What Do Reds Value in Moustakas and Senzel?

[Ron Madden]

What do the Reds really value in Mike Moustakas and Nick Senzel?


With the exception of Hunter Greene, no two current Reds players entered their Reds careers with higher expectations than Moustakas and Senzel.

Now, the Reds have to decide whether or not they’re still worthy of starting every day.

As the Reds get starters back from the injured list, they have more of a surplus of depth than they’ve had in a while.

Every game, the Reds have three spots in the lineup for these five players: Moustakas, Senzel, Max Schrock, Albert Almora Jr. and Donovan Solano.

Over the last two seasons, Moustakas hasn’t performed like a good hitter. Since the start of the 2021 season, there are only 37 MLB players with an OPS lower than Moustakas who have at least 330 at-bats.

Among those 37 players, 31 of them can play a premium defensive position (catcher, shortstop, center field).
Mike Moustakas has only started six games at third base over the last month, and the Reds have virtually had him become a full-time designated hitter.

Senzel has the worst WOBA, the third-worst barrel rate of players with at least 100 at-bats, and the second-worst walk rate.


The Reds have much less invested in Almora Jr., Schrock and Solano than they do in Moustakas and Senzel.

Beginning on Tuesday, the Reds will have to decide whether they value recent production over reputation and upside.


article here:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/mlb/what-do-the-reds-really-value-in-mike-moustakas-and-nick-senzel/ar-AAYGsst?ocid=BingNewsSearch

[Wayne Krivsky]

Senzel I can understand. He is still young enough and has the pedigree to be an everyday player. I know there is severe Senzel fatigue in Cincinnati, but if he were on another team and brought in as a buy low candidate over the offseason people would be intrigued. I dont see the downside in playing him.

Moose I think it's time to just throw in the towel. He would have to go on an absolute tear to rebuild any trade value before the deadline for the Reds to get rid of his contract. He's been a liability in the field, can't stay on the field, and doesn't have the bat to support putting up with the previous two items.

I'd be open to keeping Moose if he was open to a bench role. Seems like a good guy, good reputation. Cant be bad to have that type of player in the clubhouse over 162 games. I just don't want him getting 400+ at bats.

I look at Senzel in a similar fashion. I almost wonder if less can be more with him. Injuries have been his biggest downfall, even this year where he has avoided the big injuries, but the small nagging ones could be impacting his performance. I wonder if him in a utility spot getting a couple starts per week and a little extra time as a late inning defensive sub makes more sense, and could actually be the better role for him long term.

[REDREAD]

IMO, Senzel is not an issue. He can spot start, be a 4th OF or the Reds can continue to give him chances, I really don't care either way. The point is, due to lack of depth in the Reds' OF, he's going to get playing time. If the Reds somehow end up with a surplus of OF, Aquino can be cut.
Almora is 28, Senzel turns 27 in June.. they are basically the same age.

Moose? He's been a disappointment, but there's not a lot of pop in this lineup. He can continue to share time at DH, 1b, and a pinch hitter. I really don't see how releasing Moose makes the team better. He's not a good player, but it's not as if he's blocking someone better.

I really don't see Max Schrock as anything more than a fungible bench guy. He really should not play OF. I mean, sure.. keep him on the team but if a roster crunch happens and he needs to be cut or sent to AAA (I don't know what kind of contract he has), I would not cry over losing him.

Actually, that logic can apply to all 5 guys mentioned above.. they are all transitional players until the Reds find someone better (which may take a while :lol:) I understand that writers need to write about something -- I am not criticizing the author, but the decision of who to play probably will have no impact on the team's future.. All these guys are just stopgaps.

[Kc61]

Moose and Senzel again? Another discussion?

I’ll only say that Reds should be focused on the future and should make decisions for the future. This season is hopeless. So like everyone else, treat them with the future in mind.

[Old school 1983]

With Moose, the Reds really need to find a trade partner willing to eat his salary or offset it with a bad contract of their own for a guy who doesn’t log jam a position for the Reds like Moose does.

My suggestion…see if the Dodgers could work a Moose for Bellinger swap into a larger deal for Castillo or Mahle. The Dodgers currently need OF help and maybe some 3b help. Including Pham, Naquin, or Drury could offset any need to take lesser prospects in the larger deal for a pitcher even with the Moose/Bellinger swap.

This would also get Senzel out of CF too.

[Ron Madden]

Senzel I can understand. He is still young enough and has the pedigree to be an everyday player. I know there is severe Senzel fatigue in Cincinnati, but if he were on another team and brought in as a buy low candidate over the offseason people would be intrigued. I dont see the downside in playing him.

Moose I think it's time to just throw in the towel. He would have to go on an absolute tear to rebuild any trade value before the deadline for the Reds to get rid of his contract. He's been a liability in the field, can't stay on the field, and doesn't have the bat to support putting up with the previous two items.

I'd be open to keeping Moose if he was open to a bench role. Seems like a good guy, good reputation. Cant be bad to have that type of player in the clubhouse over 162 games. I just don't want him getting 400+ at bats.

I look at Senzel in a similar fashion. I almost wonder if less can be more with him. Injuries have been his biggest downfall, even this year where he has avoided the big injuries, but the small nagging ones could be impacting his performance. I wonder if him in a utility spot getting a couple starts per week and a little extra time as a late inning defensive sub makes more sense, and could actually be the better role for him long term.

Good Post :thumbup:
I just can't see paying Moose all that money for as little production as he provides

[SomeCallMeTim]

Where else are they gonna go?

[UK Reds Fan]

1. Moose is basically you have to eat this year and next year contract wise. I'm cool with his as bench bat from left side and spot starter. But not a plan to play everyday. He's basically only able to play 3b, 2b and DH at this point....
- 2b....So we've got India at 2b...so not need to waste innings there.
- 3B we've got Drury (for now)...Farmer could play here as well I assume. I think Lopez is a better backup 3B right now vs. Moose....De La Cruz is potentially the move way down the line.
- SS impacts this as well....assuming Barrero is a future SS or even McClain in AA. Somebody between Farmer, Barrero, McClain is going to stick at SS and the rest will move to other spots...like 3b or CF potentially.
- The only spot left is DH....I guess he can stick here. But I'd argue between Votto, Stephenson or maybe we actually get a legit bat at DH. Moose isn't really a viable starting DH imo.

2. Senzel is the easiest.
- This year...ride it out and let him sink or swim with a year of innings in CF. 2022 is a wash at this time and basically auditions/trades for the future.
- But if he puts up his 600-ish OPS for a full year...he's up to 1.25M in salary. Now he's arb eligible...so why waste 4M-ish in 2023 to see the same crap. I'd be looking to make a deal for a future CF or if Barrero is a legit CF move...then get him there in 2023.


So I think we have to eat Moose's contract for 1.5 years left and cut Senzel next year is how I see it.

[Redsfan6272]

Senzel I can understand. He is still young enough and has the pedigree to be an everyday player. I know there is severe Senzel fatigue in Cincinnati, but if he were on another team and brought in as a buy low candidate over the offseason people would be intrigued. I dont see the downside in playing him.

Moose I think it's time to just throw in the towel. He would have to go on an absolute tear to rebuild any trade value before the deadline for the Reds to get rid of his contract. He's been a liability in the field, can't stay on the field, and doesn't have the bat to support putting up with the previous two items.

I'd be open to keeping Moose if he was open to a bench role. Seems like a good guy, good reputation. Cant be bad to have that type of player in the clubhouse over 162 games. I just don't want him getting 400+ at bats.

I look at Senzel in a similar fashion. I almost wonder if less can be more with him. Injuries have been his biggest downfall, even this year where he has avoided the big injuries, but the small nagging ones could be impacting his performance. I wonder if him in a utility spot getting a couple starts per week and a little extra time as a late inning defensive sub makes more sense, and could actually be the better role for him long term.

That's a heck of alot of money to pay a bench player with his contract.. no way!!

[Big Klu]

Maybe Moustakas' bat plays better at 2B? After all, let's not forget that that's the position he was brought here to play. ;)

[Tuff Nut]

I am sure his bat could play better defense.

[CySeymour]

That's a heck of alot of money to pay a bench player with his contract.. no way!!

Paying him is inevitable at this point. Getting another team to take on his contract would probably be next to impossible without attaching an actual asset to a trade.

[JFLegal]

That's a heck of alot of money to pay a bench player with his contract.. no way!!

right, but this isn't the NFL. the reds can't just cut him and recoup any of their money. every penny is guaranteed, so they are going to pay moose regardless. no one thinks he should be an everyday starter who gets 500 ABs in a season. so, then the reds have two choices: cut him and eat the remaining $30M+ (including the buyout for 2024), or keep him through the 2023 season as a spot starter/DH/pinch hitter since the reds are going to lose that money regardless.

i would say the best of the terrible options is to just keep moose through 2023 as a bench/DH type of player. unless it's crystal clear he is blocking a better player from being on the roster (so not schrock) then not sure what the reds would stand to gain by cutting him.

my goodness MLB players have it good. guaranteed contracts? if any sport should have guaranteed contracts, it's the violent NFL. pretty crazy how there is no accountability for players like moose who sign a $64M contract (with a small market team no less) and completely suck. teams should be allowed to get some type of insurance or something. (we could call it "suck insurance.")

[JFLegal]

Maybe Moustakas' bat plays better at 2B? After all, let's not forget that that's the position he was brought here to play. ;)

yet another incredibly strange aspect of that signing by the reds. you give a 4-year, $64M deal to a player on the wrong side of 30 ... and then you want to play him out of position at second base? worst FA signing ever by the reds and it's not close. yes, i remember eric milton. moose is far worse. (they were/are both terrible, but milton cost about 35% as much as moose.)

[CySeymour]

right, but this isn't the NFL. the reds can't just cut him and recoup any of their money. every penny is guaranteed, so they are going to pay moose regardless. no one thinks he should be an everyday starter who gets 500 ABs in a season. so, then the reds have two choices: cut him and eat the remaining $30M+ (including the buyout for 2024), or keep him through the 2023 season as a spot starter/DH/pinch hitter since the reds are going to lose that money regardless.

i would say the best of the terrible options is to just keep moose through 2023 as a bench/DH type of player. unless it's crystal clear he is blocking a better player from being on the roster (so not schrock) then not sure what the reds would stand to gain by cutting him.

my goodness MLB players have it good. guaranteed contracts? if any sport should have guaranteed contracts, it's the violent NFL. pretty crazy how there is no accountability for players like moose who sign a $64M contract (with a small market team no less) and completely suck. teams should be allowed to get some type of insurance or something. (we could call it "suck insurance.")

This is a direct result of MLB players having such a strong union.

[Ky Fried Redleg]

right, but this isn't the NFL. the reds can't just cut him and recoup any of their money. every penny is guaranteed, so they are going to pay moose regardless. no one thinks he should be an everyday starter who gets 500 ABs in a season. so, then the reds have two choices: cut him and eat the remaining $30M+ (including the buyout for 2024), or keep him through the 2023 season as a spot starter/DH/pinch hitter since the reds are going to lose that money regardless.

i would say the best of the terrible options is to just keep moose through 2023 as a bench/DH type of player. unless it's crystal clear he is blocking a better player from being on the roster (so not schrock) then not sure what the reds would stand to gain by cutting him.

my goodness MLB players have it good. guaranteed contracts? if any sport should have guaranteed contracts, it's the violent NFL. pretty crazy how there is no accountability for players like moose who sign a $64M contract (with a small market team no less) and completely suck. teams should be allowed to get some type of insurance or something. (we could call it "suck insurance.")

Jmo , but it seems to me that Moose, with the 64 mil guaranteed, has never seemed super motivated to be in tip top shape to excel as the Major League level. I do think he was overvalued by the Reds when they signed him but he could have been better had he taken it upon himself to stay in better baseball shape. I know that's probably a minority opinion on here but I think he could have been more productive had he not been so lazy in working to stay a Major League caliber hitter and fielder.

[CySeymour]

Jmo , but it seems to me that Moose, with the 64 mil guaranteed, has never seemed super motivated to be in tip top shape to excel as the Major League level. I do think he was overvalued by the Reds when they signed him but he could have been better had he taken it upon himself to stay in better baseball shape. I know that's probably a minority opinion on here but I think he could have been more productive had he not been so lazy in working to stay a Major League caliber hitter and fielder.

And you know he didn't put in the work how? If he was that lazy, fine, but just because he isn't productive doesn't prove anything about how hard he's working. Through injury and age, it's more likely that his skills have just eroded and he just simply isn't that good anymore.

[OldFashionedRed]

right, but this isn't the NFL. the reds can't just cut him and recoup any of their money. every penny is guaranteed, so they are going to pay moose regardless. no one thinks he should be an everyday starter who gets 500 ABs in a season. so, then the reds have two choices: cut him and eat the remaining $30M+ (including the buyout for 2024), or keep him through the 2023 season as a spot starter/DH/pinch hitter since the reds are going to lose that money regardless.

i would say the best of the terrible options is to just keep moose through 2023 as a bench/DH type of player. unless it's crystal clear he is blocking a better player from being on the roster (so not schrock) then not sure what the reds would stand to gain by cutting him.

my goodness MLB players have it good. guaranteed contracts? if any sport should have guaranteed contracts, it's the violent NFL. pretty crazy how there is no accountability for players like moose who sign a $64M contract (with a small market team no less) and completely suck. teams should be allowed to get some type of insurance or something. (we could call it "suck insurance.")

It's one thing to have a bad season, but what bothers me in the accountability department is that he's been out of shape for HOW LONG NOW? He looks like a slob out there, like he just got off a night shift folding carboard boxes and downing an XL mountain dew and a box of doughnuts. The guy is struggling at least in part due to his lack of appreciation for the opportunity. Like you said, no accountability, and a strong players union. Both the NBA and MLB need what I call a "hard reset". Just stop paying players more than what doctors and teachers make. Return to the days of players holding jobs in the offseason. Sorry for the bitterness.

[Z-Fly]

That's a heck of alot of money to pay a bench player with his contract.. no way!!

The money is already spent. The only decision now is does he make the team better or worse than someone in AAA. Or is it worth spending even more money on the open market to replace that roster spot.

[Tony Cloninger]

The only pedigree that Senzel has is injury prone and unable to play over any injury or produce much. But he has to play because he had some pedigree from a long long time ago. The loser mentality of let’s just play those 2 because it’s a lost year because the better producing players are fungible and not part of the future. Great stuff. The #1 pick is not guaranteed so why not play the fungible since the Reds have been so good at developing their own over the last 5 years.

[Ky Fried Redleg]

And you know he didn't put in the work how? If he was that lazy, fine, but just because he isn't productive doesn't prove anything about how hard he's working. Through injury and age, it's more likely that his skills have just eroded and he just simply isn't that good anymore.

I don't know how much/little work he's put in. I know he had the foot problem last season that kept him out of action. I was hoping to see him come to camp in the best shape of his life coming off last year but it didn't appear to be he case. Maybe someone can offer proof to the contrary , but it seemed the guy could not even get to a lot of balls hit near him at third. He may have been in amazing shape but he didn't look it.

[Wonderful Monds]

It's one thing to have a bad season, but what bothers me in the accountability department is that he's been out of shape for HOW LONG NOW? He looks like a slob out there, like he just got off a night shift folding carboard boxes and downing an XL mountain dew and a box of doughnuts. The guy is struggling at least in part due to his lack of appreciation for the opportunity. Like you said, no accountability, and a strong players union. Both the NBA and MLB need what I call a "hard reset". Just stop paying players more than what doctors and teachers make. Return to the days of players holding jobs in the offseason. Sorry for the bitterness.

Good lord, the standards for this board have really gone in the tank.

[Wonderful Monds]

right, but this isn't the NFL. the reds can't just cut him and recoup any of their money. every penny is guaranteed, so they are going to pay moose regardless. no one thinks he should be an everyday starter who gets 500 ABs in a season. so, then the reds have two choices: cut him and eat the remaining $30M+ (including the buyout for 2024), or keep him through the 2023 season as a spot starter/DH/pinch hitter since the reds are going to lose that money regardless.

i would say the best of the terrible options is to just keep moose through 2023 as a bench/DH type of player. unless it's crystal clear he is blocking a better player from being on the roster (so not schrock) then not sure what the reds would stand to gain by cutting him.

my goodness MLB players have it good. guaranteed contracts? if any sport should have guaranteed contracts, it's the violent NFL. pretty crazy how there is no accountability for players like moose who sign a $64M contract (with a small market team no less) and completely suck. teams should be allowed to get some type of insurance or something. (we could call it "suck insurance.")

I’m fully against the idea that MLBers shouldn’t have guaranteed contracts, but this does give me an idea….


What if there was some kind of “competitive balance” pool wherein teams could cut a guy off their roster and not be on the hook for his salary anymore, which would then be paid by a general fund maintained by the league?

Maybe you would have to limit it only one guy every season/every few seasons, or like you can’t do it again until that original guy’s contract would’ve ended.

But it would certainly give the “small market” teams more incentive to take a risk and spend/try to compete.

[westofyou]

It's one thing to have a bad season, but what bothers me in the accountability department is that he's been out of shape for HOW LONG NOW? He looks like a slob out there, like he just got off a night shift folding carboard boxes and downing an XL mountain dew and a box of doughnuts. The guy is struggling at least in part due to his lack of appreciation for the opportunity. Like you said, no accountability, and a strong players union. Both the NBA and MLB need what I call a "hard reset". Just stop paying players more than what doctors and teachers make. Return to the days of players holding jobs in the offseason. Sorry for the bitterness.

The combined revenue of all Major League Baseball teams was 9.56 billion U.S. dollars in 2020

But the players need to work that second job to get respect.

Okay

- - - Updated - - -

As for what do the Reds value in Moose... Williams was on the watch when they signed him and left the team 10 months later so I'm thinking that maybe nobody valued him more than Williams?

[#13]

Senzel was part of the discussion on Extra Innings over the weekend. I thought it was just me, but Senzel just looks like he doesn't enjoy any part of playing baseball. He just seems miserable and not enjoying the game. He is finally healthy but just doesn't seem to have anything special about his game. Also, I noticed whenever he puts out any effort at all on the field, its the same painful look on his face, bending over at the waist, and grabbing both knees. Something just doesn't seem right about him. Just my opinion, and hopefully he can turn things around in the second half and make some sort of offensive impact on the field....his career is slipping away.

[LeatherPants]

I’m fully against the idea that MLBers shouldn’t have guaranteed contracts, but this does give me an idea….


What if there was some kind of “competitive balance” pool wherein teams could cut a guy off their roster and not be on the hook for his salary anymore, which would then be paid by a general fund maintained by the league?

Maybe you would have to limit it only one guy every season/every few seasons, or like you can’t do it again until that original guy’s contract would’ve ended.

But it would certainly give the “small market” teams more incentive to take a risk and spend/try to compete.


This is a really good idea that the large market teams would never go for.

[westofyou]

Interesting comp



Rk Name From To Age G PA AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA OBP SLG OPS TB GDP HBP SH SF IBB OPS+
1 Mike Moustakas 2022 2022 33 46 177 151 19 33 6 0 3 14 2 0 19 35 .219 .322 .318 .640 48 4 5 0 2 0 73
2 Jesse Winker 2022 2022 28 66 278 234 20 49 9 0 4 24 0 0 42 50 .209 .327 .299 .626 70 4 0 0 2 1 8

[Chip R]

This is a direct result of MLB players having such a strong union.

Nothing wrong with that.

[Chip R]

I’m fully against the idea that MLBers shouldn’t have guaranteed contracts, but this does give me an idea….


What if there was some kind of “competitive balance” pool wherein teams could cut a guy off their roster and not be on the hook for his salary anymore, which would then be paid by a general fund maintained by the league?

Maybe you would have to limit it only one guy every season/every few seasons, or like you can’t do it again until that original guy’s contract would’ve ended.

But it would certainly give the “small market” teams more incentive to take a risk and spend/try to compete.

I saw some writer tweet about that this spring and I saved it for a while but finally deleted it from my bookmarks. Called it amnesty, I think. Moose would be the perfect candidate for that.

[westofyou]

Nothing wrong with that.

Minimum salary for MLB players in 1947 was $5,000. Twenty years later in 1967 it was $6,000

Hence they now have union and guys don't sell insurance in Spartanburg all winter