Turn Off Ads?
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 36 of 36

Thread: Sickel's Reds Top 20...

  1. #31
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    536

    Re: Sickel's Reds Top 20...

    No, there may not be any talent comparable to Bruce, Cueto, or Votto in the system now (save Alonso). But the depth of this system contrasted with most of this decade and what we're used to as Reds fans lately is significantly different IMO. There's a good collection of baseball players here.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #32
    Member 15fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    5,504

    Re: Sickel's Reds Top 20...

    Quote Originally Posted by dougdirt View Post
    Why do we need some cavalry is the question?
    2008 MLB standings

    The Reds finished 23.5 games back last season.

    Only Baltimore (28.5), Oakland (24.5), and Seattle (39) finished further back in the AL. In the NL, only Washington (32.5) and Pittsburgh (30.5) finished further off the pace.

    By that metric, the Reds finished further out of the race than 80% of all of the teams in MLB last season.

    That tells me that the roster needs a little more than tweaking.

    And with 0 options in the minors to fill any of the biggest needs at the major league level in 2009, I'm starting to understand how the Japanese must have felt when they were dug in at Iwo Jima and got a glimpse of the approaching American forces.

    I'll also pose this question - If you were one of the 29 other GMs in MLB, how many guys in the Reds minor league system would you go out of your way to acquire and be willing to give up anything of significance (ie, a good defender up the middle or a legit ML arm) to do so?

  4. #33
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    35,322

    Re: Sickel's Reds Top 20...

    Quote Originally Posted by 15fan View Post
    2008 MLB standings

    The Reds finished 23.5 games back last season.

    Only Baltimore (28.5), Oakland (24.5), and Seattle (39) finished further back in the AL. In the NL, only Washington (32.5) and Pittsburgh (30.5) finished further off the pace.

    By that metric, the Reds finished further out of the race than 80% of all of the teams in MLB last season.

    That tells me that the roster needs a little more than tweaking.

    And with 0 options in the minors to fill any of the biggest needs at the major league level in 2009, I'm starting to understand how the Japanese must have felt when they were dug in at Iwo Jima and got a glimpse of the approaching American forces.

    I'll also pose this question - If you were one of the 29 other GMs in MLB, how many guys in the Reds minor league system would you go out of your way to acquire and be willing to give up anything of significance (ie, a good defender up the middle or a legit ML arm) to do so?
    Last years team and next years team aren't close to the same. Next year and going forward we aren't going to have Corey Patterson, Paul Bako or Josh Fogg. Next year we also get Jay Bruce, Joey Votto and Edwin Encarnacion closer to their prime years and Johnny Cueto with more experience as well as a fully healthy Aaron Harang.

    And again, what are our biggest needs?
    Catcher - Ryan Hanigan from the farm is there and we are looking at bringing in another one via trade currently.
    Left Field - I still feel the Dye trade goes down, which is centered around Bailey from the farm.
    Shortstop - We don't have anyone ready to step in there, but the Reds may not even be trying to go for someone either and at that point there isn't much the farm can help with. If they do want to go after a shortstop, they certainly can use the farm to get someone even if they pull off the trade for Dye.

  5. #34
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,111

    Re: Sickel's Reds Top 20...

    Quote Originally Posted by dougdirt View Post
    And again, what are our biggest needs?
    Catcher - Ryan Hanigan from the farm is there and we are looking at bringing in another one via trade currently.
    Left Field - I still feel the Dye trade goes down, which is centered around Bailey from the farm.
    Shortstop - We don't have anyone ready to step in there, but the Reds may not even be trying to go for someone either and at that point there isn't much the farm can help with. If they do want to go after a shortstop, they certainly can use the farm to get someone even if they pull off the trade for Dye.
    When you lose 88 games, your needs are simple. Better pitching, better defense and better offense. I'd say that our biggest needs are a 5th starter, a consistent high OBP guy at the top of the order, a catcher and a CFer. I'm optimistic about the 5th starter options the Reds have, but pessimistic about the other 3 needs. I think the Reds need to pursue talent outside the organization for those 3.
    Regarding your identified team needs - I am optimistic about LF.
    Ryan Hanigan is not the answer. The Reds underestimate the awfulness of the defense on the left side of the infield. Its a big problem.

  6. #35
    Vampire Weekend @Bernie's camisadelgolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    11,434

    Re: Sickel's Reds Top 20...

    Quote Originally Posted by Mario-Rijo View Post
    Justin Reed does have the physical tools to play CF but you're opinon on Henry I don't quite understand. I have on at least 2 maybe 3 different occassions listed a scouting report on Henry via BA that says he has the tools & the aptitude to play CF as well, I don't know if you have seen that or not. The Reds not playing him in CF is a mystery too me.
    I've seen those reports, too, but they're not exactly ringing endorsements. I've seen Henry play center field, and based purely on defense, I'd rather see Norris Hopper in center. You can put Henry in center, but I just don't think it's a good idea on a regular basis. If the Reds, for some reason, have players in the corners who cover a lot of ground, it might not be bad, but you're probably better off putting a better bat in right and Bruce in center. The fact that Henry can play center field without embarrassing himself makes him more versatile and valuable, but I think Reed has the skills to be a pure center fielder, which gives him a huge advantage in this aspect.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mario-Rijo View Post
    Reed does have more speed and power potential but Henry plays with more of each.
    That's true, but if you'll forgive me nitpicking (which is appropriate since Henry and Reed are almost worth the same in terms of value as a prospect), Henry had 11 homeruns in 500 plate appearances in 2007, whereas Reed had 11 homeruns in 462 plate appearances. This is in addition to Henry being noticeably more polished and being two years older.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mario-Rijo View Post
    If Henry has the plate discipline advantage, how is this neither, it's Reed vs. Henry?
    That was just a typo. Henry has a huge advantage here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mario-Rijo View Post
    Again if this is a straight up comparison Henry played in AA, Reed in Low A. Henry very well could/should advance based on his play at this level, Reed not at all did he perform well enough to advance.
    I expect the differences in their performances to differ for at least a couple years. I'm just speculating, but I think he's on the Drew Stubbs trail, and what I mean by that is that I think they're working with his plates discipline and his swing to get him to make more contact. Sean Henry, on the other hand, is already polished in that area, so he's kind of hit his ceiling already.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mario-Rijo View Post
    Fair enough Reed likely is the more talented of the 2 but I happen to think that Henry's talents are not as far away from Reed's as people think. I could be wrong but I would state that the BA article suggests that he has pretty good raw talent.
    That's fair. If he could play center field or second base well, he'd shoot up my prospect rankings, but until then, he's no more than a fourth or fifth outfielder, which has value, but won't make much of an impact at the big league level.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mario-Rijo View Post
    I'd say Henry is the more talented of the 2 but that Heisey is more polished which results in better production because Heisey isn't completely devoid of talent himself. And if I'm right Henry's production as he moves up will improve as he continues to refine his game, Heisey's production isn't likely to improve much and maybe not even stay the same, except for maybe an increase in pop that a lot of prospects get at age 24. Oh yeah that was the other thing about these 2 Heisey did most of his damage as a 23 yr old in A+ whereas Henry did most of his as a 22 yr old in AA.
    'Lacking tools' is a common misnomer for Chris Heisey. As you said, he's not devoid of talent, but when it comes to Heisey vs. Henry, based on talent alone, I'd take Heisey every day of the week. The age and level differences are worthy of note, but every player advances at different rates, and I don't think the pace of a player developing makes a big difference. That's why I'm not attacking Drew Stubbs' development all the time.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mario-Rijo View Post
    All in all Reed might have more talent but hasn't come close to putting it together, will he ever, I have my doubts. But if he does it better be this coming year and in a big way. But Henry has finally put it together and at higher levels which IMO is more important and what makes him more valuable. Heisey and Henry are somewhat close overall but I think there is reason to expect a little more out of Henry which again makes him more valuable, seeing as how both have played quite well to this point.
    I have my doubts about Reed reaching his potential, too. What Henry has done to this point is certainly more impressive, and I completely understand someone being higher on Henry as a prospect, but my logic is basically this: fourth outfielders are a dime a dozen, and everyday centerfielders are very, very valuable. Reed obviously has less of a chance of reaching his potential, but I think our differences of opinion come from how we view the value of prospects and not from how we view Sean Henry and Justin Reed.

  7. #36
    BobC, get a legit F.O.! Mario-Rijo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Springfield, Ohio
    Posts
    9,052

    Re: Sickel's Reds Top 20...

    Quote Originally Posted by camisadelgolf View Post
    I've seen those reports, too, but they're not exactly ringing endorsements. I've seen Henry play center field, and based purely on defense, I'd rather see Norris Hopper in center. You can put Henry in center, but I just don't think it's a good idea on a regular basis. If the Reds, for some reason, have players in the corners who cover a lot of ground, it might not be bad, but you're probably better off putting a better bat in right and Bruce in center. The fact that Henry can play center field without embarrassing himself makes him more versatile and valuable, but I think Reed has the skills to be a pure center fielder, which gives him a huge advantage in this aspect.
    I had no idea you have actually been able to put an eye on him. That certainly changes things, what is it exactly that would lead you to feel that Hopper makes a better CF? Is it Henry's talent or skill out there that makes you think he couldn't pull it off on a full time basis?

    That's true, but if you'll forgive me nitpicking (which is appropriate since Henry and Reed are almost worth the same in terms of value as a prospect), Henry had 11 homeruns in 500 plate appearances in 2007, whereas Reed had 11 homeruns in 462 plate appearances. This is in addition to Henry being noticeably more polished and being two years older.
    Well I feel Henry is far more valuable a prospect, however isn't this a direct contradiction to what you have been stating? I thought what you were saying is that Reed is a far more valuable prospect than Henry. BTW there really is no comparison to their bats in any way to this point. But I think you mean 2008 Henry had 11 HR in 500 PA's and Reed 11 HR in 460 PA's. Problem is Reed's Slg% was .383 and Henry's was .450. Which is aboout in line with their career lines in that dept.

    I expect the differences in their performances to differ for at least a couple years. I'm just speculating, but I think he's on the Drew Stubbs trail, and what I mean by that is that I think they're working with his plates discipline and his swing to get him to make more contact. Sean Henry, on the other hand, is already polished in that area, so he's kind of hit his ceiling already.
    Could be but I'm not so sure on either count.

    That's fair. If he could play center field or second base well, he'd shoot up my prospect rankings, but until then, he's no more than a fourth or fifth outfielder, which has value, but won't make much of an impact at the big league level.
    I would agree however a 4th or 5th OF has a lot more value than a guy who never makes it and at this point Reed is looking like the latter. You obviously feel different but there's no indication at all that he is likely to bust out.

    'Lacking tools' is a common misnomer for Chris Heisey. As you said, he's not devoid of talent, but when it comes to Heisey vs. Henry, based on talent alone, I'd take Heisey every day of the week. The age and level differences are worthy of note, but every player advances at different rates, and I don't think the pace of a player developing makes a big difference. That's why I'm not attacking Drew Stubbs' development all the time.
    I would agree that different players advance differently somewhat but they usually are almost always better early on and level off as they go up the ladder. Which isn't the case with Henry who had he played up to his ability early on would have likely had some outstanding #'s looking at what he is doing right now. That said I do see these 2 roughly the same players overall but I'd give the edge in raw talent to Henry. IF Henry polishes up his game though I think there's a decent chance he could be a starting player, Heisey I have seen play and I would say he's a definite bench player on a good team albeit a darn good 4th/5th OF. But I don't really have too much of an issue with these 2 being flip flopped, it's a close call in terms of value currently.

    I have my doubts about Reed reaching his potential, too. What Henry has done to this point is certainly more impressive, and I completely understand someone being higher on Henry as a prospect, but my logic is basically this: fourth outfielders are a dime a dozen, and everyday centerfielders are very, very valuable. Reed obviously has less of a chance of reaching his potential, but I think our differences of opinion come from how we view the value of prospects and not from how we view Sean Henry and Justin Reed.
    I definitely would view a potential starting CF as more valuable but at this point I just feel like the writing is on the wall for one Mr. Reed unless he has it in him to make drastic changes to his approach to the game. Which is obviously where we part ways here. It's just like Yorman and Duran they are at this point more likely to pull a Reed than they are to have a great minor league career let alone a major league one. But I put them both ahead of Reed because they do still have potential whereas Reeds hourglass has just about run it's course. But if Reed happens to prove me wrong I'll give you major kudos for seeing something that I sure don't.
    "You can't let praise or criticism get to you. It's a weakness to get caught up in either one."

    --Woody Hayes


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