51 games in & chugging along....

[Cincy the Red]

I was just looking at some season to date averages for our Reds and a few stood out to me....

Hitting:

1 - 8.60 hits/game (excellent!)
2 - 1.05 HR's/game (very nice)
3 - 4.80 runs/game (would love to see that get over 5)
4 - 4.01 walks/game (I have not done the research but that seems to be an awesome average per game....obviously Votto plays a big part in that)
5 - 7.78 K's/game (obviously I would like to see that lower but it is what it is....the team is still hitting more than striking out on average)

Pitching:

1 - 8.21 K's/game (pretty good but with this staff, could be better in my opinion. I still say we need Cingrani up here to replace Hoover/Ondrusek....be nice to have another lefty)
2 - 2.64 walks/game (very nice)
3 - 3.54 runs/game (this accounts for all runs not just earned...so excellent in my opinion)

The Reds are doing very well on both sides, hence a top 3 win/loss record in MLB thus far. Scary thing is....I still see room for improvement and, once again in my opinion, our best ball is yet to come. They seem to be playing with purpose (which is good) but I feel there is a "switch" yet to be flipped as a team that will elevate them to a dominate level.

Long Live Reds Nation!

 

[Redsfan1507]

I like the W-L, but IMO, the Reds can't "dominate" playing .375 against playoff contenders. Even IF the Reds can turn their current good team / bad team season splits into a playoff berth, I won't be a believer they can go farther in post season until they show they can play above .500 against teams with equal talent in the previous 6 months. If they don't beat them in July, August and September, it isn't likely they'll beat them in October either. Just saying. I'd like to see the Reds play better against better teams.

 

[JohnU]

I thought tonight's game (Tues) was a pretty nice representation of what the Reds are capable of doing against fair-to-decent pitching. Without expounding on the couple of chances they had early to break it open, all the same -- churn. Turning the lineup over often will eventually give everybody enough swings to beat teams.

Pitching keeping the team in the game for 4-5-6 innings. It's nice to score early.

Will be curious to see how the rest of the league holds up when some of their pitchers have to go around the league twice.

 

[redsfan03]

One thing that worries me is the strength of schedule. The Reds have the second worst strength of schedule in the entire MLB. In fact, the Reds have a LOWER winning percentage than their "expected winning percentage" calculated by ESPN. Granted, I have no idea how they calculate "expected winning percentage," but it's slightly disconcerting that the Reds have had such an easy schedule considering what lies ahead. The schedule gets significantly tougher between now and the All Star break. It will be interesting to see how the Reds fare because 1507 is right - the Reds could make the playoffs beating up on bad teams, but it won't matter come playoff time because every team in the playoffs is good.

 

[Redsfan1507]

The box score only lists 1 Indians error, but there were several more mistakes, and all if them weren't pitching. Not the Reds fault, but they add to their league leading runs total frequently (as they should) against teams that issue more charity than typical playoff teams...my concern is not only does that charity become more rare for our Reds against better teams, we tend to make more mistakes ourselves, and those better teams do what the Reds do- accept the charity. Confidence is good, and winning streaks build confidence...but the Reds need to win a few series against likely playoff teams to really deserve that confidence.

 

[JohnU]

You don't have to be better in the playoffs (1973 Mets, 1987 Twins, 2006 Cardinals), but you do have to be able to win a series. St. Louis is proving it can win a series, nearly every series so far. The Reds can win one at home this year, usually.

Again, I need to see how well these other pitching staffs hold up through August. Strength of schedule is relative. Every team plays the same number of games against bad teams.

We had expected Milwaukee to be better and the Nats were supposed to run away with it. The sweep in Pittsburgh was a fluke and Reds needed to play just a tad better to split in St. Louis. Losing the Atlanta series was a managerial gaffe, IMO.

Everyone is going to beat up on the Fish and the Cubs. The Mets are a team you ought to beat 2 out of 3. Beating Harvey was a coup.

I re-assert ... gotta win 16 games a month, no matter who you beat.

The playoffs -- get there first. Make me worry later.

 

[Redsfan1507]

I disagree on semantics, John. You have to be better in the playoffs because you don't get to play the Cubs, Astros, or even the Brewers or Indians. Sure, everyone plays the same schedule, but I think there is a correlation to winning in the playoffs and winning more of those regular season series against better teams. The '69 Mets are rare. The Cardinals don't fit that scenario at all- a perennial playoff team in major transition, still winning the big ones. You could say the same about the Braves. Our Reds get a guy on the DL and they often start up the excuse machine. How you handle adversity is more likely to get you deeper in the playoffs, than depending on historic good luck or bad competition.

 

[JohnU]

Well, yeah ... can't lose the ball in the lights (Bruce) or fail to walk a hitter (Arias) ahead of a pitcher with .000 batting average.

 

[chico ruiz]

i get what you're saying 1507. it makes sense as it applies directly to the manager of the reds. ie. putting them in a position to win v. good teams, etc etc. i am also skeptical of dusty's decisions in high pressure situations. however, your '69' mets analogy is erroneous or, at the very least, misguided. that team won 100 games and beat all the good NL teams in regular season series. cubs, pirates, cards, braves, dodgers, giants, and split with the reds. maybe you were trying to make a different point? i'm not sure what you mean about an excuse machine. i haven't noticed that from management or the players. also, the cardinals are the type of organization that will never have to be in major transition. they're built to sustain success from the bottom up. cubs and mets are undergoing major transitions. staying in the NLC, and staying with the major transition theme, you underestimate the pirates. above average offensive balance, and barring anymore injuries, a good pitching staff.

 

[JohnU]

Pirates won't fold this year. I think they fixed some of their problems behind the plate and in rotation depth. Again, I need to see this team in the August grind.

 

[Cincy the Red]

Agreed JohnU. For whatever reason, I am more concerned about the Pirates than the Cards to be honest. But nonetheless, good to see the division playing tough again like back in the day.....good stuff.

 

[Redsfan1507]

I was referring to the "miracle" of the '69 Mets. 2011 had a short novel of excuses by Dusty. I don't believe Dusty is a leader, or a strategist, and I don't see him as a positive where talent is equal, although his ineptness has shown him to be a difference maker... Usually, a losing one that throws someone else under the bus. In not amused, or sympathetic to Dusty. He's a handicap, IMO.

 

[Redsfan1507]

I don't believe I underestimate the Pirates, they've proved to be better, but until they show otherwise, they are just a first half team with a good manager...that doesnt have the ability to fill holes in their roster that prove to catch up to them around August every year. I see Arizona as similar. Colorado doesn't have enough pitching to last, and I don't believe in the Phillies bats or manager.

I underestimated the Nationals last year, because I underestimated their young pitching and limited lineup holding up in a long season. I overestimated the Dodgers this year, because I thought their pitching was better, and that all that talent would be put to better work ethic than Mattingly had been able to muster. IMO, they have an attitude problem, coincidentally, like every other team Hanley Ramirez has ever been on had. I never underestimate the Cardinals, Braves or Giants. Their talent varies, but their methodology doesn't. They know how to win.

I have concerns about our Reds in post season, because although they capitalize on superior talent, they look lost against similar talent, and Dusty has all the wrong answers in situations where a manager makes a difference. Dusty always "needs" another bat, even when he gets one, frankly because he wastes half his opportunities trying to play feel good reclamation players hitting away after leadoff doubles, running in pitch out counts, sleeping through 6 run innings, pitching his bullpen to death in 4 run defecits, and pitching to 8 hitters with closers on deck. They Run the bases like blind baboons. This team would have to have a payroll of $200 mil to make up for that much managerial baggage with talent. This should be a World Series team, as it should have been last year. They've outgrown Dusty.

 

[JohnU]

Losing this one tonight (Wed.) was a toughie. Two extremely poor at-bats by Hannahan and Paul in RBI situations, though Cleveland tried to give it away with some '62-Mets style baserunning. Giambi knows how to win ball games.