Turn Off Ads?
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 33

Thread: should Paul Janish be on the 25 man roster?

  1. #1
    Brett William Moore Will M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Crescent Springs KY
    Posts
    3,657

    should Paul Janish be on the 25 man roster?

    Gonzo is a decent major league shortstop offensively & defensively when healthy. He played in 111 games in 2006, 110 games in 2007 & zero games in 2008. If the Reds can get 110 games of league average offense & defense out of him it will be a big boost (compared to 2008).

    Even if Gonzo can play like 2006 or 2007 that leaves 52 games that we need a SS for. Neither Kep, Gonzo nor Rosales can play SS on other than an emergancy basis. To put any of these guys at SS alongside EE at 3B is going to mean a lot of games lost on groundballs to the left side. Valaika may be able to play SS in the bigs but it seems he needs time at AAA.

    Janish can obviously play SS well. He has actually hit this spring. Even if he is a weak stick good glove shortstop he should be the guy at SS when Gonzo can't go.

    I know one criticism is that we can't live with Taveras's weak stick in CF & Janish's weak stick at SS. Fine. When Janish plays SS put Dickerson in CF & get a bat to play LF.
    .

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #2
    Stat Wanker Hodiernus RedsManRick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Guelph, ON
    Posts
    16,145

    Re: should Paul Janish be on the 25 man roster?

    Two wrongs do not make a right.

    Janish's bat might just be enough to keep him at replacement level. I'd rather have Hairston's glove and bat than Janish's glove and bat at SS -- and use the roster spot for somebody who can do more than just play defense.
    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.

  4. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Cincinnati Ohio
    Posts
    956

    Re: should Paul Janish be on the 25 man roster?

    rosales was brought up as a SS... he moved over to 1B for season after having tommy john I believe.


    Id like to see Keppinger and Rosales both make the squad... and Janish in AAA

  5. #4
    Vavasor TRF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Amarillo, TX
    Posts
    13,750

    Re: should Paul Janish be on the 25 man roster?

    I'm for giving Kepps spot to Janish. Janish could be a plus defender, and he is hitting a bit this spring. I believe the offense in LF, RF, 1B and 3B, plus the pop from BP and the drastic improvement a C will make up for any sub par offensive performance from Janish.
    Suck it up cupcake.

  6. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Newport Beach, CA
    Posts
    8,066

    Re: should Paul Janish be on the 25 man roster?

    Quote Originally Posted by TRF View Post
    I believe the offense in LF, RF, 1B and 3B, plus the pop from BP and the drastic improvement a C will make up for any sub par offensive performance from Janish.

    Interesting. I see it the other way around. I think Bruce will take a step up----and a BIG one at that, although that may not happen untill the second half of the season. After that, I think Votto, Phillips and EE perform about the same as last year. LF, even though improved defensively, simply doesn't look like an offensive improvement. Having said that, to me, a platoon of Dickerson and Tavaras would be an upgrade in CF but I don't think we'll see it.

    As for catcher, I think there will be a slight uptick offensively but it's also possible that Hernandez turns out to be the over-the-hill gang and Hannigan turns out to be a guy that should be reserved for late season call-ups.

    In the multiple games that I saw Janish play last year I wasn't all that impressed with his 'D'. Better than Keppinger? Sure. A top defensive SS? Not at this time in my opinion. And his weak bat with an average glove doesn't win him a place on the roster.

    Of course, we have a manager that does some bizarre things so I'd say that Paul has a 50-50 shot.

    Rem

  7. #6
    Passion for the game Team Clark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Posts
    8,104

    Re: should Paul Janish be on the 25 man roster?

    Quote Originally Posted by RedsManRick View Post
    Two wrongs do not make a right.

    Janish's bat might just be enough to keep him at replacement level. I'd rather have Hairston's glove and bat than Janish's glove and bat at SS -- and use the roster spot for somebody who can do more than just play defense.
    Got to agree with ya. I root for Janish, but I am well aware of his limitations. I just can't see the Reds playing Janish over Hairston at this point.
    It's absolutely pathetic that people can't have an opinion from actually watching games and supplementing that with stats. If you voice an opinion that doesn't fit into a black/white box you will get completely misrepresented and basically called a tobacco chewing traditionalist...
    Cedric 3/24/08

  8. #7
    Party like it's 1990 Blitz Dorsey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    4,716

    Re: should Paul Janish be on the 25 man roster?

    No, no, no. And then no.

    Terrible as a hitter and vastly overrated as a fielder. Other than that I love him.

  9. #8
    Pitching is the thing WVRedsFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Rainelle, WV
    Posts
    8,163

    Re: should Paul Janish be on the 25 man roster?

    For a team as offensively challenged as the Reds are (spring training stats prove this), they need to keep Janish in AAA and let Hairston play regardless of his limitations (and if he's healthy). It's hard to believe we are going into the season praying that Gonzo can play short (when everyone knew he couldn't) and having to even look at Janish as a possible replacement. Good grief.

    Getting 6-8 hits a game is not going to do it unless you have Cy Young, Sandy Koufax, Tom Seaver, Bob Gibson, and Roger Clemons in your rotation and a great bullpen to back them up. Our staff is good, but not that good.

    No, no, and no again.
    www.ris-news.com
    "You only have to bat a thousand in two things; flying and heart transplants. Everything else you can go 4-for-5."
    -Beano Cook

  10. #9
    The Big Dog mth123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    14,945

    Re: should Paul Janish be on the 25 man roster?

    If Gonzalez is not all the way back, this team has a huge problem. Jerry Hairston is not a player that a team whose present and future is so obviously revolving around its young pitching staff should be counting on. I want no part of Keppinger at SS. Janish is a guy who I think will struggle to put up an OPS north of .600.

    So, the choices are:
    1. Gonzalez - a guy whose knee holding up with day in and day out stress is a huge question (who still hasn't played back to back days I believe),
    2. Hairston - a 30 something Journeyman who was never really a SS to begin with and until last season was a pretty poor offensive player to boot,
    3. Keppinger - an "offensive minded" infielder who two teams have already given up on and in his first extended action put up an OPS of < .660,
    4. Janish - a minor leaguer who appears to be a solid and steady defender with enough range to play the spot but who hasn't really even hit in the high minors (and his defense is emphasized due to his lack of offense resulting in it being over-rated as others have noted),
    5. Rosales - probably a better defender than Hairston or Keppinger but the Reds moved him from SS for a reason and probably should get no more than occassional fill-in time at the position, and
    6. Frazier and Valaika - two minor leaguers who aren't ready yet and probably should not be stepping on a field as a SS if and when they are.

    From that group, if Gonzo can't go, I'd prefer Janish on a day-in, day-out basis. I think the cumulative wear and tear to the staff is too great with minus defenders at SS day after day. As occasional, once every week or two guys, the wear and tear from guys like Hairston, Keppinger or Rosales doesn't accumulate on the staff, but every day, day after day, it does. If its purely a bench role, Hairston, Rosales and Kepp probably are more deserving than Janish, but if Gonzalez goes down for an extended period, I want Janish in there as the primary guy.

    IMO, that is Janish' lot in life. He's a guy you know can play the spot but doesn't really help your bench, so you stash him in AAA and call on him when you need day in day out defensive stability after your starter goes down. The Reds used to have a guy in the organization for a while named Gary Green who's career was basically just that http://www.thebaseballcube.com/playe...ry-Green.shtml and I think of Green every time I see Janish play. No on the 25 man roster if Gonzo can play regularly, but given the choices, he's the starter, IMO, if Gonzo goes down.

    Tell me again why the Reds didn't need to address the SS position over the winter.
    Last edited by mth123; 03-25-2009 at 05:32 AM.
    "All I can tell them is pick a good one and sock it." --BABE RUTH

    Having better players makes "the right time" or "the big hit" happen a lot more often. PLUS PLUS

  11. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Pook's Hill
    Posts
    1,556

    Re: should Paul Janish be on the 25 man roster?

    The thought of Hairston or Keppinger once again logging significant time at shortstop behind our young starters gives me the yips; maybe if we had a GG third baseman, but not along side EE. It feels too much like playing Russian roulette.


  12. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    princeton, nj
    Posts
    9,482

    Re: should Paul Janish be on the 25 man roster?

    Quote Originally Posted by mth123 View Post
    If Gonzalez is not all the way back, this team has a huge problem. Jerry Hairston is not a player that a team whose present and future is so obviously revolving around its young pitching staff should be counting on. I want no part of Keppinger at SS. Janish is a guy who I think will struggle to put up an OPS north of .600.

    So, the choices are:
    1. Gonzalez - a guy whose knee holding up with day in and day out stress is a huge question (who still hasn't played back to back days I believe),
    2. Hairston - a 30 something Journeyman who was never really a SS to begin with and until last season was a pretty poor offensive player to boot,
    3. Keppinger - an "offensive minded" infielder who two teams have already given up on and in his first extended action put up an OPS of < .660,
    4. Janish - a minor leaguer who appears to be a solid and steady defender with enough range to play the spot but who hasn't really even hit in the high minors (and his defense is emphasized due to his lack of offense resulting in it being over-rated as others have noted),
    5. Rosales - probably a better defender than Hairston or Keppinger but the Reds moved him from SS for a reason and probably should get no more than occassional fill-in time at the position, and
    6. Frazier and Valaika - two minor leaguers who aren't ready yet and probably should not be stepping on a field as a SS if and when they are.

    From that group, if Gonzo can't go, I'd prefer Janish on a day-in, day-out basis. I think the cumulative wear and tear to the staff is too great with minus defenders at SS day after day. As occasional, once every week or two guys, the wear and tear from guys like Hairston, Keppinger or Rosales doesn't accumulate on the staff, but every day, day after day, it does. If its purely a bench role, Hairston, Rosales and Kepp probably are more deserving than Janish, but if Gonzalez goes down for an extended period, I want Janish in there as the primary guy.

    IMO, that is Janish' lot in life. He's a guy you know can play the spot but doesn't really help your bench, so you stash him in AAA and call on him when you need day in day out defensive stability after your starter goes down. The Reds used to have a guy in the organization for a while named Gary Green who's career was basically just that http://www.thebaseballcube.com/playe...ry-Green.shtml and I think of Green every time I see Janish play. No on the 25 man roster if Gonzo can play regularly, but given the choices, he's the starter, IMO, if Gonzo goes down.

    Tell me again why the Reds didn't need to address the SS position over the winter.
    I agree with all of this, with one exception-- the Reds may want to have a late inning defensive specialist if Gonzo looks rusty or unfit.

    Zach Cozart strikes me as baseball's next Alex Gonzalez.

  13. #12
    Waitin til next year bucksfan2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    10,264

    Re: should Paul Janish be on the 25 man roster?

    The only way I put Janish on the team is if Gonzo is on the DL. I actually like Janish and his approach at the plate. He doesn't have any power to speak of but he could be a decent 8 hole hitter. IMO he could become an Adam Evertt type SS. But at the beginning of the season I am willing to roll the dice and go with Gonzo, Hariston, Keppy, and Rosales.

  14. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Shelburne Falls, MA
    Posts
    10,213

    Re: should Paul Janish be on the 25 man roster?

    Zach Cozart strikes me as baseball's next Alex Gonzalez.
    Gonzo was the starting SS on a couple World Series champs, so that speaks mighty well for Cozart.
    "Baseball is a very, very complex business. It's more of a people business than most businesses." - Bob Castellini

  15. #14
    High five! nate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Irvine, CA
    Posts
    6,976

    Re: should Paul Janish be on the 25 man roster?

    I dunno, I kind of think Janish would be a good guy to have on the 25-man. Especially should we find ourselves with the lead after 8.
    "Bring on Rod Stupid!"

  16. #15
    Member OnBaseMachine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    34,844

    Re: should Paul Janish be on the 25 man roster?

    Quote Originally Posted by mth123 View Post
    5. Rosales - probably a better defender than Hairston or Keppinger but the Reds moved him from SS for a reason and probably should get no more than occassional fill-in time at the position, and
    Rosales was moved off shortstop because he had Tommy John surgery a few years ago. I'm not sure how good a defender he is at SS, but he looks very good at third base. From what I've seen, he's got a strong arm and is light on his feet, which is always a plus. Keppinger looks like he's wearing cement shoes when he's at SS. If it comes down to Rosales or Kepp at SS, give me Rosales.
    Last edited by OnBaseMachine; 03-25-2009 at 12:06 PM.
    I miss Adam Dunn.


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