PDA

View Full Version : Tracking - Alonso, Grandal, Volquez, Boxberger, Sappelt, Wood, Torreyes



Pages : 1 2 [3] 4 5

_Sir_Charles_
09-02-2012, 10:30 PM
Since this is about ex-reds....

http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/28546/defensive-player-of-august-paul-janish


We point this out, because it’s the only thing that Janish did wrong on the defensive side in 28 games this month. In fact, in the other 388 innings that Janish has played this season he’s been credited with NO OTHER Defensive Misplays (BIS has 50+ categories to choose from) and has just one error.

http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=23537471&c_id=mlb

dougdirt
09-03-2012, 01:31 AM
In case you missed it....

Edwin Encarnacion hit a baseball a nautical mile on Saturday - http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=24391923&c_id=mlb

WVRedsFan
09-03-2012, 02:13 AM
Just a reminder of how lucky we are. Volquez's last outing was typical of Edinson away from the friendly confines of Petco. Throwing (and I mean throwing) 86 pitches in 4.1 innings, he allowed nine hits and five runs, walking three. Of course he struck out five, but the point is compared to Mat Latos, and even with the loss of Alonso and that catcher who makes Mes look bad right now, it's not worth the aggravation of having him around.

RedsManRick
09-03-2012, 03:21 AM
In case you missed it....

Edwin Encarnacion hit a baseball a nautical mile on Saturday - http://mlb.mlb.com/video/play.jsp?content_id=24391923&c_id=mlb

That was his 37th HR of the year. I knew he was having a very good season, but wow! Go EE!

Blitz Dorsey
09-03-2012, 04:16 AM
I think Edwin has been seeing the same "doctor" as Melky. Any Reds fan who watched Edwin knows exactly what's going on here. That's about all that needs to be said.

Reminds me of when Bret Boone suddenly became a 35+ HR guy in Seattle. Haha. Have to be blind to not see what's going on.

kaldaniels
09-03-2012, 10:16 AM
I think Edwin has been seeing the same "doctor" as Melky. Any Reds fan who watched Edwin knows exactly what's going on here. That's about all that needs to be said.

Reminds me of when Bret Boone suddenly became a 35+ HR guy in Seattle. Haha. Have to be blind to not see what's going on.

When asked to name the 2 guys in recent guys who have gone from average to super-sluggers...I think Jose Bautisa and EE are at the top of the list. And they are teammates. So unless something is in the water in Toronto, it may be a situation worth monitoring (nothing more, nothing less) if you are MLB. But until busted, nothing you can really do about it.

Vottomatic
09-03-2012, 10:31 AM
Nah. EE just works out and lifts weights. That's all it is. ;) :D

dougdirt
09-03-2012, 12:13 PM
Is Edwin really much larger now than he was?

He has always had above-average power potential. I don't know that I buy the "stuff" connection. Why wasn't he using it for 2010 or 2011? He was with Toronto then too.

Right now he is a guy in his prime, who has always had above average power potential, playing in a very home run friendly environment.

Would I have believed you 6 years ago if you told me he would hit 45 in a season? I would have found it unlikely. But if you said he would hit 35? Yeah, I would have believed that all day long.

757690
09-03-2012, 12:32 PM
Is Edwin really much larger now than he was?

He has always had above-average power potential. I don't know that I buy the "stuff" connection. Why wasn't he using it for 2010 or 2011? He was with Toronto then too.

Right now he is a guy in his prime, who has always had above average power potential, playing in a very home run friendly environment.

Would I have believed you 6 years ago if you told me he would hit 45 in a season? I would have found it unlikely. But if you said he would hit 35? Yeah, I would have believed that all day long.

Melky didn't look bigger. I imagine the "stuff" being used today isn't the same stuff used earlier. HGH, for instance, doesn't make you bigger, just quicker. I think we are naive to think the steroid era actually ended.

oneupper
09-03-2012, 12:34 PM
I think we are naive to think the steroid era actually ended.

This. And there are those who want us to forget it already.

RedsMan3203
09-03-2012, 12:35 PM
I've had EdE starting on my Fantasy Team all year.... (Great move, huh?)

But, he has been healthy ALL year... I think splitting time between DH/1B has done him wonders... Its given him a ton of confidence at the plate not having to deal with his defense issues and such...

dougdirt
09-03-2012, 12:41 PM
Melky didn't look bigger. I imagine the "stuff" being used today isn't the same stuff used earlier. HGH, for instance, doesn't make you bigger, just quicker. I think we are naive to think the steroid era actually ended.

Did the 'stuff' really do something for Melky, or was it his BABIP being .379 that made his numbers look great? His career BABIP is currently at .309, and that includes this year. His peripherals look pretty much in line with what we have seen from him in other parts of his career. His power is up a tad, but he is also now 27 years old, so a .170 IsoP up from a previous high of .140 (before he got to San Fran, it was .165 in 2011) isn't really anything to suggest performance enhancers.

kaldaniels
09-03-2012, 12:49 PM
Did the 'stuff' really do something for Melky, or was it his BABIP being .379 that made his numbers look great? His career BABIP is currently at .309, and that includes this year. His peripherals look pretty much in line with what we have seen from him in other parts of his career. His power is up a tad, but he is also now 27 years old, so a .170 IsoP up from a previous high of .140 (before he got to San Fran, it was .165 in 2011) isn't really anything to suggest performance enhancers.

Performance aside, I think the Melky comp was in reference to your "EE doesn't look bigger" remark. It was simply saying that by using PED's you don't necessarily look bigger. You may have a case based on EE simply reaching his ceiling, but I wouldn't use EE's size to "rule out" (<---for lack of a better term) PEDs.

dougdirt
09-03-2012, 12:50 PM
Performance aside, I think the Melky comp was in reference to your "EE doesn't look bigger" remark. It was simply saying that by using PED's you don't necessarily look bigger. You may have a case based on EE simply reaching his ceiling, but I wouldn't use EE's size to "rule out" (<---for lack of a better term) PEDs.

Sure, but my comment was in reference to "EE is just lifting more" by Vottomatic.

kaldaniels
09-03-2012, 12:58 PM
Sure, but my comment was in reference to "EE is just lifting more" by Vottomatic.

Got it.

_Sir_Charles_
09-09-2012, 11:01 AM
Not worthy of a thread of it's own, but I saw this video interview with Dunner and just thought you'd all get a kick out of it. Funny stuff.

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=espn:8294782

Vottomatic
09-09-2012, 11:12 AM
Sure, but my comment was in reference to "EE is just lifting more" by Vottomatic.

I was just kidding Doug.

EE is one of my favorite former Reds. Liked him when he was here, and thought he over-maligned by the fans. A guy who I thought would eventually put it all together, who maybe got traded before his potential matured into reality.

But it's all a moot point now.

redsmetz
09-17-2012, 09:48 AM
This interesting piece from ESPN's "Elias Says" blog regarding Alonso's grand slam

From Elias: Imagine hitting a first-inning grand-slam home run - and when you touch home plate, you look up at the scoreboard and find that your team is still trailing! That's what happened on Friday night to Padres first baseman Yonder Alonso, who responded to the Rockies' five-run top of the first with a four-run blow. But those were the only runs that San Diego would score as Colorado won, 7-4.

But back to Alonso. He became the first major-leaguer in 53 years to hit a first-inning grand-slam and find his team trailing when he returned to his dugout. The last player to do that was Bob Cerv of the Kansas City A's on July 3, 1959; he connected off Cleveland's Herb Score after the Tribe had scored five times in the top of the first. Like Alonso's Padres, Cerv's Athletics never scored again, and Score wound up with a complete-game victory, 8-4.

REDREAD
09-17-2012, 10:36 AM
Well, back to EdE.. I heard on the radio (I don't know who said this)
EdE is crediting his power surge to an adjustment that made his swing shorter.
Honestly, I don't know if this is true or not, but thought I'd pass it on.

HokieRed
09-17-2012, 11:58 AM
Alonso update. 4 for 5 with a BB and 2 RBI's yesterday.

CTA513
09-17-2012, 07:50 PM
Well, back to EdE.. I heard on the radio (I don't know who said this)
EdE is crediting his power surge to an adjustment that made his swing shorter.
Honestly, I don't know if this is true or not, but thought I'd pass it on.

I saw an article earlier this year that said he now keeps both hands on his bat all the way through his swing instead of letting one hand come off like he used to do here.

Superdude
09-17-2012, 08:25 PM
I saw an article earlier this year that said he now keeps both hands on his bat all the way through his swing instead of letting one hand come off like he used to do here.

Can we trade Brook Jacoby for Dwayne Murphy?

Wonderful Monds
09-17-2012, 08:37 PM
This. And there are those who want us to forget it already.

Yeah. And it seems like some teams are more ahead of the curve than others in that area. Toronto definitely. St. Louis is another one.

But, at the same time, we've heard Toronto has elaborate systems for stealing pitchers signs so it could be something like that instead.

Superdude
09-17-2012, 08:56 PM
Yeah. And it seems like some teams are more ahead of the curve than others in that area. Toronto definitely. St. Louis is another one.

But, at the same time, we've heard Toronto has elaborate systems for stealing pitchers signs so it could be something like that instead.

Is there a point where you would not consider it a problem anymore? A high profile player just got busted for 50 games in a playoff chase, so it's not like MLB is still afraid to address the issue. How is it easier to believe that guys like Jose Bautista and Edwin are taking PED's that no one knows about, don't build any noticeable muscle, and don't show up on tests? I'm not expert on PED's, so maybe I'm naive, but this wonder drug seems a little far-fetched to me. And if it existed, wouldn't it be rampant throughout the league?

Wonderful Monds
09-17-2012, 09:11 PM
Is there a point where you would not consider it a problem anymore? A high profile player just got busted for 50 games in a playoff chase, so it's not like MLB is still afraid to address the issue. How is it easier to believe that guys like Jose Bautista and Edwin are taking PED's that no one knows about, don't build any noticeable muscle, and don't show up on tests? I'm not expert on PED's, so maybe I'm naive, but this wonder drug seems a little far-fetched to me. And if it existed, wouldn't it be rampant throughout the league?

Couldn't tell you. Some people might just have connections or methods to beat the system, and would rather not reveal them to maintain the competitive edge.

There is more to building strength than just bulking up though. The eye test is probably the worst judge of whether or not someone juiced tbh. The ability to recover better and quicker makes a big difference.

If I had to guess though I'd owe it more to sign stealing than anything else. I re-read that ESPN piece where they investigated the possibility of sign stealing in Rogers Centre and the numbers were eye popping.

edabbs44
09-17-2012, 09:12 PM
Is there a point where you would not consider it a problem anymore? A high profile player just got busted for 50 games in a playoff chase, so it's not like MLB is still afraid to address the issue. How is it easier to believe that guys like Jose Bautista and Edwin are taking PED's that no one knows about, don't build any noticeable muscle, and don't show up on tests? I'm not expert on PED's, so maybe I'm naive, but this wonder drug seems a little far-fetched to me. And if it existed, wouldn't it be rampant throughout the league?

No offense, but I think you are being naive. There are a number of questionable performances happening right now. But it wouldn't have to be rampant in order to exist.

Wonderful Monds
09-17-2012, 09:15 PM
Couldn't tell you. Some people might just have connections or methods to beat the system, and would rather not reveal them to maintain the competitive edge.

There is more to building strength than just bulking up though. The eye test is probably the worst judge of whether or not someone juiced tbh. The ability to recover better and quicker makes a big difference.

If I had to guess though I'd owe it more to sign stealing than anything else. I re-read that ESPN piece where they investigated the possibility of sign stealing in Rogers Centre and the numbers were eye popping.

On that note, Edwin has decently big splits home and away.

This might be a good read on the subject:
http://m.espn.go.com/wireless/story?storyId=6837424

Brutus
09-17-2012, 09:58 PM
Is there a point where you would not consider it a problem anymore? A high profile player just got busted for 50 games in a playoff chase, so it's not like MLB is still afraid to address the issue. How is it easier to believe that guys like Jose Bautista and Edwin are taking PED's that no one knows about, don't build any noticeable muscle, and don't show up on tests? I'm not expert on PED's, so maybe I'm naive, but this wonder drug seems a little far-fetched to me. And if it existed, wouldn't it be rampant throughout the league?

Theoretically, some drugs are not necessarily to outright build muscle mass, but rather reduce the effects of aging, improve hand-eye coordination and keep up a player's strength and energy on a daily basis.

Take fatigue, for example. Being able to take supplements that boosted a player's energy everyday for six months would not necessarily manifest itself in a greater single-game performance, but rather more consistently reach potential over the course of 162 games. That would lead to tremendously better stats. And if the same drug, in theory, reduced or delayed aging effects, it would allow the player to sustain it for longer than most guys typically start to decline.

I don't think a lot of these drugs would be terribly noticeable outwardly. Muscle mass is not necessarily always going to improve a player's power anyhow. Bat speed is considered more important than brute strength based on the scientific studies I've seen. Sometimes strength equals better bat speed, but not always and not necessarily directly.

Superdude
09-17-2012, 10:43 PM
No offense, but I think you are being naive. There are a number of questionable performances happening right now. But it wouldn't have to be rampant in order to exist.

Sure there's some "questionable performances", but what's it coming from at this point? I don't think it's naive at all to say it's pretty obviously not testosterone or traditional steroids. As far as fatigue reducing supplements, I just don't see how that accounts for half of the improvement we've seen from Bautista and Encarnacion. What is this miracle drug doing?

camisadelgolf
09-18-2012, 05:08 AM
The headline kind of made me chuckle. "Yeah, right."
http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/cubs/post/_/id/13583/marshall-trade-set-to-pay-off-for-cubs-in-13

edabbs44
09-18-2012, 08:03 AM
Sure there's some "questionable performances", but what's it coming from at this point? I don't think it's naive at all to say it's pretty obviously not testosterone or traditional steroids. As far as fatigue reducing supplements, I just don't see how that accounts for half of the improvement we've seen from Bautista and Encarnacion. What is this miracle drug doing?

With the way medicine and technology are today, I don't think anything can be ruled out for anyone. We are in the middle of an era of athletes doing stuff that has never been seen before. I don't think it can all be explained by legitimate training advances.

REDREAD
09-18-2012, 12:16 PM
The headline kind of made me chuckle. "Yeah, right."
http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/cubs/post/_/id/13583/marshall-trade-set-to-pay-off-for-cubs-in-13

Isn't it great that we no longer have to read stories about how Tim Hummel, Tim Norton, Brandon Larson, etc will eventually lead the team to the promised land and all those years of sucking will pay off.. I like contending :)

I understand that every club has to rebuild occasionally, but getting excited that Sappelt might be a suitable 4th OF just doesn't do it for me anymore.

Tom Servo
09-18-2012, 12:28 PM
Agreed. Same for hoping that Wood will take several steps forward.

dougdirt
09-20-2012, 06:06 PM
I went back and watched Sappelt some this season. Don't like what he has done with his swing, or pre-swing. Before he broke out, he had a lot of bat movement before he would begin his swing and to me it seemed it was keeping him from getting his balance just right and sapping him of some power. He has some more movement than he had last year again and I wonder if again he is just missing his balance point in his swing, causing him a lack of some power.


This post was made at the end of May. Sappelt, again, has a different swing that he was using both here in Cincinnati (both good and bad) and the one he was using earlier when this post was made.

redsmetz
09-25-2012, 08:45 AM
Interesting piece from MLB.com about Alonso and the trade and how his season has gone.

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20120924&content_id=38954402&vkey=news_sd&c_id=sd&partnerId=rss_sd

fearofpopvol1
09-25-2012, 08:40 PM
Johnny Bench likes Grandal better than Mesoraco and Hanigan.


On the Reds’ catching tandem of Ryan Hanigan and Devin Mesoraco: “(Mesoraco) is still developing. I think you’re going to see a lot of good things from Devin. Hanigan has always been a great receiver. He’s got his average up around .290. I don’t think we’ve seen the best of him. I think he’s an even more productive hitter than he’s shown. He’s only got 23 RBIs; I thought that was a misprint. He has a good eye. I’ve talked to him about being more of a hands hitter than a body hitter and to get his hands to stay up. And (catcher Dioner) Navarro comes up and does a good job. We gave up (Yasmani) Grandal (in a trade to San Diego), and I thought that he was the best of all of them. Somebody knew that, too. I guess that’s why they wanted him in San Diego.”

Bench had lots of good things to say about the team this year.

http://www.indystar.com/article/20120919/SPORTS/120919058/Hall-Famer-Johnny-Bench-visits-Indy-talks-Bobby-Knight-Reds-World-Series-chances

_Sir_Charles_
09-30-2012, 11:24 AM
I cannot express how glad I am to NOT have Edinson Volquez anymore. I agreed with the Hamilton trade at the time (and still think it was the right move), but there aren't many things that drive me nuts quicker than a pitcher without control.

This season, Volquez is second in the majors in walks allowed with 102. ONE HUNDRED AND TWO!!! To put things in perspective, the highest walk total on the Reds is Mat Latos with 63. Homer has 52, Cueto 48, Leake 41 and Bronson is second in the league with only 34 allowed. I know that the almighty strikeout gets more attention and praise, but IMO its the BB's that should be the more important stat.

http://omgreds.com/uploaded_images/walksRiverfront-716737.jpg

CTA513
09-30-2012, 08:07 PM
I cannot express how glad I am to NOT have Edinson Volquez anymore. I agreed with the Hamilton trade at the time (and still think it was the right move), but there aren't many things that drive me nuts quicker than a pitcher without control.

This season, Volquez is second in the majors in walks allowed with 102. ONE HUNDRED AND TWO!!! To put things in perspective, the highest walk total on the Reds is Mat Latos with 63. Homer has 52, Cueto 48, Leake 41 and Bronson is second in the league with only 34 allowed. I know that the almighty strikeout gets more attention and praise, but IMO its the BB's that should be the more important stat.

http://omgreds.com/uploaded_images/walksRiverfront-716737.jpg

He finished with 105 after walking 3 more today.

Brutus
09-30-2012, 08:12 PM
Interesting piece from MLB.com about Alonso and the trade and how his season has gone.

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20120924&content_id=38954402&vkey=news_sd&c_id=sd&partnerId=rss_sd

Good article, but did they really call Edinson an "innings eater?"

KoryMac5
09-30-2012, 08:17 PM
I have always thought Volquez would be a lights out closer. If he could focus on his best pitches and mix a breaking ball in from time to time he could be very good.

PuffyPig
09-30-2012, 08:41 PM
Good article, but did they really call Edinson an "innings eater?"

An "innings eater" is one of the biggest misnomers in basball.

It is generally used to discribe a starter who's middling but gives you innings.

The question is why you want a middling pitcher giving you extra innings of mediocre pitching.

757690
09-30-2012, 08:50 PM
An "innings eater" is one of the biggest misnomers in basball.

It is generally used to discribe a starter who's middling but gives you innings.

The question is why you want a middling pitcher giving you extra innings of mediocre pitching.

Because usually, the alternative is a starter who's middling but doesn't give you innings.

i.e. Joe Blanton > Josh Fogg

M2
10-01-2012, 02:16 AM
Because usually, the alternative is a starter who's middling but doesn't give you innings.

i.e. Joe Blanton > Josh Fogg

Or, more often, a starter who's flat out bad. The Rockies are desperate for a few quality innings eaters. The Cardinals got a lot of mileage out of innings eaters like Jeff Suppan, Jason Marquis and Woody Williams.

PuffyPig
10-01-2012, 08:31 AM
Because usually, the alternative is a starter who's middling but doesn't give you innings.

i.e. Joe Blanton > Josh Fogg

An ininings eater saves the bullpen. All you said is that a decent pitcher is better than a poor pitcher. My point is, instead of getting a middling pitcher who gives you inninghs, get a decent pitcher. When people say "innings eater", they are really saying "poor pitcher". So, in reality. the advantage of an innings eater is extra bad pitching.

757690
10-01-2012, 11:21 AM
An ininings eater saves the bullpen. All you said is that a decent pitcher is better than a poor pitcher. My point is, instead of getting a middling pitcher who gives you inninghs, get a decent pitcher. When people say "innings eater", they are really saying "poor pitcher". So, in reality. the advantage of an innings eater is extra bad pitching.

I don't think an innings pitcher is a poor pitcher, he's just not a great one. If an innings eater was giving the team poor innings, he wouldn't be an innings eater, he'd be a bad pitcher who is forced to pitch often because the team has no better alternative, i.e. Jose Acevedo, Eric Milton, Ramon Ortiz, etc.

Sea Ray
10-02-2012, 05:27 PM
As this thread is generally about ex-Reds and I think we can all agree that the last thing we need now is another Adam Dunn thread, there's this:


Adam Dunn struck out twice in last night’s win over the Indians, bringing his season total to 220. The major league record is 223, set by Mark Reynolds in 2009. Dunn could fall out of bed and strike out three times in two games, so the record is his, right?

Well, maybe. Depends on what drives his sense of personal pride. Now that the White Sox have been eliminated it wouldn’t be shocking for Robin Ventura to sit Dunn — er, I mean for Dunn to have a “sore shoulder” or something — and have him miss the last two games, thus avoiding the dubious record

http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/10/02/adam-dunn-nearing-the-single-season-strikeout-record/

I doubt he'll get the major league record for the reasons stated above but he's already shattered his own personal high for Ks as well as the AL record. Looks like he will keep his avg off the interstate as he's at .206 right now.

fearofpopvol1
10-03-2012, 02:41 AM
As this thread is generally about ex-Reds and I think we can all agree that the last thing we need now is another Adam Dunn thread, there's this:



http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/10/02/adam-dunn-nearing-the-single-season-strikeout-record/

I doubt he'll get the major league record for the reasons stated above but he's already shattered his own personal high for Ks as well as the AL record. Looks like he will keep his avg off the interstate as he's at .206 right now.

41 bombs look good though. Most he's hit since 2004 too! Not a guy you'd want in the field because of his glove, but as a DH on an AL team, I think you take that. 49th all time on the home run list, 1 away from tying Duke Snider. So curious to see how he does next year and beyond even and if he gets to 500 or eventually 600.

Vottomatic
04-18-2013, 02:02 PM
Update 4-18-13:

Ronald Torreyes - (Cubs minors) .500, 4 games, 4 hits, 8 at-bats, 4 walks

Dave Sappelt - (Cubs) 19 at-bats, 1 hit, 6 K's

Travis Wood - (Cubs) 1-1, 1.83 e.r.a., 3 starts, 19.2 IP, 13 hits, 13 K, 8 BB

Juan Francisco - (Braves) - 39 at-bats, .333, 3 HR's, 10 K's, 2 BB, .930 OPS

Brad Boxberger - triple A Padres - 9 IP, 13 K's, 2.00 e.r.a. 4 BB

Yasmani Grandal - Padres - suspended

Yonder Alonso - Padres - 55 at-bats, .309 average, 2 HR's, .844 OPs

Edison Volquez - Padres - 0-3, 11.68 e.r.a., 12 IP, 21 hits, 9 K, 7 BB

Paul Janish - triple A Braves - 3 games, .182 average

Donnie Joseph - KC triple A - 5 games, 5 IP, 3 hits, 1.59 e.r.a., 11 K's, 5 BB

JC Sulbaran - KC double A - 11.74 e.r.a., 2 starts, 7 IP, 10 earned runs

Chris Dickerson - Baltimore - 3 at-bats, 1 pinch hit, .333

Adam Rosales - Oakland high A ball - 1 game, 3 at-bats, 1 hit

Jeremy Horst - Phillies - 8.10 e.r.a., 6.2 IP, 9 hits, 6 K, 3 BB

Jonny Gomes - Boston 21 at-bats, 4 hits, 9 BB, .190

Edwin Encarnacion - .232, 2 HR's, 15 games

Zach Stewart - CWS triple A, 3 starts, 4.50 e.r.a., 16 IP, 20 hits, 13 K, 6 BB

Josh Roenicke - Twins - 5 games, 1.17 e.r.a.

Adam Dunn - White Sox - 14 games, .111 average, 2 HR's

Chris Denorfia - Padres - .364, 1 HR, 14 games, .951 OPS

Jeff Keppinger - White Sox - batting .183 in 60 at-bats

Didi Gregorius - D'backs triple A - 7 games, .387, 2 HR's

Drew Stubbs - Indians - 41 at-bats, .220

Brandon Waring - no stats shown for 2013. May have retired.

Norris Hopper - no stats shown for 2013. May have retired.

Willy Taveras - KC - 17 games, 32 at-bats, batting .406

Dan
04-18-2013, 02:38 PM
Thanks for putting that together.

texasdave
04-18-2013, 02:41 PM
What? No Country Kepp?

coachpipe
04-18-2013, 02:44 PM
Adam Rosales in high A ball? were we that bad that year to have him play as much as he did? or is he coming off of injury?

cumberlandreds
04-18-2013, 02:46 PM
Adam Rosales in high A ball? were we that bad that year to have him play as much as he did? or is he coming off of injury?

I think he is on a rehab but not sure about that.

Good list. But you know what, I wouldn't want any of them back. I'm happy with who we have now.

RichRed
04-18-2013, 03:46 PM
Didi Gregorious just got called up to the D'backs following Aaron Hill's injury.

RichRed
04-18-2013, 03:53 PM
Willy Taveras - KC - 17 games, 32 at-bats, batting .406

Where did you see this? All I'm finding is that he's hitting .106 at AAA Omaha.

texasdave
04-18-2013, 03:55 PM
Where did you see this? All I'm finding is that he's hitting .106 at AAA Omaha.

Those were his Spring Training numbers. The .406 I mean.

dougdirt
04-18-2013, 03:55 PM
Didi Gregorious just got called up to the D'backs following Aaron Hill's injury.

He wasn't really called up. He was in AAA on rehab and was taken off of the DL. While there he hit .387/.424/.645 with 2 home runs, 2 doubles, 2 walks and a strikeout in 7 games.

Vottomatic
04-18-2013, 03:56 PM
Where did you see this? All I'm finding is that he's hitting .106 at AAA Omaha.

http://mlb.mlb.com/team/player.jsp?player_id=430838#gameType='S'&sectionType=career&statType=1&season=2013&level='ALL'

They have it wrong. They list him with those stats for 2013. But when I dug further and went to KC's player stats, he's not listed.

www.mlb.com has it wrong on his player page. Sorry.

redsmetz
04-18-2013, 03:57 PM
What? No Country Kepp?

Glad you asked. I meant to share this article when it was published right before the season started:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/31/sports/baseball/jeff-keppinger-white-sox-contact-hitter-may-be-last-of-dying-breed.html?smid=pl-share

texasdave
04-18-2013, 03:58 PM
He wasn't really called up. He was in AAA on rehab and was taken off of the DL. While there he hit .387/.424/.645 with 2 home runs, 2 doubles, 2 walks and a strikeout in 7 games.

He is showing up on the Diamondbacks' active roster. http://diamondbacks.mlb.com/team/roster_active.jsp?c_id=ari

texasdave
04-18-2013, 04:01 PM
Glad you asked. I meant to share this article when it was published right before the season started:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/31/sports/baseball/jeff-keppinger-white-sox-contact-hitter-may-be-last-of-dying-breed.html?smid=pl-share

Thanks.

dougdirt
04-18-2013, 04:07 PM
He is showing up on the Diamondbacks' active roster. http://diamondbacks.mlb.com/team/roster_active.jsp?c_id=ari

He is on the active roster, but he wasn't called up. He was simply activated from the DL, where he began the year. He was rehabbing in AAA.

texasdave
04-18-2013, 04:29 PM
He is on the active roster, but he wasn't called up. He was simply activated from the DL, where he began the year. He was rehabbing in AAA.

Ahh. So he was down in AAA on a rehab assignment?

dougdirt
04-18-2013, 04:34 PM
Ahh. So he was down in AAA on a rehab assignment?

Yes sir.

Funny enough, I went back and watched both of his home runs he hit while there. They went to almost the exact same spot. In Reno there is a big tower in the bullpen (probably a light tower). His first home run landed right in front of it and bounced off of it. His second home run hit off of the tower about 8-10 feet up.

coachpipe
04-18-2013, 04:40 PM
nice to see volquez tearing it up:laugh:

jojo
04-18-2013, 04:55 PM
Chris Denorfia's line thus far: .364/.429/.523

_Sir_Charles_
04-18-2013, 05:08 PM
Good list. But you know what, I wouldn't want any of them back. I'm happy with who we have now.

I still want Torreyes back. But I'm weird...so there's that. :O)

smixsell
04-18-2013, 05:08 PM
Yonder's not an elite anything guy, which is why it made sense to deal him away from a team that employs the best 1B in the business.

Totally agree.

Tom Servo
04-18-2013, 05:14 PM
Chris Denorfia's line thus far: .364/.429/.523
Heisey/Paul are okay, I guess, but I would love the chance to have a Denorfia/Dickerson platoon.

Jamz
04-18-2013, 05:21 PM
Out of curiosity do you guys think that Gregorius will be better than Cozart? Do you think that the Diamondbacks would have taken Cozart over Gregorius?

dougdirt
04-18-2013, 05:29 PM
Out of curiosity do you guys think that Gregorius will be better than Cozart? Do you think that the Diamondbacks would have taken Cozart over Gregorius?

I believe Gregorius will have a better career than Cozart, though maybe not a better 2013 season. After this season though, I would take Gregorius. Better defense and I believe he has a potentially better bat as well.

TRF
04-18-2013, 05:44 PM
I'm fairly convinced Volquez is hurt again. He's always been wild, but not this wild.

Kc61
04-18-2013, 06:10 PM
Out of curiosity do you guys think that Gregorius will be better than Cozart? Do you think that the Diamondbacks would have taken Cozart over Gregorius?

I think the DBacks may well have preferred Cozart as a more proven prospect. No way of knowing.

Me - I'd take Cozart for now and the future. Very underrated. Like a machine at SS, very consistent in the field. Good power for a SS. If he hits a bit more consistently he will be among the top all around SSs in the league.

Gregorius - more athletic, better range, hitting a question. Don't know yet if he will field his position as consistently as Cozart does, although probably will make more spectacular plays.

Just my personal preference, both good young players, but I'm a big Cozart supporter.

reds44
04-18-2013, 06:14 PM
I'd take Cozart over Didi.

REDREAD
04-18-2013, 06:39 PM
I'd take Cozart over Didi.

Me too. The future is now. Didi might eventually be better, but I'm glad the Reds went with the bigger certianty.

11larkin11
04-18-2013, 08:51 PM
Didi with a solo shot in Yankee Stadium in his first AB of the season.

texasdave
04-19-2013, 01:26 PM
Drew Stubbs is off to a slow start. But the most perplexing of his stats is that in 48 PA he has yet to score a run. No matter how much he struggled with the bat in Cincinnati, once he was on he seemed to get around the bases. Nary a run scored so far. Cleveland's record when Drew scores a run? 0-0. :)

dougdirt
04-19-2013, 02:42 PM
Drew Stubbs is off to a slow start. But the most perplexing of his stats is that in 48 PA he has yet to score a run. No matter how much he struggled with the bat in Cincinnati, once he was on he seemed to get around the bases. Nary a run scored so far. Cleveland's record when Drew scores a run? 0-0. :)
So you are saying that they are undefeated? Drew Stubbs is the best ever.

Jamz
04-19-2013, 05:24 PM
I feel bad for Stubbs almost. A perfect example of 'what could have been'.

PuffyPig
04-19-2013, 06:45 PM
I think the DBacks may well have preferred Cozart as a more proven prospect.



IIRC, the Diamondbakcs really, really wanted DiDi, or at least they said so after the trade.

Didi might turn out to be an excellent SS, but you need to give up value to get value.

jojo
04-19-2013, 07:12 PM
Heisey/Paul are okay, I guess, but I would love the chance to have a Denorfia/Dickerson platoon.

Most of Denorfia's career has been spent in extreme pitcher's environments (wOBA=.320 @ home and wOBA-.350 on the road) and he's been a plus defender in the corner outfield slots. He's one of those undervalued guys IMHO. While he does have platoon splits, he could be a a very solid starter in a more friendly park-kinda in the vane of a Randy Winn.

I think Denorfia could be a solution in left.

gilpdawg
04-19-2013, 07:25 PM
I think he is on a rehab but not sure about that.

Good list. But you know what, I wouldn't want any of them back. I'm happy with who we have now.

Without looking it up since I'm on mobile, I think I remember Rosales having a knee injury at some point.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

Crumbley
04-19-2013, 08:43 PM
IIRC, the Diamondbakcs really, really wanted DiDi, or at least they said so after the trade.
Their GM compared him to a young Jeter.

oneupper
04-22-2013, 09:53 AM
Small Sample size but Torreyes is a freak of nature.

In his first 31 PAs at AA. ZERO Ks. ZERO. The Kid's 20 y/o. He WILL be a major leaguer.

dougdirt
04-22-2013, 01:01 PM
Didi Gregorius hit his second home run last night.

Chip R
04-22-2013, 04:09 PM
The Reds are going to get Wood tonight.

PuffyPig
04-22-2013, 04:11 PM
Their GM compared him to a young Jeter.



I'm guessing the little league model?

_Sir_Charles_
04-22-2013, 04:13 PM
Small Sample size but Torreyes is a freak of nature.

In his first 31 PAs at AA. ZERO Ks. ZERO. The Kid's 20 y/o. He WILL be a major leaguer.

I agree. His hit tool is unreal.

TRF
04-22-2013, 04:55 PM
The Reds are going to get Wood tonight.

must.... resist...

dougdirt
04-22-2013, 04:58 PM
While Didi Gregorius has split time in AAA (rehab) and the Majors, he has 4 home runs, 4 doubles, 3 walks and 3 strikeouts in 46 plate appearances in 2013.

Wonderful Monds
04-22-2013, 05:04 PM
Most of Denorfia's career has been spent in extreme pitcher's environments (wOBA=.320 @ home and wOBA-.350 on the road) and he's been a plus defender in the corner outfield slots. He's one of those undervalued guys IMHO. While he does have platoon splits, he could be a a very solid starter in a more friendly park-kinda in the vane of a Randy Winn.

I think Denorfia could be a solution in left.

B-R likes him a lot if you move him to a neutral run environment, and likes him a whole lot more in GABP, if you mess around with their neutralized batting tool for him.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/d/denorch01-bat.shtml

_Sir_Charles_
04-22-2013, 05:07 PM
While Didi Gregorius has split time in AAA (rehab) and the Majors, he has 4 home runs, 4 doubles, 3 walks and 3 strikeouts in 46 plate appearances in 2013.

I've been watching him. I don't think he's as good as he's shown thus far, but he certainly is winning some fans over in 'zona. Excellent start for him.

Sea Ray
04-22-2013, 05:17 PM
I get irritated when people talk about how we traded Stubbs for Choo. No, it was mainly Didi that we traded in order to get Choo. I think the Reds TV team mentioned Stubbs for Choo just this weekend

dougdirt
04-22-2013, 05:35 PM
I've been watching him. I don't think he's as good as he's shown thus far, but he certainly is winning some fans over in 'zona. Excellent start for him.

No one is as good as he has shown thus far. His OPS is 1.700+

Benihana
04-22-2013, 05:48 PM
Yonder Alonso now has a .730 OPS in just about 700 plate appearances since being traded. Remember when people wanted to keep him instead of Joey Votto?

Dave Sappelt has yet to accumulate 100 plate appearances on the rebuilding Cubs (despite now being 26 years old). His OPS this year (in an obviously small sample size) is .250. Remember when people thought he was the starting CF of the future?

This regime has PROVEN that it really knows what it's doing when it comes to trading prospects. No one gets it right all the time, but I have full faith in their ability to sort out who to deal and who to keep.

It will be interesting to see who, if anyone, gets dealt in order to upgrade the OF, the only noticeable weakness on the roster.



*Of course the jury is still out on Grandal vs. Mesoraco, but I don't think anyone is lamenting that decision based off of current performances...

dougdirt
04-22-2013, 05:51 PM
Re: Alonso

Petco.

He has publicly stated he changed his game because power doesn't play in Petco.

And did anyone really want to keep him over Votto, or did some people just want Votto to man up, quit being a "me first" player and to move to left field and let the far lesser athletic Alonso play first so the team could be better overall?

Benihana
04-22-2013, 05:55 PM
One more: JC Sulbaran has an 8.60 ERA in AA since being traded to Kansas City.

R_Webb18
04-22-2013, 05:57 PM
I think people were saying keep Alonso if you could trade for Jose B at the time.

If I'm Votto I wouldn't want to move to left field either.

dougdirt
04-22-2013, 06:14 PM
If I'm Votto I wouldn't want to move to left field either.

Do what is best for the team.

Always Red
04-22-2013, 06:33 PM
Do what is best for the team.

I think Mat Latos was best for this team.

dougdirt
04-22-2013, 06:36 PM
I think Mat Latos was best for this team.

Unless Joey Votto knew in July that the Reds would land Mat Latos in December, his decision was based on what he wanted. Mat Latos worked out great for the Reds. I wouldn't undue that trade at all. But Votto didn't want to move for his own selfish reasons (that he had worked hard to get to where he was at first base defensively over the years).

Always Red
04-22-2013, 06:42 PM
Unless Joey Votto knew in July that the Reds would land Mat Latos in December, his decision was based on what he wanted. Mat Latos worked out great for the Reds. I wouldn't undue that trade at all. But Votto didn't want to move for his own selfish reasons (that he had worked hard to get to where he was at first base defensively over the years).

Votto was selfish for not moving to LF?

dougdirt
04-22-2013, 06:54 PM
Votto was selfish for not moving to LF?

If he was asked to and wouldn't do so, absolutely. And I just don't believe for a second that no one asked him before deciding to put a slow, unathletic guy like Yonder Alonso in left field over a far more athletic and faster Joey Votto, who had actually played left field sparingly in his career.

Nathan
04-22-2013, 06:56 PM
If he was asked to and wouldn't do so, absolutely. And I just don't believe for a second that no one asked him before deciding to put a slow, unathletic guy like Yonder Alonso in left field over a far more athletic and faster Joey Votto, who had actually played left field sparingly in his career.

Sure he was asked, otherwise, how do you think we got the quote that he didn't want to move there?

dougdirt
04-22-2013, 06:57 PM
Sure he was asked, otherwise, how do you think we got the quote that he didn't want to move there?

The quote that we do "have" is where the media had asked him I believe.

REDREAD
04-22-2013, 07:05 PM
Unless Joey Votto knew in July that the Reds would land Mat Latos in December, his decision was based on what he wanted. Mat Latos worked out great for the Reds. I wouldn't undue that trade at all. But Votto didn't want to move for his own selfish reasons (that he had worked hard to get to where he was at first base defensively over the years).

But did they actually ask Votto to move to LF? I don't remember them asking him.

Even so, maybe it would've hurt the team to move Joey to LF. If Joey can't handle LF adequately (or was a Dunn-type defender), how is that good for the team?

IMO, if a NL team has two good 1b, the best thing to do is trade one, as opposed to playing one of them out of position.

Another example was the attempt to move Aaron Boone to 2b. Boone agreed to try it, in order to accomodate Larson, but never got comfortable out there.

Yonder has a career OPS of around 750.. Even if you give him some extra OPS points for playing in the GAP, it's not worth moving an MVP around and risking disrupting him. Heck, Votto might've not signed the extension if he was pressured to go to LF..

_Sir_Charles_
04-22-2013, 07:12 PM
No one is as good as he has shown thus far. His OPS is 1.700+

Well obviously. My point is I don't think he'll be an above average hitter. I think his ceiling is an average hitter with a well above average glove. And that's very valuable.

redsmetz
04-25-2013, 10:02 AM
I came across this blog post about Edinson Volquez from a link at the Poz article on Ankiel - first time EV's gone 7 innings without a walk in his career:

http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/04/25/edinson-volquez-pulls-off-a-first-seven-innings-no-walks/

lollipopcurve
04-25-2013, 10:31 AM
But Votto didn't want to move for his own selfish reasons

Some guys earn that right. Had the Reds insisted on his moving to LF, he'd have kept going... all the way to free agency (or wherever they'd have traded him before free agency).

Thank goodness this front office and ownership doesn't run the team like a squadron of recruits.

Always Red
04-25-2013, 10:36 AM
Some guys earn that right. Had the Reds insisted on his moving to LF, he'd have kept going... all the way to free agency (or wherever they'd have traded him before free agency).

Thank goodness this front office and ownership doesn't run the team like a squadron of recruits.

They earn that right by earning a Gold Glove, and when the contemplated move would have lessened the defense in 2 spots.

Joey Votto selfish? I think not, I think the Reds considered the move, considered the weakening of the defense in 2 spots and made their own decision.

westofyou
04-25-2013, 10:48 AM
Some guys earn that right. Had the Reds insisted on his moving to LF, he'd have kept going... all the way to free agency (or wherever they'd have traded him before free agency).

Thank goodness this front office and ownership doesn't run the team like a squadron of recruits.

Thank goodness they realize that people play the game not empty uniforms

Trajinous
04-25-2013, 11:17 AM
I came across this blog post about Edinson Volquez from a link at the Poz article on Ankiel - first time EV's gone 7 innings without a walk in his career:

http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/04/25/edinson-volquez-pulls-off-a-first-seven-innings-no-walks/

It's amazing. Volquez is a one-season wonder. I'm glad we traded him away, such wasted potential.

traderumor
04-25-2013, 11:17 AM
Re: Alonso

Petco.

He has publicly stated he changed his game because power doesn't play in Petco.

And did anyone really want to keep him over Votto, or did some people just want Votto to man up, quit being a "me first" player and to move to left field and let the far lesser athletic Alonso play first so the team could be better overall?Wow. These are the kind of statements that I'd love to watch the reaction of the player's motives being questioned if approached face to face with this accusation. Even if Votto was asked to move to LF and refused, to conclude that is a "me first" act is a world record long jump to conclusions about someone's character.

*BaseClogger*
04-25-2013, 12:04 PM
selfˇish adjective \ˈsel-fish\
: concerned excessively or exclusively with oneself : seeking or concentrating on one's own advantage, pleasure, or well-being without regard for others

dougdirt
04-25-2013, 02:53 PM
Wow. These are the kind of statements that I'd love to watch the reaction of the player's motives being questioned if approached face to face with this accusation. Even if Votto was asked to move to LF and refused, to conclude that is a "me first" act is a world record long jump to conclusions about someone's character.

If the team asked him to do something and he said no, I worked hard to get where I am at this position, what would you call that if not selfish or me first? The team, if they asked him to move to left field, clearly thought that was the best thing for the team (otherwise they wouldn't have asked).

Doesn't matter really. Not worth getting into a big debate about it. Votto is at first for the Reds for a very long time. Alonso is with another team. We have Mat Latos. I don't think anyone is bothered at all by a single one of those things.

dougdirt
04-25-2013, 02:56 PM
Some guys earn that right. Had the Reds insisted on his moving to LF, he'd have kept going... all the way to free agency (or wherever they'd have traded him before free agency).

Thank goodness this front office and ownership doesn't run the team like a squadron of recruits.

Some guys earn that right.... and that is why the Yankees defense sucks and has for years at shortstop. It is why the Reds defense was so terrible for years with Griffey in center when it was clear that he had no range at all anymore. There is a fine line between ego and what is best for the team, and teams often go with the ego of a star player. I get that. But let's not pretend that it is always the best option for the team either. Sometimes it works out. Sometimes it doesn't.

PuffyPig
04-25-2013, 03:03 PM
If the team asked him to do something and he said no, I worked hard to get where I am at this position, what would you call that if not selfish or me first? The team, if they asked him to move to left field, clearly thought that was the best thing for the team (otherwise they wouldn't have asked).

Doesn't matter really. Not worth getting into a big debate about it. Votto is at first for the Reds for a very long time. Alonso is with another team. We have Mat Latos. I don't think anyone is bothered at all by a single one of those things.

I think many are bothered by you labeling Votto "selfish".

If your employer wanted to to move to Bugtussel "for the good of the company" and you refused, are you "selfish"? If they wanted you to to manange a different group of people (a group you dispised) "for the good of the company" are you being selfish?

Just because a player/employee doesn't do exactly what may be in the best interests of their organization doesn't mean they deserve a label of "selfish". You are entitled to weigh the interest of your organization with your own personal interests.

And I don't recall that it's settled in stone that Votto was actually and formally asked to move to LF, it was just speculated that he might have been.

kaldaniels
04-25-2013, 03:14 PM
Some guys earn that right.... and that is why the Yankees defense sucks and has for years at shortstop. It is why the Reds defense was so terrible for years with Griffey in center when it was clear that he had no range at all anymore. There is a fine line between ego and what is best for the team, and teams often go with the ego of a star player. I get that. But let's not pretend that it is always the best option for the team either. Sometimes it works out. Sometimes it doesn't.

That seems reasonable. However I don't think any of us out here in the peanut gallery have the right to assertively say he is/was selfish.

coachpipe
04-25-2013, 03:33 PM
doug..sometimes you post the dumbest things on here..and then continue to try and back it up with what you would like to think are good points..but i guess its good entertainment

dougdirt
04-25-2013, 03:50 PM
doug..sometimes you post the dumbest things on here..and then continue to try and back it up with what you would like to think are good points..but i guess its good entertainment

Yet I know when to capitalize letters while typing and you can't seem to figure it out while calling someone else dumb.

Hoosier Red
04-25-2013, 03:50 PM
I think many are bothered by you labeling Votto "selfish".

If your employer wanted to to move to Bugtussel "for the good of the company" and you refused, are you "selfish"? If they wanted you to to manange a different group of people (a group you dispised) "for the good of the company" are you being selfish?

Just because a player/employee doesn't do exactly what may be in the best interests of their organization doesn't mean they deserve a label of "selfish". You are entitled to weigh the interest of your organization with your own personal interests.

And I don't recall that it's settled in stone that Votto was actually and formally asked to move to LF, it was just speculated that he might have been.


I think this point is spot on. If he was in fact asked, but said, "No" then he is in fact thinking of himself first.

But considering one's self interests does not make one "selfish." It doesn't even make the decision inherently "selfish" as there's a lot more give and take that we're not at all privy too. As in, there's a difference between, saying, "Absolutely refuse to go," and "I don't think I'd be comfortable with that move,"

And even if we decide that particular decision was selfish(for the record, I wouldn't), it doesn't mean he should be labeled selfish as one selfish decision should not outweigh a number of unselfish decisions he could have made.

dougdirt
04-25-2013, 03:53 PM
I think many are bothered by you labeling Votto "selfish".

If your employer wanted to to move to Bugtussel "for the good of the company" and you refused, are you "selfish"? If they wanted you to to manange a different group of people (a group you dispised) "for the good of the company" are you being selfish?

Just because a player/employee doesn't do exactly what may be in the best interests of their organization doesn't mean they deserve a label of "selfish". You are entitled to weigh the interest of your organization with your own personal interests.

And I don't recall that it's settled in stone that Votto was actually and formally asked to move to LF, it was just speculated that he might have been.

Apples and Oranges. Joey Votto wasn't moving to a different place. They weren't asking him to oversee different people.

And as I said, we can't be certain that Votto was asked, but can we be intellectually honest and think that the Reds never approached Votto to ask him to move before they even began thinking about playing an unathletic and slow player like Alonso to left given that the Reds had already had Votto playing left field in recent years? We may not know for sure, but I think anyone looking at the situation can probably agree that the odds were very good that the Reds at least asked him about the situation.

mattfeet
04-25-2013, 03:53 PM
doug..sometimes you post the dumbest things on here..and then continue to try and back it up with what you would like to think are good points..but i guess its good entertainment

Let's keep it civil in here, folks. You too, Doug.

M2
04-25-2013, 03:59 PM
Moving a GG 1B to LF would have been insanity. Messing with Joey Votto to accommodate Yonder Alonso also would have been insanity. Whoever was against it, whoever stopped it from happening, I'm thankful.

Trading Yonder Alonso in a package for a stud pitcher? I don't have enough thumbs to put up to signal my approval of that.

dougdirt
04-25-2013, 04:10 PM
Moving a GG 1B to LF would have been insanity. Messing with Joey Votto to accommodate Yonder Alonso also would have been insanity. Whoever was against it, whoever stopped it from happening, I'm thankful.

Trading Yonder Alonso in a package for a stud pitcher? I don't have enough thumbs to put up to signal my approval of that.

Don't confuse the two things. I am beyond thrilled to have traded Alonso and the others for Mat Latos. I would do it a billion times without ever thinking twice about it.

But, at the time that Votto would have been approached for a move, no one had a clue that Mat Latos was on the table as an option.

coachpipe
04-25-2013, 04:35 PM
Yet I know when to capitalize letters while typing and you can't seem to figure it out while calling someone else dumb.

I forgot that without capital letters the words mean different things:thumbup:

M2
04-25-2013, 04:38 PM
Don't confuse the two things. I am beyond thrilled to have traded Alonso and the others for Mat Latos. I would do it a billion times without ever thinking twice about it.

But, at the time that Votto would have been approached for a move, no one had a clue that Mat Latos was on the table as an option.

Fair point, but I'm still happy Votto wasn't shifted to play Alonso at 1B. Like I said, whoever put the brakes on that idea is a personal hero of mine.

As an aside, Alonso always was trade bait. It wasn't if so much as when with him. Getting Latos was just fabulous execution of an inevitable transaction.

*BaseClogger*
04-25-2013, 04:39 PM
Can't it be selfish and a good thing? Yeesh y'all can be uptight sometimes...

dougdirt
04-25-2013, 04:40 PM
I think many are bothered by you labeling Votto "selfish".

They are bothered by it because Votto is "our guy".

traderumor
04-25-2013, 04:46 PM
Apples and Oranges. Joey Votto wasn't moving to a different place. They weren't asking him to oversee different people.

And as I said, we can't be certain that Votto was asked, but can we be intellectually honest and think that the Reds never approached Votto to ask him to move before they even began thinking about playing an unathletic and slow player like Alonso to left given that the Reds had already had Votto playing left field in recent years? We may not know for sure, but I think anyone looking at the situation can probably agree that the odds were very good that the Reds at least asked him about the situation.

I'm not following. You have a stud hitter and gold glove 1st baseman just entering the prime of his career and a guy who doesn't even play a very good 1b in the minors, blocked. So its natural to assume that they ask one of the top players in the game to make a dramatic position change to accomodate a blocked minor leaguer?

I'd be more of the mind it wasn't even brought up to Votto with the current regime. Now, if we're talking the O'Brien or Bowden years, then maybe, there were a lot of dumb ideas floating around back then. But I'd have to give the current management team more credit for not even asking their stud in the name of "for the good of the team" to move to the outfield.

Jamz
04-25-2013, 04:47 PM
Or maybe Votto was thinking about the team when he offered his opinion? Regardless of what happened the team has the final say. If they wanted him in left he would have played in left. They probably asked him about it, and he probably wasn't fond of the idea 1) because he didn't want to move there and 2) because he has very little to no experience there. I can't call it a completely selfish decision as it likely was the right one not only for Joey but also for the team.

Larry Schuler
04-25-2013, 04:49 PM
Calling Votto "selfish" feels a bit ridiculous and discounting of everything he contributes to the team.

If you are one to put on heavy tunnel-vision blinders inside of an over-simplified, zero-context vacuum, maybe you can hyper-focus on one speculative instance where Joey Votto could have possibly MAYBE been acting in his best interests but, even then, sometimes the best interest of your most contributing franchise player, who has previously shown zero distracting bravado or self-absorbed immature behavior, can be in your own interest as a team.

So in short, I struggle to even fathom a situation where I'd say "Joey Votto is selfish" without a hint of irony or sarcasm.

traderumor
04-25-2013, 04:49 PM
They are bothered by it because Votto is "our guy".Oh please. I'm bothered because you are denegrating someone's character based on a conversation you assumed happened. That isn't fair, even if it was Yadier Molina, whom I loathe, being called "selfish."

Brutus
04-25-2013, 04:51 PM
We should all expect selfishness from someone who drinks fancy coffee.

dougdirt
04-25-2013, 04:53 PM
I'm not following. You have a stud hitter and gold glove 1st baseman just entering the prime of his career and a guy who doesn't even play a very good 1b in the minors, blocked. So its natural to assume that they ask one of the top players in the game to make a dramatic position change to accomodate a blocked minor leaguer?

I'd be more of the mind it wasn't even brought up to Votto with the current regime. Now, if we're talking the O'Brien or Bowden years, then maybe, there were a lot of dumb ideas floating around back then. But I'd have to give the current management team more credit for not even asking their stud in the name of "for the good of the team" to move to the outfield.

The Reds started playing Alonso in left in the middle of 2010. Votto had yet to win a gold glove. Not that it matters. The Reds certainly had the idea at some point that they wanted Joey Votto and Yonder Alonso in the same line up. That is why Alonso wound up in left field despite the disaster that it was. So, the question then becomes what is the best configuration: An athletic player in left and a non-athletic player at first, or a non-athletic player in left and an athletic player at first? I can't imagine any scenario where they decided without asking Votto that playing the far more unathletic guy in left field was a better option.

dougdirt
04-25-2013, 04:56 PM
Oh please. I'm bothered because you are denegrating someone's character based on a conversation you assumed happened. That isn't fair, even if it was Yadier Molina, whom I loathe, being called "selfish."

Denigrating his character?

Come on now. I have met Joey Votto a few times. He seems like a good dude. Shy, but there is nothing wrong with that. I just happen to believe he made a selfish choice, if he was indeed asked to move to left field and said no. It happens. He isn't the only guy to do it (as I laid out in a previous post).

traderumor
04-25-2013, 05:01 PM
Denigrating his character?

Come on now. I have met Joey Votto a few times. He seems like a good dude. Shy, but there is nothing wrong with that. I just happen to believe he made a selfish choice, if he was indeed asked to move to left field and said no. It happens. He isn't the only guy to do it (as I laid out in a previous post)."You are selfish, you would not do what is best for the team, but were most concerned about yourself, because I assume you were asked to move to left field so Yonder could play first." Sounds like an attack on the other person's character to me. I'm guessing if you had that conversation with Votto, he'd be offended and feel like his character was attacked, using the reasonable person test.

dougdirt
04-25-2013, 05:08 PM
"You are selfish, you would not do what is best for the team, but were most concerned about yourself, because I assume you were asked to move to left field so Yonder could play first." Sounds like an attack on the other person's character to me. I'm guessing if you had that conversation with Votto, he'd be offended and feel like his character was attacked, using the reasonable person test.

I guess we can look at it that way.

I certainly wouldn't approach him with that exact quote though. But I certainly would ask him if he was asked and then asked a question as to how playing someone much worse suited for left field, a more important defensive position, was better for the team.

Shin-Soo Choo was asked to play another position for the best option of the team. If he had said no, I am only playing right field, then what? Would people not have questioned his commitment to the Reds. Who was it, Edgar Renteria? who was signed to be a utility guy but said he was only going to play shortstop? People ripped him apart for it. Why is this different? Because Joey Votto can hit the heck out of the baseball? Why should that have anything to do with it?

M2
04-25-2013, 05:16 PM
The Reds started playing Alonso in left in the middle of 2010. Votto had yet to win a gold glove. Not that it matters. The Reds certainly had the idea at some point that they wanted Joey Votto and Yonder Alonso in the same line up. That is why Alonso wound up in left field despite the disaster that it was. So, the question then becomes what is the best configuration: An athletic player in left and a non-athletic player at first, or a non-athletic player in left and an athletic player at first? I can't imagine any scenario where they decided without asking Votto that playing the far more unathletic guy in left field was a better option.

1) The Reds didn't need Votto to win a GG to know he was an elite defender. That was crystal clear before 2010 ever started.

2) I would not assume the Reds actually wanted Votto and Alonso in the same lineup. They gave the tires a kick on having Alonso play LF, but it's entirely possible they decided he didn't have enough bat for 1B and was incapable of playing LF and that he never held much of a spot in the team's long-term thinking. Trying him in LF might have been nothing more than seeing if there was any point to keeping him around.

3) You're asking the wrong question in terms of best configuration, IMO. Mine would be, make the better player shift or the lesser player shift? I make the lesser player shift. And if he can't then I replace him with someone who can do the job.

4) I'm with traderumor on this. My guess is the team brass shot down the idea before it ever got to Votto, largely for the reasons I just mentioned. I doubt Alonso ever impressed management enough to seriously entertain the notion of moving Votto.

traderumor
04-25-2013, 05:27 PM
The Reds started playing Alonso in left in the middle of 2010. Votto had yet to win a gold glove. Not that it matters. The Reds certainly had the idea at some point that they wanted Joey Votto and Yonder Alonso in the same line up. That is why Alonso wound up in left field despite the disaster that it was. So, the question then becomes what is the best configuration: An athletic player in left and a non-athletic player at first, or a non-athletic player in left and an athletic player at first? I can't imagine any scenario where they decided without asking Votto that playing the far more unathletic guy in left field was a better option.I'd hope the players are playing where they are told to play and that management is not running this type of stuff by them until they've gotten to the point of decision.

As M2 already stated, it most likely never got past the management discussion phase, so throwing crap at the wall in the ears of the players would only serve to get them worrying about stuff that they shouldn't be worrying about.

You approach Votto with "hey, we've been thinking about moving you to left because we think you might be better out there than Alonso" and he starts wondering about the competency of his leaders and worrying about making this decision. And he'd be right, because that would be poor management of the situation.

jojo
04-25-2013, 06:25 PM
This seems like a funny argument to be having because both sides are really just operating on supposition.

R_Webb18
04-25-2013, 06:31 PM
I suppose you could argue all day and night but does it even matter at this point?

edabbs44
04-25-2013, 06:38 PM
Asking Jeter to move for the world's greatest SS and asking The world's greatest 1b to move for a minor leaguer are pretty different things.

M2
04-25-2013, 07:08 PM
Asking Jeter to move for the world's greatest SS and asking The world's greatest 1b to move for a minor leaguer are pretty different things.

Not to mention that what the Yankees were figuring is which one would be able to stick at SS longer. I'd say they chose correctly.

OGB
04-25-2013, 07:13 PM
I think many are bothered by you labeling Votto "selfish".

If your employer wanted to to move to Bugtussel "for the good of the company" and you refused, are you "selfish"? If they wanted you to to manange a different group of people (a group you dispised) "for the good of the company" are you being selfish?

Just because a player/employee doesn't do exactly what may be in the best interests of their organization doesn't mean they deserve a label of "selfish". You are entitled to weigh the interest of your organization with your own personal interests.

And I don't recall that it's settled in stone that Votto was actually and formally asked to move to LF, it was just speculated that he might have been.

Apples and oranges indeed. One person's effect on maintaining a profitable corporation and one athlete, who represents (essentially) 1/9 of his team, contributing to its wins an losses are starkly different things. If you can't see that, then I should just bow out of this conversation now. You can't compare million dollar athletes playing a game to one of us at our jobs because the similarities begin and end with the fact that we're both emplyed.

I agree with Doug that the Latos trade is one of the best moves this organization has ever made, but assuming Votto balked at moving to LF, it was selfish. This would have almost certainly been a better baseball team in 2010-11 with both Votto and Alonso in the everyday lineup. Cal Ripken knew that was the case when the O's asked him to move to 3rd, and they had a couple seasons when they almost made the World Series.

kaldaniels
04-25-2013, 07:45 PM
There are scenarios where Votto refusing the move would be selfish, sure. But we don't really know all that happened and to state he was selfish as fact is outrageous.

Brutus
04-25-2013, 07:54 PM
Fair point, but I'm still happy Votto wasn't shifted to play Alonso at 1B. Like I said, whoever put the brakes on that idea is a personal hero of mine.

As an aside, Alonso always was trade bait. It wasn't if so much as when with him. Getting Latos was just fabulous execution of an inevitable transaction.

And that is another reason I'm in favor of drafting B.P.A. rather than for need. Even if a player is blocked, you can use those assets to acquire a more pressing need later. I say draft for the players that are most likely to develop or have the highest upside. Worry about the future in the future.

Brutus
04-25-2013, 07:59 PM
In both corporations and baseball, you rely on individuals to do their jobs successfully. Puffy's example was perfectly on point. Baseball players are like employees. They are paid to do a job and the company's job hinges on the ability of each person to function.

A player, or an employee for that matter, might not want to change position for reasons other than selfishness. Sometimes they might not be comfortable with a new position. They might not feel they'll best serve a company in a new spot. And let's be honest, study after study has shown that happy people are more productive people. The psychological effects of what a person is comfortable with should not be overlooked.

Mitri
05-04-2013, 01:32 PM
After a recent hot streak Drew Stubbs is up to .284/.340/.420 on the season with 4 SB. A .383 BABIP will bring his average back down to career norms, but it's good to see Drew not completely flailing in Cleveland. He's been hitting either 8th or 9th in the Tribe lineup playing a mix of CF and RF.

Benihana
05-04-2013, 01:49 PM
And that is another reason I'm in favor of drafting B.P.A. rather than for need. Even if a player is blocked, you can use those assets to acquire a more pressing need later. I say draft for the players that are most likely to develop or have the highest upside. Worry about the future in the future.

When we have a GM that we fully trust to execute such trades (like we do now with Jocketty), I'd completely agree. When Dan O'Brien was at the helm, I'd say we had to be a bit more judicious. That guy would trade an All-Star 1B for a pitcher like Dave Williams. Or even worse, he'd do nothing when obvious moves needed to be made.

jojo
05-04-2013, 02:28 PM
When we have a GM that we fully trust to execute such trades (like we do now with Jocketty), I'd completely agree. When Dan O'Brien was at the helm, I'd say we had to be a bit more judicious. That guy would trade an All-Star 1B for a pitcher like Dave Williams. Or even worse, he'd do nothing when obvious moves needed to be made.

Before the start of the 2008 season you were poised to trade Votto, Bailey and others for Bedard.

This isnt a dig but rather just an acknowledgement that GMing and predicting the futures of players is hard.

dfs
05-04-2013, 02:55 PM
That guy would trade an All-Star 1B for a pitcher like Dave Williams. Or even worse, he'd do nothing when obvious moves needed to be made.
...well not if the all star is today's version of Joey Votto, but if it was the 31 year old version of Sean Casey who was powerless and slower than syrup in February then it wouldn't be that bad a trade.

Look, Dave Williams didn't work out as a red. Many of us knew the chances that he would be valuable were slim. I suspect Dan O knew that Dave Williams was about as valuable as a bag of balls. All that said, that's what the 31 year old Sean Casey was worth.

Nice guy. Really Nice Guy. Never a GOOD major league firstbaseman. If Sean Casey is the caliber of first baseman it takes to make your all star team, it means your league is pretty terrible. That doesn't make him good. You can say the injuries did it or the weight or whatever, but the results are the results.

Yes, The Reds got stuck giving Dave Williams 1.5 million dollars and 8 terrible starts. The Pirates got stuck giving Sean Casey 4 million dollars and 250 at bats before flipping him for a relief pitcher who put up a 9.00 lifetime ERA and the Pirates were glad to make the flip because it left the Tigers on the hook for the other 4 million dollars that Casey was due to be paid.

Nice guy, but he had a fork in him. Both teams that traded Casey away during the end of his career improved their own bottom line by making the trade.

mth123
05-04-2013, 03:11 PM
When we have a GM that we fully trust to execute such trades (like we do now with Jocketty), I'd completely agree. When Dan O'Brien was at the helm, I'd say we had to be a bit more judicious. That guy would trade an All-Star 1B for a pitcher like Dave Williams. Or even worse, he'd do nothing when obvious moves needed to be made.

I don't get the knocking of the deal of Casey for Williams. I never thought that Williams would be successful but if not for the clueless front office in Pittsburgh, the Reds would have been stuck paying Casey's crazy money. Unloading Casey opened up 1B which was later filled more economically and more productively by the Hatteberg/Aurilia platoon. Dealing Casey wasn't O'Brien's problem, it was the deals for ERic Milton and Ramon Ortiz that are his horrible legacy, I'm guessing that was at the guidance of ownership. Moving that money off the books may have paved the way for adding a guy like Arroyo in Spring Training.

Casey was an expensive, pudgy, judy hitter who produced at 1B like a decent middle infielder might, He had just had his age 30 season and the handwriting was on the wall. Getting Casey off the books was one of O'Brien's better moves IMO.

toledodan
05-04-2013, 06:13 PM
After a recent hot streak Drew Stubbs is up to .284/.340/.420 on the season with 4 SB. A .383 BABIP will bring his average back down to career norms, but it's good to see Drew not completely flailing in Cleveland. He's been hitting either 8th or 9th in the Tribe lineup playing a mix of CF and RF.

hitting coach?

scott91575
05-04-2013, 06:31 PM
hitting coach?

To put it in a little perspective, he went 9 for 13 in the 3 days before that post (now 10 for 17 in his last 4 games). That incredible hot streak put him at .761 OPS. So do you think he is more of the hitter like these last 4 games or all the prior games where his OPS was .579?

He had a 7 for 13, 7 for 15, 5 for 11, and 5 for 13 three game stretches last season. He goes through hot streaks for short periods and then does absolutely nothing for very long stretches. It's what Stubbs does. We shall see if his recent hot streak is the same old thing or something he can finally sustain.

Benihana
05-04-2013, 07:49 PM
...well not if the all star is today's version of Joey Votto, but if it was the 31 year old version of Sean Casey who was powerless and slower than syrup in February then it wouldn't be that bad a trade.

Look, Dave Williams didn't work out as a red. Many of us knew the chances that he would be valuable were slim. I suspect Dan O knew that Dave Williams was about as valuable as a bag of balls. All that said, that's what the 31 year old Sean Casey was worth.

Nice guy. Really Nice Guy. Never a GOOD major league firstbaseman. If Sean Casey is the caliber of first baseman it takes to make your all star team, it means your league is pretty terrible. That doesn't make him good. You can say the injuries did it or the weight or whatever, but the results are the results.

Yes, The Reds got stuck giving Dave Williams 1.5 million dollars and 8 terrible starts. The Pirates got stuck giving Sean Casey 4 million dollars and 250 at bats before flipping him for a relief pitcher who put up a 9.00 lifetime ERA and the Pirates were glad to make the flip because it left the Tigers on the hook for the other 4 million dollars that Casey was due to be paid.

Nice guy, but he had a fork in him. Both teams that traded Casey away during the end of his career improved their own bottom line by making the trade.

Sean Casey was one year removed from a year where he hit .324/.381/.524 with 24 HR and 99 RBI. I'd say that makes the All-Star team in any league, in just about any year. The following year (his last as a Red), he hit .312/.371/.423. Not great numbers for a 1B but nothing terrible either. Dave Williams was a horrible pitcher, period.

When all was said and done, Sean Casey had an .834 OPS as a Cincinnati Red. That is significantly better than our very own Jay Bruce has been career to date.

Getting back on point (and thread relevent), my point was not to lament trading Sean Casey, but to point out that Dan O'Brien was a horrible GM, especially when it came to trades and free agency. When you have a horrible GM, it is a lot more difficult to blindly trust your Front Office to draft the best available player and convert weaknesses into strengths via the trade market.

sdwagers
05-04-2013, 08:08 PM
I don't get the knocking of the deal of Casey for Williams. I never thought that Williams would be successful but if not for the clueless front office in Pittsburgh, the Reds would have been stuck paying Casey's crazy money. Unloading Casey opened up 1B which was later filled more economically and more productively by the Hatteberg/Aurilia platoon. Dealing Casey wasn't O'Brien's problem, it was the deals for ERic Milton and Ramon Ortiz that are his horrible legacy, I'm guessing that was at the guidance of ownership. Moving that money off the books may have paved the way for adding a guy like Arroyo in Spring Training.

Casey was an expensive, pudgy, judy hitter who produced at 1B like a decent middle infielder might, He had just had his age 30 season and the handwriting was on the wall. Getting Casey off the books was one of O'Brien's better moves IMO.


I think a bucket of balls and fungo bat would have netted us more than Williams did. He had a losing record and plus 7 ERA. ... seriously ...

reds44
05-04-2013, 08:13 PM
I don't get the knocking of the deal of Casey for Williams. I never thought that Williams would be successful but if not for the clueless front office in Pittsburgh, the Reds would have been stuck paying Casey's crazy money. Unloading Casey opened up 1B which was later filled more economically and more productively by the Hatteberg/Aurilia platoon. Dealing Casey wasn't O'Brien's problem, it was the deals for ERic Milton and Ramon Ortiz that are his horrible legacy, I'm guessing that was at the guidance of ownership. Moving that money off the books may have paved the way for adding a guy like Arroyo in Spring Training.

Casey was an expensive, pudgy, judy hitter who produced at 1B like a decent middle infielder might, He had just had his age 30 season and the handwriting was on the wall. Getting Casey off the books was one of O'Brien's better moves IMO.
Um, what?

His career line with the Reds was .305/.371/.463/.834. I'm not saying moving him was a bad idea, because Hatteberg posted similar numbers for much cheaper, but I think you're selling Casey short.

dougdirt
05-04-2013, 08:52 PM
Casey's last year with the Reds netted a .423 SLG. That is like a decent middle infielder.

mth123
05-04-2013, 08:54 PM
Um, what?

His career line with the Reds was .305/.371/.463/.834. I'm not saying moving him was a bad idea, because Hatteberg posted similar numbers for much cheaper, but I think you're selling Casey short.

2005 OPS+ was equal to his career 109. Seriously a 1B should be a lot farther above 100 than that. 2003 was 102, 2002 was 81, 2001 was 108, 1998 was 104. He had good seasons in 1999 and 2000 and a brief resurgence in 2004, but he clearly wasn't that guy. A decent 2B could give you most of those seasons. Even a decent SS would have been better than Casey in 2002 and 2003.

He certainly proved to be a part-timer after the deal. O'Brien made the right call, but people were remembering 1999 when he did it. There was no way they were going to get a good player and have some one take his money off the Reds hands. The Reds were stuck taking Williams $1.5 Million from the Pirates just to move him at all. Even as a home town hero, the Pirates quickly wised up and moved him to the first team that would pay the rest of his deal for a Minor League Reliever.

Seeing how Casey performed after the deal, I don't see how anyone can criticize the Reds for moving him off the books in whatever way they could.

dfs
05-04-2013, 08:54 PM
Sean Casey was one year removed from a year where he hit .324/.381/.524 with 24 HR and 99 RBI. I'd say that makes the All-Star team in any league, in just about any year. The following year (his last as a Red), he hit .312/.371/.423. Not great numbers for a 1B but nothing terrible either.

Right. How did Casey do ....after ....the trade. The fact that Casey was very valuable in 2004 and essentially valueless after 2005 and Dan O'Brien recognized it kind of makes the rest of your post suspect.

CySeymour
05-04-2013, 08:59 PM
Um, what?

His career line with the Reds was .305/.371/.463/.834. I'm not saying moving him was a bad idea, because Hatteberg posted similar numbers for much cheaper, but I think you're selling Casey short.

Check out his numbers post Reds.

cincrazy
05-04-2013, 10:47 PM
To say Casey was overrated is fair. To say he was never a good first baseman is absurd. He had a very productive Reds career, and was a popular player, and teammate. He put up some very good seasons, and in a few of those years he was among the top 1B in the league. To say otherwise is repainting history with your own brush.

dougdirt
05-04-2013, 10:51 PM
To say Casey was overrated is fair. To say he was never a good first baseman is absurd. He had a very productive Reds career, and was a popular player, and teammate. He put up some very good seasons, and in a few of those years he was among the top 1B in the league. To say otherwise is repainting history with your own brush.

99, 00 and 04 Casey were very good. His other years, he was a below average first baseman.

reds44
05-04-2013, 10:52 PM
Casey's last year with the Reds netted a .423 SLG. That is like a decent middle infielder.
The year before he slugged .534. To say he produced like a MIFer is simply wrong.

mth123
05-04-2013, 11:10 PM
To say Casey was overrated is fair. To say he was never a good first baseman is absurd. He had a very productive Reds career, and was a popular player, and teammate. He put up some very good seasons, and in a few of those years he was among the top 1B in the league. To say otherwise is repainting history with your own brush.

Nobody said he was never a good first baseman. What I said was that at the time he was dealt he wasn't a good 1B and he was being paid $8 Million to put up numbers that you could get off the scrap heap (which the Reds did when they signed Hatteberg). I think moving that $8 Million deal at all was a fairly good accomplishment. Complaining about the return is the revisionist history.

OPS+ as a Red

Joey Votto 155
Ted Kluszewski 128
Tony Perez 127
Lee May 123
Hal Morris 115
Sean Casey 114
Dan Driessen 113
Nick Esasky 111
Scott Hatteberg 109
Willie Greene 106
Gordy Coleman 106

As 1B go, Casey's bat was nothing special and his best years were behind him. I think Casey's post Reds' career is proof that O'brien made a really good move to dump his contract regardless of the return.

kaldaniels
05-04-2013, 11:18 PM
Nobody said he was never a good first baseman. What I said was that at the time he was dealt he wasn't a good 1B and he was being paid $8 Million to put up numbers that you could get off the scrap heap (which the Reds did when they signed Hatteberg). I think moving that $8 Million deal at all was a fairly good accomplishment. Complaining about the return is the revisionist history.

OPS+ as a Red

Joey Votto 155
Ted Kluszewski 128
Tony Perez 127
Lee May 123
Hal Morris 115
Sean Casey 114
Dan Driessen 113
Nick Esasky 111
Scott Hatteberg 109
Willie Greene 106
Gordy Coleman 106

As 1B go, Casey's bat was nothing special and his best years were behind him. I think Casey's post Reds' career is proof that O'brien made a really good move to dump his contract regardless of the return.

Post 651. I really wanted to jump in on that remark but I passed. But if we are going to deny it was ever said....

Topcat
05-04-2013, 11:30 PM
The fact this thread has jumped the shark and onto such topics as Hatteburg and Casey etc tells me the Reds did very well on Latos and Marshall trades.

757690
05-04-2013, 11:33 PM
OPS+ during the years 1997-2005 for a player with no signs of PED use is a rather useless stat.

Plus, it doesn't take into account Casey's speed ;)

mth123
05-04-2013, 11:45 PM
OPS+ during the years 1997-2005 for a player with no signs of PED use is a rather useless stat.

Plus, it doesn't take into account Casey's speed ;)

PEDs or no, it was an indication of his performance in his era and his trade value was most assuredly a reflection of it. His age 26 to 28 performance had 13, 6 and 14 HR with Slugging % of .458, .362 and .408. The year before he was dealt he hit 9 HR and slugged .423. He was set to make $8 Million. Did anyone really think they were going to get a good player for him?

757690
05-05-2013, 01:12 AM
PEDs or no, it was an indication of his performance in his era and his trade value was most assuredly a reflection of it. His age 26 to 28 performance had 13, 6 and 14 HR with Slugging % of .458, .362 and .408. The year before he was dealt he hit 9 HR and slugged .423. He was set to make $8 Million. Did anyone really think they were going to get a good player for him?

I agree the time was right to trade Casey, I just think he was undervalued, as were many assumed clean players from that era.

As for what the trade itself, here's my take.

First, the $8M is meaningless, imo, because Linder didn't use that money to acquire anyone else or help the team improve. He simply pocketed it, as usual.

Second, they weren't going to get anything good for Casey, but who they choose speaks volumes about O'Brian's ability to evaluate MLB talent. Dave Williams couldn't break 85 MPH with his fastball and walked around 5 batters per 9 innings. But O'Brian was impressed that he won 10 games the season before, and thought he could be fixture in the Reds rotation.

Even someone with no knowledge of advanced stats could understand that Williams wasn't an MLB pitcher. This wasn't a case of overvaluating a prospect, Williams was three year veteran, with a horrible track record. It would have been better to get no one than Williams.

This trade was a breaking point for me. I stopped following the Reds closely after this trade, because it was clear to me that they were the worst organization in baseball.

mth123
05-05-2013, 01:31 AM
I agree the time was right to trade Casey, I just think he was undervalued, as were many assumed clean players from that era.

As for what the trade itself, here's my take.

First, the $8M is meaningless, imo, because Linder didn't use that money to acquire anyone else or help the team improve. He simply pocketed it, as usual.

Second, they weren't going to get anything good for Casey, but who they choose speaks volumes about O'Brian's ability to evaluate MLB talent. Dave Williams couldn't break 85 MPH with his fastball and walked around 5 batters per 9 innings. But O'Brian was impressed that he won 10 games the season before, and thought he could be fixture in the Reds rotation.

Even someone with no knowledge of advanced stats could understand that Williams wasn't an MLB pitcher. This wasn't a case of overvaluating a prospect, Williams was three year veteran, with a horrible track record. It would have been better to get no one than Williams.

This trade was a breaking point for me. I stopped following the Reds closely after this trade, because it was clear to me that they were the worst organization in baseball.

It has nothing to do with talent evaluation and everything to do with jumping when a team was dumb enough to take on that contract when similar players were available on the scrap heap. The Reds had to take Williams to even the money a bit.

Assuming the Reds had other options is the fallacy here.

fearofpopvol1
05-05-2013, 02:30 AM
I agree the time was right to trade Casey, I just think he was undervalued, as were many assumed clean players from that era.

As for what the trade itself, here's my take.

First, the $8M is meaningless, imo, because Linder didn't use that money to acquire anyone else or help the team improve. He simply pocketed it, as usual.

Second, they weren't going to get anything good for Casey, but who they choose speaks volumes about O'Brian's ability to evaluate MLB talent. Dave Williams couldn't break 85 MPH with his fastball and walked around 5 batters per 9 innings. But O'Brian was impressed that he won 10 games the season before, and thought he could be fixture in the Reds rotation.

Even someone with no knowledge of advanced stats could understand that Williams wasn't an MLB pitcher. This wasn't a case of overvaluating a prospect, Williams was three year veteran, with a horrible track record. It would have been better to get no one than Williams.

This trade was a breaking point for me. I stopped following the Reds closely after this trade, because it was clear to me that they were the worst organization in baseball.

O'Brien was fired about 6 weeks after that trade. The 2006 season was a pretty darn exciting year to tune in for a variety of reasons. The Reds almost went .500 and they were in the race until September.

757690
05-05-2013, 06:09 AM
It has nothing to do with talent evaluation and everything to do with jumping when a team was dumb enough to take on that contract when similar players were available on the scrap heap. The Reds had to take Williams to even the money a bit.

Assuming the Reds had other options is the fallacy here.

The facts just don't back up that assertion.

First, the Reds threw in $1M to help cover Casey's salary, so your claim that Williams was necessary to make the money makes no sense. If the Reds were willing to throw in $1M, then they surely were willing to throw in $2M and not have to take Williams if they really didn't like him.

It's very clear from the press releases, that O'Brian wanted Williams. He saw him as a way to upgrade the rotation. From the press release: "In our minds, he has the necessary profile to pitch in our ballpark," O'Brien said.

Second, Casey wasn't this washed up has-been that you make him out to be. He still had much more trade value than you're claiming.

He was coming off of this slash line: .312 .371 .423 .795 and was one year away from this slash line: .324 .381 .534 .915.

Everyone knew he was on the way down, but the general consensus was and should have been that he was going to drop from an above average 1B to an average 1B offensively. And that is what happened.

Casey put up this slash line with the Pirates: .296 .377 .408 .785 and this slash line for the rest of his career: .292 .352 .391 .743

That was so good that the Tigers were willing to trade a decent pitching prospect for him at the trading deadline, and took his salary. Not only that, but they then signed him to a $4M free agent deal in the off season.

Casey, even with his $8M contract, has much more trade value than Dave Williams at the time of the trade. He easily could have been traded to an AL team, like the Tigers, for a decent prospect.

mth123
05-05-2013, 09:00 AM
The facts just don't back up that assertion.

First, the Reds threw in $1M to help cover Casey's salary, so your claim that Williams was necessary to make the money makes no sense. If the Reds were willing to throw in $1M, then they surely were willing to throw in $2M and not have to take Williams if they really didn't like him.

It's very clear from the press releases, that O'Brian wanted Williams. He saw him as a way to upgrade the rotation. From the press release: "In our minds, he has the necessary profile to pitch in our ballpark," O'Brien said.

Second, Casey wasn't this washed up has-been that you make him out to be. He still had much more trade value than you're claiming.

He was coming off of this slash line: .312 .371 .423 .795 and was one year away from this slash line: .324 .381 .534 .915.

Everyone knew he was on the way down, but the general consensus was and should have been that he was going to drop from an above average 1B to an average 1B offensively. And that is what happened.

Casey put up this slash line with the Pirates: .296 .377 .408 .785 and this slash line for the rest of his career: .292 .352 .391 .743

That was so good that the Tigers were willing to trade a decent pitching prospect for him at the trading deadline, and took his salary. Not only that, but they then signed him to a $4M free agent deal in the off season.

Casey, even with his $8M contract, has much more trade value than Dave Williams at the time of the trade. He easily could have been traded to an AL team, like the Tigers, for a decent prospect.

We'll just disagree. I think it was pretty obvious that a now in his 30s Casey had started swirling around the drain by the end of 2005 and certainly wasn't worth the cost that his contract called for. People point to 2004, and it was a good year, but it was largely a result of his HR/FB rate spiking to 13.2%. 2005 was a lot like 2001, 2002, 2003 and it was pretty apparant that 2004 was an outlier. He had to be moved to clear the dead wood. Yes, the Reds added $1 Million which means that they saved $6 Million in all. I guess I just don't see a team taking that version of Sean Casey with a $6 Million cost and giving up anything of value. They weren't going to get anything any better than Dave Williams and the rotation at the time was in need of warm bodies. I suppose they could have thrown in more money and taken a marginal AA reliever like the Pirates did, but at that point two-thirds of Casey's money for the year had already been paid and the Tigers were taking on less than $2.7 Million. I think the Reds would have needed to chip in more money to get even that. That reliever turned out to be a big zero by the way and the Tigers were rewarded with a .650 OPS the rest of the way. The Tigers were a bit desperate at the time. Their hot kid, Chris Shelton, was one of those guys who came up and put up good numbers right away and couldn't adjust as the league adjusted to him. The Tigers were in a race and it had become apparant that 1B needed help. The environment at the deadline is a lot different than in the off-season. I doubt that the Tigers would have been interested at the time Casey was dealt from the Reds.

Other than a couple of early seasons, and his 2004 outlier, those stats just don't fly at 1B unless they are real, real cheap. He couldn't run, wasn't anything to write home about as a defender and if he wasn't OPSing .850+ he just wasn't worth much. The Reds unloaded his money and replaced him with better production for a fraction of the cost. I just don't see what there is to complain about here.

mth123
05-05-2013, 09:08 AM
I don't know how this all started, but we're way off topic. I'm done derailing the thread. If somebody wants to start another thread, OK, but I don't see what else there is to say about the Casey-Wiliams situation.

Sorry for derailing.

jojo
05-05-2013, 11:15 AM
I don't know how this all started, but we're way off topic. I'm done derailing the thread. If somebody wants to start another thread, OK, but I don't see what else there is to say about the Casey-Wiliams situation.

Sorry for derailing.

How about ending the tangent with everyone regardless of their feelings about Casey agreeing that it was a deal that worked out for the Reds.

_Sir_Charles_
05-05-2013, 11:16 AM
Torreyes up to AA now. Still the one that got away IMO.

http://www.milb.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?pos=2B&sid=milb&t=p_pbp&pid=591720

.321/.418/.411/.829

He doesn't have power, but he does have skills this club is sorely lacking. Solid defender, speed, hits for average, unreal contact ability, doesn't strikeout and excellent walk rate. Ummm...why did we include him again?

Tony Cloninger
05-05-2013, 02:30 PM
Torreyes up to AA now. Still the one that got away IMO.

http://www.milb.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?pos=2B&sid=milb&t=p_pbp&pid=591720

.321/.418/.411/.829

He doesn't have power, but he does have skills this club is sorely lacking. Solid defender, speed, hits for average, unreal contact ability, doesn't strikeout and excellent walk rate. Ummm...why did we include him again?

You trade enough prospects for players...one of the ones you trade is going to stick. I like Marshall a lot. I wish Wood and Sappelt would have been enough or they could have included someone else but good thing it was not Gregorious.

_Sir_Charles_
05-05-2013, 03:01 PM
Yeah I know. Doesn't change me wishing otherwise. *sigh*

REDblooded
05-05-2013, 03:27 PM
Agree... Torreyes was one of my favorites in the farm when he got dealt.

Vottomatic
05-06-2013, 10:02 AM
Update 5-6-13:

Ronald Torreyes - (Cubs minors - AA) .317, 19 games, 4 hits, 8 walks

Dave Sappelt - (Cubs) 45 at-bats, .178

Travis Wood - (Cubs) 2-2, 2.50 e.r.a., 6 starts, 39.2 IP, 24 hits, 26 K, 12 BB

Juan Francisco - (Braves) - 68 at-bats, .294, 4 HR's, 26 K's, 3 BB, .809 OPS

Brad Boxberger - Padres - 2 IP, 4 K's, 0.00 e.r.a. 0 BB

Yasmani Grandal - Padres - suspended

Yonder Alonso - Padres - 111 at-bats, .279 average, 4 HR's, .785 OPs

Edison Volquez - Padres - 3-3, 5.50 e.r.a., 37.2 IP, 45 hits, 21 K, 16 BB

Paul Janish - triple A Braves - 24 at-bats, .208 average

Donnie Joseph - KC triple A - 11 games, 11 IP, 7 hits, 3.27 e.r.a., 18 K's, 6 BB

JC Sulbaran - KC double A - 10.93 e.r.a., 6 games, 14 IP, 1.92 WHIP

Chris Dickerson - Baltimore - 13 at-bats, .308

Adam Rosales - Oakland A's - 36 at-bats, .278, .750 OPS

Jeremy Horst - Phillies - 6.59 e.r.a., 13.2 IP, 19 hits, 7 K, 4 BB

Jonny Gomes - Boston 50 at-bats, .220

Edwin Encarnacion - .223, 9 HR's, 32 games

Zach Stewart (future Cy Young Winner) - CWS AAA, 6 starts, 4.66 e.r.a., 36.2 IP, 42 hits, 23 K, 8 BB

Josh Roenicke - Twins - 10 games, 1.29 e.r.a., 14 IP, 9 hits, 10 K's

Adam Dunn - White Sox - 103 at-bats, .146 average, 6 HR's

Chris Denorfia - Padres - .302, 2 HR, 96 at-bats, .822 OPS

Jeff Keppinger - White Sox - batting .196 in 102 at-bats

Didi Gregorius - D'backs - 30 at-bats, .433, 3 HR's

Drew Stubbs - Indians - 95 at-bats, .274, 2 HR's, 4 SB, 8 BB, 29 K

Brandon Waring - Baltimore AA - .077 in 26 at-bats

Norris Hopper - no stats shown for 2013. May have retired.

Darnell McDonald - Cubs AAA - .182 in 66 at-bats

Willy Taveras - KC AAA - 59 at-bats, batting .237

REDREAD
05-06-2013, 02:38 PM
Stubbs is off to a nice start 327 OBP / 737 OPS.

Not crying over his loss or saying he will maintain it, but if he could maintain that pace, he becomes a nice player to have.

Vottomatic
05-06-2013, 02:43 PM
This thread has over 62,000 views. I wonder what thread has the most in Redszone history?

RichRed
05-06-2013, 02:46 PM
Stubbs is off to a nice start 327 OBP / 737 OPS.

Not crying over his loss or saying he will maintain it, but if he could maintain that pace, he becomes a nice player to have.

I'm skeptical whether he'll maintain it but I like that Francona has him batting 9th (in 23 of the 26 games he's played so far), rather than miscasting him as a top of the order guy.

RiverRat13
05-06-2013, 03:45 PM
Stubbs is mashing against LHP and flailing against RHP. In other words, he's doing what Drew Stubbs does. His early season stats are a bit skewed because 44% of his PA have been against lefties thus far and unless Tito is going to platoon him (or at the very least give him some days off against RHP), he's not going to face that high of a percentage of lefties all year.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.cgi?id=stubbdr01&year=2013&t=b

REDREAD
05-06-2013, 03:54 PM
I'm skeptical whether he'll maintain it but I like that Francona has him batting 9th (in 23 of the 26 games he's played so far), rather than miscasting him as a top of the order guy.

Yea, I agree, excellent move by Franconna.
As someone said in another thread. It seems they are just letting Stubbs be Stubbs.
I honestly wish Drew well (except when we play the Indians).

scott91575
05-06-2013, 04:00 PM
Stubbs is mashing against LHP and flailing against RHP. In other words, he's doing what Drew Stubbs does. His early season stats are a bit skewed because 44% of his PA have been against lefties thus far and unless Tito is going to platoon him (or at the very least give him some days off against RHP), he's not going to face that high of a percentage of lefties all year.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/split.cgi?id=stubbdr01&year=2013&t=b

It's not only that, but he just went through what will probably be his hottest streak of the year. If Stubbs stats were posted about 5 days ago, people would be here laughing and thanking god he wasn't on this team still.

As I already mentioned, Stubbs often goes through 3 game hot streaks and then does nothing. He did it all the time with the Reds, and he is doing it with Cleveland. Assuming he will hit for this average the rest of the year is a bit optimistic since he is right now at his high water mark for the year after an insane hot streak. He will most likely do what Stubbs does, struggle for a month, get hot for a few days, rinse, repeat, and end the season with a sub .700 OPS and have near 200 K's.

REDREAD
05-06-2013, 05:09 PM
It's not only that, but he just went through what will probably be his hottest streak of the year. If Stubbs stats were posted about 5 days ago, people would be here laughing and thanking god he wasn't on this team still.
.

Well, I agree that based on the last 2 years, it's not likely that Stubbs will maintain this pace.

However, it's not completely impossible.
In 2009, 196 AB, he posted a 762 OPS
In 2010, 583 AB, he posted a 773 OPS
Even 2011 wasn't horrible, a 686 OPS in 604 ABs. With Drew's other skills, a 686 OPS makes him a decent player. In fact baseball reference awarded him a 1.9 WAR that year. I'm not a huge fan of WAR, but based on that, he's an average player.

It really wasn't until 2012 that Drew became a bad player.

My point is.. It's possible that Drew could post a 700+ OPS this year. Sure, giving him a seat against tough righties skews the numbers, but isn't that smart managing to leverage Drew in situations where he's going to excell? Yes, if Drew OPSes over 700 in a platoon like situation, I agree that's not as good as if he OPSed 700 as an everyday player.

I guess my point is, the Indians might get pretty good value out of Drew.
With Bourne's injury, Drew has been a nice piece for them to have.

That doesn't mean the Reds made a mistake in the Choo trade. I still do that trade no matter what. Even if Drew ends up becoming a superstar (not likely), I have no regrets on that trade.

scott91575
05-06-2013, 06:08 PM
Well, I agree that based on the last 2 years, it's not likely that Stubbs will maintain this pace.

However, it's not completely impossible.
In 2009, 196 AB, he posted a 762 OPS
In 2010, 583 AB, he posted a 773 OPS
Even 2011 wasn't horrible, a 686 OPS in 604 ABs. With Drew's other skills, a 686 OPS makes him a decent player. In fact baseball reference awarded him a 1.9 WAR that year. I'm not a huge fan of WAR, but based on that, he's an average player.

It really wasn't until 2012 that Drew became a bad player.

My point is.. It's possible that Drew could post a 700+ OPS this year. Sure, giving him a seat against tough righties skews the numbers, but isn't that smart managing to leverage Drew in situations where he's going to excell? Yes, if Drew OPSes over 700 in a platoon like situation, I agree that's not as good as if he OPSed 700 as an everyday player.

I guess my point is, the Indians might get pretty good value out of Drew.
With Bourne's injury, Drew has been a nice piece for them to have.

That doesn't mean the Reds made a mistake in the Choo trade. I still do that trade no matter what. Even if Drew ends up becoming a superstar (not likely), I have no regrets on that trade.

I know you are not stating it was a poor trade. I am just pointing out how quickly people here post stats after a guy goes on a hot streak. Even last year Stubbs got over .700 OPS with the Reds at about this time of year without the benefit of hitting a high percentage of left handers.

I agree he should be used mostly against LHers, but many people here are very quick to post stats at peaks and valleys, especially early in the season. It is simply way too early and actually a rather poor time (after a massive hot streak) to make any kind of conclusions.

REDREAD
05-06-2013, 07:30 PM
I agree he should be used mostly against LHers, but many people here are very quick to post stats at peaks and valleys, especially early in the season. It is simply way too early and actually a rather poor time (after a massive hot streak) to make any kind of conclusions.

Yea, I agree there's a tendency to get too excited/depressed over the normal peaks and valleys early in the season :)

RichRed
05-08-2013, 10:40 AM
Yea, I agree there's a tendency to get too excited/depressed over the normal peaks and valleys early in the season :)

And just like that, it's valley time again for Stubbs. After a 0 for 11 run over the last three games, his season stats are down to .252/.304/.379 (.682 OPS).

dfs
05-08-2013, 11:07 AM
Just to add to the above list.

Justin Turner is filling in the utility slot for the mets to the tune of 341/364/415 in 45 at bats at the age of 28.

Turner is also the rare minor league second baseman who actually has a big league career. Granted it's as a utility player, but pension time is pension time.

For Ramon Hernandez the Orioles got Ryan Freel, Brandon Waring and Turner and it looks like Turner who they lost off waivers to the mets was the only thing of value they got besides salary relief.

malcontent
05-08-2013, 11:30 AM
He will most likely do what Stubbs does, struggle for a month, get hot for a few days, rinse, repeat, and end the season with a sub .700 OPS and have near 200 K's.
Agreed. And (referencing the Gregorius thread) turning that kind of offensive liability at the top of Baker's lineups into Choo wasn't going to happen without including Gregorius in the deal.

dougdirt
05-10-2013, 03:27 AM
Didi Gregorius remains on fire.

He obviously isn't nearly as good as he has shown so far, but after the game tonight where he went 2-3 with a walk and double he is hitting .422/.469/.733.

membengal
05-10-2013, 07:07 AM
Didi Gregorius remains on fire.

He obviously isn't nearly as good as he has shown so far, but after the game tonight where he went 2-3 with a walk and double he is hitting .422/.469/.733.

Unreal. Never thought he had any stretch in him like that, much less when starting out.

HokieRed
05-10-2013, 08:52 AM
Let's add in Rosales, finally healthy enough for a short stretch anyway of every day play. 44ABs: .318/.400/.477/.877. Always liked the kid; I wish him well.

Tom Servo
05-10-2013, 10:28 AM
Let's add Chris Valiaka: .219/.261/.344/.601


on second thought, let's not. Apparently he fractured his wrist other day, which is a real tough break for a guy finally getting a shot. Of course, if he continued to hit like he was, his shot was probably going to end soon regardless of injury.

Caveat Emperor
05-10-2013, 10:39 AM
Is Gookie Dawkins still playing? Can we add him too?

PuffyPig
05-10-2013, 10:55 AM
I think we need to add in Bo Hart and John Gall. And Stubby Clapp.

REDREAD
05-10-2013, 10:58 AM
And just like that, it's valley time again for Stubbs. After a 0 for 11 run over the last three games, his season stats are down to .252/.304/.379 (.682 OPS).

Hey, he's back to 693 OPS now, that's good :)
After today's game, he might stink again :)

REDREAD
05-10-2013, 11:01 AM
Let's add Chris Valiaka: .219/.261/.344/.601


on second thought, let's not. Apparently he fractured his wrist other day, which is a real tough break for a guy finally getting a shot. Of course, if he continued to hit like he was, his shot was probably going to end soon regardless of injury.

Will Chris is in the perfect situation for a guy like him.. Miami.
He should be able to stick as a utility infielder there at least until he become arb eligible.
I didn't know he had a broken wrist though, good update.

RadfordVA
05-10-2013, 11:21 AM
Didi Gregorius remains on fire.

He obviously isn't nearly as good as he has shown so far, but after the game tonight where he went 2-3 with a walk and double he is hitting .422/.469/.733.

If he turns into an All Star eventually, Kevin Towers will look like a genius. When you throw a Jeter comparison on a guy it is obvious how much you love the guy. Has to feel good for a GM when you nail something like that.

dougdirt
05-10-2013, 12:22 PM
If he turns into an All Star eventually, Kevin Towers will look like a genius. When you throw a Jeter comparison on a guy it is obvious how much you love the guy. Has to feel good for a GM when you nail something like that.

I'm sure Towers is feeling nice right now. But let's be honest, Gregorius still has the same ceiling he had before: .280 with 40 walks and 15 home runs to go along with plus defense. He just may get there a little sooner.

I wrote about Gregorius last October at MinorLeagueBall.com (http://www.minorleagueball.com/2012/10/26/3556914/didi-gregorius-will-the-bat-match-the-glove) and noted that if he could just settle on one approach at the plate rather than the 3 or 4 he seemed to use, it would benefit him. Of course, my timeline did seem a little bit off:


So what do we make of all this?

That is going to depend on what kind of player he wants to become. Right now, he has several different approaches in his game (the make-contact approach, the two-strike approach, the power approach). I think he needs to settle on one style, decide whether he wants to focus on contact or on power. The frequent shifts in emphasis and indecision could potentially be holding him back.

Gregorius will be just 23-years-old for 2013, so there is still development time on the clock. If he adopts the power approach, I suspect he'll need a full year of Triple-A to make it work. If he focuses on being a singles hitter and looks for contact, I think he'll need less time.

Kc61
05-10-2013, 12:51 PM
After his unfortunate home run the other day, as of now Juan Francisco has 83 PA, the usual low walk rate, a high strikeout rate (he had one in 2012 too), a UZR rating of 0.4.

His slash line is .295/.337/.500/.837.

I post this not to compliment Francisco so much, but to compliment the Braves. As someone who has been a fan of Francisco, I think the Braves understand this player well and are using him very effectively.

traderumor
05-10-2013, 12:59 PM
Didi Gregorius remains on fire.

He obviously isn't nearly as good as he has shown so far, but after the game tonight where he went 2-3 with a walk and double he is hitting .422/.469/.733.which probably means an 0 for 20 is lurking.

dougdirt
05-10-2013, 01:56 PM
After his unfortunate home run the other day, as of now Juan Francisco has 83 PA, the usual low walk rate, a high strikeout rate (he had one in 2012 too), a UZR rating of 0.4.

His slash line is .295/.337/.500/.837.

I post this not to compliment Francisco so much, but to compliment the Braves. As someone who has been a fan of Francisco, I think the Braves understand this player well and are using him very effectively.

His BABIP currently sits at .409. When it comes crashing back to Earth, and don't worry, it will, he is going to go back to being the .240/.280/.440 hitter that he is. Guys with 6-1 strikeout to walk ratios don't hit over the long haul.

Kc61
05-10-2013, 02:05 PM
His BABIP currently sits at .409. When it comes crashing back to Earth, and don't worry, it will, he is going to go back to being the .240/.280/.440 hitter that he is. Guys with 6-1 strikeout to walk ratios don't hit over the long haul.

I know that's your view.

Francisco frequently has a high BABIP. That's because he hits the ball very hard. It obviously won't be .409, but it's likely to be quite high.

The problem with the analysis of many on Francisco is that they focus entirely on a single weakness and virtually ignore his unusual strengths. He simply mashes most RHP and over time a good organization will find a way to make effective use of that skill. Lifetime against RHP, so far, .329 OBP, .499 SLG.

Francisco's inability to hit lefties will probably always prevent him from being a complete player. But I expect to see him contributing in meaningful games for several years to come. The Braves get this and having watched their handling of this player increases my respect for the Bravos' organization.

dougdirt
05-10-2013, 02:17 PM
I know that's your view.

Francisco frequently has a high BABIP. That's because he hits the ball very hard. It obviously won't be .409, but it's likely to be quite high.

The problem with the analysis of many on Francisco is that they focus entirely on a single weakness and virtually ignore his unusual strengths. He simply mashes most RHP and over time a good organization will find a way to make effective use of that skill. Lifetime against RHP, so far, .329 OBP, .499 SLG.

Francisco's inability to hit lefties will probably always prevent him from being a complete player. But I expect to see him contributing in meaningful games for several years to come. The Braves get this and having watched their handling of this player increases my respect for the Bravos' organization.

In 2011 and 2012 he had over 300 MLB PA's and a BABIP of .320. Normalize his current season to a .320 BABIP and he is sitting at .244/.289/.449.

Now, that of course is counting him against lefties and righties. But still, a guy who is striking out in 35% of his plate appearances who has one of the highest outside of the zone swinging rates in the game is going to see his BABIP come down over time to a normalish level. He is a useful player, but he isn't anything more than that.

Kc61
05-10-2013, 05:14 PM
In 2011 and 2012 he had over 300 MLB PA's and a BABIP of .320. Normalize his current season to a .320 BABIP and he is sitting at .244/.289/.449.

Now, that of course is counting him against lefties and righties. But still, a guy who is striking out in 35% of his plate appearances who has one of the highest outside of the zone swinging rates in the game is going to see his BABIP come down over time to a normalish level. He is a useful player, but he isn't anything more than that.

Against right handers, in 389 plate appearances lifetime, Francisco has a .376 BABIP and a 117 OPS+. And I submit that the BABIP is not mere luck but because he hits the ball so hard. Thus a .499 RH SLG. I don't think you can "normalize" him to .320 against righties.

Whatever you may project, Francisco has pretty impressive numbers against righties so far, which is how he should be measured, because he is a platoon player.

He is compared to WMP, which is incredibly misleading, because a lefty platoon hitter is far more valuable than a righty platoon hitter. And Francisco's defense has improved, and he has that dynamite arm.

I think he's better than you do, but time will tell. If the Reds had a platoon of Francisco and Frazier at third base, I think they'd be a better team.

dougdirt
05-10-2013, 05:22 PM
Last year vs RHP he had a .326 BABIP. In 2011 it was .333. In 2013 it is .471. Those are the only years in which he has had more than a handful of at bats. One of those numbers is not like the others. Even if he comes back to a .330 BABIP against righties, he still will struggle to post an OBP north of .300, which still leaves him as what I expect him to be. Useful, but not more.

malcontent
05-10-2013, 05:25 PM
If the Reds had a platoon of Francisco and Frazier at third base, I think they'd be a better team.
I agree. I do think the Braves won that trade. I just don't see Hoover as anything more than middling, certainly not dominant by any stretch.

Kc61
05-10-2013, 05:33 PM
Last year vs RHP he had a .326 BABIP. In 2011 it was .333. In 2013 it is .471. Those are the only years in which he has had more than a handful of at bats. One of those numbers is not like the others. Even if he comes back to a .330 BABIP against righties, he still will struggle to post an OBP north of .300, which still leaves him as what I expect him to be. Useful, but not more.

Only problem with that is that in 2013 JP has 70 PAs against righties. Lifetime he has 389 PAs against righties. So this year represents only 18% of his at bats v. RHP. His current, 2013 high BABIP doesn't have that much influence on his lifetime stats.

Even if you view this year as an outlier, JF clearly has a trend toward higher than average BABIP numbers against righties based on lifetime stats. Again, his lifetime BABIP v. righties is .376. And I've provided a view on why.

As I said earlier, I don't expect his 2013 BABIP so far to hold up, but looking at all of Francisco's career numbers against righties, .295/.337/.500/.837, I think he's making a significant contribution as a platoon player. And based on years of following this player, I think he is a very potent hitter against RHP.

dougdirt
05-10-2013, 05:38 PM
Only problem with that is that in 2013 JP has 70 PAs right handed. Lifetime he has 389 PAs right handed. So this year represents only 18% of his right handed at bats. It doesn't have that much influence on his lifetime stats.

So even if you view this year as an outlier, JF clearly has a trend toward higher than average BABIP numbers right handed based on overall statistics. Again, his lifetime BABIP right handed is .376. And I've provided a view on why.

As I said earlier, I don't expect his 2013 BABIP so far to hold up, but looking at all of Francisco's career numbers right handed, .295/.337/.500/.837, I think he's making a significant contribution from that side of the plate. And based on years of following this player, I think he is a very potent hitter against RHP.

Do you think he is a .295/.340/.500 hitter against right handers moving forward?

dougdirt
05-10-2013, 05:39 PM
I agree. I do think the Braves won that trade. I just don't see Hoover as anything more than middling, certainly not dominant by any stretch.

Except for that stretch that consisted of all of 2012 right?

Kc61
05-10-2013, 05:47 PM
Except for that stretch that consisted of all of 2012 right?

I agree that Hoover had a better 2012 than Francisco.

But let's not exaggerate the difference -- Hoover spent more than half the season in the minor leagues and had a pretty small sample size in the majors.

As time goes on, with both firmly established now as major leaguers, we'll see how it goes.

dougdirt
05-10-2013, 05:51 PM
I agree that Hoover had a better 2012 than Francisco.

But let's not exaggerate the difference -- Hoover spent more than half the season in the minor leagues and had a pretty small sample size in the majors.

As time goes on, with both firmly established now as major leaguers, we'll see how it goes.

I was merely pointing out that Hoover in fact has dominated "by a stretch" since the poster said he was "certainly not dominant by any stretch". Nothing more was being implied.

With that said, I will still take Hoover in the long run over Francisco, who I simply don't trust enough to hit every single day.

Kc61
05-10-2013, 05:52 PM
Do you think he is a .295/.340/.500 hitter against right handers moving forward?

If Francisco plays consistently against RHP, and say he gets 400 PAs on average as a platoon player, I think he'll probably average out around .800 OPS against righties.

I'd guess .325 OBP and .475 SLG.

His overall OPS will probably be a bit lower because he will inevitably get some at bats against lefties, which will bring him down to, maybe, .785-790.

I could see Francisco having some much bigger years than that against righties, but I'd assume an average of about .800 v. righties because of the relatively low OBP.

Good enough to start against RHP at third base for the Braves for several years IMO.

Kc61
05-10-2013, 05:59 PM
I was merely pointing out that Hoover in fact has dominated "by a stretch" since the poster said he was "certainly not dominant by any stretch". Nothing more was being implied.

With that said, I will still take Hoover in the long run over Francisco, who I simply don't trust enough to hit every single day.

I hope you are right since Hoover is a Red. I have no problem with Hoover and wouldn't begin to compare a talented relief pitcher to a talented platoon third baseman. Apples and oranges. No way for me to compare them fairly.

dougdirt
05-10-2013, 06:19 PM
I hope you are right since Hoover is a Red. I have no problem with Hoover and wouldn't begin to compare a talented relief pitcher to a talented platoon third baseman. Apples and oranges. No way for me to compare them fairly.

It is a tough comparison. But for me, I will take a strong reliever over a guy who can't start. I see Hoover as a strong reliever and Francisco as a guy who can't start.

Vottomatic
05-12-2013, 11:00 AM
For playing on a last place team, Wood is putting up some good numbers.

3-2, 7 starts, 46 IP, 29 hits allowed, 2.33 e.r.a., 14 BB, 34 K, .179 average against him, WHIP 0.93.

Some will argue the league hasn't seen him enough. I disagree. He's been around long enough.

I'll give him props.

scott91575
05-12-2013, 12:39 PM
For playing on a last place team, Wood is putting up some good numbers.

3-2, 7 starts, 46 IP, 29 hits allowed, 2.33 e.r.a., 14 BB, 34 K, .179 average against him, WHIP 0.93.

Some will argue the league hasn't seen him enough. I disagree. He's been around long enough.

I'll give him props.

He has been pitching well, but I wouldn't point to the league not seeing him. I would point to his .202 babip, which is incredibly low. He is not a bad pitcher, but he is not great either. His line drive rate of 17% is a bit lower than the league average of about 20%, yet not by much. His strikeout rate and walk rate are right around average. All of that adds up to a pretty lucky pitcher, especially since the Cubs are not a good fielding team.

Patrick Bateman
05-12-2013, 03:44 PM
Wood has turned himself into a pretty competent pitcher. Would probably take him over Leake at this point, but would be pretty close.

But I think anyone who sees him as much more than that is getting fooled by the sample size.

dougdirt
05-12-2013, 03:49 PM
Wood is one of those guys who seems to have a small ability to control his BABIP. In 2011, it was high, but we also know that in 2011 he was having real problems throwing his cutter. For his career, in 411 innings, he has a .265 BABIP. While his current BABIP should rise from the .200 mark it is at right now, he has a history of being one of the guys who seems to be able to keep his BABIP lower than the league.

dougdirt
05-12-2013, 11:08 PM
Gregorius went 2-5 today with a double and a triple. Getting it done.

scott91575
05-12-2013, 11:11 PM
Gregorius went 2-5 today with a double and a triple. Getting it done.

and he is 4 for his last 19.

dougdirt
05-12-2013, 11:21 PM
and he is 4 for his last 19.

And 21 for his last 58.

Patrick Bateman
05-12-2013, 11:24 PM
Love the small sample size debates (ie. nitpicking which numbers mean something).

Didi is doing well, but means nothing until he does it well for longer.

dougdirt
05-12-2013, 11:26 PM
Love the small sample size debates (ie. nitpicking which numbers mean something).

Didi is doing well, but means nothing until he does it well for longer.

I was really just jabbing back at a 4 for 19 sample with a "this season" sample.

Clearly Didi isn't this good. I don't need a sample size to know that. With that said, I think the notion that Didi Gregorius is just a slap hitter can be put to rest with this sample size for those who did make that assessment.

scott91575
05-13-2013, 12:04 AM
Love the small sample size debates (ie. nitpicking which numbers mean something).

Didi is doing well, but means nothing until he does it well for longer.

That is pretty much what I was getting at. I was giving him a jab for posting about 1 game and stating "getting it done." I too can find small sample sizes that shows he is not getting it done.

The guy has 64 PA's. I like the updates, but the editorials here are often laughable.

I guess if we want to stick to this season as some sort of conclusion, he is one of the worst clutch hitters in the league. He is batting .000 with runners in scoring position (0 for 9).

Oh, and he got thrown out at home today while on 3rd base and 1 out. The next hitter singled.

scott91575
05-13-2013, 12:34 AM
BTW...Drew Stubbs just went 0-3 with 3 K's (after getting a day off to avoid Verlander). He is now 3 for his last 24 with 9 K's and no extra base hits. OPS down to .658.

dougdirt
05-13-2013, 12:36 AM
That is pretty much what I was getting at. I was giving him a jab for posting about 1 game and stating "getting it done." I too can find small sample sizes that shows he is not getting it done.

The guy has 64 PA's. I like the updates, but the editorials here are often laughable.

I guess if we want to stick to this season as some sort of conclusion, he is one of the worst clutch hitters in the league. He is batting .000 with runners in scoring position (0 for 9).

Oh, and he got thrown out at home today while on 3rd base and 1 out. The next hitter singled.

Clearly his season isn't some conclusion. But the guy is hitting to cover off of the ball to start the season.

scott91575
05-13-2013, 12:47 AM
I am going to continue a theme here since many only post when players are going well.

Yonder Alonso - 5 for his last 25. OPS still a respectable .743 considering where he plays half the time.

Dave Sappelt - It's pretty much all bad. .451 OPS and a -1.4 UZR

Brad Boxberger - Has pitched 3.2 scoreless innings in 2 mop up appearances.

Edinson Volquez - 2 quality starts in a row to bring his ERA down to 5.15. Only walked 7 in those 2 starts.

Ronald Torreyes - 5 for last 27 with 2 doubles. OBP still over .400, but now slugging .375.

Yasmani Grandal - Found a new supplement supplier that swears it won't show up on drug tests.

scott91575
05-13-2013, 12:50 AM
Clearly his season isn't some conclusion. But the guy is hitting to cover off of the ball to start the season.

I agree, but he has cooled off recently. He also doesn't walk much (which was true in the minors) and I really don't expect him to continue to hit for power. He only had 1 year in the minors over .400 slugging. Guys get hot. Heck, even Drew Stubbs gets hot. I just think some here have gone a little overboard with some former player starts.

dougdirt
05-13-2013, 01:03 AM
I agree, but he has cooled off recently. He also doesn't walk much (which was true in the minors) and I really don't expect him to continue to hit for power. He only had 1 year in the minors over .400 slugging. Guys get hot. Heck, even Drew Stubbs gets hot. I just think some here have gone a little overboard with some former player starts.

He went 0-8 over the two games before today. I guess that is cooling off. After tonight, he is hitting .323/.364/.548 so far in May.

My point about the power wasn't that he was going to hit 25 home runs, but that he isn't some slap hitter. Just like Drew Stubbs wasn't, even though his minor league numbers may have suggested it. But some people certainly suggested that both guys were slap hitters because of their minor league numbers.

dougdirt
05-13-2013, 01:04 AM
Best thing about Torreyes so far? 14 walks and 6 strikeouts.

scott91575
05-13-2013, 01:20 AM
He went 0-8 over the two games before today. I guess that is cooling off. After tonight, he is hitting .323/.364/.548 so far in May.

My point about the power wasn't that he was going to hit 25 home runs, but that he isn't some slap hitter. Just like Drew Stubbs wasn't, even though his minor league numbers may have suggested it. But some people certainly suggested that both guys were slap hitters because of their minor league numbers.

Like I stated, 4 for 19. His BABIP is .400. His line drive rate is high, so I will give him that (even those numbers are above your typical line drive numbers). Yet only 3 walks so far. In all honesty, I see him as a .300 to .320 at best OBP guy with some years under .300. He also is not going to slug .655. Let's face facts, he is most likely a .450 type guy at best. So I see a .770 ceiling for him and will probably be a low to mid .700 guy. Which for a shortstop in today's league, especially one with a good glove, is not too bad. I see him probably being an above average SS. Yet that is as far as I would go, and I can even see him completely flame out if he is not good at making adjustments.

Of course I could be wrong and maybe he is the next Nomar Garciaparra (a SS who ended up hitting much better in the pros during his prime). Yet even Nomar was a .800+ OPS guy in the minors with stints where he was well above that.

I do agree, he is not a slap hitter. Yet he is certainly not a power hitter either. If he ends up being a .800+ OPS guy with a OBP above average I will be rather surprised, and not even this hot start has changed my opinion on that.

dougdirt
05-13-2013, 01:43 AM
I don't think anyone is arguing that what he is doing right now is anywhere near what he is. I haven't seen it. Heck, I think his ceiling is probably as a .750 OPS type of guy.

Not sure anyone has suggested he is a power hitter, though I could have missed that.

I just think you are arguing things that no one has said.

scott91575
05-13-2013, 01:49 AM
I don't think anyone is arguing that what he is doing right now is anywhere near what he is. I haven't seen it. Heck, I think his ceiling is probably as a .750 OPS type of guy.

Not sure anyone has suggested he is a power hitter, though I could have missed that.

I just think you are arguing things that no one has said.

Not all are arguments, more are simple statements. Yet there has been some major excitement and conclusions made on trades based on the very early season numbers.

Don't forget, the Arizona GM compared him to Jeter. So I may not be arguing with anyone in particular here, but come on, Didi has been talked up way too much. I am sort of getting tired of it, especially with his hot start.

dougdirt
05-13-2013, 01:50 AM
Not all are arguments, more are simple statements. Yet there has been some major excitement and conclusions made on trades based on the very early season numbers.

In this thread? Who has drawn conclusions about anything from 2013 so far? I didn't see you quote any of those posts, hence all of this confusion about where exactly you are coming from.

scott91575
05-13-2013, 03:33 AM
In this thread? Who has drawn conclusions about anything from 2013 so far? I didn't see you quote any of those posts, hence all of this confusion about where exactly you are coming from.

You have not seen the conclusions about trading Leake instead of Wood, Stubbs being a .750 OPS player, and trading Cozart instead of Didi? Heck, even the speculation of "if Didi is an all star Towers looks like a genius." It's all a bit too much. Maybe I will become the richest man in the world, but I don't think anyone should spend too much time on that hypothetical.

Not all in this thread, and some have been moved out of this thread IIRC. There are whole other threads on the subjects based on stuff in this thread. Plus, there is really only 1 person actually bumping this thread with general info. The rest is "oh look, [insert name] has these numbers." Oh no! The Reds may have not given up junk! Ya know, like someone bumping it after a 2 for 5 game.

dougdirt
05-13-2013, 03:52 AM
You have not seen the conclusions about trading Leake instead of Wood, Stubbs being a .750 OPS players, and trading Cozart instead of Didi? Heck, even the speculation of "if Didi is an all star Towers looks like a genius." It's all a bit too much.

Sure I have. Several pages ago.

But let's jump into it. Would it shock anyone if Travis Wood wound up better than Mike Leake? If Didi Gregorius turns into an All-Star caliber shortstop, doesn't Kevin Towers look like a genius, especially if he does it sooner rather than later? Stubbs.... I just don't know about that one. But the other two?



The rest is "oh look, [insert name] has these numbers." Oh no! The Reds may have not given up junk! Ya know, like someone bumping it after a 2 for 5 game.

I am simply happy that Didi is doing well. I like him, both as a person and as a player. I root for him to do well. He is doing well. This thread is appropriate for talking about how he is doing, is it not?

RadfordVA
05-13-2013, 04:52 AM
You have not seen the conclusions about trading Leake instead of Wood, Stubbs being a .750 OPS player, and trading Cozart instead of Didi? Heck, even the speculation of "if Didi is an all star Towers looks like a genius." It's all a bit too much. Maybe I will become the richest man in the world, but I don't think anyone should spend too much time on that hypothetical.



Towers could look like a genius because he loved Didi because of his athleticism and felt he would grow into a much different player because of it. Anyone can look at a player having good numbers in minors and say hey I think he will be good in majors. He looked at it from his scouting background and seen potential for much more. It is way early but he has to be encouraged by the start.

If you don't like talk about small samples possibly being an introduction to something more you should probably avoid forums until August.

scott91575
05-13-2013, 05:24 AM
Sure I have. Several pages ago.

But let's jump into it. Would it shock anyone if Travis Wood wound up better than Mike Leake? If Didi Gregorius turns into an All-Star caliber shortstop, doesn't Kevin Towers look like a genius, especially if he does it sooner rather than later? Stubbs.... I just don't know about that one. But the other two?



I am simply happy that Didi is doing well. I like him, both as a person and as a player. I root for him to do well. He is doing well. This thread is appropriate for talking about how he is doing, is it not?

No, this thread is about tracking the progress of players the Reds traded. When you ignore the bad and only post the good with your own personal "hooray," you are manipulating the purpose of the thread. Please start your own "hurrah for Didi" thread and stop manipulating this thread for your own personal party. Didi is doing well. Good for him. Yet when you ignore the fact he is 4 for his last 19, and in fact mocking it, and then stating he is doing work thanks to a 2 for 5 day, you are making a mockery of it. So please get off your high horse and simply admit you are willing to ignore the bad and exalt the good in order to justify your own personal beliefs. There is even a whole Didi thread for that to be done.

You in fact tried to mock me for stating a simple truth. You provided a one day sample for people, and I in fact provided the rest of the information you conveniently left out since the last report on him. You are biased, and it's pretty clear. If you would have just stated his overall progress I would have left well enough alone. Yet you did not, and you in fact are responding to other people from other threads, something you seem rail against me for. You felt the need to continue to state how well he is doing while leaving out the fact he was hitless in his previous two days. The only person who has had any decent sensibility in this thread has been the OP, and I applaud him for that. Yet your views on someone you clearly have a personal like for has skewed your views.

As for your other statements, as far as Kevin Towers goes, you know the full reason people make those statements is giving validity to his recent stats making him an all star. As for Travis Wood, I have stated my thoughts on that and went into full depth into why he was dealt instead of Leake. It was not even all about skill as a pitcher. Wood had 1 option left at best (that one is still a little hazy), the Reds just traded for Latos, and Chapman was slated to be the 5th starter. Leake had 3 options left. So talent was not the only thing, and on top of that I have stated why Wood is not even a superior option on multiple occasions. It was and still is a tossup at best.

scott91575
05-13-2013, 05:27 AM
Towers could look like a genius because he loved Didi because of his athleticism and felt he would grow into a much different player because of it. Anyone can look at a player having good numbers in minors and say hey I think he will be good in majors. He looked at it from his scouting background and seen potential for much more. It is way early but he has to be encouraged by the start.

If you don't like talk about small samples possibly being an introduction to something more you should probably avoid forums until August.

If you don't like the fact small sample sizes are poor, perhaps you should avoid baseball entirely.

This thread is about updates, and that is fine. Not cherry picking random days where they do well, or making grandiose statements about their future. I, in all honesty, have in fact mocked them and perhaps I shouldn't have. Yet when people ignore the bad and only post the good it is is poor form. So is the inverse. If people stop only posting something they like, I will not post what they don't like.

OGB
05-13-2013, 06:02 AM
Dude...chill out. If you want to make a point of updating this daily, then fine, but most people only think to mention something here if it's "so and so went 4-5 with a HR" or "what's his face struck out 4 times today giving him 11 over his last 26 ABs."

You don't need to take someone's recognition of a player's good day as a personal jab that you need to defend. If someone said "Didi with another 2-5 day, boy are we going to regret that trade," then maybe it's worth some debate.

scott91575
05-13-2013, 06:46 AM
Dude...chill out. If you want to make a point of updating this daily, then fine, but most people only think to mention something here if it's "so and so went 4-5 with a HR" or "what's his face struck out 4 times today giving him 11 over his last 26 ABs."

You don't need to take someone's recognition of a player's good day as a personal jab that you need to defend. If someone said "Didi with another 2-5 day, boy are we going to regret that trade," then maybe it's worth some debate.

Actually, if you look on this thread, most people outside of the OP don't make a point of updating with bad stats. Like I stated before, the OP (I really need to look up his name, but I am a lazy, lazy man) has done a good job of just doing updates. Other than that, it's mostly been people biding their time waiting to post a hot streak by someone they thought would be a good player with the Reds. yet instead the Reds dealt that player.

I am not taking it as a personal jab (well, besides the time it was and stated as much). I just hate something that started as a thread that actually looks back on a Reds trade with objectivity, but became something else. It becomes a thread about "oh dear God why did we deal that guy?!" Overall stats with updates from the last update are great. I enjoy that. Yet when people update 1 day or a random hot streak and ignore the rest, well, that is just poor form. Why haven't people posted about Stubb's recent cold streak? Why did Didi go through a 2 for 14 streak before Doug decided he was doing work? Why was it a big deal before that, and then suddenly nothing? Why are there no posts about Stubbs being below .600 before his hot streak? That is my point.

Make updates, not cherry picking stats because you liked them.

As for chilling out, I am not upset in the least. I am articulating an opinion. Sometimes that can be done with brevity, and sometimes it cannot. The length or the matter at hand does not purvey anger.

RadfordVA
05-13-2013, 07:15 AM
Make updates, not cherry picking stats because you liked them.



Everyone "cherry picks stats". If it is not a career line then it has selective end points.

Sometimes small samples indicate possibility of a trend continuing and some people would like to talk about those possibilities. Everything that is a change starts out as small sample. Jose Baustista's power outburst started out as a couple hot weeks. I don't see anyone that stated the start to a season is proof of anything, only a possibility of future success.

TRF
05-13-2013, 10:47 AM
don't a lot of players cool off after a concussion? I'm not saying DiDi is the next Barry Larkin, but man...

REDREAD
05-13-2013, 03:18 PM
You have not seen the conclusions about trading Leake instead of Wood, Stubbs being a .750 OPS player, and trading Cozart instead of Didi? Heck, even the speculation of "if Didi is an all star Towers looks like a genius." It's all a bit too much. Maybe I will become the richest man in the world, but I don't think anyone should spend too much time on that hypothetical.
.

Well, I think I was the only one praising Stubbs in this thread for having a decent start to the season.
I wasn't trying to say that the Reds screwed up or that he would maintain this.
I think IF Stubbs can OPS 700, he's a decent player. Not a star, but a decent player. In no way am I predicting what he will end up as. He's a flawed player.

I think it's fair to say that "if Didi ends up being an allstar, then Towers is a genius".
Lots of people just assumed AZ got hosed in that three way deal. It's possible that when that trade is looked at in 5 years, maybe AZ ends up winning the trade.
Not out of the question that Bauer washes out, the Reds only get one year of Choo (and the supplemental FA draft pick washes out), while Didi is a solid SS for AZ for 6 years. Am I predicting that? No. But it's possible.

No offense, but try to relax.. This is just talking about ex-Reds in this thread. I guess I don't see people grandstanding around saying "I was RIGHT ABOUT STUBBS". "Trading Didi WILL HAUNT"... It's kind of funny to see the stats rise and fall in this early season... People have their favorite traded players, and are happy to see them doing well. People also like to see their "goats" struggle after being traded. It's human nature.

I would still rather have Leake than Wood, but maybe Wood ends up being the better pitcher... too early to tell for sure. Both pitchers need everything to work well for them to have success, although I think Leake has a little bit more margin for error with his sinker and his ability to throw 4 pitches for strikes.

Tony Cloninger
05-14-2013, 10:28 AM
Travis Wood = Three Fingers Brown.
First starter for the Cubs to have 8 straight starts of 6 innings and 3 ER or less...to begin the season since Brown.
I still say 3 ER in 6 innings is not a QS....but it is hard to believe that no one has been able to achieve that as a Cubs pitcher since old Mordecai.

Travis is also a pretty good hitting pitcher as well.

Yonder would have been nice to keep if he could have played LF, but he is no longer able to use the ballpark in SD as an excuse to be a Sean casey light. They reconfigured that park to help the hitting. I still like him but he is more like James Loney as a hitter right now.