Should the Reds move the fences back?

[BadFundamentals]

So the consensus is: Keep the fences; move the pitchers?

nicely done...

HOWEVER, allow me to remind a few of you about a team some thirty years ago in cincinnati that won the world series back to back with a group of pitchers not altogether of different caliber than the current crop. Sure Nolan/Gullet had careers which were statistically a cut above anything on the current staff but as for the other starters (all the Billinghams, Darcys, Kirbys, Alcalas, Normans, Zachrys etc.) if you adjust up their career ERAs ~ .75 to allow for the greater run scoring in today's game they end up looking statistically surprisingly similar to Corey Lidle, Ramon Ortiz, Paul Wilson, Aaron Harang, Eric Milton etc.......etc....

Sure the performances of Reds pitchers have stunk the last 3 years (apart from bullpen first half of 2003) but part of the problem is that in recent years Reds pitchers UNDER ACHIEVE when they put on the Red uniforms.

If I'm not mistaken Reds have had ONE hall of fame pitcher in the last 30 years, Tom Seaver and maybe a hanful of All Stars (Dibbles, Myers, Rijos, Sotos, Charltons, Armstrongs..??). It's a Reds tradition to rely on strong EVERY DAY lineups. Why have Reds pitching staffs in recent years so grossly under performed relative to the over achieving staffs of Reds history?

Certainly, an infield of Rose, Concepcion, Morgan, Perez, Bench would be a bit more inspiring to a pitcher then EE, Lopez, 2B du jour, Casey, LaRue. Just by association you could likely get more out of pitchers by surrounding them with that caliber of talent. Could it be that what some have suggested about recent reds teams related to "lack of leadership", "lack of intensity", "lack of committment" etc.. etc...could be playing more of a part in under-performing pitching performances than one might initially think?

[westofyou]

nicely done...

HOWEVER, allow me to remind a few of you about a team some thirty years ago in cincinnati that won the world series back to back with a group of pitchers not altogether of different caliber than the current crop.

1975 NL TEAM PITCHING STATS

TEAM           W    L   PCT   G    GS    CG   SV  GF   IP      H      R     ER    BB   SO    ERA
Dodgers        88   74 .543   331  162   51   21  111  1470.1  1215   534   477   448   894  2.92 
Pirates        92   69 .571   387  161   43   31  118  1438.2  1302   565   482   551   768  3.02 
Reds          108   54 .667   439  162   22   50  140  1460    1422   586   546   487   663  3.37 
Mets           82   80 .506   391  162   40   31  122  1466.1  1344   625   552   580   989  3.39 
Padres         71   91 .438   452  162   40   20  122  1464.2  1494   683   570   521   713  3.50 
Cardinals      82   80 .506   435  163   33   36  130  1455.1  1452   689   578   571   824  3.57 
Expos          75   87 .463   433  162   30   25  132  1480.2  1448   690   614   665   831  3.73 
Giants         80   81 .497   420  161   37   24  124  1432.2  1406   671   595   612   856  3.74 
Phillies       86   76 .531   445  162   33   30  129  1455.2  1353   694   618   546   897  3.82 
Braves         67   94 .416   428  161   32   24  129  1430.1  1543   739   624   519   669  3.93 
Astros         64   97 .398   427  162   39   25  123  1458.1  1436   711   656   679   839  4.05 
Cubs           75   87 .463   460  162   27   33  135  1445    1587   827   732   551   850  4.56 
TOTALS        970  970 .500  5048 1942  427  350 1515 17458   17002  8014  7044  6730  9793  3.63 


2005 NL TEAM PITCHING STATS

TEAM           W    L   PCT   G    GS    CG   SV  GF   IP      H      R     ER    BB   SO    ERA
Cardinals     100   62 .617   598  162   15   48  147  1445.2  1399   634   560   443   974  3.49 
Astros         89   73 .549   597  163    6   45  157  1443    1336   609   564   440  1164  3.52 
Mets           83   79 .512   554  162    8   38  154  1435.2  1390   648   602   491  1012  3.77 
Nationals      81   81 .500   632  162    4   51  158  1458    1456   673   627   539   997  3.87 
Brewers        81   81 .500   557  162    7   46  155  1438    1382   697   636   569  1173  3.98 
Braves         90   72 .556   646  162    8   38  154  1443.2  1487   674   639   520   929  3.98 
Padres         82   80 .506   618  162    4   45  158  1455.1  1452   726   668   503  1133  4.13 
Marlins        83   79 .512   611  162   14   42  148  1442.1  1459   732   671   563  1125  4.19 
Cubs           79   83 .488   619  162    8   39  154  1440    1357   714   671   576  1256  4.19 
Phillies       88   74 .543   604  162    4   40  158  1435    1379   726   672   487  1159  4.21 
Giants         75   87 .463   673  162    4   46  158  1444.1  1456   745   698   592   972  4.35 
Dodgers        71   91 .438   620  162    6   40  156  1427.1  1434   755   695   471  1004  4.38 
Pirates        67   95 .414   613  162    4   35  158  1436    1456   769   708   612   958  4.44 
Diamondbacks   77   85 .475   620  162    6   45  156  1456.1  1580   856   788   537  1038  4.87 
Rockies        67   95 .414   621  162    4   37  158  1418.2  1600   862   810   604   981  5.14 
Reds           73   89 .451   654  163    2   31  161  1433    1657   889   824   492   955  5.18 
TOTALS       1286 1306 .496  9837 2594  104  666 2490 23052.1 23280 11709 10833  8439 16830  4.23 

[Cyclone792]

1975 NL TEAM PITCHING STATS

TEAM           W    L   PCT   G    GS    CG   SV  GF   IP      H      R     ER    BB   SO    ERA
Dodgers        88   74 .543   331  162   51   21  111  1470.1  1215   534   477   448   894  2.92 
Pirates        92   69 .571   387  161   43   31  118  1438.2  1302   565   482   551   768  3.02 
Reds          108   54 .667   439  162   22   50  140  1460    1422   586   546   487   663  3.37 
Mets           82   80 .506   391  162   40   31  122  1466.1  1344   625   552   580   989  3.39 
Padres         71   91 .438   452  162   40   20  122  1464.2  1494   683   570   521   713  3.50 
Cardinals      82   80 .506   435  163   33   36  130  1455.1  1452   689   578   571   824  3.57 
Expos          75   87 .463   433  162   30   25  132  1480.2  1448   690   614   665   831  3.73 
Giants         80   81 .497   420  161   37   24  124  1432.2  1406   671   595   612   856  3.74 
Phillies       86   76 .531   445  162   33   30  129  1455.2  1353   694   618   546   897  3.82 
Braves         67   94 .416   428  161   32   24  129  1430.1  1543   739   624   519   669  3.93 
Astros         64   97 .398   427  162   39   25  123  1458.1  1436   711   656   679   839  4.05 
Cubs           75   87 .463   460  162   27   33  135  1445    1587   827   732   551   850  4.56 
TOTALS        970  970 .500  5048 1942  427  350 1515 17458   17002  8014  7044  6730  9793  3.63 


2005 NL TEAM PITCHING STATS

TEAM           W    L   PCT   G    GS    CG   SV  GF   IP      H      R     ER    BB   SO    ERA
Cardinals     100   62 .617   598  162   15   48  147  1445.2  1399   634   560   443   974  3.49 
Astros         89   73 .549   597  163    6   45  157  1443    1336   609   564   440  1164  3.52 
Mets           83   79 .512   554  162    8   38  154  1435.2  1390   648   602   491  1012  3.77 
Nationals      81   81 .500   632  162    4   51  158  1458    1456   673   627   539   997  3.87 
Brewers        81   81 .500   557  162    7   46  155  1438    1382   697   636   569  1173  3.98 
Braves         90   72 .556   646  162    8   38  154  1443.2  1487   674   639   520   929  3.98 
Padres         82   80 .506   618  162    4   45  158  1455.1  1452   726   668   503  1133  4.13 
Marlins        83   79 .512   611  162   14   42  148  1442.1  1459   732   671   563  1125  4.19 
Cubs           79   83 .488   619  162    8   39  154  1440    1357   714   671   576  1256  4.19 
Phillies       88   74 .543   604  162    4   40  158  1435    1379   726   672   487  1159  4.21 
Giants         75   87 .463   673  162    4   46  158  1444.1  1456   745   698   592   972  4.35 
Dodgers        71   91 .438   620  162    6   40  156  1427.1  1434   755   695   471  1004  4.38 
Pirates        67   95 .414   613  162    4   35  158  1436    1456   769   708   612   958  4.44 
Diamondbacks   77   85 .475   620  162    6   45  156  1456.1  1580   856   788   537  1038  4.87 
Rockies        67   95 .414   621  162    4   37  158  1418.2  1600   862   810   604   981  5.14 
Reds           73   89 .451   654  163    2   31  161  1433    1657   889   824   492   955  5.18 
TOTALS       1286 1306 .496  9837 2594  104  666 2490 23052.1 23280 11709 10833  8439 16830  4.23 

Yep, in 1975 we had an ERA+ of 107 ... compared to an ERA+ of a whopping 86 in 2005. Heck, if we had a 107 ERA+ this past season we'd have won 90 games, if not more.

[BadFundamentals]

that's irrelevant.

Look at the CAREERS of those 75/76 pitchers you'll see that as a GROUP they over-performed their career stats in 75/76. Look at the Lidles, Miltons, Ortiz etc..etc...they all underperform when they become reds. Bad trend.

[BadFundamentals]

("irrelevant" maybe a little strong...but 3rd in league vs. last in league is not the point)

[pedro]

("irrelevant" maybe a little strong...but 3rd in league vs. last in league is not the point)

Well yes it is. IIRC you yourself often like to point out that AB's and games are not isolated events but happen within the context of a league and an entire season. If your team has the 3rd best pitching in the league then it stands to reason that that pitching would be a major contributor to that teams success. Granted, had the 2005 Reds pitching staff been backed up by a defense comparable to the 1975-76 teams they may have been a notch better but nonetheless the fact the 2005 Reds were last in the league in pitching is extremely relevant.

[flyer85]

The BF shuffle ... open mouth and insert foot.

[SteelSD]

HOWEVER, allow me to remind a few of you about a team some thirty years ago in cincinnati that won the world series back to back with a group of pitchers not altogether of different caliber than the current crop. Sure Nolan/Gullet had careers which were statistically a cut above anything on the current staff but as for the other starters (all the Billinghams, Darcys, Kirbys, Alcalas, Normans, Zachrys etc.) if you adjust up their career ERAs ~ .75 to allow for the greater run scoring in today's game they end up looking statistically surprisingly similar to Corey Lidle, Ramon Ortiz, Paul Wilson, Aaron Harang, Eric Milton etc.......etc....

Sure the performances of Reds pitchers have stunk the last 3 years (apart from bullpen first half of 2003) but part of the problem is that in recent years Reds pitchers UNDER ACHIEVE when they put on the Red uniforms.

No. No, they didn't look like "statistically similar" to Corey Lidle, Ramon Ortiz, Paul Wilson, and Eric Milton.

First, you can't just wash away Gary Nolan and Don Gullett, who combined for 735.7 Innings of above-average pitching during 1975 and 1976. That's a big deal because the current version of the Reds doesn't have two Starting Pitchers who can do that although Aaron Harang might be a start.

Pat Darcy had no history (or future) outside the BRM, so I'm not sure how you can say he "overachieved". Jack Billingham posted his worst ERA+ (ERA versus league average) seasons with the Reds and produced better results than his 1975/1976 seasons with other teams. Likewise, Clay Kirby produced similar and better results before joining the Reds. Pat Zachary was a rookie in 1976, pitched awful ball for the Reds in 1977, but produced at an above-average clip with for three seasons with the Mets.

Fred Norman produced a below average ERA+ in 1975 with the Reds (96 ERA+) which was nearly identical to his numbers in 1971, 1972, and 1973. Norman produced better than average ERA numbers in 1974 and 1976, but did so by significantly cutting his HR rate which has nothing to do with the defense. Santo Alcala put up exactly 132.0 Innings as a rookie in 1976, so it's not as if he was carrying a load.

The BRM bullpen? Rawley Eastwick was a rook in 1974 (amazing how rookies keep popping up during that run, huh?), came out blazing until the Reds traded him in 1977. He's really the only guy I can find who performed with another club at a level significantly lower than he did with the Reds. Will McEnaney was ANOTHER 1974 rookie. He pitched poorly in his short stint that season, then pitched really well in 1975, then pitched very poorly in 1976 (with the same Reds team). He was traded to the Expos in 1977 and pitched much better for them than he did the 1976 club and finished his career pitching well above average ball for St. Louis in 1979.

Pedro Borbon pitched all but 106 Innings with the Reds so it's near impossible to tell if he got a "bonus" from the BRM defense. I have little doubt that the Reds defense helped him more than anyone else because he couldn't strike out anyone. The Reds have NO ONE on the team remotely resembling Clay Carroll- who pitched exceptionally well both before joining the Reds and after he left.

Now the 2005 squad...

Aaron Harang broke out this season at age 27. Let's hope that continues.

Cory Lidle threw awful ball the year before the Reds acquired him. Eric Milton hasn't made anyone even THINK of "league average Starting Pitcher" since 2001. The last time Ramon Ortiz did anything resembling "decent" was 2003 and only then because he was the luckiest pitcher on the planet. You have to be to post an ERA under 4.00 while giving up 40 HR. Ortiz ERA+ in 2003 was 82 and he posted an ERA+ of 83 with the Reds in 2005. No way that cat "underperformed" with the Reds. It was predictable. Claussen hasn't underperformed in the least. In fact, he most likely got a little bit ERA-lucky in 2005 but that's a moot point because we don't have any legit non-Reds performance to compare Claussen to.

Don't even get me started on the bullpen. There's simply zero comparison.

So, where are all these guys who "overperformed" on the BRM? And where are all the guys who've "underperformed" for the recent Reds?

They don't exist.

If I'm not mistaken Reds have had ONE hall of fame pitcher in the last 30 years, Tom Seaver and maybe a hanful of All Stars (Dibbles, Myers, Rijos, Sotos, Charltons, Armstrongs..??). It's a Reds tradition to rely on strong EVERY DAY lineups. Why have Reds pitching staffs in recent years so grossly under performed relative to the over achieving staffs of Reds history?

The Reds pitchers haven't underperformed recently. They're just bad pitchers. That's what happens when you can't draft starting pitchers, can't develop starting pitchers, and can't trade for or sign starting pitchers who have a halfway recent decent of recent performance.

And shame on you for forgetting who John Franco is.

Certainly, an infield of Rose, Concepcion, Morgan, Perez, Bench would be a bit more inspiring to a pitcher then EE, Lopez, 2B du jour, Casey, LaRue. Just by association you could likely get more out of pitchers by surrounding them with that caliber of talent.

It's nice to see that your new pet project is Edwin Encarnacion. I'll warn you, however, his indicators currently point to him having the ability to be one of the top handful of defensive 3B in the game as he matures. I know why you dislike young players and I know that you don't understand how this whole "projection" thing works, but you're as off-base about him as you were about Felipe Lopez and nearly as off-base as you've been about Adam Dunn.

When you're wrong as often as you've been, at some point you need to figure out why you've been wrong and quit being wrong. In short, if it hurts when you do that then STOP DOING THAT.

And there's no one on your "current" list that is close to being as bad at their position as Pete Rose was at 3B (the position he played for the BRM in 1975-76). By the time Rose moved back in from the Outfield to man third, his range had significantly deteriorated versus his days at Second Base and his arm was never truly good enough to play third. After 613 games there from 1975-78, I have a feeling that he was completely happy to accept the Phillies offer knowing that he didn't need to worry about playing that position due to the presence of a guy named Mike Schmidt.

Seriously, a guy with as big an ego as Rose...I can literally hear the conversation:

Phillies: "...and Pete, we won't ask you to play Third Base."

Rose: "And where do I sign?"

Could it be that what some have suggested about recent reds teams related to "lack of leadership", "lack of intensity", "lack of committment" etc.. etc...could be playing more of a part in under-performing pitching performances than one might initially think?

No, because the recent Reds pitchers haven't underperformed. You love Joe Randa for his "leadership". Pitchers stunk. You were a big Rich Aurilia supporter. Pitchers stunk. You love (or I guess, used to) love Sean Casey. Pitchers stunk.

See, bad pitchers can stink regardless of the ballpark. Bad pitchers can stink with anyone playing behind them. Bad pitchers can stink with any collection of teammates walking to the plate. They can stink regardless of who's in the clubhouse.

Why?

Because that's what bad pitchers do.

[BadFundamentals]

The facts are CLEAR.

There were 10 pitchers on 75/76 staffs who pitched 90+ innings in 75 or 76.
SP Jack Billingham
SP Gary Nolan
SP *Fred Norman
SP Pat Darcy
SP *Don Gullett
SP Clay Kirby
CL Rawly Eastwick
RP *Will McEnaney
RP Pedro Borbon
RP Clay Carroll
SP Pat Zachry

Of those 10, two pitchers (Kirby and Darcy) were every bit as bad pitchers as what we've seen the last few years. Billingham had unremarkable career and worse years in 75/76. Nolan at end of career also stank it up in 75/76. So we have FOUR pitchers who were no better quality than current Reds pitchers.

As for the other 6, ALL the REST OVER-PERFORMED their career numbers in 75/76. All of them ! ! Eastwick didn't have a brilliant career but he was BRILLIANT in 75/76. 72-76 was it for Borbon then nothing, then out of baseball. Norman, journeyman type numbers one of best years of career in 76. Zachry best year of career in 76. Gullet, good career, BEST year in 75. Carrol, 2.90 for career, but 2.60 in 75/76.

Reds didn't have all star staffs then but the guys then typically peformed up to or greater than expectations.

The current trend for Reds pitching is to put on Reds uniform and then stink it up.

[Heath]

Unfortunately the GABP isn't an erector set where we can take chairs down and stands as we see fit.

They designed the stadium for a short porch in right - we'll make our bed and lie in it.

[ochre]

The current trend for Reds pitching is to put on Reds uniform and then stink it up.

So the fact that's CLEAR is that bad pitchers stink? What exactly are you trying to say, and how are you going to relate it back to Dunn striking out too much? Cut to the chase, don't leave us all hanging like that.

[Chip R]

The facts are CLEAR.

What's clear is you are trolling. All you do is post here to get a rise out of others. Even when confronted with evidence to the contrary you ignore it and continue to troll. That is clearly against the rules. Consider yourself warned.

[Jim]

For the amount of money it would cost to move the fences back, you could buy the pitching and save the trouble.

EXCELLENT point!

[Blimpie]

What's clear is you are trolling. All you do is post here to get a rise out of others. Even when confronted with evidence to the contrary you ignore it and continue to troll. That is clearly against the rules. Consider yourself warned.

Warning (20%)...Warning (40%)...Will Robinson!

[SteelSD]

The facts are CLEAR.

Not to you.

The current trend for Reds pitching is to put on Reds uniform and then stink it up.

Let's take a look at the guys who were hanging around the Reds in 2005 who came from somewhere else...

Paul Wilson ERA+

Tampa Bay 2001: 92
Tampa Bay 2002: 92
Cincinnati 2003: 92
Cincinnati 2004: 92

Ramon Ortiz ERA+ (as Starter)

Anaheim 2003: 82
Anaheim 2004: 84
Cincinnati 2005: 83

Eric Milton ERA+

Minnesota 2002: 91
Philadelphia 2004: 92
Cincinnati 2005: 69

Paul Wilson joins up. SAME pitcher he had been with the D-Rays. Ramon Ortiz signs on. SAME pitcher he had been with the Angels. A Home Run machine like Eric Milton has money thrown at him while everyone knows he's got a knee injury that will never EVER heal, and you get his 2005 season. None of those three guys "underperformed" while with the Reds.

Two of those pitchers posted identical ERA numbers versus league average for at least two seasons prior to joining the Reds. Milton was below average before signing on and there was every chance that we'd see nothing but the worst of him because of his physical issues. Even Cory Lidle threw 192+ awful Innings for Toronto the year before joining the Reds. Then what did he do? Threw awful ball for the Reds. Hardly a mind-blowing occurrance.

Coming into 2005, only four active MLB Pitchers had posted a season in which they allowed 40+ Home Runs while also posting a season in which they had allowed 50 Doubles. Dan O'Brien, in his infinite wisdom, decided that it was a good idea to acquire two of them for the 2005 Cincinnati Reds. Three of those four pitchers (Ortiz, Milton, Lima- in that order) finished 91st, 92nd, and 93rd in OPS Against among the ninety-three 2005 ERA qualifiers. The fourth (Jamie Moyer) was saved only by the cavern he calls a ballpark. Moyer's road numbers (.913 OPSA) would have ranked him between Milton and Lima on that list.

You think that's some kind of coincidence?

See, here's the thing...

When you bring in pitchers who have a history of stinking things up, they'll most likely stink things up with your team as well. When you import pitchers who have proven they can give up the longball like nobody's business and then watch them suck, you're not seeing "underperformance". You're watching DESTINY in full-on action.

Has nothing to do with "intangibles" or "chemistry" or fairy dust or magic jelly beans.

It has everything to do with the fact that bad pitchers pitch badly.