Turn Off Ads?
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 94

Thread: Drew Stubbs: What if?

  1. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    675

    Re: Drew Stubbs: What if?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheNext44 View Post
    His BABIP its around fifty points lower this year than his career average. It might not be luck but that is too extreme to blame totally on reduced skill.
    Actually it seems to dovetail nicely with this explanation, which has nothing to do with luck.

    Quote Originally Posted by AtomicDumpling View Post
    Trying to make more contact has only resulted in weaker contact, including on the balls that he would have hit harder using his old approach. The weaker contact is leading to more infield singles but fewer line drives, doubles, triples and home runs. To get hits on a regular basis you need to make hard contact -- not just contact.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    13,168

    Re: Drew Stubbs: What if?

    AD's point is a good one. Here's another way to look at it. Stubbs in 2010 was on his way to being a good power hitter. 22 home runs, .444 SLG percentage. Last year in 110 more at bats, he had only 15 homers and a .364 SLG. This year is not yet over, but Stubbs has 14 homers and a .356 SLG.

    We've seen a deterioration in Stubbs' power numbers. He looked like a potential 30 homer and 30 SB guy. But now, he's apparently trying for more contact, it's not working, and his power numbers are deteriorating.

    It does make sense for him to go back to an approach that seeks to use his power more and less concern about contact. The contact ain't happening anyway.

  4. #18
    Stat Wanker Hodiernus RedsManRick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    15,895

    Re: Drew Stubbs: What if?

    I think the "he is who he is" people are right. However, I wonder if when they say that they define "who he is" as a .220 AVG and a sub .300 OBP.

    Here's some data to inform the conversation:
    Code:
    Season	PA	AVG	OBP	SLG	OPS	wOBA	BB%	K%	ISO	LD%	BABIP
    2010	583	.255	.329	.444	.773	.345	9.4%	28.8%	.189	15.5%	.330
    2011	681	.243	.321	.364	.686	.314	9.3%	30.1%	.121	19.5%	.343
    2012	484	.220	.287	.356	.642	.291	8.1%	29.1%	.135	14.5%	.291
    
    
    Season	O-Swg%	Z-Swg%	Swg%	O-Con%	Z-Con%	Con%	Zone%	F-Str%	SwStr%
    2010	25.1 %	64.3 %	43.9 %	54.2 %	79.9 %	72.3 %	48.0%	62.1%	11.7 %
    2011	25.6 %	65.3 %	43.5 %	54.0 %	81.8 %	72.8 %	45.1%	61.5%	11.5 %
    2012	23.6 %	62.4 %	41.5 %	55.6 %	81.9 %	73.8 %	46.2%	63.4%	10.9 %
    What I find remarkable is just how consistent his approach has been. Despite all the conversation about taking more hacks early in the count, choking up with the 2-strikes, etc., he's basically the same guy he's always been this year. He's just gotten worse results.

    My theory? Random variation around a true talent level that looks something like .245/.320/.380. If I were Dusty, I'd be batting Stubbs 7th or 8th and telling him to do his thing. Let him swing for the fences and drive in some runs when he runs in to one. And let him work some walks and steal bases as pitchers decide to go after the pitcher instead. But most of all, let him get out of his own head. His skill set does not match what you want from a guy at the top of the order and forcing the square peg in to the round hole isn't doing anybody any good.
    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.

  5. #19
    Burn It Jamz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    413

    Re: Drew Stubbs: What if?

    I've been one of Stubbs' biggest supporters and many people know that. However, and while I do think he's had some bad luck this season, I think that he needs to go down until he can prove he belongs with the big club again. Honestly whether it's deteriorating skill, lack of adaptability, or just the bad luck getting into his head...it doesn't really matter he's not playing at a level deserving of being on our team right now. This is compounded by the fact that Frazier and Heisey have been playing so well and they deserve a spot much more than he does.
    I see great things in baseball. It's our game.

  6. #20
    Stat Wanker Hodiernus RedsManRick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    15,895

    Re: Drew Stubbs: What if?

    Quote Originally Posted by AtomicDumpling View Post
    I think the bolded part is the exact reason why his stats have gotten worse the last couple years. Stubbs actually has been trying to make more contact and use his speed and that approach has hurt his game tremendously. That approach is never going to work for him and he should in fact do the exact opposite. Trying to make more contact has only resulted in weaker contact, including on the balls that he would have hit harder using his old approach. The weaker contact is leading to more infield singles but fewer line drives, doubles, triples and home runs. To get hits on a regular basis you need to make hard contact -- not just contact.

    Here is part of a post I made in another thread.

    And as Tom Servo mentioned, Stubbs' awful pitch-recognition skills are another reason why he will never be a good contact hitter. The Reds need to quit trying to force him to be a speedy contact hitter because he has tried that and failed. Stubbs needs to work the count, take more walks, swing HARD and pull the ball down the line. Stubbs' body, swing and vision compel him to be a power hitter. Instead of trying to make weak contact and leg out infield hits Stubbs needs to use that speed to turn hard-hit singles into doubles and doubles into triples.
    Exactly. I agree that player's should play to their strengths. But guess what? Contact is Stubbs biggest weakness, by far. He is below replacement as a contact hitter. Sure, he could make better use of his speed if he made more contact, but just like muscling up for power results in less contact, shortening up for contact results in less power. Trying to go beyond your ability results in worse performance, not better.

    Stubbs had a very good year in 2010, when he was taking the approach he came up with. Since then, the Reds have pushed for him to make better use of his speed. At the same time, his strikeouts went up and his power went down. His GB/FB ratio went from 1.09 to 1.42 to 1.49. Huh, I wonder what happened to his power.

    We need to stop treating strikeouts like they're a moral failing and accept them as one of the outcomes that comes with the set of outcomes produced by a player's skill set and approach. What matters is not the amount of a specific outcome, but the whole suite of outcomes he produces. Yes, balls in play would be better than strikeouts. But homers and extra base hits are better than infield singles and stolen bases. That weak grounder to short that he beats out may not feel like a failure the way a strikeout does, but if knew that his contact oriented approach just cost him a homer on that swing, you'd feel differently. And we need to recognize that telling poor contact hitters to change their approach so that they can make more contact is about as effective as telling Juan Pierre or Jeff Keppinger to muscle up and hit some homers.

    Let Stubbs focus on making hard contact when he does connect and stop worrying about how to maximize the number of infield singles.
    Last edited by RedsManRick; 09-06-2012 at 07:32 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.

  7. #21
    Et tu, Brutus? Brutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga.
    Posts
    10,475

    Re: Drew Stubbs: What if?

    Quote Originally Posted by RedsManRick View Post
    Exactly. I agree that player's should play to their strengths. But guess what? Contact is Stubbs biggest weakness, by far. He is below replacement as a contact hitter. Sure, he could make better use of his speed if he made more contact, but just like muscling up for power results in less contact, shortening up for contact results in less power. Trying to go beyond your ability results in worse performance, not better.

    Stubbs had a very good year in 2010, when he was taking the approach he came up with. Since then, the Reds have pushed for him to make better use of his speed. At the same time, his strikeouts went up and his power went down. His GB/FB ratio went from 1.09 to 1.42 to 1.49. Huh, I wonder what happened to his power.

    We need to stop treating strikeouts like they're a moral failing and accept them as one of the outcomes that comes with the set of outcomes produced by a player's skill set and approach. What matters is not the amount of a specific outcome, but the whole suite of outcomes he produces. Yes, balls in play would be better than strikeouts. But homers and extra base hits are better than infield singles and stolen bases. That weak grounder to short that he beats out may not feel like a failure the way a strikeout does, but if knew that his contact oriented approach just cost him a homer on that swing, you'd feel differently. And we need to recognize that telling poor contact hitters to change their approach so that they can make more contact is about as effective as telling Juan Pierre or Jeff Keppinger to muscle up and hit some homers.

    Let Stubbs focus on making hard contact when he does connect and stop worrying about how to maximize the number of infield singles.
    What you're saying defies statistical studies that suggest on base percentage is more important than slugging percentage, Rick. If he shortens up his swing, sure, he'll lose power. But if that means more times making contact and consequently a better OBP, that equals better, not worse, performance. Further, it doesn't always mean less power if you're selective about it. Joey Votto often shortens up his swing. But not always. He knows when to shorten up and go the other way and when he can afford to swing for the fence.

    Stubbs' career ISO is .150. We need to stop acting like he's even giving the Reds a ton of power. He's not. He's not even cracked a career .400 slugging percentage. Guys like Adam Dunn can somewhat get away with the strikeouts because he's hitting 40 homers. Guys like Drew Stubbs cannot.

    If Stubbs were OPS'ing .800, you'd have a point. But he's not so there's no justification for doing what he's doing.
    "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

  8. #22
    KungFu Fighter AtomicDumpling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Hamilton, OH
    Posts
    2,690

    Re: Drew Stubbs: What if?

    Quote Originally Posted by Brutus View Post
    What you're saying defies statistical studies that suggest on base percentage is more important than slugging percentage, Rick. If he shortens up his swing, sure, he'll lose power. But if that means more times making contact and consequently a better OBP, that equals better, not worse, performance. Further, it doesn't always mean less power if you're selective about it. Joey Votto often shortens up his swing. But not always. He knows when to shorten up and go the other way and when he can afford to swing for the fence.

    Stubbs' career ISO is .150. We need to stop acting like he's even giving the Reds a ton of power. He's not. He's not even cracked a career .400 slugging percentage. Guys like Adam Dunn can somewhat get away with the strikeouts because he's hitting 40 homers. Guys like Drew Stubbs cannot.

    If Stubbs were OPS'ing .800, you'd have a point. But he's not so there's no justification for doing what he's doing.
    OBP is more important than SLG. You are absolutely right about that. But that doesn't change the fact that Stubbs' efforts to increase his contact rate have not increased his OBP. In fact his OBP has declined. And his SLG has plummeted. Stubbs had .443 SLG for his first two years in 2009 and 2010 combined. He has a .360 SLG for 2011 and 2012 combined. That is a huge, huge drop in a key statistical measure. Clearly his new contact-oriented approach has killed his productivity.

    I think the point you are missing is that Stubbs is making weaker contact than he did before he changed his approach. This more frequent but weaker contact has resulted in a lower OBP because he is not hitting the ball hard enough to get a hit.

    Making more contact leads to a higher OBP in theory, but in order to make more contact you have to change your swing and/or your approach at the plate. Making those changes is going to affect all of your at-bats, not just the ones where you would normally strike out. To make more contact hitters shorten their swing. Shortening your swing leads to more contact (which is good) but also leads to weaker contact (which is bad). Weaker contact leads to fewer hits. So you have two opposite forces interacting. More contact = higher OBP. Weaker contact = lower OBP. Do they offset? Which one wins? In Stubbs' case clearly the weaker contact has prevailed and has resulted in a lower OBP and a plummeting SLG.

    Merely making contact is not good enough. You have to hit the ball hard, not just make contact.

    Stubbs has made small gains in his contact rate, but his OBP has actually fallen. He is making more contact but getting on base less often. There are three reasons for that:

    1. First, that increased contact has come mostly on weakly hit balls. Weakly hit balls are not likely to become hits, (not to mention that it is nearly impossible to get an extra base hit on a weakly hit ball).

    2. Secondly, the max-contact approach has caused weaker contact on balls that he would have hit hard with his old approach, which means that some sharply hit balls that used to get through for hits are now hit more weakly and end up getting fielded and he makes an out where he would have had a hit before.

    3. Thirdly, the increased contact rate has reduced his walk rate because he can't walk if he hits the ball, which offsets any gains to his OBP from making more contact.

    Clearly Stubbs' altered approach has hurt his game. He needs to do something else. With his old approach he was an above average hitter in 2009 and 2010. He should go back to that approach. Or maybe he should go balls to the wall as a power hitter strikeouts be damned.
    Last edited by AtomicDumpling; 09-06-2012 at 09:21 PM.

  9. #23
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    1,385

    Re: Drew Stubbs: What if?

    What if Drew could learn to hit from the left side also?

    Is he athletic enough, young enough?

    Many slap-hitters from the left side did not have Drew's speed. The drag bunt from the lefty batter's box would be quite a weapon for him.

    He seems most susceptible to the breaking ball away. Switch-hitting would virtually eliminate that.

  10. #24
    Stat Wanker Hodiernus RedsManRick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    15,895

    Re: Drew Stubbs: What if?

    Quote Originally Posted by Brutus View Post
    What you're saying defies statistical studies that suggest on base percentage is more important than slugging percentage, Rick. If he shortens up his swing, sure, he'll lose power. But if that means more times making contact and consequently a better OBP, that equals better, not worse, performance. Further, it doesn't always mean less power if you're selective about it. Joey Votto often shortens up his swing. But not always. He knows when to shorten up and go the other way and when he can afford to swing for the fence.
    Sure, on a point for point basis, OBP is more valuable than slugging by nearly 2 to 1. If Stubbs could trade 1 point of slugging for 1 point of OBP, that would be a great trade, I'd agree. If it was 2 points of slugging for 1 point of OBP, he'd coming out about even. But what if it's 3, 4 or 5 points of slugging for a a point of OBP? The trade doesn't make sense then.

    But that's sort of beside the point, because the reality is that Stubbs OBP isn't going up. He's not trading slugging for OBP; he's losing both. He's getting on base less AND slugging less. He's not actually putting the ball in play more. But he is getting fewer less powerful hits when he does put the ball in play. His walk rate has dipped a bit too. He's hitting more grounders (which should produce a higher BABIP) and yet his BABIP is going down. Why is that?

    Maybe it's just dumb luck/ random variation. I don't see people making that argument -- though they probably should. Maybe his skills have simply regressed -- but it would pretty weird for an incredibly athletic player in his prime to have his skills dry up on him -- he's not losing power because of a loss of strength or reaction times. Maybe pitchers are attacking him differently -- but he's seeing pretty much the same type of pitches he always has.

    There are two things I know: Drew Stubbs has been trying to prioritize contact. And Drew Stubbs' performance has regressed. Those could just be spurious -- happening at the same time but not related. But given how we saw it happen with Dunn and what I can see in the data, I'm inclined to think otherwise.
    Last edited by RedsManRick; 09-06-2012 at 10:29 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.

  11. #25
    Et tu, Brutus? Brutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga.
    Posts
    10,475

    Re: Drew Stubbs: What if?

    Quote Originally Posted by RedsManRick View Post
    Sure, on a point for point basis, OBP is more valuable than slugging by nearly 2 to 1. If Stubbs could trade 1 point of slugging for 1 point of OBP, that would be a great trade, I'd agree. If it was 2 points of slugging for 1 point of OBP, he'd coming out about even. But what if it's 3, 4 or 5 points of slugging for a a point of OBP? The trade doesn't make sense then.

    But that's sort of beside the point, because the reality is that Stubbs OBP isn't going up. He's not trading slugging for OBP; he's losing both. He's getting on base less AND slugging less. He's not actually putting the ball in play more. But he is getting fewer less powerful hits when he does put the ball in play. His walk rate has dipped a bit too. He's hitting more grounders (which should produce a higher BABIP) and yet his BABIP is going down. Why is that?

    Maybe it's just dumb luck/ random variation. I don't see people making that argument -- though they probably should. Maybe his skills have simply regressed -- but it would pretty weird for an incredibly athletic player in his prime to have his skills dry up on him -- he's not losing power because of a loss of strength or reaction times. Maybe pitchers are attacking him differently -- but he's seeing pretty much the same type of pitches he always has.

    There are two things I know: Drew Stubbs has been trying to prioritize contact. And Drew Stubbs' performance has regressed. Those could just be spurious -- happening at the same time but not related. But given how we saw it happen with Dunn and what I can see in the data, I'm inclined to think otherwise.
    You're jumping to a lot of conclusions on causation, but I don't know what it's based on, to be honest.

    The only things that have changed in his peripherals is that he's seeing fewer pitches and he's seemingly traded some line drives for grounders. Watching him swing the bat, his swing hasn't changed. He's still got a long, looping swing. Nothing has changed in that regard. He's sometimes swinging earlier in the count (which is corroborated by his P/PA down to 3.9), but the root of his problem is still there: he's got a long swing. That's the biggest issue with his contact problems.

    I don't know where wanting to make more contact is even in this conversation as to why his numbers are down. The problem isn't the desire, it's the execution. He's not doing what it would take on a technical basis to actually make more contact. Swinging earlier is one thing, but swinging short is another.

    A short swing gives a player more control of the bat and helps contact. Scott Rolen is a great example of bat control because he can hit line drives, soft or otherwise, because he can short up a swing and guide the ball over the head of the infielders. Obviously no one can do it on command, but he's able to get the ball in play in RISP situations a lot more often because of this skill. That's what Stubbs is missing. He's not doing that right now, hence the reason his numbers haven't changed.

    You're right Stubbs' BABIP is down. But his LD% is way down. And if he were truly shortening up his swing, that would be one thing. But he's not doing that. He's still got the same old swing he had. He's swinging earlier, but he's not swinging any shorter. Stubbs has never embraced a shorter swing. Dusty has him trying to not be as selective, which hasn't worked, but Stubbs won't ever get better until he changes his mechanics.
    Last edited by Brutus; 09-07-2012 at 12:32 AM.
    "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

  12. #26
    The Big Dog mth123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    14,692

    Re: Drew Stubbs: What if?

    I don't think it matters whether he swings for power, shortens up to make contact or takes a tennis racket to the plate. Stubbs just can't hit a major league caliber breaking pitch running away from him and the possibility of one coming confounds him much of the time whether it actually comes or not. I'd guess any changes we've seen to his approach have been desperate attempts to do somethig he just can't do. Pitchers simply know how to get him out now and that wasn't true when he was more productive as a relatively unknown younger player. I don't expect him to ever be any better than he was in 2010 and 2011 was better than 2012. 2012 is probably better than we should expect from 2013 and so on. The only way I see Stubbs production increasing is if he sits against RHP and limits his exposure to around 175 PAs per year against LHP. The Reds simply need to find another option to play CF against RHP. Every day CF are hard to find. I think focusing on a platoon mate is the best alternative.
    "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

  13. #27
    Danger is my business! oneupper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Back in Florida
    Posts
    8,138

    Re: Drew Stubbs: What if?

    Quote Originally Posted by mth123 View Post
    . I think focusing on a platoon mate is the best alternative.
    Perhaps. But it won't happen on a Baker-managed team (which begs the other question). Just as Stubbs has been the subject of endless debate here on RZ, you have to believe that the same thing has been going on in the REDS organization for years now. They haven't been able to fix him after six years in the organization. (BTW his performance vs LHP is trending down also...maybe the southpaws have figured him out too).

    Let someone else try to fix him. Problem is, I'm not sure there will be many (or any) takers for a straight trade. Maybe as part of a package deal (problem for problem)

    If you can't trade him. Do you extend an arbitration offer o just let him go?
    If you ask me, that is more likely to be the debate this offseason.
    "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it."

    http://dalmady.blogspot.com

  14. #28
    THAT'S A FACT JACK!! GAC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Bellefontaine, Ohio
    Posts
    26,654

    Re: Drew Stubbs: What if?

    Quote Originally Posted by George Foster View Post
    The latest stats available on Stubbs (reds.com) are through 116 games.

    Stubbs has had 1734 ML at-bats. What is most alarming is he's not getting better, he's not remained the same, he's getting worse. Since 2010, he's first full season, all of his hitting stats have gone down. Down in 2011 compaired to 2010, and down in 2012 as compaired to 2011.

    Very few ML hitters improve their hitting stats dramatically after 1700 ML at-bats. As the saying goes, "you are what the back of your baseball card says you are."

    I really think Stubbs career is at a crossroads. He needs to totally change his approach to hitting, to have a chance to be one of those rare few who can dramatically improve their overall hitting stats. He needs to make a lot more contact and use his speed, he has struck out 563 times.

    After 1700 ML at-bats it is unrealistic of us as fans to think he's "going to break out of it" or his "potential" will finally come through. This is "the real" Drew Stubbs. We will see spring training of 2013 if he has made real changes. If not, the Reds might part ways with him and he becomes a Cory Patterson. A different team every other year. His defense will keep him in the majors but not as a star but a bench player. If the Reds had a better option, he would already be on the bench.
    Very good post. Couldn't have said it better. Stubbs will be 28 yrs old in a few weeks. There are no "what ifs?" left with him IMO. If The Reds had a better option he'd be G-O-N-E.

    The only thing his speed does for him is that he gets back to the bench faster then any of the other players after producing another out with the bat. I've watched him a lot this year at the plate and it simply is mind boggling watching him put himself in the hole 0-2 with the bat on his shoulder. Good pitches too. He has, IMO, a terrible batting eye and no plate discipline. Advantage pitcher because he's now in a defensive position just trying to protect the plate and hang in there when the pitcher ain't going to give him nothing to hit. Doesn't have to either because Stubbs will swing at something, and the vast amount of time it results in a K.

    Almost a 1/3 of his A/Bs this season (147) are batting behind in the count. And the numbers are.... .163 BA .169 OB% .197 SLG% .366 OPs ... and 147 Ks.

    He's not going to improve on this. He is what he is, and it's unacceptable.

    And as far as playing CF?.... thank God he is fast! But IMO he doesn't see/track FBs well, takes bad routes, but is able to "overcome" it with his speed.

    Where's Chris Denorfia when we need him?
    "panic" only comes from having real expectations

  15. #29
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    1,589

    Re: Drew Stubbs: What if?

    Quote Originally Posted by GAC View Post
    Where's Chris Denorfia when we need him?
    Yeah.

    I don't have the patience to look up the splits, but I suspect Stubbs is behind in the count far more often than a regular hitter.
    "Even a bad day at the ballpark beats the snot out of most other good days. I'll take my scorecard and pencil and beer and hot dog and rage at the dips and cheer at the highs, but I'm not ever going to stop loving this game and this team and nobody will ever take that away from me." Roy Tucker October 2010

  16. #30
    Member Strikes Out Looking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    2,427

    Re: Drew Stubbs: What if?

    I think that the pitchers have figured out how to pitch him and he hasn't learned how to adapt.
    Win the Division


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