Originally Posted by _Sir_Charles_
No I didn't. Especially when you consider that Votto missed considerable time, Ludwick & Rolen struggled mightily for extended periods in the first half, and Stubbs had his worst season to date. All that, and guess what, we STILL had an offense that scored runs at a rate right in the middle of the NL. We STILL had the 4th best run differential in the NL. And we STILL won 97 games, 1 win off the NL lead. I'd say our offense was fine. Could it improve? Certainly....but heck, so could the pitching. A +81 run differential and 97 wins tell me that they don't "need" more offense.
For the Reds to rest on their laurels would be a terrible, terrible mistake.
They won 97 games but played the Cubs and Astros about 36 times. They were fortunate to play in a division with two of the weakest teams in baseball, and the Reds took full advantage.
The Reds also had an amazing steak of good luck with the health of their starting pitching. And their closer was Hall of Fame quality, at least for one year. Next season they may have to rely more on offense.
With the Reds' OBP needs and failures against RHP, I just can't see the Stubbs/Heisey tandem in CF again.
How the Reds go about fixing it is a good question, there are alternatives, but sitting on their hands to me isn't a good option.