Turn Off Ads?
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 23 of 23

Thread: Josh Willingham disgruntled

  1. #16
    Something clever pahster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Columbia, MO
    Posts
    1,907

    Re: Josh Willingham disgruntled

    Quote Originally Posted by Root Down View Post
    This move seems like it would be a lateral one to me. I'd really like to see them add some power if anything to the lineup.
    Willingham has power. For his career, he's got a line of .265/.361/.471/.832.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #17
    Jack of all trades Root Down's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    NW Ohio
    Posts
    206

    Re: Josh Willingham disgruntled

    Quote Originally Posted by pahster View Post
    Willingham has power. For his career, he's got a line of .265/.361/.471/.832.
    Yeah you're right, after reading more about him he does have some power and could even be a useful addition to the lineup. I could see adding him to the mix, but he is disgruntled, gruntled, or just plain upset about not being an everyday player there in Washington. I don't see him being much happier in Cincinnati. Plus, what would we have to give up to get him and would it be worth it? I'm not saying it wouldn't be, I'm curious what you think.

  4. #18
    Something clever pahster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Columbia, MO
    Posts
    1,907

    Re: Josh Willingham disgruntled

    Quote Originally Posted by Root Down View Post
    Yeah you're right, after reading more about him he does have some power and could even be a useful addition to the lineup. I could see adding him to the mix, but he is disgruntled, gruntled, or just plain upset about not being an everyday player there in Washington. I don't see him being much happier in Cincinnati. Plus, what would we have to give up to get him and would it be worth it? I'm not saying it wouldn't be, I'm curious what you think.
    Given that the Nationals have eleventy billion OF's on their roster, I don't think that they're in a particularly strong bargaining position. I don't think Willingham would be free, but I don't think the Reds would have to give up that much for him, either.

    If the Reds were to acquire him, he'd deserve to play everyday in LF (his splits against righties and lefties are nearly identical, so he doesn't need to be platooned). In this scenario, Dickerson would then move to and take over CF. However, we all know that won't happen because of Taveras' two year contract.

  5. #19
    Member Highlifeman21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Bristol, just around the corner from ESPN
    Posts
    8,694

    Re: Josh Willingham disgruntled

    Quote Originally Posted by pahster View Post
    Given that the Nationals have eleventy billion OF's on their roster, I don't think that they're in a particularly strong bargaining position. I don't think Willingham would be free, but I don't think the Reds would have to give up that much for him, either.

    If the Reds were to acquire him, he'd deserve to play everyday in LF (his splits against righties and lefties are nearly identical, so he doesn't need to be platooned). In this scenario, Dickerson would then move to and take over CF. However, we all know that won't happen because of Taveras' two year contract.
    Foiled again!

    However, even if Dickerson were to waste away on the bench if we added Willingham, it means McDonald goes back to AAA (I'm lovin' it!).


  6. #20
    Socratic Gadfly TheNext44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    4,228

    Re: Josh Willingham disgruntled

    If Dickerson is going to be sitting against lefties, and Gomes is not going to play, Willingham would be a great acquisition. I think he would be happy with a platoon role as long as he got 450 AB's, which would be easy to promise, and which he would deserve.
    "Imagination is more important than knowledge." -- Albert Einstein

  7. #21
    The Big Dog mth123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    14,728

    Re: Josh Willingham disgruntled

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNext44 View Post
    If Dickerson is going to be sitting against lefties, and Gomes is not going to play, Willingham would be a great acquisition. I think he would be happy with a platoon role as long as he got 450 AB's, which would be easy to promise, and which he would deserve.
    How so as the RH half of a platoon? That's a 250 AB role.
    "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

  8. #22
    I hate the Cubs LoganBuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    6,125

    Re: Josh Willingham disgruntled

    Going to the GABP right now is the same as dining here.
    The Sox traded Bullfrog the only player they've got for Shottenhoffen. Four-eyes Shottenhoffen a utility infielder. They've got a whole team of utility infielders.

  9. #23
    Socratic Gadfly TheNext44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    4,228

    Re: Josh Willingham disgruntled

    Quote Originally Posted by mth123 View Post
    How so as the RH half of a platoon? That's a 250 AB role.
    As RH half of LF platoon and 4th outfielder. He is the first to fill in for anyone taking time off, and the #1 Rh bat off the bench when he is not starting. That should get him close, over it if there are any injuries.

    This would also move Hairston to the backup infielder role, a much better role for him.
    "Imagination is more important than knowledge." -- Albert Einstein


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