Turn Off Ads?
Page 9 of 13 FirstFirst ... 5678910111213 LastLast
Results 121 to 135 of 181

Thread: Geno to short?

  1. #121
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    26,472

    Re: Geno to short?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bourgeois Zee View Post
    I find it odd that you all assume Suarez to be historically awful at SS defense when he's actually showed you what he can do as a SS defensively.

    He's bad, absolutely. And he's likely to have lost a step. (Maybe.)

    Historically awful?

    Ummm... Unlikely in the extreme.
    He was -18 UZR/150 6 years ago. I just showed that that itself is historically bad. He will likely be worse. It’s unlikely he will be better.
    That’s why we’re playing, bro


  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #122
    Member Bourgeois Zee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    6,618

    Re: Geno to short?

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    He was -18 UZR/150 6 years ago. I just showed that that itself is historically bad. He will likely be worse. It’s unlikely he will be better.
    And, again, he'd have to be a couple magnitudes worse than that to not be better than what is projected by ZiPS for other Red SS options.

  4. #123
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    26,472

    Re: Geno to short?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bourgeois Zee View Post
    And, again, he'd have to be a couple magnitudes worse than that to not be better than what is projected by ZiPS for other Red SS options.
    At his best, Suarez is a +20 offensive player. If he is -20 on defense, he’s a replacement level player at SS. It’s likely he is worse.
    That’s why we’re playing, bro

  5. #124
    Member Wonderful Monds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    9,435

    Re: Geno to short?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bourgeois Zee View Post
    I find it odd that you all assume Suarez to be historically awful at SS defense when he's actually showed you what he can do as a SS defensively.

    He's bad, absolutely. And he's likely to have lost a step. (Maybe.)

    Historically awful?

    Ummm... Unlikely in the extreme.
    He’s already lost a step at 3B. I think he’ll still be okay at third, but I think he’s probably closer to being a first baseman than a shortstop at this point.

    I think he probably would be historically bad at SS, just because guys like Suarez at this point in their careers don’t get many chances to play that spot.

  6. #125
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    434

    Re: Geno to short?

    The best the Reds could hope for is like when they had Rich Aurilia at second: hands were okay, but range like a statue.

  7. #126
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2020
    Posts
    39

    Re: Geno to short?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kc61 View Post
    It’s likely to be Holder against RHP, Farmer against LHP, and Garcia in the minor leagues.

    Unless somebody better falls into the team’s lap off the waiver wire or in trade talks.

    I believe Reds already know this, although they are still shopping around. Could change during the season.
    You’re probably right and that is very underwhelming. I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a sprinkle of Senzel and Suarez there too, Bell loves to shuffle.

  8. #127
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    26,472

    Re: Geno to short?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bourgeois Zee View Post
    And, again, he'd have to be a couple magnitudes worse than that to not be better than what is projected by ZiPS for other Red SS options.
    Concerning what to expect from the SS position this year. It should be at the worst, replacement level. That is the very definition of replacement level, a player you can get for free when you have no other options.

    If the Reds are going to start a player who is below replacement level, that’s a bigger failure than not signing someone this offseason. Every team should be able to find a replacement level player to fill every roster spot. If the Reds don’t have a player on the roster who can provide replacement level production, they can easily find someone who will.
    That’s why we’re playing, bro

  9. #128
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,146

    Re: Geno to short?

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    Concerning what to expect from the SS position this year. It should be at the worst, replacement level. That is the very definition of replacement level, a player you can get for free when you have no other options.

    If the Reds are going to start a player who is below replacement level, that’s a bigger failure than not signing someone this offseason. Every team should be able to find a replacement level player to fill every roster spot. If the Reds don’t have a player on the roster who can provide replacement level production, they can easily find someone who will.
    The platoon of Farmer/Holder is gonna be at least replacement value. The question is if the pair of them can hold up for the whole season.
    "Even a bad day at the ballpark beats the snot out of most other good days. I'll take my scorecard and pencil and beer and hot dog and rage at the dips and cheer at the highs, but I'm not ever going to stop loving this game and this team and nobody will ever take that away from me." Roy Tucker October 2010

  10. #129
    Member mth123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    25,444

    Re: Geno to short?

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    Concerning what to expect from the SS position this year. It should be at the worst, replacement level. That is the very definition of replacement level, a player you can get for free when you have no other options. I'm not convinced we

    If the Reds are going to start a player who is below replacement level, that’s a bigger failure than not signing someone this offseason. Every team should be able to find a replacement level player to fill every roster spot. If the Reds don’t have a player on the roster who can provide replacement level production, they can easily find someone who will.
    I think expecting replacement level play from SS on this team is a generous assumption. There are sub-replacement players every year. Replacement level isn't a given.
    "All I can tell them is pick a good one and sock it." --BABE RUTH

  11. Likes:

    *BaseClogger* (02-28-2021),Mitri (02-26-2021)

  12. #130
    Member Mitri's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    2,725

    Re: Geno to short?

    Quote Originally Posted by dfs View Post
    The platoon of Farmer/Holder is gonna be at least replacement value. The question is if the pair of them can hold up for the whole season.
    That is a huge assumption. They are easily two of the worst hitters slated for playing time in all MLB 21, and one is barely a SS.

  13. Likes:

    *BaseClogger* (02-28-2021)

  14. #131
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    26,472

    Re: Geno to short?

    Quote Originally Posted by mth123 View Post
    I think expecting replacement level play from SS on this team is a generous assumption. There are sub-replacement players every year. Replacement level isn't a given.
    In 2019, there were only 6 position players who qualified for the batting title who had negative WAR. 3 were Pujols, Miggy and Hosmer, who were only playing because of their contracts.

    There are guys who put up negative WAR, but they almost never are starters.
    That’s why we’re playing, bro

  15. #132
    Member Bourgeois Zee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    6,618

    Re: Geno to short?

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    In 2019, there were only 6 position players who qualified for the batting title who had negative WAR. 3 were Pujols, Miggy and Hosmer, who were only playing because of their contracts.

    There are guys who put up negative WAR, but they almost never are starters.
    And again (fourth time now), you are underestimating the hole projections have pegged for the Reds at SS.

    I'd venture to guess it's the biggest hole in baseball, bar none.

    The BEST the Reds have projected, according to ZiPS, is -0.7. The replacements, if given enough ABs to qualify, end up at -0.7 too.

    And your numbers are misleading too. There are only six who qualified for the batting title who garnered negative value. There are a hundred guys who earn negative value who have more than 100 ABs. Most of those guys with putrid numbers get replaced. Unfortunately, the Reds' replacements project to be just as bad as those who they might replace. (Again, that hole is massive.)

    That's why we're having this circular conversation.

  16. Likes:

    *BaseClogger* (02-28-2021),Edd Roush (02-26-2021)

  17. #133
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    26,472

    Re: Geno to short?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bourgeois Zee View Post
    And again (fourth time now), you are underestimating the hole projections have pegged for the Reds at SS.

    I'd venture to guess it's the biggest hole in baseball, bar none.

    The BEST the Reds have projected, according to ZiPS, is -0.7. The replacements, if given enough ABs to qualify, end up at -0.7 too.

    And your numbers are misleading too. There are only six who qualified for the batting title who garnered negative value. There are a hundred guys who earn negative value who have more than 100 ABs. Most of those guys with putrid numbers get replaced. Unfortunately, the Reds' replacements project to be just as bad as those who they might replace. (Again, that hole is massive.)

    That's why we're having this circular conversation.
    First, you keep using ZIPS. Steamer, for instance, has Garcia as exactly a replacement level player, zero WAR. You realize these projections have gigantic error bars, so when discussing them at this level of detail, it’s rather meaningless.

    Second, you made my point with your point about guys who get replaced if they produce negative WAR. That will happen with the Reds too, if that occurs. Teams pretty much always find a way to get a player who is at least replacement level to start at every position, even if it takes a mistake or two. I am confident that will happen with the Reds too.

    If it doesn’t and the Reds go an entire season with below replacement level production at SS, then we have much bigger worries as fans, because that means the organization is incompetent.
    That’s why we’re playing, bro

  18. #134
    Member RedsManRick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Guelph, ON
    Posts
    18,885

    Re: Geno to short?

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    I showed you precisouly where the math falls short. It never has had to consider a defensive SS that bad. It is based on a history of teams always playing a decent enough defensive SS.

    There are examples every year of teams that could move a player to SS that would be terrible defensively, open up a spot for a strong offensive player, but they always choose to have a decent defensive SS, even if that means that they are getting terrible offensive production at SS. Obviously most teams don’t have to make this decision, but it seems there always are a few every season, and they always choose to have a decent defensive SS. This isn’t theory. This is looking at history and drawing conclusions.

    Concerning the Reds and Suarez. Last year, they had the option of moving him to SS, putting Senzel back at 3B and Shogo in CF. They chose to pick up Galvis’ option instead, which resulted in a glut of OF and not enough playing time for them all. That first option is easily the best, if Suarez could handle SS. Clearly the Reds concluded that he couldn’t.
    1) None of that changes what the math would be. The next 30 runs aren't suddenly magic when it comes to wins and losses. That is, unless you just keep asserting they are I guess? That teams haven't played guys that poor isn't a sign that it would completely crater your team. It would just be dumb in light of #2.

    2) I explained in detail why it is that teams don't play guys who are that bad defensive at SS: There's no reason to. It doesn't give them any advantage because it craters the player's total production relative to freely available alternatives and there are invariably spots open lower on the defense spectrum.

    3) Why are you focused on this hypothetical of a -50 SS when Geno would be nothing close to that?

    As for what the Reds did or didn't do, I'm not arguing about their decision making. Besides, it's not about some binary "can he handle it or it not". It's about costs, tradeoffs, uncertainty, etc. -- across multiple positions impacting the whole roster. For example, Nick Senzel finished 2019 with labrum surgery -- I suspect that had something to do with not considering him at 3B.
    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.

  19. Likes:

    Edd Roush (02-26-2021)

  20. #135
    Member 757690's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Dayton
    Posts
    26,472

    Re: Geno to short?

    Quote Originally Posted by RedsManRick View Post
    1) None of that changes what the math would be. The next 30 runs aren't suddenly magic when it comes to wins and losses. That is, unless you just keep asserting they are I guess? That teams haven't played guys that poor isn't a sign that it would completely crater your team. It would just be dumb in light of #2.

    2) I explained in detail why it is that teams don't play guys who are that bad defensive at SS: There's no reason to. It doesn't give them any advantage because it craters the player's total production relative to freely available alternatives and there are invariably spots open lower on the defense spectrum.

    3) Why are you focused on this hypothetical of a -50 SS when Geno would be nothing close to that?

    As for what the Reds did or didn't do, I'm not arguing about their decision making. Besides, it's not about some binary "can he handle it or it not". It's about costs, tradeoffs, uncertainty, etc. -- across multiple positions impacting the whole roster. For example, Nick Senzel finished 2019 with labrum surgery -- I suspect that had something to do with not considering him at 3B.
    First, concerning Senzel, I talked laid it out not as a binary choice, but included all the variables. Take a look again. Why would a labrum surgery effect him 3B but not CF? Zero logic there.

    Second, you’re trying to have it both ways. At first you’re saying the math works for Suarez to move to SS. Now you are saying teams don’t do it because the math doesn’t work. Which is it? Clearly teams have had similar situations to the one the Reds are in now before. And they never have moved the 3B to SS.

    If you want to argue that the math doesn’t work, fine. Then the math doesn’t work and the Reds shouldn’t try Suarez at SS. But if it does, then why haven’t other teams tried it before?
    That’s why we’re playing, bro


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