Randomville

Randomville! => The Locker Room => Topic started by: euro60 on March 29, 2016, 10:34:32 PM

Title: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: euro60 on March 29, 2016, 10:34:32 PM
My Reds predictions:

Iglesias has a roller coaster season, but by the end of it ends up looking like a non-pyscho version of Cueto.  And still puts up solid numbers over all.  But then next year he gets hurt.

DeSclafini puts together a blah season that doesn't look great on the surface but improves slowly but steadily, emerging as a boring-but-good mid-rotation SP for next year, and the 3-4 years after that.

Reed pulls off a poor man's DeSclafini and turns into a backend starter.

Stephenson busts.  I don't know why.  He just seems like the kind of guy who will.

Finnegan doesn't make it as a starter but turns into an okay middle reliever.

Hamilton learns to hit.  Not well, but maybe like .260 with no walks and a crappy OBP.  Which with his speed and defense actually makes him a pretty good CF overall.

Winker turns into a "professional hitter" type.  Not at the superstar Votto level, but maybe like an Adam LaRoche.  Kind of guy who hits .275 with 25 HR every year.  This is also what I predict will happen to Kyle Schwarber.

Erwin busts.

Peraza turns into a weak stick, but plays good 2B defense and can run.  So not a great player, but a perfectly serviceable #8 hitting mid-infielder.  But it doesn't happen this year.  He sucks this year.

Cingrani turns into one of those really annoying closers who will be lights out for a month, then get shelled and blow 4 saves in two weeks.  Which in the overall scheme of things is still not a bad closer, but one you never feel good about.  But that also doesn't happen this year.  He sucks this year, at least for 2/3 of the season before finally showing his potential late.

Hoover sucks.  Diaz sucks.  The whole bullpen sucks other than Cingrani who still is kind of sketchy and turns into the bane of the team for the next 4 years.

Mesoraco gets hurt, and keeps getting hurt, but manages to be very productive the few months each season where he's actually healthy.

Suarez puts up utility guy numbers.  Which is bad this year since he is starting, but maybe next year he will be a utility player and he'll be a decent one.

Duvall busts, but ends up being a semi-useful power bat off the bench.

Moscot turns into a swingman, who is bad but still good because he's a lot less bad than other options.  He gets 3-4 starts a year, the rest he is a long reliever/mop-up guy.  Puts up 4.75-5.00 ERA's.

Phillips puts together a year that is less good than last year, but still not bad overall.  He finally accepts a trade and the Reds get two good-not-great prospects for him.  One busts.  The other surprisingly turns into an all-star.

The Reds don't trade Votto, which is too bad because if you look at all my predictions, what you have is a solidly average  (but young and cheap) core overall that just needs a superstar to put them over the top.  The kind of superstar that a guy like Votto might get you if you traded him for an elite prospect.  But they don't trade him, so they end up playing .500 ball for the next three or four years.

I figured this should be a new (2016) thread
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Dan on March 30, 2016, 10:12:57 AM
Votto used to be that superstar - I assume he is no longer?
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: euro60 on March 30, 2016, 11:30:08 AM
Votto had a very nice year last year: in 158 games he had an MLB-leading 143 walks, a .314 batting average, 29 home runs, and 80 RBI. Not too shabby.

Wasn't he voted MLB come-back player of the year?

But that was still ways off his superstar years from the 2010-12 era. That will not happen again.

Votto is now 32, and certainly can be productive for a number of years. But his contract runs through the 2023 season, yes EIGHT MORE YEARS (with actually an option for 2024, so potentially NINE more years). No way any team is going to want to make a trade for this guy.

My expectations for the Reds are so low this year, that I'm hoping they'll pleasantly surprise us. But if they don't, I won't be offended.

In the allocation of the use of our firm's suite for client entertainment, I went for early dates (in May), as I figure the season will be pretty much over by Memorial Day weekend...
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: daytime drinking on March 30, 2016, 01:01:35 PM
Votto had a very nice year last year: in 158 games he had an MLB-leading 143 walks, a .314 batting average, 29 home runs, and 80 RBI. Not too shabby.

Wasn't he voted MLB come-back player of the year?

But that was still ways off his superstar years from the 2010-12 era. That will not happen again.

Votto is now 32, and certainly can be productive for a number of years. But his contract runs through the 2023 season, yes EIGHT MORE YEARS (with actually an option for 2024, so potentially NINE more years). No way any team is going to want to make a trade for this guy.

My expectations for the Reds are so low this year, that I'm hoping they'll pleasantly surprise us. But if they don't, I won't be offended.

In the allocation of the use of our firm's suite for client entertainment, I went for early dates (in May), as I figure the season will be pretty much over by Memorial Day weekend...

you don't think those were joey votto superstar numbers?  it was his best year ever if yer into sabermetrics.  which i'm not, but he was fucking stellar last year
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Dan on March 30, 2016, 01:21:35 PM
Quote from: euro60 link=topic=106746.msg5148
Votto had a very nice year last year: in 158 games he had an MLB-leading 143 walks, a .314 batting average, 29 home runs, and 80 RBI. Not too shabby.

Holy crap those are amazing numbers. If you offered me a team of those numbers we'd win championships every year.

(I understand about the contract length...that's a tough one)
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Zafer Kaya on March 30, 2016, 02:12:24 PM
No way any team is going to want to make a trade for this guy.

Yes, they would. Because Votto is still pretty awesome.  The Diamondbacks just paid $225 for Greinke, and he's the same age as Votto plus he's a pitcher.

I think the Reds could possibly get someone just to take his contract.  If they are willing to eat contract money, they could get some elite prospects, but not sure it's worth it.

The problem is that the club worries about fans if they "give away" Votto for nothing.  Even worse, Votto may not want to leave in which case they will be seen as having pushed out an MVP player who is still really good and loves the Reds.

The reality is that at this point in time, roughly $200m in the pocket is more useful to the Reds than paying Joey Votto to screw up their draft picks.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: daytime drinking on March 30, 2016, 02:39:03 PM
No way any team is going to want to make a trade for this guy.

Yes, they would. Because Votto is still pretty awesome.  The Diamondbacks just paid $225 for Greinke, and he's the same age as Votto plus he's a pitcher.

I think the Reds could possibly get someone just to take his contract.  If they are willing to eat contract money, they could get some elite prospects, but not sure it's worth it.

The problem is that the club worries about fans if they "give away" Votto for nothing.  Even worse, Votto may not want to leave in which case they will be seen as having pushed out an MVP player who is still really good and loves the Reds.

The reality is that at this point in time, roughly $200m in the pocket is more useful to the Reds than paying Joey Votto to screw up their draft picks.

it seems to me like we got a crappy beta version of the cardinals.  when the cardinals rebuild, they still make the playoffs.  when we rebuild (though, is the first actual rebuild in over 30 years?) we set the program back a decade
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: euro60 on March 30, 2016, 03:21:42 PM
Yes, they would. Because Votto is still pretty awesome.  The Diamondbacks just paid $225 for Greinke, and he's the same age as Votto plus he's a pitcher.

Votto may not want to leave in which case they will be seen as having pushed out an MVP player who is still really good and loves the Reds.

That's comparing apples (pitchers) to oranges (batters)...

I think they can move him without his consent... And I think that 2016 is the last year that can happen, since after 2016, Votto will be a "10 and 5" player.

Bottom line: if the Reds had gotten any feelers to trade Votto for a decent prospect, I think they would've done it, and still think they would do it. But what club wants to take on close to $200 mill in payroll. And I don't see the Reds eating/paying tens of millions to make that happen.

Oh well, at least I'll get more years of good use from my Votto jersey! 
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Zafer Kaya on March 30, 2016, 03:57:20 PM
Votto has a full no-trade clause in his contract, I think that's the main reason he hasn't been moved.



Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: euro60 on March 30, 2016, 04:33:27 PM
Votto has a full no-trade clause in his contract, I think that's the main reason he hasn't been moved.
I didn't know that. In that case, the whole thing is moot. Votto likes it here, and it's highly doubtful he'll ever agree to a trade, even to Toronto.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: trixi on March 30, 2016, 06:46:47 PM
Give him away!   :pirate:
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: euro60 on March 30, 2016, 10:38:54 PM
Give him away!   :pirate:
you mean... to you? He's still a bachelor....

It reminds me of an episode a few years back when a young girl, maybe 7 or 8, was the announcer for the next batter up, and she announced him... "Coming up for the Reds... Joey Hotto!"... the entire stadium exploded with laughter, and even Votto himself was shown on the big screen laughing. Priceless.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Dan on March 31, 2016, 10:29:58 AM
That. Is. Adorable.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: euro60 on March 31, 2016, 02:41:19 PM
And the most important Reds Opening Day-related news is surely this: Taste of Belgium will have a float in the Findlay Market Opening Day Parade!

I asked if they were going to toss waffles into the crowd. Sadly, they are not  ;)
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: daytime drinking on March 31, 2016, 03:47:32 PM
i'm excited to see these youngsters.  apparently the brewers have been doing rebuilding right.  should be fun next 10 years.  it's funny that votto might be around longer than some of these rooks.  still excited
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: trixi on March 31, 2016, 10:33:31 PM
Give him away!   :pirate:
you mean... to you? He's still a bachelor....

bwahaaahaaa.  I am not a fan, so as long as he would not be traded to my team, I'd be quite happy to have him go somewhere else! 
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Dan on April 01, 2016, 09:48:29 AM
You'd become a fan, I'm sure, if he was traded to your living room. :-p
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Zafer Kaya on April 01, 2016, 10:26:19 AM
The Cubs probably have five players better looking than Joey Votto, so you can keep him.



Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Zafer Kaya on April 01, 2016, 11:25:01 AM
i'm excited to see these youngsters.  apparently the brewers have been doing rebuilding right.  should be fun next 10 years.  it's funny that votto might be around longer than some of these rooks.  still excited

Brewers really aren't in that much better shape than the Reds.  They do have the elite prospect in Arcia that the Reds lack, but the strength for both is mainly youth in depth.  The other thing is, the Brewers can move Braun and LuCroy easier than the Reds can move Votto or Phillips.

The Reds are at least not just totally hopeless.  The worst is when you have a bad team that is old and boring.  The Reds at least will be fun to watch and root for.  Maybe everyone pans out, and then you have a dynasty.  Probably not.  But at least the possibility is there.

The Reds did the right thing in rebuilding, and they should have done it earlier.  The thing is, I just don't think they got enough back for Frazier or Chapman.  So they will most likely end up with a .500-ish team instead of a dynasty.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: trixi on April 01, 2016, 10:13:22 PM
The Cubs probably have five players better looking than Joey Votto, so you can keep him.

^^^^this  :-D  and while he's not the best looking player, Rizzo owes me after his foul ball hit me last year!
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: trixi on April 01, 2016, 10:14:39 PM
You'd become a fan, I'm sure, if he was traded to your living room. :-p
Not a chance, I'd never let him in the door!  I can't believe MK hasn't chimed in on this. 
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Zafer Kaya on April 04, 2016, 11:44:59 AM
Phillies-Reds, LOL
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: euro60 on April 04, 2016, 01:34:02 PM
If nothing else, what was forecast as a rainy and later cloudy day, has remained dry all day and now is out-right sun-drenched. The Findley Market parade must be over as I see thousands of fans pouring into the Banks. Plus the Reds even have a chance to eek out a win against the Phillies.

Laissez les bon temps rouler!
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Zafer Kaya on April 07, 2016, 04:21:34 PM
Sweep!  3-0!  Atop the NL Central!  3 games ahead of St. Louis already!

Contender or pretender?  We'll find out soon.  Next three series:  Pirates, Cubs, Cardinals.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: euro60 on April 07, 2016, 04:22:11 PM
Playoffs are within reach! Just a few more wins is all it takes.  :P
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Zafer Kaya on April 07, 2016, 04:28:55 PM
If only all you could play Philadelphia every game.  I think that team is going to give the 2003 Tigers a run for their money.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Dan on April 07, 2016, 04:55:56 PM
Only 159 wins left in the regular season! It's sad that it's going so quickly.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Zafer Kaya on April 08, 2016, 10:47:39 PM
Hoover sucks.

TBF, so does the rest of the pen and indeed most of the team.  There just isn't a pun you can make about them.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: euro60 on April 08, 2016, 11:16:02 PM
Hoover sucks.

TBF, so does the rest of the pen and indeed most of the team.  There just isn't a pun you can make about them.
yup, agreed... what a heartbreaking loss... <sigh>
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Drjohnrock on April 10, 2016, 05:32:39 PM
It's early, yet, but I'll take a 5-1 start anyday.  And they took 2 out of 3 games from this year's edition of the Pirates, one of the three greatest teams that ever played in the major leagues, along with the 2016 Cubs and Cardinals.  Go Reds!
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Zafer Kaya on April 10, 2016, 10:53:59 PM
I don't think you can blame the media or anyone else for thinking the Reds would suck, which in all fairness I still think they will.  And probably even most Reds fans will still be very happy if they finish .500.  Melville got lucky.  5 hits and 4 walks in 4 IP is horrible, but somehow resulted in only 1 run.

But I don't know.  5-1 is 5-1.  It doesn't mean anything this early in the season for sure.  But the Cubs are 5-1 and I'm certainly not complaining about it.

I do think the Cubs are legitimate favorites in the division.  I don't think they are over-rated in that respect but I wouldn't blame anyone for being sick of hearing about it.  Plus, so much can happen in a baseball season.  The pre-season WS favorite in any given year probably still only has about a 20% chance of winning, tops.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Zafer Kaya on April 12, 2016, 10:50:53 AM
Was Price seriously going to leave Finnegan out there to try and finish that no-hitter?  Why does he even still have a job?

Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Dan on April 12, 2016, 11:46:13 AM
From the AP report:

Quote
Would he have been allowed to complete a no-hitter? Manager Bryan Price said no.

"He had a chance to throw a seven-inning no-hitter, but once his pitch count got up over 105 that was gonna be it for the night," Price said. "His night would have been over after the 7th."
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Zafer Kaya on April 12, 2016, 01:11:46 PM
Well that's a blatant lie from Price, since Finnegan threw 111 pitches.  There wasn't even anyone up in the pen when Finnegan passed 105.

Maybe someone can get C Trent Rosencrans to ask Price about Cozart's availability.  Troll Price into throwing another fit and then maybe that finally prompts someone to fire him.

Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Dan on April 12, 2016, 01:32:44 PM
LOL. This makes me feel like you have Finnegan in your fantasy team.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Butter on April 12, 2016, 02:07:07 PM
Well that's a blatant lie from Price, since Finnegan threw 111 pitches.  There wasn't even anyone up in the pen when Finnegan passed 105.

Maybe someone can get C Trent Rosencrans to ask Price about Cozart's availability.  Troll Price into throwing another fit and then maybe that finally prompts someone to fire him.

Well they were at 6.2 innings at that point, I think they didn't have anyone up because they figured he would finish out the 7th no problem, and then have a whole half inning to get someone ready.  As soon as someone got on base, people started getting warmed up.  Not sure what else you would have Price do.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Zafer Kaya on April 12, 2016, 03:13:01 PM
I'm just saying, if you decide that your pitcher has a hard cap of 105 pitches, and your pitcher ends up throwing 111 pitches, then you are a terrible manager.  The ability to count should be a minimal requirement for the position.

1)  There was no reason to expect that Finnegan was going to make it out of the seventh in 105 pitches.  He started the inning at 92 pitches.  92/6=15.3333.  92+15.3333=107.333.

2)  Finnegan didn't have to start that inning at all.  He should be on an innings cap considering he's previous season high in innings is like 60 or something.  So one extra inning now just means one less inning later.  92 pitches is a decent amount for a guy still getting stretched out.  Finnegan could have walked away, knowing he pitched well and in line for the win and didn't allow any hits.  You get a pinch hitter so you can possibly extend your 3-0 lead.  Your relievers have plenty of time to warm up and can come in with a clean slate.

3)  If you want Finnegan to start the inning, then have someone get up after the first batter.  Or the second batter.  Do you really care if Caleb Cotham has to get up and then sit back down?  He's far less important to the Reds future than Finnegan.

If Price had said "I just thought Finnegan deserved the chance to get through 7 and we'll just take it easy on him the next start" that might have been okay.  Or if he had been at 95 pitches and then Ross worked like a 12 pitch AB and Finnegan ends up throwing 107 then 2 pitches isn't a big deal and the odds of Ross working a count like that are low, so that's acceptable as well.

But the way that situation unfolded, if you have a hard cap of 105 pitches and he ends up throwing 111 despite you having had at least three chances to pull him, it's just bad managerial discipline. 
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: euro60 on April 12, 2016, 03:37:22 PM
It was a poorly managed game from Pryce, period.

And this stuff about "pitch count" is complete BS, by the way. As recently as 20-25 years ago, there was no such thing, and somehow the world didn't stop turning.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Zafer Kaya on April 12, 2016, 04:08:40 PM
No, you just had a lot of crappy pitching because promising young starters blew out their arms, and being able to throw 250 innings was more important than being able to throw 185 good innings.

None of those teams from back then would stance a chance against any of today's teams. 
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: daytime drinking on April 13, 2016, 10:42:11 AM
No, you just had a lot of crappy pitching because promising young starters blew out their arms, and being able to throw 250 innings was more important than being able to throw 185 good innings.

None of those teams from back then would stance a chance against any of today's teams.

not even the big red machine?  girl you crazy.  it's only because they didn't have crazy things like war back then.  all kidding aside, i would consider this year a success (and pryce his job) if a solid rotation or at least a core group of pitchers emerged.  since i consider this season a wash, i don't mind the bullpen blowing leads and games so long as it isn't the pitchers we're trying to develop. 

and for something interesting, would you trade suarez? 
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Kwyjibo on April 13, 2016, 11:34:02 AM
not even the big red machine?  girl you crazy. 

*snort*
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Zafer Kaya on April 13, 2016, 01:47:49 PM
not even the big red machine?  girl you crazy.  it's only because they didn't have crazy things like war back then.  all kidding aside, i would consider this year a success (and pryce his job) if a solid rotation or at least a core group of pitchers emerged.  since i consider this season a wash, i don't mind the bullpen blowing leads and games so long as it isn't the pitchers we're trying to develop. 

Right, and that's why I would have erred on the side of pulling Finnegan early.  If he pitches decently this year, he could be a #2/#3 starter for years to come.  Caleb Cotham and Jumbo Diaz can blow leads all year and pitch until their arms fall off and it doesn't matter.

No, I wouldn't trade Eugenio Suarez.  He's young and cheap.  Anyone under team control who is even mediocre is worth a ton.  I think Suarez is better than mediocre already, and maybe he's for real. 

If the Reds are right about Peraza being a future all-star then Suarez and Peraza should be a nice MI combo for a bunch of years.

Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: euro60 on April 15, 2016, 02:49:52 PM
Well, that good feeling of the first week lasted... a week. The fact we had any "good feeling" at all was amazing.

The Reds showed true colors against the Cubs, I'm afraid. You might say "well, the Cubs are  super-stacked this year" and you're probably right. But the Reds' pitching staff is so underwhelming that they'll have a hard time against many teams.

I'm going to my first Reds game on Monday. Weather forecast: 79 and sunny. Perfect.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Zafer Kaya on April 15, 2016, 03:43:07 PM
The Reds rotation actually looks sort of promising.  The bullpen is beyond terrible, but that doesn't matter very much during a rebuild.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: euro60 on April 17, 2016, 10:55:39 PM
well, the Reds managed 1 win (barely, no thanks to "closer" JJ Hover, whose ERA is around 17 or 18, I think, yea you read rightSt. Louis ) on the road trip to Chicago and St. Louis. So they are 6-6 now. Probably where they should be.

The upcoming St. Louis vs Cubs should be interesting.

Going to the Reds game tomorrow vs. Colorado. The Reds starting pitcher is a guy I've never heard of.... hmmmm
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Drjohnrock on April 18, 2016, 11:13:52 PM
The Reds bullpen now consists of Wood, Coltham, and--maybe--Cingrani.  Beyond that, forget it.  What a depressing loss to Colorado earlier this evening.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: euro60 on April 19, 2016, 09:44:12 AM
I was at GABP last night. First of all: I don't recall having been to a Reds game with so few people in attendance, certainly not at GABP. The official attendance was announced as being 12,000 and change, but I'm telling you, it sure seemed to me there were far less than 10,000 people there. GABP was a graveyard for much of the game. Only once (when Cozart scored the only Reds run in the 6th) was there any resemblance of a game atmosphere.

Last night's game captured the season to date perfectly: a no-name starting pitcher doing better than expected; the offense pretty much absent the whole game, with Cozart being the only exception to speak of; and a close game that the bullpen has no trouble losing in the 8th inning once again. It was deja vu all over again.

With the way the Cubs are playing (they are going to run away with the division, mark my words), the Reds are going to be 10+ games behind very soon, and probably 20-25 GB by the All-Star Game.

So the only reason to go to the ballpark this year is to enjoy the weather and the stadium, and hopefully watch a couple of youngsters break through.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Zafer Kaya on April 19, 2016, 10:22:13 AM
Dan Straily is actually somewhat interesting.  He strikes out a ton of batters even though he doesn't throw that hard.  His problem is he walks too many and he's a flyball pitcher.  And he's had some injuries.

But if he can get a few more GB and/or a little better command, he could be a solid pitcher.  If you think about, he was drafted by the A's, then went to the Cubs, then the Astros.  Those are all very modern, "moneyball" teams that know what they are doing.

Not like Straily is going to be an ace, but with the right coaching he could end up being a decent backend starter.  And then you flip him to another team for a high ceiling player/prospect.

The Cubs did this when they were rebuilding.  They took a similar pitcher in Scott Feldman, he pitched a solid half a season, and then they traded him to the Orioles.  That's how they got Jake Arrieta.  And Pedro Strop.  That deal has as much or more to do with the Cubs resurgence as any of their draft picks.

The Cubs actually did this with Straily himself.  They got him as a minor piece of the deal that sent Hammel and Samardzija to the A's for Addison Russell.  He didn't even do anything for the Cubs because he was hurt.  But the Cubs then traded him and Luis Valbuena to the Astros for Dexter Fowler.

People talk about how the Cubs and Astros built through the draft, but it's really not true.  The Astros did it more than the Cubs, but both teams improved a lot just by hard work.  You get good scouting and then just keep flipping players and bootstrap your way up.  Make moves like mad, and look to get a small profit in every move.  The Reds should have 2-3 Dan Strailys and no Alfredo Simons.

Anyway, most of the bad Reds starters aren't even real Reds.  They're just cannon fodder to eat innings while the real Reds are hurt.  And for someone like Stephenson, you're just getting him a bit of experience even though you know he isn't ready yet.

I actually don't mind rebuilding years because at least you know the team has a plan and is going somewhere.  You won't win but watching the young players is exciting, and you maybe follow the minor league teams a little more closely.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: euro60 on April 20, 2016, 12:22:40 PM
Reds won last night, but no thanks to closer JJ "ERA 15+" Hoover... Wow.

The 12:35 series closer vs Colorado is about to start. Looking out my office window (right onto the Reds stadium), there are a few people mulling about, but you can hardly tell that there is an MLB game to be played.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Butter on April 20, 2016, 12:42:02 PM
My prediction before the season was that the Reds hit 73 wins.  And I still feel like that is a good possibility, they may even flirt with .500 for a good long while.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: euro60 on April 20, 2016, 05:03:37 PM
Yet ANOTHER bullpen meltdown in the 8th (allowing 3 runs to tie the game) but thankfully the Reds escape in the 9th with a walk-off hit. Wow. Surely there must be a few relief pitchers out there that are better? Because it can't get any worse than the relief pitchers they have now...

From ESPN:

CINCINNATI -- Tucker Barnhart hit a game-ending single in the ninth inning, and the Cincinnati Reds overcame a bullpen meltdown and took advantage of a Colorado baserunning blunder to beat the Rockies 6-5 Wednesday.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: euro60 on April 21, 2016, 10:51:01 PM
It's one thing to get no-hit, in, say, a 1-0 or 2-0 game. It's quite another to be no-hit 16-0. wow.

Props obviously to Arrieta, but really this was boys against men. A dark moment for Reds fans.

On the other hand, bright days are ahead for Cubs fans. This may be their year.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Zafer Kaya on April 21, 2016, 11:00:40 PM
At that point, I'd honestly rather be no hit.

Is it really any worse than a 16-0 two hit shut out?  At least you saw something special.

It sucks to lose the no no-hit streak, but it was kind of a tainted streak anyway since the Reds hit shut out four years ago, just not in the regular season.

What are the Reds-- like 8-3 against everyone but Chicago?  Not so bad, really.  The pen will get better.  If only because they could probably get four guys off the waiver wire who would be better.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Butter on April 22, 2016, 07:16:19 AM
On the other hand, bright days are ahead for Cubs fans. This may be their year.

Don't worry, the Cubs will blow it in the playoffs.  They always do.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: daytime drinking on April 24, 2016, 02:50:54 AM
i went to the billy goat tavern recently
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: euro60 on May 02, 2016, 10:41:19 PM
So I was away on holiday the past week. The Reds didn't win a single game while I was gone. I'm not counting Sunday's up-and-down win vs. the Pirates as I landed back that day.

Tonite back at home, the Reds are up 6-3, and in the 7th inning, the bullpen blew it again, giving up 5 runs. Wow. The worst bullpen ever?
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Zafer Kaya on May 04, 2016, 02:20:21 AM
Wow. The worst bullpen ever?

Yes, now officially the worst bullpen ever.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: euro60 on May 25, 2016, 09:50:48 AM
Ok, so the Reds are in a complete free fall now.

At the start of the season, I figured the Reds would be out of first by 15 games by the end of May (and the reason I wanted to use our firm's suite for client entertainment as early as possible, which I did--twice earlier this month), but the way things are going right now, it might well be 20 games, if not more.

Reds are an MLB-worst 3-16 on the road. Yes, a pathetic 3 wins in 19 road games, and they have 8 more games to go on the current road trip. They might well finish it 1-9, it wouldn't surprise me one bit.

I know it doesn't make much or any difference whether to fire Bryan Price midway into the season, but at a certain point, you gotta wonder how much more Bob Castellini will put up with. Attendance has plummeted along the way as well.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: foolsgold on May 25, 2016, 10:20:18 AM
I wouldn't be surprised to see him finish the season but not have his contract renewed.  A change of manager isn't going make Votto remember how to hit, stop players from getting injured or turn a bunch of minor league quality pitchers into consistent winners or protect a lead.  I haven't been to many games this season and it's been since the beginning of May since I've been to GABP, so I don't know if the team has just given up (in which case, that probably is on Price.)  Are they still showing life on the field or are have they turned into Dunn/Kearns/Griffey Mk.2?

I'll just sit tight until Homer returns and then everything will correct itself, right?   ;D
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Butter on May 25, 2016, 10:26:56 AM
I saw they just put up all 15 Sun-Thurs games for June-July into a package for $59.  That actually sounds fun even if they are turrible.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Zafer Kaya on May 25, 2016, 12:05:57 PM
Bryan Price is awful, IMO.

But with the team rebuilding, I would have said the only thing that really matters is how well he handles the young players... making sure the pitchers don't throw too much or that the hitters don't get too discouraged as they adjust.

Except everyone has been hurt, or not good enough for promotion, or the Reds are understandably trying to save a buck so Price hasn't really had to work with Peraza, Iglesias, Stephenson, Reed, DeSclafani, etc.

I think Bud Black is a good manager, so I would jump on hiring him if he wants the job.  Which he probably doesn't.  Failing that, then they might as well wait until the end of the season. 
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: foolsgold on May 25, 2016, 01:16:08 PM
You know, I've always wondered why the Reds went with Price after they fired Baker.  They still had a very talented team that probably would have benefited from a manager with playoff experience, not someone unproven from the ranks.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: euro60 on May 28, 2016, 12:41:56 AM
thank you Minn Twins from keeping the Reds having the worst record in MLB. At least for now <sigh>
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Drjohnrock on May 28, 2016, 06:00:08 PM
Well, well, well--the Reds have a little backbone after all--or at least Alfredo Simon does.  Today's game against the Brewers is in progress as I type this.  Chase "Cunt" Anderson, the Brewers pitcher had already hit two Reds batters.  Tyler Holt was at third for the Reds and had home stolen.  So the Cunt hit Simon, who was at the plate, meaning the ball was dead and Holt had to go back to third.  Anderson should have been ejected on the spot.  But no.  Price went out to argue with the umpires--hopefully to ask why Anderson wasn't ejected.  But when the Cunt came up to bat, Simon drilled the shit out of him.  Good job! And Simon was ejected.  Total bullshit--Anderson should have had his ass thrown out when he hit Simon.  Yes, stupid Reds TV announcers, Simon was pitching the best that he had in a long time.  But you're wrong that the Reds should have gotten revenge some time in the future.  You can't take that bullshit from the opposing team.  I hope that will light a fire under the Reds.  But I'm not optimistic.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: euro60 on August 01, 2016, 04:32:28 PM
So long, Jay Bruce. Thanks for the 9 seasons that you gave to the organization and the fans.

We will miss you.

Wishing you the best in the remainder years of your career

BRUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCCCCCE!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Drjohnrock on August 01, 2016, 06:48:06 PM
So long, Jay Bruce. Thanks for the 9 seasons that you gave to the organization and the fans.

We will miss you.

Wishing you the best in the remainder years of your career

BRUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCCCCCE!!!!!!!!

Yes, Bruce was a class act.  And he has come a long way this season as far as being more consistent at the plate.

As for the players the Reds got in return from the Mets...well, I used to think fans were joking when they would say that Walt Jocketty was still on the Cardinals' payroll.  But now I'm not so sure it's a joke.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: euro60 on August 01, 2016, 10:34:54 PM
As for the "prospects" they Reds got, who knows? only time will tell. Anyone who says they "know" what these guys will do or become in the future is a fool or a liar or both. It's a crap shoot. Let's hope it works out...

Have to agree with DrJohn as to what a class act Jay Bruce has been throughout his tenure here in Cincinnati. Reason I wish him the best.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Zafer Kaya on August 02, 2016, 11:04:32 AM
Dilson Herrera's alright.  Not going to be a star, but has a pretty decent chance at being average.  Some might argue he already is, since he was about average when he was with the Mets last year.

They were not going to get a big return for Bruce, as while he is having a big resurgence offensively this year, people are still wary of how he was absolute crap for the previous two seasons.  Also, his fielding now is so bad it negates almost all of the value he produces with the bat.

It was a bit of a strange trade for the Mets.  They needed a hitter, but not an OF and not the kind of hitter Bruce is.  Now they have 4 corner outfielders who all stink at defense, have a lot of power and strike out a lot.  The trade looks okay on paper strictly in terms of value.  But in terms of team needs, the Mets get very little.

It's a little similar on the Reds side as they already have Peraza.  But the difference is that the Reds are rebuilding so you can never have too many prospects.  And they can figure out if they want to trade one of their guys in the offseason.  They have time, whereas the Mets are trying to win now.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Butter on August 02, 2016, 12:23:01 PM
Herrera is still only 22 and he's played parts of two major league seasons with the Mets.

As I was trying to explain to my son, when you're rebuilding, you need lots of prospects because many of them just won't pan out... But you have to give yourself a chance to have enough quantity along with quality that some will.  And if you're really lucky, a couple of them are stars.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: daytime drinking on August 03, 2016, 10:19:19 AM
i'm more and more impressed with tucker.  i'm thinking mez moves to the outfield or preferably third.  move schebler to left.  and yes, i'm a big fan of small sample sizes.  it also appears iglesias will never be a starter.  i suppose let him build some value in the bullpen and ship him.  kinda sucks.  was a big fan
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Zafer Kaya on August 03, 2016, 10:47:26 AM
I think Iglesias still has a lot of value as a guy who can come in and throw 2-3 innings shutdown innings every few days. 

I mean, it's a total bummer because if he could handle the workload he could be maybe a top ten starter.  But they're still not paying him that much and a strong middle reliever is easily worth the  $5m or so in salary.

The Reds have a lot of arms so their failed starters a la Iglesias, Lorenzen, possibly Finnegan will likely turn into excellent MR.  DeSclafini is a good middle rotation guy.  And between Lamb, Moscot, and five other dudes, they should find two good backend starters.

But they really, really need Reed or Stephenson to turn into an ace.  Reed actually looks pretty good except he just totally loses it at some point every game and gives up 4 runs just like that.  But I think that's just rookie inexperience.  Stephenson though, is starting to smell a little busty.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Butter on August 03, 2016, 11:27:16 AM
Setup guys are pretty valuable, so I think Iglesias definitely has value there.  Just witness the game last night... no Iglesias, no Lorenzen, no Cingrani and the Reds give up 3 runs in 2 innings and only are lucky enough to win with a walkoff from Scott Schebler.  Yes, Scott Schebler.

I agree with you ZK, R-Steves is starting to worry me.  I am not sure though that they need Reed or he to turn into an ace but they need one of them to be solid.  I think DeSclafani and Bailey are not a bad core to start with, though Homer just turned 30 this year.  They may just end up with five #3 starters, and you could do a lot worse.  Still think Amir Garrett could be pretty good also.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Zafer Kaya on August 03, 2016, 06:55:07 PM
I think that's the biggest potential flaw with the Reds now.  They could end up with five #3 starters.  And on the hitting side they could end up with Hamilton, Peraza, Duvall, Herrera all being average players.  Peraza and Herrera being very vanilla, and Hamilton and Duvall being awesome at certain things but horribly flawed in other ways.

And to an extent, that's not bad.  That is a nice, cheap, fairly young core of players.  If it were the Cubs, I'd be fairly happy with that. But the Cubs have the $$ to spend on big FA's like Zobrist, Heyward (not working out so well, though), Lester, Lackey to complement their core (which is actually somewhat phenomenal as opposed to just "solid").  The Reds don't have the $$ to add a superstar or two to put them over the top.   

I think the Reds took the tack of sacrificing high ceiling and high risk in favor of players closer to being major league ready.  As a result, they can turn things around in a hurry and be .500 next year.  But they might never make it much past that.

That's why I think they really need one of Reed and Stephenson to be a TOR guy, and maybe Winker to turn into an all-star hitter.  Pull that off, and the Reds are legit contenders.  Otherwise, they'll end up being decent enough... maybe eck out a wildcard one year, but no more.
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: euro60 on August 03, 2016, 10:36:05 PM

That's why I think they really need one of Reed and Stephenson to be a TOR guy, and maybe Winker to turn into an all-star hitter.  Pull that off, and the Reds are legit contenders.  Otherwise, they'll end up being decent enough... maybe eck out a wildcard one year, but no more.
you talking about the 0-6 Reed? And not just that. I see the Reds going nowhere for years to come, sadly. Way too much competition in their own division, as another thing. Wildcard one year? I wish!!!!
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: Zafer Kaya on August 04, 2016, 09:37:48 AM
Hot take!
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: daytime drinking on September 20, 2016, 08:50:51 PM
i bet lester no hits the reds tonight
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: trixi on September 20, 2016, 10:25:33 PM
i bet lester no hits the reds tonight
Unfortunately no, but a Red hit Lester :-(  GRRR  #sjv
Title: Re: Cincinnati Reds 2016
Post by: daytime drinking on September 21, 2016, 11:16:32 AM
josh smith (the pitcher) got a hit right after i posted that