Reds Worked out Mike Gonzalez

[mattfeet]

As on MLBTR:

Mike Gonzalez was spotted throwing a bullpen session during an audition for the Reds at their Spring Training complex on Monday, reports Mark Sheldon of MLB.com. With Sean Marshall set to close following Ryan Madson's injury, Cincinnati could be looking to add a left-handed setup man.

[mattfeet]

All signs point towards the FO wanting to stick with Chapman in the rotation. Nice.

[757690]

[edabbs44]

Originally Posted by 757690

I really don't get all the "all in" theories.

[Edd Roush]

Originally Posted by mattfeet

All signs point towards the FO wanting to stick with Chapman in the rotation. Nice.

Completely agreed. Mike Gonzalez has been a pretty solid reliever over his career as well. His K rate in Texas wasn't exceptional like it has been in his whole career, but it was just 7 IP. I will take a reliever with a career 10.3 K/9, even if his career BB/9 is 4.1. He also has been pretty good about supressing HRs over his career 0.8 HR/9 and he does have a career ERA of 2.94. His career FIP is slightly higher but still good at 3.36 and his career xFIP is 3.54. Projections for this year have him around a FIP around 3.5 which isn't fantastic, but good enough to continue Chapman's development as a starter.

[redsfan30]

I'd be ok with this. I am nervous about the back end of the bullpen now.

[Spitball]

There must be a reason a left handed reliever with some history of success is still unemployed. I'm guessing he is pulling a Jeff Shaw and expecting to be payed more than an aging reliever is worth.

[mattfeet]

Originally Posted by edabbs44

I really don't get all the "all in" theories.

I agree. People saying we're "all in" this year must forget we have Latos for 4 years, Marshall for 4 years, Votto for 1 more, Bruce for 4 or 5 more, Cueto for 3-4 more. Our core is in tact for a LONG time. Figure 1 of Votto or Phillips will get an extension, and that's still a very competitive team.

-Matt

[Kc61]

Originally Posted by mattfeet

I agree. People saying we're "all in" this year must forget we have Latos for 4 years, Marshall for 4 years, Votto for 1 more, Bruce for 4 or 5 more, Cueto for 3-4 more. Our core is in tact for a LONG time. Figure 1 of Votto or Phillips will get an extension, and that's still a very competitive team.

-Matt

I disagree that the Reds have a winning core of players signed long term. If Votto and/or Phillips leave, and with the ultimate departures of Rolen and Arroyo, they will have some money freed up for new talent. But the future, as with virtually any small market team, is unsettled and unclear. There are a few good long-term contracts in place, but few.

When was the last time the Reds had a sustained period of excellence? The 1970s.

They did win in 1990 because they caught fire in a particular year. That is the much more likely scenario to repeat. A single, great year or maybe two.

People looking to build long-term competitive teams in a small market are looking for a needle in a haystack. For a team like the Reds, they have to seize on the windows of opportunity. Go for it when it's possible.

With the departure of Pujols and Fielder from the division, with Votto and Phillips still around, the year 2012 would seem like a good time.

I'm glad the Reds are looking at Gonzalez and trying to bolster the pitching for 2012. I would keep Chapman on the staff for 2012. I'm happy about the off-season moves.

I hope Bailey is back to missing bats in his next outing. I'm focused on 2012. With the Madson injury, the Reds need some pitching help to win in 2012.

[traderumor]

Originally Posted by Kc61

I disagree that the Reds have a winning core of players signed long term. If Votto and/or Phillips leave, and with the ultimate departures of Rolen and Arroyo, they will have some money freed up for new talent. But the future, as with virtually any small market team, is unsettled and unclear. There are a few good long-term contracts in place, but few.

When was the last time the Reds had a sustained period of excellence? The 1970s.

They did win in 1990 because they caught fire in a particular year. That is the much more likely scenario to repeat. A single, great year or maybe two.

People looking to build long-term competitive teams in a small market are looking for a needle in a haystack. For a team like the Re-ds, they have to seize on the windows of opportunity. Go for it when it's possible.

With the departure of Pujols and Fielder from the division, with Votto and Phillips still around, the year 2012 would seem like a good time.

I'm glad the Reds are looking at Gonzalez and trying to bolster the pitching for 2012. I would keep Chapman on the staff for 2012. I'm happy about the off-season moves.

I hope Bailey is back to missing bats in his next outing. I'm focused on 2012. With the Madson injury, the Reds need some pitching help to win in 2012.

The Reds had finished second with good young talent in 1986-1988, with 1989 being the lost year due to the Pete Rose drama. After a down year in 1991, the Reds were a playoff team in 1994-1995. That's a pretty strong, sustained level of contention.

As for your "small market" woes, that is so late 90s, early 00s thinking. Any well managed organization can succeed on this playing field. While it is certainly a bigger hill to climb for the lower revenue teams, good management trumps dollars any day. Cubs? Mets? Lots of money floating around. The Red Sox are in disarray despite their blank check. The Yankees are getting old. The Rangers, long a mismanaged franchise, are now a model franchise, from the brink of bankruptcy.

Its all about management, not revenue. Revenue just means you look really stupid (and lose your job) when you don't win with all the money that is spent trying to do so.

[Kc61]

Originally Posted by traderumor

The Reds had finished second with good young talent in 1986-1988, with 1989 being the lost year due to the Pete Rose drama. After a down year in 1991, the Reds were a playoff team in 1994-1995. That's a pretty strong, sustained level of contention.

As for your "small market" woes, that is so late 90s, early 00s thinking. Any well managed organization can succeed on this playing field. While it is certainly a bigger hill to climb for the lower revenue teams, good management trumps dollars any day. Cubs? Mets? Lots of money floating around. The Red Sox are in disarray despite their blank check. The Yankees are getting old. The Rangers, long a mismanaged franchise, are now a model franchise, from the brink of bankruptcy.

Its all about management, not revenue. Revenue just means you look really stupid (and lose your job) when you don't win with all the money that is spent trying to do so.

Where did I say a large market wins every year? I didn't and they don't. And management of any franchise is key.

But a small market team has a particular problem: it can't possibly buy a championship roster every year. Even with top management. It has to build primarily with young, inexpensive players.

And when that young group emerges there is generally a short window to win championships.

I see such a window for the Reds in the next year or two. At least to become a solid playoff team. With free agency and budgetary limitations, I don't see that window necessarily lasting that long.

So I say focus in 2012 and 2013 on the major league ballclub. Fill the holes. Keep your great left arm, Chapman, with the ballclub. Fill the Madson hole if possible with a Gonzalez or whomever.

Or else, it's again, we'll be pretty good, but we're really focused on next year, and next year, and next year . . . .

[LoganBuck]

Originally Posted by Spitball

There must be a reason a left handed reliever with some history of success is still unemployed. I'm guessing he is pulling a Jeff Shaw and expecting to be payed more than an aging reliever is worth.

He had his knee scoped about six weeks ago, and is just now ready to resume baseball activity. He is at least two weeks away from being ready to pitch in the big leagues.

[757690]

Originally Posted by edabbs44

I really don't get all the "all in" theories.

I just meant that they are willing to go over budget this year if it means improving the team. Gonzalez won't be cheap if they sign him, and they already are at budget.

[traderumor]

Originally Posted by Kc61

Where did I say a large market wins every year? I didn't and they don't. And management of any franchise is key.

But a small market team has a particular problem: it can't possibly buy a championship roster every year. Even with top management. It has to build primarily with young, inexpensive players.

And when that young group emerges there is generally a short window to win championships.

I see such a window for the Reds in the next year or two. At least to become a solid playoff team. With free agency and budgetary limitations, I don't see that window necessarily lasting that long.

So I say focus in 2012 and 2013 on the major league ballclub. Fill the holes. Keep your great left arm, Chapman, with the ballclub. Fill the Madson hole if possible with a Gonzalez or whomever.

Or else, it's again, we'll be pretty good, but we're really focused on next year, and next year, and next year . . . .

Where did I say that large market wins every year? You got that from what I said?

I responded to "build long-term competitive teams in a small market are looking for a needle in a haystack." "Windows" is not a viable management model for any franchise, whether its the poor, middle class, or rich. That was a model tried in the 90s that bled into the early part of this decade, e.g. 90s Indians, pre-Moneyball A's. I don't think anyone is actively pursuing this model anymore. I'm not even sure how much it was practiced vs. how much it was hindsight "new ballpark, Indians good, must be 'window of opportunity' management model."

[Kc61]

Originally Posted by traderumor

Where did I say that large market wins every year? You got that from what I said?

I responded to "build long-term competitive teams in a small market are looking for a needle in a haystack." "Windows" is not a viable management model for any franchise, whether its the poor, middle class, or rich. That was a model tried in the 90s that bled into the early part of this decade, e.g. 90s Indians, pre-Moneyball A's. I don't think anyone is actively pursuing this model anymore. I'm not even sure how much it was practiced vs. how much it was hindsight "new ballpark, Indians good, must be 'window of opportunity' management model."

"Windows" is practiced all the time. Why else to do teams routinely mortgage the future to acquire vets when they are in the race at the trade deadline? They have a chance to win, a window of opportunity, and they take it. It happens every year.

Sports long-termers are always saying "keep it young and cheap, and then go for it when the team is reasonably well built." Except that some can't ever decide that it's time to pull the trigger and go for it.

Now is the time for the Reds to pull the trigger and go for it. The future is too unpredictable in sports. The Reds need to go for it in 2012.

To get back to the thread, with Masset out, they really need to figure out this pitching staff. An acquisition from the outside wouldn't hurt, if it's the right guy. Gonzalez seems too far away from contributing.