Zach Vincej lost

[Bourgeois Zee]

The point is there was a need to drop players. The only way your argument makes sense is if Adleman wasn’t on the short list of players to get dropped. Go back to a thread about the roster a few weeks ago, and you’ll see near universal agreement that Adleman should be on that short list. Even some guy you might know agreed

There are still months to go before the season begins, and the Reds likely aren't done adding players.

I'd suggest you wait a couple of months before breaking your arm patting yourself on the back.

[Kc61]

The point is there was a need to drop players. The only way your argument makes sense is if Adleman wasn’t on the short list of players to get dropped. Go back to a thread about the roster a few weeks ago, and you’ll see near universal agreement that Adleman should be on that short list. Even some guy you might know agreed

Despite my surprise that Adleman was kept on roster, i looked at how the Reds created seven open roster spots. And I concluded it was reasonable, understandable, and fine.

Why every minor move they make must engender this kind of griping is difficult to understand.

[dougdirt]

Despite my surprise that Adleman was kept on roster, i looked at how the Reds created seven open roster spots. And I concluded it was reasonable, understandable, and fine.

Why every minor move they make must engender this kind of griping is difficult to understand.

Because we're all crazy. And some of us HAVE to be right.

[Bourgeois Zee]

Because we're all crazy. And some of us HAVE to be right.

No, we're not.

You're wrong.

[757690]

Despite my surprise that Adleman was kept on roster, i looked at how the Reds created seven open roster spots. And I concluded it was reasonable, understandable, and fine.

Why every minor move they make must engender this kind of griping is difficult to understand.

Stuff like this happen all the time on this board, and I have no problem pointing it out every time.

Posters praise a Reds player in near unanimous fashion. Then that player is let go or traded, and everyone searches through his stats, finds obscure, superfluous data and performs logical gymnastics to justify it. Or they criticize and condemn a player, and when he stays with the team, they do the same to justify that.

It’s gotten beyond predictable.

Nearly everyone had Adleman as the next, most obvious cut. When many others were cut and he stayed, everyone is enlightened by new information and changed their minds. Forgive me for wanting to push back on that.

[Griffey012]

The bold is incorrect.

The Reds had a need to drop two players from the roster. They chose Wallace and Vincej over Adleman. One can argue they made the right choice, but there was a need to drop two players, and Adleman certainly was on the short list of who to drop. There was a need to drop him, and they chose not to. They chose to drop two prospects instead.

Why is Wallach or Vincej anymore of a prospect than Adleman?

[757690]

Why is Wallach or Vincej anymore of a prospect than Adleman?

Because we don’t know what they can do at the MLB level, and they are many years younger.

[Kc61]

Because we don’t know what they can do at the MLB level, and they are many years younger.

Any middle school player would fit that description. Takes more than youth and inexperience to be a prospect.

[Tom Servo]

Because we don’t know what they can do at the MLB level

Yes we do, it's nothing.

This hand-wringing is silly. I honestly thought the Kivlehan element would more attention than anything. Not the fact that the SS who will never be anything more than Paul Janish shouldn't have been dumped before Tim Adleman, who is extremely likely to be dumped at some point this offseason.

[Griffey012]

Stuff like this happen all the time on this board, and I have no problem pointing it out every time.

Posters praise a Reds player in near unanimous fashion. Then that player is let go or traded, and everyone searches through his stats, finds obscure, superfluous data and performs logical gymnastics to justify it. Or they criticize and condemn a player, and when he stays with the team, they do the same to justify that.

It’s gotten beyond predictable.

Nearly everyone had Adleman as the next, most obvious cut. When many others were cut and he stayed, everyone is enlightened by new information and changed their minds. Forgive me for wanting to push back on that.

I don't think this is any sort of praise for Adleman really. It's more of "why did they cut Vincej and Wallach over Adleman" answer. A few people found some reasons why it would make sense to keep Adleman over the other two. The truth is none of the group appears to have much of a chance of some sort of fungible future value. But looking for an answer to the question isn't a sudden change of viewpoint on the player. I also really don't understand where the bolded point is coming from.

- - - Updated - - -

Because we don’t know what they can do at the MLB level, and they are many years younger.

I am most definitely not a "prospect" and I fit all that criteria.

[757690]

Any middle school player would fit that description. Takes more than youth and inexperience to be a prospect.

Okay, because they had success in then minor leagues, we don’t know what they can do in the majors and are many years younger than Adleman.

[757690]

Yes we do, it's nothing.

This hand-wringing is silly. I honestly thought the Kivlehan element would more attention than anything. Not the fact that the SS who will never be anything more than Paul Janish shouldn't have been dumped before Tim Adleman, who is extremely likely to be dumped at some point this offseason.

Honestly, we don't know. Until they play, we don't. MLB history is full of players who surprised us. The same could have been said about Justin Turner a few years ago.

[Tom Servo]

Honestly, we don't know. Until they play, we don't. MLB history is full of players who surprised us. The same could have been said about Justin Turner a few years ago.

I am extremely comfortable saying Zach Vincej and Chad Wallach won't become the next Justin Turner.

[757690]

I don't think this is any sort of praise for Adleman really. It's more of "why did they cut Vincej and Wallach over Adleman" answer. A few people found some reasons why it would make sense to keep Adleman over the other two. The truth is none of the group appears to have much of a chance of some sort of fungible future value. But looking for an answer to the question isn't a sudden change of viewpoint on the player. I also really don't understand where the bolded point is coming from.

- - - Updated - - -



I am most definitely not a "prospect" and I fit all that criteria.

1. Decisions had to be made, and those decisions have consequences. More importantly, it speaks to the Reds ability to evaluate talent and understand their needs going forward. This decision speaks poorly of that, imo.

2. If the Reds had you in that 40 man roster spot instead of Adleman, I don't think it would make any difference.

[Griffey012]

Okay, because they had success in then minor leagues, we don’t know what they can do in the majors and are many years younger than Adleman.

Vincej has not had success in the minors, he barely knows what a .700 OPS is, he doesn't carry loud tools that say he may change in the future and be better. Wallach had some success in the lower levels, but he is 26 and struggled at the plate in AAA, and his biggest talent was walking against minor league pitching while not doing much else with the bat. They don't carry some loud tools like an Aquino or Jose Siri who are most definitely prospects because if it all comes together there are multiple big time big league skills there.

- - - Updated - - -

1. Decisions had to be made, and those decisions have consequences. More importantly, it speaks to the Reds ability to evaluate talent and understand their needs going forward. This decision speaks poorly of that, imo.

2. If the Reds had you in that 40 man roster spot instead of Adleman, I don't think it would make any difference.

What is the consequence of currently cutting Vincej or Wallach instead of Adleman? Having a different bad player instead of a different bad player?