to address a need, what do you do with them?

But you're making it sound like there was somehow a reluctance or refusal to deal when we don't know that at all. It is pure speculation. Knowing Jocketty's history, and the fact he's been able to work some solid deals, I'm sure the guy isn't bulling anyone when he said they made a substantial offer to the Ms for Lee or that they were trying to work with some other clubs on bullpen help.

Why is it possibly Jocketty's fault that the teams they were in discussions with pulled back, for whatever reasons, maybe weren't serious to begin with, or their asking price may have been too high? That "price" could have been monetary and/or prospects. We don't know.

Why is it always necessarily this FO's fault as to why a deal didn't go through or wasn't made?

Falls City Beer
08-01-2010, 11:54 AM
but in October we'll probably regret not exchanging some quantity for quality.

I think this is pretty squarely correct. This org. has definitely gotten better at deploying quantity/discarding weak links, but they're not great in that realm either. Some truly masterful roster-futzing might win them the division, but the margin for error is infinitesimally small. They could have overleaped a lot of that uncertainty and had the prospects to do it.

Falls City Beer
08-01-2010, 11:57 AM
Why is it always necessarily this FO's fault as to why a deal didn't go through or wasn't made?

I'm not sure who else you would hold responsible?

Marc D
08-01-2010, 11:57 AM
My .02 for the original post of the thread instead of rehashing the trade deadline arguments:

One possible scenario is to use the August waiver trade window to see if there is anyway you can move the likes of Harang, Arroyo, Cordero and Cabrerra out. I know you aren't going to get them completely off the books but any salary relief would be a bonus. Other than Arroyo all the prospects we held on to should be able to provide an instant replacement.

I know its probably not popular but if Walts banking on organizational depth then what else are you going to do? Stockpiling young prospects and keeping the aging expensive vets at the same time makes no sense.

RedLegSuperStar
08-01-2010, 12:17 PM
My .02 for the original post of the thread instead of rehashing the trade deadline arguments:

One possible scenario is to use the August waiver trade window to see if there is anyway you can move the likes of Harang, Arroyo, Cordero and Cabrerra out. I know you aren't going to get them completely off the books but any salary relief would be a bonus. Other than Arroyo all the prospects we held on to should be able to provide an instant replacement.

I know its probably not popular but if Walts banking on organizational depth then what else are you going to do? Stockpiling young prospects and keeping the aging expensive vets at the same time makes no sense.

So trading Arroyo, Harang, Cabrera, and CoCo is what this team needs to be looking at? Really? We are in a playoff chase and you want to deal our closer, starting SS, and perhaps the best player of the bunch and more consistant pitchers in the league? I'm of the impression you look foward to the following year every year with that statement. I get that salary dump would benifit them heading into the offseason.. But that should be pit on hold until after the World Series.

mth123
08-01-2010, 12:18 PM
Good post Marc D. I doubt they let Arroyo go at this point and I can't see Cabrera being cut loose, but I have this hope that I've been reluctant to post that the Reds somehow put Cordero on waivers and let him go if claimed. If Chapman is going to be an impact lefty for the late innings, Rhodes could serve as the default for the 9th inning. If Isringhausen could make a comeback, he could be the closer with Rhodes and Chapman combining with Masset, Ondrusek and Smith to give the team a pen capable of producing 3 shut down innings every day.

Lacking the top half starters to match-up with other play-off teams, shortening the game to six innings each day and removing those starters before they falter the third time through the order might be an equalizer. I think Cordero did a lot to stabilize the pen when he was signed and I don't regret it or blame the reds for doing it, but if they could get out from under it now, it would be a way to improve this team now and in the future IMO. With him off the books, it frees them to pursue guys like Downs and Aardsma if some of these guys show chinks in the armor.

_Sir_Charles_
08-01-2010, 12:26 PM
"Where do we go from here?"

The playoffs baby! The playoffs!

We're right there at the top of the division, the competition didn't really improve themselves other than marginally...maybe. We've got players coming back from injury (Harang & Bailey) and help on the way in the minors (Izzy & others). We've also stayed here at the top despite struggles from Bruce, Cabrera, Gomes, Stubbs & others. We're fine and we will be fine in the near future too thanks to not selling off the farm for a possible improvement for this season. Standing pat was the right move considering what was available.

mth123
08-01-2010, 12:30 PM
"Where do we go from here?"

The playoffs baby! The playoffs!

We're right there at the top of the division, the competition didn't really improve themselves other than marginally...maybe. We've got players coming back from injury (Harang & Bailey) and help on the way in the minors (Izzy & others). We've also stayed here at the top despite struggles from Bruce, Cabrera, Gomes, Stubbs & others. We're fine and we will be fine in the near future too thanks to not selling off the farm for a possible improvement for this season. Standing pat was the right move considering what was available.

I hope you're right, but how do address the numbers crunch? I assumed the Reds were loading up with guys like Springer and Izzy in order to deal three or four pawns for a Knight or a Bishop. Instead, we have all these pawns and not enough squares to put them.

REDblooded
08-01-2010, 12:32 PM
Well since it was post number two in a thread that I started about the Reds numbers crunch, it was a reasonable conclusion. Can't really see another post you could be responding to and if you were responding to posts in another thread, you should have made that post in that thread.

If all you took from my post was that you felt I was suggesting that you said the Reds took a step back by not trading, than you completely missed the point...

_Sir_Charles_
08-01-2010, 12:35 PM
I'm not sure who else you would hold responsible?

The FO's for the other teams who were either asking too much or changed their minds and decided to hold onto their players? Just a guess.

REDblooded
08-01-2010, 12:36 PM
I hope you're right, but how do address the numbers crunch? I assumed the Reds were loading up with guys like Springer and Izzy in order to deal three or four pawns for a Knight or a Bishop. Instead, we have all these pawns an not enough squares to put them.


Right now... Doesn't mean that will be the case in time... The mentality that the Reds somehow needed to force the issue due to the trade deadline is off the mark...

Organizational depth is a strength, not a weakness... Especially in a small market. Stuff happens. Injuries occur. Players develop at different rates. To force a move for a maybe upgrade at the cost of flexibility isn't an answer... This isn't fantasy baseball. Salary comes into play, team payroll comes into play. Not all players fit on all ballclubs... I understand the desire to make a splash and get a "name", but it isn't always the right move...

mth123
08-01-2010, 12:41 PM
Right now... Doesn't mean that will be the case in time... The mentality that the Reds somehow needed to force the issue due to the trade deadline is off the mark...

Organizational depth is a strength, not a weakness... Especially in a small market. Stuff happens. Injuries occur. Players develop at different rates. To force a move for a maybe upgrade at the cost of flexibility isn't an answer... This isn't fantasy baseball. Salary comes into play, team payroll comes into play. Not all players fit on all ballclubs... I understand the desire to make a splash and get a "name", but it isn't always the right move...

Organizational depth is a strength and hoarding it is the right strategy when trying to move from a 70 win team to a 90 win team, but once you're there, a more focused approach of cashing some of it in for quality is the way to go to the next level. Right now, these guys are wasted resources toiling in AAA and their perfromance doesn't do anything to help the team on the field. You don't win a play-off series by having the best guys 26 through 30. You win by having better quality in the guys filling major roles.

Marc D
08-01-2010, 12:42 PM
I hope you're right, but how do address the numbers crunch? I assumed the Reds were loading up with guys like Springer and Izzy in order to deal three or four pawns for a Knight or a Bishop. Instead, we have all these pawns an not enough squares to put them.


Best analogy I've seen so far. Discussing possible solutions to the situation appeals a lot more to me than choosing sides on what kind of job Walt did at the trade deadline and making loud noises about it.

I agree that I wouldn't move Arroyo or that they would move Cabrerra but Harang and Cordero are legit possibilities. Someone has to go to make room for all the pieces they have stockpiled, those two players make the most money and have the most in house replacement options.

_Sir_Charles_
08-01-2010, 12:43 PM
I hope you're right, but how do address the numbers crunch? I assumed the Reds were loading up with guys like Springer and Izzy in order to deal three or four pawns for a Knight or a Bishop. Instead, we have all these pawns an not enough squares to put them.

Izzy & Springer are lottery tickets. If they work out, great, we'll send one of the young kids down from the pen. If they don't, big deal. Send them their walking papers and say thanks for the effort.

As for the starters...I seriously think it'll work itself out. Leake is going to be limited innings-wise, that opens up innings for Harang/Bailey. Wood is going to be limited innings-wise too I think marginally. As will Volquez with him just now coming off the injury. And if somebody struggles...we'll give them some down time and let one of the others arms fill in for a bit.

In regards to the offense...Bruce is in a slump. He'll snap out of it. Gomes is in a slump, he may or may not snap out of it. If not, we've got both Heisey & Dickerson. Even Nix. Stubbs is basically a rookie. He's going to struggle. But his defense won't. My biggest concern heading forward is the health and stamina of Cabrera & Rolen. They need to be using Janish more often to spell these guys. I'm far from the biggest fan of Orlando's, but when he's fresh...he's MILES better.

knuckler
08-01-2010, 12:51 PM
If Dickerson has the rust knocked off now, I'd like to see him hold down centerfield and bat leadoff for a couple weeks while Stubbs goes to Louisville with a specific list of things to work on. If you're not that confident in Dickerson he can share time with Heisey based on pitcher matchups.

I'd put on Stubbs' list implementing a two-strike approach to put the ball in play, bunting for hits, and using his speed to steal more bases. I don't see him being able to work on things at the major league level in the midst of his current slump.

mth123
08-01-2010, 12:55 PM
Izzy & Springer are lottery tickets. If they work out, great, we'll send one of the young kids down from the pen. If they don't, big deal. Send them their walking papers and say thanks for the effort.

As for the starters...I seriously think it'll work itself out. Leake is going to be limited innings-wise, that opens up innings for Harang/Bailey. Wood is going to be limited innings-wise too I think marginally. As will Volquez with him just now coming off the injury. And if somebody struggles...we'll give them some down time and let one of the others arms fill in for a bit.

In regards to the offense...Bruce is in a slump. He'll snap out of it. Gomes is in a slump, he may or may not snap out of it. If not, we've got both Heisey & Dickerson. Even Nix. Stubbs is basically a rookie. He's going to struggle. But his defense won't. My biggest concern heading forward is the health and stamina of Cabrera & Rolen. They need to be using Janish more often to spell these guys. I'm far from the biggest fan of Orlando's, but when he's fresh...he's MILES better.

Agree about Cabrera and Rolen (Phillips needs more time off too IMO). Its kind of my point. Maybe the answer to getting that would have been to acquire somebody better than Janish to be the understudy. You could deal two or three of the number 7 starters or swingmen to get one of those and make a huge impact on this team w/o giving up so much depth that it would be risky and w/o impacting the future.

mth123
08-01-2010, 12:58 PM
If Dickerson has the rust knocked off now, I'd like to see him hold down centerfield and bat leadoff for a couple weeks while Stubbs goes to Louisville with a specific list of things to work on. If you're not that confident in Dickerson he can share time with Heisey based on pitcher matchups.

I'd put on Stubbs' list implementing a two-strike approach to put the ball in play, bunting for hits, and using his speed to steal more bases. I don't see him being able to work on things at the major league level in the midst of his current slump.

I wouldn't mind that either, but Stubbs should be down there two weeks max. He's been ok until his 1 for 36 and I was probably the most vocal Dickerson over Stubbs guy in Spring this side of TRF. I think Stubbs is better, just not right now.

_Sir_Charles_
08-01-2010, 01:21 PM
Agree about Cabrera and Rolen (Phillips needs more time off too IMO). Its kind of my point. Maybe the answer to getting that would have been to acquire somebody better than Janish to be the understudy. You could deal two or three of the number 7 starters or swingmen to get one of those and make a huge impact on this team w/o giving up so much depth that it would be risky and w/o impacting the future.

Well, I've got 2 problems with the Janish situation. 1st, I don't see anybody available who's got an acceptable bat or glove. 2nd, I think many here are undervaluing Janish's bat. I know what he's done in previous years, but some guys "get it" later in their careers. Since the beginning of spring training, all Janish has done is produce...offensively AND defensively. I certainly don't see anybody out there who's better defensively than Paul (who I think is a GG caliber defender). His bat reminds me of Hanigan, not much pop, but great plate discipline and great at working the count...and this season, more pop than previously. Just not in the 2 hole please.

As for dealing some of the pitching depth to fill the "hole" at SS....that's sounds all fine and good, but you've got to find a club willing to deal off that player we need AND is a fit for our prospects. Easier said than done.

mth123
08-01-2010, 01:35 PM
Well, I've got 2 problems with the Janish situation. 1st, I don't see anybody available who's got an acceptable bat or glove. 2nd, I think many here are undervaluing Janish's bat. I know what he's done in previous years, but some guys "get it" later in their careers. Since the beginning of spring training, all Janish has done is produce...offensively AND defensively. I certainly don't see anybody out there who's better defensively than Paul (who I think is a GG caliber defender). His bat reminds me of Hanigan, not much pop, but great plate discipline and great at working the count...and this season, more pop than previously. Just not in the 2 hole please.

As for dealing some of the pitching depth to fill the "hole" at SS....that's sounds all fine and good, but you've got to find a club willing to deal off that player we need AND is a fit for our prospects. Easier said than done.

Not trying to fill the hole. Trying to get a guy that Dusty would play consistently enough to keep Rolen, Phillips and Cabrera fresh. In spite of what we all may think, the organization seems to have made its mind up that Janish is a glove only guy who plays once every 3 or 4 weeks and it seems a waste of a roster spot. I agree that there weren't any better defenders dealt, but Jhonny Peralta, Miguel Tejada, Christain Guzman, Ryan Theriot and Blake Dewitt were all dealt in recent days. None would have cost much, most would have helped the team (not sure about Dewitt) more than what they are getting from Jansh just sitting on the bench. I wouldn't want any of those guys at SS every day, but as a guy to play for Rolen, Phillips or Cabrera most would have been ok. Janish or Cozart would only be a phone call away if the team needed some one reliable on defense every day. Dealing somebody like Del Rosario, Owings or Balentien for one of those would have been a good idea and no one would miss them.

_Sir_Charles_
08-01-2010, 01:49 PM
Not trying to fill the hole. Trying to get a guy that Dusty would play consistently enough to keep Rolen, Phillips and Cabrera fresh. In spite of what we all may think, the organization seems to have made its mind up that Janish is a glove only guy who plays once every 3 or 4 weeks and it seems a waste of a roster spot. I agree that there weren't any better defenders dealt, but Jhonny Peralta, Miguel Tejada, Christain Guzman, Ryan Theriot and Blake Dewitt were all dealt in recent days. None would have cost much, most would have helped the team (not sure about Dewitt) more than what they are getting from Jansh just sitting on the bench. I wouldn't want any of those guys at SS every day, but as a guy to play for Rolen, Phillips or Cabrera most would have been ok. Janish or Cozart would only be a phone call away if the team needed some one reliable on defense every day. Dealing somebody like Del Rosario, Owings or Balentien for one of those would have been a good idea and no one would miss them.

I see your point. I just don't agree with it. I think the in-house option is simply better. For now and for the long run. It's not costing us additional prospects or money either. Nobody knows what Del Rosario or Balentien or whoever will turn into. Dealing them away for a bench guy that isn't necessarily an upgrade over what we already have simply makes no sense to me. I know that most of those guys you mentioned have better bats than Janish, but I don't think they'd have more overall value when defense is factored in. I think the solution is already sitting on our bench and simply needs to be utilized more often. (and I don't think it's the "organization" that has decided Paul's fate...I'm pretty sure that call is all Dusty's)

mth123
08-01-2010, 01:57 PM
I see your point. I just don't agree with it. I think the in-house option is simply better. For now and for the long run. It's not costing us additional prospects or money either. Nobody knows what Del Rosario or Balentien or whoever will turn into. Dealing them away for a bench guy that isn't necessarily an upgrade over what we already have simply makes no sense to me. I know that most of those guys you mentioned have better bats than Janish, but I don't think they'd have more overall value when defense is factored in. I think the solution is already sitting on our bench and simply needs to be utilized more often. (and I don't think it's the "organization" that has decided Paul's fate...I'm pretty sure that call is all Dusty's)

Dusty is not the guy who signed Cabrera when Janish was all lined up to be the SS. The organization made the decision that he wasn't a guy they wanted playing so much.

_Sir_Charles_
08-01-2010, 03:48 PM
Dusty is not the guy who signed Cabrera when Janish was all lined up to be the SS. The organization made the decision that he wasn't a guy they wanted playing so much.

I agree that the organization thinks Paul's not a starter. But it's been all Dusty's call to not play Paul at all.

And whether they think Janish is starter material or not, the depth chart prior to the OCab signing was Janish and Janish. They needed a 2nd SS regardless of who the starter ended up being. I just don't see much out there to fill the versatile utility infielder that's much of an upgrade over Janish. Certainly not enough to make me want to take on salary or dump prospects for a half a season "fix". Cozart looks to be the real deal, I don't think the Reds brass are too worried about their SS future. The low minors is pretty well stocked too. Somebody will work out. Until then, I like what Paul brings to the table...seems like Dusty disagrees.