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

[OnBaseMachine]

While I'm 99.9% sure that Taveras is going to be worthless offensively, I'm at least hoping his defense will rebound. In 2005 and 2006 with the Astros, he posted a UZR/150 of +8.9 and +15.1. In 2007 and 2008 with the Rockies he was well below average at -17.4 and -9.7. The spacious CF in Coors could have something to do with that drop off. At the very least, let's hope his defense returns to where it was in 2005-2006.

[_Sir_Charles_]

Originally Posted by SteelSD

And if apples were oranges, they'd be a different color. Your position has basically broken down to, "He sucks, but maybe it won't be that bad as long as the Reds don't use him very often."

First, when the sole defense of a player acquisition is that maybe he won't play a lot, that's a complete indictment of the move. It's where Juan Castro and Corey Patterson live. Second, there's already been a positive declaration that Willy Taveras is the starter in Center Field and will hit leadoff for the Reds.

Taveras is NOT "competition" for anyone.

Yes, he does suck. And if we're forced to use him a lot it will suck even more. But what would suck even WORSE than that would be if we didn't sign him OR a Lf'er and rushed the kids and ruined their futures. This team's time isn't now...but it's soon. A two year deal does not cripple this teams future. We needed depth, and we still need MORE depth, but until we get that MORE depth...he's the starter. And my position hasn't broken down...it's the same as it has been since day one.

[Highlifeman21]

Originally Posted by TRF

I don't see the Reds signing a LF now. Dickerson isn't the bat off the bench, he's the LF.

The Reds replaced Adam Dunn with Chris Dickerson.

The Reds replaced Corey Patterson with Willy Taveras.

and got weaker at BOTH positions.

That kinda impresses me.

... in a bad sorta way...

[SteelSD]

Originally Posted by _Sir_Charles_

Yes, he does suck. And if we're forced to use him a lot it will suck even more. But what would suck even WORSE than that would be if we didn't sign him OR a Lf'er and rushed the kids and ruined their futures.

No. Standing pat would not have been worse than not signing Taveras. Hurting your team is never better than not hurting your team. Options, both internal and external, exist for slotting a more productive player into Center Field. The Reds weren't somehow backed into a corner. In fact, Jocketty's been targetting Taveras for some time. Even tried to trade for the guy.

This team's time isn't now...but it's soon. A two year deal does not cripple this teams future. We needed depth, and we still need MORE depth, but until we get that MORE depth...he's the starter. And my position hasn't broken down...it's the same as it has been since day one.

Players who stink don't provide "depth". They just provide stink.

[Highlifeman21]

Originally Posted by _Sir_Charles_

If by "Ya'll" you mean me, then the answer is yes. While the 2 get on base at the exact same pace in terms of OBP, I value the hit over the walk. The hit has more value. It advances runners, puts pressure on the defense and creates more options for the manager. But I don't undervalue the walk. Many here simply OVERvalue it. Just like many here OVERvalued Dunn.

The hit doesn't have more value when there aren't guys on ahead of you.

Willy Taveras will be the leadoff hitter. Leadoff. 1st guy in the lineup. Only time he might have guys on for him, is when spots 7, 8 or 9 are on base ahead of him.

Regardless, I want our leadoff guy to get on base, and that's something Willy Taveras just doesn't do, even when he hits for a .280 AVG....

[_Sir_Charles_]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

I think taking a player who always had under achieved but always had a ton of potential (Dickerson) who finally started piecing things together (both in the minor leagues for a year and a half before his major league stint and that major league stint) is a much better bet than a known terrible player.

Do you think I don't agree? I love Dickerson and I'm hoping he's the starting CF'er all season long. But it won't happen unless we sign a solid LF'er or a solid 3b and move Edwin to LF. It also won't happen if Dickerson's injury history keeps repeating itself.

Let me be clear, I want this team to go young. I love watching the young kids play with the excitement and enthusiasm. But that being said...Taveras is also young and energetic and full of potential...but I'd still prefer Dickerson. So we need to start hoping and praying that Walt finds us a good deal on a solid LF'er/3B'man and that Chris stays healthy and hits the cover off the ball.

[icehole3]

Originally Posted by Highlifeman21

Aside from Willy Taveras having speed, what are his GOOD aspects?

He came cheaper than Patterson according to what CTrent was told.

[RedlegNation]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

December is not time for an emergency plan. February is. Still doesn't change the fact that they went with the emergency plan for a CF when they already had one.

Sadly, this summarizes things perfectly.

[reds44]

Willy Taveras has been the starting CF on two different teams who have gone to the World Series. You can't say can't win with him.

[icehole3]

Originally Posted by reds44

Willy Taveras has been the starting CF on two different teams who have gone to the World Series. You can't say can't win with him.

Intangibles dont count around here, only calculations count, it's called, "mountain of evidence."

[RedsManRick]

Originally Posted by reds44

Willy Taveras has been the starting CF on two different teams who have gone to the World Series. You can't say can't win with him.

You also can't say from that simple fact that he positively contributed to his teams' success nor predict what value he's likely to provide in the future. It's a completely valueless observation other than to establish that his presence does not preclude winning. Hardly a ringing endorsement.

[Always Red]

Originally Posted by reds44

Willy Taveras has been the starting CF on two different teams who have gone to the World Series. You can't say can't win with him.

Maybe he's a good luck charm?

[Cyclone792]

Originally Posted by Raisor

As it stands right now, even assuming that the Reds find a LF that can create 90-100 runs, the team will need to have a RA of about 600 to make the playoffs.

If the team winds up with Jerry Hairston in LF, then they'll need to have a RA of about 550.

Volquez, Harrang, Cueto are good, but...

Yup, that's essentially the point. Sadly, many other people around here just don't comprehend this.

Right now we have two avenues to the playoffs:

1) Two or more hitters just absolutely go off and perform WELL above their expectations. The most likely hitters to do just that are Bruce, Votto, and Encarnacion - they're probably the only hitters even remotely capable of doing that. Dickerson would probably fit that group too (if he even plays). Still, the probability of the Reds having two guys do that just should not be expected. Even if this criteria is achieved, the pitching staff needs to at least be "good" or better.

2) The pitching staff is DOMINANT. Not merely good, but DOMINANT. We're talking three Reds pitchers in the All-Star game and the 2009 NL Cy Young Award winner on this staff dominant. The pitching staff would have to allow fewer than 650 runs. To put that in perspective, the Dodgers were the only NL team to allow fewer than 650 runs (648), and they play in a pitcher's park. We'd have to allow under 650 with half our games in GABP.

Neither one of these scenarios is likely, which also means that the playoffs aren't likely either.

The Lost Decade strikes again.

[Falls City Beer]

Originally Posted by Cyclone792

Yup, that's essentially the point. Sadly, many other people around here just don't comprehend this.

Right now we have two avenues to the playoffs:

1) Two or more hitters just absolutely go off and perform WELL above their expectations. The most likely hitters to do just that are Bruce, Votto, and Encarnacion - they're probably the only hitters even remotely capable of doing that. Dickerson would probably fit that group too (if he even plays). Still, the probability of the Reds having two guys do that just should not be expected. Even if this criteria is achieved, the pitching staff needs to at least be "good" or better.

2) The pitching staff is DOMINANT. Not merely good, but DOMINANT. We're talking three Reds pitchers in the All-Star game and the 2009 NL Cy Young Award winner on this staff dominant. The pitching staff would have to allow fewer than 650 runs. To put that in perspective, the Dodgers were the only NL team to allow fewer than 650 runs (648), and they play in a pitcher's park. We'd have to allow under 650 with half our games in GABP.

Neither one of these scenarios is likely, which also means that the playoffs aren't likely either.

The Lost Decade strikes again.

I don't know a single poster on this side of the board who thinks the Reds will contend in 2009.

[Caveat Emperor]

Originally Posted by icehole3

Intangibles dont count around here, only calculations count, it's called, "mountain of evidence."

Heart and hustle make for great hollywood copy, but a poor method of measuring the worth of an athlete.