Turn Off Ads?
Page 14 of 18 FirstFirst ... 4101112131415161718 LastLast
Results 196 to 210 of 267

Thread: Reds sign Wilson

  1. #196
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    1,870

    Re: Reds sign Wilson

    Quote Originally Posted by guernsey
    Oh, M2 likes Gardner and Pauly.

    But they won't be ML winners until '07 at the earliest. '05 in the minors; maybe a cup of coffee. '06 learning to pitch in the majors. And maybe winning more games than they lose in '07.
    Good that means we both like two pitchers? I like both of these guys better than any pitcher the Reds had coming through the system in years. I also like What Basham did until he said that the reason he made such big strides was that the Reds completely redid his delivery and you knew him and Doc Hollywood spend plenty of time together. I also like this years draft of pitchers. The top 3 of 4 HS pitchers will be good pitchers. Bailey, Gonzalez, and Valiquette
    Last edited by Redmachine2003; 11-30-2004 at 09:56 PM.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #197
    Member SteelSD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    9,333

    Re: Reds sign Wilson

    I don't care what the OPS of the two were. You can look at that stat all day long and quote it but anyone who kept up with this team at all last year knows that Paul Wilson pitched much much better than Lidle did. Sure Lidle would go through streaks of 2-3 games were he pitched wonderful but Wilson was fairly solid all year and kept us in a lot of games that the bullpen later lost.
    Only three of those games the "bullpen lost" were quality starts for Wilson, so it' not like he didn't ever tax the pen by going short in games or needed the offense to pick him up.

    I kept up with this team all last year, and I'll be the first to say (and was last year) that Wilson's smoke-and-mirror job isn't something a team should hang their hat on. There isn't a metric out there that shows Wilson to project anything resembling a 4.34 ERA (OPS Against is one of those) in 2005. He's the same pitcher he was three years ago and pretty much the same pitcher Cory Lidle was in 2004...well, except that Lidle pitched more Innings.
    "The problem with strikeouts isn't that they hurt your team, it's that they hurt your feelings..." --Rob Neyer

    "The single most important thing for a hitter is to get a good pitch to hit. A good hitter can hit a pitch that’s over the plate three times better than a great hitter with a ball in a tough spot.”
    --Ted Williams

  4. #198
    breath westofyou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    PDX
    Posts
    42,660

    Re: Reds sign Wilson

    Having Wilson on your staff isn't bad, but having him as your number one starter is.

    Here's a good historical comparison.

    30 years ago yhe Reds inked a new starterand the the Reds just inked a guy who has pitched over 870 innings and started over 110 games, he walks a little more than average thus he allows a small percentage more of baserunners. Therefore his ERA is a bit above average for his career.

    Then he'd give you this.

    Code:
    FRED NORMAN
    
    1975-1976
    
    YEAR TEAM         AGE W   L   PCT   G    GS  CG  SV  GF  IP     H    R    ER   BB   SO    ERA  RSAA
    1975 Reds         32  12   4  .750   34  26   2   0   1  188    163   85   78   84  119   3.73    0 
    1976 Reds         33  12   7  .632   33  24   8   0   2  180.1  153   71   62   70  126   3.09   10 
         TOTALS           24  11  .686   67  50  10   0   3  368.1  316  156  140  154  245   3.42   10 
         LG AVERAGE       20  20  .500           11   1      368.1  356  166  146  137  205   3.57    0 
    
    YEAR TEAM          HR  H/9   BR/9  SO/9  BB/9  SO/BB SHO WP  IBB HBP BFP   BK  NW  NL
    1975 Reds          23  7.80 11.82  5.70  4.02  1.42   0   9   5   0   795  1   8   8 
    1976 Reds          10  7.64 11.28  6.29  3.49  1.80   3   6   5   3   745  0  11   8 
         TOTALS        33  7.72 11.56  5.99  3.76  1.59   3  15  10   3  1540  1  19  16 
         LG AVERAGE    25  8.71 12.23  5.00  3.35  1.49   3  12  16   7  1569  3
    Now imagine Fred Norman as your number one starter.

  5. #199
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    11,243

    Re: Reds sign Wilson

    And the Reds were in first place at some point each of the past four seasons.
    Not in late August, and that's a lot closer to the finish line than any point when the Reds were in 1st place in the past four seasons.

  6. #200
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,160

    Re: Reds sign Wilson

    Quote Originally Posted by guernsey
    There's lots of talk about the pitchers who combined to give the Reds their worst team ERA in history. Let's look at a few of the fellows who made that happen. The Reds had nine pitchers who posted ERAs over 6.00. They logged 324 innings, or 36 nine-inning games (nearly a fourth of the schedule). Of those fine folks only Claussen figures to be back with the Reds next year. The others won't don a Reds uni in '05 (Van Poppel, White, Matthews, Reith, Sanchez, Myette, Haynes & Padilla).
    Same argument gets made every offseason and during the season, sometimes by you. New crap replaces the old crap on the crap conveyor.


    Quote Originally Posted by Redmachine2003
    I work in quality and we use Data to our advantage all the time. If we don't like what stats are telling us we don't use them we use other stats to get us what we want. ... Hey this player has an alright era and Whip but I don't think he is that good so we dig to find stats so we can say nope he isn't his VORP ( I have no idea of what this is) sucks.
    Yeah, that's how you use data to gain advantage. Ignore what it's telling you and the problem will go away. Wilson did not have an all right ERA and WHIP. He was below average on both counts. That's what the data would tell you if you gave it a careful look.

    Wilson also got superlative run support last season (roughly the same amount the Cards scored on average and better than what the Astros scored) and he only won 11 games. So I don't see where the notion that he'd be a 15-game winner elsewhere holds much water. Not to mention that his pitching stats would have suffered in a more close-cropped park.


    Quote Originally Posted by Redsmachine2003
    M2 is there a pitcher the Reds have any where in their system that you like? Or does everyone have to have Nolan Ryan type of stats for you to like them? Just a couple of questions, I am not trying to be a smart butt, I am curious on your take and if you do like any of the reds pitching prospects?
    Though I get the distinct sense guernsey was driving at something in the sarcastic vein when he answered this question for me, he got the general facts of it right. I like Pauly and Gardner, though I don't think they'll be able to offer immediate help. 2007 is a sensible timeline for both. Some people run on the theory that if a kid's a "prospect" he's got to be ready tomorrow. It doesn't work that way.

    Dustin Moseley's shown flashes, but they've only been brief. Bubba Nelson has talent, but he's got to get back on track this season. Steve Kelly could be a sleeper, but no way would I bank on that. IMO, everyone else is too young to put them on the visible horizon.

    Anyway, my take is whatever starting pitching help the farm can provide isn't coming anytime soon.


    Quote Originally Posted by guernsey
    How many will sign for less money than Paul did? Yes, Glendon Rusch already did, but the consensus on this board was that folks were praying he wouldn't get a Reds contract.
    And that's not the point. The Reds need to pay money to pitchers who can elevate the staff. Wilson, at his best, only manages to keep the team from constantly scraping bottom. The Reds just spent $3.6M on what they don't need. I have no issue with them spending more to get what they do need. I'm all for them spending more to get what they do need.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  7. #201
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    11,243

    Re: Reds sign Wilson

    I don't recall the Reds saying anything definitive on the matter, but I'll take your word it as I was paying next to no attention to these things for a few months.
    Thank you for the vote of confidence in me, but here's the definitive statement.

    Reds' payroll, prices going up
    By Marc Lancaster
    Post staff reporter

    Trying his best to mine the good news from an inherently unpleasant public-relations situation, John Allen said Wednesday the Reds' payroll will increase for 2005.

    The club's chief operating officer wouldn't say how much the budget for player salaries might rise, but he did say it was one of the reasons behind a significant bump in single-game ticket prices for next season.
    http://www.cincypost.com/2004/11/11/reds11-11-2004.html

  8. #202
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    11,243

    Re: Reds sign Wilson

    Though I get the distinct sense guernsey was driving at something in the sarcastic vein when he answered this question for me ...
    Nope, not this time.

    Sorry.

  9. #203
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,160

    Re: Reds sign Wilson

    Quote Originally Posted by guernsey
    Not in late August, and that's a lot closer to the finish line than any point when the Reds were in 1st place in the past four seasons.
    Hair meet axe. If you're a free agent sitting down listening to pitches from sub-.500 teams it all translates to "We have some talent and we've been able to compete to a degree, but we need you to put us over the top."


    Trying his best to mine the good news from an inherently unpleasant public-relations situation, John Allen said Wednesday the Reds' payroll will increase for 2005.

    The club's chief operating officer wouldn't say how much the budget for player salaries might rise, but he did say it was one of the reasons behind a significant bump in single-game ticket prices for next season.
    Well, that leaves me less than filled with confidence. That could mean they spend $48M next season. I'll wait for a definitive number or a significant addition before I get enthusiastic about that.
    Last edited by M2; 11-30-2004 at 10:19 PM.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  10. #204
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    11,243

    Re: Reds sign Wilson

    And that's not the point. The Reds need to pay money to pitchers who can elevate the staff. Wilson, at his best, only manages to keep the team from constantly scraping bottom. The Reds just spent $3.6M on what they don't need. I have no issue with them spending more to get what they do need. I'm all for them spending more to get what they do need.
    The point is that the Reds paid market value for Wilson, maybe a little less.

    The next point is that of the NL FA pitchers with Win Shares equal to or greater than Wilson will all be significantly more costly than him, and quite possibly for not a lot of added production. Folks salivate over Matt Clement and his three additional Win Shares. Why is Clement worth $5M (or more) a season more than Wilson for three extra WS?

  11. #205
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    11,243

    Re: Reds sign Wilson

    Same argument gets made every offseason and during the season, sometimes by you. New crap replaces the old crap on the crap conveyor.
    I'm willing to bet right here, right now, that the Reds don't log 324 innings next year from pitchers with ERAs over 6.00.

    Any takers?

    Archive this sucker.

  12. #206
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    11,243

    Re: Reds sign Wilson

    That leaves you with $9M left to spend on additional pitching (though it could be $4M less if the team's using that higher salary estimation). DanO's been pretty vocal about chasing bullpen help, so that's probably $1M-$3M out of the pie. Dunn may cost more if the team wants to sign him to an extension, based on the principle that you pay a little more up front in order to keep his salary reasonable down the road.

    All tolled, that might leave you enough for a flyer on Matt Morris or Woody Williams -- better options than Lidle was last year, but essentially you've got the same club as in 2004. Again that's if the club uses your $43M starting point in getting to $50M and not the higher figure they traditionally use. Either way, I'm not seeing a lot of room for two quality pitchers in there.
    Well, if they have $9M to spend after arbitration, using $3M to beef up the 'pen leaves $6M for a starter. That could land a Milton or Perez or Leiber. Maybe Millwood, if Boras gets too greedy and he's not signed on Groundhog Day.

    As for the starter acquired through trade, I'm looking for it to be about an even swap of salaries. Position player for pitcher of roughly equal service time and $$, so the budget impact is minimal.

  13. #207
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,160

    Re: Reds sign Wilson

    Quote Originally Posted by guernsey
    I'm willing to bet right here, right now, that the Reds don't log 324 innings next year from pitchers with ERAs over 6.00.

    Any takers?

    Archive this sucker.
    Well you could have made this bet after 2003, claiming the Reds wouldn't get 382 such innings from such horrid pitchers again in 2004 and I suppose you'd have been right, but the team ERA went up anyway.

    I'll bet you this. The 2005 Reds get lots of work from lots of bad pitchers.


    Quote Originally Posted by guernsey
    The point is that the Reds paid market value for Wilson, maybe a little less.

    The next point is that of the NL FA pitchers with Win Shares equal to or greater than Wilson will all be significantly more costly than him, and quite possibly for not a lot of added production. Folks salivate over Matt Clement and his three additional Win Shares. Why is Clement worth $5M (or more) a season more than Wilson for three extra WS?
    And, as has been stated too many times in this thread and in previous months, others will pay far less for better. The Reds bid against themselves for a pitcher they didn't need.

    The point with Clement is he can get you 15+ WS, while Wilson's ceiling is just about 8. You're paying for his coming seasons and, IMO, Clement's been dogged by some bad luck his past two years, his peripherals are better than his outcomes. That worm turns (or just flattens out) and you've got yourself a heck of a pitcher.


    Quote Originally Posted by guernsey
    Well, if they have $9M to spend after arbitration, using $3M to beef up the 'pen leaves $6M for a starter. That could land a Milton or Perez or Leiber. Maybe Millwood, if Boras gets too greedy and he's not signed on Groundhog Day.

    As for the starter acquired through trade, I'm looking for it to be about an even swap of salaries. Position player for pitcher of roughly equal service time and $$, so the budget impact is minimal.
    Milton, no thanks. Lieber, maybe but I wouldn't pay more than $4M for him and I'd be real nervous about it. Millwood maybe, but only for a cheap one-year deal. Basically Perez is the only guy on your list who does anything for me. And you haven't allocated any extra cash toward Dunn's LTC, which may be necessary.

    As for the trade, if that's your plan, you'd better hope someone LOVES D'Angelo Jiminez. Or you could trade Dunn, which strikes me as a thoroughly horrid idea. The best way to work the trade market is to do it with some cash in your pocket so you can ease someone else's financial pain. Costs you less in talent, and the Reds need to horde talent, plus teams don't tend to trade good pitchers they can afford, which is what you've assumed with your plan.
    Last edited by M2; 11-30-2004 at 11:30 PM.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  14. #208
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    11,243

    Re: Reds sign Wilson

    The 2005 get lots of work from lots of bad pitchers.
    Now that's definitive!!

    :MandJ: :MandJ:

    Good night.

  15. #209
    Member SteelSD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    9,333

    Re: Reds sign Wilson

    Quote Originally Posted by guernsey
    The point is that the Reds paid market value for Wilson, maybe a little less.

    The next point is that of the NL FA pitchers with Win Shares equal to or greater than Wilson will all be significantly more costly than him, and quite possibly for not a lot of added production. Folks salivate over Matt Clement and his three additional Win Shares. Why is Clement worth $5M (or more) a season more than Wilson for three extra WS?
    Because it's not three extra Win Shares.

    (BTW, the best Pitchers are consistently worth fewer Win Shares than their offensive counterparts. Just an FYI. Win Shares, although I like THT's numbers better, are fairly nebulous when applied to pitchers. Wish we had the formula but oh well.)

    Over the past three seasons, Clement is worth 18 more Earned Runs (or about 20 total Runs) than Wilson per 200 IP (as if Wilson will ever SEE 200 IP in a single season). That's just about the Run Value difference between an .750 OPS hitter and a .850 OPS hitter. Basically, that's about two standard performance deviations and the upper level is worth geometrically more than the lower.

    But you're pimping the Wilson deal as being worth "market value". Problem is that you can only cite teams being stupid as the "market". Because smart teams understand that you don't pay as much for smoke and mirrors.
    "The problem with strikeouts isn't that they hurt your team, it's that they hurt your feelings..." --Rob Neyer

    "The single most important thing for a hitter is to get a good pitch to hit. A good hitter can hit a pitch that’s over the plate three times better than a great hitter with a ball in a tough spot.”
    --Ted Williams

  16. #210
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,160

    Re: Reds sign Wilson

    Steel, stop making sense.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.


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