|
Post by Lark11 on Dec 29, 2022 14:44:30 GMT -5
Out of curiosity, what specifically about Senzel gives you any confidence? Because, I have none. I haven't had any for a couple seasons now. It really does feel like a massive player development failure for the Reds to have missed on pick 1.2. The fans endured a lot of losing for the organization to "win" pick 1.2 and they have gotten very little from it. There's at least one, and potentially two, harsh truths about the 2016 draft. The first is that it simply wasn't a very good draft class. At all. Here's the top ten picks: 1. Mickey Moniak 2. Nick Senzel 3. Ian Anderson 4. Riley Pint 5. Corey Ray 6. A.J. Puk 7. Braxton Garrett 8. Cal Quantrill 9. Matt Manning 10. Zack Collins www.baseball-reference.com/draft/?year_ID=2016&draft_round=1&draft_type=junreg&query_type=year_round&from_type_jc=0&from_type_hs=0&from_type_4y=0&from_type_unk=0Prior to the draft, I wanted the Reds to take Zack Collins on an under-slot deal, but that wouldn't have worked out any better. Apparently, the hitch in Collins' swing is just too significant for him to overcome against big league pitching. The second potentially harsh truth is that Senzel simply might not ever have been as good as people/scouts/pundits thought. At Tennessee, Senzel was really only an impact hitter in his third and final season. In his first two seasons, he hit for average and on-base, but not significant power. His third season is when he finally flashed some significant power. But, the power is what has been curiously absent in the big leagues and, with his swing mechanics, I'm not sure I see him as having the ability to generate it. As I recall, pundits were predicting high batting average and 20/20 HR/SBs for Senzel. He has never come close. So, did our development fail or was our scouting off the mark? Or, is entirely injuries that are to blame? I don't know, but I do know that I'm not seeing any real reason for optimism on his future. What are you guys seeing? You bring up some interesting points. I guess my faith in Senzel relies on his minor league stats and his first half of rookie year - before his swing adjustment. He showed 15-20HR power that year and he dominated at every level in the minors. Definitely wouldn’t be the first prospect to fail in the bigs and you’re right when you say his swing doesn’t pass the eye test right now for a guy that’ll develop much power but I still don’t think the Reds did him any favors by deciding to have him switch to CF once he got to the bigs. The time and energy spent on learning a new position had to hurt his hitting. And once the hitting starts to decline, confidence does as well and the psyche of an athlete can’t be underestimated. You just don’t typically see top 10 prospects forced to change positions dramatically (id argue 3B to CF is a dramatic change) as they’re debuting in the bigs I agree on the position change. The switch from the dirt to the grass isn't one I would have made for Senzel. You don't draft him at 1.2 and then shift him away from his more natural position. At that point, he is/should be a foundational piece that you build around. And, as you said, it takes away focus from his offensive game. Oddly, with respect to their hitting, Senzel reminds me of former Reds prospect Ryan Lamarre. Lamarre went to the University of Michigan and during his three seasons there he showed himself to be a well-rounded hitter. In his final two seasons, he hit .344/.468/.599 and .419/.459/.649. So, he showed some legit power potential (even if the college bats might have been livelier back then; I can't remember when the current bat regulations went into effect and it doesn't matter enough to research it). But, I remember at Michigan, Lamarre had powerful swing with a leg kick and a well-incorporated lower half. I also remember that Lamarre (almost?) immediately changed his swing mechanics in the professional ranks. He went from a fluid, power-generating, kinetic-chain based swing to a short, compact, "minimally incorporative of lower half" based swing. His swing mechanics drastically changed, and his power production drastically vanished. I don't know why he changed things so drastically or whether it was the Reds' player development department driving the changes. But, it seemed...ill-advised. I go back and forth on Senzel, but I do get somewhat similar vibes. His swing mechanics haven't changed as drastically as Lamarre's did, but I do think Senzel shortened the length of his swing and took some lower body out of it. Again, it's far more subtle than Lamarre, but I do think it's there. Here is Senzel at the University of Tennessee: If you look at the first two pitches Senzel sees, he's a bit more spread out with his stance and uses a small leg kick. As for the swing itself, on the second pitch he takes a hack and the swing is longer and more fluid than anything he uses in Cincy. I think part of it is the one-handed follow-through naturally gives the swing the appearance of length, but I also think the swing itself is just longer than it is now, due in part of Senzel lowering his pre-pitch hand position from what it is in this video to what it becomes below. By lowering the pre-pitch hand position, Senzel is shortening the overall swing path because the bat simply has less distance to travel. Now, obviously, a long swing can be more easily exploited, but shortening a swing can generate less force, which reduces that force available to be transferred to the baseball. I guess my question is: given Senzel's strong bat-to-ball and hand-eye coordination skills, why would you shorten the swing and rob yourself of power to become even more of a contact-oriented hitter? If consistent contact is a problem, then you shorten things up and take out length. That was never Senzel's problem. If you have longer levers (like Aaron Judge), then focusing on tightening up and removing superfluous body movement is key. That was never Senzel's problem. One thing I do love about Senzel in the above video is evidenced by the third pitch he sees. He checks his swing on the third pitch, but watch his belt and how quickly the hips are firing and then shutting down when he checks his swing. There's a lot of strong and fast rotation at work there. And, here is Senzel in 2022 as a Red: Again, compared to his collegiate video, Senzel seems to have taken the lower-half (completely?) out of the swing, lowered his pre-pitch hand position, and taken length out of his swing. With this set of swing mechanics, I really don't see how he can be an impact hitter. Maybe, he could still be an impact offensive player by hitting for a solid average and getting on-base at a good clip and coupling that with strong basestealing/baserunning, but it's tough to be an impact hitter without the ability to drive the ball. By reducing his stride/leg kick to nothing more than rolling up onto the ball of his foot and then back down, he inevitability has reduced the ability of the lower half to generate force. Quite frankly, his current set of swing mechanics is so compact, short, and controlled that it feels like a 2-strike approach...that he's using all the time. The kinetic chain is what generates the force imparted to the baseball and the kinetic chain is merely the proper sequencing of body movements to generate efficient and (ideally) maximum force. If you take out (almost?) all movement from the lower half, then you are reducing the ability to generate force. I'm not convinced he properly "gets into his back hip" with this type of stride. I'm not convinced his hips can fire the same way with such reduced lower-half movement. I don't know, maybe it is all injuries and derailed development, but Senzel seems to me like a hitter primed for the "Justin Turner treatment." Change the swing mechanics and the approach to focus on driving the baseball; let the natural athleticism and bat-to-ball skills work for you. At this point, what does he have to lose?
|
|
|
Post by scottscudder on Dec 31, 2022 17:51:39 GMT -5
Of the current Reds outfielders, Fraley is who I'm most curious to see get significant ABs this season. I think he might have some potential, although I'm not really confident about him. As for the rest, I'm not excited, and I'm actually least excited about Senzel.
Ultimately, the Reds are going to need to make some trades for quality outfielders with strong future potential. They're going to need to give up value to get value, whether it means trading away Diaz, one of the plethora of solid infield prospects they have, or even India. I liked Lark's idea in an earlier thread of targeting Taylor Trammell or similar type prospects.
I would try to trade from areas of strength/depth to get two quality, high potential outfielders. Would love to see this happen sooner rather than later so they can be setup for a 2024-2026 window.
I'm a bit worried about the Reds trying to move some of their infield prospects into outfield roles, where they will be out of position, and their bats might not play as strong. They would be de-valuing their prospects in doing so, and the result would likely be an outfield that is less than what they could get by trading for actual outfield prospects. I'd prefer not to go down this path.
|
|
|
Post by Lark11 on Jan 1, 2023 0:29:34 GMT -5
Of the current Reds outfielders, Fraley is who I'm most curious to see get significant ABs this season. I think he might have some potential, although I'm not really confident about him. As for the rest, I'm not excited, and I'm actually least excited about Senzel. Ultimately, the Reds are going to need to make some trades for quality outfielders with strong future potential. They're going to need to give up value to get value, whether it means trading away Diaz, one of the plethora of solid infield prospects they have, or even India. I liked Lark's idea in an earlier thread of targeting Taylor Trammell or similar type prospects. I would try to trade from areas of strength/depth to get two quality, high potential outfielders. Would love to see this happen sooner rather than later so they can be setup for a 2024-2026 window. I'm a bit worried about the Reds trying to move some of their infield prospects into outfield roles, where they will be out of position, and their bats might not play as strong. They would be de-valuing their prospects in doing so, and the result would likely be an outfield that is less than what they could get by trading for actual outfield prospects. I'd prefer not to go down this path.I couldn't agree more with the above in red. Very well said. I, too, am concerned about them shifting infielders to the outfield. Senzel is a cautionary tale, but I do also think there is a real chance that they lose value as a result of tumbling down the defensive spectrum. A guy like Matt McClain would seem to be a candidate to lose value from a position change to the outfield. I feel like they have settled on Noelvi at third instead of the outfield and Edwin Arroyo seems unlikely to move off the dirt. I really don't want them to move Elly off of shortstop until he proves he can't handle it at the big league level. I think he can handle it.
|
|
|
Post by scottscudder on Jan 1, 2023 1:16:33 GMT -5
I couldn't agree more with the above in red. Very well said. I, too, am concerned about them shifting infielders to the outfield. Senzel is a cautionary tale, but I do also think there is a real chance that they lose value as a result of tumbling down the defensive spectrum. A guy like Matt McClain would seem to be a candidate to lose value from a position change to the outfield. I feel like they have settled on Noelvi at third instead of the outfield and Edwin Arroyo seems unlikely to move off the dirt. I really don't want them to move Elly off of shortstop until he proves he can't handle it at the big league level. I think he can handle it. Agree on Elly. A difference maker at SS is a huge advantage for a team. Need to give him every chance to stick there. I kinda feel the same way about Stephenson. A really good hitting catcher is also super valuable and difference making. I don't want to see him at 1B. If you need to rest him, then rest him, or at most DH him. No need to add to his workload by putting him at 1B instead of DH. I certainly don't feel a strong enough need to put him at 1B to "keep his bat in the lineup" during a season when the win/loss record is likely to be irrelevant. Putting him at 1B also potentially devalues him, as it supports a narrative of "long term, Stephenson's future is as a 1B". Keeping players at maximum value will also be especially important as the Reds begin trying to follow a Rays or Indians type model, where guys will be traded a year or two before they can become free agents. They will need to get the most value back possible when making those trades.
|
|
|
Post by Lark11 on Jan 18, 2023 13:32:14 GMT -5
Notable injury news on Senzel:
From November:
From January:
"Hasn't walked in months" due to toe surgery???
|
|
|
Post by jeremiah on Jan 18, 2023 16:05:33 GMT -5
Notable injury news on Senzel: From November: From January: "Hasn't walked in months" due to toe surgery??? Wow. That's stunning. Senzel cannot catch a break w/ staying healthy.
|
|
|
Post by schellis on Jan 30, 2023 13:35:11 GMT -5
In terms of moving prospects to different positions
If a player is average at best at their current postion, for instance McClain was already splitting between SS and CF in college, and he wouldn't be the first to move from SS to a lesser position on the defensive spectrum. Doing this move is fine if their bat and glove will play at the new position.
You don't make this move to play a inferior defensive player at the position. IE Suarez sticking at 3B instead of moving him to LF to open 3B for Senzel, doing so weakens the team defensively at two positions.
You don't move a player who's value comes mostly from their glove then act surprised when the they go from useful to why are they on the roster.
Know your core players. Do not displace them for minor gains.
You also don't tinker with elite prospects till what they did to make them elite prospects doesn't work. In baseball there is no this works for every player 100% of the time method
If you have a middle infielder that hits like a 1B while still being able to be a quality defender at a middle infield position you do not move him off said position unless you have a elite player already at said position or perhaps a god level defensive player that can hit enough.
Elly should stay at SS, the Reds don't have Barry Larkin there blocking him, nor do they have a Ozzie Smith like defensive SS. He plays the position well enough that it won't take away from his bat.
Marte needed to move he was growing out of the position and will be fine at 3B
McClain I think should be dealt for a player that fits the Reds needs though he was thought a potential OF at time of draft, and his bat should play fine there. Move him and leave him.
Arroyo I feel needs to stay on the infield which could present a issue when he's ready.
When he is either India will get to expensive or Elly will be seen as growing out of the position, similar to Bogaerts who I think will be Padres replacement at 3B when Machado opts out.
Back to Senzel, he was a Rolen like player coming out of college and should have never been moved off position for Saurez who is a average fielder at best.
I feel injuries have crippled Senzel to the point that he can't be counted on for even 100 games, Reds coaching has reduced him into a non-threat hitter
His glove can't carry that bat.
The Reds are a better team when Senzel isn't on the roster, if he can maintain his health he's one of the top needs a change of scenery players in baseball.
|
|
flash
Ted Kluszewski
Posts: 703
|
Post by flash on Feb 1, 2023 14:00:34 GMT -5
I do not believe Senzel should have displaced Suarez at third after Suarez had established himself as a prospective Mike Schmidt type of hitter. Unfortunately his bat became fickle. India was a third baseman also and he switched to second because of Suarez.
I believe that the Reds should give Senzel a look at first base. Votto best option for this year is as the designated hitter. His field time should be minimal. it will keep him healthy. First base might keep Senzel healthy also, and if he really is a good fielder first base should not be a problem. I know I have said first base will be the eventual landing spot for Stephenson, until the Reds get another good catcher Stephenson is behind the dish.
|
|