Turn Off Ads?
Page 12 of 14 FirstFirst ... 2891011121314 LastLast
Results 166 to 180 of 201

Thread: Paul Wilson signs a 2 yr contract with the Reds

  1. #166
    All dyslexics must untie!
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    SW Portland, OR
    Posts
    8,604
    "was GM up on the Reds... I seem to think the answer is no"

    Digging back into the ol' memory banks...heading into '99 I was

    "Down" on JimBo for dealing Jeff Shaw and Bret Boone, after promising them (and Larkin) that they were veteran "keepers"

    "Up" on the exodus of Reginald Laverne Sanders. I didn't know what kind of season Greg Vaughn would have, but I was sure glad the Padres agreed to take on "the Sandman"

    Around about May I posted "it will take a miracle" for the Reds to contend in '99

    The Red's W-L record in June was miraculous (BTW, Larkin hasn't been the same, since)

    I suspected the Reds would deal Vaughn before the trading deadline (similar to Shaw, in '98) Thankfully, this didn't happen, and Greg had an August-September to remember

    Last weekend in Milwaukee...the bubble burst

    Will the Reds gel in 2003 like they did in '99? The year picks you. In '99 Bere and Avery pitched pretty well in April-May, then Parris/Villone took over and pitched even better. Guzman was acquired and Neagle regained his health (but then Harnisch went lame) in August-September. The Reds are going to need similar "luck" in the rotation, and health for the position players, and the kids to come of age, and the chemistry to click...then, if the ball consistently bounces the right way they can reach postseason.

    All we need is a miracle. Hope springs eternal
    Never overlook the obvious

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #167
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    princeton, nj
    Posts
    9,482
    had Bowden kept Shaw, it would have been a VERY interesting season.

    Cameron was a key, of course-- and came directly as a result of Konerko, who was acquired for Shaw. But Shaw was dealt because the Reds were so far away from contention-- which turned out to be false. And perhaps we could have scored Cameron, who was really in the doghouse, for another player

  4. #168
    Member Spring~Fields's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    8,630

    3 Seasons After 1999

    And the Reds still need "luck"


    The Reds are going to need similar "luck" in the rotation, and health for the position players, and the kids to come of age, and the chemistry to click...then, if the ball consistently bounces the right way they can reach postseason.
    Doesn't that actually support M2's and LetsGoJunior's premises? regarding "bottom feeding" "mediocrity" and of going backward?
    vs. significant improvements to the team that make substantial gains by the team?

  5. #169
    All dyslexics must untie!
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    SW Portland, OR
    Posts
    8,604
    "Doesn't that actually support M2's and LetsGoJunior's premises?"

    Probably, though I hadn't read their responses before posting my response to "how gm felt about '99" Basically, all small/mid market teams need some "luck" to reach post-season. But organizations like Oakland and Minnesota are going about their business (i.e. "making their own luck") better than the Cincy FO has, IMO

    Money always helps, but a consistent direction/philosophy is even more important. Without it, magical seasons are a result of "dumb luck"
    Never overlook the obvious

  6. #170
    Member red-in-la's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Santa Paula, CA
    Posts
    6,536
    Maybe nobody else would agree, and I am only guessing since I not a ML Scout, but isn't the Oakland "formula" still just dumb luck?

    OK, everybody tries to draft a Randy Johnson.....and hundreds of pitchers are drafted each year....but how many really make it? One precent? Less?

    The Braves got "lucky" with Glavine and Smoltz, and even with Maddux to a certain extent. Any of them could have caught a line drive off their pitching elbow, or just plain blown out their shoulder or elbow somewhere along the line.

    And did Oakland draft MORE pitchers than anybody else? I don't know. But they ended up with Mulder, Zito and Hudson.

    I guess you can argue this point, but the Reds drafted Howington, Sowers and Gruler. Weren't all three of these guys the number 1, 2, or 3 pitcher in the nation at the time?

    I don't know...just thinking out loud here.
    "Is there a problem officers?"

  7. #171
    RaisorZone Raisor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Charlotte, Nc
    Posts
    15,070
    From MLB.com>

    OAKLAND, Calif. -- If you were at a high school baseball game this spring and saw an Oakland A's scout in the stands, we know now the most appropriate thing you could have said to him:
    "Excuse me, sir, but are you lost?"

    Then, if you were really nice, you might have given him directions to the nearest four-year college, where the types of players the A's were scouting might be playing that day.

    Judging from the way the A's selected players in the 2002 First-Year Player Draft, especially on the first day, it seemed as though you weren't getting much of a look from the A's unless your high school diploma is already in a box somewhere and you've already gone to your fair share of endless university lectures and frat parties, not necessarily in that order.

    When the A's made their first 23 picks without straying once into the high school ranks, picking only college players, it made one wonder: Did the A's realize there were high school games going on this spring?

    "Yeah, we did go out to high school games, but this was part of our plan," Oakland scouting director Eric Kubota said with a tired chuckle after Day 1. "Our philosophy has always been more college-oriented. We did go out to high school games, but if there was a decision to be made on any given day, we'd probably lean toward the college game."

    It's a philosophy that makes sense for the A's -- and who's to argue with their methods anyway?

    They didn't get to the postseason the last two years on payrolls half the size of their fellow playoff teams by being high school dropouts. Their college scouting, along with their work in Latin America, built the organization many others look to as the wisest in the game.

    The way the A's went about their 2002 draft -- using all seven of their picks in the top 39 overall to take college players, and keeping the trend going from there -- tells you a lot about the their draft philosophy.

    For one, it tells you they're generally wary of prep players unless they're outright no-miss prospects. They have a successful history of picking top-flight college pitchers -- if the names Tim Hudson, Mark Mulder and Barry Zito mean anything to you -- and Kubota says it takes a very special hitter to get their attention early in the draft.

    "The ones we've taken and really succeeded on have been way at the top part of the draft," Kubota said. "They've all been polished hitters, and we never had any questions as to whether these guys could play."

    Examples of A's first-rounders who were no-doubters: Eric Chavez (1996) and Ben Grieve (1994). Both were in the big leagues at the age college draftees would be riding buses in Single-A.

    Which brings us to another reason the college approach works for the A's, perhaps more this year than in recent years. They dealt away a few prospects this winter -- third baseman Eric Hinske to Toronto in the Billy Koch deal, and pitcher Mario Ramos and first baseman Jason Hart in the Carlos Peña deal -- to help them at the Major League level. So, the A's felt compelled to strengthen their minor leagues in the quickest way possible.

    Perhaps the biggest reason the A's went to back to college again and again this year: signability.

    With four first-round picks, the A's knew they'd have to spend first-round money on four players. Clearly, they had to pick with budget in mind, a budget that won't exceed $10 million for the entire draft, the vast majority of which will go to those top seven picks from the first round and supplemental round.

    Generally speaking, a college junior with only one year of eligibility left and more of an itch to get a pro career going isn't going to hold out for as much as a high school star who can choose between millions now or millions later.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    "We think these guys have the ability, but it helped without a doubt that they're very signable."

    -- Oakland scouting director Eric Kubota

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    "We think these guys have the ability, but it helped without a doubt that they're very signable," Kubota said.

    It sure doesn't sound like they'll have much trouble with their top pick, Ohio State center fielder Nick Swisher.

    Said Swisher: "We're not the type of people who want to hold out. We just want to get out on the field. . . . There's no chance I'm going back to school."

    Oh, but you can bet the A's will. They'll go back to those college campuses again next year, and they'll hit the college ranks hard when it comes time for the draft.

    It's the old college try, and the A's clearly believe in America's system of higher education is the best in the world -- at least when it comes to drafting baseball players.

    John Schlegel is a regional writer for MLB.com based in the Bay Area. This story was not subject to the approval of Major League Baseball or its clubs

  8. #172
    post hype sleeper cincinnati chili's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    10,771
    The formula for Oakland pitching is more than just luck. Like the Astros, they aren't afraid of drafting small right handed pitchers. Anybody could have had Tim Hudson, just as anybody could have had Roy Oswalt. Also, they have almost completed stopped drafting high school pitching... certainly not in the early rounds. The odds of a FIRST ROUND high school pitcher becoming a successful major leaguer are less than 10%. With college/jc players, it jumps to over 30%.

    Plus, Oakland teaches plate discipline in the minors and promotes based on minor league performance, not just on major league potential.

    They understand the idea of replaceable talent, and don't overpay for it. Most organizations don't.

    They've purged their system of infectious, stubborn and tired old ideas. Most organizations haven't.

    It's more than just luck.

    For a good read,
    http://espn.go.com/mlb/hotstove2003/athletics.html
    How, then, are those people of the future—who are taking steroids every day—going to look back on baseball players who used steroids? They're going to look back on them as pioneers. They're going to look back at it and say "So what?" - Bill James, Cooperstown and the 'Roids

  9. #173
    RaisorZone Raisor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Charlotte, Nc
    Posts
    15,070
    From the A's Hotstove Heater
    3. Drafting college pitchers. Everyone knows the A's lean heavily on their rotation. And over the last several years, the A's have a pretty good script for strengthening it -- draft college pitchers with polish, move them through the minors quickly, and put them in the rotation. The result is arguably the best 1-2-3 group of starters in baseball, with more talent on the way from the minors. While other teams continue to throw their picks and money away on high school pitchers early, the A's increase their return and mitigate their risks by heavily drafting college pitchers instead. Why? To start, they've already pitched at least a couple of extra years out of high school without getting hurt, and they've been in a less taxing social environment during their late teens. There are other good reasons too, but those are a good start

  10. #174
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,134
    Money always helps, but a consistent direction/philosophy is even more important. Without it, magical seasons are a result of "dumb luck"
    Agreed. IMO, that's the difference between '99 and this season. The only luck involved in '99 was generally good health.

  11. #175
    Member red-in-la's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Santa Paula, CA
    Posts
    6,536
    As I recall, the 1999 Reds got mostly all the breaks almost all the time. This was especially true when a 2 out hit was needed to score a run or two. Many of those hits were NOT line shots.

    Also, I think getting seasons like they got from Villone and Parris was quite a bit of luck. Actually, the Reds got 5-6 career years from players that were not exactly likely sources.

    Maybe this isn't what other term luck, but I think of it that way.
    "Is there a problem officers?"

  12. #176
    A Little to the Left Redsfaithful's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Bexley, OH
    Posts
    7,459
    Exactly R-I-L.

    A good example of a career year on a Reds championship team is Mariano Duncan hitting .306 for the 1990 Reds. You have to catch some breaks, no matter who you are. It's a long season.
    We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
    --Oscar Wilde

  13. #177
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    11,243
    From TSN's Ken Rosenthal's mailbag:

    How much of an impact will Paul Wilson have on the Reds? I mean, here's a pitcher who was 6-12 with a 4.83 ERA with the Devil Rays last season. How is he going to help a team with aspirations of contention?

    Jay Radcliffe

    *** Jay: Don't be misled by Wilson's record with the last-place Devil Rays. Scouts say he has learned how to pitch after missing parts of the 1997 and '98 season and all of '99 with elbow and shoulder surgeries, and his numbers would have been better if the Devil Rays hadn't ridden him so hard.

    It's little wonder that Wilson went 0-3 with a 12.91 ERA in September. He threw more than 120 pitches five times, and had a six-start stretch in July and August in which he averaged 119. Those numbers are ridiculous for a pitcher with a history of arm trouble.

    Wilson threw a career-high 193 2/3 innings, and one scout says that the Reds would get optimal performance from him if they occasionally skipped him in the rotation and limited him to, say, 150 innings. The Reds know that Wilson must be handled with care, and figure that they won't need to push him due to the strength of their bullpen.

    If Wilson stays healthy, he could be a terrific signing for the Reds. If not, he could become an albatross. The Reds will pay him $500,000 next season and $3.5 million in 2004.
    "People that frequent Internet forums resemble the cast of One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest!" - C. J. Cregg, The West Wing

  14. #178
    Member red-in-la's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Santa Paula, CA
    Posts
    6,536
    Duncan actually hit over .400 that year against LH pitchers.

    Look back at the years the 1999 Reds got from:

    Casey
    Boone
    Graves
    Cameron
    Reese

    Not to mention:

    Scott Williamson
    Dimitri Young
    Michael Tucker
    Jeffery Hammonds
    "Is there a problem officers?"

  15. #179
    A Little to the Left Redsfaithful's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Bexley, OH
    Posts
    7,459
    Pokey Reese's 1999 season will go down in the record books with Brady Anderson's 50 home run season.

    Completely inexplicable.
    We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
    --Oscar Wilde

  16. #180
    Team Tuck
    Guest
    Originally posted by M2
    Sorry if I don't go running around predicting a pennant because the team signed a 29-year-old pitcher with a career 4.86 ERA.

    Like REDREAD said, Wilson improves the rotation depth. It's not a bad move, but I think it's a move made to prevent slippage, not to gain advantage.

    TeamTuck, you obviously know the Reds have released a budget figure and anybody capable of basic addition can figure out the payroll (the standard arbitration raise is $900 K if you need to make that adjustment).

    If you happen to feel that there should some kind of moratorium on talking about the Reds, the moves they're making or the current state and direction of the club then I whole-heartedly encourage you to impose it on yourself. Really, jam those digits into Chinese finger traps until the day you've unilaterally decided the topic is open for discussion.

    Personally I find your opinion that no one should have an opinion to be fifty paces beyond the border of tedious.
    1. I predicted a pennant? No. I agree with your assessment of Paul Wilson and agree that right now we're probably no better than a 3rd place team. I even stated that. I simply suggested that we give Bowden the next month. That's when you became a smart-ass, so I responded in the same smart-ass fashion. Fair enough?

    2. As for the budget, I've been very specific. I was under the impression the budget was $60m. I've twice listed 2003 payroll estimates by player for the 25 man, and I'll do so again. It totals $55m. I believe you estimated an even lower payroll figure with the current set of players. SO, be specific. Do we have payroll room right now, or no?????? If not, I can only assume the budget is closer to $55m?? Do you know?? I'm looking for answers. I mean, it's basic addition.

    Jason LaRue $1.0 ($0.3 last yr - arbitration)
    Kelly Stinnett 1.2
    Aaron Boone 4.0 (2.1 last yr - arbitration)
    Barry Larkin 7.6
    Brandon Larson 0.3
    Felipe Lopez 0.4
    Juan Castro 0.8
    Sean Casey 5.6
    Ken Griffey 9.7
    Adam Dunn 0.6
    Austin Kearns 0.5
    Reggie Taylor 0.4
    Jose Guillen 0.5
    Ruben Mateo 0.4
    Danny Graves 4.7 (3.5 last year - arbitration)
    Ryan Dempster 3.5 (2.5 last year - arbitration)
    Jimmy Haynes 2.5
    Paul Wilson 0.5
    Jose Acevado 0.3
    Chris Reitsma 0.4
    Bruce Chen 0.8 (0.3 last year - arbitration)
    Gabe White 3.1
    Scott Sullivan 2.8
    Scott Williamson 1.6 (0.6 last year - arbitration)
    John Reidling 0.5

    DL/Others:
    Russ Branyan 0.5
    Wily Mo Pena 0.3
    Dane Sardinha 0.5
    Luke Prokepec 0.3

    GRAND TOTAL $55.3

    3. Are your comments addressed to me? Was I the first one to be a smart-ass about it? I only suggested that we give Bowden the next month, I didn't realize that was such a horrible thing to suggest. I responded to you the same way you responded to me. Sorry that doesn't work for you.
    Last edited by Team Tuck; 01-14-2003 at 11:44 PM.


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