Should the Reds sign Derek Lowe?
Via Crosley Field Terrace, I see this article by Joe Sheehan of Baseball Prospectus. As one of his “five radical moves that would give the offseason some sizzle,” Sheehan recommends that the Reds sign free agent pitcher Derek Lowe:
The Reds aren’t often thought of as players in free agency, but they could be an NL Central sleeper in ‘09; Lowe, 35, would make them a bona fide contender. He’s a durable righthander who may be the safest bet in a deep free-agent pitching pool. His ability to induce ground balls is a huge asset in tiny Great American Ballpark, and his signing would allow Cincinnati to keep Homer Bailey, 22, in long relief as he adjusts to the majors, or to deal Bronson Arroyo for a quality infield glove.
Lowe is definitely a ground-ball pitcher, and I wouldn’t object strenuously to this signing, but I can’t imagine this would be the wisest use of finite resources for the Reds.
November 4th, 2008 at 9:00 am
The rotation is still iffy, and it would be where I look first for improvement. I’m an advocate of building a strong rotation first.
We don’t know if Harang will come back, if Volquez will repeat in first-half form, or if Arroyo will still be, umm, up and down. It’s anyone’s guess about Bailey and Cueto. Signing Lowe would certainly strengthen the rotation.
If they can afford it, I’d go for it.
November 4th, 2008 at 9:51 am
Chad, it’s not your money, why do you care how they spend it
November 4th, 2008 at 9:59 am
Because it’s a limited budget. If the Reds sign someone for big bucks, then there’s some other move (or moves) that they won’t be able to make.
This is why I’m somewhat concerned about Cordero’s contract. He’s a good closer, but by paying him $12 million you’re closing the door to some other places the Reds could spend money.
I don’t even know what those other things are that we’re saying no to (maybe it’s Derek Lowe??) but for every team except maybe the Yankees and Red Sox, when you sign someone to a big deal, you are closing other doors.
November 4th, 2008 at 10:09 am
Hmmm, what good is a groundball pitcher if three-fourths of your infield can’t make the play?
November 4th, 2008 at 10:28 am
The thing with the Reds and free agency is that there is hardly ever players that are good and the Reds need either in their price range or willing to play in Cincinnati. So a lot of doors are already closed to them. An extra $12 million isn’t going to help them get CC, or Holliday next year or A.J. Burnett.
Lowe is one of the few pitchers out there I wouldn’t mind seeing the Reds snag up.
November 4th, 2008 at 11:31 am
We have enough SP in Harang Volquez Arroyo Cueto and Owings. Even if one of them were to falter we have Ramirez, Maloney, Bailey, and Thompson waiting in the wings. Use the money on the bullpen and a RH bat for the middle of our lineup.
November 4th, 2008 at 11:42 am
First question is cost?
Second, health of Micah Owings?
Third, you can’t have too much good pitching, but you can have too much average pitching. Would we better off in 2009 if Fogg, with the pre season expectations of him being an average pitcher) hadn’t taken up a 2008 roster spot. Derek Lowe is not a hammer.
November 4th, 2008 at 11:56 am
Sorry, my comment was supposed to end with “/sarcasm” but I think the website mistook it for a url tag of some sort. Next time I’ll stick to the smilies!
Chad, it’s not your money, why do you care how they spend it!
:razz:
November 4th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
Dan - I have the feeling Cordero may be moved if Fuentes and K-Rod don’t end up with the Mets. Fuentes could land in Tampa Bay and K-Rod’s price will be outrageous. Given that, the Mets may make a legit move for an established closer.
November 4th, 2008 at 12:28 pm
God, please no:
http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/2008/nov/03/padres-greene-latest-one-padres-discuss/?padres
November 4th, 2008 at 2:39 pm
Cordero cost a lot of money and so would Lowe. Players the Reds develop and who then blossom into stars will cost the same money to keep. That’s the cost of building a winner.
If the Reds don’t want to or can’t afford to play that game, fielding a winning team will be a happenstance event.
November 4th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
david
i wouldnt mind it
he needs a change of scenery and remember gonzo wasnt a very good hitter before we got him.. good ol seabass
November 4th, 2008 at 3:42 pm
OMG - Gonzalez didn’t cost the prospects that Greene will require.
November 4th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
The original article’s suggestion to sign Lowe and trade Arroyo isn’t logical. In ‘08 Arroyo won 15 for a bad team and Lowe won 14 for a good team.
In the 70s I met Walter Alston who told me that when you are comparing Reds and Dodgers pitcher go by wins not ERAs and hits allowed. He said that if the Reds pitchers of that time, who were considered above average, pitched in Dodgers Stadium and the Dodgers pitchers, considered very good, pitched in Riverfront the Reds pitchers in LA would put up the same numbers as the Dodgers pitchers in LA and visa versa. He said it s always about the wins.
With that in mind Arroyo would be the better deal for the Reds.
November 4th, 2008 at 4:40 pm
You and Walter are wise to consider the home park as a serious factor in evaluating pitchers.
You and Walter are not wise to use wins instead. Wins have WAY too much to do with what the other 24 guys on your team do (mainly, how many runs they score for you).
I’d rather just look at park-adjusted ERA or something like that. When evaluating individual players (pitchers or hitters), you need to try to evaluate them alone, and filter out anything to do with what their teammates did for them.
Same reason RBI’s aren’t a great way to evaluate a hitter - has too much to do with whether the guys in front of you were getting on base or not.
November 4th, 2008 at 5:09 pm
Sorry if that came off sounding condescending or something… didn’t mean for it to but I just re-read it and didn’t like how it sounds…
At any rate, I don’t like relying on just “wins” to tell me much about how good or not good a pitcher is.
November 4th, 2008 at 5:21 pm
MLB Hot Stove Blog is reported the Reds interested in the Padres Khalil Greene.
Despite his bad numbers in 08 I wouldn’t mind this move because it would help the defense a ton with him and phillips up the middle. Plus if he can get his offense back to his 07 numbers that would help out as well. Since he is at odds with the Padre organization he may be had cheaper than other people on the block.
November 4th, 2008 at 5:35 pm
Here’s the deal with Greene. He is the same player as Alex Gonzalez. The exact same player. Greene’s value is as low as possible and being in a hitter friendly park would be better than SD, BUT you aren’t going to get him for free. It’s gonna cost something to get him here and I don’t know that I would do that. Unless he is a throw in with a deal for Peavy - unlikely - then I don’t want him. There are other more logical solutions.
November 4th, 2008 at 5:39 pm
PS Greene’s OBP career OBP is sub .300 and he has only crossed .300 twice. I’d rather move Phillips to SS (which I don’t think is the right move) and sign Orlando Hudson (which I don’t think is the right move).
November 4th, 2008 at 6:45 pm
Greene = EE . . . sub .250 AVG, 25 HRs, waste of money!!
November 4th, 2008 at 8:07 pm
If the team is considering Greene, what do they expect out of Gonzo? Is he expected healthy? Can he play third, shift EE to first and Votto to the outfield?
November 4th, 2008 at 8:11 pm
EE > Greene. C’mon Dave, don’t be ridiculous.
November 4th, 2008 at 8:48 pm
The Reds have to have balance. The pitching is stronger than the offense so there must be money for investments in filling CF, LF, and C at the minimum. Simply adding a LF and going with Hanigan and Dickerson is not going to jumpstart this offense.
November 4th, 2008 at 9:52 pm
Greene = EE . .Greene can throw to 1st
November 4th, 2008 at 10:49 pm
EE can get on base, a rare commodity for the Reds.
November 5th, 2008 at 9:48 am
Dan, condescending is OK. No offense taken.
I still might go with Walt’s pedigree on this subject but, here is another voice on the value of the wins statistic.
Joe Nuxhall, speaking about Bruce Berenyi when BB complained about the offense after he lost 18 and 14 games back-to-back with an ERA that averaged 3.50 for the two years and then was a salary hold out. The Old Lefthander criticized his comments and said “Winning Pitchers find a way to Win.”
November 5th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
How would you apply that W-L theory to Harang’s performance this year?
Harang was 6-17 with a 4.78 ERA. He had 17 of 29 starts qualify as quality starts.
For reference,
Arroyo was 15-11 with a 4.77 ERA. He had 18 of 34 starts qualify as quality starts.
November 5th, 2008 at 2:23 pm
I think you have to look at Wins, ERA and WHIP to evaluate a pitcher. With the small ballparks now, WHIP has become very important, if you allow a ton of baserunners, it will frequently become a 3-run shot, rather than a solo shot. ERA due to the fact that you could have a 5.00 ERA for the Red Sox and still win 17 games with their offense, same pitcher with the Reds would lose 20 games. Having said that, a pitcher has to know how to win, and find a way to win when he doesn’t have his best stuff. I recall a stretch a few years ago when Randy Johnson gave up 6 runs combined in 5 games, and was 1-4, that make him a bad pitcher? Overall, i think you need balance thru the entire roster, you need to be able to manufacture some runs without the longball. The club lacks a legit .300 hitter and any speed to be able to create runs.
November 5th, 2008 at 5:08 pm
I recall a stretch a few years ago when Randy Johnson gave up 6 runs combined in 5 games, and was 1-4, that make him a bad pitcher?
That’s exactly why you should never look at wins. Not even in conjuction with other metrics. Never.
November 5th, 2008 at 6:19 pm
If not Greene, look for wj to acquire a veteran shortstop among Eckstein, Renteria, or possibly Jack Wilson. Of those four I’d advocate for Greene because of his age (28) and the probability he can be had for a song. AGon is on the active list in Ven. but hasn’t played. Can’t count on him in ‘09, and if we have to watch Keppinger and his knee cap to knee cap range again we’re in trouble.
November 5th, 2008 at 9:48 pm
It sure seems there are some indicators–based on Uncle Walt’s discussions with other teams and a few things Baker said today–that they now realize Gonzalez cannot be counted on in 2009.
November 5th, 2008 at 10:42 pm
And Phillips ain’t goin to short. If the Reds were going to do that they would have made it known by now.
November 6th, 2008 at 9:12 am
Phillips was never going to short. That was all a bunch of brain leakage by people who watch games but have no idea what they are seeing unless a stat sheet is in their hands.
November 6th, 2008 at 10:49 am
I don’t think anyone thinks the Reds will move Phillips back to short. The discussion has mostly centered on whether they should move Phillips back to short or whether they should have moved him back there in the past.