2009

[HUHUH]

1b: Votto
2b: Phillips
3b: EE or Keppinger
SS: Keppinger or Gonzo
LF: Freel, Hairston and/or EE
RF: Bruce

Two biggest needs in the lineup:
CF: Strong defender, high BA, steals bases, preferably leadoff type. Is Carl Crawford available? Any other suggestions on who fits here?
C: Solid defender and arm, who can also hit! Gerald Laird? Any suggestions?

Batting Order
Crawford
Keppinger
Bruce
Phillips
Votto
Laird
EE
Freel
Pitcher

Starters:
Harang, Volquez, Cueto, Thompson, Bailey, Arroyo. If needed, trade Arroyo or Bailey.

Pen: Cordero, Burton, Bray, Roenicke, Affeldt, Belisle, ????

Philosophy: Make contact, steal bases, move guys over, good defense and good pitching.

I think the future looks more promising than anytime in the last 8 years.

Money saved on the dumped contracts could be used to sign young guys to long term deals: ala the 90's Indians.

Whaddya think? Even if they don't win, I'd enjoy watching this team more than Dunn (whiff) and Griffey (groundout).

[ChatterRed]

According to rumors, Freel is drawing alot of trade interest.

I think this team signs some OF's in free agency, will leave the infield intact, and possibly pursue a full time better hitting catcher.

I really don't want to trade Arroyo, but I think they will......he is also drawing some interest. I definitely don't want to trade Harang. I think Reds fans would blow a gasket if Harang were traded.

I do like the idea of not sitting back and waiting on the HR (Griffey, Dunn) and having guys with some pop, but that can also hit for average. I'll take 20-30 HR's and a .300 batting average over 40 HR's and a .240 batting average everyday of the week.

I hope they sign a couple of OF's or trade for them, sign another starter if they trade Arroyo, sign/trade for a catcher that can hit and play defense, and continue to bolster the bullpen.

Harang, Volquez, Cueto, Arroyo, Thompson, ???? if Arroyo is traded.

[Nasty_Boy]

Crawford isn't available. Even if he were, he is not a good center fielder.

I would want nothing to do with Freel in the lineup as an everyday player.

Where are your on base guys? If don't get on base, you don't score runs. Kepp's OBP is BA driven, but he's solid. Bruce seems to be hacking at everything thrown at him, a la Phillips. Votto will produce solid OB #'s but that lineup would sturggle unless Phillips, Bruce, and Votto take big steps forward in the run production categorie. Dunn is far from perfect but he still accounts for more runs than anyone in that lineup.

I find out what CF's are available either via trade or free agency. I also take a look at some high OBP middle infielders. The Reds need more guys that get on base at a higher rate. Kepp is better suited for 3rd or 2nd, so you have to make the decision on EE and LF... or even Votto and LF if Alonso is going to be in the bigs in a short amount of time. I would make Gonzo an extra infielder if he's untradeable.

Here's my best guess
1b Votto
2b Phillips or Kepp
SS Gonzo, Kepp, or Phillips
3b Edwin or Kepp
LF Edwin or ?
CF ?
RF Bruce

I don't think Hairston is a reasonable option. He's had a good month or so this season, but I don't like counting on below average career back ups to play an important role. I do think that Alonso is close to being major league ready, maybe late next season. Valaika and Frazier will almost certainly play a large part in the construction of this team next year, directly or indirectly... Walt may not want sign or trade for a veteran under contract because he knows these 2 aren't far from GABP.

[Root Down]

The fire that Freel brings to the club is a great thing and I would hate to see that go. I am also definitely against getting rid of Griffey. He may not be hitting all that well right now, but we are talking about Ken Griffey Jr. here, we're lucky to have him and I would love to see him celebrate with the Reds when they bring a pennant home. The pen is where I see problems. Granted the last few losses came because of a lack of offense (explainable with injuries creating large holes in the lineup with guys like Janish and Paterson), but from what I've seen in general the Reds are losing high scoring games. IMO defense is what is lacking and picking up some reliable relief would fix a lot of problems.

[Nasty_Boy]

Originally Posted by HUHUH

Philosophy: Make contact, steal bases, move guys over, good defense and good pitching.

That philosophy (except pitching and defense) will not make a difference in wins and losses. The Reds need more guys that walk and get on base. Stolen bases are nice, if you're stealing at a 85% rate... if not it's not worth the risk. Contact means nothing, if the contact isn't going for hits.

Getting on base = More Runs

Good defense and good pitching = Less Runs

More Runs + Less Runs = More Wins

Small Ball = Nothing

[Root Down]

Originally Posted by Nasty_Boy

Small Ball = Nothing

Many games have been won with a bunt and a fly ball. Small ball has it's place in the game.

[Cicero]

Originally Posted by Nasty_Boy

That philosophy (except pitching and defense) will not make a difference in wins and losses. The Reds need more guys that walk and get on base. Stolen bases are nice, if you're stealing at a 85% rate... if not it's not worth the risk. Contact means nothing, if the contact isn't going for hits.

Getting on base = More Runs

Good defense and good pitching = Less Runs

More Runs + Less Runs = More Wins

Small Ball = Nothing

Do a google search on the 1990 Reds sometime.

[ChatterRed]

Originally Posted by Root Down

The fire that Freel brings to the club is a great thing and I would hate to see that go. I am also definitely against getting rid of Griffey. He may not be hitting all that well right now, but we are talking about Ken Griffey Jr. here, we're lucky to have him and I would love to see him celebrate with the Reds when they bring a pennant home. The pen is where I see problems. Granted the last few losses came because of a lack of offense (explainable with injuries creating large holes in the lineup with guys like Janish and Paterson), but from what I've seen in general the Reds are losing high scoring games. IMO defense is what is lacking and picking up some reliable relief would fix a lot of problems.

KGJ?

Not the same player that you are trying to acknowledge.

[Blue]

That pitching staff would have real potential. The offense would stink, worse than now. I think they'll try to make a splash. I wouldn't be surprised if the Blue Jays' 3B is manning the hot corner for our Reds next season.

Jocketty will surely be doing things this offseason. I don't think he's going to be as prone to sitting back and hoping for things to break just right for the Reds to have a shot at contention.

I'm in favor of building a strong defense, but I don't think pitching and defense can carry the offense next year. The offense will be really bad if there aren't some significant acquisitions.

[CySeymour]

Originally Posted by Cicero

Do a google search on the 1990 Reds sometime.

That was a different time, when most teams played that way. So basically, the team that played small ball the best won. This is a different era, when a scoring a lot of runs is the basic idea. This is done by gettting many runners on base. Sac bunts and sac flys are ok, but they ONLY lead to one run. In todays game, you win by scoring a lot of runs. So basically, if the Reds would have been playing small ball the last 4 or 5 years, instead of losing games 7-6, they'd be losing 7-2.

[bounty37h]

Originally Posted by Nasty_Boy

That philosophy (except pitching and defense) will not make a difference in wins and losses. The Reds need more guys that walk and get on base. Stolen bases are nice, if you're stealing at a 85% rate... if not it's not worth the risk. Contact means nothing, if the contact isn't going for hits.

Getting on base = More Runs

Good defense and good pitching = Less Runs

More Runs + Less Runs = More Wins

Small Ball = Nothing

Isnt getting on base, walks, a big part of small ball though? There needs to bea good combination of small ball and power to move it along. We have tried to rely on power only for years, that hasnt equalled many wins either in the long run.

[Ghosts of 1990]

I dont want crawford or any other left handed outfielder as our CF. We've got enough lefties as it is.

[CySeymour]

Originally Posted by bounty37h

Isnt getting on base, walks, a big part of small ball though? There needs to bea good combination of small ball and power to move it along. We have tried to rely on power only for years, that hasnt equalled many wins either in the long run.

Small ball is sacrificing outs for one run. Getting a lot of runners on base should lead to a lot of runs.

[thorn]

Check out the Angels and tell me small ball doesn't.

[BLEEDS]

Originally Posted by ChatterRed

I'll take 20-30 HR's and a .300 batting average over 40 HR's and a .240 batting average everyday of the week.

That is an uneducated and ridiculous statement taken on its own merits.

OBP and OPS should be considered when making such statements, though they rarely are by the average fan.

Over 500 AB's, that's only 30 extra hits, or less than one every 5 games.

If that same .300 hitter has an OBP of .320 and the .240 guy has an OBP of .400, then it MORE than makes up for it, and in fact equates to 40 EXTRA "bases" - or in the least 40 LESS OUTS - over the same 500 AB's.

When you consider the OPS, it will give you the exact number of "BASES".

OBP and OPS equate more directly to runs than simple AVG, but of course if you didn't believe it the first 1,000,000 times you've been told, why should you believe it now?!?!

Oh, the uneducated masses, how we weep for them...

PEACE

-BLEEDS