PDA

View Full Version : Have the Reds done enough this Winter....



40YrRedsFan
12-26-2012, 04:16 PM
....to WIN the World Series? We've added Choo, Hannahan, and Donald, kept Broxton and Ludwick, traded away Stubbs, lost Navarro, Valdez, Bray, & Cairo to free agency, and might have Rolen back. The addition of Choo should improve our top of the lineup considerably over the revolving door we had there last season. But the other new acquisitions are question marks at best. Hannahan hit in the .240 range. Donald hit just above the Mendoza line at about .202.
Doesn't sound to me that these bench players are much of an upgrade over what we had last season.
I just keep asking myself if we can Win a World Series with our offense the way it is. Except for Choo in for Stubbs, we have the same lineup as last year. We had serious stretches where we couldn't score at all last year. The last month and the playoffs should be proof of that. Will Votto come back as Votto? Who knows. What about Mesoraco? He had a miserable time at the plate last year. Right now I would rate us anywhere from #6 to #9 in team power rankings. We are not there with the Nats, Angels, Dodgers, Blue Jays, etc. I think we need another bat in the lineup. Your thoughts?

RedTruck
12-26-2012, 05:11 PM
....to WIN the World Series? We've added Choo, Hannahan, and Donald, kept Broxton and Ludwick, traded away Stubbs, lost Navarro, Valdez, Bray, & Cairo to free agency, and might have Rolen back. The addition of Choo should improve our top of the lineup considerably over the revolving door we had there last season. But the other new acquisitions are question marks at best. Hannahan hit in the .240 range. Donald hit just above the Mendoza line at about .202.
Doesn't sound to me that these bench players are much of an upgrade over what we had last season.
I just keep asking myself if we can Win a World Series with our offense the way it is. Except for Choo in for Stubbs, we have the same lineup as last year. We had serious stretches where we couldn't score at all last year. The last month and the playoffs should be proof of that. Will Votto come back as Votto? Who knows. What about Mesoraco? He had a miserable time at the plate last year. Right now I would rate us anywhere from #6 to #9 in team power rankings. We are not there with the Nats, Angels, Dodgers, Blue Jays, etc. I think we need another bat in the lineup. Your thoughts?

I disagree. Adding Choo changes the WHOLE dynamic of the lineup. We had the worst lead off OBP and AVG in all of MLB. Adding a run producer like Choo is like a chain effect...and having BP be in the number 2 slot instead of Cozart (who should be in the 7th hole) should help as well.

Point is, by adding Choo and BP in the 1 and 2 spot gives Votto the opportunity to actually DRIVE in runs. So many times, SO many times, it was just Votto batting with 2 outs, because of the inability of Stubbs or Cozart to get on base.

Votto will be fine, he said he's feeling better and better.

Mesoraco? Who cares? Hannigan is surely a better catcher at this stage of the game..offensively, defensively, and just pure knowledge of pitching.

At the end of the day, we won't win by our offense. We'll win by our pitching and our bullpen and our defense.

webbbj
12-26-2012, 05:21 PM
Im very interested to see how the choo addition affects BPs production. He normally been a .333 OBP guy. With more ABs w/ a runner on and w/ Votto right behind him I think his OBP could take a nice jump.

Red Raindog
12-26-2012, 05:30 PM
Im very interested to see how the choo addition affects BPs production. He normally been a .333 OBP guy. With more ABs w/ a runner on and w/ Votto right behind him I think his OBP could take a nice jump.

I'm thinking the same way as you - kind of wish we had Navarro but it shouldn't be the deal breaker for the team.

bigredmechanism
12-26-2012, 05:46 PM
Point is, by adding Choo and BP in the 1 and 2 spot gives Votto the opportunity to actually DRIVE in runs. So many times, SO many times, it was just Votto batting with 2 outs, because of the inability of Stubbs or Cozart to get on base.

Bingo.

UPRedsFan
12-26-2012, 06:02 PM
Just doing a little math on the impact of the improved OBP in the top 2 spots in the order. Before Phillips was inserted in the leadoff spot we had Stubbs/Cozart 1 and 2. Stubbs on base % was .277 and Cozart .288.

Assume 600 plate appearances for each and the same OBP and that equates to 338 times on base combined from the top 2 spots.

Now replace those 2 with Choo (.373 OBP) and Phillips (.321 OBP) and it's 415base runners from the top 2 spots in the order. So that's 77 more base runners for Votto over the season and 77 less outs in the lineup. Maybe another 20 - 25 rbi for Votto.

Red Raindog
12-26-2012, 07:41 PM
Just doing a little math on the impact of the improved OBP in the top 2 spots in the order. Before Phillips was inserted in the leadoff spot we had Stubbs/Cozart 1 and 2. Stubbs on base % was .277 and Cozart .288.

Assume 600 plate appearances for each and the same OBP and that equates to 338 times on base combined from the top 2 spots.

Now replace those 2 with Choo (.373 OBP) and Phillips (.321 OBP) and it's 415base runners from the top 2 spots in the order. So that's 77 more base runners for Votto over the season and 77 less outs in the lineup. Maybe another 20 - 25 rbi for Votto.

let's not ignore that Rolen will not be in the 4 hole for part of the year - which should impact the runs scored too.

MoneyInTheBank
12-26-2012, 08:14 PM
....to WIN the World Series? We've added Choo, Hannahan, and Donald, kept Broxton and Ludwick, traded away Stubbs, lost Navarro, Valdez, Bray, & Cairo to free agency, and might have Rolen back. The addition of Choo should improve our top of the lineup considerably over the revolving door we had there last season. But the other new acquisitions are question marks at best. Hannahan hit in the .240 range. Donald hit just above the Mendoza line at about .202.
Doesn't sound to me that these bench players are much of an upgrade over what we had last season.
I just keep asking myself if we can Win a World Series with our offense the way it is. Except for Choo in for Stubbs, we have the same lineup as last year. We had serious stretches where we couldn't score at all last year. The last month and the playoffs should be proof of that. Will Votto come back as Votto? Who knows. What about Mesoraco? He had a miserable time at the plate last year. Right now I would rate us anywhere from #6 to #9 in team power rankings. We are not there with the Nats, Angels, Dodgers, Blue Jays, etc. I think we need another bat in the lineup. Your thoughts?

Donald's .202 and Hannahan's .244 will be replacing Cairo's .176 and Valdez's .206, so they will be a 70 point improvement. Hannahan is an absolute whiz with the glove and Donald is no slouch either. No, the bench players they acquired will not put them over the top but they are definitely an improvement over what was there last year.

On top of Choo for Stubbs there is also Frazier for Rolen. Votto will be fine. Mesoraco will be better than last year. I have a hard time believing he will continue a .234 BABIP considering his minor league track record.

The teams in the World Series last year were 11th & 12th in runs scored so they don't need to be tops in the league to reach the World Series

Fireball
12-27-2012, 03:58 PM
Let's not overlook the move of Chapman to the starting rotation.

Essentially what the Reds have gone this offseason is acquire a potential stud starting pitcher, trade for a GOOD leadoff hitter, and improve their bench.

They may not be the favorites to win the NL with these improvements, but they're serious contenders. This team just doesn't have any holes right now, and you can't really say that about any other NL team besides the Nationals and maybe the Dodgers.

smixsell
01-09-2013, 06:38 PM
Yes, they have.:beerme:

Now we just need to go out and COMPETE for it.:usa:

drowg14
01-09-2013, 06:45 PM
They have done more than enough. The Giants have proven it's not about the best team, it's about getting to the playoffs. The Reds already had one of the best teams in the NL, and are now probably one of the best 3 teams in the majors IMO. They shouldn't have too much issue getting back to the playoffs with the additions they made.

And once you get to the playoffs, it's alot of luck. The Giants were not the best team in the NL. The Tigers were not the best team in the AL.

TSJ55
01-09-2013, 06:57 PM
The Reds added some good pieces to an already good team. Now, they have to make the playoffs again and then man up in key spots.

Drowg was right about his first point of making the playoffs. After that it has nothing to do with luck and everything to do with production. The Giants and Tigers were the best team in their respective playoffs. Their World Series appearance is indisputable proof.

scott91575
01-09-2013, 07:36 PM
They shouldn't have too much issue getting back to the playoffs with the additions they made.

http://ibankcoin.com/jakegint/wp-content/imagescaler/990df0d53a189bd828b43d298a61f627.jpg

SweetLou1990
01-09-2013, 07:44 PM
The biggest hole, IMO, is the loss of Chapman in the bullpen and therefore the use of Broxton in the bullpen. I think everyone will be paying close attention to Broxton for that reason.

But yes, the Reds will contend!:D

drowg14
01-09-2013, 07:45 PM
The Reds added some good pieces to an already good team. Now, they have to make the playoffs again and then man up in key spots.

Drowg was right about his first point of making the playoffs. After that it has nothing to do with luck and everything to do with production. The Giants and Tigers were the best team in their respective playoffs. Their World Series appearance is indisputable proof.

Production in a small sample size like a 5 or 7 game series is about getting "hot" at the right time. These small samples are very prone to be affected my random noise such as babip or hr/fb flucuations, or by a couple errors.

The Giants shouldn't have even gotten out of the first round. The Giants got lucky that Votto wasn't really Votto, Cueto got hurt in his first inning which messed with Latos' scheduled starts and cost us our best pitcher, and that Leake had to be called in to start a game to replace him. I remember in game 3, the Reds first inning (I think?) was going real well, until a baserunning error which killed a rally. And since both teams had good pitching, the 1 or 2 runs which could have scored changed the entire dynamic of the game, just as Cueto getting hurt changed the entire dynamic of the series.

I'm sure the Reds also had some luck fall there way as well, but my point is that playoffs in any sport have alot of error involved with them. The longer the playoffs are, the less likely you are to have the actual "best team" become the champion. This is why the NBA/NHL playoffs are such a joke. They have a long (82 game) season, and yet over half of the teams (16/30) make the playoffs. This is why I am so against the addition of the second wild card. Just adds more randomness/luck to an already hectic equation.

Salukifan2
01-09-2013, 07:45 PM
At the end of the day, we won't win by our offense. We'll win by our pitching and our bullpen and our defense.

From what ive heard Stubbs was the only reds outfielder with a positive defensive WAR last season including Choo. Ludwick will be a year older and choo isn't the type of guy who will be able to bail out the slow footed bruce and luddy

TSJ55
01-09-2013, 08:12 PM
Production in a small sample size like a 5 or 7 game series is about getting "hot" at the right time. These small samples are very prone to be affected my random noise such as babip or hr/fb flucuations, or by a couple errors.

The Giants shouldn't have even gotten out of the first round. The Giants got lucky that Votto wasn't really Votto, Cueto got hurt in his first inning which messed with Latos' scheduled starts and cost us our best pitcher, and that Leake had to be called in to start a game to replace him. I remember in game 3, the Reds first inning (I think?) was going real well, until a baserunning error which killed a rally. And since both teams had good pitching, the 1 or 2 runs which could have scored changed the entire dynamic of the game, just as Cueto getting hurt changed the entire dynamic of the series.

I'm sure the Reds also had some luck fall there way as well, but my point is that playoffs in any sport have alot of error involved with them. The longer the playoffs are, the less likely you are to have the actual "best team" become the champion. This is why the NBA/NHL playoffs are such a joke. They have a long (82 game) season, and yet over half of the teams (16/30) make the playoffs. This is why I am so against the addition of the second wild card. Just adds more randomness/luck to an already hectic equation.

Come on man. The team(s) that should have won, did. Luck played zero factor in anything. The Reds controlled their own destiny and choked it away. It really is that simple.

Making excuses, passing the buck, and shifting the locus of control to unforseen forces, like "destiny" or "fate" or "pre-destination" doesn't fly.

If the boys play like they're capable, they will be in good shape. If they shy away from the moment, their golf season will start early again.

drowg14
01-09-2013, 09:06 PM
Come on man. The team(s) that should have won, did. Luck played zero factor in anything. The Reds controlled their own destiny and choked it away. It really is that simple.

Making excuses, passing the buck, and shifting the locus of control to unforseen forces, like "destiny" or "fate" or "pre-destination" doesn't fly.

If the boys play like they're capable, they will be in good shape. If they shy away from the moment, their golf season will start early again.

Randomness/luck and fate/destiny are the exact opposite. In no way are they related. The Giants were not the best team in the NL this year. The Nats were better, the Reds were better. The Tigers were not the best team in the AL last year. They weren't even the best team in there division until late in the year when the Sox fell off a bit. They just played better in the post season, a sample size which is a small fraction of a 162 game season.

Luck playing a significant factor in all sports playoffs systems is actually a fairly common concept. Saying "The Reds controlled their own destiny and choked it away. It really is that simple." isn't really adding to your argument either. A team choking away a series to me infers that THAT is the team that should have won, and they just couldn't put it away (like the Yankees in 2004). I am in no way trying to "pass the buck". The Giants won the WS, and they were a good team. They beat the Reds in a fairly played short series. I was making a statement about the volatiliy of tournament systems in sports and you turned it into some sort of attack on the Giants.

Do you think that the Cards were the best team last year? The Giants the year before? The Marlins in 97/03? How many times has a wild card team won the WS over the past few years?

TSJ55
01-09-2013, 10:16 PM
Randomness/luck and fate/destiny are the exact opposite.
They're all terms used to get around taking responsibility for poor play when used in terms of competition. Acceptable in poker I guess, but not in baseball.


Do you think that the Cards were the best team last year? The Giants the year before? The Marlins in 97/03? How many times has a wild card team won the WS over the past few years

"Best" is a subjective term and I shouldn't have used it. My bad. In all those examples, the team that should have won did. They scored more runs before making 27 outs.

I know I've derailed the thread but I see "luck" thrown around in here all the time and gets me worked up.

Salukifan2
01-09-2013, 11:32 PM
I see "luck" thrown around in here all the time and gets me worked up.

here here

SweetLou1990
01-10-2013, 08:36 PM
They're all terms used to get around taking responsibility for poor play when used in terms of competition. Acceptable in poker I guess, but not in baseball.



"Best" is a subjective term and I shouldn't have used it. My bad. In all those examples, the team that should have won did. They scored more runs before making 27 outs.

I know I've derailed the thread but I see "luck" thrown around in here all the time and gets me worked up.

Cueto getting hurt and the Reds activating Leake is due to injury. AKA bad luck. THe REds did not plan on having Leake on their roster but had to activate him. That is not choking it away, that is getting your Ace hurt and activating a guy not on the 25 man roster. Yeah, there were other things to, but you gotta admit this could be considered "bad luck". ALso, I am all for accountability and owning up, where it applies. Not in that circumstance.

smixsell
01-10-2013, 09:19 PM
Production in a small sample size like a 5 or 7 game series is about getting "hot" at the right time. These small samples are very prone to be affected my random noise such as babip or hr/fb flucuations, or by a couple errors.

The Giants shouldn't have even gotten out of the first round. The Giants got lucky that Votto wasn't really Votto, Cueto got hurt in his first inning which messed with Latos' scheduled starts and cost us our best pitcher, and that Leake had to be called in to start a game to replace him. I remember in game 3, the Reds first inning (I think?) was going real well, until a baserunning error which killed a rally. And since both teams had good pitching, the 1 or 2 runs which could have scored changed the entire dynamic of the game, just as Cueto getting hurt changed the entire dynamic of the series.

I'm sure the Reds also had some luck fall there way as well, but my point is that playoffs in any sport have alot of error involved with them. The longer the playoffs are, the less likely you are to have the actual "best team" become the champion. This is why the NBA/NHL playoffs are such a joke. They have a long (82 game) season, and yet over half of the teams (16/30) make the playoffs. This is why I am so against the addition of the second wild card. Just adds more randomness/luck to an already hectic equation.

Spot on.

PS Lets hope a little more experience will help avoid some of that "bad luck" next time around. (like maybe Johnny will take it a little bit easier in his pregame warmups :))

TSJ55
01-11-2013, 01:29 PM
Cueto getting hurt and the Reds activating Leake is due to injury. AKA bad luck. THe REds did not plan on having Leake on their roster but had to activate him. That is not choking it away, that is getting your Ace hurt and activating a guy not on the 25 man roster. Yeah, there were other things to, but you gotta admit this could be considered "bad luck". ALso, I am all for accountability and owning up, where it applies. Not in that circumstance.

Injury is part of the game, not "bad luck". Good teams Man Up and win in spite of it. The Giants had their share of injury too if I remember correctly.

HometownHero
01-11-2013, 06:42 PM
From what ive heard Stubbs was the only reds outfielder with a positive defensive WAR last season including Choo. Ludwick will be a year older and choo isn't the type of guy who will be able to bail out the slow footed bruce and luddy

Those three's bats will cover any type of defensive issues, plus Stubbs was only a +2 DRS this year to move his mark to +1 in his career so the mild boost in defense isn't worth playing his negative offense of a 61 OPS+ in 2012 and just 86 in career.