PDA

View Full Version : Reds discussing Jose Reyes?



Benihana
12-13-2010, 06:46 PM
Hat tip to the SunDeck:

http://network.yardbarker.com/mlb/article_external/reds_discuss_jose_reyes_with_mets/3778439

Not sure how credible this is given it's listed as a blog.

Leake or Bailey, Cordero, and Kris Negron for Reyes?

Yes, please.

JaxRed
12-13-2010, 07:04 PM
I call BS on this.

Captain Hook
12-13-2010, 07:05 PM
Best rumor of the offseason imo.Health and an expiring contract might be the only issues here.Other then that, Reyes leading off and playing SS makes the Reds a much better team.He will be, if healthy, one of the top SS in the game.

I would have to imagine that the Mets could get some other teams interested if they're serious about dealing Reyes.I doubt any trade discussion with them will fly under the radar for too long if there's any truth to it.

Captain Hook
12-13-2010, 07:12 PM
I call BS on this.

Probably.:thumbdown

GADawg
12-13-2010, 07:16 PM
Terry Collins says 'ole Frankie is his 9th inning guy...i might believe it if it were 2 starters going their way

Edd Roush
12-13-2010, 07:23 PM
When I first saw this rumor on the SunDeck, I thought "awesome." However, I looked into the numbers, and just don't like what I see. He had a miserable 2010 with a .321 OBP in over 600 PAs. He can't take a walk and was injured for most of the 2009 season and his 2010 production showed a major drop off. He is making $11,000,000 next year and has had a negative UZR each of the last two years. I don't think I give up any of the young pitchers for Reyes and think I would rather use that hypothetical payroll space on Zach Greinke. I don't want the Reds to make a move for Jose Reyes.

thatcoolguy_22
12-13-2010, 07:27 PM
Outside of whether Reyes is worth the trade or not, a trade could work for both teams. Someone on here posted a proposal involving Cordero + chaff for the Mets. That makes the money even for both. I just read on the Cairo thread the Reds could have anywhere from 4-10MM left to spend this offseason. A trade of prospects could work with NY chipping in some $$ to cover some of the contract.

I doubt there is any truth to the rumor, but the Reds match up well with almost any team as a trade partner and they have some money to spend.

However given the option, I'm with Edd in wanting Grienke over Reyes.

edabbs44
12-13-2010, 07:27 PM
If anyone wants to see me speak ill of a Jocketty transaction, this is it.

REDSEER
12-13-2010, 08:11 PM
Per Fay's Twitter:


Asked Jocketty about Reyes rumor. "No, we've had no discussions."

The Operator
12-13-2010, 08:29 PM
John Fay must read this site a LOT.

TheNext44
12-13-2010, 08:37 PM
Per Fay's Twitter:

Heard that before.

To me that means that it's about a 50/50 chance of happening. ;)

kaldaniels
12-13-2010, 09:22 PM
Greinke > Reyes
Reyes > Janish
Going by WAR, Reyes was the 8th most productive SS in baseball last year. Its worth looking into.

Ghosts of 1990
12-13-2010, 09:26 PM
This is what gives bloggers a bad name. Loses credibility. If you have something concrete and honest and you want to risk maybe making the club (and possibly your source) angry you run with it. But I can bet Fay (Mark Sheldon too) will never take anything serious again on "The Blog Red Machine".

I'd like to ask the blogger--who are these Reds "insiders" who have discussed the deal? I knew after reading sentence it was bogus. We could be the Reds insiders for all we know. Another Reds message board could be, etc. and so on.

Brutus
12-13-2010, 10:24 PM
This is what gives bloggers a bad name. Loses credibility. If you have something concrete and honest and you want to risk maybe making the club (and possibly your source) angry you run with it. But I can bet Fay (Mark Sheldon too) will never take anything serious again on "The Blog Red Machine".

I'd like to ask the blogger--who are these Reds "insiders" who have discussed the deal? I knew after reading sentence it was bogus. We could be the Reds insiders for all we know. Another Reds message board could be, etc. and so on.

People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. And I don't mean that personally, but bloggers are simply people with opinions, just like you. So they're no different from you or your site.

Maybe they know what they're talking about, maybe not. But you're not really in any position to judge that, as none of us are, since we don't know who they really are or who they know.

Blitz Dorsey
12-14-2010, 01:18 AM
I would love this. And not just because the Reds would win the yearly Salsa-dancing contest. Forget about finding a LF that can be the leadoff hitter. Getting Reyes would fill two voids: Leadoff hitter and starting shortstop. (I am not ready to make Janish the starting SS, but I think he's a solid backup.)

Course, that still leaves a ? in LF, but if the Reds gets Reyes, I might have to throw a party.

SirFelixCat
12-14-2010, 01:20 AM
I would love this. And not just because the Reds would win the yearly Salsa-dancing contest. Forget about finding a LF that can be the leadoff hitter. Getting Reyes would fill two voids: Leadoff hitter and starting shortstop. (I am not ready to make Janish the starting SS, but I think he's a solid backup.)

Course, that still leaves a ? in LF, but if the Reds gets Reyes, I might have to throw a party.

But what about the other half of the season when Reyes is injured?

Blitz Dorsey
12-14-2010, 01:23 AM
But what about the other half of the season when Reyes is injured?

There have been years he's stayed healthy. But yeah, I see what you're saying. Durability would be a concern.

I'd still do the deal though. (If "the deal" is really Bailey or Leake, plus Cordero and a good minor leaguer.)

Ron Madden
12-14-2010, 01:25 AM
I can't see any truth in this rumor.

Blitz Dorsey
12-14-2010, 01:26 AM
Do the Mets have a SS-in-waiting in the minors or something? If not, I agree, I can't imagine they would be all that interested in trading him. Reyes has proven he can get it done at the plate and in the field at the MLB level (and has some serious wheels). Not sure why the Mets would be shopping him unless they had a replacement lined up.

camisadelgolf
12-14-2010, 01:33 AM
Do the Mets have a SS-in-waiting in the minors or something? If not, I agree, I can't imagine they would be all that interested in trading him. Reyes has proven he can get it done at the plate and in the field at the MLB level (and has some serious wheels). Not sure why the Mets would be shopping him unless they had a replacement lined up.
They're excited about Ruben Tejada. There's pretty much nothing else in the pipeline for them, so I'd imagine that have a strong interest in some of the Reds' younger shortstop prospects like Billy Hamilton, Didi Gregorius, or Devin Lohman.

mth123
12-14-2010, 02:25 AM
They're excited about Ruben Tejada. There's pretty much nothing else in the pipeline for them, so I'd imagine that have a strong interest in some of the Reds' younger shortstop prospects like Billy Hamilton, Didi Gregorius, or Devin Lohman.

Wilmer Flores is the Mets SS of the future.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=flores003wil

Ron Madden
12-14-2010, 02:39 AM
I'd like to see the Reds give Paul Janish a fair chance at SS.

http://reds.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20101213&content_id=16313178&vkey=news_cin&c_id=cin

Captain Hook
12-14-2010, 03:56 AM
I'd like to see the Reds give Paul Janish a fair chance at SS.

http://reds.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20101213&content_id=16313178&vkey=news_cin&c_id=cin

So would I. I've always been a Janish supporter but, Reyes is so much better.I don't even know how it could be debated.Health is the only concern.Other then that, defense is the only area where Paul has a shot to match up and that alone just isn't enough to make me think twice about trading one of our BOR(bottom of the Rotation and I mean 6th or 7th)starters along with a few prospects to get him.I ship out what many here are willing to trade to get Greinke in a heart beat.Someone that can play everyday at SS and be a productive bat in the lineup is much more valuable then KC's best guy.

For those that say injuries would keep them from going after him.Injuries are the only reason he's available.He'd be the most sought after player in baseball if he'd been healthy the last few years especially if he would have continued putting up the numbers he did in the past.It's a bit of a risk I'd agree.I think if there's something to this, it's a risk the Reds should take.

GAC
12-14-2010, 05:48 AM
John Fay must read this site a LOT.

He's probably an SD member trying to get sponsorship to ORG. :D

Ghosts of 1990
12-14-2010, 10:56 AM
I'd like to see the Reds give Paul Janish a fair chance at SS.

http://reds.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20101213&content_id=16313178&vkey=news_cin&c_id=cin

I think there's 99% odds thats what we're going to get.

wally post
12-14-2010, 11:05 AM
Reyes was a stud, but now? very very risky. He's shown nothing last year that implies he is the ballplayer he once was.

Blitz Dorsey
12-14-2010, 11:19 AM
Reyes was a stud, but now? very very risky. He's shown nothing last year that implies he is the ballplayer he once was.

You're judging him just based on last season? He was in and out of the lineup with injuries. Maybe he's injury-prone, or maybe he's just been a bit unlucky. I understand why people are cautious about touting him as a great player due to the durability concerns, but if he can stay healthy there's no question in my mind he's an elite SS/leadoff hitter.

The Operator
12-14-2010, 11:24 AM
An important thing to remember is that this offseason, so far, has shown that veteran players can be had for less than you would expect on the trade market.

Just look at what Florida got for Dan Uggla. All of this "Bailey or Leake plus two" stuff could simply be posturing, if the rumor even has one grain of truth to it.

If The Reds did somehow end up acquiring him, I have a feeling we'd be fairly accepting of the deal.

Heath
12-14-2010, 12:12 PM
He's probably an SD member trying to get sponsorship to ORG. :D

I'd rep him.

REDREAD
12-14-2010, 12:28 PM
I'd still do the deal though. (If "the deal" is really Bailey or Leake, plus Cordero and a good minor leaguer.)

Heck yea, sign me up for that. In a heartbeat.

It's extremely difficult to get a plus SS in a trade. Probably more difficult than getting a plus starting pitcher. Reyes has some risks, but his upside from Janish is huge.

Reyes having only one year on his contract is a double edged sword. On the plus side, it's less risk and it is what is making him available in trade. On the negative side, he might be a rental player.. However, Walt has a pretty good record for retaining players that he wants to keep.

Having Reyes and Phillips up the middle would be great.

osuceltic
12-14-2010, 12:42 PM
Heck yea, sign me up for that. In a heartbeat.

It's extremely difficult to get a plus SS in a trade. Probably more difficult than getting a plus starting pitcher. Reyes has some risks, but his upside from Janish is huge.

Reyes having only one year on his contract is a double edged sword. On the plus side, it's less risk and it is what is making him available in trade. On the negative side, he might be a rental player.. However, Walt has a pretty good record for retaining players that he wants to keep.

Having Reyes and Phillips up the middle would be great.

The only reason I'm paying even a little attention to this rumor is because it seems like classic Jocketty. He has shown a willingness to pull the trigger on big-time talent when it's at low value -- and Reyes qualifies. He also has shown he isn't afraid to take on a guy in the last year of his deal and either ride it out or try to re-sign him after selling him on the team/city. Throw in his age (just 27, although it seems he has been around forever) and the perfect fit on the field and in the lineup, and I could see it happening. Really ... a leadoff-hitting shortstop in the prime of his career? Why wouldn't Walt be interested?

Also, I agree with others who figure the asking price probably will not be what has been speculated here. Walt isn't afraid to give something to get something, however. It's one reason he has been able to get deals done. Too many GMs only want to do a deal when they get something for nothing. Walt, I think, is more reasonable than that.

Having said all that, I still think it's probably nonsense. But there are aspects that make me wonder.

HotCorner
12-14-2010, 12:47 PM
The only way I would want the Reds to acquire Reyes is if Cordero was a part of the deal. It offsets money and provides risk while filling a need for both teams.

osuceltic
12-14-2010, 12:50 PM
The only way I would want the Reds to acquire Reyes is if Cordero was a part of the deal. It offsets money and provides risk while filling a need for both teams.

On a one-year deal, I don't care. It's not my money. And short of a trade for a true ace, how are the Reds going to better spend that money?

Edd Roush
12-14-2010, 01:27 PM
You're judging him just based on last season? He was in and out of the lineup with injuries. Maybe he's injury-prone, or maybe he's just been a bit unlucky. I understand why people are cautious about touting him as a great player due to the durability concerns, but if he can stay healthy there's no question in my mind he's an elite SS/leadoff hitter.

Jose Reyes was hardly "in and out of the lineup with injuries" last year. I couldn't find the leaderboard for PAs last year, but he had the 29th most ABs last year in the whole National League. That is a large enough sample size to question whether the injury in 2009 is going to deteriorate the remainder of his career. I sure as hell don't want to deal a young pitcher for a guy who had 600+ PAs and only had a .321 OBP. On top of this, his last two years of UZR suggest that he is losing range and defensive ability.

The only Reyes deal I am going to be cool with is a straight Cordero for Reyes swap, or I may give them some non-top 20 prospects if they throw in some money. Reyes is not worth our young pitching depth and his offensive advantage over Janish is not worth enough to outweigh Janish's superior defense and much lower contract.

Edd Roush
12-14-2010, 01:29 PM
On a one-year deal, I don't care. It's not my money. And short of a trade for a true ace, how are the Reds going to better spend that money?

Zach Greinke would be a much better way to spend that money. An ace will help carry this team through the regular season and be a hammer in the playoffs. We have what it takes in terms of talent to get Greinke. I just don't know if that 13.5 million dollars exists in the payroll. Dumping Cordero is the only way the Reds could acquire Greinke or Reyes and I really believe Greinke is a much better way to spend that money.

osuceltic
12-14-2010, 01:33 PM
Zach Greinke would be a much better way to spend that money. An ace will help carry this team through the regular season and be a hammer in the playoffs. We have what it takes in terms of talent to get Greinke. I just don't know if that 13.5 million dollars exists in the payroll. Dumping Cordero is the only way the Reds could acquire Greinke or Reyes and I really believe Greinke is a much better way to spend that money.

Sure, if it's an either-or, I'll choose Greinke. But if we're not getting Greinke, why not Reyes?

Edd Roush
12-14-2010, 02:02 PM
Sure, if it's an either-or, I'll choose Greinke. But if we're not getting Greinke, why not Reyes?

Because Reyes isn't worth losing depth for. I would be fine going Cordero for Reyes if we can't get Greinke, but I don't want to trade basically anything of value for him. I am really surprised with how down I am on him after looking at some of his numbers. Granted, he is not even 30 yet and could easily turn it around.

REDREAD
12-14-2010, 02:52 PM
Jose Reyes was hardly "in and out of the lineup with injuries" last year. I couldn't find the leaderboard for PAs last year, but he had the 29th most ABs last year in the whole National League.
[snip] Reyes is not worth our young pitching depth and his offensive advantage over Janish is not worth enough to outweigh Janish's superior defense and much lower contract.

Janish had his best year last year (228 AB), and was barely over replacement level. He's also 27. Lifetime 634 OPS. Weak hitter in the minors too.

Reyes had his worst season last year, but still had a 1.9 WAR advantage over Janish, and has upside. Sure, he had a 321 OBP last year, but the previous 4 years, it was over 350.

The fact that Janish is our default option makes Reyes super attractive option to me right now. It's worth rolling the dice on potentially getting an impact player at SS. Cabera was a good catalyst with the bat last year, I'd like to see an attempt to replace him. Reyes is a lifetime 286 hitter. I know people will groan when I bring up batting average, but this offense needs some more hitters that can make consistent contact.

Getting Reyes for an extra starting pitcher and change would be awesome. Sounds like a great way to use up the remaining payflex, IMO. It would certainly make having Gomes in LF more palatable.

hebroncougar
12-14-2010, 02:54 PM
It's not going to happen, but I'd like it to. If the salaries are a wash, there's no downside IMO.

Rojo
12-14-2010, 03:00 PM
Reyes had his worst season last year, but still had a 1.9 WAR advantage over Janish, and has upside. Sure, he had a 321 OBP last year, but the previous 4 years, it was over 350.

Focusing on a recent mediocre season and ignoring four good ones makes sense......if the player's 35.

RedsManRick
12-14-2010, 03:22 PM
Janish had his best year last year (228 AB), and was barely over replacement level.

1 WAR in 228 plate appearances is equivalent to 3 WAR over a full season. Drew Stubbs put up 3.2 WAR. Jose Reyes put up 2.8 WAR. I'm not making the argument (in this post) that Janish would put up 3 WAR in a full season's worth of PA, but your statement is misleading. Were he to perform at the level he performed at last year over the course of a full season, he would have been just as productive as they guy we're eager to acquire.

Let's look at all SS who qualified last year:


Name Fld WAR
Troy Tulowitzki 7.1 6.4
Stephen Drew 8.7 5.1
Hanley Ramirez -10.2 4.4
Alexei Ramirez 10.8 3.8
Cliff Penningto 9.9 3.7
Alex Gonzalez 5.1 3.4
Juan Uribe 6.8 3.2
Jose Reyes -5.0 2.8
Derek Jeter -4.7 2.5
Yunel Escobar 4.3 2.2
Marco Scutaro -4.8 2.1
Starlin Castro -2.1 2.0
Elvis Andrus 0.1 1.5
Jhonny Peralta -3.9 1.4
Orlando Cabrera 3.7 1.3
Miguel Tejada -6.8 1.3
Ian Desmond -8.8 1.1
Erick Aybar -2.0 0.9
Jason Bartlett -10.4 0.7
Alcides Escobar 3.5 0.6
Yuniesky Betanc -9.5 0.6
Cesar Izturis 5.1 -0.3

1 WAR in 228 PA suddenly doesn't look so shabby. Regarding the Reyes comp, Reyes produced .46 WAR per 100 PA. Janish produced .53 WAR per 100 PA. Again, I'm not arguing that we should make the comparison of a full season to 1/3 of one, but if you want to make it, there it is.

GoReds
12-14-2010, 03:38 PM
1 WAR in 228 plate appearances is equivalent to 3 WAR over a full season. Drew Stubbs put up 3.2 WAR. Jose Reyes put up 2.8 WAR. I'm not making the argument (in this post) that Janish would put up 3 WAR in a full season's worth of PA, but your statement is misleading. Were he to perform at the level he performed at last year over the course of a full season, he would have been just as productive as they guy we're eager to acquire.

Let's look at all SS who qualified last year:


Name Fld WAR
Troy Tulowitzki 7.1 6.4
Stephen Drew 8.7 5.1
Hanley Ramirez -10.2 4.4
Alexei Ramirez 10.8 3.8
Cliff Penningto 9.9 3.7
Alex Gonzalez 5.1 3.4
Juan Uribe 6.8 3.2
Jose Reyes -5.0 2.8
Derek Jeter -4.7 2.5
Yunel Escobar 4.3 2.2
Marco Scutaro -4.8 2.1
Starlin Castro -2.1 2.0
Elvis Andrus 0.1 1.5
Jhonny Peralta -3.9 1.4
Orlando Cabrera 3.7 1.3
Miguel Tejada -6.8 1.3
Ian Desmond -8.8 1.1
Erick Aybar -2.0 0.9
Jason Bartlett -10.4 0.7
Alcides Escobar 3.5 0.6
Yuniesky Betanc -9.5 0.6
Cesar Izturis 5.1 -0.3

1 WAR in 228 PA suddenly doesn't look so shabby. Regarding the Reyes comp, Reyes produced .46 WAR per 100 PA. Janish produced .53 WAR per 100 PA. Again, I'm not arguing that we should make the comparison of a full season to 1/3 of one, but if you want to make it, there it is.

Okay, I didn't watch a ton of baseball other than the Reds this year, but a couple of numbers jump at me.

Jason Bartlett is a -10.4, yet Juan Uribe is a 6.8 in the fielding category?

Really?

RedsManRick
12-14-2010, 03:49 PM
Okay, I didn't watch a ton of baseball other than the Reds this year, but a couple of numbers jump at me.

Jason Bartlett is a -10.4, yet Juan Uribe is a 6.8 in the fielding category?

Really?

Do you have evidence to the contrary? Just because the data challenges are our assumptions doesn't mean it's wrong. A few things:

There are always outliers in any process which includes variability. Citing outliers as evidence that the system is flawed and unreliable will result in every system being deemed flawed and unreliable. (you may or may not be inferring that based on your observations - I don't mean to imply you are necessarily doing so)
Performance and talent are two different things. It's completely possible that both guys are league average defenders from a true talent perspective and one guy just had a good season and one had a bad one. Of course, Bartlett's UZR has declined every year since 2006 and he put up a -5.6 last year. Maybe he's just not very good anymore and his reputation has yet to catch up. Uribe, by comparison, has averaged a 5.4 over the past 6 years. Maybe he's better than his reputation.
1 season of UZR = 1/3 season of OPS from a variability perspective. If a guy with an .800 OPS puts up a .675 over 1/3 of a season, we don't question the legitimacy of OPS
Defensive metrics are inherently less reliable than offensive metrics. There are more opportunities for error to be introduced in to the process of recording the events.

We can get in to the whole WAR debate or we can simply accept that all of these numbers come with error bars around them and no amount of debate will provide us a more accurate, reliable picture. The point remains -- if you extrapolate Janish's performance to a full season, he's right in the middle of the pack of everday SSs. Citing a comparatively low WAR figure from his 1/3 of a season as evidence that he's not very good is simply misleading.

westofyou
12-14-2010, 03:57 PM
Sounds like confirmation bias to me :p:

Edd Roush
12-14-2010, 04:32 PM
1 WAR in 228 plate appearances is equivalent to 3 WAR over a full season. Drew Stubbs put up 3.2 WAR. Jose Reyes put up 2.8 WAR. I'm not making the argument (in this post) that Janish would put up 3 WAR in a full season's worth of PA, but your statement is misleading. Were he to perform at the level he performed at last year over the course of a full season, he would have been just as productive as they guy we're eager to acquire.

Let's look at all SS who qualified last year:


Name Fld WAR
Troy Tulowitzki 7.1 6.4
Stephen Drew 8.7 5.1
Hanley Ramirez -10.2 4.4
Alexei Ramirez 10.8 3.8
Cliff Penningto 9.9 3.7
Alex Gonzalez 5.1 3.4
Juan Uribe 6.8 3.2
Jose Reyes -5.0 2.8
Derek Jeter -4.7 2.5
Yunel Escobar 4.3 2.2
Marco Scutaro -4.8 2.1
Starlin Castro -2.1 2.0
Elvis Andrus 0.1 1.5
Jhonny Peralta -3.9 1.4
Orlando Cabrera 3.7 1.3
Miguel Tejada -6.8 1.3
Ian Desmond -8.8 1.1
Erick Aybar -2.0 0.9
Jason Bartlett -10.4 0.7
Alcides Escobar 3.5 0.6
Yuniesky Betanc -9.5 0.6
Cesar Izturis 5.1 -0.3

1 WAR in 228 PA suddenly doesn't look so shabby. Regarding the Reyes comp, Reyes produced .46 WAR per 100 PA. Janish produced .53 WAR per 100 PA. Again, I'm not arguing that we should make the comparison of a full season to 1/3 of one, but if you want to make it, there it is.

Great information, Rick. Seeing this list makes me want to pursue Stephen Drew even more. Would would it take to pry Drew away from the D-Backs?

Brutus
12-14-2010, 04:38 PM
Great information, Rick. Seeing this list makes me want to pursue Stephen Drew even more. Would would it take to pry Drew away from the D-Backs?

Less than Justin Upton but greater than the Louisiana Purchase.

Edd Roush
12-14-2010, 04:56 PM
Less than Justin Upton but greater than the Louisiana Purchase.

Would Leake, Heisey, Cozart be enough? I think I do that deal. Heck, I think I would throw Alonso on top of that, too.

While I think Janish could do a league-average job of playing shortstop next year, I am all about adding an actual upgrade. I think Drew represents a much bigger upgrade at shortstop than Reyes. Drew is in line for about 5 million next year and would be under control for the next three years. He could be a key piece to the Reds' future.

REDREAD
12-14-2010, 05:06 PM
1 WAR in 228 plate appearances is equivalent to 3 WAR over a full season. .

That's a good point and I did not mean to be misleading. I forgot that WAR was a function of plate appearances.

Still, I think Janish over 600 ABs would be replacement level at best. He's basically another Olmedo or Machado. Playing him fulltime would really expose his offensive shortcomings.

Brutus
12-14-2010, 05:16 PM
Would Leake, Heisey, Cozart be enough? I think I do that deal. Heck, I think I would throw Alonso on top of that, too.

While I think Janish could do a league-average job of playing shortstop next year, I am all about adding an actual upgrade. I think Drew represents a much bigger upgrade at shortstop than Reyes. Drew is in line for about 5 million next year and would be under control for the next three years. He could be a key piece to the Reds' future.

Joking aside, I actually do think your proposal, even without Alonso, is more than would truly be necessary. You just don't see those types of trades in MLB, despite the enormous assumptions on message boards about requiring such a haul.

In truth, I would imagine something like Leake or Alonso, Heisey and a couple of b-prospects would be enough. But who knows for sure.

osuceltic
12-14-2010, 05:21 PM
Do you have evidence to the contrary? Just because the data challenges are our assumptions doesn't mean it's wrong. A few things:

There are always outliers in any process which includes variability. Citing outliers as evidence that the system is flawed and unreliable will result in every system being deemed flawed and unreliable. (you may or may not be inferring that based on your observations - I don't mean to imply you are necessarily doing so)
Performance and talent are two different things. It's completely possible that both guys are league average defenders from a true talent perspective and one guy just had a good season and one had a bad one. Of course, Bartlett's UZR has declined every year since 2006 and he put up a -5.6 last year. Maybe he's just not very good anymore and his reputation has yet to catch up. Uribe, by comparison, has averaged a 5.4 over the past 6 years. Maybe he's better than his reputation.
1 season of UZR = 1/3 season of OPS from a variability perspective. If a guy with an .800 OPS puts up a .675 over 1/3 of a season, we don't question the legitimacy of OPS
Defensive metrics are inherently less reliable than offensive metrics. There are more opportunities for error to be introduced in to the process of recording the events.

We can get in to the whole WAR debate or we can simply accept that all of these numbers come with error bars around them and no amount of debate will provide us a more accurate, reliable picture. The point remains -- if you extrapolate Janish's performance to a full season, he's right in the middle of the pack of everday SSs. Citing a comparatively low WAR figure from his 1/3 of a season as evidence that he's not very good is simply misleading.

What's the outlier? Janish's 2010 (.723 OPS, 96 OPS+ over 200 ABs ... compared to career .634 and 69 in the majors ... for a guy who never had an OPS of .723 above high-A ball in the minors) or Reyes's 2010 (.749 OPS, 103 OPS+ ... compared to career .769 and 101)?

Both guys just finished their age-27 seasons.

Now, I'm as big a believer in defense up the middle as anyone. I think Janish is a good but not great shortstop. I think Reyes is a pretty good shortstop. Do I think the difference offsets the possible 100-point difference in OPS, natural fit at the top of the order, speed on the basepaths and predicability of performance Reyes brings? Not even close.

And we haven't even discussed the fact that, outside of the time spent on the field because of Cabrera's injuries, Janish was used pretty judiciously to put him in positions to succeed. I think expecting him to post anything close to that .723 as a full-time starter is wishful thinking.

I can't believe I even have to make this argument. Sometimes we have to step away from our small corner of the world to see the big picture. Jose Reyes is a 27-year-old former All-Star who had a bad year. Paul Janish is a 27-year-old backup infielder who is more likely to be in AAA next year than anywhere near an All-Star Game. It's not close.

I've wasted way too much time on something that has about a 3 percent chance of happening. I think the odds are much greater that Cabrera signs in February for one or two years at reasonable money. I think Janish as the starter is the emergency scenario. With good reason.

Edd Roush
12-14-2010, 05:24 PM
Joking aside, I actually do think your proposal, even without Alonso, is more than would truly be necessary. You just don't see those types of trades in MLB, despite the enormous assumptions on message boards about requiring such a haul.

In truth, I would imagine something like Leake or Alonso, Heisey and a couple of b-prospects would be enough. But who knows for sure.

I just really believe that Drew helps in this window better than the cumulative impact of Leake/Alonso/Heisey or those prospects. If the new Diamondbacks GM is really all about adding as much talent to a talent-depleted team as possible, why wouldn't he swing this kind of deal? The Diamondbacks are going to be no good for the next few years and they have no reason for a guy like Drew.

camisadelgolf
12-14-2010, 05:24 PM
To take it further, I'd love a Drew/Janish platoon.

RedsManRick
12-14-2010, 05:29 PM
That's a good point and I did not mean to be misleading. I forgot that WAR was a function of plate appearances.

Still, I think Janish over 600 ABs would be replacement level at best. He's basically another Olmedo or Machado. Playing him fulltime would really expose his offensive shortcomings.

In 2008 & 2009, his bat was sub-replacement. In 2010, his bat was between replacement and average. His glove meanwhile is among the strongest in baseball. Combine it and you get 1.6 WAR during his time as a major leaguer.

I'm just not sure I understand the "exposed bat" argument I've seen numerous people make. Why would he get worse? Barring a platoon split, more playing time usually equates to better performance with the stick. And further, what about his 2010 was unsustainable? Did he get lucky? Did he demonstrate a skill he hasn't shown before? I understand his track record; I just haven't seen an argument which provides any explanation of what sort of fluke 2010 was. He's the same guy he's always been -- good contact, good discipline, little power, too many flyballs. He didn't benefit from a rash of infield singles or extra HRs on flyballs. So are people really making the argument that he was lucky to have so many singles?

Brutus
12-14-2010, 05:29 PM
To take it further, I'd love a Drew/Janish platoon.

I'm struggling to think of a reason why they'd need to platoon a 5 WAR shortstop lol

His career OPS vs. LHP is .721. Janish in his career vs. LHP is .717.

It seems like Drew should be an everyday player in that situation.

Edd Roush
12-14-2010, 05:35 PM
To take it further, I'd love a Drew/Janish platoon.

While Drew hits righties better than lefties and Janish hits righties better than lefties, I still think if we spent the resources to acquire Drew we should let him be the everyday starter. I wouldn't mind letting Janish play afternoon games after night games against a tough lefty, but if we acquire Drew, I want him to play as much as possible.

camisadelgolf
12-14-2010, 05:39 PM
I'm struggling to think of a reason why they'd need to platoon a 5 WAR shortstop lol

His career OPS vs. LHP is .721. Janish in his career vs. LHP is .717.

It seems like Drew should be an everyday player in that situation.
I don't doubt that that's how it would play out, but if I were the manager, I'd do it because Janish is better defensively.

Mario-Rijo
12-14-2010, 05:42 PM
In 2008 & 2009, his bat was sub-replacement. In 2010, his bat was between replacement and average. His glove meanwhile is among the strongest in baseball. Combine it and you get 1.6 WAR during his time as a major leaguer.

I'm just not sure I understand the "exposed bat" argument I've seen numerous people make. Why would he get worse? Barring a platoon split, more playing time usually equates to better performance with the stick. And further, what about his 2010 was unsustainable? Did he get lucky? Did he demonstrate a skill he hasn't shown before? I understand his track record; I just haven't seen an argument which provides any explanation of what sort of fluke 2010 was.

1 word, endurance. Don't know why and never understood the argument against Hanigan prior to '10 in this respect but it was obvious that the both of them did worse whenever they had to play for any prolonged length of time. Did I really see it? I think so because I refused to buy it until I saw some signs of it and I believe I did. Can it change, I don't know I suppose it's possible but it's a gamble, no doubt.


However the problem I see here is Reyes if healthy and assuming his talents haven't been diminished by injury can be the answer at the top of the lineup that this sometimes feast or famine offense needs, Paul Janish hasn't ever shown enough to be an upgrade to the alternatives. It is possible we don't really need an answer at the top if Stubbs improves his game and BP goes back to the Brandon of early in '10 but it would be nice to have Reyes and Stubbs back to back at the top in order to maximize our scoring opportunities. Especially since Votto is gonna be getting the Pujols treatment an awful lot.

Though I should add I doubt there is any truth to this at all. One of the things Walt and Dusty don't like is a guy who can't stay healthy.

TheNext44
12-14-2010, 06:01 PM
I just don't see Drew as that big of an upgrade over Janish to justify trading any real talent to get him.

First, remember that Drew is going to be very expensive, probably over $7M in 2011, more in 2012, and will be a free agent after the 2012 season. So you are getting two very expensive years and then he's gone.

Second, his UZR 150 last year may be a sign that he's improve in the field, or it may just be that his career -5.7 UZR/150 is evening out.

I don't want to give up 4 cheap years of Leake or Wood to find out which one Drew is, especially when he's going to cost so much and be around for just two years.

RedsManRick
12-14-2010, 06:11 PM
1 word, endurance. Don't know why and never understood the argument against Hanigan prior to '10 in this respect but it was obvious that the both of them did worse whenever they had to play for any prolonged length of time. Did I really see it? I think so because I refused to buy it until I saw some signs of it and I believe I did. Can it change, I don't know I suppose it's possible but it's a gamble, no doubt.[quote]

When discussing the impact of regular playing time on a player's endurance, I don't think it's fair to compare any other position to catching.

[quote]
However the problem I see here is Reyes if healthy and assuming his talents haven't been diminished by injury can be the answer at the top of the lineup that this sometimes feast or famine offense needs, Paul Janish hasn't ever shown enough to be an upgrade to the alternatives. It is possible we don't really need an answer at the top if Stubbs improves his game and BP goes back to the Brandon of early in '10 but it would be nice to have Reyes and Stubbs back to back at the top in order to maximize our scoring opportunities. Especially since Votto is gonna be getting the Pujols treatment an awful lot.

Though I should add I doubt there is any truth to this at all. One of the things Walt and Dusty don't like is a guy who can't stay healthy.

I get frustrated when we focus on the type of production we're getting rather than the amount of it. I may be among the worst on RZ about beating the lineup horse, but at the end of the day, I would hate to see us trade away multiple prospects for a 1-2 win upgrade just because he's fast and fits the lineup "need". If the real worry is getting a good OBP ahead of Votto, Reyes is a very expensive way to get a relatively modest upgrade.

TRF
12-14-2010, 06:13 PM
Drew is a fantastic target for dreams. But he isn't leaving AZ via trade.

Reyes is a fantastic target for dreams. But His injury, his reported decline defensively and his pricetag make him unlikely to be acquired by the Reds. And I hadn't heard that the Mets had plans to blow things up.

Both Janish and Cozart are reputed to be excellent defenders. Janish has always had a good OBP relative to his BA... usually 100+ points higher in his career. Cozart hit 17 HR's at AAA last year.

Maybe, just maybe, the Reds are fine at SS. Sure an upgrade could be acquired, but those upgrades might cost more than the Reds SHOULD give up. And there is uncertainty surrounding most SS's not named Tulo...

muddie
12-14-2010, 06:19 PM
Drew is a fantastic target for dreams. But he isn't leaving AZ via trade.

Reyes is a fantastic target for dreams. But His injury, his reported decline defensively and his pricetag make him unlikely to be acquired by the Reds. And I hadn't heard that the Mets had plans to blow things up.

Both Janish and Cozart are reputed to be excellent defenders. Janish has always had a good OBP relative to his BA... usually 100+ points higher in his career. Cozart hit 17 HR's at AAA last year.

Maybe, just maybe, the Reds are fine at SS. Sure an upgrade could be acquired, but those upgrades might cost more than the Reds SHOULD give up. And there is uncertainty surrounding most SS's not named Tulo...

I like this post.

Mario-Rijo
12-14-2010, 06:52 PM
When discussing the impact of regular playing time on a player's endurance, I don't think it's fair to compare any other position to catching.

Fair enough, but wasn't comparing them really just noting that they both had the issue.


I get frustrated when we focus on the type of production we're getting rather than the amount of it. I may be among the worst on RZ about beating the lineup horse, but at the end of the day, I would hate to see us trade away multiple prospects for a 1-2 win upgrade just because he's fast and fits the lineup "need". If the real worry is getting a good OBP ahead of Votto, Reyes is a very expensive way to get a relatively modest upgrade.

Likewise I get frustrated with the constant overlooking of how significant it can be to focus on just that. If 2 guys both have similar skillsets then sure amount is a big deal. Bad teams should focus largely on adding amount 1st then sort out the type when they get "enough". But I find it critical to have diversity in the lineup. There were times last year when we just needed not to swing and miss and give me Orlando Cabrera all day over JJ Hardy (for example) in that respect, he's better than average at making contact when he needs to. Even though there were times Cabrera's hacking ways drove me crazy and were clearly a negative. But I digress I wouldn't do some of these deals folks throw out there for the chance to obtain a Reyes or Drew. I think people want to overpay way to often.

But just "fast" isn't what the lineup needs. Fast with a history prior to last season of getting on base at a reasonable clip and preferably someone who makes consistent contact. Is he ideal? If he is the old Reyes he's fairly close to ideal and on a one year deal I'd say let's give it a shot if we can make it work somehow without selling the farm.

Cordero with Janish & Maloney seems more than fair if Walt can sway the belief that he doesn't need to make such a deal (the usual suspects that aren't top 10-15 guys). If the Mets would rather pay us millions to send better prospects and keep Coco then we might give them some top 10 guys but no one critical. At best I might go Francisco, Sappelt, Valaika types. No Cozart, Mes, Yorman, Hamilton, not even Alonso or Frazier. And definitely none of our arms though if they want to add to the deal we might be inclined to consider sending Volquez or Bailey. Say...

Reyes, Beltran & alot of dollars
Cordero, Gomes, Volquez & Valaika/Francisco

Ron Madden
12-15-2010, 05:13 AM
Drew is a fantastic target for dreams. But he isn't leaving AZ via trade.

Reyes is a fantastic target for dreams. But His injury, his reported decline defensively and his pricetag make him unlikely to be acquired by the Reds. And I hadn't heard that the Mets had plans to blow things up.

Both Janish and Cozart are reputed to be excellent defenders. Janish has always had a good OBP relative to his BA... usually 100+ points higher in his career. Cozart hit 17 HR's at AAA last year.

Maybe, just maybe, the Reds are fine at SS. Sure an upgrade could be acquired, but those upgrades might cost more than the Reds SHOULD give up. And there is uncertainty surrounding most SS's not named Tulo...


Agreed. :beerme:

Ron Madden
12-15-2010, 05:46 AM
Maybe it's just me but I really believe the 2010 Reds were a much better team with Janish at SS over Cabrera and Hanigan starting instead of Hernandez behind the plate.

REDREAD
12-15-2010, 10:47 AM
In 2008 & 2009, his bat was sub-replacement. In 2010, his bat was between replacement and average. His glove meanwhile is among the strongest in baseball. Combine it and you get 1.6 WAR during his time as a major leaguer.

I'm just not sure I understand the "exposed bat" argument I've seen numerous people make. Why would he get worse? Barring a platoon split, more playing time usually equates to better performance with the stick. And further, what about his 2010 was unsustainable? Did he get lucky? Did he demonstrate a skill he hasn't shown before? I understand his track record; I just haven't seen an argument which provides any explanation of what sort of fluke 2010 was. He's the same guy he's always been -- good contact, good discipline, little power, too many flyballs. He didn't benefit from a rash of infield singles or extra HRs on flyballs. So are people really making the argument that he was lucky to have so many singles?

You get guys like Heisley, Stynes, Nunally, etc that can put together 200 ABs or so of good-excellent performance, largely because they are under the radar. As soon as they become regular starting players, the opposing teams focus more on their scouting reports and expose their weaknesses.
2010 was by far the best year Janish ever had, but I just don't think it's sustainable. The guy has journeyman backup lable written all over him. He's useful to the team as a cheap backup in the middle infield positions, but I don't want him starting.. He'd be a black hole offensively, much like Patterson and Bako were.

RedsManRick
12-15-2010, 01:36 PM
You get guys like Heisley, Stynes, Nunally, etc that can put together 200 ABs or so of good-excellent performance, largely because they are under the radar. As soon as they become regular starting players, the opposing teams focus more on their scouting reports and expose their weaknesses.
2010 was by far the best year Janish ever had, but I just don't think it's sustainable. The guy has journeyman backup lable written all over him. He's useful to the team as a cheap backup in the middle infield positions, but I don't want him starting.. He'd be a black hole offensively, much like Patterson and Bako were.

Go ahead, keep dodging my question with additional assertions. Simply stating repeatedly and in different ways that he'll suck if he gets more plate appearances does not add any additional weight to your argument. I'm happy for you that you have a narrative you're comfortable with. In fact, my gut is inclined to agree you with.

But you want to know why Chris Stynes awesome 2000 wasn't sustainable? It was because he got over-exposed. It's because his success in 2000 was built on luck, an unsustainable .363 BABIP, which regressed to normal in subsequent years.

All I'm asking is what part of Janish's 2010 performance is not sustainable? When he gets "exposed", what will happen? Will his contact rate go down? His walk rate? Will he strike out more? Sorry to repost this, but perhaps it would help:



Year Level PA AVG OBP SLG wOBA BABIP BB K% ISO
2006 A 108 .398 .435 .612 .473 .400 6.5% 10.2% .214
2006 A+ 393 .278 .355 .421 .358 .286 9.7% 11.6% .143
2006 AA 16 .267 .313 .333 .301 .400 6.3% 33.3% .067
2007 AA 391 .244 .358 .330 .330 .287 12.8% 16.7% .086
2007 AAA 227 .221 .278 .317 .274 .247 6.2% 15.6% .095
2008 AAA 365 .252 .324 .387 .319 .302 7.1% 22.3% .135
2008 Reds 89 .188 .270 .250 .244 .230 7.9% 22.5% .063
2009 Reds 292 .211 .296 .305 .275 .247 8.9% 15.6% .094
2010 Reds 228 .260 .338 .385 .315 .283 9.6% 15.0% .125

Here are the salient data points in chart form. (I've omitted the 16 PA data point for obvious reasons)
https://doc-0c-6s-docs.googleusercontent.com/docs/secure/99q12ufs10eq7jce9t4in7u8a0mafkkb/e805gnh3fb67cetg5e52vtph6m1vd3bq/1292414400000/04050004981409543728/04050004981409543728/0B5nUejUyaK7bMTc3YjgxZDgtNTAwOS00MmRmLTk3MDAtNGY0Y TNjZGM4ZWE0?nonce=h8qvg4vu2hc9o&user=04050004981409543728&hash=32lnue4ca8ob27fe3nvdeb8v8vduetns

Janish's productivity at the plate is very, very strongly correlated with his BABIP. His underlying skills have been very consistent. When his singles fall in at a rate close to average, he hits decently. When they don't, he doesn't. So the question becomes pretty simple: what BABIP do you think we can reasonably expect? From there, we have a really good idea of how productive he's likely to be offensively. Just take that BABIP and multiply it by 1.14.

Now we can focus on the 2008 and 2009 data points in the lower left hand corner of that chart or we can look at that blob in the middle. I'll put my money on the blobs in the middle b/c I simply don't see the argument which says he's going change his underlying skill set (those skills determine the slope of the line) nor do I think a sub .250 BABIP is likely (determining the place on the line we expect him to fall).

I'm not predicting he suddenly becomes Troy Tulowitski, just that a repeat of 2010 is more likely than a repeat of 2008/09.

Rojo
12-15-2010, 08:09 PM
Did part of this thread disappear?

TRF
12-15-2010, 08:11 PM
i noticed this too. several of my poss today have vanished.

mth123
12-15-2010, 08:15 PM
Go ahead, keep dodging my question with additional assertions. Simply stating repeatedly and in different ways that he'll suck if he gets more plate appearances does not add any additional weight to your argument. I'm happy for you that you have a narrative you're comfortable with. In fact, my gut is inclined to agree you with.

But you want to know why Chris Stynes awesome 2000 wasn't sustainable? It was because he got over-exposed. It's because his success in 2000 was built on luck, an unsustainable .363 BABIP, which regressed to normal in subsequent years.

All I'm asking is what part of Janish's 2010 performance is not sustainable? When he gets "exposed", what will happen? Will his contact rate go down? His walk rate? Will he strike out more? Sorry to repost this, but perhaps it would help:



Year Level PA AVG OBP SLG wOBA BABIP BB K% ISO
2006 A 108 .398 .435 .612 .473 .400 6.5% 10.2% .214
2006 A+ 393 .278 .355 .421 .358 .286 9.7% 11.6% .143
2006 AA 16 .267 .313 .333 .301 .400 6.3% 33.3% .067
2007 AA 391 .244 .358 .330 .330 .287 12.8% 16.7% .086
2007 AAA 227 .221 .278 .317 .274 .247 6.2% 15.6% .095
2008 AAA 365 .252 .324 .387 .319 .302 7.1% 22.3% .135
2008 Reds 89 .188 .270 .250 .244 .230 7.9% 22.5% .063
2009 Reds 292 .211 .296 .305 .275 .247 8.9% 15.6% .094
2010 Reds 228 .260 .338 .385 .315 .283 9.6% 15.0% .125

Here are the salient data points in chart form. (I've omitted the 16 PA data point for obvious reasons)
https://doc-0c-6s-docs.googleusercontent.com/docs/secure/99q12ufs10eq7jce9t4in7u8a0mafkkb/e805gnh3fb67cetg5e52vtph6m1vd3bq/1292414400000/04050004981409543728/04050004981409543728/0B5nUejUyaK7bMTc3YjgxZDgtNTAwOS00MmRmLTk3MDAtNGY0Y TNjZGM4ZWE0?nonce=h8qvg4vu2hc9o&user=04050004981409543728&hash=32lnue4ca8ob27fe3nvdeb8v8vduetns

Janish's productivity at the plate is very, very strongly correlated with his BABIP. His underlying skills have been very consistent. When his singles fall in at a rate close to average, he hits decently. When they don't, he doesn't. So the question becomes pretty simple: what BABIP do you think we can reasonably expect? From there, we have a really good idea of how productive he's likely to be offensively. Just take that BABIP and multiply it by 1.14.

Now we can focus on the 2008 and 2009 data points in the lower left hand corner of that chart or we can look at that blob in the middle. I'll put my money on the blobs in the middle b/c I simply don't see the argument which says he's going change his underlying skill set (those skills determine the slope of the line) nor do I think a sub .250 BABIP is likely (determining the place on the line we expect him to fall).

I'm not predicting he suddenly becomes Troy Tulowitski, just that a repeat of 2010 is more likely than a repeat of 2008/09.

Strength has always been a question with Janish. I think if he played every day he'd wear down and his bat would slow. His K-Rate would increase and his BABIP would drop. I know that .283 is considered on the low end for BABIP, but I don't think he'd sustain that playing full-time.

There has been talk of him increasing his strength, so I hope he can handle it now, but I'm in the "I'll believe it when I see it" camp.

westofyou
12-15-2010, 08:19 PM
Did part of this thread disappear?

Bunch of them around 3 EST, some sort DB issue is my guess, then it likely reverted back to one of the prior states.

PuffyPig
12-15-2010, 08:20 PM
Year Level PA AVG OBP SLG wOBA BABIP BB K% ISO
2006 A 108 .398 .435 .612 .473 .400 6.5% 10.2% .214
2006 A+ 393 .278 .355 .421 .358 .286 9.7% 11.6% .143
2006 AA 16 .267 .313 .333 .301 .400 6.3% 33.3% .067
2007 AA 391 .244 .358 .330 .330 .287 12.8% 16.7% .086
2007 AAA 227 .221 .278 .317 .274 .247 6.2% 15.6% .095
2008 AAA 365 .252 .324 .387 .319 .302 7.1% 22.3% .135
2008 Reds 89 .188 .270 .250 .244 .230 7.9% 22.5% .063
2009 Reds 292 .211 .296 .305 .275 .247 8.9% 15.6% .094
2010 Reds 228 .260 .338 .385 .315 .283 9.6% 15.0% .125

Here are the salient data points in chart form. (I've omitted the 16 PA data point for obvious reasons)
https://doc-0c-6s-docs.googleusercontent.com/docs/secure/99q12ufs10eq7jce9t4in7u8a0mafkkb/e805gnh3fb67cetg5e52vtph6m1vd3bq/1292414400000/04050004981409543728/04050004981409543728/0B5nUejUyaK7bMTc3YjgxZDgtNTAwOS00MmRmLTk3MDAtNGY0Y TNjZGM4ZWE0?nonce=h8qvg4vu2hc9o&user=04050004981409543728&hash=32lnue4ca8ob27fe3nvdeb8v8vduetns

Janish's productivity at the plate is very, very strongly correlated with his BABIP.

If I look over the years, I see a K-rate that is decreasing,and a W-rate that is increasing.

thatcoolguy_22
12-16-2010, 12:48 AM
Drew is a fantastic target for dreams. But he isn't leaving AZ via trade.

Reyes is a fantastic target for dreams. But His injury, his reported decline defensively and his pricetag make him unlikely to be acquired by the Reds. And I hadn't heard that the Mets had plans to blow things up.

Both Janish and Cozart are reputed to be excellent defenders. Janish has always had a good OBP relative to his BA... usually 100+ points higher in his career. Cozart hit 17 HR's at AAA last year.

Maybe, just maybe, the Reds are fine at SS. Sure an upgrade could be acquired, but those upgrades might cost more than the Reds SHOULD give up. And there is uncertainty surrounding most SS's not named Tulo...


post of the thread :smileyclap

Check my track record and you can see I have argued for an increase for Janish's playing time since last offseason and was against the OCAB signing from day -30. If a trade involving Jose Reyes or Drew (fair talent on both sides) increased season ticket sales by say 25%; would you make it?

Will M
12-16-2010, 01:02 AM
I believe Walt is not going to go with Janish & Cozart at short next year.

1) Cozart's OPS at AAA last year was 726. Yes I know he plays SS but with an expected dropoff from AAA to the show it looks to me like he needs more time at AAA.
2) Cozart did not get a September callup.
3) Walt expressed interest in bringing back Cabrera but didn't like the asking price.
4) I believe that the Reds were rumored to have inquired about Bartlett.

I suspect that an upgrade at SS & a LH bat for the outfield are on Walt's to do list.

kaldaniels
12-16-2010, 01:03 AM
post of the thread :smileyclap

Check my track record and you can see I have argued for an increase for Janish's playing time since last offseason and was against the OCAB signing from day -30. If a trade involving Jose Reyes or Drew (fair talent on both sides) increased season ticket sales by say 25%; would you make it?

Are you suggesting a trade for one of those 2 would increase ticket (season) sales by 25 percent?

thatcoolguy_22
12-16-2010, 01:08 AM
Are you suggesting a trade for one of those 2 would increase ticket (season) sales by 25 percent?

Not at all. Just a hypothetical number. Sales would increase. The number was just something for debate. Proven Superstar to the average fan in Reyes would give a bump to revenue. How much would that be worth to the team? increase in payroll? would you be willing to give up more for trade if this was included in the math?

TheNext44
12-16-2010, 01:48 AM
I believe Walt is not going to go with Janish & Cozart at short next year.

1) Cozart's OPS at AAA last year was 726. Yes I know he plays SS but with an expected dropoff from AAA to the show it looks to me like he needs more time at AAA.
2) Cozart did not get a September callup.
3) Walt expressed interest in bringing back Cabrera but didn't like the asking price.
4) I believe that the Reds were rumored to have inquired about Bartlett.

I suspect that an upgrade at SS & a LH bat for the outfield are on Walt's to do list.

1) Cozart and Janish could OPS below .700 and still be league average or better shortstops given their defense.
2) Cozart wasn't called up because he wasn't needed and they didn't want to start his service time clock.
3) Cabrera was told that he would not get the playing time he wanted, and would be paid as a backup.
4) Bartlett was acquired for basically the equivalent of Fisher and Herrera. I am sure that if Jocketty wanted Bartlett, he would have gotten him.

Most importantly, Baker was quoted as saying that they got Cabrera becaue they though Janish was a year away last year. They now think he's ready.

If the Reds can get a Reyes or Drew, then I think they upgrade SS. But I don't think they are looking to upgrade it.

TheNext44
12-16-2010, 02:23 AM
Strength has always been a question with Janish. I think if he played every day he'd wear down and his bat would slow. His K-Rate would increase and his BABIP would drop. I know that .283 is considered on the low end for BABIP, but I don't think he'd sustain that playing full-time.

There has been talk of him increasing his strength, so I hope he can handle it now, but I'm in the "I'll believe it when I see it" camp.

Janish is 6"2' 195, as big or bigger than Jose Reyes, Derek Jeter and Jimmy Rollins. He played SS and pitched at Rice. He's always been considered a great athlete. He may not have the bat speed to get around the high heat from RHP, but nothing about him says endurance would ever be problem with him.

mth123
12-16-2010, 02:44 AM
Janish is 6"2' 195, as big or bigger than Jose Reyes, Derek Jeter and Jimmy Rollins. He played SS and pitched at Rice. He's always been considered a great athlete. He may not have the bat speed to get around the high heat from RHP, but nothing about him says endurance would ever be problem with him.

But we have heard multiple times in reference to his offense that he needed to gain more strength. Lack of strength has been mentioned as a factor in his offensive struggles long before he appeared Cincy. I agree that his size and frame suggest that it shouldn't be, but I've heard it enough that I want to see him OPS in the .700s over a full season before buying it. I'm guessing low .600s.

thatcoolguy_22
12-16-2010, 03:05 AM
However strength is just the opposite of speed. Most people continue adding it well through their prime years. Anyone familiar with the phrase "old man strength?" Its very reasonable to assume that over 3 years in the weight room and the maturation of his Janish's frame, he has added enough muscle to play a full season.

I think we, as a RZ whole, sometimes spend too much time looking into what players have done instead of what players are developing/trending to become. my .02

EDIT: Except for our minor league forum where it is just the opposite, obviously :)

Boss-Hog
12-16-2010, 09:21 AM
Bunch of them around 3 EST, some sort DB issue is my guess, then it likely reverted back to one of the prior states.
All,

I'm not sure what would happen that would cause this, but I don't suspect it's on our end. If you continue to notice it moving forward, please let me know right away via PM and I will contact our host.

edabbs44
12-16-2010, 09:24 AM
All,

I'm not sure what would happen that would cause this, but I don't suspect it's on our end. If you continue to notice it moving forward, please let me know right away via PM and I will contact our host.

Definitely happened to me yesterday in the minor league forum, I thought the site just got rolled back.

REDREAD
12-16-2010, 10:51 AM
Go ahead, keep dodging my question with additional assertions. Simply stating repeatedly and in different ways that he'll suck if he gets more plate appearances does not add any additional weight to your argument. I'm happy for you that you have a narrative you're comfortable with. In fact, my gut is inclined to agree you with.


I wasn't trying to dodge the question.
I guess it is more of a gut feeling for me.
Janish is 27 now. Last season, he put together about 200 good at bats. I give him credit for that. He filled in great. Prior to that, he was really poor offensively. I guess I have no reason to believe that he's suddenly put it together. I have no real stats to back it up. Just the gut feeling, and the experience of lots of journeymen playing great for a month or two and then fading back to earth. I think the Reds' FO agrees. Neither Wayne nor Walt ever wanted to hand Janish the starting job. The clear lack of confidence by the Reds means something to me too. If they thought Janish was a competent starter, they would've given him a lot more time. Sure, there's the occasional mistake by a GM, when they mis-evaluate a 27 year old, and he really is capable of starting, but more often than not, they are correct.
It's a lot easier for a GM to figure out what a guy like Janish will give you in 2011 than it is for him to figure out what some 18 year old in A ball will give you in 6 years..

So, I don't have a stat to back up my feeling. It's just a gut feeling.
I really don't want Valeka or another minor leaguer being our second shortstop either. We are trying to win next year, so I hope we can bring in another SS to help shore up the position.

I can't answer your BABIP question, because I question the entire BABIP theory. My personal belief is that is reasonable for a players' BABIP to fluctate, and it's not entirely luck based. There's so much information now on proper defensive positioning. The other team is optimizing the placement of fielders for every batter, to remove the "luck" factor. When a hitter is hitting well, his BABIP will generallly be higher. When a hitter is struggling, his BABIP will be lower. I don't want to ramble too much about this, as I know it is against the grain of most thinkers here. I respect the BABIP theory, I just disagree with it. Thus, I really don't want to predict Janish's BABIP..

RedsManRick
12-16-2010, 11:01 AM
I wasn't trying to dodge the question.
I guess it is more of a gut feeling for me.
Janish is 27 now. Last season, he put together about 200 good at bats. I give him credit for that. He filled in great. Prior to that, he was really poor offensively. I guess I have no reason to believe that he's suddenly put it together. I have no real stats to back it up. Just the gut feeling, and the experience of lots of journeymen playing great for a month or two and then fading back to earth. I think the Reds' FO agrees. Neither Wayne nor Walt ever wanted to hand Janish the starting job. The clear lack of confidence by the Reds means something to me too. If they thought Janish was a competent starter, they would've given him a lot more time. Sure, there's the occasional mistake by a GM, when they mis-evaluate a 27 year old, and he really is capable of starting, but more often than not, they are correct.
It's a lot easier for a GM to figure out what a guy like Janish will give you in 2011 than it is for him to figure out what some 18 year old in A ball will give you in 6 years..

So, I don't have a stat to back up my feeling. It's just a gut feeling.
I really don't want Valeka or another minor leaguer being our second shortstop either. We are trying to win next year, so I hope we can bring in another SS to help shore up the position.

I can't answer your BABIP question, because I question the entire BABIP theory. My personal belief is that is reasonable for a players' BABIP to fluctate, and it's not entirely luck based. There's so much information now on proper defensive positioning. The other team is optimizing the placement of fielders for every batter, to remove the "luck" factor. When a hitter is hitting well, his BABIP will generallly be higher. When a hitter is struggling, his BABIP will be lower. I don't want to ramble too much about this, as I know it is against the grain of most thinkers here. I respect the BABIP theory, I just disagree with it. Thus, I really don't want to predict Janish's BABIP..

Fair enough -- thanks for addressing my question.

TRF
12-16-2010, 11:41 AM
I wasn't trying to dodge the question.
I guess it is more of a gut feeling for me.
Janish is 27 now. Last season, he put together about 200 good at bats. I give him credit for that. He filled in great. Prior to that, he was really poor offensively. I guess I have no reason to believe that he's suddenly put it together. I have no real stats to back it up. Just the gut feeling, and the experience of lots of journeymen playing great for a month or two and then fading back to earth. I think the Reds' FO agrees. Neither Wayne nor Walt ever wanted to hand Janish the starting job. The clear lack of confidence by the Reds means something to me too. If they thought Janish was a competent starter, they would've given him a lot more time. Sure, there's the occasional mistake by a GM, when they mis-evaluate a 27 year old, and he really is capable of starting, but more often than not, they are correct.
It's a lot easier for a GM to figure out what a guy like Janish will give you in 2011 than it is for him to figure out what some 18 year old in A ball will give you in 6 years..

So, I don't have a stat to back up my feeling. It's just a gut feeling.
I really don't want Valeka or another minor leaguer being our second shortstop either. We are trying to win next year, so I hope we can bring in another SS to help shore up the position.

I can't answer your BABIP question, because I question the entire BABIP theory. My personal belief is that is reasonable for a players' BABIP to fluctate, and it's not entirely luck based. There's so much information now on proper defensive positioning. The other team is optimizing the placement of fielders for every batter, to remove the "luck" factor. When a hitter is hitting well, his BABIP will generallly be higher. When a hitter is struggling, his BABIP will be lower. I don't want to ramble too much about this, as I know it is against the grain of most thinkers here. I respect the BABIP theory, I just disagree with it. Thus, I really don't want to predict Janish's BABIP..

I agree with this to a degree, but you are eliminating luck altogether and you really can't do that. Proper positioning helps the defense, but it doesn't eliminate offense.

In three seasons as a MLB player, Janish has improved his stats each year. His OBP relative to his BA is 82 points higher, which, oddly enough is also what it is in his minor league career. His minor league OBP is .351. It isn't a stretch to think he can OBP .340+ as a starter. The strength issue with Janish wasn't his legs, it was his wrists. He worked on that and well, it looks like it paid off some.

Some guys develop late. Janish MIGHT be one of those guys. If not, Cozart is next in line. Know how many SS's hit more HR's than Cozart did last year at AAA? none. He was 3rd in OPS at the position too.

Both are reputed to be excellent defenders.

So, if it is in Jocketty's mind to upgrades SS, his only option is to overpay for an existing MLB SS. There is no one at AAA better than Janish and Cozart. Espinosa might be an upgrade in a year. Maybe sooner. But why would the Nationals deal him?

That leaves us right back at Reyes and Drew. The D-Backs won't deal Drew. No way. They'd never get the return they want for him. Reyes is a high talent major risk. He'd cost too much because of the talent, but the risk is more than the Reds should be willing to spend. Add to that the Mets haven't really indicated they want to move him. Funny thing about the Mets, they don't seem to be in a position to blow it up. They probably need to though.

I wanted Janish as the full time starter last year. He doesn't have to be an All-Star. His defense alone is reason enough. A tandem SS of Janish/Cozart could keep them both fresh and sharp, and very productive.

edabbs44
12-16-2010, 11:54 AM
Quick question for those who are in favor of giving Janish the job to start the season. How much of this is based on his fielding and, related to that, what his UZR was for 2009?

I've seen Janish's defense get talked about on here a lot, basically to the point where his legend has grown to fairly lofty levels. Much of that was in place at the start of last season, when he was coming off a ridiculous 2009 UZR/150 of 22.7. For perspective, it looks like Brendan Ryan was the 2010 leader at SS with a 12.1. Janish then followed up last season with a 2.2. OCab had a 5.3.

Obviously there are sample size issues with this metric and Janish doesn't have enough playing time to make this metric "reliable", but does anyone's opinion change based on his 2010 fielding? Should it? Fielding is much different than hitting...people on here could have read all about Janish's fielding last year, hear about his 2009 UZR performance, and then basically just assume that he is a great fielder. Performance is much more obvious to the naked eye on the hitting side.

Just curious about how people are accounting for his defense in their assessments.

TRF
12-16-2010, 12:02 PM
Quick question for those who are in favor of giving Janish the job to start the season. How much of this is based on his fielding and, related to that, what his UZR was for 2009?

I've seen Janish's defense get talked about on here a lot, basically to the point where his legend has grown to fairly lofty levels. Much of that was in place at the start of last season, when he was coming off a ridiculous 2009 UZR/150 of 22.7. For perspective, it looks like Brendan Ryan was the 2010 leader at SS with a 12.1. Janish then followed up last season with a 2.2. OCab had a 5.3.

Obviously there are sample size issues with this metric and Janish doesn't have enough playing time to make this metric "reliable", but does anyone's opinion change based on his 2010 fielding? Should it? Fielding is much different than hitting...people on here could have read all about Janish's fielding last year, hear about his 2009 UZR performance, and then basically just assume that he is a great fielder. Performance is much more obvious to the naked eye on the hitting side.

Just curious about how people are accounting for his defense in their assessments.

UZR stats over such a small sample are unreliable. As a whole, in his entire professional career, Janish is known as a plus defender with a rocket for an arm. A very accurate rocket.

That's what I am going by.

REDREAD
12-16-2010, 12:22 PM
In three seasons as a MLB player, Janish has improved his stats each year. His OBP relative to his BA is 82 points higher, which, oddly enough is also what it is in his minor league career. His minor league OBP is .351. It isn't a stretch to think he can OBP .340+ as a starter. The strength issue with Janish wasn't his legs, it was his wrists. He worked on that and well, it looks like it paid off some.

So, if it is in Jocketty's mind to upgrades SS, his only option is to overpay for an existing MLB SS. There is no one at AAA better than Janish and Cozart. Espinosa might be an upgrade in a year. Maybe sooner. But why would the Nationals deal him?



If the Reds end up using Janish as a starter, I really hope he does well.
I guess I don't know enough about Cozart to comment.

I guess the term "overpay" is all relative. If the Reds are able to dig up another SS that provides value, that is worth quite a bit. I really wouldn't think twice about dealing one of our young pitchers + change for a solid SS that could help us for a few years. I agree with you that solid SS are in short supply though. I'm hoping Walt can work some magic though.

TheNext44
12-16-2010, 01:16 PM
Quick question for those who are in favor of giving Janish the job to start the season. How much of this is based on his fielding and, related to that, what his UZR was for 2009?

I've seen Janish's defense get talked about on here a lot, basically to the point where his legend has grown to fairly lofty levels. Much of that was in place at the start of last season, when he was coming off a ridiculous 2009 UZR/150 of 22.7. For perspective, it looks like Brendan Ryan was the 2010 leader at SS with a 12.1. Janish then followed up last season with a 2.2. OCab had a 5.3.

Obviously there are sample size issues with this metric and Janish doesn't have enough playing time to make this metric "reliable", but does anyone's opinion change based on his 2010 fielding? Should it? Fielding is much different than hitting...people on here could have read all about Janish's fielding last year, hear about his 2009 UZR performance, and then basically just assume that he is a great fielder. Performance is much more obvious to the naked eye on the hitting side.

Just curious about how people are accounting for his defense in their assessments.


Good points.

Janish's career UZR/150 is 10.6, which has to be among the best for starting SS. However, even that isn't a large enough sample to really tells us who he is defensively.

But I really don't need no fancy stats to tell me that Janish going forward will be an elite defensive SS. It's pretty obvious to anyone who has watched him for just a few games. He has solid range, very sure hands, and a cannon for an arm. He also is a very smart player. I can see him being a captain of infield.

Griffey012
12-16-2010, 01:28 PM
One thing on the plus side with Reyes is that I believe he is only under contract for 1 season. If he doesn't work out, we are not stuck with an albatross of a contract. If he has a stellar year, which he likely will in a contract year, we get a great boost at SS.

RedsManRick
12-16-2010, 02:22 PM
Quick question for those who are in favor of giving Janish the job to start the season. How much of this is based on his fielding and, related to that, what his UZR was for 2009?

I've seen Janish's defense get talked about on here a lot, basically to the point where his legend has grown to fairly lofty levels. Much of that was in place at the start of last season, when he was coming off a ridiculous 2009 UZR/150 of 22.7. For perspective, it looks like Brendan Ryan was the 2010 leader at SS with a 12.1. Janish then followed up last season with a 2.2. OCab had a 5.3.

Obviously there are sample size issues with this metric and Janish doesn't have enough playing time to make this metric "reliable", but does anyone's opinion change based on his 2010 fielding? Should it? Fielding is much different than hitting...people on here could have read all about Janish's fielding last year, hear about his 2009 UZR performance, and then basically just assume that he is a great fielder. Performance is much more obvious to the naked eye on the hitting side.

Just curious about how people are accounting for his defense in their assessments.

In terms of defense, I used UZR/150 from 2008 through 2010 as my basis for a runs estimate.

Below are the data for all SS with at least 1000 innings during 2008-10. Yes, that can be as little as 1 season's worth of data. To be completely fair, we would likely want to regress those figures back towards zero a bit as the sample size decreases. That is, we should have more confident in Jimmy Rollins and Cesar Izturis's UZR/150 than we should Wilson or Ryan, who in are themselves more reliably great than Aviles or Janish.

Of note, Janish not only has a solid UZR/150 of around 10 runs (I'd probably use +5 in a 2011 projection for him), but he has the 2nd highest RZR of any SS on that list, suggesting he makes the plays he's supposed to.

This meshes with qualitative observation -- the fan scouting reported rated Janish as having excellent reactions, hands, footwork and arm but with just slightly above average foot speed.

FSR: http://www.tangotiger.net/scout/index6.php?sortid=13&prim_fld_cd=6
Fangraphs Data: http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=ss&stats=fld&lg=all&qual=1000&type=1&season=2010&month=0&season1=2008

RZR: Revised Zone Rating (percent of plays made on balls in zone)
OOZ/G: Out of Zone plays made per 9 innings (my own adjustment to the given plays OOZ data -- not well controlled for opportunity, favors defenders on teams with GB staffs)
UZR/150: UZR per 150 games

I've highlighted Janish in red and other recent Reds in blue, for additional context.


Rank Name Inn RZR OOZ/G UZR/150*
1 Nick Punto 1279 83.5% 0.34 14.4
2 Jack Wilson 2132 83.4% 0.50 13.4
3 Mike Aviles 1121 82.2% 0.41 12.8
4 Brendan Ryan 2213 84.3% 0.55 11.9
5 Paul Janish 1213 84.7% 0.29 10.6
6 Jimmy Rollins 3277 83.3% 0.32 10.5
7 Adam Everett 1536 84.1% 0.37 9.2
8 J.J. Hardy 3076 83.9% 0.40 9.1
9 Cesar Izturis 3186 83.0% 0.43 8.7
10 Alex Gonzalez 2317 81.3% 0.41 7.0
11 Elvis Andrus 2529 83.2% 0.32 6.7
12 Ramon Santiago 1347 83.1% 0.35 6.7
13 Alexei Ramirez 2723 81.2% 0.41 6.0
14 Rafael Furcal 2379 82.3% 0.42 4.2
15 Troy Tulowitzki 3222 83.4% 0.31 3.7
16 Yunel Escobar 3493 82.7% 0.47 3.4
17 Erick Aybar 3153 82.3% 0.37 3.3
18 Alcides Escobar 1453 80.6% 0.40 2.3
19 Jerry Hairston 1006 80.4% 0.48 1.6
20 Orlando Cabrera 3809 80.4% 0.29 1.5
21 Marco Scutaro 2891 80.2% 0.41 1.2
22 Ryan Theriot 2823 81.7% 0.30 1.1
23 Edgar Renteria 2798 82.4% 0.25 1.1
24 Derek Jeter 3823 82.0% 0.22 0.7
25 Jhonny Peralta 1997 80.9% 0.34 0.7
26 Cliff Pennington 1894 80.2% 0.30 0.6
27 Juan Uribe 1197 78.8% 0.29 -0.6
28 Miguel Tejada 3222 81.8% 0.30 -1.0
29 Stephen Drew 3695 79.6% 0.37 -1.7
30 Jose Reyes 2897 81.9% 0.30 -2.0
31 Starlin Castro 1073 76.9% 0.50 -3.0
32 Josh Wilson 1282 79.1% 0.29 -3.0
33 Cristian Guzman 2320 81.0% 0.40 -3.1
34 Bobby Crosby 1467 79.5% 0.30 -3.6
35 Ronny Cedeno 2043 79.5% 0.35 -3.7
36 Hanley Ramirez 3778 80.1% 0.33 -3.8
37 Michael Young 1289 85.0% 0.29 -4.2
38 Jason Bartlett 3354 79.0% 0.41 -6.0
39 Ian Desmond 1344 77.4% 0.33 -8.1
40 Everth Cabrera 1352 75.5% 0.40 -9.9
41 Asdrubal Cabrera 1850 78.3% 0.39 -10.3
42 Khalil Greene 1174 80.6% 0.41 -13.1
43 Yuniesky Betancourt 3816 76.4% 0.29 -13.1
44 Jeff Keppinger 1006 77.7% 0.26 -17.2
45 Julio Lugo 1215 77.5% 0.28 -17.7

*BaseClogger*
12-16-2010, 02:38 PM
Kinda funny that Jerry Hairston grades out above-average defensively at shortstop over the last three years.

Oh yeah, and remember me arguing a lot before the 2008 season about how Keppinger's defense wasn't really *that* bad?

Rojo
12-16-2010, 02:42 PM
Janish has struggled against righties. That worries me. Not hitting lefties is often just about a lack or reps. But not hitting righties means a slow bat. Add Janish's reputation here and it doesn't bode well.

edabbs44
12-16-2010, 02:42 PM
Interesting that Janish's OOZ/G is exactly the same as Cabrera's in that time period.

westofyou
12-16-2010, 02:47 PM
I'll say it again... Gary Green feelings, Gary Green.

RedsManRick
12-16-2010, 03:16 PM
I'll say it again... Gary Green feelings, Gary Green.

Green hit a collective .233/.262/.292 in the minors; Janish .261/.351/.382. That's a massive difference; 180 points of OPS. It's like the difference between Jay Bruce and Todd Benzinger. Or Green didn't belong in AAA, let alone the majors. Feelings can grossly oversimplify.

westofyou
12-16-2010, 03:19 PM
Green hit a collective .233/.262/.292 in the minors; Janish .261/.351/.382. That's a massive difference; 180 points of OPS. Green didn't belong in AAA, let alone the majors. Feelings can grossly oversimplify.

Green played in the 80's too and was drafted higher.

But thanks for the lesson on "feelings."

RedsManRick
12-16-2010, 03:24 PM
Green played in the 80's too and was drafted higher.

But thanks for the lesson on "feelings."

Oh, my bad. I didn't realize "feelings" meant era and draft position. I thought it had something to do with the type of ballplayer the guy was and how one guy reminded you of the other. Can you enlighten me on what you meant?

TRF
12-16-2010, 03:27 PM
Green played in the 80's too and was drafted higher.

But thanks for the lesson on "feelings."

so he played in an era of bigger parks and faster surfaces. HR power is affected more than anything right?

My point on Janish is simple: anyone got a better solution? Cabrera wasn't better. Reyes might not be. Drew is but isn't leaving AZ. He may feel all meh to you, but All i see from him is steady improvement, and excellent glove work.

I think he'll OBP .340+ in 2011. I'll take that and his glove every time.

westofyou
12-16-2010, 03:39 PM
Oh, my bad. I didn't realize "feelings" meant era and draft position. I thought it had something to do with the type of ballplayer the guy was and how one guy reminded you of the other. Can you enlighten me on what you meant?

Well both are tall and rangy, both were lauded for their glove in college and both became more challenged at the dish as they moved up the ladder.

Sure Green was more of a prototype SS from the 80's, a tad lighter than Janish, and he like Kurt Stillwell was legacy guy so he was thought of highly by scouts. he even started over Larkin in the 1984 Olympic squad. he had a pedigree. Just not a bat.

He started as the 1990 Ranger SS and eventually lost his job to Jeff Huson.

In short he couldn't get over the hump and become a starter and I feel that that path is where Janish is heading, sure he might be starting SS this year, but it doesn't mean that they won't be looking for someone else as the year goes on.

Even Woody Woodward started for a season or two, he's also a guy I see as a good comp for PJ.

edabbs44
12-16-2010, 03:58 PM
so he played in an era of bigger parks and faster surfaces. HR power is affected more than anything right?

My point on Janish is simple: anyone got a better solution? Cabrera wasn't better. Reyes might not be. Drew is but isn't leaving AZ. He may feel all meh to you, but All i see from him is steady improvement, and excellent glove work.

I think he'll OBP .340+ in 2011. I'll take that and his glove every time.

The problem is that if you start the year with PJ and he pulls a .580 OPS in the first half, what are your alternatives?

If you want to give him a shot, you have to get a vet with a high floor into camp (like a Cabrera) and make them fully aware of the situation. Maybe Cabrera wants a starting spot, maybe he wants to get 80 games around the IF on a winning team and a potential starting spot if Janish falls flat.

But going to battle with Janish as the SS is risky, and probably too risky for this team.

TRF
12-16-2010, 04:08 PM
The problem is that if you start the year with PJ and he pulls a .580 OPS in the first half, what are your alternatives?

If you want to give him a shot, you have to get a vet with a high floor into camp (like a Cabrera) and make them fully aware of the situation. Maybe Cabrera wants a starting spot, maybe he wants to get 80 games around the IF on a winning team and a potential starting spot if Janish falls flat.

But going to battle with Janish as the SS is risky, and probably too risky for this team.

The same could be said of any SS with little to no track record at the MLB level. Cozart and Valaika are certainly capable backups with Cozart a potential starter.

Every team has a gamble like this.

Here are the free agent Vet SS's and their ages. some of these guys have signed.

Geoff Blum (38)

Orlando Cabrera (36)** - club option

Juan Castro (39)

Craig Counsell (40)

Bobby Crosby (31)

Adam Everett (34)

Alex Gonzalez (33)** - club option

Cesar Izturis (31)

Jhonny Peralta (29)** - club option

Nick Punto (33) - club option

Edgar Renteria (35) - club option

Jose Reyes (28)** - club option

Miguel Tejada (37)*

Juan Uribe (31)**

Omar Vizquel (44)

I'm not sure I'd be interested in any of them at SS.

RedsManRick
12-16-2010, 04:13 PM
Well both are tall and rangy, both were lauded for their glove in college and both became more challenged at the dish as they moved up the ladder.

Sure Green was more of a prototype SS from the 80's, a tad lighter than Janish, and he like Kurt Stillwell was legacy guy so he was thought of highly by scouts. he even started over Larkin in the 1984 Olympic squad. he had a pedigree. Just not a bat.

He started as the 1990 Ranger SS and eventually lost his job to Jeff Huson.

In short he couldn't get over the hump and become a starter and I feel that that path is where Janish is heading, sure he might be starting SS this year, but it doesn't mean that they won't be looking for someone else as the year goes on.

Green didn't even compare with the poor hitting SS of his era, such as Alfredo Griffn, Jose Uribe and Ozzie Guillen.

I get the comp, I just think it sells Janish's offensive potential way short. I guess time will tell.
Even Woody Woodward started for a season or two, he's also a guy I see as a good comp for PJ.

I'd say my comments still stand. Sure, they are somewhat similar players. But Green never got over the hump because he was a historically bad hitter (as major leaguers go). Janish is definitely a poor hitter, but right there with other guys who have been ML regulars with similar profiles, such as Brendan Ryan and Jack Wilson.

edabbs44
12-16-2010, 04:15 PM
The same could be said of any SS with little to no track record at the MLB level. Cozart and Valaika are certainly capable backups with Cozart a potential starter.

Every team has a gamble like this.



A lot has to be considered to make that statement. Not every team with legit October aspirations have a question mark like that (Janish/Cozart) at such a key position.

Rojo
12-16-2010, 04:17 PM
Green hit a collective .233/.262/.292 in the minors; Janish .261/.351/.382. That's a massive difference;

Adam Everett's MIL #'s: .259/.346/.368

pedro
12-16-2010, 04:18 PM
Green hit a collective .233/.262/.292 in the minors; Janish .261/.351/.382. That's a massive difference; 180 points of OPS. It's like the difference between Jay Bruce and Todd Benzinger. Or Green didn't belong in AAA, let alone the majors. Feelings can grossly oversimplify.

Janish's minor league stats are skewed by his relative success in rookie and A ball. He really didn't hit worth a crap in AA or AAA.

TRF
12-16-2010, 04:21 PM
A lot has to be considered to make that statement. Not every team with legit October aspirations have a question mark like that (Janish/Cozart) at such a key position.

The 96 Yankees had a ? at SS.

No, I am not comparing Jeter to Janish. I am saying every team has this come up, even teams with October aspirations.

edabbs44
12-16-2010, 04:26 PM
The 96 Yankees had a ? at SS.

No, I am not comparing Jeter to Janish. I am saying every team has this come up, even teams with October aspirations.

Jeter was OPSing above .800 in the upper minors as a 20 and 21 year old. Janish put up a .654 as a 24 year old in AA and AAA and a .711 as a 25 year old in AAA.

Such a difference.

RedsManRick
12-16-2010, 04:26 PM
Adam Everett's MIL #'s: .259/.346/.368

I think Everett is actually a fine comp. For 4 years, from ages 26-29, Everett was a 2 win player. He had enough bat to justify keeping his glove around. He wasn't an all-star, but he was cheap and solidly above replacement.

This is precisely where I think Janish is. He's a got little less glove and a little more bat than Everett, but it's the same sort of deal. I think that Janish will be a serviceable major league SS during his peak -- which he has just entered. After a few years, his defense will soften and bat will slow down a bit and he'll quickly no longer be major league material. But just because he isn't the future of the franchise doesn't mean he doesn't have very real value today. I think we're letting our fear for the future cloud our judgement of the present.

But some are suggesting that even that is overly-optimistic. I think those people are focusing way too much on his 2008 and 2009 numbers, are scared that the Reds will get replacement-level production (or worse) and thus are willing to trade valuable assets for a player who can be counted on for league average production or better.

In a bubble, I'd definitely prefer Reyes to Janish. But I don't think the math makes sense when you consider the cost of the relatively modest upgrade. Those who see it as a much bigger upgrade disagree.

TRF
12-16-2010, 04:48 PM
Jeter was OPSing above .800 in the upper minors as a 20 and 21 year old. Janish put up a .654 as a 24 year old in AA and AAA and a .711 as a 25 year old in AAA.

Such a difference.

Yeah. notice how i said i wasn't comparing them?

Fine. look at the defending AL Champs SS. .643 OPS this year. He can really pick it though.

Here are the SS's from last year that qualified for the batting title sorted by OPS


RK PLAYER TEAM AB R H HR RBI BB SO BA OBP SLG OPS
1 Troy Tulowitzki COL 470 89 148 27 95 48 78 0.315 0.381 0.568 0.949
2 Hanley Ramirez FLA 543 92 163 21 76 64 93 0.300 0.378 0.475 0.853
3 Stephen Drew ARI 565 83 157 15 61 62 108 0.278 0.352 0.458 0.810
4 Starlin Castro CHC 463 53 139 3 41 29 71 0.300 0.347 0.408 0.755
5 Jose Reyes NYM 563 83 159 11 54 31 63 0.282 0.321 0.428 0.749
6 Alexei Ramirez CHW 585 83 165 18 70 27 82 0.282 0.313 0.431 0.744
7 Alex Gonzalez TOR/ATL 595 74 149 23 88 31 118 0.250 0.294 0.447 0.741
8 Marco Scutaro BOS 632 92 174 11 56 53 71 0.275 0.333 0.388 0.721
9 Derek Jeter NYY 663 111 179 10 67 63 106 0.270 0.340 0.370 0.710
10 Jhonny Peralta CLE/DET 551 60 137 15 81 53 103 0.249 0.311 0.392 0.703
11 Ian Desmond WSH 525 59 141 10 65 28 109 0.269 0.308 0.392 0.700
12 Yuniesky Betancourt KC 556 60 144 16 78 23 64 0.259 0.288 0.405 0.692
13 Miguel Tejada BAL/SD 636 71 171 15 71 30 67 0.269 0.312 0.381 0.692
14 Cliff Pennington OAK 508 64 127 6 46 50 96 0.250 0.319 0.368 0.687
15 Jason Bartlett TB 468 71 119 4 47 45 83 0.254 0.324 0.35 0.675
16 Orlando Cabrera CIN 494 64 130 4 42 28 53 0.263 0.303 0.354 0.657
17 Yunel Escobar TOR/ATL 497 60 127 4 35 56 57 0.256 0.337 0.318 0.655
18 Elvis Andrus TEX 588 88 156 0 35 64 96 0.265 0.342 0.301 0.643
19 Erick Aybar LAA 534 69 135 5 29 35 81 0.253 0.306 0.33 0.636
20 Ryan Theriot CHC/LAD 586 72 158 2 29 41 74 0.27 0.321 0.312 0.633
21 Alcides Escobar MIL 506 57 119 4 41 36 70 0.235 0.288 0.326 0.614
22 Cesar Izturis BAL 473 42 109 1 28 25 53 0.23 0.277 0.268 0.545


That's 11 teams with a sub .700 OPS at SS. A few of those teams made the postseason.

Stud SS's are hard to find, and most of us are spoiled by remembering Larkin and Davey. They don't grow on trees, and often don't grow at all.

edabbs44
12-16-2010, 05:07 PM
Janish's career OPS is .634. Right now it is very hard to see him as a probable .700ish guy.

Hoosier Red
12-16-2010, 05:34 PM
So if you have trouble seeing him as a 700 OPSish guy, don't you have an equal amount of trouble seeing him be below 600 OPS? I mean, if you're talking about a veteran with a high floor, what's the point?
So long as Janish maintains or even slightly improves his career OPS, the Reds are okay at Shortstop. If he really improves, they're in good shape at SS, and if he regresses, they're in bad shape. Which of those events do you see as most likely?

If I had to put a percentage of chances of it happening, I'd say 50% chance he stays the same or slightly improves, 35% chance he improves by more than 30 points OPS, and a 15% chance he regresses from his career OPS.

edabbs44
12-16-2010, 05:41 PM
So if you have trouble seeing him as a 700 OPSish guy, don't you have an equal amount of trouble seeing him be below 600 OPS? I mean, if you're talking about a veteran with a high floor, what's the point?
So long as Janish maintains or even slightly improves his career OPS, the Reds are okay at Shortstop. If he really improves, they're in good shape at SS, and if he regresses, they're in bad shape. Which of those events do you see as most likely?

If I had to put a percentage of chances of it happening, I'd say 50% chance he stays the same or slightly improves, 35% chance he improves by more than 30 points OPS, and a 15% chance he regresses from his career OPS.

I have no idea what his odds are. I do know that he carries a decent amount of risk and, judging by his track record, it is difficult to walk into 2010 with Janish as your starter and someone like Cozart as your fallback.

Last year there was tons of statistical analysis that presented the benefits of walking into 2010 with Chris Dickerson as your starting LFer or CFer. He really was the darling of the 2009-10 offseason. He then provided us with a .495 April OPS. Now, odds are that he would have improved that number as the sample size improved, but what if he didn't? His 19/1 K/BB ratio did not leave us with great hope for improvement.

We are in a different era now. I cannot see how, if you were to give Janish the job, you don't handcuff him to a vet.

TRF
12-16-2010, 05:56 PM
Janish's career OPS is .634. Right now it is very hard to see him as a probable .700ish guy.

Didn't he just post a .723 OPS? Yes it was 83 games. Yes it was 200 AB's but if you are toting his career numbers, you probably need to look at the most recent season where he did what you say he can't do.

TRF
12-16-2010, 05:58 PM
I have no idea what his odds are. I do know that he carries a decent amount of risk and, judging by his track record, it is difficult to walk into 2010 with Janish as your starter and someone like Cozart as your fallback.

Last year there was tons of statistical analysis that presented the benefits of walking into 2010 with Chris Dickerson as your starting LFer or CFer. He really was the darling of the 2009-10 offseason. He then provided us with a .495 April OPS. Now, odds are that he would have improved that number as the sample size improved, but what if he didn't? His 19/1 K/BB ratio did not leave us with great hope for improvement.

We are in a different era now. I cannot see how, if you were to give Janish the job, you don't handcuff him to a vet.

The biggest difference between Dickerson and Janish is the ability to stay healthy. One has been, one, not so much.

edabbs44
12-16-2010, 06:09 PM
Didn't he just post a .723 OPS? Yes it was 83 games. Yes it was 200 AB's but if you are toting his career numbers, you probably need to look at the most recent season where he did what you say he can't do.

Never said he can't do it. But history is showing that it is a definite possibility that he craps the bed at the plate in 2011.

edabbs44
12-16-2010, 06:10 PM
The biggest difference between Dickerson and Janish is the ability to stay healthy. One has been, one, not so much.

Sure, but last year Dickerson put up a historically pathetic April before getting injured. Getting hurt may have been a plus for him.

TRF
12-16-2010, 06:27 PM
Never said he can't do it. But history is showing that it is a definite possibility that he craps the bed at the plate in 2011.

If he gets 500 AB's and posts a .650 OPS, he'll be almost league average at the position. Yeah, I want better, but none of the FA SS's will likley do better and none of them are as good as Janish is defensively.

I wouldn't offer much for a guy about to be paid 11M, that has shown a sharp decline in defensive ability, and whose injury could greatly reduce his offensive and defensive production. Reyes is a big no from me.

Plus, I don't think the Mets want to deal him, rather I don't think they can. Any return they get will have to be offset with money going the other way. The return isn't likely to equal what is sent. better to just decline the option.

That leaves the FA group I posted, and I'd rather not see any of those guys in a Reds uniform.

Rojo
12-16-2010, 06:30 PM
I think Everett is actually a fine comp. For 4 years, from ages 26-29, Everett was a 2 win player. He had enough bat to justify keeping his glove around. He wasn't an all-star, but he was cheap and solidly above replacement.

I once told a girl that she was solidly above replacement. She gave back the ring.

If we're keeping our fingers crossed that PJ is an Adam Everett bat, we should think hard about an upgrade.

TRF
12-16-2010, 06:33 PM
I once told a girl that she was solidly above replacement. She gave back the ring.

If we're keeping our fingers crossed that PJ is an Adam Everett bat, we should think hard about an upgrade.

How? Who is available?

If you want an upgrade, we have to hope that it is Cozart or wait 2-3 years.

edabbs44
12-16-2010, 06:37 PM
If he gets 500 AB's and posts a .650 OPS, he'll be almost league average at the position. Yeah, I want better, but none of the FA SS's will likley do better and none of them are as good as Janish is defensively.

I wouldn't offer much for a guy about to be paid 11M, that has shown a sharp decline in defensive ability, and whose injury could greatly reduce his offensive and defensive production. Reyes is a big no from me.

Plus, I don't think the Mets want to deal him, rather I don't think they can. Any return they get will have to be offset with money going the other way. The return isn't likely to equal what is sent. better to just decline the option.

That leaves the FA group I posted, and I'd rather not see any of those guys in a Reds uniform.

I want no part of Reyes. That much we can agree on.

But I see no downside in bringing on a vet to start the season in a timeshare.

RedsManRick
12-16-2010, 07:08 PM
Sure, but last year Dickerson put up a historically pathetic April before getting injured. Getting hurt may have been a plus for him.

The willingness to cite small samples when convenient to do so never ceases to amaze me. Dickerson had 100 PA last year.

Players on the level of a Janish or Dickerson face a selection bias problem whereby if they struggle they aren't given additional bats to hit their way out of it. What would we think about Stubbs if he were sent back to AAA in July?

If Dickerson was healthy through May and beyond, I bet he would have performed much more like he was the rest of his career.

edabbs44
12-16-2010, 08:36 PM
The willingness to cite small samples when convenient to do so never ceases to amaze me. Dickerson had 100 PA last year.

Players on the level of a Janish or Dickerson face a selection bias problem whereby if they struggle they aren't given additional bats to hit their way out of it. What would we think about Stubbs if he were sent back to AAA in July?

If Dickerson was healthy through May and beyond, I bet he would have performed much more like he was the rest of his career.

Which part of his career? The middling minor league seasons on his way through the system, the seemingly better numbers as he became somewhat old for the minors, or the cumulation of a few SSSs in the majors, which a few wanted to use as evidence of his worthiness even though it was obviously skewed by a freak 2008?

Rojo
12-16-2010, 09:11 PM
How? Who is available?

Um, we're discussing Jose Reyes, who may or may not be available. That led to a discussion of whether Janish was good enough that we wouldn't need Reyes. Points were made on both sides.

Try to keep up.

RedsManRick
12-16-2010, 09:20 PM
Um, we're discussing Jose Reyes, who may or may not be available. That led to a discussion of whether Janish was good enough that we wouldn't need Reyes. Points were made on both sides.

Try to keep up.

That was not the discussion I was having. It's not that Janish is "good enough". It's that Reyes is not so much better that he merits giving up years of control of other good, cheap talent while taking on salary.

westofyou
12-16-2010, 11:25 PM
That was not the discussion I was having. It's not that Janish is "good enough". It's that Reyes is not so much better that he merits giving up years of control of other good, cheap talent while taking on salary.

Maybe back when the posts were 2 digits, but I found the debate pretty being what Rojo stated.

At least that's the POV you've been stating... at least from where I'm sitting.

RedsManRick
12-16-2010, 11:48 PM
Maybe back when the posts were 2 digits, but I found the debate pretty being what Rojo stated.

At least that's the POV you've been stating... at least from where I'm sitting.

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2306017&postcount=59

Tomatoh, tomahto I guess. I think Janish is a 2 win player. I think Reyes is a 3 to 4 win player. I'm all for adding wins at the right price and adding Reyes would be adding wins. I just don't think he'd be adding enough wins to make it worth it the cost.

If that's saying Janish is "good enough that we don't need Reyes", guilty as charged.

corkedbat
12-16-2010, 11:52 PM
I want a leadoff hitter at SS and a MotO bat in LF. If we can swap a big contact (Cordero or Phillips) and he clears a physical, I'd do a deal for Reyes and risk the injury history.

Injuries are a factor with Reyes, but he is a talent also. Bring him on board and if he goes on the IR, the go with Janish and Cozart or Negron which is what we're looking at anyway.

I'd love to find a top young 2B who could hit second and move BP now too.

Ron Madden
12-17-2010, 05:17 AM
A lot has to be considered to make that statement. Not every team with legit October aspirations have a question mark like that (Janish/Cozart) at such a key position.

At least there is some question as to how Janish/Cozart will perform.

We know exactly how little Cabrera brings to the table.

TheNext44
12-17-2010, 05:26 AM
I want a leadoff hitter at SS and a MotO bat in LF. If we can swap a big contact (Cordero or Phillips) and he clears a physical, I'd do a deal for Reyes and risk the injury history.

Injuries are a factor with Reyes, but he is a talent also. Bring him on board and if he goes on the IR, the go with Janish and Cozart or Negron which is what we're looking at anyway.

I'd love to find a top young 2B who could hit second and move BP now too.

Huge difference between Phillips and Cordero.

Phillips brings excess value to his big contract... Cordero is grossly overpaid. .

Personally, I'd love to extend Phillips.

mth123
12-17-2010, 05:58 AM
Huge difference between Phillips and Cordero.

Phillips brings excess value to his big contract... Cordero is grossly overpaid. .

Personally, I'd love to extend Phillips.

Agreed. Phillips is the guy that should have gotten the deal Arroyo got. The Reds might have arms that will make Arroyo an expensive luxury, but there is nobody to replace Phillips w/o a huge drop-off.

traderumor
12-17-2010, 08:23 AM
The willingness to cite small samples when convenient to do so never ceases to amaze me. Dickerson had 100 PA last year.

Players on the level of a Janish or Dickerson face a selection bias problem whereby if they struggle they aren't given additional bats to hit their way out of it. What would we think about Stubbs if he were sent back to AAA in July?

If Dickerson was healthy through May and beyond, I bet he would have performed much more like he was the rest of his career.A couple of things. Selection bias or replacement level? Isn't the whole argument of replacement level players that they are, well, at a level that a team seeks to replace them? "Selection bias" sounds more like something a father would say who is mad that his son isn't getting enough ABs for Zeke's Automotive.

As for the example of Stubbs, he was benched for a period of time during the season to bench his way out of non-performance in the middle of last season. While it wasn't AAA, it sure wasn't a "let him hit his way out of it" strategy.

Finally, speaking of sample size, I'm not sure he has enough of a track record, again due to being injury prone and a late bloomer, to have earned the "hit his way out of it" approach. I am really puzzled at the assertions that are made about what he can do when he really has not been on the field long enough to prove what he actually can do over a full major league season. All I've seen out of Dickerson so far is that he is fast and he struggles to make contact, when he does happen to get on the field. It isn't hard to see why managers choose to move on and give someone else a chance.

TRF
12-17-2010, 09:20 AM
Um, we're discussing Jose Reyes, who may or may not be available. That led to a discussion of whether Janish was good enough that we wouldn't need Reyes. Points were made on both sides.

Try to keep up.
If you think the mets picked up an 11M option just to trade him, well, okey doke.

But I doubt he's leaving NY. So, who is available? Or do I need to completely restrict my conversation to rwyes and not allow discussion to evolve?

edabbs44
12-17-2010, 09:58 AM
We know exactly how little Cabrera brings to the table.

Right...I'm not sure about you, but when guys like Pujols and Phillips say things like this, I think they know something that maybe we don't.


Phillips also mentioned the new shortstop Orlando Cabrera as a reason the Reds are more confident, a trait that shows up in the way they win games. The Reds lead the majors in comeback victories, with 18, and victories in their last at-bat, with 10.



http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/02/sports/baseball/02rolen.html

Regarding both Cairo and Cabrera, probably Rolen also


Says Cardinals slugger Albert Pujols: "You can see what those guys have meant for Cincinnati. They're a different team. They've brought in a winning attitude."



http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/2010-09-21-baseball-postseason-players_N.htm

Griffey012
12-17-2010, 10:13 AM
Right...I'm not sure about you, but when guys like Pujols and Phillips say things like this, I think they know something that maybe we don't.



http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/02/sports/baseball/02rolen.html

Regarding both Cairo and Cabrera, probably Rolen also



http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/2010-09-21-baseball-postseason-players_N.htm

But it's not a quantifiable statistic, dude. It isn't calculated in WAR.

kaldaniels
12-17-2010, 10:19 AM
The World Series MVP wasn't happy with the Giants offer...anyone interested?

Scrap Irony
12-17-2010, 11:12 AM
That was not the discussion I was having. It's not that Janish is "good enough". It's that Reyes is not so much better that he merits giving up years of control of other good, cheap talent while taking on salary.

Reyes is worth, on average, aound 4 wins per season. (His average is a bit higher than that, actually, and he's likely to hit with both more power and in a more advantageous spot for creating runs, but, for the sake of argument, let's assume four wins as a baseline.)

Janish, over the course of 600 or so career ABs and 1200 innings, has produced 1.6 WAR.

What's 2.5 wins worth?

PuffyPig
12-17-2010, 11:35 AM
Reyes is worth, on average, aound 4 wins per season. (His average is a bit higher than that, actually, and he's likely to hit with both more power and in a more advantageous spot for creating runs, but, for the sake of argument, let's assume four wins as a baseline.)

Janish, over the course of 600 or so career ABs and 1200 innings, has produced 1.6 WAR.

What's 2.5 wins worth?

Over the last two years he's averaged 1.4 WAR, though he was injured for lots of 2009. Call him a 2 WAR for those two years. He'll need to rebound to get to 4 WAR.

Plus, to pay his salary we'll need to cut elsewhere.

Scrap Irony
12-17-2010, 11:38 AM
He played just 36 games in 2009 due to injury.

Why focus on the aberration instead of the probability?

kaldaniels
12-17-2010, 12:17 PM
Alot of back and forth going on in regards to WAR. It boils down to this. Assume Reyes and Janish are the Mets and Reds everyday SS in 2011. What do you think each of their WAR will be. I'd establish that baseline then proceed with your argument. Throwing in Reyes injury plagued 09 WAR really skews the discussion IMO.

Griffey012
12-17-2010, 12:22 PM
The World Series MVP wasn't happy with the Giants offer...anyone interested?

For $2 mil a year in a split time role with Janish I wouldn't mind it at all. Not sure if he could play any at 3b to spell Rolen sometimes.

TheNext44
12-17-2010, 12:39 PM
Alot of back and forth going on in regards to WAR. It boils down to this. Assume Reyes and Janish are the Mets and Reds everyday SS in 2011. What do you think each of their WAR will be. I'd establish that baseline then proceed with your argument. Throwing in Reyes injury plagued 09 WAR really skews the discussion IMO.

I agree with the philosophy.

The problem is that in both cases, it's difficult to project with any accuracy. My feeling on Reyes is that he either will be healthy and a 5+ win player, or he will be the 3 win player he was last year. Was he still recovering last season, or was he as healthy as he ever will be?

As for Janish, he could be the 1.5 win player that his career stats say he was, or he could have improved his hitting so that his 2010 could be his true talent level, in which case, he's a 3 win player.

And for both cases, its possible they are somewhere in-between.

Add in the contract situation, and it's even less clear.

TheNext44
12-17-2010, 12:41 PM
For $2 mil a year in a split time role with Janish I wouldn't mind it at all. Not sure if he could play any at 3b to spell Rolen sometimes.

Renteria has averaged an OPS below .700 the last three seasons. He's Cabrera Part Ii.

RedsManRick
12-17-2010, 12:42 PM
Alot of back and forth going on in regards to WAR. It boils down to this. Assume Reyes and Janish are the Mets and Reds everyday SS in 2011. What do you think each of their WAR will be. I'd establish that baseline then proceed with your argument. Throwing in Reyes injury plagued 09 WAR really skews the discussion IMO.

Yes! All arguments about whether or not Reyes should be acquired should be rooted in 3 basic inputs, any of which can be argued.

1) Given 600 PA, how productive will Janish be? (My answer: ~2.0 WAR)
2) Given 600 PA, how productive will Reyes be? (My answer: ~3.5 WAR)
3) What is the cost for acquiring Reyes? (My answer: Much more than 1.5 WAR of value)

We've spent a whole lot of energy arguing the first input, but the 2nd and 3rd are just as important.

On #2, Reyes averaged 5.7 fWAR (fangraphs) and 5.5 rWAR (baseball-reference) between 2006 and 2008. In 2009, he missed the bulk of the season with calf and hamstring injuries. In 2010, he missed the beginning of the season due to a hyperactive thyroid gland (I don't know if this is a managed condition or 1-time thing) and put up 2.8 fWAR (2.2 rWAR) in about 85% of the playing time he had in 2006-08. 2010 was the first year he posted below average defensive stats (both fWAR and rWAR).

So we have a guy who's primary offensive tool is elite speed, coming off of 2 serious leg injuries and a thyroid problem (which affects energy levels). Upon coming back, both his defense and speed were no longer elite -- though still good. As a result, he went from a solid all-star to an above average regular. Frankly, I think I'm being generous with my 3.5-4.0 WAR projection. On fangraphs, Mets fans project him at 4.2 WAR, others at 3.5 WAR. Bill James has in that range too. That assumes around 600 PA (145 games).

There's no doubt that Reyes would be a solid upgrade over Janish. But is he a 4 win upgrade? A 2 win upgrade? And then, what is the cost of that upgrade? I don't think there's a single person on the board who wouldn't trade Cordero and some extras (like Maloney, Heisey, etc.) for him -- regardless of what they think of Janish. But what if the cost was higher -- what if it took Cueto? Bailey? Alonso? We pretty much know it can only happen if the money is equal, so that means the Reds are going to have give up some real value. But if it's not Cordero, who else can we include?

Hoosier Red
12-17-2010, 04:27 PM
Right...I'm not sure about you, but when guys like Pujols and Phillips say things like this, I think they know something that maybe we don't.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/02/sports/baseball/02rolen.html

Regarding both Cairo and Cabrera, probably Rolen also

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/2010-09-21-baseball-postseason-players_N.htm

Don't you take that with a grain of salt though Ed? I mean 1) No player is going to slam his teammate. 2) The questions are asked in a way that practically begs the player to answer affirmatively. How many interviews have you seen like this:

Interviewer: "Brandon, talk to us about what Orlando Cabrera has meant to this team."
BP> Well to be honest his range pretty much is gone, his bat was adequate at best and the year's haven't been very kind. Also, he kind of smells bad. And he was rude to my mom the other day. I don't like him very much.

So we probably shouldn't discount it completely, but I'm not sure that the vet is the guy to go to because of what the player said.

Ron Madden
12-17-2010, 04:30 PM
Don't you take that with a grain of salt though Ed? I mean 1) No player is going to slam his teammate. 2) The questions are asked in a way that practically begs the player to answer affirmatively. How many interviews have you seen like this:

Interviewer: "Brandon, talk to us about what Orlando Cabrera has meant to this team."
BP> Well to be honest his range pretty much is gone, his bat was adequate at best and the year's haven't been very kind. Also, he kind of smells bad. And he was rude to my mom the other day. I don't like him very much.

So we probably shouldn't discount it completely, but I'm not sure that the vet is the guy to go to because of what the player said.

You said it much better than I ever could. Well done.

TheNext44
12-17-2010, 04:45 PM
Right...I'm not sure about you, but when guys like Pujols and Phillips say things like this, I think they know something that maybe we don't.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/02/sports/baseball/02rolen.html

Regarding both Cairo and Cabrera, probably Rolen also

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/2010-09-21-baseball-postseason-players_N.htm

I actually agree with you about Cabrera. I was against the signing, and didn't like his statistical production, but I also think his veteran presence had a very positive effect on Phillips, and the team as a whole. He produced more than his own production, imo.

However, just for the record, what the Reds like most about Janish, are his "intangibles." In his first spring training with the big club, everyone was raving about his leadership skills.

Hoosier Red
12-17-2010, 04:47 PM
Don't you take that with a grain of salt though Ed? I mean 1) No player is going to slam his teammate. 2) The questions are asked in a way that practically begs the player to answer affirmatively. How many interviews have you seen like this:

Interviewer: "Brandon, talk to us about what Orlando Cabrera has meant to this team."
BP> Well to be honest his range pretty much is gone, his bat was adequate at best and the year's haven't been very kind. Also, he kind of smells bad. And he was rude to my mom the other day. I don't like him very much.

So we probably shouldn't discount it completely, but I'm not sure that the vet is the guy to go to because of what the player said.

To put another spin on it, the interviews generally take a result and tell the player how to react. If the interviewer had asked Albert Pujols to talk about what the youth has meant to the Reds as they'd hung in the lead against St. Louis,
Pujols would have said something along the lines of, "We've seen all that talent growing up over the last few years and we knew it was going to be good. I think their youth really helps them because they play loose and have fun and stay fresh."

Now that doesn't really contradict what he said about having all the veterans, but it just shines a positive light on any aspect of the team you wanted to highlight. Generally the side being highlighted is coincidentally the side the interviewer brought up.

edabbs44
12-17-2010, 05:19 PM
Don't you take that with a grain of salt though Ed? I mean 1) No player is going to slam his teammate. 2) The questions are asked in a way that practically begs the player to answer affirmatively. How many interviews have you seen like this:

Interviewer: "Brandon, talk to us about what Orlando Cabrera has meant to this team."
BP> Well to be honest his range pretty much is gone, his bat was adequate at best and the year's haven't been very kind. Also, he kind of smells bad. And he was rude to my mom the other day. I don't like him very much.

So we probably shouldn't discount it completely, but I'm not sure that the vet is the guy to go to because of what the player said.

Cannot totally disagree but when you hear this from more than a few people, you start to take notice. Until further notice, I'm going to believe what many in the game are saying over hypotheses and assumptions.

REDREAD
12-17-2010, 05:33 PM
I once told a girl that she was solidly above replacement. She gave back the ring.
.

:lol: You mean she left you before you got a chance to say that you had enough payflex to work her into your budget? And that she'd bridge the gap nicely until someone younger with a higher ceiling arrived?