Sean Marshall vs. Travis Wood Trade

[TJCONEY]

I read an interesting article in Yahoo on how the Reds may now be regretting this trade due to Marshall's injury problems and the fact they have money tied up in Marshall and extended his contract with the team. The article claims this at least in part has kept the team from getting the right handed bat needed in their line-up. It also mentions that Travis Wood has done well with the Cubs and he even made the All Star Team this year.

As written and with 20/20 hindsight you can make an easy call on this. Or the fact Wood is a starter and Marshall is a relief pitcher. Or you can take a more detailed approach at the postion player roster. In my opinion, the Reds are a talented team with some flaws. Injuries tend to make these flaws stick out and the Reds are no different. All teams have injuries but the injuries the Reds have had this year should not be having this kind of impact on the team offensively. A healthy Hanigan along with Mesaroco has handled the catching duties, however, there is a huge distinction between what the Reds have as everyday players and what they have coming off the bench. I have seen nothing this year off the bench that has impressed me even a little bit. I know he was injured but Heisey has shrunk to the levels of Jonny Gomes just a couple years ago and is a huge non-factor. Robinson, Paul, Izturis, Hanahan, how can you be impressed with these guys for anything they have done when the Reds needed it? Corky Miller? Please, I thought the minors were for player development not an aging catcher hanging on. Going into this year the Reds and their fans thought they were set. Perhaps, but they forgot about the bench and it has cost them this season thus far big time. Other teams that have a fraction of the Reds talent have produced players that have surprised either from their roster already or the minors but the Reds have produced nothing other than the guys everyone knew would shine already. Frazier and Cozart have not produced the way many fans would have hoped so far so the Reds also forgot to factor in that certain players may not have good or even decent years too as perhaps expected when setting the bench. Their back-ups are scrubs too, for lack of a better term, and Baker makes them stick out even further by putting some of these guys at or near the top of the batting order when he inserts them in the line-up. Need speed and the Reds forgot about that too. A great starting pitching staff, with Votto, Philips, and even Bruce have gotten the Reds to where they are but from what is and is still expected from this team, the scrubs are dragging them down. You cannot always blame the lack of a decent batting average on the fact a guy is a part time player or has been injured. He may just be a scrub and no better. Sorry for the long post just sharing a friendly opinion because I am a Reds fan.

 

[JohnU]

Except for Cingrani and a cup of java with Don Lutz, the Reds seem quite reluctant to bring their young players into the mix. I was quite disappointed with the signings over the winter that basically left the bench in the same situation as previous years -- cheap, marginal utility guys who hit .189 and sometimes get a double to drive in a run.

Derrick Robinson was/is a decent extra outfielder but he really can't hit. He is either a bunt or a tweener. He plays better outfield than a lot of other speedy guys.

St. Louis that dipped into its minors to find about 5 decent pitchers this year. Miller, Maness, Lyons and Wacha ALL pitched sterling baseball -- and still do. Siegrist and Rosenthal are very good.

Parrots brought Locke and Cumpton right up to the line and let them fire away.

Reds gave Cingrani a chance when there was no choice. Partch ... he's been OK.

I don't think the pitching has suffered all that much without Cueto, not as much as we want to insist when we look for excuses about why we're 60-49 instead of 65-44.

I could argue that Broxton and Marshall make the pen stronger. The results imply that but I don't think it is necessarily the case. Parra has stepped up. LeCure seems to be a bit weary, but all in all, I like Sam. Ondrusek worries me. Is Broxton better? Maybe. Reds don't have much to harvest in the minors for pitching, for the moment. In a couple of years, who knows?

I agree on Corky Miller. Nice guy, great coach, good for morale. I'd rather have Dinosaur Navarro.

 

[redsfan03]

In hindsight, the Reds definitely got burned on this one. I still question the intelligence of trading for a set up man, but it is what it is. Wood wasn't doing exceedingly well with the Reds, so maybe a change in scenery and pitching coach is what he needed (though Brian Price is clearly one of the best pitching coaches in the league). There's no guaranteeing he would be able to replicate the season he's putting together with the Cubs if the Reds kept him. I sure wouldn't mind having another lefty in the rotation, though. It just seemed like the Reds gave up an awful lot for a type of guy you can literally pick up off the street.

As for the disappointing season, it's a combination of factors - poor offensive coaching, bad fundamentals, lack of intelligence, questionable management, players not playing up to the hype, injuries, the front office not properly addressing certain needs, etc. I think if there was one tangible thing you could point to (besides Dusty Baker and Brook Jacoby) it would be the fact that EVERY Reds hitter has regressed from their production last season except Bruce. It's pretty frustrating when the starting pitchers are putting together some impressive starts and either getting losses or no decisions because of the anemic hitting.

In my opinion, what seems to separate the Reds from more successful small market teams like the Cardinals or the A's or the Rays is intelligence. There seems to be a general lack of intelligence in the Reds organization from top to bottom that holds them back. Suicide by stupidity seems to be their MO. You look at the Cardinals and they have a constant pipeline of players who are not overly talented but they play smart, high-IQ baseball. You don't see that with the Reds, unfortunately.

 

[JohnU]

The trick to winning offense is really only this:

baserunners.

You can't have a row of .231 guys trying to churn the offense. There's a reason they hit .231.
Don't address BAbip and ops and other metrics ... and this offense is simply unproductive.

 

[Redsfan1507]

I see regression, but it's not necessarily sold in players stats. In fact, I'd argue that if you factor in Stubbs, Rolen, Heisey, Mesoracos miserable contribution with Votti absence, you'd be hard pressed to sell Cueto and Ludwick's absence, Frazier, Hanigan and Phillips regression, adding in Choo and Bruce's plusses and the rotation improvement of Bailey, Arroyo, Latos, Leake and Cingrani. Chapman hasn't changed. The bullpen has been more spotty without Broxton ( late season addition) and Marshall, but all if those don't equate to a 10-13 win difference in last year and this one.

Tough to say the NL got better- runs are down all over, Kemp, Braun and several others haven't been as prominent.

I thought the Reds paid too much for Marshall, in talent and salary, but the bullpen difficulties, specifically the lefty LOOGY portion, would indicate the priority weakness need they had in mind trading for him.

In my mind, much of the regression might be in choices made, or overlooked. Replacing Stubbs with Choo was blunted by so many low OBP hitters in the 2 hole this year,specifically, BP missing in that spot ( even though his RBI totals are high, his BA and Run contribution is off). There is little doubt in my mind that Jay Bruce's year would dwarf Ludwick's last year as a 4 hitter, especially if Choo, Phillips and Votto hit in front of him all year. Dusty doesn't hit back to back lefty hitters, though. He's afraid if his BEST lefty hitting leftues facing a LOOGT in the 7th inning, so he allowed a gaping hole in the 2 spot for 4 AB's a game, all year. It's bad science, but that's Dusty's chemistry.

How much less would our spotty bullpen have been exposed if Chapman had started ? Not so fast...half the preferred closers aren't closing right now, and lots of those teams are playoff contenders. Starters get 18-21 outs routinely, closers just 3. Another choice... One that was intended to make Manny Parra minor league contract insurance, possibly why they opted to go half a million cheaper than Mike Gonzalez would have cost them.

This team has never taken advantage of advancing runners without HR or 2 out hits. They don't steal, or bunt, or hit behind the runner much, also a managerial choice. The 4 hitter is a groundball hitter previlent to the DP, trying to pull enough to hit more than 20 small park HR a year while dropping his average 30 points, without the HR's. PED's are less a factor, and runs are down, and we still play to the Bonds/Sosa philosophy, without Bonds and Sosa type players. A choice. They don't always choose fundamental advantages in situational play, and lose because of that some.

This team makes more bad choices on the field than in bad trades.

IMO, Dusty Baker was a worse signing than any player that could be taken off the roster. He's a guy that makes 100 errors a year that never get corrected.

 

[Hit-n-Run]

Good post 1507.

Unfortunately the starter versus reliever role for Chapman appears to be solely for discussion among fans at this point.

IMO, the biggest mistake made was not allowing him to develop as a starter in the minors. He's now four years into his Major League career and has no more command of his secondary pitches than he did when he was signed. It's not because he isn't able to develop, but rather that he hasn't been given the opportunity to do so. If he had stayed in the minors developing as a starter for the first two years he'd be well on his way to being the dominant LHSP they signed him to be.

I'd classify Chapman as a thrower more in the mold of a Ryan or Koufax, both whom took a while to develop as starters. Chapman can't develop into a dominant SP closing out 2-4 games per week, he needed to be a starter to do so. There was always going to be a learning curve for him, but I think the Reds have blown their chance to capitalize on his potential by wasting the first four years.

It's a shame really, never knowing for sure simply by never trying.

 

[JohnU]

All trades eventually will look bad. Marshall arguably is a main reason the Reds won 97 a year ago and could be part of the reason they aren't on that pace now. I don't think he's a 15-game differential, which seems to be the current pace.

Travis Wood made the AS team, a nice compliment. He's hardly an all-star. He currently could be better than Cingrani.

The Chapman issue can only be discussed from the upper atmosphere.

 

[eburg5000]

I think Chapman will be able to show how well he can do as a starter. Just not during Dusty's time with the Reds. Probably with some one like the Yankees in a few years

 

[BigBlueNation111]

I think Chapman will be able to show how well he can do as a starter. Just not during Dusty's time with the Reds. Probably with some one like the Yankees in a few years

I hope we don't lose him period!

 

[JohnU]

I do want to address the so-called "right handed bat" problem that the team hasn't bothered to address since 2003. Since they obviously want to keep the current "right handed bats" on the field, maybe hire a hitting coach who has a clue.

"Swing hard and things will happen" is a sorry way to manage an offense.

 

[Redsfan1507]

Chapmans BB:K ratio proves the myth he has serious control problems. He's been the best SP in spring training for 2 years. You don't get beat as a closer on secondary pitches, you throw your best. His role limits his development, and although it's clear Dusty fears change as much as accountability, it's equally clear that Jocketty has always seen the merits of Chapman as a SP as a no brainer, but can't get his no brainer manager to pull the trigger, and Walt doesn't have the testicles to tell Dusty to hit the road. Dusty can lead a horse to water, but he drowns more than he convinced to drink.

Dusty Baker is a likable loser. He should have stayed with the Cubs. I'll chip in for a fund to send him back.

 

[Kate Upton]

For the 8 millionth time...Aroldis Chapman is not a starting pitcher.

He doesn't have the mental makeup to be a starting pitcher.

He is unable to throw anything other than a fastball over the plate with any consistency, and he'll even lose command of that pitch far too often.

He had to be shut down for 2 weeks last season after 60 innings.

In the half year he was a starter in this country, he wasn't good.

He himself prefers the closer role to a starting role.

Enough of this, please. All of the evidence suggests that Chapman is in the role he should be in.

 

[JohnU]

The end of that discussion to me is what AC said he wanted -- that was to close. So far with the Reds, that works fine except for the unpredictable nature of the rotation. I dislike the closer concept, period, though all the evidence argues with me --if teams have good closers. Even bad closers look good when their team has the lead.

I just think the Reds ought to use Chapman to win games, not to just use him to keep them from losing one.

A creative coaching staff makes creative decisions to maximize the chance of winning. Hell, looking back at Friday, AC was a much better choice in the 4th inning than Partch was but ... alas, Dusty has decided roles and roles it will be.

I do NOT like having men on the pitching staff who just come in to waste the rest of the game. 5-run deficits should be a challenge, not a defeat.

This isn't all about Chapman, but more about how Marshall fits into the picture. On Friday, if we had Spahn, Sain, Gibson, Koufax, Rivera, Eckersley,. Fingers, Hoffman and Cy Young, Dusteroo would have called out Curt Partch.

See where I'm going with this?

 

[Kate Upton]

The end of that discussion to me is what AC said he wanted -- that was to close. So far with the Reds, that works fine except for the unpredictable nature of the rotation. I dislike the closer concept, period, though all the evidence argues with me --if teams have good closers. Even bad closers look good when their team has the lead.

I just think the Reds ought to use Chapman to win games, not to just use him to keep them from losing one.

A creative coaching staff makes creative decisions to maximize the chance of winning. Hell, looking back at Friday, AC was a much better choice in the 4th inning than Partch was but ... alas, Dusty has decided roles and roles it will be.

I do NOT like having men on the pitching staff who just come in to waste the rest of the game. 5-run deficits should be a challenge, not a defeat.

This isn't all about Chapman, but more about how Marshall fits into the picture. On Friday, if we had Spahn, Sain, Gibson, Koufax, Rivera, Eckersley,. Fingers, Hoffman and Cy Young, Dusteroo would have called out Curt Partch.

See where I'm going with this?

Oh I agree. I'm all for using your best reliever in the highest leverage situations regardless of the inning.

Unfortunately, managers leave themselves open to bashing beyond anything you could possibly imagine if they do such a thing and it backfires.

Could you imagine what the reaction would have been had Chapman gone into that game in the 4th and he blew it?

Or if he holds, the Reds come back and take the lead, and since Chapman was used, LeCure comes into the 9th and he blows it?

These scenarios are what keeps ALL managers from using their bullpen in this way. Dusty is not unique in this way.

 

[JohnU]

Oh I agree. I'm all for using your best reliever in the highest leverage situations regardless of the inning.

Unfortunately, managers leave themselves open to bashing beyond anything you could possibly imagine if they do such a thing and it backfires.

Could you imagine what the reaction would have been had Chapman gone into that game in the 4th and he blew it?

Or if he holds, the Reds come back and take the lead, and since Chapman was used, LeCure comes into the 9th and he blows it?

These scenarios are what keeps ALL managers from using their bullpen in this way. Dusty is not unique in this way.

Again, I reiterate. If Sam blows it, then he blows it. You bring your game to the ballpark. If you need to be the Man, be the Man. Arroyo should have brought his game. He didn't. Maybe that was Dusty just telling the team specifically that. The message was clear to me, as a fan. You guys bring your gloves and bats and play balls up.

So in the scenario, Chapman gets out of the 4th (which should even happen because the game should not be LOST in the 4th) and if it comes down to needing to use Jack Hannahan to get the save, how bad do you want to win this game?

Giants got that message from Pence last year. The Cards got it from Freese in 2011 ... Kirk Gibson imparted it in 1988 ... the entire White Sox rotation brought it with them in 2005 ... so whatever the team does to lose the game, it's the same stuff you need to win it ... you just have to win the must-win game.

 

[Kate Upton]

Again, I reiterate. If Sam blows it, then he blows it. You bring your game to the ballpark. If you need to be the Man, be the Man. Arroyo should have brought his game. He didn't. Maybe that was Dusty just telling the team specifically that. The message was clear to me, as a fan. You guys bring your gloves and bats and play balls up.

So in the scenario, Chapman gets out of the 4th (which should even happen because the game should not be LOST in the 4th) and if it comes down to needing to use Jack Hannahan to get the save, how bad do you want to win this game?

Giants got that message from Pence last year. The Cards got it from Freese in 2011 ... Kirk Gibson imparted it in 1988 ... the entire White Sox rotation brought it with them in 2005 ... so whatever the team does to lose the game, it's the same stuff you need to win it ... you just have to win the must-win game.

I agree John, all I'm saying is that it's easy for us to say it without being in the manager's shoes.

We aren't the one's who would be pig roasted after the move backfires. We aren't the one's trying to save our jobs, and this "out of the box thinking" is the surest way to lose your job if it doesn't work.

It's just the safest route for them to take to avoid the day after criticism...they all do it because of that.

 

[Redsfan1507]

For the 8 millionth time...Aroldis Chapman is not a starting pitcher.

He doesn't have the mental makeup to be a starting pitcher.

He is unable to throw anything other than a fastball over the plate with any consistency, and he'll even lose command of that pitch far too often.

He had to be shut down for 2 weeks last season after 60 innings.

In the half year he was a starter in this country, he wasn't good.

He himself prefers the closer role to a starting role.

Enough of this, please. All of the evidence suggests that Chapman is in the role he should be in.

No offense, Kate...but WTF could you possibly know about the "mental makeup" of Chapman, or any player ?
You are allowed an opinion. IMO, the only thing you are right about here, is that he ISN'T a SP. Dusty won't let him be. I believe it has more to do with comfort-mainly Dusty's, and only partly Chapmans, than making the team better.

The last 50 years of World Champs tells us that less than 10% of teams without a LHSP beat one with one. That isn't opinion, it's overwhelming evidence the Reds need a 3 man rotation worthy LHSP. None have more raw tools than Chapman. It's a clue that observant people paid to notice should get.

 

[JohnU]

Cingrani may be the LHSP that we are looking for.

 

[Kate Upton]

No offense, Kate...but WTF could you possibly know about the "mental makeup" of Chapman, or any player ?
You are allowed an opinion. IMO, the only thing you are right about here, is that he ISN'T a SP. Dusty won't let him be. I believe it has more to do with comfort-mainly Dusty's, and only partly Chapmans, than making the team better.

The last 50 years of World Champs tells us that less than 10% of teams without a LHSP beat one with one. That isn't opinion, it's overwhelming evidence the Reds need a 3 man rotation worthy LHSP. None have more raw tools than Chapman. It's a clue that observant people paid to notice should get.

You don't have to be on the inside to know what Chapman's mental makeup is.

Or do guys who openly pout on the mound and do sommersaults have what you're looking for in your starting pitchers?

And where have you been Rip Van Winkle? Is Cingrani a righty?

 

[Redsfan1507]

You played little league, right Kate ? We're you also a psychology major ?

Your intelligent, but misguided. In that respect, you have one more tool than your uncle Dusty. Fans like you have a lot to do with why he still has a job.

Dusty thinks his detractors blame him for shredding SP arms. No one accused him of killing closers. It's stupid, and unjustified, but it's why Chapman is never going to start for Dusty, IMO.