Xavier Paul

[SidneySlicker]

Why not give Xavier Paul a chance to win the Centerfield job? I know it was a very small sample size, but I like what he did last year and considering the alternative I think it's worth a shot. It's not like they need a long term solution there.

[RedsManRick]

96 PA, .379 BABIP, 28 years old.

[camisadelgolf]

Defensively, Paul is a mediocre defender as a corner outfielder. Putting him in center could be a disaster. We're quick to point out that the Reds were as good as they were this year thanks to the improved by pitching, but what a lot of people fail to realize is that good defense makes the pitching look better than it actually is. In a position as important as center field, I don't want to rely on a sub-par defender unless he has excellent offense to compensate for it.

[MrRedLegger]

2012 was Paul's best offensive year of his career. I can't help but think that it was largely due to a very effective bench-based regimen, which is where I think he is most effective on this Reds team.

[cinreds21]

I think I'm the only one who wants him taken off the roster like now.

[Wonderful Monds]

Originally Posted by cinreds21

I think I'm the only one who wants him taken off the roster like now.

For who? What could possibly be the point in doing that? He was a very capable pinch hitter and spot starter last year. There is no reason to not let him keep doing that until its clear he cant.

Yeah he should not be counted on to be a starter. But the replies to this thread are selling him completely short.

[Wonderful Monds]

Originally Posted by RedsManRick

96 PA, .379 BABIP, 28 years old.

Hitting his peak years, good numbers in the minors.

Pointing to a high BABIP as an immediate dismissal of a player is the most boring facet of modern baseball discussion.

[PuffyPig]

Originally Posted by Wonderful Monds

Hitting his peak years, good numbers in the minors.

Pointing to a high BABIP as an immediate dismissal of a player is the most boring facet of modern baseball discussion.

Even though it shows he's not likely to produce those numbers again?

The Pauls of the world are available every year on the waiver wire.

The secret is not to commit more than minimum salary to them, unless their production is real. Paul's high BABIP and HR/FB rate suggests his was not.

Paul is not a particularly good defender in CF. He profiles best as a 5th OF or depth in the minors.

[lollipopcurve]

The Pauls of the world are available every year on the waiver wire.

Consistent, quality ABs from the left side, the ability to play all 3 OF spots, some speed. Don't count on someone like that falling into your lap any time you snap your fingers.

[PuffyPig]

Originally Posted by lollipopcurve

Consistent, quality ABs from the left side, the ability to play all 3 OF spots, some speed. Don't count on someone like that falling into your lap any time you snap your fingers.

His defense is poor anywhere other than LF, and those quality AB's may well be an illusion over a larger sample size.

The waiver wire is full of flawed OF's with some varying tools which grade out average/above average.

I'm not advocating releasing Paul, but I certainly wouldn't count on him filling our LF vacancy. And his defense won't play anywhere else.

[RedlegJake]

Me, I like XP, but as a quality spare corner OFer, no way as a full timer. As long as he is cheap and his role defined as noted I like him over a lot of others. He is at the age he should be accepting and flourishing in the spare part role. That has a lot of value. Some guys never do much in a PT role. XP strikes me as one who might. He also strikes me as a guy eho quickly gets exposed when his role expands overmuch (aka Freel for example). I don't see Fellhauer or Wright et al quite ready and XP is still inexpensive. The waiver wwirrr line overlooks churn for no gain which I believe has some ddetrimental effects. Keep your guys unless you a)improve skills ...b)save a decent amount of payroll while remaining par skillwise. I don't see a chance to do either chasing a bench OFer on the waivers to replace XP. That's fluid of course depending on who becomes available but right now that's how I see it.

[klw]

What I could see is using Paul as a way to spell Stubbs versus tough RH's if Stubbs is still in CF come opening day.
Paul was used almost exclusively against RH this year and did well.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/pl...xa01&year=&t=b

Stubbs meanwhile had a solid bat against LH but did not fair nearly as well vs RH though his K rate and BB rate looks about the same.
.788 OPS v LH and .541 OPS v RH.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/pl...dr01&year=&t=b

[westofyou]

CF is an elite position in this game, why try to ignore that fact by addressing it with a non CF?

[lollipopcurve]

The guy is a professional pinch hitter and reserve OF. The only way he gets regular ABs is if someone goes down with an injury. Really, Paul's position on the bench is a no-brainer. Hard for me to believe it's getting much debate.

[PuffyPig]

Originally Posted by lollipopcurve

Really, Paul's position on the bench is a no-brainer. Hard for me to believe it's getting much debate.

I don't think it's geting much debate, if any. What's being debated is him starting in CF, or anywhere for that matter.