Turn Off Ads?
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 21

Thread: Infield defense

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    13,861

    Infield defense

    Felipe Lopez' fielding percentage is .946. EE's is .890.

    Together they have just about half of the Reds' major league leading 47 errors.

    Growing pains or a real problem?
    Last edited by Kc61; 05-29-2006 at 11:12 PM.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #2
    Resident optimist OldRightHander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    east of WOY
    Posts
    5,045

    Re: Infield defense

    I would like to think what we're seeing is a case of growing pains. Most of the errors seem to be more physical than mental, and it's the mental errors that seem harder to take.

  4. #3
    The Lineups stink. KronoRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    West N. Carolina
    Posts
    55,702

    Re: Infield defense

    Growing pains for EE, a concerning issue for Lopez
    Go Gators!

  5. #4
    Member harangatang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,552

    Re: Infield defense

    Lopez is more of a concern than EE but I think they both have a chance to settle down and play much better defense in the order of errors. People tend to forget Larkin made 29 errors in 1988.

  6. #5
    Worst Behavior. reds44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    25,430

    Re: Infield defense

    Is it just more or does EE have to seemed to settle down as of late? I am not as worried about EE as I am Felipe. Bad range + wild arm= problems for Felipe.
    Quote Originally Posted by PuffyPig View Post
    Let's face it, you mis-hit the bun with the mustard squirter, no one will really care.

  7. #6
    Stat Wanker Hodiernus RedsManRick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Guelph, ON
    Posts
    16,085

    Re: Infield defense

    That Larkin logic bugs me.

    1.) We have a SS committing lots of errors

    2.) We once had a SS who committed lots of errors and then became a GG

    3.) Therefore, no need to worry about our current SS.

    For every Larkin that had a bad year and got better, there are 10 guys who had a bad year BECAUSE THEY WERE BAD. Lopez's erractic arm has shown no signs of improving. Futhermore, our current stock of 1B exacerbates the issue. Meanwhile, we have a plus defending SS playing 2B. I'm not in the 'switch them now' camp. But if it's not considered in the offseason, that will be quite frustrating.
    Games are won on run differential -- scoring more than your opponent. Runs are runs, scored or prevented they all count the same. Worry about scoring more and allowing fewer, not which positions contribute to which side of the equation or how "consistent" you are at your current level of performance.

  8. #7
    smells of rich mahogany deltachi8's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    3,001

    Re: Infield defense

    Im not really concerned about Edwin, his range is terrific, he has a strong arm and is very young, it will all come together for him in time.

    FeLo I am a bit more concerned with. Basically, I think he is miscast as a SS and the Reds should give serious thought to moving him to 2b.
    Nothing to see here. Please disperse.

  9. #8
    Member Red Heeler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Cookeville, TN
    Posts
    1,659

    Re: Infield defense

    Quote Originally Posted by RedsManRick
    That Larkin logic bugs me.

    1.) We have a SS committing lots of errors

    2.) We once had a SS who committed lots of errors and then became a GG

    3.) Therefore, no need to worry about our current SS.

    For every Larkin that had a bad year and got better, there are 10 guys who had a bad year BECAUSE THEY WERE BAD. Lopez's erractic arm has shown no signs of improving. Futhermore, our current stock of 1B exacerbates the issue. Meanwhile, we have a plus defending SS playing 2B. I'm not in the 'switch them now' camp. But if it's not considered in the offseason, that will be quite frustrating.
    Good point. The errors would be less of a concern for Lopez if he had Larkin-like range. His errors become more of a problem because he doesn't get to a whole lot of balls.

    EdE on the other hand minimalizes the effect of his errors by getting to more balls than nearly any other 3B in the majors. That is what bugs me about the thought that Aurillia is a better defender. Sure, there is a greater chance that EdE might make an error, but he will also stop a lot of balls that would be doubles with Aurillia at 3B.

  10. #9
    Stat Wanker Hodiernus RedsManRick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Guelph, ON
    Posts
    16,085

    Re: Infield defense

    Exactly, I think Lopez could be a very solid 2B. He's athletic, he just don't get a great jump and doesn't have the raw burst speed to make up for it. A move to 2B would minimize that issue and also should help with the accuracy issues.

    I also agree with your take on EE. He has GG range, but again it's his throwing. Furthermore, we do NOT have a better option there, unlike Phillips and SS. EE is 3 years younger than Felipe. If he's still throwing balls in to the 3rd row on a regular basis in 2008, I'd have a similar suggestion.
    Games are won on run differential -- scoring more than your opponent. Runs are runs, scored or prevented they all count the same. Worry about scoring more and allowing fewer, not which positions contribute to which side of the equation or how "consistent" you are at your current level of performance.

  11. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    769

    Re: Infield defense

    If the Reds are going to consider moving Lopez to 2B, I'd rather see them look to move him. The market is going to be much greater for a good-hitting SS (albeit one with defensive shortcomings) than it will be for a good-hitting 2B. Perhaps my logic is all wrong on this one, but I'm of the opinion that Lopez would net us a really good package (including starting pitching help). If you swap him to 2b, you'll see that return diminish (if not disappear) and face further hurdles with the price he seeks in free agency.

  12. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    13,861

    Re: Infield defense

    Quote Originally Posted by BrooklynRedz
    If the Reds are going to consider moving Lopez to 2B, I'd rather see them look to move him. The market is going to be much greater for a good-hitting SS (albeit one with defensive shortcomings) than it will be for a good-hitting 2B. Perhaps my logic is all wrong on this one, but I'm of the opinion that Lopez would net us a really good package (including starting pitching help). If you swap him to 2b, you'll see that return diminish (if not disappear) and face further hurdles with the price he seeks in free agency.
    I would switch the positions of Phillips and Lopez and do it as soon as Phillips returns from injury. I wouldn't trade either.

    Lopez is a plus offensive middle infielder. Even at second base, he is much better offensively than most. His trade value may be higher at shortstop, but his playing value (as a Red) is higher at second, where his throwing problems would be less of an issue.

    Phillips is a great athlete. I would certainly give him the full shot at shortstop. At second base, he is not a high error guy; hopefully that would carry over to his new position.

    As for timing, I see no reason to wait. The team isn't playing well, the defense is awful. Lopez has played second (I know he did at AAA) and Phillips has played short. I would just make the move and give it some time to work out.

    As for EE, I agree he should get more time to cut down the errors.

  13. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    princeton, nj
    Posts
    9,482

    Re: Infield defense

    Reds aren't going to switch Lopez to 2nd, so it's a silly argument. There was a time to move him, and it already passed. If he continues to hit, then his next move is to 3rd base. But he also will improve at SS, and if paired with a very good second baseman, then he's a big asset. Enjoy him.

    The Reds have paired him with a good second baseman, which was the right move. The other right move is a rangy CFer

  14. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    13,861

    Re: Infield defense

    Quote Originally Posted by princeton
    Reds aren't going to switch Lopez to 2nd, so it's a silly argument. There was a time to move him, and it already passed. If he continues to hit, then his next move is to 3rd base. But he also will improve at SS, and if paired with a very good second baseman, then he's a big asset. Enjoy him.

    The Reds have paired him with a good second baseman, which was the right move. The other right move is a rangy CFer
    Reds kept FeLo at short, but that was before they had Phillips. We'll see if they move him.

    Agree 100 percent about centerfield.

  15. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    princeton, nj
    Posts
    9,482

    Re: Infield defense

    Quote Originally Posted by Kc61
    Reds kept FeLo at short, but that was before they had Phillips. .
    Phillips isn't the type of player for whom you move other players. Phillips has to go where there's an open spot and hope that he doesn't screw it up.

    Lopez is a player that gets to play where he wants, until the day that he gets dealt.

  16. #15
    He has the Evil Eye! flyer85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    south of the border
    Posts
    23,858

    Re: Infield defense

    FRAA for 2006

    EE(-8), Hatty(-5), FeLo(-4), BP(-3), RA(0) at 1B and 3b

    of note for the OF Dunn(-4) Jr(-2) AK(2) and Freel-CF(2)
    What are you, people? On dope? - Mr Hand


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