APB: Missing persons: Reds' Offense

[Brutus]

Though I am aware the Reds lead the NL in runs scored, and are third in baseball behind the Red Sox and Yankees, I am seeing no reason to believe that offense will survive, in its current construct, for the rest of the season.

I would like to put out a missing persons report for the Reds' offense that got most of those runs scored. Because it's been pretty hit-and-miss over the past month, and they're not scoring those runs nearly as often.

In the last 30 games, in fact, they're averaging just 4.3 runs per game. Amazingly, that's actually above NL average this year (which is just 4.1 runs per game), but I feel more than the average itself, it's indicative of an offense that is too reliant on a few key bats to perform to their ability.

In the macro, one could fairly say 4.8 runs per game is nothing to worry about. But does anyone believe the offense that scored those runs will exist the rest of the year? With Bruce's up and downs, Rolen's health concerns, the inconsistency from LF and the hole at SS, I just don't think the Reds' offense will sustain itself as being much above average.

I have, to this point, been OK with the deliberate approach at short, to see what may or may not manifest itself in the trade market. But I think the time is rapidly approaching, now that the pitching staff has stabilized, that the Reds begin to address a couple of positions either internally or externally.

If the Reds maintain 4.6 to 4.8 runs a game here forward, I'd say that's going to win them plenty of games. But that's the problem.. while 30 games might just be a limited sample relative to the entire season (i.e. a slump), I see it being more representative of an offense that has too many holes to continue as it was producing earlier.

So I say: find the missing offense or go get a new one--or at least some new parts.

[kaldaniels]

Not pretty the past few days, but a lot of guys left on the basepaths. I predict......4.8 runs from here on out.

[traderumor]

Originally Posted by Brutus the Pimp

Though I am aware the Reds lead the NL in runs scored, and are third in baseball behind the Red Sox and Yankees, I am seeing no reason to believe that offense will survive, in its current construct, for the rest of the season.

I would like to put out a missing persons report for the Reds' offense that got most of those runs scored. Because it's been pretty hit-and-miss over the past month, and they're not scoring those runs nearly as often.

In the last 30 games, in fact, they're averaging just 4.3 runs per game. Amazingly, that's actually above NL average this year (which is just 4.1 runs per game), but I feel more than the average itself, it's indicative of an offense that is too reliant on a few key bats to perform to their ability.

In the macro, one could fairly say 4.8 runs per game is nothing to worry about. But does anyone believe the offense that scored those runs will exist the rest of the year? With Bruce's up and downs, Rolen's health concerns, the inconsistency from LF and the hole at SS, I just don't think the Reds' offense will sustain itself as being much above average.

I have, to this point, been OK with the deliberate approach at short, to see what may or may not manifest itself in the trade market. But I think the time is rapidly approaching, now that the pitching staff has stabilized, that the Reds begin to address a couple of positions either internally or externally.

If the Reds maintain 4.6 to 4.8 runs a game here forward, I'd say that's going to win them plenty of games. But that's the problem.. while 30 games might just be a limited sample relative to the entire season (i.e. a slump), I see it being more representative of an offense that has too many holes to continue as it was producing earlier.

So I say: find the missing offense or go get a new one--or at least some new parts.

I had to check to make sure this post was from this year and not bumped from the same time last year. Rodney Dangerfield has nothing on the Reds offense.

Of course, it comes out in force any time they have a dry spell for a few games.

[Will M]

there are two 'camps' here on the ORG. one who says the Reds offense is fine. their arguements seems straightfotward - looks at total runs scored. the 2nd camp's arguements includes things like inconsistency, great against scrubs but can't score against good pitchers, concerns regarding ceratin guy's health & the fact that the offense gets to play at GABP which makes it look better than it is. This arguement has been going on for a while. It seems that people who comment on this issue are usually strongly in one camp or the other. I'd be curious to here from anyone who has switched sides. Is all this talk actually convincing anyone to change their opinion?

[Captain Hook]

I think the offense is fine but I also can't think of a good reason not to improve it if an opportunity presents itself.I don't think you sell the farm to fix the number one offense in the NL but it'd be foolish to think some things couldn't easily be improved.

Furcal will be available for next to nothing.So far this year he's been injured and has preformed well below league average at SS but I'm more interested in what he could do going forward.Looking at his career numbers I believe it's well within reason to predict that he'd be a clear upgrade for the Reds for next to nothing in prospects.He's not the long term answer for SS some would like but he could fill in nicely for the rest of this year.

[Brutus]

Originally Posted by traderumor

I had to check to make sure this post was from this year and not bumped from the same time last year. Rodney Dangerfield has nothing on the Reds offense.

Of course, it comes out in force any time they have a dry spell for a few games.

A few games? As I said in my post... they're averaging 4.3 runs a game over the last 30 games. That's a bit more than a few -- it's nearly half the season.

Whether or not that's indicative of what will happen going forward is another story. But it's most certainly not a reaction because of a few games.

[PuffyPig]

Originally Posted by Brutus the Pimp

Though I am aware the Reds lead the NL in runs scored....../

...yet you choose to ignore it, in favour of the smaller sample size.

[Caveat Emperor]

They're going to remain an inconsistent offense until they do something about the fact that they're basically giving away 3 outs every time through the batting order with the P / LF / SS combo.

[BuckeyeRedleg]

Today's lineup was pretty weak, but luckily Cairo came through with a big one.

I agree that something should be done about the black holes at SS and LF. No reason not to try to improve a weak area.

[Brutus]

Originally Posted by PuffyPig

...yet you choose to ignore it, in favour of the smaller sample size.

...past performances do not guarantee future results. You can cling to the overall number as long as you like, but the longer the Reds trend the other direction, the less it means much when determining whether the Reds need to upgrade certain positions.

At this point, it's just as likely the last 30 games are as descriptive of the team's offensive ability as the first 40 games.

[edabbs44]

Originally Posted by Caveat Emperor

They're going to remain an inconsistent offense until they do something about the fact that they're basically giving away 3 outs every time through the batting order with the P / LF / SS combo.

The Reds are 10th in baseball in LF OBP (.331 VS .320 MLB LF average). .320 is also the MLB OBP overall average.

I think it is time to realize that LF hasn't been as bad as everyone seems to think it has been. SS has been horrific. LF? Not so much.

[edabbs44]

Originally Posted by Brutus the Pimp

...past performances do not guarantee future results. You can cling to the overall number as long as you like, but the longer the Reds trend the other direction, the less it means much when determining whether the Reds need to upgrade certain positions.

At this point, it's just as likely the last 30 games are as descriptive of the team's offensive ability as the first 40 games.

You don't have to take out the first 40, just take out the first 5.

[reds44]

Originally Posted by edabbs44

The Reds are 10th in baseball in LF OBP (.331 VS .320 MLB LF average). .320 is also the MLB OBP overall average.

I think it is time to realize that LF hasn't been as bad as everyone seems to think it has been. SS has been horrific. LF? Not so much.

SS is hands down more of a need than LF. I think the Reds could survive with a Heisey/Gomes platoon out there. SS is awful, though.

[edabbs44]

Originally Posted by reds44

SS is hands down more of a need than LF. I think the Reds could survive with a Heisey/Gomes platoon out there. SS is awful, though.

I think we agree. LF is definitely upgradeable, but much less of a need.

The "black hole" stuff is rubbish.

[mth123]

We're talking offense here. The issue is really where the line-up needs to be upgraded as well as the positions. For me the glaring need is some one to hit in the 5th spot. Stubbs has been more than adequate leading off and Phillips is fine in the 2 hole. Bruce and Votto fill two thirds of the middle, but the catchers and Rolen need to be at the bottom IMO and even a new SS probably is going to be a bottom of the order guy. That leaves LF as the place to get that third member of the middle of the order. It may be true that Gomes & company are comparable to average production in LF, but they aren't good enough to hit 4th or 5th. Gomes can fill the bill against LHP I suppose, but he needs a platoon mate to do that job against RHP. Alonso and Hermida are posiibilities, but both are flawed as well. For me that is the reason to upgrade LF. If the team was made-up differently and somebody else could do that job, I'd be fine with Gomes, Heisey and a cast of thousands in left.

Next year, maybe Sappelt takes over and Mesoraco provides that extra mid-order bat, but in 2011, the mix just isn't right IMO.