Feast or famine

[Old school 1983]

I put this on a post in another thread but I think it's definitely worth it's own discussion because in my mind its been an isdue for a few seasons now.

My overall take on the reds lineup is this: way too feast or famine. They may average 5 runs a game but that's a very deceiving stat. They'll light up a so so pitcher for 10 or 15 then go 3 or 4 games where they struggle to score 1 or 2. They really only have what I want to call 2.5 hitters that will work a count and give a good tough at bat and not continually swing for the fences. Those guys are choo votto and Phillips when he is on. I put Bruce and Frazier in the power feast or famine group. They catch fire or are cold. Bruce is showing signs of plate discipline this year. Cozart seems like a dead pull hitter prone to cold streaks. The book on Mez is still out for me but he is doing a good job of getting on thus far. Heisey really us just a replacement but he needs more discipline at the dish. But the swing from the heels hot and cold nature of most of the reds lineup leads to our scoring situation. When on or versus so so pitching its like a slow pitch softball game. When off or versus tougher pitching the bats aside from choo votto and Phillips at times look undisciplined and unable to work a tough at bat. I think the best way to improve the reds lineup and make it more consistent will be to bring in more disciplined bats that work pitchers and string solid hits together rather than relying on home runs or streaky hot hitters. When was the last time that we saw a reds team that clukd consistently string good at bats and singles or walks together against an above average pitcher. I dont care if this team can light up the marlins for 8 or a good teams worst pitcher for 15 or get a lucky inning agsinst the cardinals. Those situations do not happen in the playoffs when winning matters more. I think in order make the team a more disciplined group at the plate Walt may have to pull the trigger on trades that may not be too popular in reds country at the time but on the whole will make the team better much like the joe Morgan trade in the 70s

[Redsfansince72]

LF SS and Catchers not hitting enough is ridiculous. when you have 2 players leading the MLB in OBP Choo and Votto and you are not winning, what does that say about the lineup?? Cozart is dissapointing and so is Hiesey. But Dusty wont fix the problems, so Walt will have to Dusty the lineup again. a Bonafied clutch hitter batting 4th and Phillips hitting 2nd to move the runner Choo can help this offense. Willingham should be gone after if Ludwick is out any longer. this team looks lost on the road like deer in the headlights lost and this year so far much better at home. 1-7 on the road and the schedule doesnt get easier the next 6 days, they better not come home winning only 1 game on this road trip. THAT is not a Championship made club. Doesnt sell tickets either...

[Old school 1983]

LF SS and Catchers not hitting enough is ridiculous. when you have 2 players leading the MLB in OBP Choo and Votto and you are not winning, what does that say about the lineup?? Cozart is dissapointing and so is Hiesey. But Dusty wont fix the problems, so Walt will have to Dusty the lineup again. a Bonafied clutch hitter batting 4th and Phillips hitting 2nd to move the runner Choo can help this offense. Willingham should be gone after if Ludwick is out any longer. this team looks lost on the road like deer in the headlights lost and this year so far much better at home. 1-7 on the road and the schedule doesnt get easier the next 6 days, they better not come home winning only 1 game on this road trip. THAT is not a Championship made club. Doesnt sell tickets either...

Left field is a black hole offensively. I'm liking mesoracos approach at the plate so I think the hitting situation at catcher will improve. Cozart has no business batting 2 against a good pitcher. He's a dead pull hitter. A good pitcher will just throw him outside and induce a found out or double play. Given that I still love cozarts D. And I think looking at the defense would give a good view of who to keep and who not to. Mes/hanigan catching. d good. Keep them. Votto and Phillips are going nowhere. Cozart plays awesome defense. I'd keep him unless I was blown away. Bruce's D in right saves runs. I'd keep him. If he hit in the 8 hole he'd a fine hitter. LF to me isn't an issue. Center is. Choo is not a center fielder. He makes the easy plays but he just doesn't get to balls that even average center fielders get to. Move him to left. Another defensive weakness I see is third. Frazier makes the easy plays but sometimes he doesn't. And I see at least one ball a game where I think a better defender at third would get to. So Frazier a feast or famine power guy in my eyes could be the odd man out because he has lower quality defense but still would have value in a trade due to his plus power.

[Old school 1983]

Cozart bat 8th not Bruce in previous post.

[marcshoe]

LF SS and Catchers not hitting enough is ridiculous. when you have 2 players leading the MLB in OBP Choo and Votto and you are not winning, what does that say about the lineup?? Cozart is dissapointing and so is Hiesey. But Dusty wont fix the problems, so Walt will have to Dusty the lineup again. a Bonafied clutch hitter batting 4th and Phillips hitting 2nd to move the runner Choo can help this offense. Willingham should be gone after if Ludwick is out any longer. this team looks lost on the road like deer in the headlights lost and this year so far much better at home. 1-7 on the road and the schedule doesnt get easier the next 6 days, they better not come home winning only 1 game on this road trip. THAT is not a Championship made club. Doesnt sell tickets either...

Out of curiosity, what's your definition of "winning"? Every game? You do realize that before last night, they had won 8 of ten?

[Old school 1983]

Out of curiosity, what's your definition of "winning"? Every game? You do realize that before last night, they had won 8 of ten?

I know that this question isn't directed at me but maybe I can explain my take on it. Sure we are winning but like I said in my original post we are supposed to beat teams like the cubs marlins and an aging phillies team. We are an above average team with excellent pitching. We are supposed to beat lesser teams. Sure that's winning but it's not the winning I really care about. We are a good enough team at this point to be able to be supposed to win those games. I care about our performance against playoff caliber teams versus their best pitching. The kind that we will see in the playoffs. When I see the reds hit against above average pitching the reds can get choo on and votto on but the two hole isn't giving quality at bats and hitting or at least getting runners over and aside from when Phillips was hot and playing above his offensive skill level, there has been no one consistently giving quality at bats post votto in the lineup and consistently driving he and choo in. So more or less to me to play winning baseball against quality teams with quality pitchers on the mound (which will mimic playoff situations as far as skill level) the reds are not cutting it as far as lineup performance consistency.

[New York Red]

"Feast or famine" is the perfect description of this team's offense up to this point.

[Beltway]

This article is more about the Cardinals than the Reds, but the Reds are #2 on the list.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-i...of-sequencing/

[Old school 1983]

This article is more about the Cardinals than the Reds, but the Reds are #2 on the list.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-i...of-sequencing/

Cool article. I definitely think sequencing could show offensive over performance. The cardinals seem to string performance together with runners on in tight itch situations. I'm sure luck plays a factor in this but on the whole when I watch the cardinals play they seem as a group to have more patient at bats than the reds and try to do less swinging from the heels with runners on and just try to put the ball in play and allow luck to happen. The reds on the other hand as far as I see have their overall performance skewed due to sequencing because, unlike the cards, who are the 27 Yankees on steroids as the article puts it, with runners on (which may have to due with overall player development and team approach with RISP) the reds are the 27 Yankees on steroids versus average to below average pitching and against tougher pitching can't string hits together.

[Beltway]

Cool article. I definitely think sequencing could show offensive over performance. The cardinals seem to string performance together with runners on in tight itch situations. I'm sure luck plays a factor in this but on the whole when I watch the cardinals play they seem as a group to have more patient at bats than the reds and try to do less swinging from the heels with runners on and just try to put the ball in play and allow luck to happen. The reds on the other hand as far as I see have their overall performance skewed due to sequencing because, unlike the cards, who are the 27 Yankees on steroids as the article puts it, with runners on (which may have to due with overall player development and team approach with RISP) the reds are the 27 Yankees on steroids versus average to below average pitching and against tougher pitching can't string hits together.

I'm not so sure the Cardinals are really more patient. I don't have pitches seen per PA handy, but the Reds have 99 BBs to the Cardinals 55 (http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/team/_/.../type/expanded). The Reds have the second-most BBs in MLB, while the Cardinals have the 24th most. I think some of the Cardinals' success is due to luck, but it looks to me like their philosophy is more about hitting the first good pitch they see. I guess it's less about patience and more about discipline. Their low strikeout total (8th fewest in MLB) gives me the impression that they know a good pitch when they see it (and they swing at it) and they know how to lay off the bad pitches. The Reds, on the other hand, take too many strikes, which is patient, but not disciplined. This is evidenced by their high walk and high strikeout totals (3rd in MLB).

[texasdave]

NL CENTRAL   0 OR 1   10 or more
CINCINNATI	8	5
ST. LOUIS	2	3
PITTSBURGH	3	1
MILWAUKEE	4	1
CHICAGO 	5	0

[Beltway]

I can't find P/PA as a team stat anywhere, but just browsing the ESPN individual hitting statistics, the Reds have 5 players in the top 50 in P/PA. The Cardinals have 2 (6-2 in favor of the Reds if you go top-55).

[Old school 1983]

I can't find P/PA as a team stat anywhere, but just browsing the ESPN individual hitting statistics, the Reds have 5 players in the top 50 in P/PA. The Cardinals have 2 (6-2 in favor of the Reds if you go top-55).

Interesting. I wonder what it'd look like if it was p/pa with RISP.

[Old school 1983]

I'm not so sure the Cardinals are really more patient. I don't have pitches seen per PA handy, but the Reds have 99 BBs to the Cardinals 55 (http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/team/_/.../type/expanded). The Reds have the second-most BBs in MLB, while the Cardinals have the 24th most. I think some of the Cardinals' success is due to luck, but it looks to me like their philosophy is more about hitting the first good pitch they see. I guess it's less about patience and more about discipline. Their low strikeout total (8th fewest in MLB) gives me the impression that they know a good pitch when they see it (and they swing at it) and they know how to lay off the bad pitches. The Reds, on the other hand, take too many strikes, which is patient, but not disciplined. This is evidenced by their high walk and high strikeout totals (3rd in MLB).

True. Your differentiation between patience and discipline is a great point. I was lumping them together and they definitely should not be. I often see reds players mainly heisey at pretty much anything, Bruce on curves and soft stuff inside, and Frazier on low and away breaking balls chase bad pitches trying to bash them rather than being disciplined enough to lay off and hit the pitch they should. I noticed (especially with Stubbs last year) the reds seem to take a lot of hittable pitches and swing at junk. Some of that is due to good pitching but at the same time if you get one you can crush early in the count do it. Don't just take a pitch to show patience.

[Old school 1983]

I think the reds drawing more walks than the cards brings up another good point. The reds do not have a guy who can consistently be counted to drive in runners behind votto in the lineup. Phillips is when he's hot but Frazier and Bruce are far to prone to undisciplined at bats that lead to strike outs. Sure getting on base is important but getting those runners in, especially in tight spots against good pitching is importance too. To quote tony Perez. When the big dog hits we win. You get on base. I drive you in.