Re: Uncle Part II: Stop the Madness in CF
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RedEye
I agree with you that the Reds brass may not actually adopt any of the possible solutions, for whatever reason, and most likely for the sake of "roles" and continuity in the OF. But I think it's pretty clear that Bruce, Heisey and (probably) Robinson would all be better -- i.e., more "viable" -- CF than Choo going forward. In the case of both Bruce and Heisey, we have MLB level evidence that this is the case. In the case of Robinson, we have an athletic, fast fielder who looks the part and (I believe) has played there in the minors.
I would argue the "pretty clear" part where Bruce is concerned. The MLB evidence you're citing is 35 games as a rookie, a season in which his competition for the spot was the anemic Corey Patterson and right field was manned by Ken Griffey Jr. And Bruce was moved to right the instant Junior was traded. It didn't exactly scream "center fielder of the future."
Now, one could argue that if he'd spent the offseason prepping to play CF and had played CF so far this season, he could be doing a little better than Choo has. But that's not the same thing as saying, if you flipped them today, he'll be better tomorrow.
I do believe Heisey and Robinson as a pair would be better, but Heisey's not here and Robinson's bat won't play every day all summer long, so we either live with Choo's defense in center or we bounce him back and forth depending on who else is playing that day. That's not optimal either. And then, if Ludwick does return for the stretch run and we make the playoffs, Choo's going to be playing center in the postseason. So there's an argument for leaving him there and giving him every scrap of experience he can get.
Having said all that, it certainly wouldn't shock me if the Reds made a July deal for a rent-a-center-fielder.
Re: Uncle Part II: Stop the Madness in CF
Quote:
Originally Posted by
coachpipe
They dont have one..they just want to be the "told ya choo couldnt play CF" group
Bruce came up as a centerfielder and came into camp in shape to play center. He gets better reads and jumps on the ball than choo. He'd be better in center than choo. Solution 1
Robinson or heisey when he returns. Solution 2
Hamilton from AAA: solution three
The most feasible would be Bruce. It woulfnt cause a shifting platoon and could still leave open the option to acquire a left fielder.
Re: Uncle Part II: Stop the Madness in CF
Quote:
Originally Posted by
IslandRed
I would argue the "pretty clear" part where Bruce is concerned. The MLB evidence you're citing is 35 games as a rookie, a season in which his competition for the spot was the anemic Corey Patterson and right field was manned by Ken Griffey Jr. And Bruce was moved to right the instant Junior was traded. It didn't exactly scream "center fielder of the future."
Now, one could argue that if he'd spent the offseason prepping to play CF and had played CF so far this season, he could be doing a little better than Choo has. But that's not the same thing as saying, if you flipped them today, he'll be better tomorrow.
I do believe Heisey and Robinson as a pair would be better, but Heisey's not here and Robinson's bat won't play every day all summer long, so we either live with Choo's defense in center or we bounce him back and forth depending on who else is playing that day. That's not optimal either. And then, if Ludwick does return for the stretch run and we make the playoffs, Choo's going to be playing center in the postseason. So there's an argument for leaving him there and giving him every scrap of experience he can get.
Having said all that, it certainly wouldn't shock me if the Reds made a July deal for a rent-a-center-fielder.
I suppose with Bruce it's a judgment call. But I'd be willing to put money on him being at least as good as Choo after running down some balls and taking angles in practice for a few weeks or so. He's still in his 20's and has good fundamentals in the OF even if his speed is not what it was at 21. My guess is that the only reason that this hasn't been done already is for sake of continuity. I think Walt et al. know that Choo most likely won't be here next year, so don't want to move Jay for such a short period.
My claims about Heisey were of course contingent on health. But when he comes back, I think the lineup I'd most like to see is:
Choo-Heisey-Bruce (60% of the time)
Choo-Robinson-Bruce (20% of the time)
Paul-Bruce-Choo or Paul-Choo-Bruce (20% of the time)
This gets Chris the majority of the AB's in CF (Dusty did say at one point that this was supposed to be "his time") and it removes Choo from CF most if not all the time. When/if Ludwick comes back, things can be reassessed.
Re: Uncle Part II: Stop the Madness in CF
I'll start this with the caveat that I'm skeptical of the defensive stats that place some hypothetical run value (any stats that do that actually), but for sake of argument, what would the total equation work out to if Bruce and Choo switched positions? Assuming Bruce would be an upgrade in CF, I'd make a corresponding assumption that Choo would be a downgrade in RF. Since the Reds rotation and bullpen are predominantly Right-Handed, I think we can assume that teams are going to continue to load up with LH Bats against the Reds. With those bats, I presume, hitting a fairly decent percentage of their OF Balls in play to the pull side (RF) would the net gain in Centerfield less the net loss in RF really amount to anything? Bruce has saved a lt of runs playing RF. Would Choo save as many or would the gain in CF be wiped out by a loss in RF?
Assume Choo moves to LF and Robinson moves into CF. Choo has a plus arm out there. I honestly don't know enough about Robinson's arm to say, but if Robinsons arm is a downgrade and some guys start taking extra bases on balls in Right Center, how much is that worth? I can see the net gain in CF vs LF being a little bigger for the Reds. One reason an unsure fielder in LF is better than in RF or CF is the proximity to 3B. With the shorter throw, the LF can be a little slower to the ball on base hits to LF with a lot less risk of a runner on 1B moving to 3B. Similarly, a slight bobble on a hit would open the door for a guy moving first to 3rd a lot more in RF or CF than it would in LF (arm strength is obvious, but with Choo that's a non-issue). Couple the arm factor potentially allowing extra bases in CF as compared to Choo's plus arm with the downgrade in LF and I wonder how many runs a switch of Choo and Robinson would really be worth. Choo's plus arm would be mostly wasted in LF, but its not a major factor unless Robinson has a poor arm.
My suspicion is that a switch would accomplish a lot less than most on here think it would. There is no guarantee that Bruce would be much better in CF and we know that he's pretty darned good in RF and a switch may serve to do no more than remove a strength with little to no real upgrade in CF. I personally don't think Choo is as bad as he's made out to be. I've seen a few plays that aren't being made, and one on Sunday was costly, and he's certainly below average, but I think he's adequate out there. If there was an obvious switch that could be made, I'd surely make it, but the switches available internally aren't a sure thing. Robinson/Heisey instead of Choo and his splitty LH bat against a LHP seems pretty obvious. Beyond that, the solutions proposed against RHP are iffy and I suspect wouldn't accomplish much.
Re: Uncle Part II: Stop the Madness in CF
People who think Shin Soo Choo is a "downright awful" defender have extremely short memories as Reds fans.
Re: Uncle Part II: Stop the Madness in CF
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RedEye
So should we accept mediocrity out there just because there have been worse CF?
No, but it should prevent some overreacting and help provided a proper perspective.
Re: Uncle Part II: Stop the Madness in CF
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Caveat Emperor
People who think Shin Soo Choo is a "downright awful" defender have extremely short memories as Reds fans.
So should we compare everyone's play to others from the past? In that case, Xavier Paul is a gold glover, because Adam Dunn roved out there for a while.
Re: Uncle Part II: Stop the Madness in CF
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Caveat Emperor
No, but it should prevent some overreacting and help provided a proper perspective.
I understand what you are saying, but that doesn't change Choo's defensive abilities. They still aren't good.
Re: Uncle Part II: Stop the Madness in CF
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Caveat Emperor
No, but it should prevent some overreacting and help provided a proper perspective.
A proper perspective is he's a bad defender in CF.
Re: Uncle Part II: Stop the Madness in CF
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RedEye
So should we accept mediocrity out there just because there have been worse CF?
Chris Heisey had an 88 OPS+ last year and 29 OPS+ this year. You want him 60% of the time.
And this is supposed to prevent mediocrity?
Re: Uncle Part II: Stop the Madness in CF
This is insane! If the Reds wanted a guy who could rove CF and run down every ball all the while hitting .230 with a .300 OBP, they would have kept Stubbs.
Choo > Stubbs > Heisey
Re: Uncle Part II: Stop the Madness in CF
I think Stubbs in CF and Choo in LF vs. Choo in CF and Paul/Robinson in LF would be a very interesting debate.