Turn Off Ads?
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 24 of 24

Thread: Have the Reds done enough this Winter....

  1. #16
    Salukifan2
    Guest

    Re: Have the Reds done enough this Winter....

    Quote Originally Posted by RedTruck View Post

    At the end of the day, we won't win by our offense. We'll win by our pitching and our bullpen and our defense.
    From what ive heard Stubbs was the only reds outfielder with a positive defensive WAR last season including Choo. Ludwick will be a year older and choo isn't the type of guy who will be able to bail out the slow footed bruce and luddy

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Louisville, KY
    Posts
    717

    Re: Have the Reds done enough this Winter....

    Quote Originally Posted by drowg14 View Post
    Production in a small sample size like a 5 or 7 game series is about getting "hot" at the right time. These small samples are very prone to be affected my random noise such as babip or hr/fb flucuations, or by a couple errors.

    The Giants shouldn't have even gotten out of the first round. The Giants got lucky that Votto wasn't really Votto, Cueto got hurt in his first inning which messed with Latos' scheduled starts and cost us our best pitcher, and that Leake had to be called in to start a game to replace him. I remember in game 3, the Reds first inning (I think?) was going real well, until a baserunning error which killed a rally. And since both teams had good pitching, the 1 or 2 runs which could have scored changed the entire dynamic of the game, just as Cueto getting hurt changed the entire dynamic of the series.

    I'm sure the Reds also had some luck fall there way as well, but my point is that playoffs in any sport have alot of error involved with them. The longer the playoffs are, the less likely you are to have the actual "best team" become the champion. This is why the NBA/NHL playoffs are such a joke. They have a long (82 game) season, and yet over half of the teams (16/30) make the playoffs. This is why I am so against the addition of the second wild card. Just adds more randomness/luck to an already hectic equation.
    Come on man. The team(s) that should have won, did. Luck played zero factor in anything. The Reds controlled their own destiny and choked it away. It really is that simple.

    Making excuses, passing the buck, and shifting the locus of control to unforseen forces, like "destiny" or "fate" or "pre-destination" doesn't fly.

    If the boys play like they're capable, they will be in good shape. If they shy away from the moment, their golf season will start early again.

  4. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    438

    Re: Have the Reds done enough this Winter....

    Quote Originally Posted by TSJ55 View Post
    Come on man. The team(s) that should have won, did. Luck played zero factor in anything. The Reds controlled their own destiny and choked it away. It really is that simple.

    Making excuses, passing the buck, and shifting the locus of control to unforseen forces, like "destiny" or "fate" or "pre-destination" doesn't fly.

    If the boys play like they're capable, they will be in good shape. If they shy away from the moment, their golf season will start early again.
    Randomness/luck and fate/destiny are the exact opposite. In no way are they related. The Giants were not the best team in the NL this year. The Nats were better, the Reds were better. The Tigers were not the best team in the AL last year. They weren't even the best team in there division until late in the year when the Sox fell off a bit. They just played better in the post season, a sample size which is a small fraction of a 162 game season.

    Luck playing a significant factor in all sports playoffs systems is actually a fairly common concept. Saying "The Reds controlled their own destiny and choked it away. It really is that simple." isn't really adding to your argument either. A team choking away a series to me infers that THAT is the team that should have won, and they just couldn't put it away (like the Yankees in 2004). I am in no way trying to "pass the buck". The Giants won the WS, and they were a good team. They beat the Reds in a fairly played short series. I was making a statement about the volatiliy of tournament systems in sports and you turned it into some sort of attack on the Giants.

    Do you think that the Cards were the best team last year? The Giants the year before? The Marlins in 97/03? How many times has a wild card team won the WS over the past few years?

  5. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Louisville, KY
    Posts
    717

    Re: Have the Reds done enough this Winter....

    Quote Originally Posted by drowg14 View Post
    Randomness/luck and fate/destiny are the exact opposite.
    They're all terms used to get around taking responsibility for poor play when used in terms of competition. Acceptable in poker I guess, but not in baseball.

    Quote Originally Posted by drowg14 View Post
    Do you think that the Cards were the best team last year? The Giants the year before? The Marlins in 97/03? How many times has a wild card team won the WS over the past few years
    "Best" is a subjective term and I shouldn't have used it. My bad. In all those examples, the team that should have won did. They scored more runs before making 27 outs.

    I know I've derailed the thread but I see "luck" thrown around in here all the time and gets me worked up.

  6. #20
    Salukifan2
    Guest

    Re: Have the Reds done enough this Winter....

    Quote Originally Posted by TSJ55 View Post

    I see "luck" thrown around in here all the time and gets me worked up.
    here here

  7. #21
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    West Central Ohio
    Posts
    211

    Re: Have the Reds done enough this Winter....

    Quote Originally Posted by TSJ55 View Post
    They're all terms used to get around taking responsibility for poor play when used in terms of competition. Acceptable in poker I guess, but not in baseball.



    "Best" is a subjective term and I shouldn't have used it. My bad. In all those examples, the team that should have won did. They scored more runs before making 27 outs.

    I know I've derailed the thread but I see "luck" thrown around in here all the time and gets me worked up.
    Cueto getting hurt and the Reds activating Leake is due to injury. AKA bad luck. THe REds did not plan on having Leake on their roster but had to activate him. That is not choking it away, that is getting your Ace hurt and activating a guy not on the 25 man roster. Yeah, there were other things to, but you gotta admit this could be considered "bad luck". ALso, I am all for accountability and owning up, where it applies. Not in that circumstance.
    Pete Campbell: A man like you I'd follow into combat blindfolded, and I wouldn't be the first. Am I right, buddy?
    Don Draper: Let's take it a little slower. I don't want to wake up pregnant.

  8. #22
    Member smixsell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    San Jose
    Posts
    1,153

    Re: Have the Reds done enough this Winter....

    Quote Originally Posted by drowg14 View Post
    Production in a small sample size like a 5 or 7 game series is about getting "hot" at the right time. These small samples are very prone to be affected my random noise such as babip or hr/fb flucuations, or by a couple errors.

    The Giants shouldn't have even gotten out of the first round. The Giants got lucky that Votto wasn't really Votto, Cueto got hurt in his first inning which messed with Latos' scheduled starts and cost us our best pitcher, and that Leake had to be called in to start a game to replace him. I remember in game 3, the Reds first inning (I think?) was going real well, until a baserunning error which killed a rally. And since both teams had good pitching, the 1 or 2 runs which could have scored changed the entire dynamic of the game, just as Cueto getting hurt changed the entire dynamic of the series.

    I'm sure the Reds also had some luck fall there way as well, but my point is that playoffs in any sport have alot of error involved with them. The longer the playoffs are, the less likely you are to have the actual "best team" become the champion. This is why the NBA/NHL playoffs are such a joke. They have a long (82 game) season, and yet over half of the teams (16/30) make the playoffs. This is why I am so against the addition of the second wild card. Just adds more randomness/luck to an already hectic equation.
    Spot on.

    PS Lets hope a little more experience will help avoid some of that "bad luck" next time around. (like maybe Johnny will take it a little bit easier in his pregame warmups )

  9. #23
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Louisville, KY
    Posts
    717

    Re: Have the Reds done enough this Winter....

    Quote Originally Posted by SweetLou1990 View Post
    Cueto getting hurt and the Reds activating Leake is due to injury. AKA bad luck. THe REds did not plan on having Leake on their roster but had to activate him. That is not choking it away, that is getting your Ace hurt and activating a guy not on the 25 man roster. Yeah, there were other things to, but you gotta admit this could be considered "bad luck". ALso, I am all for accountability and owning up, where it applies. Not in that circumstance.
    Injury is part of the game, not "bad luck". Good teams Man Up and win in spite of it. The Giants had their share of injury too if I remember correctly.

  10. #24
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,849

    Re: Have the Reds done enough this Winter....

    Quote Originally Posted by Brittingham.Sam View Post
    From what ive heard Stubbs was the only reds outfielder with a positive defensive WAR last season including Choo. Ludwick will be a year older and choo isn't the type of guy who will be able to bail out the slow footed bruce and luddy
    Those three's bats will cover any type of defensive issues, plus Stubbs was only a +2 DRS this year to move his mark to +1 in his career so the mild boost in defense isn't worth playing his negative offense of a 61 OPS+ in 2012 and just 86 in career.


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