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

[TRF]

I partially agree. But with the potential they both have...I want them to have a full season at AAA under their belts. Dorn may be good, but he's not good enough to nearly leapfrog AAA completely.

Dorn leapfrogged Low A to start at Sarasota after he destroyed the Pioneer League. He then posted an .815 OPS in a pitchers league, got a late promotion to AA and destroyed that league for 26 games. 1.089 OPS. In 2007 after a freak injury, a laceration to his leg, he followed up with a .906 OPS in a slightly less than full season at AA. In April he had a .516 OPS in 26 AB's. After that, .895, .915, .950, .955. If the Reds have one minor leaguer ready to make the jump to the Reds it's Dorn.

An OF of Dorn, Dickerson and Bruce would be pretty damn interesting.


And as an aside, did I see someone actually compare Willy Taveras to Ricky Freaking Henderson?

[Ltlabner]

Yet, being carried to a World Series by his previous teams isn't actually anything resembling a reason to acquire Willy Taveras and it certainly doesn't excuse his presence on the 2009 Reds.

Don't forget he's fast.

[REDREAD]

Then, by definition, it's a dumb move.

No, it's not wise to open the season with Bruce/Hopper/Dickerson as your only OF.

It's not wise at the end of December to ignore a blatant lack of OF depth, and hope that you can wait out a trade where you get a league average CF.

That's as foolish as hoping Jimmy Anderson can be a #3 starter in your rotation.

Plus, who's to say this move doesn't improve the run differential? It's certainly possible that Tavaras outproduces both Hopper and Dickerson. We won't know for sure until the season plays out, because IMO, Dickerson is hard to project.

[Ltlabner]

So, all we need to do to win the world series is go out and get 25 players who were on a world series team, how much they contributed and what they actually did is irrelevant, all that matters is that they were there.

Those dudes know how to win and have chemistry. Hank told me so.

[Kc61]

A team's success says nothing about any individual player.
A team's success says nothing about any individual player.
A team's success says nothing about any individual player.
A team's success says nothing about any individual player.

Not just directed at you Kc, but the whole line of conversation. It's just inane. No single player has enough impact on the outcome a team's season to draw a meaningful causal link above and beyond what can be gleaned from said player's personal performance. The end.

Taveras can and should be judged on the merit of what he personally did or did not do.

I'm not saying that Taveras caused two teams to get to the World Series. But I was reacting to a comment that the Reds "will never make the playoffs" with Taveras playing his usual ball for 400 or more PAs. That's a generalization that has already been proven untrue by the Houston team, if not the Colorado team.

We do know that it is possible to win with this player in centerfield. Every position can't be manned by a star. i believe Taveras can be a plus guy for the Reds, if he has a good year or two. I believe that his speed is a terrific asset if he is getting on base as he did in 2007.

But even if I'm wrong and the majority view is right, we know that two teams won with him. So he's manifestly not the disaster some would say. The key, now, is for the Reds to add a bat who will make a positive difference, shore up the infield defense, and proceed. If they do, they can win. With Taveras.

[edabbs44]

And as an aside, did I see someone actually compare Willy Taveras to Ricky Freaking Henderson?

Nope...just saying that they both scored at roughly the same percentage of times on base. Huge difference being that Henderson got on base a ton more than Taveras.

[REDREAD]

Back here on planet earth, the reality is there will be no competition for CF. It's about as clear as can be they plan on Taveras being the starting CF.

Did you also catch Walt saying that Dickerson was the LF right now?
That also happened on planet earth.

Is it also logical to think that if another OF is acquired that the tentative starting spots could be shifted?

People are just looking for reasons to call Walt an idiot, just based on one move. I really don't see all the love for Dickerson.. the guy is a backup OF at best. Maybe he's better than Tavaras, maybe not.

[Ltlabner]

No, it's not wise to open the season with Bruce/Hopper/Dickerson as your only OF.

See my response in post 810. The choice is not Taveras or nothing. That's a faulty scenario and you know it.

Plus, who's to say this move doesn't improve the run differential?

There hasn't been one reasonable explanation as to how a below average player who can't get on base, runs into oodles of outs, scores runs at replacement level and has never once had a positive RAP will positively effect anything other than the collective RZ blood pressure.

[REDREAD]

Because Dickerson has 100 AB's while Taveras has 4 years of playing time. Dickersons future is unknown. Taveras, baring a miraculous conversion, is what he is going to be.

What would Dickerson's career numbers be if he was playing in the major leagues at age 22 instead of playing at A ball?

Are you going to call Jay Bruce a bust if he doesn't have a huge season before age 27?

[TRF]

Nope...just saying that they both scored at roughly the same percentage of times on base. Huge difference being that Henderson got on base a ton more than Taveras.

That's kind of important don't ya think? Scoring when you get on base is important. Getting on base to take advantage of that scoring skill is MORE important.

No one is saying Taveras is bereft of talent. He can score from 1st base. He'll score a ton of runs if he gets on. Therein lies the rub though. He has no primary OB skills.

And that sir is why he is a waste of a roster space. I'd prefer Freel from 2004-2006. At least he could get on base.

[REDREAD]

They could easily do Bruce, Dickerson, Hopper, Stubbs and Dorn.

Except Dorn and Stubbs are going to be much worse than Tavaras if they are called up next year. Dickerson and Hopper might underperform Tavaras as well.

IMO, it's not wise to open the season with 5 puppy OF. I think Bruce will improve. Dorn and Stubbs might eventually become starting players, but why ruin them by calling them up early? Why repeat the same mistake we did with Homer?

Let's assume for a minute that Tavaras does have a horrible year. Let's assume he has an OBP of 300. Let's assume Stubbs is called up and has the same production. Which is the better alternative? Sure, Stubbs saves a few bucks, but you have stalled his development and hurt his confidence.

[westofyou]

Nope...just saying that they both scored at roughly the same percentage of times on base. Huge difference being that Henderson got on base a ton more than Taveras.

Also Rickey played in an era that suppressed runs more, so adjusted he is better than Willy in getting home. One thing though is Henderson was a good base stealer and not a great base runner, he tended to lose interest in non steal situations. Personally I'm nit sure about Taveras, he did register a plus 23 in 2007 in the Info Solutions base running matrix, plus he scored from first 6/6 times and second to home 24/30 times. As far as the Reds that season Dunn had a -11 and Griffey -4 in the same matrix.

Not sure about last year.

[edabbs44]

That's kind of important don't ya think? Scoring when you get on base is important. Getting on base to take advantage of that scoring skill is MORE important.

No one is saying Taveras is bereft of talent. He can score from 1st base. He'll score a ton of runs if he gets on. Therein lies the rub though. He has no primary OB skills.

And that sir is why he is a waste of a roster space. I'd prefer Freel from 2004-2006. At least he could get on base.

Wasn't trying to make a case for Taveras at all. It is obviously quite important to get on base.

However, I think a lot of people want to use 2008 as the barometer while discounting 2007. No one looks at 2005-2006, which could be the midpoint of his talents.

If this guy can get on base in the .330-.340 range, he'll be ok in this lineup. He obviously won't be great and won't bring this team into the playoffs, but he'll be better than many on here want to admit.

[Ltlabner]

Are you going to call Jay Bruce a bust if he doesn't have a huge season before age 27?

No.

But by age 27 we'll have a pretty darn good idea what Jay Bruce is/will be.

That was my point about Taveras. He's a known quantity versus Dickerson who is unknown.

[RedsManRick]

I'm not saying that Taveras caused two teams to get to the World Series. But I was reacting to a comment that the Reds "will never make the playoffs" with Taveras playing his usual ball for 400 or more PAs. That's a generalization that has already been proven untrue by the Houston team, if not the Colorado team.

We do know that it is possible to win with this player in centerfield. Every position can't be manned by a star. i believe Taveras can be a plus guy for the Reds, if he has a good year or two. I believe that his speed is a terrific asset if he is getting on base as he did in 2007.

But even if I'm wrong and the majority view is right, we know that two teams won with him. So he's manifestly not the disaster some would say. The key, now, is for the Reds to add a bat who will make a positive difference, shore up the infield defense, and proceed. If they do, they can win. With Taveras.

I understand that you were reacting to somebody else's comment. However, they were both right and wrong.

The presence of Taveras on a team does not preclude that team from having success. However, given the amount of production needed from the spots left to be filled, the presence of Taveras on this makes having such success all the more difficult. We needed (and still do) to add above average talent at multiple positions. With the addition of Taveras, the need is unchanged and there's one less position in which we can add that talent.