Archive for Cincinnati Reds

The preliminary rosters were recently announced for the impending Arizona Fall League. If you’re not familiar with the AFL, all you really need to know is that it’s an off-season league that offers addition innings/at-bats to prospects from around baseball. Some of the names you’ll know quite well. Others, well, you’ll probably never hear from again. And, frankly, a lot of players fall under that latter grouping.

Because there is such a wide range of talent in the league — as well as for a smattering of other reasons — any numbers produced in the league should be taken with a grain of salt. Oh, and each organization is responsible for providing a specific number of prospects to play in the league.

Read the rest of this entry »

Bryan Price doesn’t have the blueprint for keeping pitchers healthy and maximizing their talent. The Cincinnati Reds pitching coach admits as much. What he has is a recent track record that suggests he’s good at both.

Reds pitchers led the National League in ERA last year and ranked second in strikeouts-to-walk ratio. They also avoided the disabled list, with five pitchers combining to make all but one start. This year’s staff is also performing at a high level, with Johnny Cueto’s triceps injury being the only notable chink in the armor.

Price joined the Reds prior to the 2010 season following stints with the Mariners [2001-2006] and Diamondbacks [2007-2009]. He talked about his approach prior to the conclusion of spring training.

——

Price on his pitching philosophy: “As far as philosophy, you have to understand that one size doesn’t fit all. I don’t think I approach things a great deal differently than most. We’re all trying to get our guys to pitch ahead in the count, command the fastball, be attentive and involved in their preparation, and to command a presence out on the field. We want them to maintain focus and composure in difficult times.

“When you look at our success last year, we had one of the lowest walks-per-nine-innings in baseball. We had one of the highest percentage of first-batter efficiency — getting the first batter of an inning out. Those are things we encourage, but having a philosophy doesn’t mean you’re going to execute something. What it comes down to is having good athletes who are good competitors.”

On changing a pitcher’s arm angle: “Inefficiency is inefficiency. If you’ve got a big-league guy, and he can help a good team win games, I’m going to leave him alone. If you’ve got a guy in your system who has potential and isn’t reaching it, then I think you have to do certain things to extract that talent. It can be a defining moment.

“Are you taking a risk by changing an arm angle? Read the rest of this entry »

It has never happened, but it might this year – the Cleveland Indians could face the Cincinnati Reds in the World Series. Other match-ups are more likely — Nationals vs. Tigers, for instance — but Ohio’s teams may be on a collision course. It is less of a long shot than you might think.

On paper, the Reds are one of the best teams in baseball. They won 97 games last year and if they stay relatively healthy — the loss of Ryan Ludwick is an early blow — they should once again be favored to capture the National League Central title. Few will be surprised if Great American Ballpark is hosting games in late October.

Then there is the team 270 miles to their northeast. The Indians won just 68 games last year. They‘ve made major upgrades, but that‘s mostly on the position-player front. Their starting rotation is a question mark the size of Lake Erie. Justin Masterson, the de facto ace of the staff, again struggled with left-handers and posted a 4.93 ERA. The 4.16 FIP/4.15 xFIP suggest better things are in store in 2013, however.

Read the rest of this entry »

Bronson Arroyo has won 115 games in the past nine seasons. He’s also come up big in the postseason. But none of his success has come thanks to overpowering stuff.

The Cincinnati Reds’ right-hander is a craftsman. His fastball rarely reaches 90 mph, and his breaking pitches are more varied than they are exceptional. His strengths are deception and guile. Featuring a high leg kick and multiple arm angles, he delivers a cornucopia of offerings that more than make up for his lack of velocity.

Arroyo talked about his cerebral approach to pitching — and his ability to mix and match with the best of them — last week in Goodyear, Arizona.

——

David Laurila: How do you get guys out?

Bronson Arroyo: It’s never simple, but that’s just the nature of the game. There’s such a fine line between a pop-up to center field and a home run 40 feet over the wall. It’s all about the precision of the bat on the ball, and because of that, there’s nothing concrete about the game. You can never say, “If I throw this breaking ball at 78 mph, on the outside corner at the knees, it won’t get hit hard. “ It might get hit out of the park.

Pitching is kind of like making educated guesses. Where are the places I can go in the strike zone to beat this guy? Where can I go where he’ll do the least amount of damage? And sometimes that changes. You can have the bases loaded in the bottom of the last inning and not be able to afford to give up one run. Sometimes it doesn’t matter if you go to his weak spot, because he ends up hitting a blooper over second base and you still lose. It’s a very tough game, because it never stays the same. There are so many variables.

I’ve been successful over a long period of time by mixing and matching pitches a little differently than most guys. I pitch backwards a lot. I throw a lot of off-speed stuff in fastball counts. I’m also aware of my surroundings. I’m pitching, sometimes — not on a hunch, but on calculations based on a guy’s body language, his eyes, what he did to me last time. He’s watching a videotape of the last time I faced him, and I’m watching the same videotape. I know he’s making adjustments and I have to make them too. Who is going to beat the other to the punch?

It’s this whole mental game for me. I’m not physically dominating. I can’t go out there like Homer Bailey and Johnny Cueto and throw 94-95. I’m throwing 87. It’s harder for me to beat people with brute physical ability, and for that reason I have to spin the ball a little different. Read the rest of this entry »

It was about time for Todd Frazier. The Cincinnati Reds slugger was one of the top rookies in the National League last season, and arguably the most valuable player on a team that won 97 games. Drafted 34th overall in 2007, he could have been in Dusty Baker’s lineup earlier than he was.

Two lines in his 2010 Baseball America Prospect Handbook bio help explain his delayed arrival. In rating him Cincinnati’s top prospect, the publication described Frazier as “a jack of all trades but a master of none” and listed his position was as “OF/2B/3B.” Originally a shortstop, he had become a man without a defensive home.

Last year, his versatility proved more of a blessing than a curse. When Joey Votto went on the shelf, Frazier stepped in and provided solid production at first base. When Scott Rolen went down, he did the same at third base. Overall, he hit .273/.331/.498, with 19 home runs, in 128 games.

Frazier, who celebrates his 27th birthday on Tuesday, heads into the 2013 season as Cincinnati’s starting third baseman.

——

David Laurila: Are you finally an established big-leaguer?

Todd Frazier: I have that first year under my belt, but I don’t think I’m an established big-leaguer. You need at least a couple of years in to be that, but I do feel I’m a big-league ballplayer. I think I’ve opened some eyes, although there’s always room for improvement.

It’s crazy, because you play in the minor leagues — you wait your time — and when you finally get your chance, it’s: `What are you going to do with it now?’ Often, when guys get called up, they play a lot. When I got called up, I was in a pinch-hitting role. I told myself that when I get that opportunity, I need to step up. I think I was 5-for-6, or 6-for-7, as a pinch-hitter and was able to help the team enough that they kept me on. The next step was to show I belonged, and I did that. I think I proved I belong.

DL: Did not establishing yourself in any one position hold you back? Read the rest of this entry »

Ryan Hanigan might be the most underrated catcher in baseball. He is definitely one of the most studious and verbose. The 32-year-old Cincinnati Red knows the game, and he can break down the nuances of his craft — and his pitching staff — with the best of them.

Signed by the Reds as a non-drafted free agent in 2002, Hanigan made his big-league debut five years later and has since become a stalwart on both sides of the ball. A well-above-average defensive catcher who threw out 48 percent of runners trying to steal this year, he boasts a .370 lifetime OBP.

Hanigan recently addressed a number of subjects, including where he hits in the batting order, who has the nastiest stuff on the staff, and the challenges Aroldis Chapman will face as a starting pitcher.

——

David Laurila: Do you pay attention to advanced stats?

Ryan Hanigan: I have an understanding of sabermetrics and a lot of the terms people are using to categorize what matters, and is what is actually going on. There’s definitely something to it, so I’ve thought about it in terms of the type of player I’ve been, and what I’m trying to become. It factors in to the organization’s perception of you, as well as Major League Baseball’s.

Some of the new stats are more tangible, at least to the stat-specific people of this world. Baseball is moving more towards that, although there are obviously still a lot of people who don’t believe in that stuff. They look at things more old-school.

DL: As a guest on Ken Broo‘s Sunday morning sports show [AM-700 WLW] I’ve suggested you hit second in Dusty Baker’s batting order. What are your thoughts on that?

RH: There’s logic to it. That said, I’m paid to play and the decision, ultimately, isn’t for me to make. That’s up to the manager. Dusty is going to hit me where he wants to hit me, and the last thing I want to do is step on anybody’s toes. It’s not my job to try to change the status quo.

At the same time, the type of hitter I am… I’ve always considered myself a good hitter. Read the rest of this entry »

Tony Perez was elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame in 2000, a reward for 23 years of productivity, the first 16 of which were spent with the Cincinnati Reds. A respected hitter from 1964 through 1986, the native of Cuba was a renowned run-producer. A .279/.341/.463 lifetime hitter, and 7-time All-Star, he ranks 28th all-time with 1,652 RBIs. Now 70 years old, he serves as a special assistant to the president for the Miami Marlins.

Perez talked about the approach he employed as an RBI machine, and what it was like hitting in his era, when the Marlins visited Fenway Park in June.

—–

Tony Perez: “I see the ball, I hit the ball. That was my approach. When I started out, we didn’t have a hitting coach. You had to be your own. I made my adjustments through the years, but I was always a good hitter, so I didn’t have to make too many.

“We didn’t have a batting cage in the stadium, or anything like that, into the 1970s. By the 1970s, I already had six or seven years in the big leagues. Really, I didn’t hit as much as the guys do now, but I never had a problem with not hitting a lot. I had my regular batting practice, and that was it.

“I’d learn about the pitchers. I’d learn how they were trying to get me out, and I’d see the ball. The [data] is valuable to the guys who are playing now, but in my time we didn’t have that. We just picked it up from the other players. We talked a lot. We talked to the veterans. When I came up, I had Frank Robinson, Vada Pinson, Tommy Harper and guys like that. I did my asking about pitchers.

“With two strikes, we used to say that we had to protect the plate. You make the plate bigger and anything close that you can get, you swing at it. I struck out a lot, but I never took too many third strikes. I would swing at anything close that I could hit. Read the rest of this entry »

Against all odds, my attempt Friday to predict not only the exact score, but also to provide a precise play-by-play rendering of Game Two in the Philadelphia-Cincinnati NLDS series — well, it wasn’t a rousing success. As it happened, Roy Oswalt didn’t strike out 15 batters, and Chase Utley didn’t hit the inside-the-park home run I was so sure he would. Nor was I able to account for the Reds’defensive woes.

With regard to my failure, all I can say is that, like a politician who’s recently been tied to a New York City-based call-girl ring, I am humbled.

On the subject of humility, however, there appears to be one resident of Philadelphia who’s not feeling too much of it presently — namely, Mr. Charlie Manuel. With Cole Hamels set to start Game Three this evening (at 8:07 ET), and Roys Halladay and Oswalt ready to pitch hypothetical Games Four and Five, Manuel’s feeling pretty confident, as evidenced by his comments in AP writer Jay Cohen’s game preview:

[W]hile Reds manager Dusty Baker is talking about faith, his time in the military and a self-help book he read earlier this year, Manuel feels comfortable enough to say he doesn’t like Cincinnati’s chances of advancing.

“It can happen,” the grinning manager said Saturday. “It ain’t goin’ to happen, but it can happen.”

I can’t say for sure what the proper response is to these comments. Does it demonstrate undue hubris? Is Manuel merely being realistic? Ought Jay Cohen be given a Pulitzer immediately for accurately rendering Charlie Manuel’s spoken English in print?

I don’t know.

In any case, here were this author’s reactions, one-by-one:

1. Wow, did he really say that?

2. [Re-reading] Yes, he appears to’ve said that.

3. [Thinking in My Brain] He maybe shouldn’t’ve said that. The payoff for being correct is much lower than the penalty for being incorrect. Unjustified or unfulilled or un-whatever hubris is generally taboo in the sporting world.

4. On the other hand, he’s probably right. Even if these two teams are evenly matched and only home-field advantage informs the resulting outcomes, that still gives Philadelphia about an 87% chance of winning the series [1 – (.542*.542*.458)].

5. I should note this in that frigging game preview I have to write.

Before I continue, let’s agree on one thing, please — that the subject of “guaranteed victories” is a tired one. Joe Namath’s was pretty excellent, I suppose, because it’s the oldest famous one. But subsequent guarantees — and, seriously, I refuse to spend even one second of my life cataloging them — ring hollow. By definition, one needs to speak in probabilities when it comes to victory.

In any case, this is what makes Manuel’s statements notable — both (a) his acknowledgement of the probabilities and (b) recognition that the Phils’ chances of winning their series are really high. Where usually a player or manager might say, “Yeah, we just gotta go out there and continue to play our game” and/or “That’s a good team in that other dugout,” Manuel’s basically like, “We’re at least as good as the other team, and we have a 2-0 games lead. You fill in the blanks, dogg.”

Is this making a mountain out of the proverbial mole hill? Perhaps, except for two things: (a) I, personally, haven’t ever seen a manager make comments of this nature precisely, and (b) because this is the playoffs, all such comments are necessarily magnified.

As the reader will already know, my colleagues here at FanGraphs have gone to great lengths to provide learned previews for each of the postseason games thus far. Certainly, the writing and the analysis, it’s quite good — nor would I dare change it.

Having said that, though, I will level criticism on one ground — namely, for their (i.e. my colleagues’) inability to predict the future, or even to offer a prediction of same.

For example, consider Dave Cameron’s preview of tonight’s Cincinnati-Philadelphia game. Looking at the contest from the Reds’ point of view, Cameron offers some notes on Roy Oswalt‘s excellence, Bronson Arroyo’s relative inferiority, and how Dusty Baker might be best suited to leverage his bullpen against the Phillies.

That’s fine — all of it — but one thing is conspicuous by its absence from Cameron’s preview: the exact score of the game and the specific events leading to said score.

With all due respect to Cameron, I’m forced to ask: Is this still 2009, or something? If FanGraphs is going to lead the way in baseballing analysis, Dave, we’re gonna have to go the extra mile.

It’s with those shortcomings in mind that I offer to the reader this “Preemptive Review” of Game Two of the Cincy-Philly Divisional Series — in which the author (I, Carson One-Million-Dollars Cistulli) provide a review of a game that has as yet to occur.

You can find an image of the game’s exact box score below and a can see both the box score and play-by-play by clicking here. In the meantime, however, here are some things that will definitely, no-questions-asked occur tonight:

1. Roy Oswalt will strike out 15 batters, en route to a 5-2 victory.
It’s a true fact!

2. Chase Utley will hit two homers, one of the inside-the-park variety.
It’s been pre-ordained!

3. Aaron Harang will pitch 0.1 IP in relief.
Doubt it at your own risk!

4. Laynce Nix will twice be “frozen” on a strike three.
It’s getting cold in here!

5. With two outs in the sixth inning, Drew Stubbs will limit Placido Polanco to a single on a line drive “smoked” to right-center field
Why even question it?!?

Read the rest of this entry »

Eno Sarris and I will be covering the Philadelphia Phillies for the duration of the postseason.

In lieu of a proper series preview, we have elected instead — really for no reason whatsoever, other than it’s a fantastic idea — we’ve elected to explore the Phils’ chances versus Cincinnati via the splendors of Lincoln-Douglas (LD) style debate.

As is custom in LD-type debate, we begin this one with a case, as follows:

Resolved: The Phillies will defeat the Reds in the NLDS.

As is also custom in LD debate, one of us (Sarris, in this case) will take the Affirmative side; the other (I, Carson America Cistulli) will take the Negative.

It should be noted that there are a number of things here that are most certainly not proper to typical LD debate. For one thing, we basically just stop after the second cross-examination. For another, we have no idea what we’re doing.

Finally, the reader should understand that, in what follows, Sarris and I are probably just as interested in cataloging the relative strengths and weaknesses of each club as we are of actually “predicting” a winner. Obviously, in such a short series, one can only really speak in probabilities of victory.

Affirmative Constructive
In which the Affirmative makes his case.

The gentleman from Wisconsin may think he’s the Mr. Lincoln in this debate, but the Affirmative in this case is the side that will more likely stand the test of time. There are seemingly no terms to define — we all know that “wins” means “scores (much) more than the opponent in (probably the first three, but at least) the majority of games in the series,” I assume — so we can get on with the debate.

Here on this electronic paper are the most obvious reasons the “Phillies” will “win” this “series.”

1. Their “Big 3” in the starting rotation is better.
The best three starters on the Phillies averaged an 3.28 FIP this year. The Reds’ best (or first) three starters averaged an 4.19 FIP. That’s a stark difference. Oh, and a starter on the Phillies will probably win the Cy Young this year if you are into that hardware thing.

2. Their lineup is deeper.
Take out Joey Votto, the Reds’ best hitter, and the rest of the lineup averages an .340 wOBA. Take out Jayson Werth, the Phillies’ best hitter this year, and the rest of the lineup averages a .347 wOBA. And in some ways that’s understating the Phillies’ depth: their “worst” regular this year was Jimmy Rollins with his .317 wOBA, but he was hurt for much of this year, and his career wOBA is .336. You might be able to pitch around Votto, but how do you pitch around the “scariest” Phillie batter? And how do you identify the scariest Phillie batter?

Cross Examination: Negative Questions
In which the Negative asks the Affirmative questions.

Q. Could the gentleman from California please inform the reader what other factors — besides starting pitching, that is — what other factors contribute at a significant level to run production and run prevention (and, therefore, wins and losses).

Q. The gentleman from California has given the team wOBAs of the Phillies and Reds sans each respective team’s best hitter. Is there a new rule of which I’m unaware that expressly forbids each team from playing its best hitter? Are there any other reasons why neither Jayson Werth nor Joey Votto would play in these games?

Q. Does the gentleman from California’s face hurt? Because it’s sure hurting me.

Cross Examination: Affirmative Answers
In which the Affirmative responds.

A. Yes, there are other things. Like, let’s say a bullpen. The Phillies’ bullpen had a 3.87 FIP this year, the Reds a 3.90. Look at their closers – Brad Lidge (3.87 FIP, 4.06 xFIP) versus Francisco Cordero (3.92 FIP, 4.53 xFIP). “Lights-out” Lidge ain’t great, but at least he’s no Co-Co. The Phillies, in a remarkable twist of fate for that franchise, own the mound in this series.

A. There are ways to deal with singular, impressive hitters. I know that the sabres can rattle in some circles when you mention the intentional walk, but walking Joey Votto and facing Scott Rolen doesn’t quite have the same “scaritude factor” as walking Chase Utley to get to Ryan Howard. The point is, the Phillies lineup is scary from top to bottom. The Reds have some good hitters, but they also have Orlando Cabrera and his .303 OBP (.292 wOBA) in the second spot in the lineup. Thanks Dusty!

A. The gentleman from Wisconsin is no gentle man. If he would like to get petty, I’d get down in the muck with him, but I’ve shown I can be the better man and continue with the discourse at hand.

Read the rest of this entry »