Turn Off Ads?
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 80

Thread: Just too many holes to fill.

  1. #46
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    190

    Re: Just too many holes to fill.

    Quote Originally Posted by Johnny Fan View Post
    As in Oscar Taveras? Exactly what has he done on the ML roster to be considered a Plus at this point?
    As much as Billy Hamilton except he has tore up minor league pitching where BH hasnt;

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #47
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    234

    Re: Just too many holes to fill.

    Quote Originally Posted by indyscott View Post
    As much as Billy Hamilton except he has tore up minor league pitching where BH hasnt;
    I don't see BH as a plus for the Reds in the upcoming season and wouldn't of the kid in St. Louis. Now they might become a plus but at this point in the year there isn't really any way to know what a minor league talent may or may not bring to the team. The Cards have basically added one major chip and that is the guy at SS, who has a lot of HUGE questions surrounding his abilities and future.

  4. #48
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    190

    Re: Just too many holes to fill.

    Quote Originally Posted by Johnny Fan View Post
    I don't see BH as a plus for the Reds in the upcoming season and wouldn't of the kid in St. Louis. Now they might become a plus but at this point in the year there isn't really any way to know what a minor league talent may or may not bring to the team. The Cards have basically added one major chip and that is the guy at SS, who has a lot of HUGE questions surrounding his abilities and future.
    You know what PEDs were used and when correct?

  5. #49
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    87

    Re: Just too many holes to fill.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Honcho View Post
    You are cherry picking numbers to fit your own argument.
    Oh for real.

    Here was the original thing I quoted.

    "Originally Posted by bullseye View Post
    The Reds put up a ton of numbers against bad pitching. Take a look at our numbers against opponents top 3 pitchers and you will be amazed at how bad we were."

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Scotly View Post
    i noticed this also. The Reds seemed to have the ability to score 10 runs, then barely score a run a game for the next week."



    Scot writes, the Reds seem to have the ability to score 10 runs then barely score a run a game for the next week.

    I noticed this as well, so I wanted to know how often the Reds got shutout this past season and how it compared to similar hitting teams.

    In addition, I wanted to know if the Reds were shut down more often than other similar teams, and by this I went with scoring 3 runs or less is being shutdown. I wanted to know if BULLSEYE was right and we were getting shut down quite frequently vs teams compared to other similar teams.

    So I had to compare the Reds to other NL teams to be consistent as AL teams had a DH, and the best measure of how good an offense is, is to look @ the # of runs scored.


    Based on that, I chose Atlanta, who were similar to the Reds in runs scored and the Cards who were the best team in the NL in terms of runs scored. Seems logical so far doesn't it?


    I looked @ the # of times each of the teams were shutout. It's black and white, no grey. You either got shutout, or you didn't.

    Then of course I looked @ the times they scored 3 runs or less-- it's black or white-- you either score 0,1,2 or 3 runs, or you don't.

    Comparing a black/white variable among similar teams is not cherry picking the results. It's black and white. The Reds were no worse than similar or better teams in terms of getting shutout last year. I don't have time to do all the NL teams to compare. But hey, maybe later I'll go ahead and look @ the #'s for all the NL teams last year.


    But for giggles, I just checked looked @ the Cubs data. They were shutout 16 times, and scored 3 runs or less 82 times. That's a bad offense.

    Cherry picking would be me looking @ just the home totals for runs scored and ignoring road totals. Or just looking @ weekend games, or games vs teams .500 or lower. But I'm not, I'm looking @ runs scored, by game, for the entire season.

    If you aren't happy with the results, so be it. But by no means am I cherry picking the results. I'm comparing apples to apples. Times shutout, and times scoring 3 runs or less by a team for the entire season. It's straightforward. Geesh.

  6. #50
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    87

    Re: Just too many holes to fill.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scotly View Post
    Among all those stats, is there one for not hitting when we absolutely need a hit?? Like when our season is on the line and we need a win late in the year. Like the last two years.

    No, there isn't anything out there like Batting Average with runners in scoring position in a tie/1 run down game after the 7th. Or however you want to define the criteria for what a must need hit is. Whether it's in the 9th only, or when the games tied or what.

    Someone who is good with Microsoft Access could build a nice database by loading all individual game logs and then create queries and search that way.

    It would be interesting to see the #'s. Just looking @ things like .avg with 2 outs or .avg with RSIP really doesn't tell you what you wanted.


    Actually, Baseball Reference has a stat called clutch. I'll look into that for you. The Reds were -3.2, the Cards were +4.1. So if it feels like the Reds aren't clutch-- they probably weren't last year.

  7. #51
    Member Mike Honcho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Briarcliff Village, KC
    Posts
    226

    Re: Just too many holes to fill.

    Quote Originally Posted by Halfway between View Post
    Nonetheless, what he says seems to support his argument.
    thatsthepoint
    They don't think it be like it is but it do.

    Oscar Gamble

  8. #52
    Member Mike Honcho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Briarcliff Village, KC
    Posts
    226

    Re: Just too many holes to fill.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ladeda View Post
    No, there isn't anything out there like Batting Average with runners in scoring position in a tie/1 run down game after the 7th. Or however you want to define the criteria for what a must need hit is. Whether it's in the 9th only, or when the games tied or what.

    Someone who is good with Microsoft Access could build a nice database by loading all individual game logs and then create queries and search that way.

    It would be interesting to see the #'s. Just looking @ things like .avg with 2 outs or .avg with RSIP really doesn't tell you what you wanted.


    Actually, Baseball Reference has a stat called clutch. I'll look into that for you. The Reds were -3.2, the Cards were +4.1. So if it feels like the Reds aren't clutch-- they probably weren't last year.
    Access? just go to fangraphs
    They don't think it be like it is but it do.

    Oscar Gamble

  9. #53
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    141

    Re: Just too many holes to fill.

    Quote Originally Posted by Old school 1983 View Post
    They are really replacing him in the lineup with Adams, although Craig will be replacing him on the field. Adams has some pop, but struggles against lefties. I see a dropoff between him and Beltran.
    We can't really say that Beltran is a huge loss for them until we see what Beltran is doing in 2014. For example, if Beltran has a drop-off and Craig/Adams just repeat last year's numbers, then they've gained. We can assume Beltran will repeat close to his numbers last year, but until he does, the loss hasn't really hurt them. I think the Cards have a safer bet of more production with Craig/Adams than they do with Beltran.

  10. #54
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    141

    Re: Just too many holes to fill.

    Quote Originally Posted by Johnny Fan View Post
    I don't see BH as a plus for the Reds in the upcoming season and wouldn't of the kid in St. Louis. Now they might become a plus but at this point in the year there isn't really any way to know what a minor league talent may or may not bring to the team. The Cards have basically added one major chip and that is the guy at SS, who has a lot of HUGE questions surrounding his abilities and future.
    Even if Peralta doesn't add much to them, we are still behind a little and we haven't added anything (and might actually lose Choo) to get back on track.

  11. #55
    Member Old school 1983's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,702

    Re: Just too many holes to fill.

    Quote Originally Posted by LewGra View Post
    We can't really say that Beltran is a huge loss for them until we see what Beltran is doing in 2014. For example, if Beltran has a drop-off and Craig/Adams just repeat last year's numbers, then they've gained. We can assume Beltran will repeat close to his numbers last year, but until he does, the loss hasn't really hurt them. I think the Cards have a safer bet of more production with Craig/Adams than they do with Beltran.
    I was speaking with respect to Beltrans 2013 performance. Of course given Beltrans age, it's likely his numbers will decrease in 2014. If Craig has a repeat or a season close to his 2013 in 2014 and Adams can't match what Beltran gave in 2013, then there is a negative trade off in terms of offense change amongst the players mentioned from 2013 to 2014. I totally understand your point but my frame of reference was a drop of from 2013 to 2014, not a comparison of Adams to Beltran in 2014.

  12. #56
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    190

    Re: Just too many holes to fill.

    Quote Originally Posted by Old school 1983 View Post
    I was speaking with respect to Beltrans 2013 performance. Of course given Beltrans age, it's likely his numbers will decrease in 2014. If Craig has a repeat or a season close to his 2013 in 2014 and Adams can't match what Beltran gave in 2013, then there is a negative trade off in terms of offense change amongst the players mentioned from 2013 to 2014. I totally understand your point but my frame of reference was a drop of from 2013 to 2014, not a comparison of Adams to Beltran in 2014.
    Player A. .284 .335 .503 .839

    Player B. .296 .339 .491 .830

  13. #57
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    54

    Re: Just too many holes to fill.

    Quote Originally Posted by Johnny Fan View Post
    Playoffs are a crap shoot, the best teams don't always win. I hold the regular season as the standard. Over the past 3 seasons the Reds have played well. We removed the issue of our playoff issues, so lets see what happens this season.
    Playoffs are where big boys play. And how doesn't the best team win? Pits beat the pants off us when they needed to. We all know Cards can do it when ever they feel like it also.

  14. #58
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    54

    Re: Just too many holes to fill.

    Quote Originally Posted by indyscott View Post
    And here I thought it was about winning in the playoffs
    Interesting...Maybe that is my problem. I want a World Series while most just want to win during the season.

  15. Likes:

    Old school 1983 (12-19-2013)

  16. #59
    Member Old school 1983's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,702

    Re: Just too many holes to fill.

    Quote Originally Posted by indyscott View Post
    Player A. .284 .335 .503 .839

    Player B. .296 .339 .491 .830
    I'm sure that's a Beltran Adams comparison. Adams got favorable matchups all year whereas Beltran was a full time player. I'm sure the Cards could create a situation where Adams is platooned to miss lefties, but if you're expecting him to be an everyday player, those numbers will dip as he has to face more lefties.

  17. #60
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    234

    Re: Just too many holes to fill.

    Quote Originally Posted by Reds&BuckeyeGuy View Post
    Playoffs are where big boys play. And how doesn't the best team win? Pits beat the pants off us when they needed to. We all know Cards can do it when ever they feel like it also.
    Yes the playoffs are where the big boys play and they "earn" that right to play there based off of a 162 game season. Who wins in the playoffs isn't however always the best team. IF you just went with the system of old of the best NL team in each division and same in AL how many former winners of the WS wouldn't even be in the WS? Better yet, lets remove divisions and just have the best team in the NL after 162 games play the best team in the AL for the title. MLB and other sports have watered down the playoffs.


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