Turn Off Ads?
Page 7 of 13 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 192

Thread: More talent: Reds or Cardinals?

  1. #91
    Member MikeThierry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    St. Louis, Mo
    Posts
    3,703

    Re: More talent: Reds or Cardinals?

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    Broxton had one bad game where he took one for the team and give up six runs in one inning. Take away that one game and he's got close to a 1 ERA. He's actually been more effective this season than Rosenthal, not that that means much. Broxton has given up earned runs in only three appearances so far this season, while Rosenthal has given up runs in five appearances. To me, that's the best way to judge how effffive a relief pitcher has been.


    But again, when looking at talent, it's meaningless to judge it on six weeks worth of play. You look at a whole a career. When you do that, Broxton and Rosenthal have shown similar talent.

    If you consider Brixton's "downward" trend, (it really isn't there, he just was hurt for awhile) you also have to consider that Rosenthal is a rookie. Players tend to do much better than their actual talent level the first time a league sees them. Considering Rosenthal has been used in relief, that means his "career" numbers are even more suspect. Many relievers with middling talent have been very effective for a few years before the league catches up with them. History tells us that Rosenhal is due for a correction, at some point in the future, unless he too adjusts to the league's adjustment to him.
    So when his average fastball has declined drastically and has shown a trend in it declining, his SO/9 has been declining, and he's been very hittable since 2009, I'm not supposed to take that as a downward trend?

    Why do you consider Rosenthal a "reliever with middling talent"? How is a pitcher who has averaged just .3 mph less on his average fastball than Chapman considered a reliever with middling talent? Have you not even watch him pitch or understand why he was rated as high as he was in the prospect rankings (39th according to baseball america)? Good lord dude, you make Rosenthal look as if he's a Kyle McClellan type pitcher.
    “Our next home stand follows this road trip.”

    “I just want to tell everyone Happy Easter and Happy Hanukkah.” says on the day before Easter

    Mike Shannon

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #92
    Member MikeThierry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    St. Louis, Mo
    Posts
    3,703

    Re: More talent: Reds or Cardinals?

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    I think it's awesome when someone uses advanced stats like WAR, UZR and FIP when it fits the story they're telling, after years of dismissing them when it didn't
    Typical arguing tactic. Attack the debater. Yeah because we all know someone can't change their approach on how they look at stats. It's not possible at all.



    EDIT: I've been on the UZR bandwagon from day one as well as other advanced stats like OPS+, BABIP, etc. It's just that I think FIP glorifies the strikeout but tells a story. WAR can be flawed but gives you a general sense of how a player is doing. That has been my contention from the beginning. Please stop mischaracterizing my viewpoint on the matter.
    Last edited by MikeThierry; 05-15-2013 at 02:23 AM.
    “Our next home stand follows this road trip.”

    “I just want to tell everyone Happy Easter and Happy Hanukkah.” says on the day before Easter

    Mike Shannon

  4. #93
    Member MikeThierry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    St. Louis, Mo
    Posts
    3,703

    Re: More talent: Reds or Cardinals?

    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Bateman View Post
    What are you talking about?

    I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that spouting a few defensive stats completely compromised by a small sample size makes what you are advertising as representing "what's going on the field right now" is not a reasonable argument. The inventors of these stats would be the first to say that you need about 3 years s worth of data for them to be reliably used to measure a player's defensive value. There are numerous examples that illustrate why they are not a reliable indicator in a small sample size.

    Here's what we know:

    1. Kozma is a pathetically bad hitter so matter how you spin it
    2. There is little evidence that suggests that Kozma has above average speed for a SS
    3. Kozma has been heralded as being a middling fielding SS by basically everyone in the field of prospect ranking


    I don't think he magically learned how to gain range at the major league level. It's not a usual skill that grows over time. Simply put, when the scouts start noticing his fielding, or his stats prove out over a long sample size, I'll be a believer. In the end, the best evidence that we currently have is how he's been viewed coming up the pipeline Sorry, a few months of defensive stats doesn't turn him into a defensive stud.

    At the moment, you are arguing that Kozma is better than Cozart because Kozma has like 0.2 WAR. What exactly is your point? At the very best, that is merely an indictment of how bad Cozart has struggled so far. Even in your greatest spin of Kozma he has 0.2 WAR. That's a problem. Imagine when he starts slumping!
    My point, as I've been trying to make in this debate, is that the Cozart/Kozma debate is a push because they're both bad. One doesn't give either of their club a clear edge. When asking "who has better talent", nobody in their right mind would say "Oh god... there's Cozart. End the discussion now! The Cardinals can't compete with that". Where as there are clear answers in this debate (Votto is clearly better than Craig, Holliday is clearly better than anything in LF for the Reds), the Kozma/Cozart debate doesn't settle anything except tell the fans of each club that they would be best to try to find different options at SS in the near future.
    “Our next home stand follows this road trip.”

    “I just want to tell everyone Happy Easter and Happy Hanukkah.” says on the day before Easter

    Mike Shannon

  5. #94
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    11,497

    Re: More talent: Reds or Cardinals?

    Quote Originally Posted by MikeThierry View Post
    So when his average fastball has declined drastically and has shown a trend in it declining, his SO/9 has been declining, and he's been very hittable since 2009, I'm not supposed to take that as a downward trend?

    Why do you consider Rosenthal a "reliever with middling talent"? How is a pitcher who has averaged just .3 mph less on his average fastball than Chapman considered a reliever with middling talent? Have you not even watch him pitch or understand why he was rated as high as he was in the prospect rankings (39th according to baseball america)? Good lord dude, you make Rosenthal look as if he's a Kyle McClellan type pitcher.
    Never said Rosenthal was a reliever with middling talent. Just saying that even guys with middling talent put up great numbers their first time around the league as a reliever. You might not remember guys like Ray Soff, Joe Boever and John Costello, but they are perfect examples of this. It's an extremely long list.

    I'm not even saying that Rosenthal will regress, just that history tells us not to use a relievers first few weeks in the league as evidence of their talent and skill level.
    "Man, the pitch looks fast, even in slow motion." Thom Brennaman on Chapman's fastball.

  6. #95
    One and a half men Patrick Bateman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Calgary, AB
    Posts
    5,967

    Re: More talent: Reds or Cardinals?

    Quote Originally Posted by MikeThierry View Post
    My point, as I've been trying to make in this debate, is that the Cozart/Kozma debate is a push because they're both bad. One doesn't give either of their club a clear edge. When asking "who has better talent", nobody in their right mind would say "Oh god... there's Cozart. End the discussion now! The Cardinals can't compete with that". Where as there are clear answers in this debate (Votto is clearly better than Craig, Holliday is clearly better than anything in LF for the Reds), the Kozma/Cozart debate doesn't settle anything except tell the fans of each club that they would be best to try to find different options at SS in the near future.
    The edge is probably a win or two towards Cozart, because over time, he has shown some ability to hit major league pitching, and scouts (and last year's stats) ranked Cozart as an above average fiedler.

    Kozma at the moment has proven neither, therefore, difficult not to give the edge to Cozart when he does the two most important things a SS can do better than Kozma. Again, not saying Cozart is a world beater, but he does have major league value, a trait that is not necessarily common with Kozma.

  7. #96
    Salukifan2
    Guest

    Re: More talent: Reds or Cardinals?

    The problem with the whole Kozma/Cozart debate is that the two are being asked to do two completely different things. All the cards are asking Kozma to do is play solid D and and bat over .220 in the 8th spot.

    The reds, on the other hand, are asking Cozart to bat in between Choo and Votto, something he lacks the ability to do.

    Who has more talent? Cozart. Who is doing what the team is asking of them? Kozma

  8. Likes:

    Revering4Blue (05-15-2013)

  9. #97
    Member NebraskaRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Lincoln, NE
    Posts
    1,455

    Re: More talent: Reds or Cardinals?

    The real question is, would Cozart put up with something like this?

    http://deadspin.com/shane-robinson-h...e-ko-506790609

  10. Likes:

    Tom Servo (05-15-2013), _Sir_Charles_ (05-15-2013)

  11. #98
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    14,314

    Re: More talent: Reds or Cardinals?

    Was looking over some stats for tomorrow's 40 game recap.

    My conclusion is that the only thing the Reds have really done wrong this year is to be in the same division as the Cardinals.

    Cards have really been unbelievable this year. As a Reds fan, I hope it fades, probably will, question is how much.

  12. #99
    Member Magdal's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Tn.
    Posts
    1,436

    Re: More talent: Reds or Cardinals?

    Interesting thread that I enjoyed reading. Good points made all over the place. My opinion is that the 2 teams are just too close to call. It's getting exiting to me right now as the Cards are pulling away from the pack...exept for the Reds who are matching them, both 8-2 in the last 10.

    Let me add 2 wrinkles: HUGE upgrade when Ludwick returns. And for the Cards, Westbrook is out. (see Gast) This kid may be solid for a few months.

    It's gonna be a 2 team race, I believe down to the wire. It's gonna be good.

    BTW, Holliday is WAY overated. Luddy has more power, more clutch and is the better defender.
    Last edited by Magdal; 05-15-2013 at 06:51 PM.

  13. #100
    Member smixsell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    San Jose
    Posts
    1,179

    Re: More talent: Reds or Cardinals?

    Quote Originally Posted by Magdal View Post
    Interesting thread that I enjoyed reading. Good points made all over the place. My opinion is that the 2 teams are just too close to call. It's getting exiting to me right now as the Cards are pulling away from the pack...exept for the Reds who are matching them, both 8-2 in the last 10.

    Let me add 2 wrinkles: HUGE upgrade when Ludwick returns. And for the Cards, Westbrook is out. (see Gast) This kid may be solid for a few months.

    It's gonna be a 2 team race, I believe down to the wire. It's gonna be good.

    BTW, Holliday is WAY overated. Luddy has more power, more clutch and is the better defender.
    I agree that the talent level is pretty close. I predict that the Reds will win the division by about 5 games though. The Cards will get some nagging injuries to key older players like Beltran and the Cards pitching staff will come back to earth in a BIG way. Just want to go on record with the prediction.

    PS Also agree with your assessment of Ludwick. His loss is huge to the Reds.

  14. #101
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    11,497

    Re: More talent: Reds or Cardinals?

    If you look back at history, there are very few teams that win a division that do so with less than three workhorse pitchers. Nearly all division winners I can remember, have at least three guys who give the team 30+ starts and around 200 IP.

    I think this is the biggest weakness for the Cardinals this season. I see Wainwright doing it, but I doubt both Lynn and Garcia do it, and Westbrook with his injury, definitely won't. Cardinal fans better hope Miller doesn't.

    Maybe the Cardinals can buck the trend, but there's a reason why so few teams who don't have three workhorses win divisions. Those innings and starts from quality arms are extremely valuable. When those numbers aren't reached, it means more starts from back of the rotation or worse pitchers, and more innings from middle relievers. Neither one of those are strengths for the Cardinals.
    "Man, the pitch looks fast, even in slow motion." Thom Brennaman on Chapman's fastball.

  15. #102
    Salukifan2
    Guest

    Re: More talent: Reds or Cardinals?

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    If you look back at history, there are very few teams that win a division that do so with less than three workhorse pitchers. Nearly all division winners I can remember, have at least three guys who give the team 30+ starts and around 200 IP.

    I think this is the biggest weakness for the Cardinals this season. I see Wainwright doing it, but I doubt both Lynn and Garcia do it, and Westbrook with his injury, definitely won't. Cardinal fans better hope Miller doesn't.

    Maybe the Cardinals can buck the trend, but there's a reason why so few teams who don't have three workhorses win divisions. Those innings and starts from quality arms are extremely valuable. When those numbers aren't reached, it means more starts from back of the rotation or worse pitchers, and more innings from middle relievers. Neither one of those are strengths for the Cardinals.
    I see no reason y Lynn couldn't do it

  16. #103
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Posts
    6,057

    Re: More talent: Reds or Cardinals?

    Quote Originally Posted by Magdal View Post
    Interesting thread that I enjoyed reading. Good points made all over the place. My opinion is that the 2 teams are just too close to call. It's getting exiting to me right now as the Cards are pulling away from the pack...exept for the Reds who are matching them, both 8-2 in the last 10.

    Let me add 2 wrinkles: HUGE upgrade when Ludwick returns. And for the Cards, Westbrook is out. (see Gast) This kid may be solid for a few months.

    It's gonna be a 2 team race, I believe down to the wire. It's gonna be good.

    BTW, Holliday is WAY overated. Luddy has more power, more clutch and is the better defender.

    I do not agree about Holliday. He may have some of the most wacky swings where it looks like he is just lunging at pitches but he is still better than Ludwick......who in no way is able to come back until August. This does not help the Reds at all.....as I just do not see him coming back and being able to help as well as he did last year anyways.

  17. #104
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    409

    Re: More talent: Reds or Cardinals?

    Quote Originally Posted by Magdal View Post
    , Holliday is WAY overated. Luddy has more power, more clutch and is the better defender.
    lol

  18. #105
    Member smixsell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    San Jose
    Posts
    1,179

    Re: More talent: Reds or Cardinals?

    Quote Originally Posted by Magdal View Post
    Holliday is WAY overated.
    I wish.


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25