per mlbtraderumors:Reds dangling Keppinger

[fearofpopvol1]

Originally Posted by mth123

I'd suggest "he can play anywhere" should be rephrased to he's inadequate defensively and can't really play anywhere.

As for his career offensive numbers .287/.338/.390/.728 woo hoo!! Players with those numbers usually need to be defensive specialists to be a major leaguer. As an offensive minded player, its pretty inadequate.

I do like Kepp as a RH Bat against LH pitching, just not sure there is room for such a specialized player on a team already filled with RH Bats, especially when the teams's two best RH Bats that hit LH Pitching play the same positions (2B and 3B). I'd keep him over Nix, Jones or Castillo though. If the Reds had 13 deserving players for the Roster, I'd have no problem with the Reds just releasing Kepp. As the team is currently constructed, I think the Reds struggle to have more than 10 obvious major league position players for 2009. By the end of the season, there could be lots of guys to add to the list, but not now. Its why I suggest dealing Kepp in hopes of getting a major league player who fits better over just keeping some one else ahead of him. As constructed now, Kepp makes the 13 man position player roster along with Rosales (though Janish is making a push IMO) and the team goes with no lefty bench bat. For the record, I would have kept Ward ahead of Kepp.

It's a realtively small sample size. He's never played a full season. He was over .300 in the minors and the year he had the most ABs in the majors was last season and I'm convinced that he just never recovered full from his injury (where he was hitting .320 prior to be injured).

I'm not advocating Keppinger be a starter, but I think as a spot starter in the IF, he's a good guy to have around, particularly as you said, against LHP.

If the Reds had better options, I'd be all for them kicking Keppinger out, but I don't think, as it currently stands, that Keppinger ISN'T one of the 25 better options, even if he is on the closer side of 25.

[redsmetz]

Originally Posted by remdog

So far, for me, Paul Janish bares an eerie similarity to Darryl Chaney. In '72 the debate was whether Chaney or Concepcion should be the Reds SS of the future. We know where that went. (Thankfully).

The current situation is nothing like that but, still, Janish and Chaney are clones IMO.

Not saying that Janish isn't the best choice defensively, but that's what the Reds reap when they don't make an effort to shore up that spot given Gonzo's obvious possibilities of not being able to play.

Rem

Chaney was a useful player for seven seasons for the Reds. It was a point I attempted to make some time ago on the thread about bench players. Janish could be a useful bench player, although I agree we've got a plethora of these guys at the moment. That said, you always have need of players like Chaney, Janish, Keppinger, Hairston, etc. on a club. And sometimes they end up starting for occasional periods (e.g. 1973 for Chaney following Concepcion's broken leg).

I don't thinking anyone questions that there were "obvious possibilities" of Gonzo being unable to play. That's a no brainer that the club couldn't do much about. He's under contract and will be paid one way or the other. While finding a more permanent replacement would have been nice, it wasn't among the most pressing needs given the fact that Gonzo may be able to play. I know this is an endless circular discussion on the question, I just don't think the club had much choice while other matters needed addressing as well. In all likelihood, 2009 isn't "the year" and riding out the AG contract is just a matter of fact, IMO.

[remdog]

Originally Posted by redsmetz

Chaney was a useful player for seven seasons for the Reds. It was a point I attempted to make some time ago on the thread about bench players. Janish could be a useful bench player, although I agree we've got a plethora of these guys at the moment. That said, you always have need of players like Chaney, Janish, Keppinger, Hairston, etc. on a club. And sometimes they end up starting for occasional periods (e.g. 1973 for Chaney following Concepcion's broken leg).

I don't thinking anyone questions that there were "obvious possibilities" of Gonzo being unable to play. That's a no brainer that the club couldn't do much about. He's under contract and will be paid one way or the other. While finding a more permanent replacement would have been nice, it wasn't among the most pressing needs given the fact that Gonzo may be able to play. I know this is an endless circular discussion on the question, I just don't think the club had much choice while other matters needed addressing as well. In all likelihood, 2009 isn't "the year" and riding out the AG contract is just a matter of fact, IMO.

You are correct in stateing that Gonzo's contract was a 'sunk cost'. That much was given. And, I'll admit that the Reds front office certainly has more info to go on than I do as an outside observer. However, I think SS was a more pressing need than CF since we already had Dickerson 'in-house' for a lot less money than Wille Tavaras. Whether or not Dickerson hits is a question but his 'D' is probabaly as good, or better, than Willy's, based on his minor league reports. As for hitting, Chris may not be able to steal as many bags as Willy but Willy won't hit as many HR's as Chris. (famous shrug)

Anyway, before I get too much more off track, yes, a team does need the Chaney/Janish type player from time to time. Things happen. That's why you stockpile them at AAA.

As for 2009 not being 'the year', I think it could have been if the correct moves had been made in the off-season. IMO, those moves weren't made and now, once again, we're looking at 'next year'. I don't know about you but, personally, I'm getting a lot tired of that.

Rem

[Ron Madden]

Originally Posted by remdog

You are correct in stateing that Gonzo's contract was a 'sunk cost'. That much was given. And, I'll admit that the Reds front office certainly has more info to go on than I do as an outside observer. However, I think SS was a more pressing need than CF since we already had Dickerson 'in-house' for a lot less money than Wille Tavaras. Whether or not Dickerson hits is a question but his 'D' is probabaly as good, or better, than Willy's, based on his minor league reports. As for hitting, Chris may not be able to steal as many bags as Willy but Willy won't hit as many HR's as Chris. (famous shrug)

Anyway, before I get too much more off track, yes, a team does need the Chaney/Janish type player from time to time. Things happen. That's why you stockpile them at AAA.

As for 2009 not being 'the year', I think it could have been if the correct moves had been made in the off-season. IMO, those moves weren't made and now, once again, we're looking at 'next year'. I don't know about you but, personally, I'm getting a lot tired of that.

Rem

I agree with Rem, Over the off season SS was and still is the biggest need the Reds had to address. They didn't do it. CF could have been filled by in-house options.

It's just my humble opinion but I believe Kriviski blew it by signing Gonzo to that three year deal to begin with and Walt only compounded the problem by overpaying for Taveras instead of beating the bushes for a SS.

I'm sure this post won't sit well with many here but It's my honest opinion.

[Redhook]

Originally Posted by Ron Madden

I agree with Rem, Over the off season SS was and still is the biggest need the Reds had to address. They didn't do it. CF could have been filled by in-house options.

It's just my humble opinion but I believe Kriviski blew it by signing Gonzo to that three year deal to begin with and Walt only compounded the problem by overpaying for Taveras instead of beating the bushes for a SS.

I'm sure this post won't sit well with many here but It's my honest opinion.

Sits well with me. I agree 100%.

[WVRedsFan]

The Gonzales signing was a mistake and Krivsky was in his full panic mode (somwthing he did often) by giving him that contract. Walt was handcuffed by the promises from Doc Hollywood that Alex was OK, so he went for a CF, which was a mistake. Now we have no SS and probably won't find one until the winter. Little things that make Hairston the main candidate. Sad stuff.

[camisadelgolf]

Originally Posted by WVRedsFan

The Gonzales signing was a mistake and Krivsky was in his full panic mode (somwthing he did often) by giving him that contract. Walt was handcuffed by the promises from Doc Hollywood that Alex was OK, so he went for a CF, which was a mistake. Now we have no SS and probably won't find one until the winter. Little things that make Hairston the main candidate. Sad stuff.

Hindsight is 20/20, but what should have Krivsky done? That first season, AGon was one of the better shortstops in MLB, and I don't think anyone could've predicted the injuries that were going to happen. And the reason AGon missed so much time that first season with the Reds was so he could spend time with his ailing child.

[kpresidente]

Originally Posted by fearofpopvol1

It's a realtively small sample size. He's never played a full season. He was over .300 in the minors and the year he had the most ABs in the majors was last season and I'm convinced that he just never recovered full from his injury (where he was hitting .320 prior to be injured).

I'm not advocating Keppinger be a starter, but I think as a spot starter in the IF, he's a good guy to have around, particularly as you said, against LHP.

My big thing about Keppinger, and the reason I defend him, is because I don't think his 2008 represents anything except what happens when you rush a guy back from a broken knee-cap. Offensively, his monthly splits strongly support that conclusion, and it's only reasonable to assume that his defense would have been even more adversely affected (basically his range ~ his glove & arm are fine), given the nature of the injury.

If you wipe out 2008, which I pretty much do, you see a slightly below average defensive SS (but certainly not awful), and a fantastic offensive player who brings this team exactly what it needs most, namely, OBP. The splits are also not nearly as dramatic, so that effect is lessened as well.

For me, if it came down to Kepp vs. Hairston at SS, for instance, I take Kepp and don't look twice, because I give it about a 60-70% chance he repeats his 2007, and I give Hairston about a 1% chance of repeating his 2008.

[jojo]

Keppy projects to be roughly a league average bat in '09. He's projected to be a -13 defender at short over a season (aka CHONE). That would roughly make him something like a 1 to 1.5 player as a full time shortstop (in other words a below average regular).

[*BaseClogger*]

Y'know, as much crap comes from that site, they still post a lot of interesting stuff that turns out to be true...

[nate]

Originally Posted by *BaseClogger*

Y'know, as much crap comes from that site, they still post a lot of interesting stuff that turns out to be true...

Heh.

Yeah, I think it's fascinating. I also think it's become more credible over the years. Nothing to set one's watch to, but more credible.

[M2]

I recall that sometimes when I'd wear those old Adidas shorts, the ones with the built-in liner that had a tendency to fray, that sometimes I'd catch myself dangling some Keppinger.

[REDREAD]

Originally Posted by camisadelgolf

Hindsight is 20/20, but what should have Krivsky done? That first season, AGon was one of the better shortstops in MLB, and I don't think anyone could've predicted the injuries that were going to happen. And the reason AGon missed so much time that first season with the Reds was so he could spend time with his ailing child.

The Reds could've gone with that guy they got from the Nats that they later discarded. I think his name was Brenden Harris (not trying to be a smart aleck, I am not sure if I remember his name right). They also had Keppinger and Olmedo in house. Sure, none of those would've been great options, but they were all inexpensive stopgaps until something better came along. Neither would've hamstrug us long term. Gonzo's money could've been used to sign/acquire someone that would've had a more postitive impact.

[camisadelgolf]

Originally Posted by REDREAD

The Reds could've gone with that guy they got from the Nats that they later discarded. I think his name was Brenden Harris (not trying to be a smart aleck, I am not sure if I remember his name right). They also had Keppinger and Olmedo in house. Sure, none of those would've been great options, but they were all inexpensive stopgaps until something better came along. Neither would've hamstrug us long term. Gonzo's money could've been used to sign/acquire someone that would've had a more postitive impact.

How has Gonzalez' contract hamstrung the Reds? Who are the better options that have come along?

And how wasn't Gonzalez a positive impact before he became injured? In 2007, 30 shortstops had 250+ plate appearances, and amongst them, Alex Gonzalez had the 9th-best OPS. If the Reds had the 9th-best player at each position, they'd go to the playoffs.

[M2]

Originally Posted by camisadelgolf

Who are the better options that have come along?

No point in running the truck back over the rest, but I'd say the problem is that a better option hasn't come along.