Reds are moving in right direction

[Jefferson24]

Last year we finished with 73 wins. If we finish at .500 this year we hill have 81. If we can continue that level of improvement we would be looking at 89 wins in 2007.

I'm disappointed that we haven't finished this year as strong as we started the year. However, after last year the thought of a .500 year for 2006 seemed to be something I would be happy with. Hopefully if continue improving at the same rate and we can expect to be contenders next year.

It is sad though that in such a down year for the NL we couldn't have played a little better and been contenders this year. I guess this year isn't actually over yet but it sure feels that way after this past week. I still think were moving in the right direction and I'm optimistic about our future.

I wouldn't mind a 10 game winning steak starting Friday night, either.

[guttle11]

This year isn't over. We can still make the playoffs. That has to be kept on the front burner.

But taking a step back, you're completely right. Trading Pena, Kearns, and Lopez, along with a few good acquisitions, gave this team a clear, young nucleus to build around: Dunn, Edwin, Harang, Arroyo, Phillips, Freel and Ross. Throw in guys like Bailey, Votto, Bray, Harris, and Denorfia, who all have potential to make contributions in the next couple of years, and you have quite a bit of young talent.

The future does indeed look bright, but the present doesn't look so bad either.

[flyer85]

is the improvement real or has randomness just produced a slightly better outcome?

Just because the Reds win a few more games doesn't necessarily mean real progress has been made(it doesn't mean that is hasn't either). Looking at overall win totals doesn't tell the entire story.

[redsmetz]

I just took a look at the 1990 Reds as well as the 1988 and 1989 team. The changes in 1990 were not dramatic. Marianno Duncan, a mid season pickup in '89 had a one of his best years. The Billy Hatcher pickup right at the start of the season was huge. Other players were coming into their own or continuing their good play from earlier years.

Clearly the bullpen coalesced although much of the pitching staff was the same as the previous year.

I think if you look at other Reds championship years, the change from one year to another was not dramatic (save perhaps 1972 with the acquisition of Joe Morgan et al). I'm also sure there are team historians here who know this far better than I do.

Certainly this team needs work, but we have the nucleus of a good team here. Let's build on it.

[Jefferson24]

is the improvement real or has randomness just produced a slightly better outcome?

Just because the Reds win a few more games doesn't necessarily mean real progress has been made(it doesn't mean that is hasn't either). Looking at overall win totals doesn't tell the entire story.

Time is the test. If it's only randomness then next year we revert back to the sub .500 record and probably attribute this year's improvement to the weak condition of the NL. If we have indeed improved then we should expect to see an equal or better record next year.

I'm not a stats guy but I would guess this year’s team numbers are better than last years. The true test is how we do next year.

[flyer85]

Time is the test. If it's only randomness then next year we revert back to the sub .500 record and probably attribute this year's improvement to the weak condition of the NL.

not necessarily. Just dig further.
How is the overall talent level? Is it getting better?
How many had subpar years?
How about career years?
Who is likely to continue to improve?
Who is likely to decline?
Is there a major league ready talent in the minors?

[dfs]

is the improvement real or has randomness just produced a slightly better outcome?

Boy that's an interesting question isn't it?

For all the carping about Jerry Narron, since ditching Dave Miley the reds have gone from a terrible team to a 500 team. Wayne Krivski has turned over more than half the roster and....
they still don't have a bullpen they can count on.
they still play terrible defensive baseball, as bad as Bob Boone's teams.

I think the truth is that the reds were not as bad as they played under Miley and Boone, but also not as good as their early season record (and a weak league) made them look a week and a half ago.

Krivski inherited a collection of talent that he's trying to turn into a baseball team. He still has a ways to go.

They have the pieces of an effective bullpen. They need to figure out how to make it work.
They have the pieces of a starting rotation. They need to figure out how to make it work.
They need a shortstop. One guy for the position.
They need to figure out what to do with Junior. He needs to be out of centerfield. He can't cut it out there.
They need somebody to stabilize Encarnacion and Dunn defensively. Both those guys win games with their bats, but they also make our pitchers work too hard by extending too many innings.

I know how I would solve most of those problems. The reds need to figure out how THEY will solve them. They aren't going to be better than 500, till they do solve them.

[dfs]

I just took a look at the 1990 Reds as well as the 1988 and 1989 team.

Well, yeah, but the 85 through 88 teams were second place teams that folks all over baseball thought should be competing for the divisional title. Nobody thought that about this crew. The 89 team was the same team, but the season got destroyed because of the investigation into the manager's gambling problems.

The biggest change from the 89 team to the 90 team was who the manager was. Lou made a few tweaks and took Pete's team to win the series. That's not to belittle either man, just the way of things.

[UK Reds Fan]

is the improvement real or has randomness just produced a slightly better outcome?

Just because the Reds win a few more games doesn't necessarily mean real progress has been made(it doesn't mean that is hasn't either). Looking at overall win totals doesn't tell the entire story.

I would tend to agree with your sentiment.

Assuming the Cubs get some of their pitching injuries addressed by other arms, Milwaukee with their farm system appears to be looking to improve next year, etc... The Reds need to continue overhauling our issues to truly improve.

Unfortunately, one of our main issues IMO are in the heart of our lineup....Griffey and Dunn. 2 below average defenders, Dunn appears to have no ability to improve but instead is plateauing, Griff gives you less and less hope as the years go by that he is a viable middle of order hitter.

Outside of EdE, I don't see any middle of order guys that give you great confidence. Instead we'll be relying on a total lineup to give above average production which basically hopes and prays that Phillips, Ross and Hateburg and duplicate their offensive performance. And that the SS (or 2b if Phillips were to switch to SS) spot can be filled with a solid hitter next year.

I think their is a greater likelihood that we stay the same or digress as opposed to actually improving in 2007.

[HumnHilghtFreel]

Like others have said, this season isn't over yet.

But I do agree that we are a team on the rise. Nobody thought prior to the season we'd be in a position to make the post-season, even in a weak NL. That's a testament to our team.

I'm honestly excited for this offseason to see what kind of noise we make in the free agent market. The Kearns/Lopez trade freed up a big chunk of change for us on top of new ownership that says they're willing to pony up some cash to put out a winner. Adding some key pieces in the offseason to the core we already have in place is really exciting to me.

Obviously I'll be dissappointed if we miss the playoffs this year, but the fact that we have a team that fought its way out of obscurity to be relevant this late in the year is really encouraging for the coming seasons.

[redsmetz]

I would tend to agree with your sentiment.

Assuming the Cubs get some of their pitching injuries addressed by other arms, Milwaukee with their farm system appears to be looking to improve next year, etc... The Reds need to continue overhauling our issues to truly improve.

Unfortunately, one of our main issues IMO are in the heart of our lineup....Griffey and Dunn. 2 below average defenders, Dunn appears to have no ability to improve but instead is plateauing, Griff gives you less and less hope as the years go by that he is a viable middle of order hitter.

Outside of EdE, I don't see any middle of order guys that give you great confidence. Instead we'll be relying on a total lineup to give above average production which basically hopes and prays that Phillips, Ross and Hateburg and duplicate their offensive performance. And that the SS (or 2b if Phillips were to switch to SS) spot can be filled with a solid hitter next year.

I think their is a greater likelihood that we stay the same or digress as opposed to actually improving in 2007.

Sometimes RedsZone is maddening (what do I mean sometimes?)!

On one hand you talk about Dunn and Griffey and defense and suggest they are plateuing or diminising. Griffey is an open question. The clock certainly is ticking. Whether he should switch positions is, IMO, a legitimate question. All the clamoring that Dunn has missed his peak gives me pause. I disagree and I think if the Reds let him go, Reds fans will rue that day.

I think Phillips is coming into his own and I think he may well slide over to shortstop NEXT year. Ross is a question mark, but there's no reason he cannot continue like he has this year. It is NOT a given that his hitting will diminish to the BS "career norms". We could easily be witnessing the period in his career that adjusts those norms (after all you can NEVER know career norms or even a career year until after the fact).

No one suggests that Hatteberg is a long term solution. Like the Valentin extension, having him next year gives much needed depth to a position and if he's anywhere near his career norm (yes, at his age, you can at least allude to it), he's a good cog. I agree with those who suggest he may be sharing time with a developing Votto or perhaps some other player who comes along.

The maddening thing is the gloomy gusses who just assume the sky will fall. Do you folks go through you whole lives assuming the worst?

[Johnny Footstool]

Career norms aren't BS. They are what they are -- the normal production of a player based on his previous production. That's not saying players can't improve, have career years, or figure something out and suddenly reach a higher plateau. But in general, they tend to stay near their norms.

[westofyou]

Dunn appears to have no ability to improve but instead is plateauing,

If the plateau is 40 HRs 100 Runs 100 RBI then sign me up to that type of plateau.

ALL LEAGUES & TEAMS
ALL YEARS
ALL POSITIONS
HOMERUNS >= 40
RUNS >= 100
RBI >= 100


1    Babe Ruth                11   
T2   Barry Bonds               7   
T2   Alex Rodriguez            7   
T4   Willie Mays               6   
T4   Ken Griffey Jr.           6   
T6   Hank Aaron                5   
T6   Jimmie Foxx               5   
T6   Sammy Sosa                5   
T6   Ralph Kiner               5   
T6   Lou Gehrig                5   
T11  Jim Thome                 4   
T11  Frank Thomas              4   
T11  Duke Snider               4   
T11  Manny Ramirez             4   
T15  Eddie Mathews             3   
T15  Albert Pujols             3   
T15  Albert Belle              3   
T15  Hank Greenberg            3   
T15  Johnny Mize               3   
T15  Mark McGwire              3   
T15  Shawn Green               3   
T15  Mike Schmidt              3   
T15  Carlos Delgado            3   
T15  Jeff Bagwell              3   
T15  Andres Galarraga          3

[dfs]

If the plateau is 40 HRs 100 Runs 100 RBI then sign me up to that type of plateau.

I'll take the second on that motion.

In an optimal world Dunn would be a DH on an American League team, but, if I'm the reds GM, you're going to have to offer me some serious bait to even open the discussion.

Dunn doesn't have to get better to be a great player, but I would appreciate it if he could somehow even out his defence.

[remdog]

Sometimes RedsZone is maddening (what do I mean sometimes?)!

On one hand you talk about Dunn and Griffey and defense and suggest they are plateuing or diminising. Griffey is an open question. The clock certainly is ticking. Whether he should switch positions is, IMO, a legitimate question. All the clamoring that Dunn has missed his peak gives me pause. I disagree and I think if the Reds let him go, Reds fans will rue that day.

I think Phillips is coming into his own and I think he may well slide over to shortstop NEXT year. Ross is a question mark, but there's no reason he cannot continue like he has this year. It is NOT a given that his hitting will diminish to the BS "career norms". We could easily be witnessing the period in his career that adjusts those norms (after all you can NEVER know career norms or even a career year until after the fact).

No one suggests that Hatteberg is a long term solution. Like the Valentin extension, having him next year gives much needed depth to a position and if he's anywhere near his career norm (yes, at his age, you can at least allude to it), he's a good cog. I agree with those who suggest he may be sharing time with a developing Votto or perhaps some other player who comes along.

The maddening thing is the gloomy gusses who just assume the sky will fall. Do you folks go through you whole lives assuming the worst?

Sometimes? Come back after 6 years and tell me about it.

The Reds need someone that has the 'nads to tell Jr. that it's time to switch positions---either a corner slot or first base. (That guy is obviously not Narron.) Likewise, the Reds need that same person to tell Dunn that it's time to switch to first base if Jr. wants left field. I would not let him go easily if I could get someone that would be a #1 starter with a future ahead of himself.

There is every reason to think that Ross will become this years' Jason LaRue and vise versa. It's called his career. He never showed much potential in the minors and even less in the majors. Maybe it was the Skyline Chilli that gave him a boost. It's the only thing I can think of outside of 'career year' or that stuff that Barry Bonds liked.

Phillips is the only player mentioned above who had the potential in the minors to justify his play this year so I think there's a chance that he could be a solid Major Leaguer long-term.

Hatteberg was brought in to be bench strength and the fact that he has started so much just points out the fact that the Reds starting eight has big holes. Another 'career year' player, I think Hat could be that solid bench guy we need next year but I certainly wouldn't want to bank on him as my starter at first and have to hope he duplicates this years' numbers.

Rem