Prospects for peace?

[JohnU]

Pedro's value as a DH probably depends on the rest of the batting order. Essentially he's a long-ball guy, not much else. Personally, I'd rather have Joey Votto as a DH.
Actually, I don't think the Reds truly intend to contend this year ... just try to sell the future with this young pitching staff. Most of the fans will buy that sandwich, I reckon, though I won't. It's a bunch of Bailey-type pitchers who will still need a lot of bullpen and some hitting, neither of which has yet to be addressed.
Unless, of course, we keep buying into the con game that Bruce and Hamilton "worked on some things" this winter, which is always better than doing it while real games are being played.
I guess I will still root for this outfit, and I will look for the silver lining. I just wonder if rebuilds are actually useful if they are predicated on faith and hope instead of metrics and real coaching.

 

[eburg5000]

They have two rule 5 guys on the team. Could be a big problem if they try to keep them.

 

[JohnU]

With a completely rebuilt bullpen, O'Grady as a lefty might get a shot at the Reds.
Anybody thinking Cave has a chance ... he doesn't play left field so there's no hope.

 

[eburg5000]

No hope seems to be the battle cry for the 2016 and on Reds I'm afraid. But who knows stranger things have happened,

 

[Hit-n-Run]

After listening to a few Dick Williams' interviews talking about analytics and the roster in general I get the impression they acquired Jake Cave with the thought of him platooning with Yorman Rodriguez. He mentioned a few times that Yorman is out of options and they are hopeful he has a good ST and makes the team.

Cave has played all three OF positions, mostly CF and has hit .300+ versus RHP while struggling a bit against lefties. He hits very few HR's and K's a lot for a guy without power. Yorman is better versus LHP. I'm not sold on it working, but I think it may be the Reds' plan at this point.

 

[Hit-n-Run]

The sad reality is that the Reds don't have any outfielders that look like great options moving forward. Winker is the #1 prospect, but his stat line is fairly modest and may be average to below when he reaches the big club.

 

[JohnU]

I hear mixed signals about Winker. I think it's time to get him 250 PA and see what works.
At least we don't have to worry about beating the Giants this year.

 

[Hit-n-Run]

My post may be a little unfair in regards to Winker, after all he just turned 22. He doesn't strike out a ton and does get on base. He's posted in the .280+ consistently and the power numbers will most likely continue to increase, so maybe 2016 will be a breakout season for him.

I see Pete Rose got his answer from the Commish. Pretty much what I expected. I went to a season ticket holder Pete Rose Q & A a couple weeks ago. Pete is a funny guy and has a ton of amusing stories, but the more you listen to him unedited the more you understand why Manfred sees no evidence Pete has changed. Interesting Manfred made a point to separate the MLB ban from the HOF eligibility issue. Didn't take long for the HOF to issue it's own statement. Haven't heard from John Dowd yet, I'm sure we will.

 

[JohnU]

Pete has never been contrite about that and nobody ever expected him to grovel at people's feet. He believes his career speaks for itself. In that respect, he's right. It's hard to prove he ever gambled as a player and when he took over the team as manager, they were in one of the worst periods in 40 years. They became instantly relevant. If he gambles now, it's no problem.

I think the H of F could change its position on this eventually but it will take a purging of the arrogant elitists. The BBWA is nothing but puffed up about its own importance.

Manfred did the only logical thing, though, and shoved the onus of responsibility onto the writers where it belongs. It's an educational comment if nothing else. It also clarifies why Abbott and Costello can be in the Hall of Fame, so Manfred is playing by the Hall's rules.

But if Bonds and Clemens never get in, and Joe Jackson is forever scorned, Pete has a zero chance, not since Pete has clearly admitted he still gambles on the game and doesn't intend to stop.

 

[Redsfan1507]

With the Reds utter failure to develop a single regular MLB OF that could muster back to back .260 seasons in the last quarter century, I question the effectiveness of a plan to put as many prospects in the system as possible. They've had about 400 of them to that failed result in that time. They either draft bad, develop bad, or both. Until that changes, I have little confidence in enough stars aligning in the next 5 years to compete for anything but an occasional better than .500 season.

I think the Reds have two problems- they can't seem to make enough money to keep a veteran MLB roster of championship talent, or develop a process to keep replenishing with talent they can afford. They need to get better at the business of baseball before young talent can prove to be the answer, IMO.

Part of the problem is the only living organizational identity the Reds have is the Big Red Machine, but they've failed to employ enough of them to build a "Reds way" legacy, and now they are all too old to coach or manage. They have an organization that is strongest in Latin American scouting of pitchers, but few signs of having any insight into how to get outfielders that can hit the MLB average, to MLB. They've had some 1b- how about making some of them LF's ? He'll, you can count the Reds 3b that could hit on one hand, and half of them were short term traded guys like aging Buddy Bell, Tony Fernandez, and Scott Rolen, or shortly to be traded Ray Knight, and probably Todd Frazier. Encarnacion didnt hit until he left. They got good mileage at SS with Concepcion and Larkin, but it's been drought since. They've had a few hitting catchers- Oliver, Taubensee, Mesoraco, but generally this has been a sketchy offense for a long time. Whatever hitting "philosophy" the Reds have been employing, hasnt been working too well for a long time. I don't think it's all bad luck, I think it's been a bad plan and worse execution.

A minor league hitter of Jay Bruce's acclaim shouldn't equate into a .230 MLB hitter.

If that is the equasion, how can they expect Billy Hamilton to hit ?

So, I don't think an overall is a bad thing, but the Reds needs to purge the entire organizational infrastructure first, not just gut the MLB roster. They need better scouts, instructors, coaches, managers, front office personnel at all organizational levels. They also need a long term ownership and MLB President of Baseball Operations with the ability and commitment to close up fundamental weaknesses and sustain a high level log performance that merit equally high expectations.

A metric-centric approach is a start, but it isn't a solution in itself. Analytics as a valuation tool after the fact is contentious enough, but it's use as a predictive tool is so far, mostly fantasy. Technology helps predict where defenses should play, but doesn't insure the pitcher hits the mitt, or the shift fields the ball cleanly, and knowing a breaking ball is coming to your hitter doesn't help him take it oppage for a hit. Team success takes geeks and jocks, motivators and mentors, finding and getting talent, translating knowledge into physical execution, and rewarding earned success, not just pacifying an investment for mediocrity... for all that money and staff, Reds fundamentals as simple as putting the bat on the ball seems to get lost too often. That's a clue they haven't solved 101 yet.

 

[Redsfan1507]

Poor Pete is a moron. He doesn't use a bookie anymore- he just bets legal baseball now. I can't imagine he believed this was going to get him considered for reinstatement. He's dillusional.

 

[JohnU]

Off the topic: Does anybody come off surprised that Cueto's 6-year deal was 130M ... with an opt-out in 2 years?
We were all assuming he was a 200M golden idol when the 2015 season started.
I can't even say for sure that anybody who looked at him considered Cueto an ace. Clearly, he is No. 2 in the Giants rotation, ahead of Samardjiza, who is really a version of Homer Bailey.

Still off the topic: I think the Rose train has left the station and he can thank himself for not wanting much more than to dangle the magic finger in front of MLB by not addressing his gambling addiction, which by any measure should be a plea for help in most sectors of society where failure occurs. America is pretty forgiving of people who try to work it out, including Josh Hamilton and the late, great Steve Howe. When players of this nature get multiple chances, and they continue to fail ... well, too bad. But MLB is forgiving and so are the fans because ... they tried and failed.

Pete has not tried. In fact, he's basically admitted he doesn't care, in the face of the one final goal he wants to establish -- that he belongs in the club with the game's greatest players. One wonders, if all the game's greatest were to gather now, and vote on Pete's behavior, if they'd agree he belongs in the club or should be scorned for mocking the most important rule -- the illusion or act of modifying the outcome based on pursuit of a gambler's share. Rose was given multiple chances to acknowledge his sin, even after a trip to the pokey ... and if he had quit betting on baseball, the game likely would have opened the door to his admission to the Hall of Fame.

He didn't. In conclusion: Go away, Pete. We appreciated your game.

On the topic: I think the Reds have generally relied on luck to produce a contender since Baker was hired.
Lucky that Chapman was willing to work on his off-speed pitch.
Lucky that Barnhart was a better hitter than they expected.
Lucky that Cozart was willing to work on his own to fix his hitch.
Lucky that Votto actually did mend.

The only guy who profited from coaching was Frazier, who fixed his hitch with the help of Don Long to become a 30-HR guy.

If the pitching got help, about all I remember was Price helping Latos tighten up his delivery. It helped in 2012.

If there is any skill coming from the system, it's all pitching ... and none of these guys is an ace, excepting maybe Iglesias who is a Cuban and, if I follow trends, that makes him vulnerable to social blunders. He seems legit but he's hardly the product of the farm system. In fact, he isn't.

The complete lack of hitting skills in the Reds system is a pure puzzlement. It's been going on for a decade. We have been looking for a LEFT fielder since 2001, discounting Dunn who was the only guy who did it right -- he took his glove out there and hit 44 home runs with it.

Meanwhile, Yonder Alonso ....

Whatever else has to happen, the only talents the Reds have in the system are identifiable in a couple of ways. They come up and go 1-for-20 in PH roles or they tear an ACL or a shoulder the first week they are here and we don't hear about them again.

We do have Jess Winker and a coaching staff that shows it is inert.

At this point, what's the difference? Another veteran signing for $8 million over 2 years will still produce the same result. And another 500 strikeouts in the outfield is going to produce another 65 wins.

 

[Hit-n-Run]

It's being reported the Reds have traded Frazier to the Whisox in a three team trade involving the Dodgers. The Reds allegedly will get #4 prospect 2B Peraza and OF Scott Schebler. Probably the same two the Dodgers dangled for Chapman before that deal got shelved.

 

[JohnU]

I JUST BECAME A WHITE SOX FAN.

 

[eburg5000]

Seems the Reds are making a statment here, and that is they don't give a rats ass about the fans. Plus they think we are so stupid we will continue to buy tickets

 

[JohnU]

It seems that way. I don't understand the details of how the team got better except it's clear that signing a top level shortstop when we have 2 on the roster would mean they either plan to put Suarez at 3B or LF.

I see David Holmberg signed a minor league deal with the Braves. He was the guy we were expecting to be the answer after we got him for Hanigan.

Worms turn.

 

[Redsfan1507]

They did have the good timing to wait until I renewed my tix to dump (almost) the rest of the team. I'm sure I'll have lots of elbow room around me this season.

I'm going to vent a little on the Reds "little slump" ...

Reds suprised everyone in the 1990 WS after hanging around as largely a 2nd place team for the Rose led teams of late 80's, following miserable post BRM years of the earlier 80's- the losingest Reds in my memory (but soon to be revisited ), but generally the Reds had a team people thought could contend until after the 1995 season. The next time that really happened was 2010, That's 15 years between contenders. Anyone that thinks the current firesale is going to produce another contender in 2-3-5 years is a lot more optimistic than I.

It took 2 decades for the Pirates and Royals to dig back out to relevance.

The Reds have to rebuild a system from the bottom up, IMO a tough job, considering they haven't brought a single home grown regular OF to the Reds that could hit a paltry .260 or better in back to back seasons in more than a quarter century.

Pretty good trivia question (who is the last Reds minor league product with back to back .260 seasons for the REDS as an everyday OF ? ) You may be looking for a while.... Eric Davis 88-89 ? Well, regular is a misnomer- Davis NEVER had as many as 500 AB in ANY of his MLB seasons. Paul O'Niell ? Nope.. Not as a Red...only as a later Yankee. Kal Daniels '87-88 but he had under 400 AB's in 87. You might have to go back to Pete Rose or Vada Pinson for that one folks...that's a LOT longer than a decade...and .260 is about the MLB composite AVERAGE BA - including all those light hitting catchers, shortstops and yes, those pitchers. THE REDS HAVEN'T PRODUCED A MLB OUTFIELDER THAT COULD HIT THE MLB AVERAGE IN BACK TO BACK SEASONS IN ....FOREVER. OUTFIELDERS ARE THE MOST COMMON POSITION PLAYERS IN THE GAME. THE REDS HAVE PLAYED MORE THAN 100 OF THEM IN THAT TIME, and have had 4 times that many in their organization in that time....AND, THEY ARE BATTING .000 FOR CONSISTENT .260 OR BETTER MLB OF'S.

Zero over that large a sample size isn't a slump- it's total absence of ability.

So, this isn't a NEW problem...it's a historic, systemic Reds problem. The Reds organization obviously doesn't know how to put the ball in play, and haven't for a long, long time. BTW, they aren't making it up with more HR or SB either. It's who they draft, what (if anything) they teach them, that results in how they fail to execute in MLB, even at the AVERAGE rate.

The REAL gravity of all that as it applies to today or tomorrow's Reds is, this team can't afford to buy or even keep much MLB talent. They don't grow enough of it to sell off for other team's best prospects, either. So, trading MLB talent for former top prospects that have disappointed the teams that paid their bonus, doesn't bode well for the Reds having the ability of "fixing" their bats, does it?

Changing GM's and trading All-Stars for pre-MLB prospects in their 3rd organization isn't going to fix that. This team has to go back to 101...find better amateur hitters, sign them, and most importantly, hire coaches and instructors that can develop them into MLB hitters. Routinely. For generations.

They probably aren't going to do all that in 3 years.

 

[JohnU]

Losing Frazier does this: It makes Bruce irrelevant on offense, not that he wasn't anyway. Frazier was the one hitter aside from Votto that made the Reds a threat of any sort. Now, walking Votto is automatic. This lineup will be lucky to score 3 runs a game for a rotation that has yet to prove it can get past the 4th inning inside the pitch limit -- to get to a bullpen that has been completely disassembled. The only guy left is Chapman, who has to be wondering ... geez, the bastards traded me and only have to keep me because I shot up the garage.
Yeah, that 2-5 year window is the lie the front office will be selling us. By some accident, this team will win 56 games this year ... I'd say that's about as good as it gets.
Sadly, there is some talent on this roster, but the 2007 Reds had more talent.
I can't say for sure that the 1981 Reds couldn't beat this outfit.

 

[Redsfan1507]

I may sit in the stands with a grocery bag over my head or some type of mask on this year. The obvious message, being, Im a fan that bought a ticket, but am embarrassed to be supporting this kind of team.

If you've been to a minor league game and checked the program, you noticed half the players in the program aren't the ones actually on the team at that moment. That's what I envision the 2016 Reds to be like. Lots of rotating rosters of minor leaguers in and out, a few what the hell signings of guys that retired (or should have) a couple years ago, and last chance cheap long shots destined to be cut in an inning or two.

The biggest problem outside of the W/L record this team may face in the near term is that ownership may start looking to sell off dwindling return on investment. A revolving roster never becomes more stable with revolving ownership.

This looks to me as bleak a Reds team since the early 80's teams- where Mario Soto, Dave Collins and aging Dave Concepcion were the only name players..."supported" by guys like Householder, Redus, Esasky, and dozens of forgotten trivia questions.