Freel traded for Ramon Hernandez

[jojo]

I'm with lollipop, you can measure his raw impact on the current unit, but I don't think it really means anything.

In a way your post (from which the above point was taken) kind of argues in favor of the alternative conclusion. By this I mean that measuring the impact of Hernandez relative to the current iteration of the roster informs (or should at least in my view) subsequent decisions.

For instance, if the goal is the playoffs, the addition of Hernandez probably just eliminated a lot of potential options (like adding an Izturus or an Everett as the O's and Tigers have recently done) or if it hasn't eliminated them it signals the need for a huge upgrade somewhere else.

[MrCinatit]

To be frank, I am very surprised Walt was able to get a very warm body for Freel. Ryan was a lot of fun while he lasted, but his best years are far behind him.
Yes, I realize Hernandez is the same age and has a recent history of injury - but I have very high hopes for this move. Plus, he might be able to make a very nice connection with out two young Dominican pitchers...which could be a very nice plus, indeed.

[M2]

In a way your post (from which the above point was taken) kind of argues in favor of the alternative conclusion. By this I mean that measuring the impact of Hernandez relative to the current iteration of the roster informs (or should at least in my view) subsequent decisions.

For instance, if the goal is the playoffs, the addition of Hernandez probably just eliminated a lot of potential options (like adding an Izturus or an Everett as the O's and Tigers have recently done) or if it hasn't eliminated them it signals the need for a huge upgrade somewhere else.

Since Hernandez cost no significant extra cash nor any frontline trading chips, it's an illogical leap to assume he's cost the club anything. How exactly has it eliminated anything other than other catching options?

Izturis and Everett (the former in whom I had some interest, the latter whom I consider one of the worst players alive) are off the market because other teams signed them, not because the Reds acquired Hernandez. Simply put, there is no connection.

Are sizable changes needed elsewhere? You bet. I believe I made that very point in my first post in this thread. That was always the case. The catcher acquisition wasn't going to be a singularly transformational event for the Reds. They weren't getting a star catcher this winter. That said, the club also couldn't afford to clod around with one foot stuck in a nothing-from-your-catcher bucket like it did last season.

This move signals nothing. There's nothing new the Reds need to do that they didn't need to do prior to the Hernandez acquisition. There is, however, one less thing to do.

[jojo]

Since Hernandez cost no significant extra cash nor any frontline trading chips, it's an illogical leap to assume he's cost the club anything. How exactly has it eliminated anything other than other catching options?

That's exactly the point. They've locked their catching up and here's the impact...(insert your estimate).

Now they still need to add this amount of impact....(insert your estimate).

Izturis and Everett (the former in whom I had some interest, the latter whom I consider one of the worst players alive) are off the market because other teams signed them, not because the Reds acquired Hernandez. Simply put, there is no connection.

I thought it was pretty obvious those two guys were being used as examples of a type of shortstop (i.e. ones who need substantial defensive value just to be considered an average major league player). Locking in the impact of an upgrade at one position colors the compromises that could be made at other positions if indeed the goal is to have the greatest shot at making the playoffs this season.

[Ltlabner]

That's exactly the point. They've locked their catching up and here's the impact...(insert your estimate).

Now they still need to add this amount of impact....(insert your estimate).

Which assumes a players contributions/impacts are fixed and neither enhanced or diminished by subsequent player moves.

[jojo]

Which assumes a players contributions/impacts are fixed and neither enhanced or diminished by subsequent player moves.

Hernandez's true skill level isn't going to change with the addition of a shortstop. Maybe his impact changes if the plan is to also go out and get a platoon partner for him.....

[Cyclone792]

Brandon (Charleston): What are your thoughts on the Reds acquiring Ramon Hernandez?

Joe Sheehan: It only cost them money, as they didn't give up much, and he makes them better. Hernandez is basically an average MLB player, and those aren't that easy to find behind the plate.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/ch...1228937771#new

This is a pretty damn good summary why I'm fine with this deal.

One of the biggest problems the Reds have had during The Lost Decade is they simply have too few average players. While Cincinnati's finest enjoyed to pile the blame on guys such as Adam Dunn, it was the Reds' lack of enough average players surrounding Dunn that made them awful.

Instead of average players, the Reds had lousy players. They had Patterson. They had Bako. They had Valentin. They had Majewski. They had Stanton. Everyone reading this knows we can keep going here.

Finally for once the Reds have managed to find an average player at a position where they've had utter crap in recent memory. That's an upgrade there. It doesn't morph this team into a 90 win squad, but it's one step toward that goal. Now it's time for step 2, step 3, step 4, etc. in the series of moves toward that goal.

[Ltlabner]

Hernandez's true skill level isn't going to change with the addition of a shortstop. Maybe his impact changes if the plan is to also go out and get a platoon partner for him.....

But again, all of the calculus goes out the window one another player move is made so saying that he brings us .5 games closer to the promised land on December 10th, 2008 really doesn't tell us much.

Not to mention that a players impact goes beyond his raw skill-set. Admittedly, a majority of a players value is derived from his skill-set/abilities, but you sometimes need to think in three dimensions (and beyond raw data) when considering player impact.

M2s point about Hernandez quick acquisition without soaking up a massive pile of resources possibly allowing the Reds to get a true glove-man at SS makes the case. Hernandez stays a .5 win impact (making that number up) but it allows an overall impact to the win total for the team since the defense at short has been so weak. So saying Hernandez only added a .5 win benefit to the team really doesn't tell you anything until all the player moves are finished.

Another example may be Rose's move to 3B. Roses skill level didn't increase, but his ability to play third allowed the addition of Foster to the team.

[M2]

That's exactly the point. They've locked their catching up and here's the impact...(insert your estimate).

Now they still need to add this amount of impact....(insert your estimate).

Again, you're stuck in linear mode. The Reds need an aggregate of moves that improve the offense, defense and pitching. It's not just the relation of the moves to the current roster, it's the relation of the moves to each other.

I thought it was pretty obvious those two guys were being used as examples of a type of shortstop (i.e. ones who need substantial defensive value just to be considered an average major league player). Locking in the impact of an upgrade at one position colors the compromises that could be made at other positions if indeed the goal is to have the greatest shot at making the playoffs this season.

I thought it was pretty obvious my response was that Hernandez hasn't precluded the Reds from making any other moves they may have been considering.

[OnBaseMachine]

The Reds addressed a clear need, as four catchers took turns behind the plate in 2008 -- Paul Bako, Dave Ross, Javier Valentin and Ryan Hanigan. Bako had the plurality of the playing time, hit .217 with six homers and is now a free agent. Ross already has signed with the Braves to back up for Brian McCann. Valentin also is a free agent after spending the last five years in Cincinnati and never establishing himself as worthy of the starting job. As for Hanigan, the 28-year-old hit .271 with two homers in 31 games this year and earned praise from Dusty Baker for his handling of the Reds' pitchers. Hanigan hit .324 in Triple-A with four homers in 75 games this year, and figures to be Hernandez's backup, perhaps ready to take over as the starter in 2010 assuming that Cincinnati doesn't pick up Hernandez's $8.5 million option.

For the coming year, Hernandez is a good fit in Cincinnati. He's got power, having hit 137 homers in a 10-year career, including 15 this year and 23 in 2006, and has a decent career line of a .263 average, .326 on-base and .421 slugging percentage. He doesn't strike out too much and isn't a huge liability behind the plate, though he did struggle a bit throwing out base-stealers this year, throwing out 24 of 123 (20%) -- Hernandez's career rate is 30% and the 2008 major league average was 27%. Hernandez also is a boisterous clubhouse presence, though he's the type of guy who might wear on his teammates after a while -- going from a team full of big personalities like the Orioles to a quieter situation in Cincinnati, he might emerge as a vocal leader. If it doesn't work out personality-wise, then hey, it's only one year.

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/tou...-hernande.html

[jojo]

Again, you're stuck in linear mode. The Reds need an aggregate of moves that improve the offense, defense and pitching. It's not just the relation of the moves to the current roster, it's the relation of the moves to each other.

There is nothing linear about it..... it's looking at what each part will add up to in relation to the final aggregate. Since all parts aren't being acquired at once, the acquisition of one informs the needed impact of the remaining.

I thought it was pretty obvious my response was that Hernandez hasn't precluded the Reds from making any other moves they may have been considering.

It's obvious that you think that but less obvious why.

[Cyclone792]

Reds catchers - excluding Hanigan - posted a .664 OPS last season (.321 OBP and a .343 SLG). I fully expect the Hernandez/Hanigan combo to blow that out of the water, and that will represent a decent upgrade from the Bako/Ross fiasco.

[M2]

There is nothing linear about it..... it's looking at what each part will add up to in relation to the final aggregate. Since all parts aren't being acquired at once, the acquisition of one informs the needed impact of the remaining.

So A + B + C = final aggregate isn't linear? Oh wait, it is.

As for the second sentence, let's see if this takes the second time around - "There's nothing new the Reds need to do that they didn't need to do prior to the Hernandez acquisition. There is, however, one less thing to do."

A catcher who can hit in the #7 slot was always the target. It's what the Reds got, at least it's what they think they've got.

It's obvious that you think that but less obvious why.

Hard to be more specific than I have been. It burned no significant amount of resources and changed none of the team's other needs. I suppose this might change someone's perspective if they were under the delusion the Reds were going to acquire a star catcher, but how many other delusions must I then account for?

[Spitball]

I haven't seen this mentioned, but the Reds should never deal with the Orioles on December 9. In the name of Milt Pappas, couldn't they have held off until after midnight?

[M2]

I haven't seen this mentioned, but the Reds should never deal with the Orioles on December 9. In the name of Milt Pappas, couldn't they have held off until after midnight?

Great pickup.

So Ryan Freel wins the Triple Crown next year?