Turn Off Ads?
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 42

Thread: Stubbs vs. Votto

  1. #16
    Where's my chair? REDREAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    20,921

    Re: Stubbs vs. Votto

    Quote Originally Posted by jojo View Post
    I'm not a fan of how he mixed BP stats with WAR in his argument (because BP sets replacement level differently than WAR). But I think his conclusion is alright with the caveat that Doug brought up being that its possible Stubbs isn't a league average bat.
    I agree with the general premise that if Stubbs can bat like a league average CF (or even slightly below average), he's going to be a very valuable player.

    Is he going to be able to do that? I'm a little skeptical, but hopeful. IMO, this is the type of young player you want to take a chance on. His defense is good enough that if he struggles with the bat, he's not going to drag down the entire team. That was one of my huge problems with Larson getting so much playing time. His glove was so horrible that when he failed to hit, he was contributing absolutley nothing. At least Stubs will contribute on defense, even if he struggles adjusting to ML pitching on offense.
    Thank you Walt and Bob for going for it in 2010-2014!

    Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    4,511

    Re: Stubbs vs. Votto

    Quote Originally Posted by nate View Post
    I think combining a Dunn and Stubbs thread would be very Redszoney.
    I'd be careful of this. It might possibly never end.

  4. #18
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    18,632

    Re: Stubbs vs. Votto

    Quote Originally Posted by REDREAD View Post
    I agree with the general premise that if Stubbs can bat like a league average CF (or even slightly below average), he's going to be a very valuable player.

    Is he going to be able to do that? I'm a little skeptical, but hopeful. IMO, this is the type of young player you want to take a chance on. His defense is good enough that if he struggles with the bat, he's not going to drag down the entire team. That was one of my huge problems with Larson getting so much playing time. His glove was so horrible that when he failed to hit, he was contributing absolutley nothing. At least Stubs will contribute on defense, even if he struggles adjusting to ML pitching on offense.
    I'm comfortable with the notion that Stubbs could be a league average player in 2010. I'm not nearly as comfortable with the notion that he will be a league average bat in 2010.
    "This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner

  5. #19
    Et tu, Brutus? Brutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga.
    Posts
    10,495

    Re: Stubbs vs. Votto

    Quote Originally Posted by jojo View Post
    I'm comfortable with the notion that Stubbs could be a league average player in 2010. I'm not nearly as comfortable with the notion that he will be a league average bat in 2010.
    I'm comfortable with Stubbs being a league average bat for his position in 2010, but I hold no greater expectations than that. I do think he can repeat a 750/760 OPS. If he does, he stands the chance of being as good as this article suggests. If not, as you said, at worst we're probably talking about an overall average centerfielder until the bat does improve.
    "No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda

  6. #20
    Member Highlifeman21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Bristol, just around the corner from ESPN
    Posts
    8,694

    Re: Stubbs vs. Votto

    Quote Originally Posted by nate View Post
    I think combining a Dunn and Stubbs thread would be very Redszoney.
    So we can over-emphasize Dunn's bad defense and under-emphasize his bat, while we can over-emphasize a "what could be" with Stubbs's bat, while potentially over-emphasizing his great defense (although at this point, I'm excited to see what this kid can do defensively over a full season... can he be Franklin Guitierrez?).

    I'm sure the thread would turn into Stubbs being way better than Dunn b/c of the defense.

  7. #21
    Socratic Gadfly TheNext44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    4,228

    Re: Stubbs vs. Votto

    Right now, in 2010, it's highly doubtful Stubbs will be as productive as Votto or even Dunn, all things considered. His K rate is still too high, and there is no way he continues his power surge over a whole season. I would be thrilled if Stubbs ends up as league average CF over the course of his first full season.

    But I do think that there is a better than average chance that Stubbs eventually, two or three years down the road, turns into a 4+ win player, similar to Votto. He has the physical tools, and he has progressed, if very slowly, throughout his minor league career.

    I could seem him have a similar career as Jayson Werth. A few years figuring out what type of hitter he will be, then developing into All-Star. Stubbs has the advantage that his defense will keep him playing everyday, so he should progress just a bit faster that Werth.

    Stubbs could still stay where he is now, but I like his chances of getting better.
    "Imagination is more important than knowledge." -- Albert Einstein

  8. #22
    Stat Wanker Hodiernus RedsManRick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    15,918

    Re: Stubbs vs. Votto

    I still like Curtis Granderson as a comp for Stubbs. I think Stubbs will trade some of those homers for doubles and triples, but would not at all be surprised to see him maintain something like a .270/.340/.440 line. I think he's got a bit more power than Gutierrez. In any event, he only needs to put up something like a .700 OPS to be a solid addition to the team thanks to the quality of his 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.

  9. #23
    Box of Frogs edabbs44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    16,296

    Re: Stubbs vs. Votto

    Quote Originally Posted by RedsManRick View Post
    I still like Curtis Granderson as a comp for Stubbs. I think Stubbs will trade some of those homers for doubles and triples, but would not at all be surprised to see him maintain something like a .270/.340/.440 line. I think he's got a bit more power than Gutierrez. In any event, he only needs to put up something like a .700 OPS to be a solid addition to the team thanks to the quality of his defense.
    I'd like to see better than .700 OPS. This team needs bats. Defense is great, especially in CF, but I wouldn't be happy with him providing a .275/.350/.350 line.

  10. #24
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    18,632

    Re: Stubbs vs. Votto

    Quote Originally Posted by RedsManRick View Post
    I still like Curtis Granderson as a comp for Stubbs. I think Stubbs will trade some of those homers for doubles and triples, but would not at all be surprised to see him maintain something like a .270/.340/.440 line. I think he's got a bit more power than Gutierrez. In any event, he only needs to put up something like a .700 OPS to be a solid addition to the team thanks to the quality of his defense.
    I'd argue that Franklin Gutierrez has shown significantly more power than Stubbs.
    "This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner

  11. #25
    Stat Wanker Hodiernus RedsManRick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    15,918

    Re: Stubbs vs. Votto

    Quote Originally Posted by jojo View Post
    I'd argue that Franklin Gutierrez has shown significantly more power than Stubbs.
    Shown, yes; that's what I said "I think he's got," meaning that he has the inherent ability -- not that he's produced it as of yet. Though I had admittedly forgotten how similar Gutierrez's body type is to Stubbs. Both are tall, lanky guys who should add power as they age. In any event, I think Stubbs will prove to be a 20 HR guy in his prime.

    EDabbs, I'd like to see an OPS significantly north of .700 too. But we don't "need bats" any more or than we "need run prenvention". Improvement in our run differential counts regardless of which side of the ledger it's on. A .700 OPS and his defense would represent a substantial improvement in our run differential over what we got from CF in 2009.
    Last edited by RedsManRick; 10-30-2009 at 03:28 PM.
    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.

  12. #26
    Waitin til next year bucksfan2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    10,124

    Re: Stubbs vs. Votto

    Quote Originally Posted by RedsManRick View Post
    Shown, yes; that's what I said "I think he's got," meaning that he has the inherent ability -- not that he's produced it as of yet. Though I had admittedly forgotten how similar Gutierrez's body type is to Stubbs. Both are tall, lanky guys who should add power as they age. In any event, I think Stubbs will prove to be a 20 HR guy in his prime.

    EDabbs, I'd like to see an OPS significantly north of .700 too. But we don't "need bats" any more or than we "need run prenvention". Improvement in our run differential counts regardless of which side of the ledger it's on. A .700 OPS and his defense would represent a substantial improvement in our run differential over what we got from CF in 2009.
    The Reds have built a pretty darn good "run prevention" club. Rolen, Phillips, Bruce, Stubbs, and Hanigan are all well above average defensive players. You can throw Votto into the mix as an above average defender and depending on which direction the SS position goes it could be Cozart of Janish who are above average. The only position that is questionable defensively is LF and it all depends on who plays there.

    To be honest I think bats, especially in the OBP area, are the primary need of this club.

  13. #27
    Stat Wanker Hodiernus RedsManRick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    15,918

    Re: Stubbs vs. Votto

    Quote Originally Posted by bucksfan2 View Post
    The Reds have built a pretty darn good "run prevention" club. Rolen, Phillips, Bruce, Stubbs, and Hanigan are all well above average defensive players. You can throw Votto into the mix as an above average defender and depending on which direction the SS position goes it could be Cozart of Janish who are above average. The only position that is questionable defensively is LF and it all depends on who plays there.

    To be honest I think bats, especially in the OBP area, are the primary need of this club.
    Again, "need" is the wrong word here. Adding offense may be the most cost-effective strategy to improve our run differential at the moment. As you point out, there is less room for us to improve the team through defense. But the presence of those plus defenders elsewhere and relatively poor offense elsewhere in the lineup doesn't change the value of the defense Stubbs provides. His additional runs prevented count just the same as if his teammates were poor defenders and good hitters.

    There are not really diminishing returns so long as that guy is going to get playing time. If you're a 700 RS/ 700 RA team, it doesn't matter if you get to 720/700 or 700/680. Now, strategically speaking, in terms of how you use your resources to improve that differential, there are limits to how much you can improve on either side of the ball - but that's because there are only 9 guys on the field at any one time. If you're adding a guy who is one of those 9, the effect is the same.

    So long as your goal is winning and not just winning in a particular way, runs are runs, and it doesn't really matter whether you're improving your offense or your defense. It's not where you're improving; it's that you're improving.
    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.

  14. #28
    BobC, get a legit F.O.! Mario-Rijo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Springfield, Ohio
    Posts
    9,052

    Re: Stubbs vs. Votto

    Quote Originally Posted by RedsManRick View Post
    Again, "need" is the wrong word here. Adding offense may be the most cost-effective strategy to improve our run differential at the moment. As you point out, there is less room for us to improve the team through defense. But the presence of those plus defenders elsewhere and relatively poor offense elsewhere in the lineup doesn't change the value of the defense Stubbs provides. His additional runs prevented count just the same as if his teammates were poor defenders and good hitters.

    There are not really diminishing returns so long as that guy is going to get playing time. If you're a 700 RS/ 700 RA team, it doesn't matter if you get to 720/700 or 700/680. Now, strategically speaking, in terms of how you use your resources to improve that differential, there are limits to how much you can improve on either side of the ball - but that's because there are only 9 guys on the field at any one time. If you're adding a guy who is one of those 9, the effect is the same.

    So long as your goal is winning and not just winning in a particular way, runs are runs, and it doesn't really matter whether you're improving your offense or your defense. It's not where you're improving; it's that you're improving.
    In the macro that's true but in the micro you cannot forget to score runs. If you had 8 Paul Janish's around the diamond you are gonna lose more (probably a lot more) than you win. With a pretty good run preventing unit. True or not?
    "You can't let praise or criticism get to you. It's a weakness to get caught up in either one."

    --Woody Hayes

  15. #29
    Stat Wanker Hodiernus RedsManRick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    15,918

    Re: Stubbs vs. Votto

    Quote Originally Posted by Mario-Rijo View Post
    In the macro that's true but in the micro you cannot forget to score runs. If you had 8 Paul Janish's around the diamond you are gonna lose more (probably a lot more) than you win. With a pretty good run preventing unit. True or not?
    Absolutely, and that will show up in your differential. Getting 20 runs better at prevention at the cost of 20 runs of offense accomplishes nothing. But even if your offense sucks, you benefit more from improving your defense by an additional 20 runs than by improving your offense by 10. It's the change in the differential that matters, not which side you're affecting.

    The point is that you can never just focus on or the other. For position players, they always both count.
    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.

  16. #30
    Et tu, Brutus? Brutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga.
    Posts
    10,495

    Re: Stubbs vs. Votto

    Quote Originally Posted by RedsManRick View Post
    Absolutely, and that will show up in your differential. Getting 20 runs better at prevention at the cost of 20 runs of offense accomplishes nothing. But even if your offense sucks, you benefit more from improving your defense by an additional 20 runs than by improving your offense by 10. It's the change in the differential that matters, not which side you're affecting.

    The point is that you can never just focus on or the other. For position players, they always both count.
    This is the key distinction that gets lost in the shuffle. People that enjoy UZR use the run differential. The common reply is that you can't sacrifice too much offense, which is true. But that's never been the crux of the issue.

    The point you are making, Jojo makes, I would make, etc., is that trading 20 runs scored for 20 runs prevented is a net break-even. However, while you continue to lose offense, if you could, hypothetically, trade 5 runs scored for 10 runs prevented with every player in your lineup, this is better than improving your offense by two runs over your defense.

    Hence, it's the overall differential that matters, and not the dynamic of how you get there. Clearly you need some competent hitters at some point, so that's not to say a team would be advised at comprising a lineup completely of hit-less, field-more players. But sometimes there's too much an emphasis at getting a bat just to get a bat, and forget that you might be doing yourself a disservice by gaining those runs scored at the expense of runs prevented.
    "No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference." ~Tommy Lasorda


Turn Off Ads?

Tags for this Thread

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