Turn Off Ads?
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 89

Thread: Reds to pick up Galvis option

  1. #31
    Member UKWhoDey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Lexington
    Posts
    104

    Re: Reds to pick up Galvis option

    Quote Originally Posted by Kc61 View Post
    Galvis provides optionality -

    Reds can acquire a shortstop and play Freddie at second.

    Reds can acquire a second baseman and play Freddie at short.

    Reds can acquire a CFer and pair Senzel/Galvis in middle infield.

    I think Reds will make one of those moves - and a second move for a C or a corner OF.
    Thats how I see it. A flex guy who can capably fill in, and gives us options to explore what best guy we can pick up to be a mainstay at one of those 3 postions.


    I think Senzel needs to be at 2nd. Why cant we put Lorenzen in CF, get that bat in the lineup consistently, and go pickup some filthy bullpen arms?

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #32
    Member Tom Servo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    32,443

    Re: Reds to pick up Galvis option

    Quote Originally Posted by UKWhoDey View Post
    Thats how I see it. A flex guy who can capably fill in, and gives us options to explore what best guy we can pick up to be a mainstay at one of those 3 postions.


    I think Senzel needs to be at 2nd. Why cant we put Lorenzen in CF, get that bat in the lineup consistently, and go pickup some filthy bullpen arms?
    Lorenzen hit .208/.283/.313 last season.
    “I don’t care,” Votto said of passing his friend and former teammate. “He’s in the past. Bye-bye, Jay.”

  4. Likes:

    Coopdaddy67 (11-02-2019),Edd Roush (11-01-2019),Griffey012 (11-01-2019),Ironman92 (11-01-2019),Mitri (11-01-2019),NC Reds (11-01-2019),RedsManRick (11-01-2019),Revering4Blue (11-01-2019),wlf WV (11-01-2019)

  5. #33
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    2,130

    Re: Reds to pick up Galvis option

    Quote Originally Posted by UKWhoDey View Post
    Why cant we put Lorenzen in CF, get that bat in the lineup consistently, and go pickup some filthy bullpen arms?
    Because Billy Hamilton would be more productive than Lorenzen.

    Not sure why, but I get the feeling choosing Galvis over J Iglesias might mean they plan to make a play for Didi. If they had offered a contract to Iglesias it would have been to play SS, and they would not pursue other options. But they bypassed him. Choosing to keep Galvis instead allows room for something different.

  6. Likes:

    REDREAD (11-01-2019)

  7. #34
    Pitter Patter TRF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Letterkenny
    Posts
    19,918

    Re: Reds to pick up Galvis option

    I think a contributing factor to Ward getting axed was the insane regression of Peraza. Not the only reason, but Senzel wasn't as advertised, and for the most part, the AAA success of VanMeter, BOG and even Aquino's 2 week HORRIFIC slump had to be the deciding factor. Peraza is young, still fast, and still has upside. But he needs the right coaching. Again, either the Reds believe he has greatness in him, or they better make someone else believe it.

    Also, I believe the FO thinks that Senzel's recovery is going to take longer than expected. Meaning get bodies for CF, get bodies for MI.
    Use a Cocktail Stick!

  8. #35
    Member Ron Madden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    10,868

    Re: Reds to pick up Galvis option

    Retaining Galvis doesn’t prevent the Reds from pursuing more offense and defense in the middle infield. If the club is unable to bring back free agent José Iglesias or add another shortstop, it's comfortable giving the job to Galvis since he has played there most of his career.

    If Iglesias or another shortstop is signed, Galvis could play second base. If both positions are filled from the outside, he could also be a useful utility player.

    https://www.mlb.com/reds/news/freddy...tion-exercised

  9. Likes:

    757690 (11-01-2019)

  10. #36
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    24,426

    Re: Reds to pick up Galvis option

    Worst case scenario, the Reds acquire a better SS and 2B and then trade Galvis and have to eat half his salary, which is a few million dollars. A tiny risk taken, and I doubt they would have to eat any of his contract if they trade him.
    “We’re going to get the pitching.” -Bob Castellini
    “You got the pitching, now what?” - Reds fans

  11. Likes:

    REDREAD (11-01-2019)

  12. #37
    Stat Wanker Hodiernus RedsManRick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Toronto, ON
    Posts
    18,727

    Re: Reds to pick up Galvis option

    Nothing wrong with $5.5M for a competent super-utility guy.
    Games are won on run differential -- scoring more than your opponent. Runs are runs, scored or prevented they all count the same. Worry about scoring more and allowing fewer, not which positions contribute to which side of the equation or how "consistent" you are at your current level of performance.

  13. Likes:

    Chip R (11-04-2019),Coopdaddy67 (11-02-2019),Edd Roush (11-01-2019),Old school 1983 (11-02-2019),REDREAD (11-01-2019)

  14. #38
    Someday Never Comes mth123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    24,010

    Re: Reds to pick up Galvis option

    Quote Originally Posted by Kc61 View Post
    Sub-.500 because of Freddie Galvis? Overreaction.

    Heyman’s tweet called Galvis a “great defender” today. He had 52 extra base hits this season. He’s a low OBP hitter but if he hits seventh or eighth in the lineup he’s a positive factor.

    It always was likely Reds would exercise. It costs them $4.5 million (over and above the buyout cost) which is very reasonable for a starting player. Reds can now seek stars or near-stars to fill a couple of other positions.
    Only one guy can hit 7th and only one guy can hit 8th. The Reds cup runneth over with those guys. They needed to aim for better at the spots they have open. They didn't need to lock into 120 or so starts from a guy whose career high OBP was .309 in 2017. It's a lost opportunity to try to improve. Votto, Barnhart, Aquino, Galvis, the pitcher... how many line-up spots can they lock into at below average production? Right now I count 5 spots with Senzel being a question mark in another. They have Suarez and Winker. Even if they could get Mookie Betts without giving up the entire future, there is no way a team with that many below average spots can win 80 games. The Reds need 3 above average bats brought in and locking Galvis into one of the spots makes that much less likely to happen.
    "All I can tell them is pick a good one and sock it." --BABE RUTH

  15. #39
    Someday Never Comes mth123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    24,010

    Re: Reds to pick up Galvis option

    Quote Originally Posted by RedsManRick View Post
    Nothing wrong with $5.5M for a competent super-utility guy.
    Except in Cincy a guy making $5.5 Million will be the third highest paid position player on the roster and will start at least 120 games. Realistically, the Reds had two open positions - SS and whichever position between CF and 2B that Senzel doesn't play. They needed to acquire above average bats at both and hope that a couple of the others surprise or they significantly upgrade one of the other spots already locked up (I'm looking at you Tucker Barnhart). Bringing Galvis back at what I expect will be a nearly every day line-up fixture makes that much less likely.
    "All I can tell them is pick a good one and sock it." --BABE RUTH

  16. #40
    Member Tom Servo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    32,443

    Re: Reds to pick up Galvis option

    Quote Originally Posted by mth123 View Post
    Only one guy can hit 7th and only one guy can hit 8th. The Reds cup runneth over with those guys. They needed to aim for better at the spots they have open. They didn't need to lock into 120 or so starts from a guy whose career high OBP was .309 in 2017. It's a lost opportunity to try to improve. Votto, Barnhart, Aquino, Galvis, the pitcher... how many line-up spots can they lock into at below average production? Right now I count 5 spots with Senzel being a question mark in another. They have Suarez and Winker. Even if they could get Mookie Betts without giving up the entire future, there is no way a team with that many below average spots can win 80 games. The Reds need 3 above average bats brought in and locking Galvis into one of the spots makes that much less likely to happen.
    Barnhart and Aquino don't seem locked in to anything, Williams even said as much regarding Aquino. And while I definitely have doubts about the sustainability of Aquino's game but I don't think you can say with any degree of certainty that he's a lock to provide below average production.

    I just think you're trying to read too many tea leaves right now when it should come down to whether you think Galvis is any good or not. I think while you could certainly do better I'm fine with his general profile of glove and pop.
    “I don’t care,” Votto said of passing his friend and former teammate. “He’s in the past. Bye-bye, Jay.”

  17. #41
    Someday Never Comes mth123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    24,010

    Re: Reds to pick up Galvis option

    For the record, I didn't want Galvis, Iglesias, Peraza or Dietrich brought back. Go into the off-season with all the resources free and the positions open. If they end up needing to settle for somebody like Galvis, there will be guys like him available for cheap in February. Intstead they paid $5.5 Million (more than players like him will likely get) and locked up a spot, which is just one less spots available for a better player.
    "All I can tell them is pick a good one and sock it." --BABE RUTH

  18. #42
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    369

    Re: Reds to pick up Galvis option

    In his 116 PA with the Reds last season, .234/.284/.695 for a WRC+ of 74.

  19. #43
    Someday Never Comes mth123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    24,010

    Re: Reds to pick up Galvis option

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Servo View Post
    Barnhart and Aquino don't seem locked in to anything, Williams even said as much regarding Aquino. And while I definitely have doubts about the sustainability of Aquino's game but I don't think you can say with any degree of certainty that he's a lock to provide below average production.

    I just think you're trying to read too many tea leaves right now when it should come down to whether you think Galvis is any good or not. I think while you could certainly do better I'm fine with his general profile of glove and pop.
    I'm looking at the team and I see two above average bats in Suarez and Winker. The rest are question marks like Aquino and Senzel and none of the others profile to be above average. Hitting Galvis 8th is fine as long as the rest of the line-up isn't filled with guys who should also be hitting 8th. I think the Reds have 7, 8 and 9 locked up for cheap already. Aquino, Pitcher, Senzel. The other positions need more offense.
    "All I can tell them is pick a good one and sock it." --BABE RUTH

  20. #44
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    27,585

    Re: Reds to pick up Galvis option

    Quote Originally Posted by mth123 View Post
    Only one guy can hit 7th and only one guy can hit 8th. The Reds cup runneth over with those guys. They needed to aim for better at the spots they have open. They didn't need to lock into 120 or so starts from a guy whose career high OBP was .309 in 2017. It's a lost opportunity to try to improve. Votto, Barnhart, Aquino, Galvis, the pitcher... how many line-up spots can they lock into at below average production? Right now I count 5 spots with Senzel being a question mark in another. They have Suarez and Winker. Even if they could get Mookie Betts without giving up the entire future, there is no way a team with that many below average spots can win 80 games. The Reds need 3 above average bats brought in and locking Galvis into one of the spots makes that much less likely to happen.
    Add two bats to the top or middle of the order.

    Galvis then hits seventh, maybe eighth.

    Winker, Suarez, Senzel, Votto is four hitters. Aquino is five hitters. Add two more - and you have seven hitters. Before you get to Galvis.

    Even subtract one from the list and Galvis hits seventh.

    The Rede are not going to scrap the entire team. They will look to add two bats. My hope is Grandal and Marte. But substitute anyone you want. It can work fine - with some bullpen additions too.
    Last edited by Kc61; 11-01-2019 at 02:34 PM.

  21. Likes:

    REDREAD (11-01-2019)

  22. #45
    Where's my chair? REDREAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    26,077

    Re: Reds to pick up Galvis option

    Quote Originally Posted by mth123 View Post
    Except in Cincy a guy making $5.5 Million will be the third highest paid position player on the roster and will start at least 120 games. Realistically, the Reds had two open positions - SS and whichever position between CF and 2B that Senzel doesn't play. They needed to acquire above average bats at both and hope that a couple of the others surprise or they significantly upgrade one of the other spots already locked up (I'm looking at you Tucker Barnhart). Bringing Galvis back at what I expect will be a nearly every day line-up fixture makes that much less likely.
    Another thread had a quote from DW , it looks like Senzel is plan "A" for CF.
    Whether we agree with that or not, that seems to be the Reds' plan.

    So that means, two holes in the middle infield. Only in house people are Peraza, Van Meter, and now probably Galvis. So Galvis can be plan B for 2b and SS, and the Reds can still upgrade one or both of those spots.
    I get what you are saying, but since Galvis had a 1 million buyout, it's really only costing 4.5 million to keep Galvis for insurance, and I Agree with others, Galvis could easily be salary dumped if it came to that.

    Sure, the Reds still need to add 2-3 bats, as you said, but I think this actually gives them more flexibility, not less. We don't want to be in Feburary and be stressing out that Peraza (And maybe Blandino) is the only guy able to even play SS and have the Reds make a desperation move on someone worse that Galvis.. Galvis gives them a decent "floor" at one middle infield position.
    Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | cumberlandreds | Gallen5862 | Kinsm | Plus Plus | Powel Crosley | RedlegJake | The Operator