Turn Off Ads?
Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Reds better off than @ this time last year

  1. #1
    Member Ron Madden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,815

    Reds better off than @ this time last year


  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #2
    Box of Frogs edabbs44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    16,296

    Re: Reds better off than @ this time last year

    I agree.

  4. #3
    Vavasor TRF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Amarillo, TX
    Posts
    13,251

    Re: Reds better off than @ this time last year

    I agree too. It is amazing what can happen when high end talent gets a chance to mature. Hopefully Bailey matures into at least a solid #3.
    Suck it up cupcake.

  5. #4
    Member Cedric's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Monroe
    Posts
    6,373

    Re: Reds better off than @ this time last year

    Who in the world would dispute this? Of course the Reds are better with their own talent maturing, guys like Chapman, Wood, Stubbs, and Bruce.

    I think people are just worried that other teams in the division have gotten much better. Doubt anyone is arguing the Reds are worse today than this time last year.
    This is the time. The real Reds organization is back.

  6. #5
    The Future is Now Ghosts of 1990's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    4,026

    Re: Reds better off than @ this time last year

    At best, Push. While some youngsters have matured a little bit; Rolen is a year older. Phillips has more wear and tear on the tires. Rhodes is now gone. Cordero is a ticking time bomb in some folks eyes. Of course, I think that Harang isn't going to be pitching against #1 guys is a plus. Some would say the fact he won't be pitching at all is a plus. I don't think we're necessarily better than last year--but when you look at the beginning of seasons like 2005, 2006, 2007, etc. we are A LOT further along. We are in the mix, we are relevant. But heading into last year I knew we would be pretty tough to beat.
    2009 Attendance Record: 3-5 2010 Attendance Record: 2-9
    2011 Attendance Record: 3-4 2012 Attendance Record: 3-4
    2013 Attendance Record: 5-2 2014 Attendance Record: 3-0

  7. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta, aka, the most prosperous city in the world.
    Posts
    10,533

    Re: Reds better off than @ this time last year

    Quote Originally Posted by Ghosts of 1990 View Post
    Of course, I think that Harang isn't going to be pitching against #1 guys is a plus.
    When has he ever pitched agaisnt the other team's #1 starter, other than on a random basis?

    Pitchers pitch against the other team's rotation on a random basis. Harang has pitched against the other team's best pitcher about 20% of the time.

  8. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta, aka, the most prosperous city in the world.
    Posts
    10,533

    Re: Reds better off than @ this time last year

    Quote Originally Posted by Ghosts of 1990 View Post
    But heading into last year I knew we would be pretty tough to beat.

    So tough to beat that you predicted we would go 83-79?

  9. #8
    The Future is Now Ghosts of 1990's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    4,026

    Re: Reds better off than @ this time last year

    Quote Originally Posted by PuffyPig View Post
    When has he ever pitched agaisnt the other team's #1 starter, other than on a random basis?

    Pitchers pitch against the other team's rotation on a random basis. Harang has pitched against the other team's best pitcher about 20% of the time.
    http://www.baseball-reference.com/pl...&t=p&year=2010

    Carpenter, Zambrano, Josh Johnson to open the season. Carpenter again three starts later. And you're right rotations get jumbled because of staggered off days, injuries, etc.

    You might be in the camp that Harang wasn't that bad. I don't think he should have faced a #1 starter even 1% of the time. Every 5th time out or 20% of the time (possibly reduced from 25% or 30% because he didn't end up making a full seasons worth of starts) it was nearly a guaranteed loss because he couldn't hang with #1's. So from this standpoint we're better already.
    2009 Attendance Record: 3-5 2010 Attendance Record: 2-9
    2011 Attendance Record: 3-4 2012 Attendance Record: 3-4
    2013 Attendance Record: 5-2 2014 Attendance Record: 3-0

  10. #9
    The Future is Now Ghosts of 1990's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    4,026

    Re: Reds better off than @ this time last year

    Quote Originally Posted by PuffyPig View Post
    So tough to beat that you predicted we would go 83-79?
    The fact that I even predicted a team who hadn't had a winning record in how many seasons to have a winning record means I thought they would be pretty tough. How many people were gun shy? I was one of them. People did it every year with the Reds. I was trying to make a wise and conservative yet accurate prediction. It was probably also before the rosters were finalized. I still didn't see them as being better than the Cardinals, no. But heading into last year, 83 wins qualifies as pretty tough to me with the way things had went in the previous decade.
    2009 Attendance Record: 3-5 2010 Attendance Record: 2-9
    2011 Attendance Record: 3-4 2012 Attendance Record: 3-4
    2013 Attendance Record: 5-2 2014 Attendance Record: 3-0

  11. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta, aka, the most prosperous city in the world.
    Posts
    10,533

    Re: Reds better off than @ this time last year

    Quote Originally Posted by Ghosts of 1990 View Post
    The fact that I even predicted a team who hadn't had a winning record in how many seasons to have a winning record means I thought they would be pretty tough. How many people were gun shy? I was one of them. People did it every year with the Reds. I was trying to make a wise and conservative yet accurate prediction. It was probably also before the rosters were finalized. I still didn't see them as being better than the Cardinals, no. But heading into last year, 83 wins qualifies as pretty tough to me with the way things had went in the previous decade.
    Saying a team is "pretty tough to beat" means you consider them the odds on favorite to win.

    Yet you expected the Cards to be better?

  12. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta, aka, the most prosperous city in the world.
    Posts
    10,533

    Re: Reds better off than @ this time last year

    Quote Originally Posted by Ghosts of 1990 View Post
    http://www.baseball-reference.com/pl...&t=p&year=2010

    Carpenter, Zambrano, Josh Johnson to open the season. Carpenter again three starts later. And you're right rotations get jumbled because of staggered off days, injuries, etc.
    Only Johnson was his team's #1 starter last year.

    It's an old wives tale that #1 starters face #1 starters etc.

    It gets mixed up almost immediately.

  13. #12
    The Future is Now Ghosts of 1990's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    4,026

    Re: Reds better off than @ this time last year

    Quote Originally Posted by PuffyPig View Post
    Saying a team is "pretty tough to beat" means you consider them the odds on favorite to win.

    Yet you expected the Cards to be better?
    That's not what "pretty tough to beat" means to me. In terms of the NL Central its being in the hunt, being within 5 games of the team that wins the division.
    2009 Attendance Record: 3-5 2010 Attendance Record: 2-9
    2011 Attendance Record: 3-4 2012 Attendance Record: 3-4
    2013 Attendance Record: 5-2 2014 Attendance Record: 3-0

  14. #13
    The Future is Now Ghosts of 1990's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    4,026

    Re: Reds better off than @ this time last year

    Quote Originally Posted by PuffyPig View Post
    Only Johnson was his team's #1 starter last year.

    It's an old wives tale that #1 starters face #1 starters etc.

    It gets mixed up almost immediately.
    Only guy who ended up with the #1 best number on his respective team but Chris Carpenter was a #1, as was Zambrano and if you want me to dig I'll find some more #1's who Harang pitched against. But does it really matter? Him throwing against a 2 or 3 was still a huge disadvantage whether it was Jaime Garcia or Rowland Smith or Hiroki Kuroda (twice), etc.

    He also pitched against Roy Halladay.
    2009 Attendance Record: 3-5 2010 Attendance Record: 2-9
    2011 Attendance Record: 3-4 2012 Attendance Record: 3-4
    2013 Attendance Record: 5-2 2014 Attendance Record: 3-0

  15. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta, aka, the most prosperous city in the world.
    Posts
    10,533

    Re: Reds better off than @ this time last year

    Quote Originally Posted by Ghosts of 1990 View Post
    Only guy who ended up with the #1 best number on his respective team but Chris Carpenter was a #1, as was Zambrano and if you want me to dig I'll find some more #1's who Harang pitched against. But does it really matter? Him throwing against a 2 or 3 was still a huge disadvantage whether it was Jaime Garcia or Rowland Smith or Hiroki Kuroda (twice), etc.

    He also pitched against Roy Halladay.
    No it doesn't matter, as pitchers pitch randomly against other teams' starters.

    Sure he pitched agaisnt some #1 starters, randomness ensures that.

  16. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Lexington
    Posts
    5,717

    Re: Reds better off than @ this time last year

    Are they better than this time last year? Yeah, somewhat. Is that good enough to win the division again? Debateable.

    Alot rests on the shoulders of Rolen and Gomes, IMO. If they get near the same perfornance for each, then they should be fine. I would prefer that they add on more piece from the outside that is a clear upgrade. Probably won't happen, but I've had a feeling that Walt will still make a move on par with the Chapman signing (or even more surprising) - I may be wrong, but that feeling is still there.


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