Turn Off Ads?
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 39 of 39

Thread: The Case For: Xavier Paul

  1. #31
    The Big Dog mth123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    14,703

    Re: The Case For: Xavier Paul

    Quote Originally Posted by redsmetz View Post
    I really don't fall on any particular side regarding Paul, although I agree with you that I wouldn't have Xavier Paul hold us back from necessarily bringing Rolen back.

    That said, is there some particular injury that Paul had that would still present itself when spring training is over? As much as folks suggest that there are phantom DL injuries galore, I really don't believe it's that prevalent and they can't be made out of whole cloth - there have to be a medical basis for it. Is there some injury I'm forgetting?
    Simply tell him that you want to expand the roster beyond the 25 man restriction. He gets Major League money and Major League service time towards his pension and some ABs on a rehab in Louisville with a chance when a real injury happens down the road. If the alternative is DFA and the hope that some team that just cut down finds room for a 28 year old who has never been able to stick in the majors, I'm pretty sure he won't mind saying his side hurts or that he twisted his back during ST.
    "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

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #32
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,137

    Re: The Case For: Xavier Paul

    Quote Originally Posted by *BaseClogger* View Post
    With the game on the line, I'm PHing Scott Rolen before I use Xavier Paul, even against a tough RH pitcher...
    That's bad managing. I love Scott Rolen, but you need to be able to play matchup late in a game. Hannahan is not a good enough bat to be the primary LH PH for a team with visions of October dancing in its head.

    Quote Originally Posted by mth123
    Funny that you mention small samples. People are getting pretty carried away concerning Xavier Paul based on a pretty darned small sample.
    I am by no means sold on Xavier Paul as some sort of sure thing. If he's not producing, I'd cut bait on him in a heartbeat. Yet there is no other viable LH bench bat on the roster at this juncture. Paul's at the front of the line because he's the guy who most recently had the hot hand ... and because who else?
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  4. #33
    The Big Dog mth123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    14,703

    Re: The Case For: Xavier Paul

    Quote Originally Posted by M2 View Post
    That's bad managing. I love Scott Rolen, but you need to be able to play matchup late in a game. Hannahan is not a good enough bat to be the primary LH PH for a team with visions of October dancing in its head.



    I am by no means sold on Xavier Paul as some sort of sure thing. If he's not producing, I'd cut bait on him in a heartbeat. Yet there is no other viable LH bench bat on the roster at this juncture. Paul's at the front of the line because he's the guy who most recently had the hot hand ... and because who else?
    Its a big reason why I wouldn't worry about having that second LH on the bench. Ideally, I'd love to see the Reds with a Matt Stairs from 10 years ago, or Jason Giambi or Jim Thome taking that spot as a lefty PH, but since its Xavier Paul, I wouldn't let lefty/righty influence my roster make-up so much. I'd just keep the best guys. This really gets to the heart of my argument. IMO, Rolen, even in an aging, injured declining state, is a better player than what Xavier Paul is likely to be.

    The Reds won 97 games last season without anyone most of the year and with Stubbs, Cairo, Valdez, et al on the roster were even way more splitty and Hannahan and Choo will even it out some. If it becomes a big problem, they can make a change. I'd keep Paul around on the DL somehow,and I'd be keeping an eye on H-Rod, Fellhauer, Perez and others to see if they could fill a bench role from the left side. I maintain my stance that, if we're trying to be ideal here, the lefty bat should play 2B and SS. If H-Rod could start-off hitting well, I'd comsider replacing Jason Donald with H-Rod.
    Last edited by mth123; 02-06-2013 at 06:21 AM.
    "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

  5. #34
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,137

    Re: The Case For: Xavier Paul

    Quote Originally Posted by mth123 View Post
    Its a big reason why I wouldn't worry about having that second LH on the bench.
    Hannahan is the secondary LH on the bench and his job is assured. If not Paul, who's the primary LH on the bench? The Reds had better be worried about that.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  6. #35
    Member mdccclxix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Crown
    Posts
    3,615

    Re: The Case For: Xavier Paul

    Let's look at who the Reds might want to PH for against a RHRP:

    Heisey (when he plays)
    Cozart (weak SS bench prohibits the idea mostly)
    Hannigan (perhaps in an extra inning game)
    Ludwick (handles RHP okay)
    Frazier (same)

    Of course the pitching spot is always going to need pinch hitting, but I'd think Heisey, Frazier, Ludwick, or Choo (when any is on the bench) would face RHP before Paul. Maybe not always, but you get the picture. Paul could easily turn into Willie Harris and need-a-miracle-walk-or-slap-a-single-cold-off-the-bench type of disappointment.

  7. #36
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,137

    Re: The Case For: Xavier Paul

    Quote Originally Posted by mdccclxix View Post
    Let's look at who the Reds might want to PH for against a RHRP:

    Heisey (when he plays)
    Cozart (weak SS bench prohibits the idea mostly)
    Hannigan (perhaps in an extra inning game)
    Ludwick (handles RHP okay)
    Frazier (same)

    Of course the pitching spot is always going to need pinch hitting, but I'd think Heisey, Frazier, Ludwick, or Choo (when any is on the bench) would face RHP before Paul. Maybe not always, but you get the picture. Paul could easily turn into Willie Harris and need-a-miracle-walk-or-slap-a-single-cold-off-the-bench type of disappointment.
    You keep avoiding the question. The Reds need a competent LH bat to come off the bench and face tough RHPs. Paul could turn into Willie Harris last year or he could turn into Willie Harris for a decade before that.

    But if not Paul, then who? If you don't have an answer, then Xavier Paul needs to be on the 25-man roster.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.

  8. #37
    The Big Dog mth123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    14,703

    Re: The Case For: Xavier Paul

    Quote Originally Posted by M2 View Post
    You keep avoiding the question. The Reds need a competent LH bat to come off the bench and face tough RHPs. Paul could turn into Willie Harris last year or he could turn into Willie Harris for a decade before that.

    But if not Paul, then who? If you don't have an answer, then Xavier Paul needs to be on the 25-man roster.
    Career OPS VS. RHP

    Xavier Paul .713 with a .338 BABIP
    Jack Hannahan .681 with a .289 BABIP

    Normalize the BABIP and they are the same guy. Why is Paul considered a "competent LH bat" while Hannahan is dismissed as though he doesn't exist?

    IMO, Hannahan is labeled a defensive guy because he's got a really good glove. Paul, OTOH, doesn't stand out defensively so he's labeled a "competent LH bat." Reality is that these guys are very similar offensively.

    If a potent LH bat on the bench is essential, time to sign Jim Thome or Jason Giambi. Otherwise, I don't think Paul's LH bat should have such an influence on the make-up of the roster. Paul is an OK 25th man, but his LH bat is not worth bypassing a better guy for. Hannahan can provide the same thing. Heisey, or whoever of the other four OF who isn't starting, would probably be preferable against a RHP than either of them.
    Last edited by mth123; 02-07-2013 at 06:26 AM.
    "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

  9. #38
    Member mdccclxix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Crown
    Posts
    3,615

    Re: The Case For: Xavier Paul

    Dang, I just deleted my response somehow.

    Anyway, the short of it was I miss Laynce Nix. If Rolen is Rolen at 3b and can hit cold off the bench, he's got Paul's spot and the Reds will be fine without another LHH on the bench. If Rolen isn't suited for the job, Paul stays. I'd say it's 60/40 Paul stays at this point. Rolen's gone through every waiting period and still hasn't jumped on board. I think everyone needs to look at what's left in the tank for him before deciding.

  10. #39
    Posting in Dynarama M2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    28,137

    Re: The Case For: Xavier Paul

    Quote Originally Posted by mth123 View Post
    Normalize the BABIP and they are the same guy. Why is Paul considered a "competent LH bat" while Hannahan is dismissed as though he doesn't exist?
    Paul might not be. We've been over this. If he flops, move on to someone else. Hannahan will be 33 soon and he has 1,665 PAs in the majors. We know what he is and it isn't a quality bat. Paul might not be the PH the Reds need. Hannahan isn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by mth123 View Post
    If a potent LH bat on the bench is essential, time to sign Jim Thome or Jason Giambi.
    I'm cool with that, but until someone like that shows up the Reds have Xavier Paul at the top of the LHB off the bench list. Maybe the Reds' plan is to see what Paul looks like in ST and then scramble for another LH bat if he's not getting it done. That's reasonable, but the lack of any other option as we head into the start of ST leads me to believe Paul is part of Plan A.
    Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

    I'm witchcrafting everybody.


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