Reds renew all coaches except...........
in [Cincinnati Reds]
|
Prev: Pitching Coach
Next: ASBCR 2009 questions
From: Zuke on 13 Oct 2009 11:12 On Mon, 12 Oct 2009, tom dunne wrote: > On Oct 12, 11:11 am, Zuke <m...(a)privacy.net> wrote: >> 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. > > I don't think Hannigan is ideal, either. Nothing worse than clogged > bases. But if your options are Hannigan or Alex Gonzalez, for > example, you will score more runs with Hannigan batting second. That's not the option I am looking for. How about Juan Francesco? > >> 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. > > This is the kind of thinking that got Willy Taveras a two-year > contract. He was the 2008 stolen base champ, the very definition of a > threat on the bases. But as they say, you can't steal first base. > Stubbs will get on base more often than Taveras, but probably not > enough for my liking. > I am not comparing Stubbs and Taveras basically because with Stubbs you are playing with house money. If you go a few months and Stubbs shows he is not the answer you are not out anything. > This year's MLB stolen base efforts for Stubbs/Dickerson: > > -Stubbs had 10 steals, 4 caught stealing in 196 plate appearances > -Dickerson had 11 steals, 3 caught stealing in 299 plate appearances > > In their minor league careers, Stubbs tried to steal more often than > Dickerson, and was successful at almost exactly the same rate as > Dickerson. That's pretty much what happened with them in the majors > this year as well. Stubbs did steal a ton of bases at Louisville this I don't understand why Dickerson wasn't given a shot this year rather than bringing in Traveras. The front office must not be convinced he is the answer.
From: David Short on 13 Oct 2009 13:20 Zuke wrote: > I don't understand why Dickerson wasn't given a shot this year rather > than bringing in Traveras. The front office must not be convinced > he is the answer. If B.J. Szymanski had hit, nobody would have ever heard of Chris Dickerson, but Szymanski didn't hit. Dickerson put together a bit of a surprise year in Dayton in 04 while the highly touted Szymanski pretty much fell on his face. The organization took notice. Other than that couple of months in Dayton, Dickerson didn't hit as a minor leaguer. He's an athlete and he never really seemed overmatched. Teams keep athletes around in the hope that sooner or later they will get it, start to hit and turn into somehting. While Szymanski (and Stubbs) glide around centerfield, Dickerson gets the job done quietly with a bit less range. After the 06 season, I thought the reds were going to release him, but instead they put him on the 40 man roster. During the 07 season the reds were giving playing time to folks like Buck Coates and Jason Ellison. Dickerson seemed buried and frankly didn't do anything with the Lookouts or with the River bats that made him look like he deserved his spot on the 40 man roster. About halfway through the 07 season Jay Bruce hit his way out of Sarasota, destroyed the Southern League for a couple of weeks and made his was to Louisville. A couple of things happened to Dickerson at this point. First of all, he got moved out of centerfield for a younger player, Bruce. Since then the reds have moved Bruce out of center, but Dickerson has never really moved back. (Really with Stubbs around...neither of them should be playing there as long as Drew hits) The other thing that happened to Dickerson is curious. He started hitting. He's been very open about the fact that he watched Bruce and started imitating what Bruce was doing. He started really poking the ball around. The reds dumped Junior and Dunn and....Hey, we need somebody out there? They promoted Dickerson and he had a hundred at bats where he looked a lot like Barry Bonds and then he got hurt. The reds were not believers and gave the centerfield job to Wily Taverible. Dickerson played around as a fourth outfield/platoon guy and got hurt again. He's not a star. He MIGHT be a servicable platoon guy. With his injury history over the last two years, he's a tough guy to count on. He's the type of guy that if a manager takes a liking to him can have a career off the bench. Oh...and he's into recycling. dfs
From: tom dunne on 13 Oct 2009 14:32 On Oct 13, 9:30 am, David Short <David.no.Sh...(a)Spam.Wright.Please.edu> wrote: > tom dunne wrote: > > Giving 60 games to Laynce Nix is a big part of the problem, one I hope > > won't be repeated next year. > > Nix was as good a gamble as Gomes was. AT one time Nix was a highly > thought of prospect who got hurt instead of having a career. > > They were just throwing talent against the wall to see what stuck. This is an odd argument. Nix has never shown anything remotely as positive as Gomes's first three full seasons. With Gomes, you're rolling the dice looking for his 2005 season, and you're content with his 2007 campaign. With Nix, you're hoping a guy who has never once posted a .300 OBP can suddenly, at age 28, become a decent hitter? That's not a gamble, that's magical thinking. The Reds gave Nix 337 plate appearances, which is more than he's seen since he played for the Rangers in 2004 (and more than the Reds gave the previously successful Gomes or cheaper in-house option Chris Dickerson.) Nothing in Nix's career said he was worth playing that much, and in the end he wasn't worth it. Cincinnati actually got the best season of Nix's career, and it was still just a 95 OPS+. I realize that talkinjg about Nix is complaining about the in-flight meal while the plane is going down in flames, but a good franchise isn't giving guys like Laynce Nix a starting spot hoping he'll stick.
From: tom dunne on 13 Oct 2009 14:44 On Oct 13, 11:12 am, Zuke <m...(a)privacy.net> wrote: > On Mon, 12 Oct 2009, tom dunne wrote: > > On Oct 12, 11:11 am, Zuke <m...(a)privacy.net> wrote: > >> 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. > > > I don't think Hannigan is ideal, either. Nothing worse than clogged > > bases. But if your options are Hannigan or Alex Gonzalez, for > > example, you will score more runs with Hannigan batting second. > > That's not the option I am looking for. How about Juan Francesco? I still like Phillips for that spot, and would put Rolen there as well. > >> 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. > > > This is the kind of thinking that got Willy Taveras a two-year > > contract. He was the 2008 stolen base champ, the very definition of a > > threat on the bases. But as they say, you can't steal first base. > > Stubbs will get on base more often than Taveras, but probably not > > enough for my liking. > > I am not comparing Stubbs and Taveras basically because with Stubbs > you are playing with house money. If you go a few months and > Stubbs shows he is not the answer you are not out anything. I'm just saying that while speed is nice, nothing is more important than reaching first base. As great as Rickey Henderson's steals and homers are, the most dangerous thing about him is that he got on base 40% of the time. > > This year's MLB stolen base efforts for Stubbs/Dickerson: > > > -Stubbs had 10 steals, 4 caught stealing in 196 plate appearances > > -Dickerson had 11 steals, 3 caught stealing in 299 plate appearances > > > In their minor league careers, Stubbs tried to steal more often than > > Dickerson, and was successful at almost exactly the same rate as > > Dickerson. That's pretty much what happened with them in the majors > > this year as well. Stubbs did steal a ton of bases at Louisville this > > I don't understand why Dickerson wasn't given a shot this year rather > than bringing in Traveras. The front office must not be convinced > he is the answer. I don't think he's the answer, either, in the long term, but wasting millions on guys like Taveras was not an improvement. Walt Jocketty should have been able to see that this offense wasn't very good (we all did!) and played for 2010 instead of wasting money in a half-assed attempt to look competitive in 2009. He could have given the starting CF job to Dickerson, watched the Reds go 78-84 and saved $6 million. For the record, I'm not anti-Stubbs. I just don't think he looks like a good leadoff hitter yet, and wouldn't pencil him in for that job at Dickerson's expense.
From: tom dunne on 13 Oct 2009 14:49
On Oct 13, 1:20 pm, David Short <David.no.Sh...(a)Spam.Wright.Please.edu> wrote: > Zuke wrote: > > I don't understand why Dickerson wasn't given a shot this year rather > > than bringing in Traveras. The front office must not be convinced > > he is the answer. > > If B.J. Szymanski had hit, nobody would have ever heard of Chris > Dickerson, but Szymanski didn't hit. Dickerson put together a bit of a > surprise year in Dayton in 04 while the highly touted Szymanski pretty > much fell on his face. The organization took notice. > > Other than that couple of months in Dayton, Dickerson didn't hit as a > minor leaguer. He's an athlete and he never really seemed overmatched. > Teams keep athletes around in the hope that sooner or later they will > get it, start to hit and turn into somehting. While Szymanski (and > Stubbs) glide around centerfield, Dickerson gets the job done quietly > with a bit less range. > > After the 06 season, I thought the reds were going to release him, but > instead they put him on the 40 man roster. During the 07 season the reds > were giving playing time to folks like Buck Coates and Jason Ellison. > Dickerson seemed buried and frankly didn't do anything with the Lookouts > or with the River bats that made him look like he deserved his spot on > the 40 man roster. > > About halfway through the 07 season Jay Bruce hit his way out of > Sarasota, destroyed the Southern League for a couple of weeks and made > his was to Louisville. A couple of things happened to Dickerson at this > point. > > First of all, he got moved out of centerfield for a younger player, > Bruce. Since then the reds have moved Bruce out of center, but Dickerson > has never really moved back. (Really with Stubbs around...neither of > them should be playing there as long as Drew hits) > > The other thing that happened to Dickerson is curious. He started > hitting. He's been very open about the fact that he watched Bruce and > started imitating what Bruce was doing. He started really poking the > ball around. > > The reds dumped Junior and Dunn and....Hey, we need somebody out there? > They promoted Dickerson and he had a hundred at bats where he looked a > lot like Barry Bonds and then he got hurt. > > The reds were not believers and gave the centerfield job to Wily > Taverible. Dickerson played around as a fourth outfield/platoon guy and > got hurt again. > > He's not a star. He MIGHT be a servicable platoon guy. With his injury > history over the last two years, he's a tough guy to count on. He's the > type of guy that if a manager takes a liking to him can have a career > off the bench. That sounds right to me. The thing the Reds did wrong was think Willy Taveras could fill the hole any better for ten times the salary. If you are forced to fill starting spots with bench-quality players, you should at least look to do it cheaply. Gomes and Nix were both cheap, but signing Taveras over playing Dickerson is the kind of decision that perpetually hamstrings unsuccessful small market clubs like Cincinnati. |