The good folks at the Hardball Times kindly asked that I write the 5-Questions Season Preview for the Reds, and you can find the result published here.
It's not the most in-depth piece I've ever written, but I think it does a good job of setting up the coming season. As I see it, the Reds' hopes in '08 will come down to how well their young guys pitch. If two of Bailey, Cueto, and Volquez have good seasons in the rotation (regardless of who starts the year where), the Reds could be pretty exciting toward the end of the year. If not... meh.
Also, for a small bit of controversy, I argue that Dusty does not, in fact, have an extreme tendency to favor veterans over youth.
Similar articles have also been published on the Brewers, Cubs, and Cards, with the Pirates and Astros due to be published tomorrow. Good way to get caught up on our division rivals.
....
This is only tangentially related, but I also wanted to highlight Chris's excellent post on Dusty Baker. I have my share of reservations about Dusty, but his ability to handle and motivate players is clearly a strength...and might have quantifiable impacts on player performance.
...
Update: Holy crap! Rob Neyer picked up on the Baker commentary in his blog at ESPN! I need to send stuff to THT more often. :)
Thanks to Joel for the tip, as I don't have a subscription to ESPN.
Justin -
ReplyDeleteHere are some of my thoughts after doing some research on Dusty's history with rookies.
Dusty hates rookies, or does he?
Another Chris
Chris,
ReplyDeleteThanks for that. It's worth pointing out that Shawn did something similar back when Dusty was hired. I linked to some of it here.
-j
Holy crap, Rob Neyer picked up on the Baker stuff! (see update above)
ReplyDeleteCongrats on the Neyer mention. Unfortunately, us poor slobs can't read it. I presume Neyer thinks Baker blocks young guys. I suspect Neyer was also a major force behind the "Baker destroys young arms" story line. He beat that drum pretty hard, back in the day.
ReplyDeleteAnalyzing Baker not playing young kids, in hind sight, will be difficult. If Baker misuses and refuses to develop young players then it's not fair to say, "look those guys stunk anyway."
We will have our answer soon. If Votto, Bailey, and Bruce sit for Hatteberg, Affeldt, and Patterson then nothing will convince me to the contrary.
I became very concerned for the Reds when I read that Baker quote about Votto caring too much about OBP. Then my mind exploded when Daugherty's ridiculous piece came out. FJM's rebuttal was overly profane and not funny but that doesn't make Daugherty's article any better. It isn't important, but if you talk to Daugherty it might be interesting to mention Bill James has 2 Red Sox World Series rings.
FWIW, Neyer agreed with my take on Baker's tendency to block young players.
ReplyDeleteI guess the question I have is this: if this really is true, which young players were blocked? Shawn's investigation of this last winter found relatively little (by my judgement) evidence of guys with strong minor league performances at young ages who weren't given a shot. Maybe a better way to do this would be to go back and use old Baseball America rankings, as stats can be misleading...
I'd also say that at some point, you have to expect that SOME prospects won't be given a shot. Every organization seems to do this now and then. See, for example, Chris Denorfia, Brady Clark, and (almost) Felipe Lopez in the Reds organization. The question, as I see it, is whether Baker is as unusually extreme in this respect as his reputation would suggest.
Frankly, the only guy I ever hear about being blocked is Choi, and to me that looks more like a guy who got hurt at the wrong time than someone being blocked.
As for Daugherty and FJM's articles, I think we're pretty much in agreement.
One thing I will say is that Baker historically has seen substantially better than expected offensive performances from his players, even if you take out Bonds. Some of that might be luck, but the study I linked does find some evidence of manager skill (and, in regresses to the mean). So, at this point, I'm comfortable thinking that Baker's influence on hitters is probably going to be more positive than harmful. I certainly agree with Baker's opinion on called third strikes... -j
Thanks for the link, and congrats on the Neyer mention (which I'll never be able to see).
ReplyDeleteNitpicky question time. You wrote:
ReplyDelete"Bailey and Volquez have continued to have control issues..."
Voltron? The numbers are 8 IP, 13K/2BB. I haven't seen the games, though - has there been wildness?
Great piece, by the way. I forgot to say that.
ReplyDeleteI must confess to feeling the tiniest bit of worry about the great things Baker is saying about Johnny Cueto -- don't love him too much, if you know what I mean.
Chris, that was written before Volquez's latest outing. And some of his early throwing sessions did bring reports of control issues, which have always been his problem. I agree that his work this spring has been encouraging! -j
ReplyDeleteP.S. Glad you liked it! :)
ReplyDeleteI'm going to be daring and post this quote from Neyer's article. Hope he doesn't mind...it's old enough now that it's probably not a big deal. This was his response after quoting my piece on Baker:
I think that's probably right. From a distance, it's easy to scream, "Give the job to Bruce! Give the job to Votto! Give the jobs to Bailey and Cueto!" There are a couple of reasons to lower our voices, though. One, often you don't want to give a job to a young player. You want him to earn the job, whether through good stats or hard work (or both, ideally). And two, some young players simply aren't ready to perform in the majors. Cueto has logged 22 innings above Double-A, and Bruce has drawn 23 walks in 66 games above Class A. I think both of them are ready -- the other guys, too -- but I'm ready to call off the dogs until we see what Baker and management actually do before Opening Day.