BP on Reds/Krivsky

[flyer85]

24th on the Hit List

Plus he's let Tony Womack linger around the roster within reach of Ryan Freel's starting job. That's not just decisive, that's decisively stupid.

[BRM]

What? You mean Redszone isn't the only one that thinks this is a terrible decision?

[flyer85]

Originally Posted by BRM

What? You mean Redszone isn't the only one that thinks this is a terrible decision?

They probably picked it up from visiting redszone, kind of like a case of the clap

[westofyou]

Not to defend Womack, whom I agree is the teams first cut.

But the Reds aren't very high on Freel's play in the IF, that is abundently clear, any ignoring of that is just tail chasing the subject, why Tony Womack is playing can not be discussed without discussing WHY Ryan Freel isn't playing, and calling the GM/Manager an Idiot/Slash Fill-in-the-Blank only avoids the real question.

Why isn't Ryan Freel good enough to be the starter?

BP has Freel at a robust .260/.345/.356 6.1 projection in VORP, Baseball Info Solutions has him at .259/.355/.365 in their projections.

Neither is something to boast about when your fielding is being questioned by the team, neither is much to boast about over 600 at bats either

That would put him in this neighborhood in the post strike world.

RUNS CREATED/GAME             YEAR    RC/G      SB       OBA      SLG    
1    Tom Goodwin              2000     4.94       55     .346     .352   
2    Darren Lewis             1998     4.65       29     .352     .362   
3    Otis Nixon               1995     4.61       50     .357     .338   
4    Chuck Knoblauch          2001     4.47       38     .339     .351   
5    Andy Fox                 2002     4.17       31     .338     .333   
6    Otis Nixon               1997     4.16       59     .337     .318   
7    Tony Womack              2002     4.08       29     .325     .353   
8    Tom Goodwin              1999     4.03       39     .324     .341   
9    Dave Roberts             2003     4.01       40     .331     .307   
10   Mark McLemore            2000     3.95       30     .353     .316

I'm of the opinion that neither of the guys are what the Reds really want at 2nd base, and that despite the fact that Narron and his world view still finds the water bug as the most important trait a 2nd baseman can possess. Freel's unrestrained water bug routine hasn't grow on Narron, whose Huckelberry Hound sensibilities leans towards a more controled manner of play.

So IMO it's not really why is Womack starting as much as why isn't Freel starting.

[flyer85]

which makes it seems if they are willing to trade offense for ??whatever??, then just give it to Bergolla(who is an excellent defensive player) and bat him 8th.

And even though Freel's PECOTA is anemic his VORP is ~15 higher than Womack

[Red Leader]

I can see the argument of why not Freel. I don't think he'd be a good everyday 2B option for them either. So why not Rich Aurilia at 2B? Maybe not as much range as Freel, but better than Womack, and provides better offense than Womack.

[flyer85]

Originally Posted by Red Leader

I can see the argument of why not Freel. I don't think he'd be a good everyday 2B option for them either. So why not Rich Aurilia at 2B? Maybe not as much range as Freel, but better than Womack, and provides better offense than Womack.

The stuff I read all spring said the Reds liked Freel as a super-utility kind of player. Now I read today that Narron says Freel and Womack are the 2nd basemen and Aurilia is the utility guy that will play all the infield positions(including 1st when a lefty is pitching). Make up your mind.

[Johnny Footstool]

Originally Posted by westofyou

Not to defend Womack, whom I agree is the teams first cut.

But the Reds aren't very high on Freel's play in the IF, that is abundently clear, any ignoring of that is just tail chasing the subject, why Tony Womack is playing can not be discussed without discussing WHY Ryan Freel isn't playing, and calling the GM/Manager an Idiot/Slash Fill-in-the-Blank only avoids the real question.

Why isn't Ryan Freel good enough to be the starter?

BP has Freel at a robust .260/.345/.356 6.1 projection in VORP, Baseball Info Solutions has him at .259/.355/.365 in their projections.

Neither is something to boast about when your fielding is being questioned by the team, neither is much to boast about over 600 at bats either

That would put him in this neighborhood in the post strike world.

RUNS CREATED/GAME             YEAR    RC/G      SB       OBA      SLG    
1    Tom Goodwin              2000     4.94       55     .346     .352   
2    Darren Lewis             1998     4.65       29     .352     .362   
3    Otis Nixon               1995     4.61       50     .357     .338   
4    Chuck Knoblauch          2001     4.47       38     .339     .351   
5    Andy Fox                 2002     4.17       31     .338     .333   
6    Otis Nixon               1997     4.16       59     .337     .318   
7    Tony Womack              2002     4.08       29     .325     .353   
8    Tom Goodwin              1999     4.03       39     .324     .341   
9    Dave Roberts             2003     4.01       40     .331     .307   
10   Mark McLemore            2000     3.95       30     .353     .316

I'm of the opinion that neither of the guys are what the Reds really want at 2nd base, and that despite the fact that Narron and his world view still finds the water bug as the most important trait a 2nd baseman can possess. Freel's unrestrained water bug routine hasn't grow on Narron, whose Huckelberry Hound sensibilities leans towards a more controled manner of play.

So IMO it's not really why is Womack starting as much as why isn't Freel starting.

Even if Freel manages to hit only .260 (which I think would be a worst-case scenario), his OPB will still be 40 points higher than Womack's. 40 points of OB is well worth any shortcomings Freel might have with the glove. The argument shouldn't need to go any farther than that.

Comparing Freel to the Tom Goodwins and Otis Nixons of the world is fair, but not really germaine to the situation. He's the better of two available options.

[Red Leader]

Originally Posted by flyer85

Make up your mind.

That, IMO, will lead to the demise of Jerry Narron. His inability to make up his mind. He commits to one thing, and then changes his mind before fully carrying out his "plan". I think those 3 player's roles were clear as a bell back in December. Aurilia should be the starting 2B. Freel should be the super-sup, and Womack should be a bench guy, PH and PR when needed.

[flyer85]

Originally Posted by Red Leader

That, IMO, will lead to the demise of Jerry Narron. His inability to make up his mind. He commits to one thing, and then changes his mind before fully carrying out his "plan". I think those 3 player's roles were clear as a bell back in December. Aurilia should be the starting 2B. Freel should be the super-sup, and Womack should be a bench guy, PH and PR when needed.

obviously spring training didn't decide anything. The Cards are going to dump Spivey, they really need Womack back in town.

[traderumor]

Originally Posted by flyer85

The stuff I read all spring said the Reds liked Freel as a super-utility kind of player. Now I read today that Narron says Freel and Womack are the 2nd basemen and Aurilia is the utility guy that will play all the infield positions(including 1st when a lefty is pitching). Make up your mind.

Not defending the specific decision, but what is wrong with a manager making conjecture about where guys might play, but then once things start happening on the field, he goes another direction? Should he just stubbornly stick to his word?

[flyer85]

Originally Posted by traderumor

Not defending the specific decision, but what is wrong with a manager making conjecture about where guys might play, but then once things start happening on the field, he goes another direction? Should he just stubbornly stick to his word?

only if what he saw made him change his mind. If it did I am not sure what he saw. I find it interesting that I heard Marty and Stewie say a number of times that they were pretty sure that Womack wasn't going to be playing 2b because of his extremely poor defense in the spring(they both thought Aurilia would be the starting 2b). I guess Jerry saw it differently and now realizes that Womack is his best option thanks to his impressive spring.

[westofyou]

The argument shouldn't need to go any farther than that.

Sorry, that's too absolute for me.

Something plays in to it aside from the OB% and the glove, maybe it's his K's maybe it's lack of faith in Lopez and Freel aside each other?

Comparing Freel to the Tom Goodwins and Otis Nixons of the world is fair, but not really germaine to the situation. He's the better of two available options.

Then why isn't he getting the call? That's all I'm asking.. and as you can see from my first sentence I'm not backing Womack, so instead of talking down Womacks game I'm just pondering why Freel doesn't get the start.

[BRM]

Originally Posted by flyer85

which makes it seems if they are willing to trade offense for ??whatever??, then just give it to Bergolla(who is an excellent defensive player) and bat him 8th.

And even though Freel's PECOTA is anemic his VORP is ~15 higher than Womack

Good point. If they are looking for the best defensive option, I'd think Bergolla would be the guy when he's healthy. If they are looking for the best offensive option, Freel or Aurilia would have to be the choice. It just seems odd that the worst offensive and defensive player of the group is the one Narron chose. I guess some could argue that Freel is worse defensively than Womack but I'm not sure I'd agree with that.

[Reds Nd2]

Originally Posted by flyer85

which makes it seems if they are willing to trade offense for ??whatever??, then just give it to Bergolla(who is an excellent defensive player) and bat him 8th.

That's the option I would go with. Does anyone else think that platooning 2B adversely affects Lopez' defense at SS?