Reds renew all coaches except...........
in [Cincinnati Reds]
|
Prev: Pitching Coach
Next: ASBCR 2009 questions
From: David Short on 11 Oct 2009 11:13 "tom dunne" <dunnetg(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >On Oct 10, 10:02 pm, "David Short" >> It's not clear to me what Ryan Hannigan's offensive production really >> will >> be. Hitters in the 8 slot in the NL tend to see a real blip in OBP simply >> because there's no reason to give them anything to hit with the pitcher >> up >> behind them. It seems to me that Hannigan got this kind of boost this >> year. > >Right, but consider the competition. The 2009 Reds dedicated the >majority of the second slot ABs to a combination of Hairston, Janish, >Gonzalez and McDonald. All Hannigan has to do is get on base more >often than that group and he's an upgrade. Lop 50 points off his OBP >and he still outperforms the hitters that Dusty put out there. One of the major assumptions of any statistical view of the game is that events are independent. Everybody knows that it isn't true, but we ignore it (by varying degrees) in order to be able to add that discourse to our game. I'm not convinced how much of Hannigan's game is an illusion based on small sample size and the # 8 halo and the fact that it's a pretty empty OBP driven game. In return you can argue that I'm being stubborn and I'll agree that Hannigan deserves credit for what he has done, but in my heart I'll still think it's a heck of a lot easier to draw a bunch of walks and empty singles in front of the pitcher than it is to do the same with Joey Votto hitting behind you. I hear what you're saying Tom and to a degree I agree. I'm just not convinced. dfs
From: john smith on 11 Oct 2009 11:34 In regard to Hannigan, I just can't get over the 9 rbis all year, regardless that he hits 8th. For all the arguments that an 8th hitter doesn't get balls to hit, that is just a big excuse. First of all if your hitting 8th, your not as good a hitter as the 7 other guys in front of you. The pitcher has a natural let down against batters hitting at the end of the order. Especially with two out the opposing pitcher wants to pitch to that 8th guy so his opposite number leads off the next inning....So their are arguments pro and con on the 8th hitter...... What I saw from Hannigan was a bunch of punchy hits to the opposite field for the most part. It was a nice story but IMO opinion he is a nice back up catcher. His defense was very nice and if he plays 30 games a year for the Reds I am fine with that. They need to go out and find a starting catcher and ss to contend in 2010.
From: Bob Braun on 11 Oct 2009 11:43 "john smith" <eddygdvd(a)msn.com> wrote in message news:17008-4AD1FB15-8711(a)baytvnwsxa002.msntv.msn.com... > > > What I saw from Hannigan was a bunch of punchy hits to the opposite > field for the most part. It was a nice story but IMO opinion he is a > nice back up catcher. His defense was very nice and if he plays 30 games > a year for the Reds I am fine with that. They need to go out and find a > starting catcher and ss to contend in 2010. If the catcher can hit, they can use Janish at ss. Don't ask me who that is. Not a lot of Joe Mauer types floating around out there.
From: David Short on 11 Oct 2009 12:03 "Bob Braun" <oxinfla(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:hasuel$f62$1(a)news.eternal- > If the catcher can hit, they can use Janish at ss. Don't ask me who that > is. Not a lot of Joe Mauer types floating around out there. Assuming the following are set Joey Votto Brandon Phillips Scott Rolen Jay Bruce Drew Stubbs/Chris Dickerson that leaves left field, catcher and shortstop. At least one of those positions has to have an offensive upgrade over what it provided last year (and Bruce needs to take a step forward and one of Stubbs/Dickerson has to not be a train wreck) and they can compete. I don't have a problem with Hannigan in a part time role. I have a problem with penciling him in as a full time starter when he has trouble staying healthy. I think they need at least another 80 game catcher on the roster. It's easy to add together Gomes and Nix power numbers and say "left field wasn't a problem" but the weirdest split of the season has to go to Gomes who hit like a tiger when he played anywhere else and then hit like a lamb when he was in left field. The numbers guy in me wants to say its a sample thing and let it go, but I'm not sure. Reds left fielders put up a 720 ops which is pretty terrible considering the home park. Gomes split his playing time 50/50 in left and right. As a rightfielder he put up a 301/365/619 which is just pretty dang darned good, but as a left fielder he went 231/289/462 which is pretty dang darned awful. If the reds can put up a 301/365/619 in left (and bruce takes a step forward and one of Dickerson/Stubbs doesn't crash and burn and Rolen doesn't get hurt and Votto doesn't go Psycho) the reds can afford to play Janish and Hannigan plus an empty bat partner. Of course a good organization would upgrade as many bases as possible. dfs
From: Zuke on 12 Oct 2009 11:11
On Sat, 10 Oct 2009, tom dunne wrote: >On 10:02 pm, "David Short" > <David.No.Sh...(a)Spam.Wright.Please.Edu> wrote: >> "tom dunne" <dunn...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message >>> Speaking of catchers, I think the most effective 1-2 for this team >>> would have been Chris Dickerson leading off and Hannigan/Hernandez >>> batting second. >> >> It's not clear to me what Ryan Hannigan's offensive production really will >> be. Hitters in the 8 slot in the NL tend to see a real blip in OBP simply >> because there's no reason to give them anything to hit with the pitcher up >> behind them. It seems to me that Hannigan got this kind of boost this year. > > Right, but consider the competition. The 2009 Reds dedicated the > majority of the second slot ABs to a combination of Hairston, Janish, > Gonzalez and McDonald. All Hannigan has to do is get on base more > often than that group and he's an upgrade. Lop 50 points off his OBP > and he still outperforms the hitters that Dusty put out there. > No offense to Hannigan but if you are at all serious about winning you do not have him batting second. Even if it works out to the maximum he can give you, you have a slow guy on the base paths. If they can't find a better option in the number two hole they may as well close up shop. As far as another post with Stubbs not being out there because of low on-base percentage, I say when he does get on he's a real threat. I don't know what Dickerson's stolen base record is but I don't see him as anywhere near the threat that Stubbs is. In addition, if you put Stubbs in there and he performs (something he hasn't disproven with his late season play) you have filled a major position on the team for the next 5 seasons. In addition, you can play Dickerson in left field rather than Nix. |