|
Post by psuhistory on Mar 16, 2015 17:06:54 GMT -5
Is that any better? ? Paul Maholm's leg is back! Catch the fever!
|
|
|
Post by Lark11 on Mar 16, 2015 17:18:11 GMT -5
Is that any better? ? Yes. Having one of them in the rotation is better than both. And Maholm>Marquis. Also if either makes the rotation they can be removed for injury or ineffectiveness. Why on earth would/should EITHER of them be in the rotation???
|
|
|
Post by kinsm on Mar 16, 2015 18:40:32 GMT -5
It was nice when this team had a solid rotation. Trading Latos really killed that. The team basically traded Latos for Marlon Byrd. I still can't get over how disappointing that is. Jason Marquis and Paul Maholm will be getting a lot of starts this year. That already makes the team's chances of going over .500 slim to none. 'OR' and 'might', not 'AND' and 'WILL'. Here is the sentence corrected: Jason Marquis or Paul Maholm might be getting lots of starts this year. Brandon Phillips might hit like he's 29 and Iglesias might pitch 200 innings this year after throwing none last year, and, and, and, ....but probability is against you.
|
|
|
Post by redsfanman on Mar 16, 2015 21:11:42 GMT -5
'OR' and 'might', not 'AND' and 'WILL'. Here is the sentence corrected: Jason Marquis or Paul Maholm might be getting lots of starts this year. Brandon Phillips might hit like he's 29 and Iglesias might pitch 200 innings this year after throwing none last year, and, and, and, ....but probability is against you. I never suggested that I expected Iglesias to start even half the season, I think 100 IPs is a high threshold. Later in the season they'd have to turn to one of the younger internal options they have in the organization, but based on this poll most people who voted expect the Reds to be out of contention by then anyway.
|
|
|
Post by vtreds22 on Mar 18, 2015 19:09:07 GMT -5
I said I'd make a more official prediction by Opening Day. I'm doing a complete 180. No team that is serious about winning would have Jason Marquis in its rotation.
This team is going to be quite mediocre until July. It's going to be downright abysmal after Cueto (and possibly Chapman, Leake, and maybe Bruce) are traded.
69-93. Too many things would have to go right for this team to finish over .500. 90+ wins is a pipe dream. I'm pretty sure I was sauced when I made my 90+ wins a few weeks ago. Either that or I didn't think the Reds would rely on over-the-hill scrubs to play serious roles this season.
|
|
|
Post by kinsm on Mar 18, 2015 23:33:03 GMT -5
I said I'd make a more official prediction by Opening Day. I'm doing a complete 180. No team that is serious about winning would have Jason Marquis in its rotation. This team is going to be quite mediocre until July. It's going to be downright abysmal after Cueto (and possibly Chapman, Leake, and maybe Bruce) are traded. 69-93. Too many things would have to go right for this team to finish over .500. 90+ wins is a pipe dream. I'm pretty sure I was sauced when I made my 90+ wins a few weeks ago. Either that or I didn't think the Reds would rely on over-the-hill scrubs to play serious roles this season. www.fangraphs.com/blogs/dave-cameron-fangraphs-chat-31815/Comment From lunch: are there any teams whose off seasons don’t make sense to you? not that you think what they did was dumb, but moves that you don’t understand. i guess i’m asking – which team has the least sensical off season narrative? Dave Cameron: The Reds/Phillies/Brewers, probably. ---- Comment From The Average+Sports+Fan: Since you list the Reds first among off seasons that didn’t make sense. What would you have done differently? Dave Cameron: Either tried harder to put a real winner on the field or just blown it all up and gone into rebuild mode. Picked a side, basically. They just did neither. ---- Comment From RK: Any thoughts/updates to your Reds article yesterday now that Raisel Iglesias has been named to the rotation? Dave Cameron: Better him than Maholm. Still don’t get the point of having Jason Marquis around, but this is better. ---- Comment From RMR: Before becoming the Reds manager, Bryan Price talked a pretty sabermetric game. Now, he’s talking about the team needing to run more and is actively choosing to have Jason Marquis in his rotation. Do you think there’s something about the realities of managing that results in the otherwise sabermetrically inclined to soften on their supposed principles? Dave Cameron: It’s not really Bryan Price’s fault that Jason Marquis is in camp. He doesn’t really get to dictate the organizational direction.
|
|
|
Post by thebigdawg on Mar 19, 2015 23:57:14 GMT -5
I'll say 74-88. A fairly similar season compared to last year. I think the offense will improve, but our pitching staff is setup for disaster.
Sports talk in Cincinnati by August will be more focused on the Bengals than the Reds.
|
|
|
Post by dukecrunchybagel on Mar 24, 2015 8:04:03 GMT -5
I'm guessing for 72-90 and the cellar. We have zero depth, a hideous bench, a questionable bullpen, and very weak rotation. Bryan Price will be gone by this time next year.
This time is just not very good, and I think it highly likely that at least two of Cueto, Chapman, Leake, Byrd, & Bruce are gone by July 31, especially if Farmer Bob finally shows Jocko the door, which given the fact I expect this time to be pretty putrid out the door is at least a 33% chance.
I don't foresee this team being competitive again until 2019 soonest.
|
|
|
Post by redsfanman on Mar 24, 2015 9:28:02 GMT -5
I see the Reds being competitive again in 2016, with: C Mesoraco 1b Votto 2b Phillips 3b Frazier SS Suarez LF Winker CF Hamilton RF Bruce
Bench: Barnhart, Yorman Rodriguez (out of options), Kyle Waldrop, Negron
Rotation: Bailey Iglesias Lorenzen DeSclafani Stephenson
Bullpen: Cingrani Badenhop LeCure Diaz Contreras Corcino Sampson Hoover ....plus a year to add other candidates (through free agency or trades of the first three names), with Cueto, Leake, Chapman (assuming he's traded), Marshall, Ludwick (buyout), and other contracts coming off the books.
|
|
|
Post by kinsm on Mar 24, 2015 9:31:14 GMT -5
Why the hell would you put Waldrop on the bench in 2016? If you have any hopes of him ever being a major league starter you don't stick him on the bench.
That rotation would be bloody awful.
|
|
|
Post by redsfanman on Mar 24, 2015 10:02:09 GMT -5
Why the hell would you put Waldrop on the bench in 2016? If you have any hopes of him ever being a major league starter you don't stick him on the bench. That rotation would be bloody awful. Woah, I'm pleasantly surprised by that response. You're right, I wouldn't put Waldrop on the bench in 2016. I would, however, list him on a preliminary roster, just like I would for Suarez this year, because needing to play everyday doesn't undermine his value if the team needs him - his name belongs in the conversation. Like Suarez this year, Waldrop would be a phone call away. The rotation would be lacking in experience, but certainly not talent. Of course we don't yet know what the Reds will get if they choose to trade away Cueto, Leake, Chapman, and/or Bruce - huge unknowns.
|
|
|
Post by dukecrunchybagel on Mar 24, 2015 16:16:07 GMT -5
Votto and Bailey are both up for major raises next year at $20M and $18M respectively. Add on $13M for BP, $12 for Bruce (if he's still around), $8M for Frazier, and $5M for Meso, $3M for Iglesias and you're already looking at $82M in contract commitments before you sign anybody. So if you're looking at a payroll around $100 - $110M, you don't have much to spend on any significant free agents (espcially if we retain Cozart at around $3 - $5M).
The team will be without an ace, have an even weaker BP at second, and still have a mess for a bullpen. And if Votto continues to gimp it up, you're not looking at the best offense in the world either. To be competitive in 2016, the Reds will have to hope that:
1) Iglesias and DeSclafini can both be #2/#3 type starters 2) Stephenson bounces back and takes a step towards becoming our ace or at the very a solid #3 -- I think we can live with a rotation with four solid #2/#3 types and no ace (Bailey, DeSclafini, Stephenson, Iglesais) 3) BHam's first half was more reality than his second 4) Votto isn't a gimp 5) Jocko acutally gets something of value for Cueto, Chapman, & Byrd. 6) Suarez's offensive upside over Cozart overshadows his defensive downside versus Cozart
That's just about as many if's for the 2016 club as the 2015 version, so I'm not particularly hopeful. And we are still looking at a mess of a bullpen and no bench strength...
|
|
|
Post by riverfront86 on Mar 26, 2015 13:20:23 GMT -5
Votto and Bailey are both up for major raises next year at $20M and $18M respectively. Add on $13M for BP, $12 for Bruce (if he's still around), $8M for Frazier, and $5M for Meso, $3M for Iglesias and you're already looking at $82M in contract commitments before you sign anybody. So if you're looking at a payroll around $100 - $110M, you don't have much to spend on any significant free agents (espcially if we retain Cozart at around $3 - $5M). The team will be without an ace, have an even weaker BP at second, and still have a mess for a bullpen. And if Votto continues to gimp it up, you're not looking at the best offense in the world either. To be competitive in 2016, the Reds will have to hope that: 1) Iglesias and DeSclafini can both be #2/#3 type starters 2) Stephenson bounces back and takes a step towards becoming our ace or at the very a solid #3 -- I think we can live with a rotation with four solid #2/#3 types and no ace (Bailey, DeSclafini, Stephenson, Iglesais) 3) BHam's first half was more reality than his second 4) Votto isn't a gimp 5) Jocko acutally gets something of value for Cueto, Chapman, & Byrd. 6) Suarez's offensive upside over Cozart overshadows his defensive downside versus Cozart That's just about as many if's for the 2016 club as the 2015 version, so I'm not particularly hopeful. And we are still looking at a mess of a bullpen and no bench strength... Dear God...the season hasn't even begun and you assholes are already trading Cueto, Chappy, AND Byrd...and Byrd has yet to even play a boinking game in Cincy. Chapman I see gone after this year, I bet Cueto gets his LTC from the Reds...how many of you had Votto, BP, AND Homer gone a few years due to the same circumstances?
|
|
|
Post by redsfanman on Mar 26, 2015 14:02:31 GMT -5
Dear God...the season hasn't even begun and you assholes are already trading Cueto, Chappy, AND Byrd...and Byrd has yet to even play a boinking game in Cincy. Chapman I see gone after this year, I bet Cueto gets his LTC from the Reds...how many of you had Votto, BP, AND Homer gone a few years due to the same circumstances? For a preliminary outline of what the 2016 Reds will look like, it's true, I'm not including Cueto or other players who I expect to be gone. If they're back it's a plus. In Cueto's career, at least since 2010, you might notice a trend: 2010, good year, 185.2 innings (good year, at the time) 2011, breakout year, but only 156.2 innings (injury prone!). 2012, great year, 217 innings. 2013, bad year, 60.2 innings (people question whether he'll ever be healthy again since he's so injury prone) 2014, great year, 243.2 innings (best season, give him $200m!) The trend is that Cueto deals with injury problems every other year, at least since he's become good. If Cueto has a great (and healthy) year reminiscent of 2012 and 2014 I think he'll be traded away. He certainly will NOT be extended for $25m+ per year even if he repeats his 2014 production. If he has a year reminiscent of 2011 or 2013 I think his price may be driven down sufficiently for the Reds. How many people had Votto, BP, and Homer gone a few years ago? I don't know. Who expected Latos to be retained this winter? Lots, I would assume, but it still didn't happen. Marlon Byrd is a stopgap until Jesse Winker is ready, darn right I'd be getting rid of him. Byrd doesn't need to play a game in Cincinnati to determine that. The worst case scenario on Marlon Byrd is that he reaches enough plate appearances for his 2016 option to vest. I doubt the Reds can trade the entirety of his $8m deal for 2016 - the Phillies couldn't.
|
|
|
Post by dukecrunchybagel on Mar 26, 2015 17:04:06 GMT -5
My guess is that if the Reds sign Cueto to a LTC, he'll end up spending most of the next five years on the DL. If they don't, he'll likely win multiple CYAs, and be inducted into the HOF wearing a Yankees cap.
Gosh, I'm cheerful.
That being said, beacause of the injury risk, I'd much rather the Reds signed Leake than Cueto. Not as good a pitcher when they're both healthy, but I think it far more likely that Leake can pitch day in and day out. Plus he'll be at least $50M cheaper.
Now watch, the Reds sign Leake and he spends the next five years on the DL... Sigh
|
|