Trade Deadline is...well...dead

Well, I'm back in the saddle, a bit wearier and perhaps even a bit saltier, but back nonetheless. I've had a couple of professional and family issues with which to deal, so finding time to do justice to this blog has been difficult, but such is life. I can't guarantee that there will be no further interruptions, but things are trending in the right direction, so it's time for some new content. My apologies to the loyal readers and thanks to those who sent inquiries. Now, without further adieu, let's get back to baseball.

In the near future, I'm planning on touching on my remaining prospect write-ups in some manner (based on the rankings of last offseason), as my obsessive compulsive side won't let those go unfinished. Besides, better late than never, right? In addition, I'm going to take a stab at saving a prospect's professional career, take the next step in rebuilding the Big Red Machine, and maybe slay a sacred cow or sling a stone at a giant. But, for now, let's just revisit the Reds' current position in relation to the 3 pressing questions I posed this past offseason.

2011 Reds

Frustrating. That's the one word I would use to describe the 2011 Reds. Unfortunately, that's as close as we can come to pinning an identity on this squad. Fans, in seemingly equal measure, are frustrated with Walt Jocketty for either (1) refusing to add talent to make a postseason push or (2) failing to sell off talent to build for the future. Obviously, Jocketty finds himself in an untenable position vis-a-vis the fan base.

Billy Beane once put forth the philosophy that a General Manager needs to divide the season into thirds. The first 2 months are to be spent evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of the team. The second 2 months are when the weaknesses should be addressed through player personnel moves. And, of course, the final 2 months are for letting those changes play out.

Here, however, it seems that the first 2 months and more have done little to establish the identity of this team. As a result, it's very difficult for anyone, Jocketty included, to determine whether we should be buyers or sellers, play for the present or the future. In the end, Jocketty ended up doing nothing at all. It's difficult to defend the decision to stand pat with a team that is in desperate need of a jolt. A shakeup of some sort to crush the complacency. If the team has any hopes of making a playoff push, then it likely needed a tweak of some sort. By doing nothing, Jocketty may have ensured that he should have been a seller.

So far this season, the Reds have a very strong Run Differential of +40, which should translate into a better win/loss record than 53-55. And yet, it hasn't. The season has been characterized by inconsistency and volatility in both offense and pitching. In fact, the team has been so up and down that they an almost impossibly long stretch of games wherein they simply couldn't string together back to back wins.

In the offseason, I identified three issues that I thought would go a long way towards determining the organization's success this year. So, here's a quick look at how those issues have played out thus far.

#1 The Aroldis Question

Aroldis exploded on the scene with a lot of hype and a Steve Nebraska fastball. He immediately set the baseball world on fire with his record setting heat. His arrival put the Reds front and center in the minds of baseball fans and in the coverage of the national media. However, he remained more side-show curiosity than impactful big league pitcher. He has all the tools to be a big time success, but he worked only 13.1 innings and his role for 2011 was unclear.

Given his abilities, the Reds had a potentially dominating weapon to unleash on the league in 2011, if only they could harness him properly. So far, they have failed to do so, which is in part due to usage problems, but also because of his struggles with command.

Given the inconsistency in the rotation, having a weapon like Aroldis would have been invaluable. In the bullpen, he needs to be used in high leverage situations (i.e. situations where the value of a run is the highest) in order to maximize his impact. In 2011, Dusty has turned to Coco Cordero, Billy Bray, Logan Ondrusek, and Nick Masset more frequently in high leverage situations than Aroldis Chapman.

Granted Aroldis has struggled with his performance in 2011, but the organization has failed to turn his freakish abilities into tangible production. For a team with a very strong run differential that has consistently struggled in 1-run games, it's inconceivable that an almost unparalleled weapon isn't leaned on more heavily in these situations.

#2 The Scott Rolen Situation

Scott Rolen was a very good acquisition for the Reds and was a big part of the team's success in 2010. He solidified the hot corner on offense and provided surprisingly strong offensive production. However, given his age and degenerative shoulder condition, it was unwise to expect a repeat performance. As a result, I suggested that a key to the season would be finding a fallback option at the hot corner, as Rolen was only likely to be good for ~120 games. So, at a bare minimum, the team needed to find ~42 games of quality play at third.

In an effort to pick up the Rolen slack, the Reds have leaned largely on Miguel Cairo, who has posted a respectable, though hardly impactful, slash line of .277/.351/.422. Cairo is a pro's pro and he's a nice utility player, but he's simply not going to be able to offer up the type of hitting that the team needs to help replicate Rolen's 2010 level of production.

The Reds needed to add a better fallback option at the hot corner. The failure to do so has hamstrung the offense in 2011.

#3 The Zack Greinke Quandry

The Greinke question was largely about Zack Greinke, but also about organizational complacency. The worst part about the offseason was the organization's decision to rest on its laurels under the pretext of "payroll restrictions." When a team takes a significant step forward, as the Reds did in 2010, it is frequently followed by a step backward. And, not surprisingly, that appears to be happening to the Reds this year.

When a team breakthrough to another level, like the postseason, it frequently happens because a lot of things go right. And, frankly, banking on all those things to go right again in the following season is a sucker's bet.

The Reds had an opportunity to reel in a legitimate Ace to bolster the pitching staff, but instead allowed him to go to a division rival. Naysayers will point to Greinke's ERA, which sits at a mediocre 4.50, while believers will point to the fact that his peripherals are ridiculously good (11.8 K/9 and 2.0 BB/9) and his ERA will regress to a mark more reflective of his true level of performance.

But, the bottom line is that Greinke, despite missing over a month of the season, has a 2.2 WAR (Wins Above Replacement) for the Brewers, which would be the best mark on the Reds staff (Cueto 1.8, Leake 1.6, no one else over 1.0). Given the inconsistency and overall ineptitude of our rotation, adding a pitcher of Greinke's caliber would have gone a long ways towards adding stability in the team's performance. Even if the other three rotations spots are shaky, having Greinke and Cueto in the 1st and 2nd slots would have ensured that the Reds could at least have strung together a few back-to-back wins. By making starting pitching a strength, the team could have more easily addressed any offensive deficiencies. Instead, they gave that advantage to a division rival.

2011 Pressing Question #3: Zack Greinke Remorse

Pressing Question #3: Will the Reds regret not acquiring the services Zack Greinke?

For the first time in forever, the Reds are in position where they have a surplus of starting pitching. However, the rotation lacks a legitimate number 1 starter. That makes it a rotation ideally suited for the grind of a 162-game season, but perhaps not for a short postseason series where Aces rule. Whether it's a 5 or 7 game series, chances are good that an Ace will get two or more starts. In such an environment, the Reds are at a distinct disadvantage in two games before the first pitch is even fired. So, the obvious question is should they have gone after the services of a young, former Cy Young award winner who actively sought out smaller market organizations in his quest for a new home?

Asking this question now as opposed to a couple weeks ago brings different considerations into play. Over the past couple of weeks, Greinke has been shutdown because of a rib fracture, Mike Leake has looked shaky at best in spring training, and Johnny Cueto has been hampered by forearm tightness. Obviously, that may change the equation to a certain extent.

Greinke was shutdown with a rib fracture which will linger into the beginning of the season and cost him a few starts. However, all he'll need to do is rest and then rebuild his arm strength, so the injury should be a once-and-done type problem, not a lingering issue.

As for Leake, he hit the ground running last year and looked like a legitimate #2 type starter. However, he faded in the middle months and was shutdown early with shoulder fatigue. Leake's Spring Training struggles may be nothing more than adjusting to the strength he added over the offseason, but it could also be lingering effects from the shoulder fatigue. At this point, it's questionable whether he is ready for the majors from an endurance and performance level standpoint.

Perhaps most disconcerting is Johnny Cueto's struggles with arm soreness. He was originally shut down for 8 days due to forearm tightness. At first glance, it seems a minor problem, but forearm tightness is frequently a precursor to Tommy John surgery. However, the Reds medical staff gave him a clean bill of health and ran him back out to the mound today. The results were not promising, as Cueto departed after throwing just one inning, this time complaining of bicep soreness. Obviously, not good. Not. Good. Hopefully, it ACTUALLY is nothing more than soreness, but it could ultimately be something much more serious.

Greinke suffers from social anxiety and is uncomfortable in many social situations, but he comfortably wears the label of #1 Starter. He has legitimate ace potential and in the past 3 seasons he has posted WARs of 4.9, 9.4, and 5.2. The 9.4 WAR season justifiably earned him a Cy Young award and may represent the high point of Greinke's career. Even so, last year only two Reds starters had WARs over 2.0, including Johnny Cueto at 2.8 and Travis Wood at 2.2.

It's looking like the Reds are in danger of losing their best pitcher from 2010 for a significant period of time. Even if Greinke never again approaches his Hall of Fame caliber season of 9.4 WAR, he still represents a 2.5 to 3.0 win improvement over everyone on the Reds staff unless they take a step forward. Given a larger sample size, it's likely that Travis Wood posts an improved WAR, but the Reds have more depth than high performance arms.

When you factor in that the improving NL Central has tightened up and gotten even more competitive, then you have to consider this something of a zero-sum game. If the Reds had acquired Greinke, then they would also have kept him away from a division rival. So, any gain by the Reds is essentially a corresponding loss for the Brewers. If Greinke returns to 9 wins above replacement, then that's a plus 9 for the Reds and a minus 9 wins in missed opportunity for the Brewers.

Obviously, only time will provide the answer to this question, but I think it was a mistake for the organization not to be an aggressive suitor on Greinke.

2011 Season Pressing Question #2: Scott Rolen

Pressing Question #2: How can the Reds extract maximum value from Scott Rolen and the hot corner?

Dusty Baker must be reading my mind, because today he came out with his plan to get 120 games from Scott Rolen. On first glance, that doesn't seem like much in light of Rolen's stature, but it's probably a fairly realistic goal.

Rolen played in 112 games in 2007, 115 games in 2008, 128 games in 2009, and 133 games in 2010. So, the past two years, he has played in more than 120 games, but he consistently wears down and declines in the second half. Over the past three seasons, he has a .293 batting average with a .850 OPS in the first half, but a .272 batting average and .774 OPS in the second half.

A more limited and better managed workload might enable Rolen to better maintain his performance level over an entire season. Rolen carried the team at times last year and was a key reason for the team's success. However, he'll be 36 this year and relying on him to carry the team is likely a losing strategy, as Rolen will have to fight off Father Time and the injury bug to repeat his success in 2010.

This offseason, I wanted the Reds to find a legitimate cleanup hitter to bump Rolen down to the 6th spot in the order. Such a move would have enabled us to not rely so heavily on Rolen, instead using him in a more complimentary role. Unfortunately, budgetary constraints prevented them from bringing in a cleanup hitter, so Rolen will again be leaned on to produce.

In 2010, Rolen was a 5.0 win player for the Reds, his best mark since his 2006 season with the Cardinals. But, given his age, a repeat performance might not be in the cards. As a result, it will be very important to get quality production from the other 42 games at third base. Who will step up to fill that roll?

It will likely be some unholy combination of Juan Francisco, Miguel Cairo, and Edgar Renteria. In the best case scenario, Juan Francisco justifies the organization's faith in him and becomes an impact hitter at the hot corner. If not, then the organization will be left with two players who join Rolen on the down slope of their careers. The organization's faith in and handling of Francisco has arguably prevented Todd Frazier from being a legitimate option at the hot corner, as he has been used in more of a utility role because Francisco has blocked him at third. So, the team does have quite a bit invested in Francisco. If Rolen back slides and Francisco fails to step up, then the hot corner could be a problem for the Reds in 2011.

Ultimately, the type of production the Reds get out of the hot corner will be a determining factor in the team's performance in 2011.

2011 Season Pressing Question #1: The Aroldis Decision

Well, time to start looking ahead to the 2011 season. The 2010 season met or exceeded all reasonable expectations and served as a good first step on the road to the promise land. The Reds have enough young talent to take another sizable step on their journey, but most teams that take a significant step forward in one year frequently slide back the next.

To me, it seems that the two World Series contestants, Texas and San Francisco, are ripe for a regression. The Giants did little to nothing this offseason and had a few too many overperformers last year to bank on a repeat performance. And, they simply don't have many young players that they can count on improving in 2011. They are going to need a bounce back from Pablo Sandoval or a Posey-like debut for Brandon Belt. Outside of that, they seem a candidate to slide backwards. As for the Rangers, they landed Adrian Beltre, but lost Cliff Lee. As a result, I'm not convinced that they have the pitching to get back to October. As for Beltre, he might be an upgrade, but they also completely undercut the standing of their team leader, Michael Young, to do so. Who knows how that will impact the chemistry and clubhouse. There are significant questions surrounding both teams.

As for the Reds, what do we make of them after seeing them stand pat? Well, their emerging young talent makes standing pat less detrimental, as several young players are in line for a step forward. Even so, there are a handful of questions that will likely determine the level of success that the Reds are able to achieve this season. And, first on the list is:


1. Whether the Reds can help Aroldis Chapman make the transition from "unbelievable spectacle" to "massively productive" baseball player.

In short, spectacles sell tickets, but production wins ballgames. Aroldis is currently long on the former and short on the latter.

Chapman exploded on the scene with a blazing fastball and a Bugs Bunny slider, which put the Reds on the national radar in a way not seen since the days of Josh Hamilton. The Reds haven't had the kind of sustained success necessary to be consistently relevant to the national discussion, but when a story that transcends the game lands in the Queen city the Reds once again resurface in the national consciousness. Hamilton was just such a story and upon his departure I lamented the loss of both the player and the story, which were inseparable and equally valuable to the organization.

Now, the Reds have another chance, but to fully reap the rewards from the marriage of story and production, they'll have to determine how to properly utilize Chapman. How do they get more from him than the spectacle? How do they get production that effectively advances the team towards the postseason? Aye, there's the rub.

To start, the Reds have decided to use Chapman out of the bullpen in 2011, rather than letting him develop as a starter. Just like everyone else, I find that decision to be a questionable one. I understand that the Reds are closer now to a championship than they have been in decades. So, the desire to have all hands on deck is understandable. At the same time, I think if you have any confidence in Chapman's ability to start, then you have to send him down. Once he becomes entrenched as a reliever, it will become increasingly difficult to shift him back to the starting rotation. A similar situation is happening in Texas with Neftali Feliz, who thus far has been deemed too valuable as a reliever to be switched back to the rotation.

Personally, I am beginning to question whether Chapman can smoothly make the transition to the rotation, so I'm not as opposed to the notion of him as a reliever as I was previously. Still, given the disparity in workload between starting (200 IP) and relieving (60 IP), there is no doubt that starters have a greater ability to make an impact. As a result, Chapman should be given every opportunity to start. Regardless, the Reds have decided that the best way to extract production from Chapman is to use him as a reliever.

To be a productive reliever, Chapman will need to work high leverage innings. He already has the stuff to thrive in such a role, as evidenced by his stellar 12.8 K/9 and his paltry 66.7% contact rate. However, he'll have to continue refining his command, as evidenced by his 3.4 BB/9, First Pitch Strike % of only 57%, and 16.6 pitches per inning. As a pitcher who avoids contact, he'll always be less efficient with his pitches, but a first pitch strike would make him that much tougher, simply by tipping the probability of success in his favor. And, as the Phillies demonstrated in the playoffs, his pitches aren't completely untouchable, so a bit of refinement would serve him well.

Overall, Chapman has the type of stuff to be as effective as Neftali Feliz was last year for the Rangers. And, once he establishes himself, the Reds will have just as much difficulty in switching him back to the rotation. Regardless, the Reds ability to extract production from Chapman will go a long way to determining their success in 2011.