AL evaluator critique of the Reds

[cincrazy]

In Buster Olney's column this morning, and unknown AL evaluator had this to say about the Reds: "I don't necessarily drink the Reds Kool-Aid. They are losing the Astros from their schedule." He notes that although the Reds won 97 games, there were seven teams with a better run differential than the Reds last year.

I mean... what? That's your reasoning? They lose the Astros from their schedule? There are some really, really stupid people in the game of baseball that have really, really important jobs. Kind of scary if you ask me.

[CySeymour]

I think it is valid to note they won't be playing 18 games versus the Astros. Their run differential last season had them as a 91 win team, so there is some evidence to suggest they were a bit lucky last year.

[cincrazy]

I think it is valid to note they won't be playing 18 games versus the Astros. Their run differential last season had them as a 91 win team, so there is some evidence to suggest they were a bit lucky last year.

However, they were 10-5 against the Astros. They didn't own them anymore than you'd expect to own a bad team. I'm not saying it won't play a factor in their win total, maybe a few games, but you don't buy into them for that reason? That's the only reason you give? Just silly to me.

[reds1869]

However, they were 10-5 against the Astros. They didn't own them anymore than you'd expect to own a bad team. I'm not saying it won't play a factor in their win total, maybe a few games, but you don't buy into them for that reason? That's the only reason you give? Just silly to me.

Not only that, the Reds added a leadoff man who has been a six win player in the past. That is a pretty substantial upgrade. Basing predictions solely on the Astros is silly.

[New Fever]

However, they were 10-5 against the Astros. They didn't own them anymore than you'd expect to own a bad team. I'm not saying it won't play a factor in their win total, maybe a few games, but you don't buy into them for that reason? That's the only reason you give? Just silly to me.

Exactly, I read the article yesterday and I was thinking the same thing. The Reds were 87-60 versus everyone else.

[klw]

However, they were 10-5 against the Astros. They didn't own them anymore than you'd expect to own a bad team. I'm not saying it won't play a factor in their win total, maybe a few games, but you don't buy into them for that reason? That's the only reason you give? Just silly to me.

It could be that the evaluation could have been deeper than that but Olney found that to be the best line to use.

[jojo]

It could be that the evaluation could have been deeper than that but Olney found that to be the best line to use.

And the context could've been "world series favorites" which is a much, much higher bar than "legitimately good".

[Steve4192]

I think it is valid to note they won't be playing 18 games versus the Astros.

Why?

Everyone else in the division got to play them 18 times too. In terms of winning the Central, losing the Astros has no impact whatsoever. It might have some impact on the wild card spots, but if the Reds take care of business in the division it won't matter.

[Superdude]

Why?

Everyone else in the division got to play them 18 times too. In terms of winning the Central, losing the Astros has no impact whatsoever. It might have some impact on the wild card spots, but if the Reds take care of business in the division it won't matter.

Exactly. I don't know why this keeps getting brought up as if we were the only team that played the Astros last year.

[_Sir_Charles_]

I think it is valid to note they won't be playing 18 games versus the Astros. Their run differential last season had them as a 91 win team, so there is some evidence to suggest they were a bit lucky last year.

FWIW, we do still play the Astros this coming season. 3 times late in the year.

[hebroncougar]

Is the unknown evaluator from the Astros? Twins? Seattle? Anytime someone doesn't have the guts to attach their name to something, hard to give it credence.

[dougdirt]

Is the unknown evaluator from the Astros? Twins? Seattle? Anytime someone doesn't have the guts to attach their name to something, hard to give it credence.

Like it or not, there it's a reason names are never attached to these kinds of things. So you can never really take anything they say seriously, or just look at it and decide if there is something there or not.

[Strikes Out Looking]

Are the Cardinals not playing the Astros 18 times either?

[Blitz Dorsey]

Are the Cardinals not playing the Astros 18 times either?

Exactly.

[Tom Servo]

AL evaluator can suck it.