Jonah Keri ranks the Reds #1

[Mutaman]

You're actually making my point.

I can't blame Keri for his statement because he clearly hasn't watched Heisey play enough or followed the Reds closely enough to know his strengths and weaknesses, and there's no reason to expect him to.

However, that doesn't make his statement any less wrong. Keri based his analysis solely on stats, and he revealed a big problem when one does that.

The stats say Heisey isn't that much worse than Ludwick overall, if they played everyday. Watching them play tells us otherwise, and very clearly and decisively.

Bingo! A very nice piece of writing. Keri clearly based his statements on what he saw on a piece of paper. No rational person who watched Ludwick last year or Heisey over the last several years would seriously argue that Heisey is a "competent replacement" for Ryan Ludwick.

[757690]

I don't think it means that at all. Most teams don't have starting caliber guys sitting around in case of emergency. Heisey is a pretty good 4th OF all things considered. He's struggling when he plays every day because he's a good bench player but not really a starter.

Name 5 teams with a better option at 4th OF. Please provide team name and player.

What you described is a good bench. Decent depth, as Keri described, is the ability to replace an injured player with a player who won't hurt the team. Most teams don't have decent depth, which was why Keri liked the Reds so much.

I think the Reds have better depth than most teams, but Heisey isn't a good example of it.

[Mutaman]

Part of the problem here is that folks are considering this issue totally in terms of Heisey- a half way decent bench who fails everytime he is given the opportunity to start.

But I'm also upset with Keri's statement because in comparing Heisey to Ludwick he is foolishly diminishing Ludwick. The notion that Heisey is a "competent replacement" for the guy who carried this team on his back when Votto went down last year and followed that up with a superb post season, is pretty frivolous.

[RedEye]

Part of the problem here is that folks are considering this issue totally in terms of Heisey- a half way decent bench who fails everytime he is given the opportunity to start.

But I'm also upset with Keri's statement because in comparing Heisey to Ludwick he is foolishly diminishing Ludwick. The notion that Heisey is a "competent replacement" for the guy who carried this team on his back when Votto went down last year and followed that up with a superb post season, is pretty frivolous.

Please back this up with objective data of some sort. You keep repeating that any rational person would agree with you, while ignoring that Keri and several other rational posters on this board have brought up evidence that points in the other direction.

[RedEye]

Allow me to quote from this recent Votto article on Enquirer.com:

"The definition of what constitutes "good" is evolving, at least in many circles, away from the triple crown categories batting average, home runs and RBI into more nuanced statistics that value actions on the field differently than the more traditional statistics."

'Nuff said.

[Mutaman]

Allow me to quote from this recent Votto article on Enquirer.com:

"The definition of what constitutes "good" is evolving, at least in many circles, away from the triple crown categories batting average, home runs and RBI into more nuanced statistics that value actions on the field differently than the more traditional statistics."

'Nuff said.

What "actions on the field" has Heisey ever contributed that would support Keri's statement. feel free to throw in as many "nuanced statistics: as you like.

[Mutaman]

Please back this up with objective data of some sort.

How's this. 7/12. Red's battling for the pennant. Votto goes down. How does Ludwick respond?

7/12 .333 .avg 7 HR 19 RBI 1.090 ops
8/12 .327 .avg 7 HR 19 RBI .986 ops

Post season: Against several of the best pitchers in baseball over 5 games. How does Ludwick respond?

6 hits in 18 ab, 3 hr 1.288 ops

'nuff said.

[RedEye]

What "actions on the field" has Heisey ever contributed that would support Keri's statement. feel free to throw in as many "nuanced statistics: as you like.

.740-ish OPS with solid defense at three positions.

[RedEye]

How's this. 7/12. Red's battling for the pennant. Votto goes down. How does Ludwick respond?

7/12 .333 .avg 7 HR 19 RBI 1.090 ops
8/12 .327 .avg 7 HR 19 RBI .986 ops

Post season: Against several of the best pitchers in baseball over 5 games. How does Ludwick respond?

6 hits in 18 ab, 3 hr 1.288 ops

'nuff said.

When have I ever said Ludwick was a lesser hitter than Heisey?

All I have suggested is that Heisey brings an underrated all-around game to replace Ludwick's bat with other skills.

Your response has basically been to ... repeat over and over how many HR and RBI Ludwick had in one month or to tell me that he is "clearly" the better player to "anyone who watches the Reds."

*Sigh*

[Mutaman]

When have I ever said Ludwick was a lesser hitter than Heisey?

All I have suggested is that Heisey brings an underrated all-around game to replace Ludwick's bat with other skills.

Your response has basically been to ... repeat over and over how many HR and RBI Ludwick had in one month or to tell me that he is "clearly" the better player to "anyone who watches the Reds."

*Sigh*

Actually it's two months and 5 games in the post season. Plus, the difference btween Ludwick and Heisey in the field is not all that significant. What Heisey adds, in speed and athleticism, Ludwick more than makes up for in intelligence and instinct.
One of Heisey's drawbacks is that he's just not that an intelligent ballplayer, whereas, his opening day sliding fiasco not withstanding, Ludwick is a very savy professional.

[Kc61]

.740-ish OPS with solid defense at three positions.

The only problem with Heisey's hitting is that it stopped after 2011.

[RedEye]

Actually it's two months and 5 games in the post season. Plus, the difference btween Ludwick and Heisey in the field is not all that significant. What Heisey adds, in speed and athleticism, Ludwick more than makes up for in intelligence and instinct.
One of Heisey's drawbacks is that he's just not that an intelligent ballplayer, whereas, his opening day sliding fiasco not withstanding, Ludwick is a very savy professional.

There is, quite simply, no real proof for this claim other than your opinion. I've seen Heisey make boneheaded plays and smart ones; I've seen Ludwick make both as well. Many times. I've watched those outcomes just like you.

But what keeps Ludwick on the field throughout his career is his hitting -- whereas there is more to Heisey as a ballplayer than that. Granted, Heisey does have problems with the bat that frustrate us all. He is by no means a perfect player. But we also tend to forget that Ludwick -- other than in 2008 and 2012 -- also had many problems with his hitting. And without his hitting, the guy just ain't much. That's why he was available on the cheap before spring training last year, the consummate "journeyman" OF for Walt to sign.

[RedEye]

The only problem with Heisey's hitting is that it stopped after 2011.

Except... actually it didn't.

2011 = .793 OPS
2012 = .715 OPS
2013 = .477 OPS (in 62 AB)

So it didn't really stop... it just varied a bit. His paltry 2013? Probably also a natural variation due to a small sample size.

I think most likely Chris will settle into that 162 game average of .734 we see on Baseball Reference. Not gangbusters, but definitely not useless either. Especially when you add in the defense.

[RedEye]

And can I just say I never intended -- or expected -- this to become a Chris Heisey debate. I like Heisey. I think he can be a good role player on this club. I don't think he adds what Ludwick does exactly, but I think he brings some other useful skills. That's not why I posted this article.

I posted it because I think Jonah Keri's point is a broader one, a less authoritative one and more just, well, encouraging and interesting than anyone in the "calling Chris Heisey a useful player is absurd and the work of a national media hack" camp has given it credit for.

With that, OjoRojo is signing out.

[Kc61]

There is, quite simply, no real proof for this claim other than your opinion. I've seen Heisey make boneheaded plays and smart ones; I've seen Ludwick make both as well. Many times. I've watched those outcomes just like you.

But what keeps Ludwick on the field throughout his career is his hitting -- whereas there is more to Heisey as a ballplayer than that. Granted, Heisey does have problems with the bat that frustrate us all. He is by no means a perfect player. But we also tend to forget that Ludwick -- other than in 2008 and 2012 -- also had many problems with his hitting. And without his hitting, the guy just ain't much. That's why he was available on the cheap before spring training last year, the consummate "journeyman" OF for Walt to sign.

If Heisey still hit like he did in 2011, his hot season, then all of your points would be valid. Heisey's a better fielder, Ludwick's career has been up and down, all fair points.

But Heisey last year had an OPS+ eight points below Mike Leake's. This year it's worse so far. His BB/K rate last year was .22, same as Wilson Valdez had.

Until Heisey shows that he still can hit, IMO there's no comparison between him and Ludwick. If he gets out of his "slump" which has lasted over a full season, we can talk.