The biggest Reds news of 2016: their TV deal is about to expire

Photo Credit: Lynn Friedman

It's a challenging time for the Cincinnati Reds.  Coming off back-to-back losing seasons, there doesn't seem to be much reason for immediate optimism.  Even the front office is no longer bothering to predict great things.  In a recent interview, Reds President Walt Jocketty called 2016 a "transition year."  The front office is usually the last to admit they're not bound for contention, so we shouldn't expect much from the team next year.  All signs point to a fire sale this winter, and the question is more "how much" than "whether" in terms of the Reds converting their higher-priced veteran talent into cheaper and controllable prospects.  I'm hopeful that the next year will bring some exciting trades, at least.  I do worry that the Reds waited too long to sell off some of their top guys.  Chapman has only 1 year of control left and thus won't command the return the Padres just got for Craig Kimbrel.  Frazier probably peaked last summer.  Et cetera.  But there's still value to be had (and dealt).

There is one acquisition sitting on the horizon, however, that seems guaranteed to bring a nice boost to the Reds' bottom line: their television contract expires after next season.  Baseball's TV bonanza started, more or less, when the Dodgers received their other-worldly TV contract a few years back.  Ever since, we've seen team after team secure outstanding contracts that substantially boost revenues.  While there has been some cause for concern that this bubble might someday burst, there hasn't been any indication of that so far as I've seen.

Currently, the Reds' TV contract with FSN Ohio is reportedly for about $30 million per year.  That figure stands to increase with the new deal, but not to the tune of anything approaching the $8+ billion contract (total) the Dodgers received.  In fact, it might be laughably smaller: Cincinnati is the smallest TV market in all of baseball, according to Nielson's 2014-2015 Local Television Market Universe estimates:

Designated Market Area (DMA)	TV Homes	% of US
1. New York	7,442,270	6.539
2. Los Angeles	5,523,800	4.854
3. Chicago	3,477,250	3.055
...	...	...
21. St. Louis	1,226,860	1.078
22. Pittsburgh	1,173,320	1.031
...	...	...
35. Milwaukee	893,210	0.785
36. Cincinnati	876,290	0.770

This improves, of course, if one adds Indianapolis (#27 with 1,082,690 homes) and Louisville (#49 with 656,900 homes) into the Reds' territory.  I'm not positive whether those packages would be part of the same deal or not.  Probably?

In any case, it remains to be seen how much extra money this new deal might provide the team.  An estimate a year and a half ago had the deal at $75 million.  I don't have any way to judge how accurate that is, but if true it would provide the Reds an extra $45 million to play with per season.  One has to expect that not all of that will make it to the team payroll, but it should still pay for most of Joey Votto's and Homer Bailey's contracts, which collectively range from $41 million in 2017 to $48 million in 2019. Effectively wiping those deals off the books, while still permitting the Reds to (hopefully?) benefit from their contributions on the field, would be huge.  The Reds have seemed pretty much at maximum budget from the moment that Homer Bailey signed his extension.

My hope is that they at least see an increase of $20-$25 million in their TV deal, which would be enough to cover Joey Votto.  Getting that money back to play with the rest of the roster could net them 6-7 wins per year in free agent salaries, and even more value if invested in young, extendable talent.  Time will tell.

...of course, the problem is that it's unclear who those young, extendable talents might be.  Anthony DeSclafani?  Eugenio Suarez?  Jesse Winker?  Robert Stephenson?  Some soon-to-be-acquired talent?  It remains to be seen.  But the Reds clearly will need a major infusion of talent to get back to being competitive with the likes of the Cardinals, Cubs, and Pirates.

Hat tip to a commenter on this article at fangraphs, who pointed out the Nielson DMA ratings.

Belated Transactions: Mat Latos swapped for DeSclafani and Wallach

Mat Latos was outstanding for the Reds
Photo Credit: SD Dirk

In my continuing (and intermittent) efforts to catch up the Reds' offseason, here's a discussion of their biggest-profile trade.

The Reds' acquisition of Mat Latos was arguably the biggest move of GM Walt Jocketty's tenure with the Reds.  In exchange for two top-tier prospects, a relief prospect, and a struggling big-league pitcher, the Reds acquired an established, young, big league starter with high upside and many years of control left on his contract.  It was a huge trade, and one that paid immediate dividends for the Reds.  Latos had two excellent seasons for the Reds before last year's injury-limited season, and was a major part of the Reds' 2012 division champion team.

The 2012-2013 Latos is still the guy that I think about when I hear his name.  As a result, it was with a sense of dread when I heard he was traded.  I knew the issue: he had one year left on his contract, and there was little indication that the Reds would be able to re-sign him.  Nevertheless, it seemed like a major blow to the team.  

Here's the thing: Mat Latos might not be the same pitcher that he was in 2012-2013.  As I wrote last year, there was reason to be concerned about his health.  Here is his FanGraphs line:

Lato's strikeout rate took a big hit last year.  So did his ground ball rate.  And Steamer seems to have noticed, projecting him for what would easily be the worst season of his career.  Now, one might be surprised to see a projection system react so strongly to one bad year.  Steamer, however, uses fastball velocity in its projections, and Latos was throwing 2 mph lower last season compared to the previous years of his career.

Steamer is worried, and probably for good reason.  Latos might bounce back, of course, and would be a terrific asset for the Marlins as they try to compete with the uber-rotation Nationals.  He had a number of relatively minor injuries last year that prevented him from having a normal spring training and might have sapped his strength and flexibility in a temporary fashion.  But it could also be that he won't return to form, in which case he is suddenly a back-end starter.

Despite all of that uncertainty, the Reds flipped his last year of control for a pair of players who have some promise.  Let's take a look!

Anthony DeSclafani, 24-year old RHP

DeSclafani (which I am struggling mightily to spell correctly) was a 6th-round selection out of the University of Florida, and Miami acquired him in the Jose Reyes/Mark Buerhle trade prior to the 2013 season.  He has never been a top-tier prospect, but he has steadily advanced through the Marlins' system, and split time between AA, AAA, and MLB last year.  He's shown a decent strikeout rate, (usually) excellent walk rates, and acceptable home run rates throughout his career.  

He only threw 33 innings last year in the majors, but so I'm not at all concerned about the ugly ERA.  I'm actually quite encouraged by the strong walk rate and the effective strikeout rate, though I am arching my eyebrow a bit at his ground ball rate.  The main caveat I have is that a chunk of those innings came in relief, which might inflate those rates.  Still, as a toe-dip in the majors, one can do a lot worse.

We didn't get a write-up on DeSclafini with Kiley McDaniel's prospect work this offseason, but he gave us this quick line in a comment:

That contrasts a bit with the stat line in my view.  His control, based on bb/9, has been superb most of the time, save for his stint in AAA last year.  I'm surprised to see his stuff rated so highly (league-average, maybe a tick above), so that's encouraging.  Here are his Brooks Baseball scattercharts:

We have a clear separation between his four-seam fastball and his sinker, which both sat at the high end of where Kiley had him velocity-wise.  Nothing here was identified as a curve, although it's possible that some of the "sliders" above could be a hard curve ball, while the cutters could be what McDaniel described as a slider.  If the slider is his best breaking pitch, however, that would be surprising, because he threw the "cutter" fewer times than the "slider."  So, we have some inconsistency.  We'll just have to wait and see!

At the minimum, it looks like the Reds acquired a mlb-ready #5 starter.  Hopefully he can be more of a #3 or #4.  Given the risk and short term control inherent in Latos, that strikes me as a pretty nice return.  

But wait, there's more!

Chad Wallach, 23-year old RHB Catcher

Wallach was a 5th-round selection out of California State-Fullerton.  While 5th round is nothing to sneeze at, he hasn't highlighted a lot of top-prospect lists that I've seen. Nevertheless, he had a really nice season last year, largely at the Marlin's low-A affiliate.  I'm particularly excited by the fact that he showed both superb walk rates and superb strikeout rates, walking far more often than he struck out.  That's really good performance.  He didn't show a ton of power, but a catcher with good on-base skills can be mighty valuable if he can field his position well.  As throw-ins go, from a stathead perspective at least, he's a good one.

Summary Opinion

This isn't the clear steal that the Alfredo Simon trade seemed to be.  But given the high risk that Latos presents as he enters the season, I doubt the Reds could have done much better.  Latos suffered a big drop in his apparent stuff last season, and is coming off of injuries to both his throwing arm and his legs.  That, combined with his impending free agency unquestionably hurts his value quite a bit.  With this trade, the Reds cleared up some payroll, replaced Latos in the rotation, and gained years of low-cost control.  If DeSclafani is a serviceable cog at the back of the Reds' rotation for the next few season, the Reds did well in this deal.  

...And that's not even bringing up the argument that they also rid themselves with a problem in the clubhouse in the process (<-fwiw argument="" both="" div="" guessing="" i="" is="" m="" of="" sides="" that="" their="" to="" truth="">

Belated Transactions: Reds trade Simon for Much More Than Bag of Balls

Just before I departed France to return to the States, the Reds made two major trades representing (as Scott put it on a recent Red Reporter podcast) 40% of their starting rotation.  Things were too crazy in my life to write about it at the time, but I wanted to comment a little bit on these two moves.  We'll take Simon tonight, and save Latos for another day.

Alfredo Simon was acquired as a last-minute waiver-wire pickup in 2012 just before opening day, forcing Todd Frazier back to the minors for a week or so to make room on the 25-man roster.  While he'd bounced between the rotation and bullpen, with unimpressive results, for the Orioles in prior seasons, the Reds put him squarely into a bullpen role and got surprisingly good results.  Stats:

In this two seasons in the bullpen, Simon was steady and solid.  He didn't put up peripherals that were completely out of character for his history, but it was as if he figured out how to pull together his best strikeout, walk, and ground ball rate numbers together.

In 2014, missing Mat Latos to start the season, the Reds turned to Simon as their #5 starter.  Surprisingly, he put together an extremely good first-half, albeit one that seemed highly unlikely to continue.  Predictably, he started to regress in the second half, and while he still posted solid enough season totals, I saw little reason to think he was likely to be anything like a solid starter in 2015.  Really, just about all of the warning signs are there.  ERA estimators worse than ERA?  Check.  Below-career average BABIP?  Check.  Declining strikeout rate?  Check.  Entering mid-30's?  Check.  Much, much higher inning totals than prior season or ever before?  Check.  Bad second half?  Check.  Awful projections?  Check: Steamer says 4.92 ERA next year.  

I'd hoped the Reds would trade him at the all-star break, and figured that any value he might have built in the first half would have vanished.  On top of all that, there are off-field rape accusations.  While I tried to stay neutral to that while the legal process played out, I honestly got squeamish every time I saw him take the mound last year...and I know I'm not the only one.

And yet, somehow, the Reds managed to trade him to the Detroit Tigers for a pair of players who have both have some legitimate value: Eugenio Suarez and Jonathan Crawford.  Wow.

Eugenio Suarez, 23-year old RHB SS

Suarez got just shy of half of the Tigers' starts at shortstop last year, and acquitted himself pretty well in his rookie season.  The wrap on him coming up was that he was a good defender with some range limitation, and a decent bat except that he was prone to striking out.  That matches up well to his numbers: UZR, DRS, and the Fan Scouting Report all rate him around average or a tad below-average at shortstop.  He didn't hit a lot, but walked at a decent enough clip to get on base at about a league-average rate.  Overall, he earned 0.7 WAR, which extrapolates out to around 1.5 WAR in a full season of work.  His Steamer projection isn't quite so rosy for this season, but if nothing else he looks like a solid utility infielder who can handle all of the infield positions.

As soon as he was acquired, questions started rumbling about whether Zack Cozart was on his way out the door.  After all, he's just reaching arbitration for the first time ($2.35 M in 2015), and wOBA'd a pathetic 0.254 last season thanks, at least in part, to his absolute refusal to walk (4.6 BB% for his career) and evaporating power (0.079 ISO last year).  It sounds like the job is still Cozart's, but I don't have a problem with Suarez giving him some competition in spring training.

Jonathon Crawford, 23-year old RHP

Crawford was the Tigers' 2013 first-round draft pick, so last year was his first full season of play.  It wasn't a great campaign, but wasn't a complete disaster either.  Certainly, his strikeout rates and walk rates both leave a bit to be desired (and see Doug's comments here).  Furthermore, from what I've gathered, the scouting community wasn't particularly impressed with him either.  And yet, he nevertheless held his own in full-season High-A ball.  He's reportedly something of a ground-ball specialist, which makes one hope that there's something to his superb 2014 home run rate.  In 2013, he was throwing 93-96 mph, though Doug reported low-90's.  And he has pedigree: recent first-rounder, and ranked as the #4 Tigers prospect entering last season at FanGraphs.  One thing that I've learned time and time again is to never discount the ability of talented players to make major strides forward when given the opportunity.

Honestly, getting either of these guys for Simon would seem like a good deal to me.  Neither is top-shelf talent (though Crawford arguably was recently), but each has some value.  And I'm honestly not sure that Simon will be much better than replacement this year.  That the Reds were able to turn him into these two prospects seems like a major coup to me.  This was easily the Reds' best deal of the offseason.

Reds swap Heisey for Matt Magill

So long to Chris Heisey
Photo credit: Keith Allison

With Chris Heisey set to hit his third year of arbitration and likely clear the $2 million mark, the Reds flipped him for Dodger pitcher Matt Magill.  Heisey was someone that the blogosphere loved as he came up.  A 17th-round pick, he was usually not rated very highly on prospect rankings, but he played his way to the big leagues.  Although he's shown decent power in the minor leagues (along with decent patience, sometimes), he surprised a lot of us in his 2011 campaign when he smacked 18 home runs in part-time duty, often as a pinch-hitter.  Nevertheless, he never really secured a full-time job.

We definitely saw Heisey become increasingly aggressive during his years with the big league club, and more contact-oriented.  His walk rate 7% to 6% to over around 4-5% from 2010-2014, his swing % increased from 48% to 53%.  He, strangely had a bit of a reversed split over his career (0.295 wOBA vs. LHP, 0.323 vs. RHP), which made it harder to leverage his offensive talents via a platoon.  So, what we have is a very nice 4th outfielder who could play all three outfield slots effectively, provide some power off the bench, and someone who could (theoretically) fill in for an injury whenever needed.  Unfortunately, it always seemed like the times that Heisey did get a chance to play every day as an injury replacement were the same times he fell into bad slumps.  The wrap on him was that that he became exposed as his playing time increased, and there might be some truth to that.

I've always liked Heisey, even if I never really bought into him as a full-time player.  His main argument for playing time, in my view, was a slightly-better-than-replacement bat coupled with plus fielding (average in CF, above-average in a corner).  He's frankly carved out a nice little career; I'm sure most teams would take 50 career home runs from a 17th-round selection any day.  I hope he finally gets a full-season worth of at-bats and performs well, even if it's a Brennan Boesch-like flash in the pan season.  Here are his final Cincinnati stats:

Chris Heisey Career Stats

In return, the Reds acquired Matt Magill.  Magill was also a late-round selection (31st), and pitched his way onto folks' radar.  Coming off a nice AA-campaign in 2012, Mike Newman wrote this about him at FanGraphs:

I saw Magill while sitting with a veteran scout who said, “Magill has more stuff than Kevin Slowey.” And while I can hear the whistling of thousands of index fingers twirling in the air in unison, that’s a pretty impressive feat considering Magill was a 31st round pick. With an 89-92 MPH fastball and slider which flashed plus, Magill has the ceiling of a number four starter with the floor of an excellent ROOGY. Prospect followers will want to point to the lofty strikeout totals as an indicator he has more in the tank, but his slider is a real out pitch against minor league hitters and just won’t be as effective against big league hitters.

Unfortunately, upon arriving at AAA, Magill has encountered what appear to be tremendous control issues, walking ~6 batters per 9 innings across 160 innings in AAA in 2013-2014, posting a lovely 9.1 bb/9 in 27 innings with the Dodgers in 2013.  Yikes.  For someone who doesn't throw particularly hard and doesn't have a reported overpowering secondary offering, it's not very encouraging.

So, yeah.  Shrug.  Maybe someone in Cincinnati thinks they can fix him.  And what do you expect in return for someone you were about to non-tender anyway?

Matt Magill stats:

Why the Confusion on the New Home Plate Collision Rule?

Photo Credit: Allan Foster

I was extremely pleased when baseball rolled out their new rules to help eliminate--or at least reduce--home plate collisions.  Unlike a lot of Reds fans (from what I gather...), I think Pete Rose was a jerk for laying out Ray Fosse in the 1970 All Star game.  I don't like seeing players get hurt out of some ridiculous sense of manly tradition.  I'd be glad to see them go.

Unfortunately, the implementation of the new rule has had its share of hiccups.  The rule has a challenging job, and thus implementation is a challenge.  The goal is to keep catchers experiencing unnecessary collisions while simultaneously keeping things fair for the runner.

Today, it didn't seem to work very well.  C. Trent has a nice piece tonight at the Enquirer talking about the controversial play involving Roger Bernadina trying to score on the Pirates Tony Sanchez today.  He does a good job reviewing that play and everyone's reactions to it, so I'll just send you there to read up on it.  In short, everyone says they're confused by the ruling today.

Is the rule really so confusing?  Here's the complete rule 7.13, including the very important "comment" section.

OFFICIAL BASEBALL RULE 7.13
Collisions at home plate

A runner attempting to score may not deviate from his direct pathway to the plate in order to initiate contact with the catcher (or other player covering home plate). If, in the judgment of the umpire, a runner attempting to score initiates contact with the catcher (or other player covering home plate) in such a manner, the umpire shall declare the runner out (even if the player covering home plate loses possession of the ball). In such circumstances, the umpire shall call the ball dead, and all other baserunners shall return to the last base touched at the time of the collision.

Rule 7.13 comment: The failure by the runner to make an effort to touch the plate, the runner's lowering of the shoulder, or the runner's pushing through with his hands, elbows or arms, would support a determination that the runner deviated from the pathway in order to initiate contact with the catcher in violation of Rule 7.13. If the runner slides into the plate in an appropriate manner, he shall not be adjudged to have violated Rule 7.13. A slide shall be deemed appropriate, in the case of a feet first slide, if the runner's buttocks and legs should hit the ground before contact with the catcher. In the case of a head first slide, a runner shall be deemed to have slid appropriately if his body should hit the ground before contact with the catcher. 

Unless the catcher is in possession of the ball, the catcher cannot block the pathway of the runner as he is attempting to score. If, in the judgment of the umpire, the catcher without possession of the ball blocks the pathway of the runner, the umpire shall call or signal the runner safe. Notwithstanding the above, it shall not be considered a violation of this Rule 7.13 if the catcher blocks the pathway of the runner in order to field a throw, and the umpire determines that the catcher could not have fielded the ball without blocking the pathway of the runner and that contact with the runner was unavoidable.

Frankly, this seems pretty straightforward.  Here's my interpretation:

• First, there's the runner.  The runner cannot initiate contact with the catcher, and is explicitly forbidden from lowering his shoulder, pushing with his hands, etc.  If, however, he slides for the bag (i.e. not a take-out slide), he's doing it right.
• Second, there's the catcher.  The catcher is required to leave a path for the runner to score unless they have the ball.  The one exception is that the catcher has a right to receive a throw, even if that takes them into the path of the runner.  So, the catcher can't set up in front of the plate, but if the throw brings him into the baserunner's path (as a good throw sometimes will), he has the right to move into the path as you catch the ball.

There's unquestionably going to be some subjectivity when it comes to applying the rule, especially when it comes to that exception for fielding a throw.  But if the events were as Bernadina and Price (and even Sanchez!) report, and Tony Sanchez did indeed have his body in the basepath throughout the entire play, and not just when trying to catch the ball, then Bernadina should have been called safe.  The rule seems clear as day on this.

The same situation arose in Toronto in a game vs. the Yankees, and Josh Thole sorta-kinda was in front of the plate as Francisco Cervilli slid.  The difference to me, however, was that Thole was a) standing (there was still a path to the plate) and b) moving away from the plate and into the path of the baserunner to intercept the throw as the ball came in.  It's a judgement call, but to me, it looks like a fair play by Thole.

As the photo from today's game that C. Trent posted indicates, however, Sanchez was already crouching in front of home plate before he received the ball.  When I watch the replays of that play, it again appears to me that Sanchez was set up, crouched, and in the path of the baserunner before he could reasonably said to be going after the throw from Jordy Mercer.  Admittedly, though, because none of the cameras, are focused on Sanchez the entire time, it is hard to be completely certain.

Here's the thing: this is exactly the situation that often would result in a home plate collision in the past.  Yes, the throw absolutely beat him to the plate.  But a year ago, Bernadina would have been expected to lay Tony Sanchez out in that situation.  That play is what the rule is designed to prevent.  Here, Bernadina did what he was supposed to do: slide.  But Sanchez did not adhere to his responsibilities under this rule.  He blocked the plate before receiving the ball.  For this rule to work--and I really think it needs to work--it needs to be enforced evenly.

Therefore, I don't think the problem is with the rule.  This is an important rule.  We need to protect catchers from unnecessary violence on the field.  But, at the same time, we need to protect the rights of the runner to not be blocked from home plate, in exactly the same way that they cannot be blocked from other other bases when fielders do not have the ball.

The problem today was not the rule.  It was that the rule was not enforced.

Bryan Price

Bryan Price (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The Reds named Bryan Price the manager yesterday.  By all accounts, Price has been a fantastic pitching coach.  I remember the buzz when he was hired as a pitching coach, and the general feeling of how lucky the Reds were to get him.  Pitchers have had nothing but positive things to say about him since he started here, and the results have been superb.  I'm not convinced that you can really judge a coach by his results; you have no control group, after all.  But it's at least consistent with the idea that he's been a very successful coach.

I've been pretty excited to read the quotes from players about Price.  Probably the best, which everyone has seen but I'll repost it because I like it so much, is from Bronson Arroyo.

"I think he'd be unbelievable," Bronson Arroyo said when asked about Price as manager. "He's as organized as anyone in the game, he holds people as accountable as well as anyone I've seen. He doesn't buy into stereotypical things in the game, things that other people buy into that I don't feel are relevant. Price looks at evidence. He's a freaking smart guy, he makes his decision on reasonable evidence. Sometimes in baseball we go by hunches, what someone else said or they way things have gone in the past. He doesn't do that."

As a guy who watches baseball from a sabermetric angle most of the time, that's music to my ears.  I don't expect Price to be a sabermetric guy.  But if the principle way that he makes decisions is based on evidence--I don't care of its sabermetric evidence or scouting-based evidence--I'm happy.  It implies someone who has a scientific approach to the game, and someone who can make adjustments when the evidence is compelling.  Really, that's all I can ask for.

In any case, I have one short Bryan Price story.  This year, and I don't remember when, I was watching one of Homer Bailey's starts.  It was one of those games when he was just spectacular.  He was pumping good heat exactly where he wanted it, and had both his breaking ball and splitter fooling hitters all night.  When Homer was finally removed from the game, they showed a shot of Homer talking to Bryan Price in the dugout.  Price had his hand on Homer's shoulder, eyes locked on Homer's, and they were just talking.  Price had an enormous, proud smile on his face, and I imagined that he was basically asking Homer what it's like to have all of his hard work pay off.  Homer just looked so happy to get that kind of sincere praise.

I remember thinking about how remarkable that little interaction was.  I can't remember the last time I had an interaction like that.  It's not just that he was telling Homer that he'd been great.  It seemed clear that he and Price had developed an extremely close, working relationship.  It was one that allowed a kind of quiet, but sincere, effective, and personal praise.  How much better is that than the standard slap on the butt?  I remember thinking how lucky the Reds were to have him as their pitching coach.

That's what I keep thinking about when I think about Price as the Reds' manager.  I'm hoping he can develop that kind of relationship with all of the Reds' players.  It would go a long way toward satisfying that important part of managing: getting your players to buy into you as the manager, and allowing the manager to unify the club on a common path toward the ultimate goal.  If he can do that as well as Dusty did, at least in Dusty's earlier years with the club, and also be a sound tactical manager, the Reds could have someone pretty special here.

It's a time for optimism.  And I'm sure by next year, people will be frustrated with Price, just as they are with any manager.  But I can't help but feel like the Reds are pretty lucky to have Price, this time as their manager.

How much does Mat Latos matter?

Image via Wikipedia

I'm still thrilled about the Latos deal.  I know I'm probably more down on Alonso than most others, and for that reason I'm probably wrong.  But the main loss I see in the deal is Grandal.  I love Grandal, but that's an acceptable price for an outstanding pitcher of Latos's age and contract.  It bears repeating: the contract is a huge deal.  Without it, Latos is a top-30 pitcher (maybe top-15).  With it, he's one of the most valuable pitchers in baseball.

The Reds' rotation is currently looking like this:
1. Latos
2. Cueto
3. Leake
4. Bailey
5. Arroyo I guess.
6. Wood/LeCure/Chapman

Latos and Cueto make a very good #1/2, and Leake/Bailey are solid mid-rotation starters if they can last the season.  Arroyo's sort of a disaster, but at least his xFIP was still in the mid-4 range last season.  I still think Wood can contribute something, and wouldn't be surprised to see him take Arroyo's job by the end of the season.

To me, this is an average to above-average rotation.  If coupled with good offense and good fielding, this should result in an above-average Reds ballclub.  And if they get to the playoffs, I feel pretty good having Latos and Cueto going 1 & 2 in the rotation against most rotations in the league.  And that's even acknowledging that I'm pretty skeptical of Cueto's 2011 season.

Does this trade make the Reds good enough to make the playoffs, though?

Last year, the Reds went 79-83 in what was a very disappointing season.  Baseball Prospectus's adjusted standings, however, has them at between 82 and 83 wins depending on which set of data you use (83 wins based on runs scored/allowed, or component stats...82 if you include strength of schedule).  While obviously the win that's on the books is what matters for last season, I tend to think (with some data to back this) that estimated wins are a better forecaster of future team performance.

Let's be simple-headed here.  Latos is essentially slotting in for what was replacement-level performances from Volquez and hopefully some of Arroyo's dreadful outings.  If we assume the rest of the team will perform as it did last year (it won't), and that Latos performs at his typical 3-4 WAR level next year, we can reasonably expect that this deal improves the Reds from an 83ish win team to an 86-87ish win team.

Is that enough?  The Brewers (90-93 wins by BPro-adjusted standings) and the Cardinals (88-90 wins) are both losing big pieces this offseason.  I expect that the Cardinals, at least, will replace Pujols with above-replacement production.  And there's a decent bet that the Brewers will do the same.  The Cardinals lose more by losing Pujols, but then they also are gaining a starter next year in Wainwright.  Therefore, I think that we can ballpark that both teams will drop 4 wins or so off their BPro estimated standings pace

This puts all of three of the Reds, Cardinals, and Brewers in the 85-88 win range.  So we're back to a three team heat to start the 2012 season.  That's where I thought we'd be last season, so this is nice to see.  I guess.

To get the Reds to the point that they are the realistic favorites, however, they really need to add another significant piece.  Unless Mesoraco breaks out in a huge way (and it has to be huge to be an improvement, given how good Hernnadez/Hanigan were last year (~4 fWAR!)), I just don't see a position where the Reds stand to get better next season.  And declines are pretty likely at a few positions: hell, Phillips was a 6-fWAR player last year, which is awesome but quite likely his peak.  The most obvious candidate position for an upgrade is left field, though I will say that you can do worse than running Chris Heisey out there.

I don't know how realistic it is that the Reds could add someone who could make a big difference.  I don't think there's room in the budget for an impact signing, and free agent prices seem kind of crazy to me this offseason (3yr/$31.5 M for Michael Cuddyer?  Wow).  And in terms of trades, who do the Reds have left to deal after this deal?  I can see a team being interested in Travis Wood, but how much will they pay for him?  And is that return enough to ditch the Reds best insurance option in the rotation?  I'd be fine with trading away Juan Francisco or Billy Hamilton, but I think the Reds like them as much as any other team could be expected to.

My guess is that what we have is probably the team we'll see on opening day.  That's a team that can compete.  But I don't think they can be ranked as a favorite.  And frankly, I have this feeling that this team is held together by a shoestring.  I don't see a lot of depth to withstand injury here.  So, we'll hope for the best and see what happens.

My Answers for Reds Blogger Roundtable

This week, Blog Red Machine has organized a roundtable discussion of sorts that included many of the major Reds blogs.


Anyway, the nature of the beast dictated that many of the answers that I submitted were never published.  If they published everything that everyone submitted, the post would be too long.  So, since the original pieces have already run, I decided to publish all of my answers for those who may be interested.


The National League Central Division


1. I am of the opinion that the Pittsburgh Pirates are the division’s biggest surprise and that our Reds are the biggest disappointment. Would you agree or disagee? If you disagree with either, please state why.

The Pirates are hands-down the biggest surprise.  Unfortunately, I think they're unlikely to continue their success. But it's nice to see Pirates fans having fun in July for once.


The Reds have been disappointing, no question. But I think they are tied for disappointing-ness with the Cubs. I think most had the Cubs around .500 this year--not in the hunt, but respectable. Instead, they've been nothing short of dreadful.

2. What one player that plays for an NL Central team do you feel is the most underrated player within the NL Central and why?

Can I cheat and go local with Drew Stubbs? All I hear about when I watch broadcasts is his strikeouts. And they're frequent, no question--the Reds knew that they would be when they drafted him.  I see people talking about sending him down to AAA. But even so, his hitting line of .252/.323/.391 is better than league average (wRC+ of 102) in the lower offensive environment we're experiencing, and he plays outstanding defense in center field. FanGraphs has him as a 2 WAR player while B-Ref has him as a 1.6 WAR player already this season.

I think Drew Stubbs certainly has some room to grow on his performance this season, especially in the power department. But even as he has been this year (and last!), the guy has put up above-average major league numbers. I don't think that's the current perception.

If you want non-Reds, you can pick one of the other NL Central Center Fielders: Andrew McCutcheon, Colby Rasmus, or maybe even Marlon Byrd!

3. For the first half of the season, if you had to select an MVP just from the teams in the NL Central, who would that be?

There are about 7 guys that I think have a good case, but I'll go with Andrew McCutcheon.  He leads the division in both fWAR (fangraphs) and rWAR (at baseball-reference).  I'm a little skeptical of the WAR data, as I don't know if the fielding numbers that you see at FanGraphs or B-Ref are real.  In past seasons, his UZR, TZ, etc, have not been good.  But even so, he's leading the division in oWAR (WAR, ignoring the fielding), plays a premium defensive position, and is arguably the biggest reason that the Pirates are where they are.

4. And what about a Cy Young type candidate from those in the NL Central...Is there one?

There are a bunch of guys in the mix as tops in the division, but none of them holds a candle to Roy Halladay or his ilk. I'll go with Shaun Marcum in the Central, though. While Greinke got more press when he arrived, Marcum has been outstanding this year. He gets more than his share of strikeouts, doesn't walk anyone, and even hit a home run in his start last weekend. And he does all of it despite only having an upper-80's fastball. Also in the running: Johnny Cueto, Jaime Garcia, Chris Carpenter and maybe even Kyle Lohse?

5. Finally, who is the division favorite for the remainder of the season and why...

There is no clear favorite.  BPro's playoff standings have the Cardinals odds to win the division at 46%, with the Brewers at 40%.  The Reds, meanwhile, have division-winning odds of 11%.  Interestingly, the Reds have the highest 3rd-order winning percentage in the NL Central (barely).  But their current win deficit, coupled with the fact that they're so close in quality level with those other teams, makes it pretty tough to compete.

I think the Brewers' rotation is being underrated in those rankings.  Greinke, in particular, is a major puzzle, and I think is likely to have a monster second half.  I don't see any team competing with that rotation, their offense is top drawer, and they even seem to be catching the ball better this year than in years past.  That's the team to beat, as I see it.  

That said, I also think the Reds have a run left in them.  Four games back is just not that big of a deficit, and Walt has done some interesting things at the trade deadline.  

Baseball In General

1.  No question that year after year we see at least one ASG starter voted in due to his popularity with the fans. And this year more than ever, we see many players pulling themselves out of the midsummer classic due to various reasons, ala the NFL Pro Bowl. Now, players that have no business playing are now participating. Is the ASG now migrating into a joke like the Pro Bowl?

It sort of depends on what you mean by "no business playing." Depending on the data you use, some guys can go from ridiculous selections to perfectly legitimate. Are you talking about performance in 2011? Most seem to think this should be the measure by which we judge worthiness, but I think it's ridiculous to put that much weight on 2-3 months of data.  Using only first half data means you're guaranteed to have guys riding lucky streaks into the All Star Game, which makes any complaints about worthiness seem silly to me. I'd prefer to at least use past calendar year stats (at least then we're not ignoring half of the players' work!), if not projections to pick the best players in baseball to represent in the game. But I realize I'm in a strong minority on that one.

As for guys bowing out, I really don't mind in the slightest. It's an exhibition game, and a player's season has to take precedence. No one should really care about who actually plays in the game or what actually happens anyway. I'd be concerned if one of my team's players played in the game out of some feeling of obligation when he really just needed to rest. The guys bowing out are doing their job.

2. Not many people like the fact that the ASG determines home field advantage for the World Series. What’s you best way to award home field for the WS?

I'd just give it to whichever team had the better regular season record, like they did from 1998-2002.  That makes it something that teams have to earn.  I also liked that wild card teams could never have home team advantage in the playoffs.  The current system is beyond stupid.

3. A big discussion was waged over that of interleague play. For or against and why...

I may be in the minority among blogger-types, but I've always enjoyed interleague. I like seeing new teams and players from the other league. And I enjoy playing the Indians every year. And it's fun to see teams have to adjust to a new set of rules for a handful of games, be it AL teams having to bench Travis Hafner and David Ortiz, or NL teams looking at their bench of defensive replacements and trying to find a DH in there.

Also, I love the wild card, and support adding a second one to the playoffs--especially if it screws up the wild card team's pitching rotation for the Division Series. And I think realignment is always fun to think about, although I didn't like the most recent proposal. But the DH sucks (see? I have some traditionalism in me!).

4. So it looks like the Los Angeles Dodgers could be yours in the not too distant future. Would you have a problem if Mark Cuban were to buy the team because apparently...a) he might be interested and b) baseball has not wanted him in the past. Mark Cuban as an MLB team owner. Thoughts...

People seem to love Mark Cuban because he lives a more public life than most owners and is apparently friendly to sabermetrics (at least, based on his basketball ownership this seemed to be the case).  I think most of the excitement about him is just hype.  He's clearly very good at manipulating public opinion.

I really don't have a strong opinion on him either way.  My goal for major league baseball would be to make sure that whoever is allowed to buy the team would buy it and run it as a viable business rather than breaking it into pieces and extracting all of its value like the McCourt's did with the Dodgers.  I'm not in a position to know whether Cuban would be good in that respect or not.  Probably.  But is he the best option for the Dodgers?  I have no clue.

5. You’re a GM of a team. You can make a deal for one player for your team, no restrictions. Who ya got and why?

Is this completely open ended, i.e. pick the player you'd most want in baseball and don't worry about who you have to send away to get him?  If so, I'll go with Evan Longoria.  He's probably the best (offense + fielding) third baseman in baseball moving forward, and his position has become unbelievably shallow.  And he has the most team-friendly contract in the history of major league baseball.  The guy is in his fourth year, and is making $2 million.  Next year, he's making $4.5 M.  He'll make a total of $12.5 million over the next three years, and then the Rays have three MORE years of very reasonable club options at $7.5 million, $11 million, and $11.5 million.  If you're going to build a team around a guy, get the guy who is both awesome at baseball and is locked into a deal that is waaaay below market value.

The Reds

1. We’ve all thought (or most of us anyway) that the Reds are just a move or two away from repeating as NL Central champs. What are those moves?

I think we're all going to have the same answer: starting pitching and shortstop. I don't know if Zack Cozart is going to hit--hope so, but he's not elite-level talent. I do wish we would have had a few months to figure that out. But shortstop has been a huge black hole in the line-up, and upgrading to someone like Jose Reyes could mean a 3 win boost to the Reds in just a half-season. That's an enormous upgrade.

The Reds could also use a top of the rotation starter. I think the Reds' rotation is better than it has shown thus far, so if it's going to be upgraded I think you really need a top-flight talent. A #3 starter isn't really a meaningful upgrade as I see it, because the Reds may well get that kind of performance in the second half from the guys they already have. Erik Bedard should be available, but he's hurt (though with a leg injury, not arm), expensive, and will only have a start or two before the trade deadline to show he's healthy.  

Rumors surfaced yesterday that the Reds are interested in Ubaldo Jimenez. I don't think the Rockies would be interested in trading him, as he's done well in Denver, has a good contract, and the Rockies should be good next year. But if he can be had, I'd give pretty much anything in the Reds' farm except for Devin Mesoraco for him. Would Leake/Grandal/Alonso/Frazier do it? I'm not sure, but I'd pay that for a guy like Jimenez. 8+ career k/9, 50% career GB%, and an acceptable walk rate? Yes please.

2. Most frustrating aspect of the 2011 Reds is...

The fact that their rotation has just not come together like it should have. This is a talented group of pitchers, and they have as a group underperformed both their projections and their peripheral statistics. I expected the Reds' starting depth to overcome their lack of an ace, but instead of a bunch of #3's we've had a bunch of #4-5's. That's the biggest difference between what they've done and what I expected to see this year. Maybe we'll get something else in the second half...hope so.

3. Assign a letter grade for the following (and yes, you can explain your grades):

a. Dusty Baker: B. I really don't hate the guy like so many seem to. I think he's a terrific clubhouse presence, and has done a good job of defending and supporting his young players throughout his time with the Reds. While I disagree with some of his moves, I haven't been consistently frustrated with something this year like in years past. I'd like to see Heisey get a lot more PA's than Gomes over the rest of the season, and I'd like Cordero to not pitch when the Reds have more than a three run lead (warmed up or not). But those are really my only complaints.

b. Walt Jocketty: B-. I don't like making moves for the sake of making moves, and Jocketty isn't someone who does that. I think they've done well in using a patient approach to handle both Volquez's struggles and Chapman's. Willis has looked like a good find, and I think the Reds' outfield situation has been a best-of-a-bad-situation thus far. He hasn't made any desperation trades (yet). I think you have to give him credit for building what he has, and sticking with it. But I doubt I'll ever understand what the heck took so long with Cozart. That move came at least a month late. I don't know if it really will matter, but it's frustrating. I also would hope we'll see him make a move soon to bring in some talent...this grade is based on the assumption that he will do something.

c. Bob Castellini: A. For the most part, he's cheered the team on and kept his bottom out of the front office's business. That's what I want from an owner.

d. the Reds fans: C. I'll just say despite it all, we're four games back people!

4. You’re Walt. Brandon Phillips: extension or no? Why?

I love Brandon Phillips. Good bat, good fielding, important position. So yes, I'd be interested in extending him. But the question is the price tag, right?

Without doing anything rigorous, I'd project Phillips to be something like a 3 WAR player next year in his age-31 season. If we do a five year contract extension, and apply a "standard" 0.5 WAR/yr aging curve, and include inflation, Phillips would be worth somewhere in the vicinity of five years/$60 M. That's a big chunk of change, but he's probably worth that price. Assuming there's room in the Reds' budget for it...

That's pretty similar to Dan Uggla's 5 yr/$62 M deal, of course. I'm sure that deal will be front and center in Phillips' negotiations, and so far, that's not going very well for the Braves (which might be good for the Reds). But Phillips is a very different kind of player than Uggla: Phillips has some power, but is also very athletic and gets a lot of value from his fielding. Hopefully he won't drop off a cliff like Uggla apparently has.

Even if not extended, I pick up Phillips' option. If he's a 3 WAR player next year, he's probably worth $16 M or so, and the Reds would "only" have to pay $12 M. It's a pretty obvious move, I think.

5. It’s highly unlikely Francisco Cordero will be back next season (and I suppose a decent portion of the fanbase is glad for that), who’s the closer for 2012 and going forward?

Who's available as a free agent? I could survive with Nick Masset or Logan Ondrusek as a closer, but ideally you'd like someone who has a bigger arm. Maybe the Reds could acquire someone like Matt Thornton...?

I'm sure the Reds will probably look to Aroldis Chapman to be the closer next year provided he doesn't stink in the second half. They shouldn't. See below.

6. Should Aroldis Chapman be in the minors working on becoming a starter (provided you did NOT say Chapman was the answer for #5)? Is the starter’s role where he would benefit the organization the most?

Yes.  If a pitcher has a shot to be a successful starter he should be used as such until such time that he proves he's incapable of doing that.  Even average starters are as valuable as most of the better closers.  Closers pitch during important times in ballgames, but the number of innings they throw is so small compared to the number of innings starters throw that it's really no contest.  If a closer throws 70 innings and a starter throws 210, the closer's innings would need to be THREE TIMES as important as the starter's.  We can measure that with Leverage Index, and, in general, closers' innings are roughly twice as important.  

Chapman should be starting.  That would give the Reds a guy who is capable of being a top of the rotation pitcher if he can find a change-up.  Don't the Reds have to see if that can happen?

7. A silly question, really. Who wins a Reds only HR Derby?

Bruce!  Votto's got tremendous power, but I think Bruce has him beat in terms of raw muscle.  I'd love to see this.  The Reds should do this sometime...

2010 Reds Draft Review

Thundering Turtle at Red Reporter has an amazing review of the players that the Reds drafted this week.  I just wanted to take a shot at couple "visuals" of the draft, based on his work.

First, drafted players by position.  Key: P=SP, R=reliever, 1=1B, 2=2B, 3=3B, S=SS, O=OF, C=C.  If there's question, I listed a player by his "more valuable" position.  This includes a lot of pitchers who may be starters but are probably actually going to end up relievers.

PORP23ROPRPSRRPPSRPPPPP1P22OP3RPOOCPOOP3PCSOP32RPP

I haven't looked at a lot of drafts this way, but this looks like a pitching-heavy draft to me (pitchers shown in red).  Here's the breakdown by position:

SP (P) = 20
RP (R) = 8 (including at least 3 of the first 10)
C = 2
1B = 1
2B = 4
3B = 4
SS = 3
OF = 8

1B's are generally only drafted if they can hit, so we don't have a lot of pure hitters in this draft (if any).  The #2 pick (Gabriel Rosa OF) and the #5 pick (Ryan Wright 2B) are probably the best--Wright is reportedly an offense-oriented second baseman.  In a sense, this is a good thing: guys that start on the left side of the defensive spectrum can move to "easier" positions if their bat develops, but 1B's do not move up.


What about HS vs College?  Here's a list on the pitchers:

HCCCCCHCCHHCCCCCHCHCCCCHHCCH

So the Reds started with a high-school arm, but then definitely leaned college most of the rest of the way.  I think it's probably normal to draft more college arms over the full draft.  There were a few HS players taken late as possible over-slot guys.

Hitters:

HCCCHHHCCC?CCCCHCHCHHHC

The ? is Yordanyz Perez, a 27-year old Cuban outfielder.

The Reds seemed to go pretty even between college and high school in early rounds, lean college in middle rounds, and then go high-school in late rounds.

Reds 1st pick is Robert Stephenson

Given their low draft position, I was hoping that someone would fall down to the Reds, and they in turn would pull a Pirates draft and sign their guy over slot.  That doesn't seem to be what happened here (though he may well require over-slot money), but it's not like the Reds were reaching either.

From what I've gathered, Robert Stephenson is a hard throwing right-hander with a good frame and three pitches: fastball, curve, change.  They showed a change-up on the Reds broadcast, and it had decent looking movement on it in on the hands of a right-hander, although it is reported his 3rd best pitch.  His MLB video only shows fastballs (as far as I can tell), and he reportedly sits 93-95 mph and has hit 97 or 98.  Reports are good on his control (given his age), and at least one person out there thinks that some mechanical tweaks can improve it even more.  Could be true, could just be someone talking...  Also unquantifiable is his makeup: 4.2 GPA*, reportedly works hard at baseball, is coachable, etc.

* For what it's worth, as an educator, I'm not a fan of the extra-credit-on-your-GPA classes.  I know some high schools do this for AP classes.  Others do it for A+'s.  I just find it annoying, because you really have no idea what's going on behind that GPA when someone's in the 3.7-3.9 range.  They might be taking "hard" classes, but getting B's.  That's not necessarily going to translate well into college.  But whatever.  At least in Stephenson's case, we know he did great.

All reports are that he's signable (if you pay him enough), so I expect the Reds to get this done.  Might take going a bit over slot, but I always support doing that when it's necessary to get good talent.

...

In general, I'm not crazy about HS pitchers from a risk standpoint.  But at the same time, that's definitely where the upside is these days.  The old Moneyball/Bill James mantra that HS pitchers aren't worth it is no longer holding true in the data, and for a pretty simple reason: signing bonuses are high enough now to convince the truly elite talent to sign out of high school, whereas they used to get comparable value from a college scholarship.*

* As an aside, this is precisely why a hard slotting system is a bad idea: the current system allows MLB to get the top athletes into baseball before they either go to college or have a chance to sign with another sport.

Kevin Goldstein has the philosophy that you draft for upside because most teams can't sign elite guys as a free agent, and trading for them requires you to give up similar amounts of talent.  There's a lot of truth in that.  And with the Reds picking at a franchise-record-lowest 27th overall this year, you're not going to find safeish, high upside picks at this point in the draft.  So rolling the dice and going after a high school arm with top of the rotation potential is an ok gamble to me.

Of course, I'm sort of making judgments in a vacuum here, as I don't follow amateur baseball at all, and I don't know what else was out there...I'm not really even qualified to have an opinion. ;)  But the last Reds' draft pick to completely bomb was Chris Grueler in 2002.***  If you look at the current Reds squad, their top picks since 2004 are a major part of what has gotten them to be where they are: Homer Bailey, Jay Bruce, Drew Stubbs, (soon) Devin Mesoraco, and Mike Leake.  They've clearly built up a track record, so I think they deserve to be trusted.

*** A careful reader would note that the Reds have taken two right-handed high school pitchers since 2002. One has been a modest success in Homer Bailey.  The other is Chris Grueler.  50% is pretty good performance on a HS arm, but that's what we're dealing with here.

Resources on Robert Stephenson (will add more as I go)

• Thundering Turtle at Red Reporter
• Doug Gray at Reds Minor Leagues
• MLB's schtick.
• Baseball America's mini-scouting report.
• And a blog from last night.
• Perfect Game (via Doug)
• Baseball Beginnings (via Doug)
• Mark Hulet at FG doesn't love him, citing max-effort delivery:

Marc Hulet: Reds: Robert Stephenson, LHP (California HS): Stephenson doesn't currently have the ceiling of some of the other prep arms available but he's received first round consideration from teams looking for signability. He's said to have solid control but I don't like the all-out effort in his delivery. In one video segment on MLB.com, his hat nearly flew off his head during his delivery - on more than one occasion. His curveball and changeup need a fair bit of work but his fastball can reach the mid-90s. Lots more tidbits in Thundering Turtle's post today.