Who is the one player that needs to step up the most?

[M2]

To the main question:

Brandon Claussen is the only guy on the roster outside of Harang who profiles as someone who might be able to be a consistently decent or better starter. He gets my pick with Ryan Wagner and Todd Coffey tied in a close second.

[lollipopcurve]

I'll take Claussen and then Williams. Gotta be the SPs.

[SteelSD]

Originally Posted by Betterread

Runs produced are the sum of runs scored and runs batted in MINUS home runs (because they produce one run, not two).
May I ask that people who wish to comment on a post, actually read the post, not merely extrapolate something else that they wish to discuss. Comprehension must come before analysis, otherwise the analysis comes across as didactic (if it is done with articulation -as your post was) or simply irrelevant (if it is done crudely).

Betterread, folks are reading your posts and are commenting that any metric that involves the use of RBI is flawed from the start. You're correct that comprehension needs to precede analysis. But in this case, you need to comprehend that the metric you're using was, for the most part, conceived to identify the players who were potentially most likely to produce opportunity-driven rate stats independent of HR totals. Nothing more. The metric you're using isn't a valid gauge of actual offensive value when applied to real live baseball.

Runs Created (over 97% accurate as a measure of actual Run production) is a much MUCH better way to evaluate a player's actual offensive value.

Over the past two seasons, here are the NL players who have topped Dunn's 241.8 RC during that span:

Albert Pujols (294.1 RC)
Todd Helton (273.6 RC)
Bobby Abreu (265.5 RC)
Derrek Lee (261.6 RC)

Of the five players we're talking about, Pujols, Helton, Abreu, and Dunn have produced RC totals topping 115 RC in both seasons. Take Helton out of Coors, and you've likely got nearly a dead heat between he and Dunn for that span. Only Pujols (a freak of nature) and Dunn are below the age of 30.

Will Dunn produce more Runs? Yeah. But he's a top-tier consistent Run production machine right now. And he's the last guy on the team who actually needs to step his game up for the Reds to be more successful.

[Ron Madden]

I do "NOT" subscribe to the popular notion held by many fans, media members and field management of this club.

The "LEAST "Important" area in which this club needs to improve is "Run Production".

All this talk about "Playing The Game Right" and "The Need To Maufacture Runs" drives me crazy.

With all that said, We NEED Ownership, GM, Scouting and Pitching Staff all take one giant step forward.

[Chip R]

I think, for himself, Kearns needs to step up. He had a half of a good season and has either been injured or non-productive the rest of the time. He's getting into that area where, if he puts up numbers like he's capable of, he can make as much as Dunn is. If he gets hurt again or it looks like he's lost his mojo, then he's going to be paid just like another ballplayer. He'll roam around from team to team and perhaps be a part of a successful team but will never really find a home. Much like Reggie Sanders. Good, but not great. I'd say Ryan Wagner would be a close second. He could either be a very valuable reliever or just a journeyman.

For the Reds fortunes I would say Claussen needs to take that step forward. Nothing is more important for the Reds current and future success than good pitching. Talk all you want about how the offense doesn't manufacture runs but if the Reds pitching last year was even just below league average, they would have been a lot better team.

[registerthis]

The list has to begin with Milton. He's the most expensive pitcher on this team, and the one player that the Reds would like to trade the most. You solve that dilemna if he performs at a respectable level for half a season and the Reds are able to find some large market team in need of a cog in their pitching rotation for the stretch run.

Getting Milton off of this roster should be one of the top priorities of this team, and the quickest way to accomplish that is to get him playing at a level that doesn't make every other team treat him as if he's raw sewage when the Reds include him in a trade proposal.

[registerthis]

Originally Posted by SteelSD

Will Dunn produce more Runs? Yeah. But he's a top-tier consistent Run production machine right now. And he's the last guy on the team who actually needs to step his game up for the Reds to be more successful.

The problem is, some people want Dunn to increase his win shares from 28 to 100. So long as he's not a definitive factor in every single Reds win, people will find holes in his game.

[PickOff]

Originally Posted by M2

To the main question:

Brandon Claussen is the only guy on the roster outside of Harang who profiles as someone who might be able to be a consistently decent or better starter. He gets my pick with Ryan Wagner and Todd Coffey tied in a close second.

So there is absolutely no chance that Williams or Milton or Wilson will be consistently better?

[M2]

Originally Posted by PickOff

So there is absolutely no chance that Williams or Milton or Wilson will be consistently better?

IMO there's no chance they'll be consistently good, which makes them, for me, inherently uninteresting. Do I care if one of those guys claws his way to a 4.75 ERA? No. It won't help the team in any significant way and what the Reds will need to do even if one of those guys achieves that is replace him at the earliest possible moment.

Plus, being only mildly bad doesn't meet my definition of stepping up.

[KronoRed]

Originally Posted by PickOff

So there is absolutely no chance that Williams or Milton or Wilson will be consistently better?

I bet there's a chance, a VERY small one, Wilson and Milton are done, Willaism may find a Steve Parris 99 somewhere but I doubt it.

They are filler, plain and simple.

[WebScorpion]

I think Kearns and Milton will both improve on last season's performance, but I think Wilson is the one we 'need'. I'm not sure he'll be able to do it tho...first year back after shoulder surgery is usually pretty shaky, especially in the early going. I look for Wilson to finish the season strong, which could be great if we are in the running for anything at that point.

[Betterread]

Originally Posted by SteelSD

Betterread, folks are reading your posts and are commenting that any metric that involves the use of RBI is flawed from the start. You're correct that comprehension needs to precede analysis. But in this case, you need to comprehend that the metric you're using was, for the most part, conceived to identify the players who were potentially most likely to produce opportunity-driven rate stats independent of HR totals. Nothing more. The metric you're using isn't a valid gauge of actual offensive value when applied to real live baseball.

Runs Created (over 97% accurate as a measure of actual Run production) is a much MUCH better way to evaluate a player's actual offensive value.

Over the past two seasons, here are the NL players who have topped Dunn's 241.8 RC during that span:

Albert Pujols (294.1 RC)
Todd Helton (273.6 RC)
Bobby Abreu (265.5 RC)
Derrek Lee (261.6 RC)

Of the five players we're talking about, Pujols, Helton, Abreu, and Dunn have produced RC totals topping 115 RC in both seasons. Take Helton out of Coors, and you've likely got nearly a dead heat between he and Dunn for that span. Only Pujols (a freak of nature) and Dunn are below the age of 30.

Will Dunn produce more Runs? Yeah. But he's a top-tier consistent Run production machine right now. And he's the last guy on the team who actually needs to step his game up for the Reds to be more successful.

OK. I am willing to consider another way to determine a player's run production.
I'm confused by the RC metric. In this post Dunn has a metric of 241.8, and in your original table it is 2.66. So how is the metric calculated and (if you have the time) explain to me how a metric makes the analysis of a player's production more valuable than the basic runs plus RBIs minus homeruns formula for determining who produces the most runs, which I value because the point of the game is who scores the most runs.
Thanks for your patience, as I am now interested in this metric.

[Raisor]

2005 Reds

Actual Runs-820
Runs Created-847.5
Runs Produced-(RBI+RS-HR)-1382

What good does that 1382 do?

[Cyclone792]

Originally Posted by Betterread

OK. I am willing to consider another way to determine a player's run production.
I'm confused by the RC metric. In this post Dunn has a metric of 241.8, and in your original table it is 2.66. So how is the metric calculated and (if you have the time) explain to me how a metric makes the analysis of a player's production more valuable than the basic runs plus RBIs minus homeruns formula for determining who produces the most runs, which I value because the point of the game is who scores the most runs.
Thanks for your patience, as I am now interested in this metric.

A very basic premise of RC - and what has been known for several years to be one of the most accurate indicators of offensive production - is the combination of avoiding outs while acquiring bases. The more often you can avoid outs and/or acquire bases, the more value you have (aka creating baserunners, known as OBP, and advancing runners around the bases, known as total bases or SLG). It does not matter who your teammates are and how valuable they are at what they do. As a hitter, your goal is to acquire as many bases as possible while using up the fewest outs. The hitters who do this better than everyone else are the best hitters in the game.

First basic examples:

Batter A hits a solo home run
Batter B hits a grand slam

With the flawed R+RBI-HR formula, Batter A is credited with one run produced while Batter B is credited with four runs produced, despite the fact that neither batters had any control whatsoever of whether or not there were men on base when they hit the home run. A home run is essentially four bases acquired at the cost of zero outs. In terms of accounting for individual run production, all home runs are mostly equal, and RC accurately shows that.

Second basic example:

Batter A singles
Batter B singles, moving Batter A to second base
Batter C singles, scoring Batter A and moving Batter B to second base
Batter's D, E and F all strike out to end the inning.

In the flawed R+RBI-HR formula, Batter A is credited with a run scored and Batter C is credited with an RBI. Batter B is credited with absolutely nothing. In reality, Batter's A, B and C have mostly equal results of one base acquired at the cost of zero outs. Again, RC accurately shows this while R+RBI-HR fails. (I say mostly equal results because more recent/advanced RC formulas have modifications in the formula that also accounts for situational hitting).

Wiki's page on RC is actually pretty decent in terms of showing the formulas ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runs_created

[Topcat]

no numbers. No projections its as simple as this Milton has to win 16 games. If he does thew Reds will compete. The reality is thats a huge huge wish. But it is possible. My opinion is based upon his 2nd half of season and the time his knee has had to gain strength.