08 REDS v. 09 REDS

by davidmac84 on Oct 13, 2009 1:14 PM EDT Comment 9 comments

Going into 09 the Reds had some obvious positions where dramatic improvement was possible/ Corner OF defense/ SS Defense/ CF offense- they mostly captured this improvement besides the one ugly decision to sign Willie Taveras.

Difference between 08 and 09

Position Offense Defense Combined

1b                     +9              (13)                  (4)
2nd                  +11            (6)                   +5
SS                   (14)           +32                 +18
3rd                   (7)             +11                   +4
LF                   (48)             +39                 (9)
CF                   (4)              +12                +8
RF                +15             +21                 +36
C +1              +1
P                      same

So the Reds lineup actually was 59 runs plus from 08 worth 6 wins. The pitching using FIP was worse in 09 regressing from 4.54 to 4.63.

Going forward if the Reds offense stays around the same at 1st base/ 2nd/ SS/ and corner OF. They seem to have a pretty easy 50 run improvement from 3rd base/CF. The defense will probably see a regression @ SS/ improvement at 3rd base/ possible improvement CF- so positional defense about the same as 08.

Without pitching improvement- I see the Reds around the 83 win mark. If Harang comes back strong and Bailey continues his late season form- the Reds should be in the 85-90 range.

0 recs | Comment 9 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

huh?

Set the gearshift to the high gear of your soul.

by Kevin Mitchell is Batman on Oct 13, 2009 2:15 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

This is a good start

but it’s kind of hard to read, especially since the data is not standard for what people are used to seeing. Might I suggest reformatting the data a bit? Instead of using slashes, list the data so that it is clear what applies to what.

Definitely a good argument.

by Slyde on Oct 13, 2009 2:22 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I will list out the conclusions

Difference between 08/09 by position:

Offense: Defense Combined

1b +9 1b (13) 1b (4)
2nd +11 2b (6) 2b +5
SS (14) SS +32 SS +18
3rd (7) 3rd +11 3rd +4
LF (48) LF +39 LF (9)
CF (4) CF +12 CF +8
RF +15 RF +21 RF +36
C +1 C +1
P same

Combined Positional difference plus 59 runs for 09 compared to 08. The Reds Corner offensive numbers are a little fluky because Gomes/Dickerson hit much better when playing in RF than LF.
The numbers match pretty well with the actual run totals.

Runs Scored 08 704 to 09 673- 31 run difference and since the Reds were a faster team and wOBA only accounts for SB/CS this may be a reason for the 8 run discrepancy- but either way pretty close to what actually happened.

Runs Allowed 08 800 runs to 09 723- 77 run difference but 97 runs were prevented by the position players with the pitchers actually have a slight regression in 09 from a 4.54 FIP to a 4.63 FIP.

Overall- if I was Reds GM I would keep Janish @ SS.
Not offer Gomes much money- if healthy Dickerson is a better option in LF where he would be conservatively 25 runs better on defense while Chris should be right around league average offense. In fact Nix was almostly exactly on par with Gomes last year.
Send Bailey back to the Texas pitching coach and make sure his fastball stays strong for 2010.
I see this team around 85-86 wins and if Bruce has his break through year could make a serious run at 90 wins(and it would help if Dusty was fired).

by davidmac84 on Oct 13, 2009 3:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

so, uh, RF is amazing without Bruce, eh?

And what’s the deal with Votto’s D? At first it was bad, then it was good, now its bad again? What’s the firm statement on this?

"And then there was the USAID guy in Kandahar who drove a giant pink Cadillac, which the locals set on fire one day. If you wanted to destroy something symbolic during a riot, you just could not do better than that. Good stuff." - Ghosts of Alexander

by Cy Schourek on Oct 13, 2009 5:49 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

The firm statement is that single season UZR is inconclusive.

Definitely a good argument.

by Slyde on Oct 13, 2009 6:05 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs

so Janish isn't going to Ozzie his way into the HOF?

by Cy Schourek on Oct 13, 2009 6:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

that depends on if he can do a back flip...

Nobody listens to Andrew

by nlt-andrew68 on Oct 13, 2009 8:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

He's a good shortstop

but it’s unlikely that he’s the best defensive shortstop in baseball. It usually takes about 2-3 years of data to really get a handle on a player’s true level. Also, there is an intrinsic flaw with UZR that can cause the exact same performance to be valued differently from year to year. If a large number of shortstops perform worse next year (theoretically), but Janish performs exactly the same, his UZR would actually go up since the average has gone down. That’s one of the reasons you see fluctuations in the numbers from year to year. Another reason being the fact that it takes time for a stable sample to be acquired.

Definitely a good argument.

by Slyde on Oct 13, 2009 9:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs