-
Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Four out of the last five games Heisey has been the starter, and he's rewarded the Reds by going 7-of-17, striking out only once. Is the job now his for the rest of the year as long as he stays afloat?
I'm inclined to say yes.
The Reds have made it clear they're not going to move Bruce to center, but they also haven't given any indication they're content with the utter lack of production from Stubbs in the past month. It seems to me the Reds are ready to see if Heisey can handle the job full-time. I imagine Stubbs will still get a spot start here or there, but I think Heisey is your starter the rest of the season... especially if he maintains a .750 OPS going forward.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Reading the tea leaves, I think Baker is frustrated with Stubbs' lack of improvement and looking for other options at this point. The extreme valleys are no longer worth the occasional long ball, supposed defense, and extra half-step on the basepaths. Baker perhaps sees the near 900 second-half OPS this season and the September/ October 931 OPS last season and figures he can live with the (supposed) poorer defense for the uptick in power, obp, and overall offense.
I'm guessing Heisey's going to get a lot more time from here forward. If he catches fire (as he did last September, as he appears to be doing now), it could be the difference between simply playoff baseball and a World Series title.
He's proven to be a league average or better bat and his defensive metrics show him to be somewhere from average to slightly above. I would have liked to have seen Baker make the move earlier, but late is better than never.
Having said that, I'm perhaps biased. I hate Stubbs' play, for the most part. And I really like the way Heisey plays (though his lack of walks frustrate, especially when a pitcher can't seem to find a plate).
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
4th OF > 5th OF. Heisey over Stubbs for now with Stubbs playing against LHP and in late game defensive switches.
Begs the question, would moving Bruce to CF once or twice a week be that big a drop defesively? I don't think he'd be that much a noticeable change from Heisey.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
According to every defensive metric I've seen, Heisey is around league average or better. Stubbs is about the same.
The drop from Stubbs defensively = the drop from Heisey defensively
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Scrap Irony
According to every defensive metric I've seen, Heisey is around league average or better. Stubbs is about the same.
The drop from Stubbs defensively = the drop from Heisey defensively
I don't know if I believe the metrics around Stubbs' defense, but if I'm playing along, I could see how Heisey's aggressiveness and willingness to lay out for a ball could bridge the gap considering Drew's timidness around the wall and on balls falling in front of him.
It might not be a necessary thing for a good defender, but off the top of my head, I can't recall even one time Drew has dived for a ball.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Stubbs doesn't play shallow enough to make consistently great OOZ plays, IMO. He has very good range due to his speed, he's below average near the wall, and he's not often willing to dive/ risk letting a ball get behind him.
He's simply a passive player offensively and defensively, IMO.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
When you run as fast as Stubbs does it is better to run full speed through the spot where the ball is going to land than it is to dive for it. You have to slow down to dive. I know diving is all the rage these days because it gets you on the highlight reels on ESPN, but diving is not smart when you are running full speed. On top of that, most of the time when a guy dives he could have just run to the spot and made the catch anyway, but chose to use the more dramatic dive play instead. I would estimate 90% of dives are unnecessary. Some of them are just plain comical the way guys hold back then dive at the last moment to get a cheer out of the crowd and an out-of-zone play on their UZR.
Diving helps infielders more than outfielders. Infielders are taking one or two steps before diving. They are not going full speed, so diving doesn't slow them down and is often the fastest way to stretch out for a ball.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Like Scrap said, I wish Heisey walked more. And had a higher baseball IQ. He does quite a few things that make you scratch your head. That being said, he's much more enjoyable to watch than Stubbs.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Scrap Irony
According to every defensive metric I've seen, Heisey is around league average or better. Stubbs is about the same.
The drop from Stubbs defensively = the drop from Heisey defensively
Heisey has 480 innings logged in CF. That's worth around 60 AB's on the hitting side. Basically, UZR tells us next to nothing about Heisey's defense in CF. Way too small of a sample size to have any real meaning, or reflection of his true skill and talent there.
Btw, UZR is the only defensive rating system that equates Heisey and Stubbs. Total Zone, Range Factor and Tango's Fan Rating all have Stubbs significantly better in CF than Heisey. Stubbs is above average in all of them, and Heisey is average or below average. Again, sample size is so small for Heisey that it doesn't mean much, but just getting tne facts out there.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Brutus
Four out of the last five games Heisey has been the starter, and he's rewarded the Reds by going 7-of-17, striking out only once. Is the job now his for the rest of the year as long as he stays afloat?
.
Heisey hasn't started four of the last five in CF. Stubbs started every game v. Arizona in CF.
Heisey got two starts in Arizona, but in RF and LF.
Over the last 11 games, since the Philly series began on 8/20, Heisey has started in CF three times, on 8/20, on 8/26 and on 8/31.
In that span he started in LF once, RF once, he pinch hit four times, he came in defensively in LF once, he DNP twice.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
757690
Heisey has 480 innings logged in CF. That's worth around 60 AB's on the hitting side. Basically, UZR tells us next to nothing about Heisey's defense in CF. Way too small of a sample size to have any real meaning, or reflection of his true skill and talent there.
Btw, UZR is the only defensive rating system that equates Heisey and Stubbs. Total Zone, Range Factor and Tango's Fan Rating all have Stubbs significantly better in CF than Heisey. Stubbs is above average in all of them, and Heisey is average or below average. Again, sample size is so small for Heisey that it doesn't mean much, but just getting tne facts out there.
On Baseball-Reference, Heisey grades out as slightly above average (13 runs, in fact, if extrapolated to 1,200 innings). Stubbs is 12 per those same 1,200 innings. Admittedly, he also grades out as below average (slightly) in range factor; then again, when compared to CF, so does Stubbs.
You may scream sample size, and that's certainly a valid question as to Heisey's numbers. But there's really only one way to fix that, isn't there?
I dismiss Tango's Fan Rating as nothing more than style points from eyes that cannot gauge accurately what's happening with the glove.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kc61
Heisey hasn't started four of the last five in CF. Stubbs started every game v. Arizona in CF.
Heisey got two starts in Arizona, but in RF and LF.
Heisey has played more lately but in various different positions in the outfield.
Yep. Dusty has already gone on record saying that he's sticking with Stubbs.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
max venable
Yep. Dusty has already gone on record saying that he's sticking with Stubbs.
Dusty has stopped short of saying he's sticking with Stubbs. He hasn't sold him down the river publicly, but that isn't the same as saying he's sticking with him. I think you'd be hard pressed to find a recent statement from Dusty saying Stubbs will continue to start.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Heisey is hot now so he may play more, but there is no indication Stubbs has lost his job. Dusty's comment in the Fay blog "He'll be back in there" suggests that Stubbs is simply getting some time to regroup.
My guess is that Heisey will get a lot of playing time in September. He is hot at the plate. Reds will want to rest guys with a big lead. Chris will play all the outfield positions. I'd expect Ludwick to get some rest in September as well.
But when Game 1 of the playoffs comes around, I expect Stubbs in CF. Hitting lower in the lineup with Votto back, Phillips at lead off, Cozart second, Stubbs seventh.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
I'm betting a weekend off or so for Stubbs. His defense is too good to not have out there.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kc61
Heisey is hot now so he may play more, but there is no indication Stubbs has lost his job. Dusty's comment in the Fay blog "He'll be back in there" suggests that Stubbs is simply getting some time to regroup.
My guess is that Heisey will get a lot of playing time in September. He is hot at the plate. Reds will want to rest guys with a big lead. Chris will play all the outfield positions. I'd expect Ludwick to get some rest in September as well.
But when Game 1 of the playoffs comes around, I expect Stubbs in CF. Hitting lower in the lineup with Votto back, Phillips at lead off, Cozart second, Stubbs seventh.
Time to regroup may well be an indefinite timetable with no guarantee of a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Given the way Dusty operates in the media, I wouldn't expect him to come out and say if Stubbs were going to lose his job. It's possible this is temporary, but we're not going to know based on Dusty's comments.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Brutus
Time to regroup may well be an indefinite timetable with no guarantee of a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Given the way Dusty operates in the media, I wouldn't expect him to come out and say if Stubbs were going to lose his job. It's possible this is temporary, but we're not going to know based on Dusty's comments.
"He'll be back in there" was Dusty's quote in the Fay blog.
It's possible Dusty meant as a pinch runner, or a defensive replacement, or for another team, or in a different profession. But most likely, Dusty meant that Drew will be back playing most of the time in CF.
As others have said, the Reds value his defense. I'd expect Stubbs as the primary CFer until the team acquires a new player, maybe this off-season.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Quote:
Time to regroup may well be an indefinite timetable with no guarantee of a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Given the way Dusty operates in the media, I wouldn't expect him to come out and say if Stubbs were going to lose his job. It's possible this is temporary, but we're not going to know based on Dusty's comments.
Exactly. Although I had noticed a certain similarity in the way Dusty was talking about Stubbs over the past week and the way in which he talked about Soft J near the end of his regular playing time. Dusty doesn't speak directly about it usually, but when he starts saying things like "He wants it more than anyone" and "It's hard for all of us to watch" and "It tears your heart out," I think that's his way of signaling the end is near. As if on cue, Stubbs got his long office meeting this weekend. I don't think if this was a temporary thing it would have been such a long meeting. I look for Heisey and Stubbs to basically swap places now.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
There's a difference between "Stubbs has problems playing at the wall" and "Stubbs is a conservative defender" -- I think the latter is absolutely true. Frankly, with a quality pitching staff, I'd rather he didn't take chances that turn singles into doubles and doubles into triples. Give your pitcher a chance to get out of the inning.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
I'm fine with the way Stubbs plays defense. I agree that diving is overrated at best and harmful in many cases. His speed turns a number doubles into singles and even outs and he hardly ever turns singles into doubles or triples by diving.
However, I'm absolutely not fine with what Stubbs has been bringing to the plate. It doesn't work for a #2 hitter and frankly doesn't work anywhere. I expect Heisey will get some more playing time short term, but I'd be surprised if Drew doesn't get some time in CF batting #7 once Votto comes back to see if he can find his comfort zone before the playoffs. Clearly the Reds think they are better defensively with Stubbs in CF or they would have made this switch much sooner.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kc61
"He'll be back in there" was Dusty's quote in the Fay blog.
It's possible Dusty meant as a pinch runner, or a defensive replacement, or for another team, or in a different profession. But most likely, Dusty meant that Drew will be back playing most of the time in CF.
As others have said, the Reds value his defense. I'd expect Stubbs as the primary CFer until the team acquires a new player, maybe this off-season.
Stubbs will still get PT was all Dusty was saying. I really feel going forward Stubbs will get less time. Dusty held a closed-door, 30 minute meeting with Stubbs. To me, that screams "We're making some changes, keep your head up." Of course, it's all speculation. But Dusty is trying to handle this with respect for Stubbs, while doing what's best for the team. Which is playing Stubbs less.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Scrap Irony
He's simply a passive player offensively and defensively, IMO.
That's a very interesting way to put it.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Stubbs is the better and smarter CF... I can agree with him being "passive" in CF, but I'd rather have that than turn bloops into extra base hits like Heisey did this week. Diving for the balls isn't the issue, diving for them in those situations and when you don't have a chance (a la Ryan Freel) isn't very smart. Stubbs arm is better and gets the ball to the correct cut off man with a good throw nearly 100% of the time. Play Heisey till his bat cools off, but they need Stubbs D in CF especially in bigger parks.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Wonderful Monds
I don't know if I believe the metrics around Stubbs' defense, but if I'm playing along, I could see how Heisey's aggressiveness and willingness to lay out for a ball could bridge the gap considering Drew's timidness around the wall and on balls falling in front of him.
It might not be a necessary thing for a good defender, but off the top of my head, I can't recall even one time Drew has dived for a ball.
Dive? Heck, on those balls in front of him, I don't remember him ever even catching one on the run or while he was moving. He runs to a spot and if he can't beat the ball there and catch it while standing still, he pulls up and plays it on the hop. Its why so many hits fall in front of him. I think UZR is pretty shaky but if Stubbs UZR is unimpressive, those plays he doesn't make in front of him are why IMO.
I don't really want him to dive. but he doesn't need to pull up when the ball is still 15 feet in the air and two steps in front of him.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kc61
Dusty's comment in the Fay blog "He'll be back in there" suggests that Stubbs is simply getting some time to regroup.
As in back in there today. Against a RHP. Is there something more to this or does Heisey need "a rest" after playing so well of late.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Heisey is simply the lesser of two evils right now, but he's still no more than a reserve OFer pressed into a regular role.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
corkedbat
Heisey is simply the lesser of two evils right now, but he's still no more than a reserve OFer pressed into a regular role.
I'm still not convinced of that. He has a career .768 OPS. The average CF is .730. I don't see any reason he couldn't be an average starter out there on an everyday basis.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Stubbs back in the starting lineup, batting 2nd for tonights game.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Brutus
I'm still not convinced of that. He has a career .768 OPS. The average CF is .730. I don't see any reason he couldn't be an average starter out there on an everyday basis.
He's a career 103 OPS+ guy (95 OPS+ and 100 wRC+ this season) with a 105 wRC+ who plays CF (again, according to objective metrics) at a higher than league average level.
Hmmm...
Better than league average bat
Better than league average defense in CF
Better than league average speed
I realize he's not Matt Kemp out there, but he's a damn sight better than anything Drew Stubbs has offered over the past two years.
-
Stubbs starting tonight, batting second. The more things change...
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Brutus
I'm still not convinced of that. He has a career .768 OPS. The average CF is .730. I don't see any reason he couldn't be an average starter out there on an everyday basis.
This, this, a thousand times this.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RedEye
This, this, a thousand times this.
Ultimately I don't worry about CF because I'm confident the Reds can get by in 2012 either way and I expect a change in that position next year.
But we should remember that Stubbs missed time in June and Heisey didn't hit when he got the chance. Heisey was below .600 OPS that month and the game threads on RedsZone were wondering when Stubbs would return. (Heisey has had good months too, but in June he was he was the CFer for an extended period.)
The bottom line, though, is that Walt wants superior defense in key positions and he obviously doesn't see Chris as providing that in CF. He likes Stubbs' defense. It's just obvious that defense is driving this train.
Funny thing is that Heisey, defensively, is one of the best LEFT fielders I've seen. He's really outstanding out there. I also like his power and his hustle. There are things about his game I don't like, but he's been valuable overall.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kc61
Ultimately I don't worry about CF because I'm confident the Reds can get by in 2012 either way and I expect a change in that position next year.
But we should remember that Stubbs missed time in June and Heisey didn't hit when he got the chance. Heisey was below .600 OPS that month and the game threads on RedsZone were wondering when Stubbs would return. (Heisey has had good months too, but in June he was he was the CFer for an extended period.)
I'm guessing it's a pretty short list of players who don't have some stretch of 83 PAs with below a .600 OPS.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
nate
I'm guessing it's a pretty short list of players who don't have some stretch of 83 PAs with below a .600 OPS.
LOL, it's a pretty long list of ballplayers who got a month to prove themselves and failed and never got another chance.
Yes, anyone can have a bad month. But when you have an audition it's a good idea to do well right then. Frazier did well when he took over for Rolen. Now he's basically a regular.
It's may be unfair but so far Chris hasn't had another full time CF opportunity since June. Maybe he will get one, maybe not. That's sports.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
nate
I'm guessing it's a pretty short list of players who don't have some stretch of 83 PAs with below a .600 OPS.
That is true, but based on the eye test, Chris seems more prone to slumps when given regular starting duties.
That is, however, not an endorsement that he should not be given the chance, because I think he should. Ultimately, while these 2 players are our primary CF options, I think the solution is to play the hot hand (or rather the one who is not slumping) until one of them seizes the role.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Wonderful Monds
That is true, but based on the eye test, Chris seems more prone to slumps when given regular starting duties.
That is, however, not an endorsement that he should not be given the chance, because I think he should. Ultimately, while these 2 players are our primary CF options, I think the solution is to play the hot hand (or rather the one who is not slumping) until one of them seizes the role.
Even if you assumed an eye test was a safe way to draw such a conclusion, when has he really ever been given "regular starting duties" long enough to determine he's "more prone to slumps?"
Just a cursory look at his game logs shows he's only made at least a week's worth of starts consecutively once in his career (this year when Stubbs went on the DL). So I honestly don't see how anyone should believe they have enough data to know whether someone was prone to slumps given such limited opportunity.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Brutus
Even if you assumed an eye test was a safe way to draw such a conclusion, when has he really ever been given "regular starting duties" long enough to determine he's "more prone to slumps?"
Just a cursory look at his game logs shows he's only made at least a week's worth of starts consecutively once in his career (this year when Stubbs went on the DL). So I honestly don't see how anyone should believe they have enough data to know whether someone was prone to slumps given such limited opportunity.
I recall several stints last year when he was given regular time in the OF, though yes, this is all based on memory so I concede completely that I could be mistaken. At any rate, I think his stats warrant another regular go at it out there.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Wonderful Monds
I recall several stints last year when he was given regular time in the OF, though yes, this is all based on memory so I concede completely that I could be mistaken. At any rate, I think his stats warrant another regular go at it out there.
Looking back at last year, it appears he never started more than five games in a row and that only happened once (to end the season).
He started four games in a row one other time.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Brutus
Looking back at last year, it appears he never started more than five games in a row and that only happened once (to end the season).
He started four games in a row one other time.
Just curious, do you have the numbers on what the greatest % of games he started through any stretch of the season? He might not have played every game in a row, but got a day or two off.
-
Re: Is Heisey now the incumbent?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Wonderful Monds
Just curious, do you have the numbers on what the greatest % of games he started through any stretch of the season? He might not have played every game in a row, but got a day or two off.
It's something I'd have to look up manually. I guess it depends how long a stretch we're talking. Two weeks? Three? A month?