10 Reasons Why The Reds Will Win The NL Central

[mth123]

I'll go a step further and look at the Reds opponents:

Cardinals---Okay they signed second baseman Adam Kennedy, OF Preston Wilson and re-signed Mark Mulder (who won't be ready at the start of the season). But did they improve that much significantly? Pujols was out for a portion of the season but Jim Edmonds is in decline and Scott Rolen's injury history is something to note. But losing Marquis and Suppan and hoping Reyes and Wainwright will step in maintain the same level of success for the starting rotation remains to be seen. And Jason Isringhausen recovery from hip surgery will be watched closely in spring training. Still, has the Cards offseason moves doesn't seem like they improved significantly from last season.

Losing Marquis and Suppan is addition by subtraction. The rotation is improved because of the losses of these guys not worse. And Wainwright and Reyes would be the 3 and 4 we've been screaming for. Kip Wells will be the free agent signing of the off-season. This team is good when they are all on the field. Don't count on Edmonds, Izzy and Rolen missing so much time in 2007 like they did in 2006. Chris Duncan may be the break-out player of 2007.

Chicago---They made a big splash this offseason with all their signings and moves including bringing in Lou Pinella. But an outfield of Floyd/Murton, Soriano and Jones is horrible defensively. Sure the Cubs will be able smash the ball with their hitters but so could the Reds and where did that get them? Their starting rotation is questionable and if they think Marquis and Lilly will win more than 15 games apiece, that is asking alot. But the bullpen with the erratic Ryan Dempster will hurt them in the long haul unless Kerry Wood and his achy elbow show he can be a successful closer.

Zambrano, Hill, Prior, Lilly, Marmol, Marshall, and Guzman would all be better bets as the Reds number three than anyone on the Reds roster. I agree that Marquis is a waste of money. In the bullpen, Dempster is a little shaky but with Eyre, Howry, Wood, Ohman and Wuertz (and the starters above that don't make it) they are deep, effective and have options to turn to. I wish the reds had the cubs pen.

Houston---They lose Pettite but acquire Jennings and we'll call that even. Signing Carlos Lee was nice but there are questions about his weight and we know how players become complacent after they signed that big multi-year deal. Lee can replace loss production with the departure of Bagwell and makes a nice tandem with Lance Berkman. But asking their second baseman of today, Chris Burke, to play center and their second baseman of the past, Craig Biggio to play 120+ games is asking alot. But if OF Jason Lane and closer Brad Lidge don't rebound from horrible 2006 seasons, this team might not have improved as much as people think. And there is always the Roger Clemens issue.

Bagwell hasn't been on the field in a couple years so his loss doesn't matter when looking at last year. Burke will be an upgrade in CF overall. I was not and am not a fan of Willy Tavaras or that Juan Pierre type of player. I agree tha Biggio is on the decline, but they signed Mark Loretta to ease the burden and the combination will be ok. Jason Lane is only tabbed for the bench at this point and Luke Scott (who had an MVP caliber 2nd half) will be in the OF with Lee and Burke. I agree that a lot hinges on Clemens and Lidge. If Clemens doesn't pitch for Houston they'll finish 4th (looking down on Pittsburgh and Cincy). If he comes back by July or so, they'll be in it.

Milwaukee---Here is a team that bears watching. If Richie Weeks and Ben Sheets can remain healthy this team will contend. Estrada improves their catching and a full year of Cordero as the closer will be better than what Kolb or Turnbow did last year. They still have a move to make because they want to shift Bill Hall to LF which means either Mench or Jenkins could be dealt to possibly upgrade center field or add more pitching depth. But even with Sheets and Suppan in the rotation, the rest of it looks ordinary and the Reds rotation looks possibly better than the Brewers on paper.

Corey Koskie's post concussion syndrome could mean Hall back at 3B with Mench and Jenkins in LF. They'll be pretty good offensively if they do that. I like their pitching the best with Sheets, Capuano, Suppan and Bush in the rotation and the back of the bullpen with Cordero, Capellan, Wise and that pesky Shouse. This is a team that just needs to stay healthy (especially in the rotation).

Pittsburgh---The Pirates were mentioned before on this thread so I won't elaborate in depth. Sure they have a young, promising rotation but trading Mike Gonzalez means Salamon Torres is the closer for the time being unless Matt Capps steps up to be closer. Adam LaRoche was a big trade but this team has been cursed since it dealt 3rd baseman Armis Ramirez to the Cubs. What they lack is a bopper that can swing from the right side (Xavier Nady isn't it). Still losing since 1992 brings up a stench in Pittsburgh that is only wiped away come September when the Steelers take over the sports pages in town.

I already discussed them above and they are not on par with these other 4 teams. But they do look very similar to the Reds IMO. If everyone is so quick to write-off the Pirates, what is the source of all this belief in the Reds outside of springtime optimism?

There is my short analysis. Again, I don't see any team improving themselves significantly. With all the wheeling and dealing the Cubs did, they weaken their outfield defense and signing Marquis and Lilly to big contracts for .500 records is ludicrous. I'm willing to bet Milton and Loshe will have more wins than these two.

I hope you are right and I am wrong. I really do. Good discussion.

[Falls City Beer]

Everything could break right for the Reds--everything--and they're still not going to catch Houston, St. Louis, or Milwaukee.

I'm picking them to finish last in the division. 68 wins.

[vaticanplum]

I want to remind everyone who points out that the Cardinals haven't improved significantly that the Cardinals WON THE WORLD SERIES. Call it a fluke, point out the weaknesses on that team, but you don't get through an entire season and three playoff series and come out on top without some kind of team of merit.

That said...and I have been avoiding saying it...I feel good about the Reds this year. I have nothing to back that up and I'm not going to try. That's just how I feel.

[camisadelgolf]

You mean the Reds, who haven't had a winning season since 2000, compare with the defending World Series champs who boast the games best hitter, two other perennial All Stars on offense and an annual contender for the Cy Young award?

Yes, I think the reds compare. How far apart were their records last year? What did the Cardinals do to improve?

You mean the Reds, who man 1B with a pair of players who offer little in the way of power or promise, compare with an annual contender like Houston who boast one of the games top hitters at 1B?

No, Houston definitely has an edge at first base. However, there is a lot more than one position on the baseball field.

You mean the Reds, who spent the off-season overpaying for the likes of David Weathers, Mike Stanton, Chad Moeller and Jeff Conine, compare with a team that went out and spent serious money to retain or acquire all star caliber players like Alfonso Soriano and Aramis Ramirez?

You're right--Javon Moran, a utility outfielder "prospect", was way too much to give up for Jeff Conine, a proven utility guy who will reap us two early draft picks after 2007. And David Weathers is certainly over-paid. I mean, $2.25 million for a guy who posted a 4.00+ ERA once in the past seven years? RIDICULOUS! Oh, and Stanton? Who in his right mind would pay $2 million dollars for a guy who has been approximately league average or better ever single year for over the past decade while posting a 2.10 ERA in 53 career post-season appearances? There's no way I'd want to fill gaps on a team with those three World Series winners. Oh, and "over-paying" is a good word for bringing in Chad Moeller--it's because of that signing we couldn't afford a third starter in free agency.

You mean the Reds, who haven’t developed a starting pitcher since Tom Browning and boast only Adam Dunn, Chris Denorfia and Todd Coffey as homegrown talents that project to play serious roles with any success, compare with the Brewers who have budding homegrown stars all around like Prince Fielder, Ricky Weeks, Ben Sheets, JJ Hardy and Corey Hart?

You're right--the Brewers have better home-grown talent. Let's just skip the regular season and put them in the World Series right now. Good point.

Before the Reds lay claim to any ability to compete with those teams, lets aim a little lower and see if the Reds could even compete with its fellow friend in futility the Pittsburgh Pirates.

Offensively, when I look at the Pirates I see a team with middle of the order that could be formidable with Jason Bay as the key guy and other power bats like Adam LaRoche and Xavier Nady (both projected at OPS over .800). The Pirates could be an offensive force if Freddy Sanchez (.344/.378/.473 with 53 doubles in 2006) makes the move to 2B. Sanchez probably won’t repeat his 2006 numbers but still should OPS near .800 and at 2B that would be quite an asset. This would also allow Jose Bautista in the line-up at 3B. Bautista could end-up as the power bat that pushes the Pirates to respectability. He still projects with an OPS below .800 but at the 60th percentile PECOTA predicts a slugging percentage of .454. Additional power could come from Ryan Doumit who should see some time at Catcher and as a switch hitter possibly some time at 1B against lefties. PECOTA is projecting a slugging % of .448 at the 50th percentile. Last year’s 2B Jose Castilla could move to the super sub role (he has been playing OF in the Carribean World Series) and would probably benefit with less exposure. Jack Wilson is still at SS and isn’t much offensively but is at least a wash with Alex Gonzalez IMO. The other key to the offense could be at CF/Lead-off. Here the Reds seem to have an advantage with Freel and Denorfia over Chris Duffy and Nate McClouth. Both Duffy and McLouth project to OBPs in the .325 to .340 range. Both put up decent OBPs in the minors but Duffy’s was more batting average driven while McLouth sprinkled in a few more walks. Overall I see an offense at Pittsburgh with similar strengths and similar question marks as compared to the Reds. I actually see more upside at Pittsburgh though.

As far as Pitching goes, the Reds seem to have an advantage with the top 2 starters, but the Pirates rotation of Duke, Gorzelanny, Snell, Malholm and Armas is much more likely to put up a good start day in and day out. PECOTA projects the top 4 to be about average or better with Armas having an ERA in Milton-land. ZIPS projects all 5 to have an ERA less than 5.00 with Duke at 3.92. The best case for the Reds would be a wash in these rotations, but Pittsburgh has more depth and more upside. In the Bullpen Pittsburgh took a hit by trading Mike Gonzalez, but with Salomon Torres closing (a projected ZIPS ERA of 3.44), Damaso Marte (3.97 ZIPS) providing a veteran lefy and Matt Capps (23 with a ZIPS ERA projected at 3.87), Josh Sharpless (26 with a 4.11 ZIPS), Jonah Bayliss (26/4.69), and John Grabow (28/4.23) providing youth, effectiveness and upside they compare favorably with the Reds. Todd Coffey (4.04 ZIPS) and maybe Mike Stanton (3.71) might be the only Reds reliever to even make the roster in Pittsburgh. David Weathers (5.35), Rheal Cormier (4.89), and Bill Bray (4.79) would probably be deemed past their expiration date or not yet ready. Gary Majewski (4.21) could possibly be a 12th man on the staff.

The Reds and Pittsburgh are pretty evenly matched with similar holes and strengths on offense. I like Pittsburgh’s pitching better with the Reds having an advantage at the top but Pittsburgh having a deeper rotation and a better bullpen.

Its going to be a good race in the central - for 5th place.

You're right about Pittsburgh. Everyone knows it's the youthful pitchers that put together the most dominant, consistent numbers. I think you can pretty much bank on almost all their guys having 10+ win seasons and sub-4.00 ERAs.

[AdamDunn]

by tradition, we'll be tied for first at the all-star break and then fall to third place

[mth123]

Yes, I think the reds compare. How far apart were their records last year? What did the Cardinals do to improve?



No, Houston definitely has an edge at first base. However, there is a lot more than one position on the baseball field.



You're right--Javon Moran, a utility outfielder "prospect", was way too much to give up for Jeff Conine, a proven utility guy who will reap us two early draft picks after 2007. And David Weathers is certainly over-paid. I mean, $2.25 million for a guy who posted a 4.00+ ERA once in the past seven years? RIDICULOUS! Oh, and Stanton? Who in his right mind would pay $2 million dollars for a guy who has been approximately league average or better ever single year for over the past decade while posting a 2.10 ERA in 53 career post-season appearances? There's no way I'd want to fill gaps on a team with those three World Series winners. Oh, and "over-paying" is a good word for bringing in Chad Moeller--it's because of that signing we couldn't afford a third starter in free agency.



You're right--the Brewers have better home-grown talent. Let's just skip the regular season and put them in the World Series right now. Good point.



You're right about Pittsburgh. Everyone knows it's the youthful pitchers that put together the most dominant, consistent numbers. I think you can pretty much bank on almost all their guys having 10+ win seasons and sub-4.00 ERAs.

St. Louis will have a better rotation in 2007 than in 2006. And in 2006 the Cardinals lost significant time from the lead-off hitter (and SS), and 2/3 of the middle of its order (who happen to man key defensive spots in CF and 3B). They will have their closer back. Even Pujols was out for a couple weeks and playing a little hurt upon returning. There is no comparison. As the Cardinals got all of these guys back and their play improved to the play-off caliber team that they are, the Reds lost 2 key offensive players at the all star break and the guy who was the best hitter afterwards. These teams seemed fairly evenly matched while going head to head in June of 2006, but since then the Cardinals have added a lot just by getting guys back from injury while the Reds have subtracted key offensive contributors with no real improvement to the pitching staff. Don't confuse the Reds being competitive with St. Louis in June with where either of these teams are now.

As for the overpayment remarks. Conine has slugged .450 once since 1999 (2003) and had an OBP above .350 twice (2001 and 2005) since 1996. Any talent at all and the $2 Million paid is an overpayment. Weathers walked over 4 and gave up 1.47 HR per nine innings in 2006. A deadly combination that was mitigated by a BABIP of .236. He is projected for an ERA over 5 in 2007. This was not a guy to re-sign at any cost, so over $2 Million is an overpayment IMO. Stanton wasn't as bad a deal, but the combined money from those 3 (and some others where it is being slowly frittered away) could have actually addressed a need or 2. An upgrade from Lohse $4 Million by some of that amount could go a long way. The point is simply that the contention that other teams did nothing to improve and that the Reds moves are on par is completely false. Chicago and Houston may have overpaid for the like of Lilly, Derosa, Marquis, Williams and Lee but they have actually improved the on-field performance of those positions. The Reds meanwhile combined all of these small "wise not overpaying" signings to spend a large % of this years payroll on inferior players. Paying above minimum for inferior players is a waste IMO. This was a year to go big or stay home.

[Krusty]

I want to remind everyone who points out that the Cardinals haven't improved significantly that the Cardinals WON THE WORLD SERIES. Call it a fluke, point out the weaknesses on that team, but you don't get through an entire season and three playoff series and come out on top without some kind of team of merit.

That said...and I have been avoiding saying it...I feel good about the Reds this year. I have nothing to back that up and I'm not going to try. That's just how I feel.

The Cardinals winning the World Series reminded me of how the Pittsburgh Steelers won the Super Bowl last year....they got on a roll towards the end of the season and carried them through the playoffs and championship. We all seen how the Steelers did this year. And odds are the Cardinals will have a tough time duplicating that stretch run they had last year.

As for the Reds, it will be interesting to see if they learned anything from that West Coast trip in late August which essentially separated them from the Cardinals. Add to that Griffey going down with an injury and no protection for Dunn in the lineup. If Griffey remains healthy and Dunn can put the ball in play more along with this team getting hot like the Cardinals did down the stretch last year.....we'll anything can happen.

Did you honestly think the Detroit Tigers was going to win their division last year with the likes of the White Sox, Twins and Indians in that division? Did you think the Marlins would have done what they did last season during spring training?

That is why you play the games.

[buckshotrod]

I'm in Krusty....my big concern is the bullpen. We have coughed up too many wins or lost ground in close games too many times. What used to be a great bullpen years ago has become a doormat. Hopefully these guys in the pen come thru this year. If so, it could be interesting. Remember, we went down to the next to last game last year!

[vaticanplum]

The Cardinals winning the World Series reminded me of how the Pittsburgh Steelers won the Super Bowl last year....they got on a roll towards the end of the season and carried them through the playoffs and championship. We all seen how the Steelers did this year. And odds are the Cardinals will have a tough time duplicating that stretch run they had last year.

To me, the point regarding the Cardinals is that they were/are a cohesive team. A lot of people point to the fact that only three games separated the Cards from the Reds in the regular season. That's true. But talent and experience carried the Cardinals through the postseason; it wasn't just a lucky or "hot" streak. I do not believe the Reds would have had the same success had they squeaked into the postseason last year. The Cardinals were a high-quality team that faltered through the year and then reached their potential when it counted. The Reds were a mid-level team who overperformed during parts of the year and then faltered back down to their abilities when it counted. That's all the difference in the world in this sport.

I don't believe it's a matter of the Cardinals "duplicating their stretch" next year. They were and are a better team than their regular-season record reflected. If anything, I'd point to odds that they're likely to have a much better year in 2007 than in 2006.

As for the Reds, it will be interesting to see if they learned anything from that West Coast trip in late August which essentially separated them from the Cardinals. Add to that Griffey going down with an injury and no protection for Dunn in the lineup. If Griffey remains healthy and Dunn can put the ball in play more along with this team getting hot like the Cardinals did down the stretch last year.....we'll anything can happen.

This I agree with. It may be one reason I believe the Reds are due for a good year. We knock experience on this board, but it does make a difference. The Reds have not been good for a long time. There are a handful of incredibly talented players on the team who have never had a good taste of what it's like to get close to winning. Last year, they did. I think it will affect them. I think this team will be a lot hungrier this year than we've been used to seeing the last few years.

Did you honestly think the Detroit Tigers was going to win their division last year with the likes of the White Sox, Twins and Indians in that division? Did you think the Marlins would have done what they did last season during spring training?

That is why you play the games.

back to facts again, unfortunately: all of those teams have a higher level of base talent than the Reds. All of them. I could easily look at the Tigers at the beginning of last season and see than they had a well-constructed, well-balanced team.

As I said, I'm torn. I do think the Reds could do very well this year. It's just hard for me to gauge exactly why I think that, because compared to other teams, it still is a team with serious defecits in its very makeup.

[camisadelgolf]

St. Louis will have a better rotation in 2007 than in 2006. And in 2006 the Cardinals lost significant time from the lead-off hitter (and SS), and 2/3 of the middle of its order (who happen to man key defensive spots in CF and 3B). They will have their closer back. Even Pujols was out for a couple weeks and playing a little hurt upon returning. There is no comparison. As the Cardinals got all of these guys back and their play improved to the play-off caliber team that they are, the Reds lost 2 key offensive players at the all star break and the guy who was the best hitter afterwards. These teams seemed fairly evenly matched while going head to head in June of 2006, but since then the Cardinals have added a lot just by getting guys back from injury while the Reds have subtracted key offensive contributors with no real improvement to the pitching staff. Don't confuse the Reds being competitive with St. Louis in June with where either of these teams are now.

As for the overpayment remarks. Conine has slugged .450 once since 1999 (2003) and had an OBP above .350 twice (2001 and 2005) since 1996. Any talent at all and the $2 Million paid is an overpayment. Weathers walked over 4 and gave up 1.47 HR per nine innings in 2006. A deadly combination that was mitigated by a BABIP of .236. He is projected for an ERA over 5 in 2007. This was not a guy to re-sign at any cost, so over $2 Million is an overpayment IMO. Stanton wasn't as bad a deal, but the combined money from those 3 (and some others where it is being slowly frittered away) could have actually addressed a need or 2. An upgrade from Lohse $4 Million by some of that amount could go a long way. The point is simply that the contention that other teams did nothing to improve and that the Reds moves are on par is completely false. Chicago and Houston may have overpaid for the like of Lilly, Derosa, Marquis, Williams and Lee but they have actually improved the on-field performance of those positions. The Reds meanwhile combined all of these small "wise not overpaying" signings to spend a large % of this years payroll on inferior players. Paying above minimum for inferior players is a waste IMO. This was a year to go big or stay home.

So we're on the same page, I'll go on the record saying that I don't think the Reds will win the NL Central. If I had to make a pick, I'd actually go for the Astros. However, to respond to your statements, I'll say this:

St. Louis should be better than they were in 2006. I think they could win a 100 games this year. The Cubs' signings however (plus players rebounding from injury) should result in them being a team in the middle of the NL Central race, but by no means are they a run-away winner.

I think you won't understand the signings of Cormier, Weathers, Stanton, Conine, etc. until 2009, when Griffey's contract is off the books. In 2009, the Reds are going to look completely different, and they'll have tons of draft pick compensation. The players signed to $2 million contracts are all about plugging holes and bringing in draft picks. Granted, they could spend a little less to fill those holes--and let's say it brings you an extra $6 million to spend on an impact player this year--but what is $6 million going to get you? Shannon Stewart and a journeyman starter? I'm pretty sure it won't be enough to make a difference between the Reds competing and the Reds being an NL Central favorite.

[TheWalls]

As I look at this list, they all appear plausible. However, the likelihood of all of the planets aligning seems remote. However, even if only seven or eight of them fell we could be contending at the break and use some of the money we didn't waste on overpriced free agents to make a run. Do we have enough protection for these items if they don't work out???

10 Reasons Why The Reds Will Win The Central:

1. A double play duo of Gonzalez and Phillips along with a combo of Freel/Denorifa in center with a solid catcher defensively in Ross gives the Reds best defense they have had in this decade.

This necessitates Jr. moving to right for the good of the team, Freel staying healthy and Ross avoiding the drops he had on way too many plays at the plate last year. Denorfia and Valentine provide backup plans.

2. Brook Jacoby will be the hitting coach that gets Dunn to cut down on his strikeouts by at least 25-30 and put the ball in play more.

Hard to get around this issue. Not sure the we have enough small ball offense to overcome Dunn hitting 6th because of his awful situational hitting and untimely and frequent Ks.

3. Junior will play at least 120 games and provide at least 30 HRs and 90+ RBIs. Playing RF will be less stress physically despite what Junior is saying now.

Again, hard to overcome losing the most professional hitter on the team.

4. Harang and Arroyo will be one of the best one-two tandems in the NL Central. Each player could easily win between 15-20 games apiece.

As much as I hate Milton, he'll eat innings and keep us in games (especailly on the road). I think Saarlos and Lohse have a chance to be pretty good and I like Belisle and EZ as the first reserve starters. Heaven help us if Arroyo or Harang's arms fall off.

5. Milton, Lohse and Saarloos are very capable of winning 10-12 games apiece.

See above.

6. Aging veterans Mike Stanton and David Weathers will be able to hold the fort in regards to the closer role till Eddie Guardado is ready by the allstar break. But if Todd Coffey or Bill Bray show they are ready to assume the closer role, the bullpen becomes stronger yet.

I really do think this pen could be pretty good. Cormier, Bray, Majik, Stanton, Coffey, Weathers, Belisle/Saarlos looks decent on paper.

7. Edwin Encarncion will have a breakout season and will make fewer errors than he did in 2006.

Best clutch hitter in the lineup. Should hit between Dunn and Griffey EVERY GAME! Again, no real fall back strategy.

8. The combination of Scott Hatteberg and Jeff Conine at lst will put up better numbers than any year that Casey manned the position.

They'll be productive if unspectacular. If it doesn't work, look for Votto.

9. The emergence of Homer Bailey sometime around Memorial Day will bolster the rotation and add more depth to the pen with either Saarloos, Belisle or Ramirez.

I don't expect him to have a significant impact this year.

10. There is no reason why Krivsky and Castanelli won't be aggressive as they were in the first year running the show. And no matter how you look at, the Cardinals, Astros, Cubs and Brewers each have their flaws going into spring training.

I agree. Our restraint this winter should pay off if we're competing at the break. If we're not, let the second guessing begin.

Call me crazy if you want but if this team can avoid the injury bug, I see this team winning close to 90 games this season.

I agree. This is highly dependent on the middle of the lineup and the starting pitching. Unfortunately, these are the two parts of the team that have the least insurance at this time.

[M2]

I think Krusty touched on most of what needs to go right for the Reds to win in 2007. Unlike some previous seasons, I can see where this team could win 85-90 games (though I can also see where it could lose 85-90 games).

As for the division, I don't like what the Cubs have added and the Astros look ready to do the collapse. As usual, the Cardinals are the team to beat. The most complete challenger in the division looks to be the Brewers. Obviously you never know when or if everything will come together for a team, but Milwaukee's got its act together on paper.

[Falls City Beer]

I think Krusty touched on most of what needs to go right for the Reds to win in 2007. Unlike some previous seasons, I can see where this team could win 85-90 games (though I can also see where it could lose 85-90 games).

As for the division, I don't like what the Cubs have added and the Astros look ready to do the collapse. As usual, the Cardinals are the team to beat. The most complete challenger in the division looks to be the Brewers. Obviously you never know when or if everything will come together for a team, but Milwaukee's got its act together on paper.

I'm surprised that you could see this version of the Reds winning 85. This team looks like one of the worst in a very, very long time. This offense could (likely will) be a turd for the ages.

I've almost stopped dropping by Redszone (which is insane, as I usually drop by once or twice a day even in the dead of winter) I have so little hope or interest in this year's squad. I'm bored to the point of nausea with this incarnation.

[M2]

I'm surprised that you could see this version of the Reds winning 85. This team looks like one of the worst in a very, very long time. This offense could (likely will) be a turd for the ages.

You very well could be right. The offense is going to need huge contributions from Dunn and Encarnacion. The CF situation also has to be resolved before the season. Lohse has to step up, the bullpen has to be functional and Saarloos probably has to have a solid campaign. A lot of things have to go right. The good news is they aren't wildly outlandish things. Yes, many are unlikely, but not snowball's chance in hell unlikely. Right now I've got the Reds figured in with the Cubs and Astros at sub-.500 and in the 3-4-5 mix (I'm leaning toward 4), but we'll see what spring training brings.

It is unfortunate the club added so little this offseason. I agree with you that if things go wrong (namely health), then 2007 could be on par with 2001 in how ugly it gets.

[mth123]

So we're on the same page, I'll go on the record saying that I don't think the Reds will win the NL Central. If I had to make a pick, I'd actually go for the Astros. However, to respond to your statements, I'll say this:

St. Louis should be better than they were in 2006. I think they could win a 100 games this year. The Cubs' signings however (plus players rebounding from injury) should result in them being a team in the middle of the NL Central race, but by no means are they a run-away winner.

I think you won't understand the signings of Cormier, Weathers, Stanton, Conine, etc. until 2009, when Griffey's contract is off the books. In 2009, the Reds are going to look completely different, and they'll have tons of draft pick compensation. The players signed to $2 million contracts are all about plugging holes and bringing in draft picks. Granted, they could spend a little less to fill those holes--and let's say it brings you an extra $6 million to spend on an impact player this year--but what is $6 million going to get you? Shannon Stewart and a journeyman starter? I'm pretty sure it won't be enough to make a difference between the Reds competing and the Reds being an NL Central favorite.

$6 Million plus the $4 Million starting point for Lohse means you upgrade to a very solid $10 Million guy.

As for the draft picks, it remains to be seen whether fading relievers would even qualify for compenstation under the new rules concerning type A and B Free Agents. Even if they do, the Reds would have to offer arbitration which would be absolutely insane. More likely these guys will be DFA'd or announce their intent to retire when their current deals expire.