Reds sign Willy Taveras to 2 year deal....

[BuckeyeRedleg]

Originally Posted by LoganBuck

After letting this sink in more, I can not underscore how mad I am about this.

Go read the comments of the idiots on the Hal McCoy blog. They don't get it.
http://www.daytondailynews.com/o/con....html#comments

Go to ESPN, CBS, MLB, or any of the other general fan sites and you'll see they don't.

It's scary.

[lollipopcurve]

He'll be really entertaining walking from the batter's box to between firstbase and back to the dugout almost 500 times in 09

.

In a way, he will be. To each his own.

[_Sir_Charles_]

Originally Posted by Raisor

Before continuing, please do a thread search for OBP. Read them.

Thanks.

As soon as I get a free 10-month stretch, i'll do that. Seriously though, I have read a LOT of threads on that. What's your point? Are you seriously going to say that a walk-based OBP will remain high when a hitter slumps? Walks do not remain consistant throughout a season. They fluctuate just as hits do.

[M2]

Even if OB is more math than you can personally digest, Taveras is a leadoff hitter who's never scored more than 83 runs in a season. He averages 88 runs per 162 games. In the simplest of terms, he's no good at his job.

[mth123]

Originally Posted by _Sir_Charles_

If Dunn were to have bunted for 100 singles instead of 100 walks...yes, he'd be even more valuable. Somehow, whenever I talk about this, people seem to think that I think a walk is a bad thing. Hit > Walk > Out. Now that's a formula I can agree with everytime.

In any given situation a hit is better than a walk. Walks are more consistent and more slump proof. And I'd rather have a walk than a "productive out." A team only has 27 outs to use up in a game and with few exceptions avoiding using one of those is better. There are situations where a sac fly or bunt are useful and preferred over a walk, but they are so few and far between that using that to justify making a lot of outs is non-sense IMO. Get me a better player that gets on base and I'll take my chances. The situations where the "productive out" is useful are always dependent on guys being on base, so getting guys that can do that should be priority number one and the "productive outs" should be a secondary concern. If the situation calls for a bunt, there are always guys on the bench (i.e. the pitching staff) that can do that.

[TRF]

Originally Posted by _Sir_Charles_

Sorry, I just disagree. When a hitter with a BA driven OBP slumps...he's not "just making outs". Odds are, a player with a higher BA is able to put the bat on the ball. Those kind of players are just hitting them where they ARE when they slump. That can still advance runners. A player with a high walk rate...I guess when they slump they still walk at the exact same pace....riiiiiiight. Players don't walk more often and less often during a season. Nah, walkers are consistant.

everything about this post is flat wrong. walks never slump. buys with a consistent OBP of say around .380 despite fluctuating BA's still help their team by being on base.

Taveras has no real repeatable ability to get to 1B, BECAUSE he does not walk. In his non career year of 2007, his career OPS is BELOW .650. I'd like to point out that in his career year, he only played in 97 games. His exposure was limited and he certainly surprised with a .100 point increase in his OPS vs his career norm.

Taveras couldn't take advantage of a park made for hitters of all kinds. His doubles output was not affected by the deadening of the ball, but the question is why not? With his speed and the expanse of that park, he should have been a 40+ doubles guy. Speed never slumps right? His best weapon is the SB, but his percentage as been decidedly average accept for last year. Did he suddenly get faster? Or did, in what was an arbitration year, he realize he needed a counting stat to boost his argument? I dunno, but that is a possibility. He never had that many SB attempts before.

Taveras is best used as a pinch runner/25th man on the roster. Instead he'll be a black hole of suck for 1200 PA's over two freaking years.

[SteelSD]

Originally Posted by _Sir_Charles_

Sorry, I just disagree. When a hitter with a BA driven OBP slumps...he's not "just making outs". Odds are, a player with a higher BA is able to put the bat on the ball. Those kind of players are just hitting them where they ARE when they slump. That can still advance runners. A player with a high walk rate...I guess when they slump they still walk at the exact same pace....riiiiiiight. Players don't walk more often and less often during a season. Nah, walkers are consistant.

You might want to put away the rolleyes emoticon. Over the last three seasons, by month, the correlation between Adam Dunn's monthly BA and IsoD (OBP minus BA) was -0.49 with an IsoD Standard Deviation of only .037. Dunn's two lowest IsoD months occurred when he hit .287 and .310. Dunn's three highest IsoD months happened when he hit .157, .217 and .161.

That's basically the "slump proofing" effect Ron's talking about and only once during any month did Dunn's OBP slip below .328. Only four times out of 18 months did Dunn produce an OBP lower than .352. BA-driven OBP players like Taveras don't have the ability to do that because they're doing nothing but making Outs when they slump. Ron's not wrong about this.

[icehole3]

Originally Posted by mth123

No, but that is the story that the owner has been selling. I would expect moves that help either A) in the short term B) in the long term or C) Both.

Singning Taveras is D) none of the above. Its the worst kind of move for a team like the Reds. It not only kills the team in 2009, but likely blocks guys like Stubbs, Dickerson or even Heisey from getting an audition. The Long Term was made worse IMO with no short term improvement. It was time to see if Dickerson can be an answer over the course of a season and it is what I like least about this move. Our best hope is that this is a cheap enough deal that Taveras can be painlessly jettisoned or sent to the end of the bench when the time comes (and it already has IMO).

If Dickerson gets buried on the bench and Taveras is hitting like all these geniuses think he will then the Reds will be buried in last place and Dusty will get his head chopped off by Bob Cast and Redszone will be like Emerald City and the stat guys around here will be running thru the poppys with Dorothy.

[Blitz Dorsey]

I need to know what the contract looks like before I know how I really feel about this. If we got him on the cheap, I can live with it. Especially if Baldelli and Dye are on the way. I know getting one of them is probably the maximum for the Reds, but I can dream. I would love some outfield depth where Baldelli could actually be the backup to all three OF spots (and possibly take over for Taveras in CF). That would give us an outfield of Dye in LF, Baldelli in CF and Bruce in RF with a bench of Taveras and Dickerson.

[_Sir_Charles_]

Originally Posted by TRF

everything about this post is flat wrong. walks never slump. buys with a consistent OBP of say around .380 despite fluctuating BA's still help their team by being on base.

BS. Simply put....BS. I don't have to look at numbers to prove it. I watch the games. Players will go a week without drawing a walk even if they normally walk at a high rate.

[Raisor]

Originally Posted by Blitz Dorsey

I need to know what the contract looks like before I know how I really feel about this. .

Willy T could be paying the Reds the next two years, and it wouldn't be worth it.

[SteelSD]

Originally Posted by _Sir_Charles_

Not true. And I'm pretty sure you know that. Even if we assume that a large portion of his hits were bunt singles (which they weren't when I watched him in Houston), those bunt singles will STILL advance runners and force the defense to make a play. A walk will NOT do that no matter how much you guys seem to want it to. A walk is NEVER as valuable as a hit. ANY kind of hit.

Walks don't advance Runners? Hmn...

In 2008, 202 Runs were scored during the MLB season when the hitter at the place walked with the bases loaded. Those walks advanced 606 Baserunners. Now, do you think that maybe a lot more Runners than that were advanced by bases on balls with Runners on 1st and/or 1st and 2nd?

How many Baserunners do you think were advanced by bunt Singles?

And exactly how does adding a Baserunner, either in addition to advancing one or by himself, not put "pressure" on a defense even if that base was acquired via Walk? Answer? Any on-base event pressures the opposition. That's why they're all so important.

[icehole3]

Originally Posted by _Sir_Charles_

BS. Simply put....BS. I don't have to look at numbers to prove it. I watch the games. Players will go a week without drawing a walk even if they normally walk at a high rate.

I agree, try going thru the Yankees rotation followed by Red Sox and then face the Angels rotation, that'll start a slump real fast.

[OUReds]

Originally Posted by _Sir_Charles_

BS. Simply put....BS. I don't have to look at numbers to prove it. I watch the games. Players will go a week without drawing a walk even if they normally walk at a high rate.

So you refuse to defend your position and refuse to believe the evidence presented against it? Nice.

[Tom Servo]

--Are the Reds still interested in Jerry Hairston Jr.? "Yes. He could end up being the left fielder if we can't get that RBI man, which might be hard to do at this point. We may have a different type of team, where we rely on speed and defense and try to manufacture runs. We've still got some guys who can hit the ball out of the ballpark -- (Joey) Votto, (Jay) Bruce and (Edwin) Encarnacion. But we're going to a little bit different kind of team."


...

...

...