Drew Stubbs for CF in '10?

[Brutus]

Originally Posted by PuffyPig

Marginal as a fielder in CF.

I'm on board with the Stubbs thing as I've stated for the reasons above. However, let me say, I definitely don't see Dickerson as marginal defensively.

This year in center (sample size beware, obviously), he's a +35 UZR/150. That is incredible. Clearly the size of sample is as such it would come down if he actually played 150 games out there. However, even expecting that to come down, he's probably a significantly above-average fielder out there.

[Kc61]

Originally Posted by Highlifeman21

On what planet is Dickerson a marginal CF, b/c it sure as heck isn't Earth.

Right now Chris Dickerson is our best proven CF, and our best option to bat leadoff.

I think you're kidding yourself about Dickerson. For the 25 man roster, sure. As an everyday player, won't happen.

Chris' basic problem has been an inability to stay on the field. And while he's a good CF, Stubbs IMO has a special ability out there and may be even better.

I see CF as a shared position for next year. But I think Stubbs will get the most playing time. I doubt the Reds will count on Dickerson being healthy for a full season and will play him as a backup/part timer.

As for the Heisey talk, he'll be back at AAA next year, or traded. He isn't in the equation right now. Maybe sometime during 2010 he becomes a factor, probably as a fourth outfielder.

[VR]

Originally Posted by Highlifeman21

Jason Bay is arguably the worst defensive LF in all of baseball.

There, I said it.

C'mon now, that's just silly talk.


http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/fieldin.../lf/order/true

[Highlifeman21]

Originally Posted by PuffyPig

Marginal as a fielder in CF.

Marginal as a CF?

What are you defining as marginal?

[Highlifeman21]

Originally Posted by PuffyPig

You may not be the only one thinking it, but you seem to be the only one who's squeezing his knees in glee at the very thought of Stubbs stumbling next year.

I don't want Stubbs to stumble, but at the same time I want people to be realistic about what he will and won't do next year.

If the Reds need Stubbs to repeat or improve upon what he did in limited time in 2009 for 2010, then I think we're just setting ourselves up for disappointment.

[Highlifeman21]

Originally Posted by VR

C'mon now, that's just silly talk.


http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/fieldin.../lf/order/true

Fielding %? Really?

Ask the UZR crowd about Jason Bay and see what answer(s) you get.

[VR]

Originally Posted by Highlifeman21

Fielding %? Really?

Ask the UZR crowd about Jason Bay and see what answer(s) you get.

I'm not defining the 'best', only what is not the 'worst'.

Try saying this out loud...

"The worst left fielder in the game".....

Played 1,279 innings
Commtted 0 (zero) errors
#2 in putouts in the bigs
#1 in outfield assists with 15
19th out of 35 LF (min 300 innings) in UZR/150


That said, he's not a great fielder. But with Stubbs/CDick in center, Jay Bruce in right....and a stellar defensive infield, I'm willing to go with a mediocre LF who can put up 35/ 110 for you.

He's the perfect fit to bat cleanup and play left.

[Brutus]

Originally Posted by Highlifeman21

Fielding %? Really?

Ask the UZR crowd about Jason Bay and see what answer(s) you get.

LOL you read them (us) like a book.

[dougdirt]

Originally Posted by Highlifeman21

I don't want Stubbs to stumble, but at the same time I want people to be realistic about what he will and won't do next year.

At the same time I think thats how we feel about Stubbs too. The difference lies in what everyone thinks is 'realistic' for Stubbs. Some of us are a wide margin apart on those 'realistic' numbers.

[Highlifeman21]

Originally Posted by dougdirt

At the same time I think thats how we feel about Stubbs too. The difference lies in what everyone thinks is 'realistic' for Stubbs. Some of us are a wide margin apart on those 'realistic' numbers.

Spot on.

'realistic' is a wide margin based on how/where you draw your conclusions

[Chip R]

Originally Posted by TheNext44

One player is never the problem. One player only represents 11% of an offense per game, much less over the whole season. If there is a decent lineup around him, he really shouldn't drag them down that much. I think it was all the things you mentioned happening at the same time.

Sometimes not even two is a problem. The Orioles in the 70's had Mark Belanger (.580 OPS) and Rick Dempsey (.666 OPS) playing nearly everyday, and were around a league average offense every year, and made the playoffs nearly every year.

So the question remains, could the Reds have put up a record like they did over the past 6 weeks with Willy T in CF? The man is getting paid $4M a year. Walt and Dusty were the guys who signed him off the scrap heap. Stubbs has options and if he doesn't have a great ST, he might be the one going to LOU.

Could we get the stats guys on this? Project what the rest of the lineup did over the past 6 weeks and plug Willy T.'s numbers for the season - or career, if you like - in there instead of Stubbs and see what the record would be.

Stubbs is much better than Willy T both offensively and defensively. I'm not going to even get into the Dickerson debate because he has trouble staying healthy and I don't think the Reds are high on him. I think they might carry him as an extra OFer but I wouldn't be surprised if they trade him.

[TheNext44]

Originally Posted by Chip R

So the question remains, could the Reds have put up a record like they did over the past 6 weeks with Willy T in CF? The man is getting paid $4M a year. Walt and Dusty were the guys who signed him off the scrap heap. Stubbs has options and if he doesn't have a great ST, he might be the one going to LOU.

Could we get the stats guys on this? Project what the rest of the lineup did over the past 6 weeks and plug Willy T.'s numbers for the season - or career, if you like - in there instead of Stubbs and see what the record would be.

Stubbs is much better than Willy T both offensively and defensively. I'm not going to even get into the Dickerson debate because he has trouble staying healthy and I don't think the Reds are high on him. I think they might carry him as an extra OFer but I wouldn't be surprised if they trade him.

Using a very basic RC formula, Stubbs created 25 runs over his 196 PA's. Plug in Taveras' numbers this year, his worse ones, and he would have created 14 runs. They had the same walk rate, so it was pretty easy.

So that means that having Taveras in stead of Stubbs over those 42 games would have cost the Reds just over one win.

However, you make a great point, and demonstrate the problem with these stats and formulas. No one in their right mind would think that playing Taveras in those games would have only cost the Reds one win.

Having Stubbs in CF and leading off clearly changed the attitude of the Reds. I think it was clear that having him there made the team play better. Having an out machine leading off, who takes terrible routes to the ball in CF, perpetuates a losing feeling. It makes it really easy to not care, to assume that you are going to lose. Having someone with talent in that spot really made a difference, far beyond his statistical advantage, imho.

I may seem to be contradicting myself, and maybe I am, or maybe I'm not... no I am... kinda. But I still think that on a team, one bad offensive player does not ruin the offense, if and this is crucial, if that player does produce enough defensively to counter their suckitude on offense, and the team is solid everywhere else. Neither was the case for Taveras and the 2009 Reds.

[nate]

Originally Posted by Chip R

So the question remains, could the Reds have put up a record like they did over the past 6 weeks with Willy T in CF?

No.

OK, good question!

[RedlegJake]

On Willie T, I'm going to go the contrarian route and say I think he won't be anywhere near the strating job next season if he isn't cut or traded/given away. Why? I'm trusting Dusty to be the same "old style" guy he usually is. With that in mind I think Willie T crossed a line that Dusty won't forget easily - Baker thinks WT loafed on rehab. To guys like Dusty that's a cardinal sin. He easily forgives lack of talent, even lack of production, if he thinks a guy works his butt off, but let him believe a guy isn't putting it all out there and it's over. My guess is Willie's gone even if it means eating money.

As to the original question, I like Stubbs as the CFer in 2010 with liberal doses of ChrisD. Heisey could step in to a lesser role as Stubbs' backup if the Reds trade Chris - and I see that as a distinct possibility if they find an interested team who'll swap a similar player at a position of need (SS, C, SP). The Reds continue to display an ambivalent attitude toward Dickerson, probably because they've always seen CF as Stubbs'.

[PuffyPig]

Originally Posted by Highlifeman21

Marginal as a CF?

What are you defining as marginal?

A marginal fielding CF is one who can play CF but not someone you'd want playing there over a number of years. Adequate would be another word I would use.