Colorado just got better.

FINALLY, THE MISSING PIECE!

Sort of a rich man's Corey Patterson?

Behold the genius of Dusty Baker's strategem!

Wow, this has Dusty's fingerprints all over it. If Taveras could play the middle infield positions, Dusty would probably adopt him too.

Congratulations Marty. This guy is the exact opposite of Adam Dunn. Your cup runneth over!

Wow, this has Dusty's fingerprints all over it.

We'll never know for sure unless we dust for them.

I also blame Dusty for the weather conditions outside and that unsightful nicotine odor.

How's his defense?

It's OK, not as good as it should be given his speed. He gets to a lot of balls, but doesn't always seem to catch them.

Taveras was on a nice little upward trajectory before last season, looking like he might settle in as a guy with an OPS+ around 100, but skewed toward OBP and with excellent speed. And he's a fantastic bunter, for whatever that's worth. That's a useful player. But his 2008, of course, was a disaster.

He seems like the kind of guy - a fairly young veteran in midcareer who doesn't seem to have tapped his talent - that Dusty has gotten a lot out of in the past. At his 2008 level, though, he's worthless.

I'm more impressed by Taveras's 68 steals and only 64 runs scored this year.

The last player to have more steals than runs? (with at least 40 steals?) Why, Deion Sanders of the 1997 Reds, of course.

Was Jay Bruce's CF defense so weak? Or is Bruce just a natural RF?

I like it. No more Freel and Farney. Just a guy who can burn it up speedwise and avg - Baker and Quirk are challenged to improve his OBP though.

Or is Bruce just a natural RF?

He spent a significant amount of his minor league innings in RF (though most of them in CF). I think most players with that profile spend their MLB career at the "easier" position.

Interestingly, Bruce was very good in a small sample in CF and terrible in a small (but larger than the CF) sample in RF this past season.

Taveras's career UZR numbers add up to almost exactly average but he's been below average each of the last two seasons.

I suppose a projection would put Bruce as about 5-10 runs worse than Taveras defensively. The relevant comparison is Taveras vs. another corner outfielder and I don't know who the Reds would bring in for such a role at a similar price tag.

The move will be wasted once Dusty makes him the leadoff man.

Put him 8th and now you have something.

He can only help the Reds outfield which for several years is where fly balls go to enjoy freedom, unhindered by man.

ZiPS comps him to Tom Goodwin, another Dusty favorite. His upside is Juan Pierre.

He seems like the kind of guy - a fairly young veteran in midcareer who doesn't seem to have tapped his talent - that Dusty has gotten a lot out of in the past.

Dusty had a nice run of this in SF but I don't think this claim holds up well anymore. Last season, Dusty got a Brandon Phillips season out of Phillips, awful stuff out of Patterson and Keppinger, pretty standard stuff out of Ross, Freel, Valentin and Cabrera. He got a nice season out of Hairston but he had stunk for two seasons under Dusty in Chicago. Unless you mean to refer to really talented players like Ramirez and Lee (Taveras isn't in the same universe), the only Cub success story that springs to mind is Barrett. Though, again, he did no better or worse than usual with Jones, Walker, etc.

Don't get me wrong, Ramirez became a star (and improved his defense) under Dusty and presumably Dusty deserves some credit there. And I don't think you can say that Dusty is any worse with this type of player than anyone else. And who knows, if you added up all the post-SF numbers, maybe he does a bit better than you'd expect even if you drop Ramirez and Lee. But he's not a miracle worker and he does seem to have a fondness for these crappy players. Willy Taveras on your team isn't a big deal. Willy Taveras getting 400 PA a year is a problem. Willy Taveras getting 600 PA is likely a disaster. And if he starts out hot, Dusty may never get him out of the lineup.

Anyway, Taveras is just Patterson with better BA/OBP but less power and defense (both are excellent base stealers). There's nothing in Taveras' minor-league record to suggest he can ever be any better than he is. In seasons when he manages to hit 300, he's probably on the stinky end of "starter-worthy" but really he's a 5th OF. Signing him to a 2-year deal is odd ... what's the money?

Sort of a rich man's Corey Patterson?

No. Patterson's a damn sight better than Taveras defensively, and has a lot more power. I wouldn't really want either one of them, but I'd take Corey if pushed to it. Taveras is better at getting on base and is probably more predictable in the mediocrity-to-badness he brings to the table, but that isn't saying anything.

Don't get me wrong, Ramirez became a star (and improved his defense) under Dusty and presumably Dusty deserves some credit there. And I don't think you can say that Dusty is any worse with this type of player than anyone else.

That's fair, but the reason people bring this stuff up is this: Dusty needs to be better with these types of players than other managers are, because he's demonstrably awful at everything else a manager does. If he's not bringing his (once well documented, now dubious) motivational skills to bear with his veteran players, he's kind of useless.

What would it have taken to land Juan Pierre? Taveras is basically an inferior version. Is there any word on how much money the Dodgers want the receiving team to eat?

Unless you mean to refer to really talented players like Ramirez and Lee (Taveras isn't in the same universe), the only Cub success story that springs to mind is Barrett.

Quite a few more than that, I think.

Willy Taveras ain't Slappy Pierre. He walks more than Slappy does, and has a better arm. Slappy's primary advantage over Taveras is durability/consistency, but you can decide for yourself what Slappy's brand of consistency is worth.

As far as the Dodgers go, Slappy's contract is a sunk cost, and you can do a lot worse for a fourth outfielder, so as long as he's not ######## too much about playing time I'd rather keep him, unless there's some kind of financial crisis and I can find someone to take half his contract.

Unless, of course, his scrappiness is too tempting and the manager just has to give him 300+ PAs. In that case I'd rather just eat the money and release him. Actually, I'd rather fire the manager and keep Slappy on the bench, but as we know, the real world ain't that simple.

so as long as he's not ######## too much about playing time I'd rather keep him

I suppose you're right. Pierre did request a trade but he's never had the reputation as a malcontent so it's unlikely that he's being particularly hostile about the situation.

Additionally, shipping him off at a tremendous discount would require the GM to explicitly admit a tremendous mistake on his part.

He walks more than Slappy does,

No he doesn't. Pierre walks 1 per 16.5 AB, Taveras 1 per 17 AB. Taveras gets plunked more often but not enough so you'd notice. Pierre carries a career 300 BA vs. Taveras 283 and thereby Pierre has the higher OBP. The last 4 years, Pierre's OBP has been right around 330, Taveras' career OBP. Somehow Taveras even has a lower ISO which is really hard. Taveras' career OPS+ is 72; even last year Pierre managed a 73.

Granted it's a choice between gruel and gruel with raisins but there's no doubt that Pierre is the one with raisins.

Taveras' advantage is that he's moving into his "prime". But my point wasn't about which you'd want now, my point was that Pierre through age 26 was a much better player than Taveras and, thus, Pierre represents his upside. Pierre through age 26: 312/361/380, 88 OPS+. Pierre ages 27-30: 286/329/359, 79 OPS+. Taveras through age 26: 283/331/337, 72 OPS+ and coming off his worst season.

And Pierre is noodle-armed but he used to do a nice job of getting to the ball.

It feels weird saying this, but moves like this cement the glad feeling I have that Jocketty was ousted out of St. L.

I was thinking the same thing, So. I'm sure Jocketty recognizes that Taveras isn't a star, but I've never been sure that he recognizes the size of the gulf between Taveras and, say, Shane Victorino.

Wow, this has Dusty's fingerprints all over it.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

(Hands Neifi Perez a Cabbage Patch doll in a baseball uniform) ...

Can you show me where Dusty touched you?

Depending on the money involved, I don't think this is a bad signing by Cincy. He was terrible last year, but that looks flukishly low. He'd been much better every year of his career, including when he was a starter at ages 23-24.

He's no world-beater (yes, that is rather certainly putting it nicely), but let's look at a few things about him:

- his OPS+ blows, but as a steal-rific up-the-middle defender, that stat underrates him. In particular, his time in Colorado should especially deflate his OPS+. Not only is Tavaras not a power hitter, but he really doesn't look like any sort of flyball hitter as well. Coors Field causes batters' raw numbers to leap because of the way the ball travels in the air, hence someone who doesn't hit the ball in the air will suffer in ballpark adjustments that adopt a one-size-fits-all park adjustments. (I'm reminded of how Juan Pierre's numbers stayed roughly similar upon leaving Coors - Pierre is one of the most extreme groundballers of his generation).

- Taveras was good enough to land a starting job at age 23. He wasn't good, mind you, but a lousy hitter at age 23 has a chance to be serviciable when he reaches his prime. Someone who posts a 75 OPS+ at age 23 (which Taveras did at sea-level in Houston) should be a decent bet to have an OPS+ around 90 at age 27 or so.

- Taveras is entering his prime. He'll be 27 next year and 28 in the final year of this contract. If he can post a 90ish OPS+ at the plate while manning a key defensive position and providing great base running, he can be adequate. He'll never be great, but I think people are underestimating his upside.

You're supposed to buy low. Taveras strikes me as a good player to buy low on this off-season. The key, as mentioned at the beginning of this ramblin, is the money involved. Did they buy low? If Cincinnait sinks a modest amount of money in Taveras in order to lock down one position at low cost and free up money for spending elsewhere, that's fine. That's actually a pretty good idea.

If Cincinnait sinks a modest amount of money in Taveras in order to lock down one position at low cost and free up money for spending elsewhere, that's fine. That's actually a pretty good idea.


Of course, indication is that Cincy's using this move to free up Norris Hopper to start in left...

Granted it's a choice between gruel and gruel with raisins
Double LOL. I read this to my son who LOLed, after I couldn't finish reading it aloud without LOLing.

I sometimes ask myself why a man of my age and various levels of responsibility still plays fantasy baseball. And now I remember why.

The relevant comparison is Taveras vs. another corner outfielder and I don't know who the Reds would bring in for such a role at a similar price tag.

Daniel Dorn? Sure, no one seems that excited about him, his defense is bleh, and he could use another year in the minors, but he has hit a lot on his way up, and it's Willy Taveras we're talking about.

i watched willy for 2 years in houston

willy can't/won't walk, doesn't know how to lean into a pitch, has zero strike zone judgement and has a real tough time deciding what to do if he comes up with a runner on first. he grounds into a LOT of FC.

his bread and butter is bunt hits and beating out infield choppers

he has a tough time hitting balls into the OF and most of his doubles are either down the line or something to got into the OF that the slow IF didn't get to.

he runs very very fast

he's gotten smarter about stealing vs lousy catchers/pitchers and not the pettitte types

as a fielder, he runs very very fast. he very often doesn't get good jumps and he almost always lets balls fall in in front of them so he can play them on a hop. i'd say he's a little better than average.

oh yeah - unless he changed last year, he just will NOT throw the ball to the cutoff man. he wants to throw it to home/3rd and even though his arm is quite strong, his aim is lousy

he's brian hunter all over again

astros fans absolutely LOVED him. you see, he runs VERY fast. fans LOVE bunt hts and guys who beat out IF choppers and i got a strong feeling they like it better than doubles or HR. oh yeah, and he has a batting average over 280. which is what matters the absolute most. ask marty brennaman. marty is gonna LUUUUVVVVV willy

and you best believe willy will be leading off. you always put fast CF who bunt a lot in leadoff.

I have seen this signing mocked in several places--three threads here, BP, etc, and I can see why. Taveras has no power, a low OBP, and according to some metrics cannot even play CF very well.

That said, I don't really have a big problem with the signing for several reasons:

1. As a couple of people have pointed out, I have not seen any real suggestions for alternatives. Putting Bruce in CF might make sense if the Reds had corner OFs they wanted to play who could hit. They don't, and I think Bruce is most likely to succeed if parked in RF and left alone.
2. Taveras may be a bad CF. But I have seen some metrics that say he is not, and one of the Reds' big problems over the last ten years has been lack of attention to team defense, as emblematized by leaving Griffey in CF. Even if Taveras is bad, I would rather have a really fast, bad guy in his 20s than what they have had. I would also rather have Taveras than Patterson.
3. People sneer at Taveras in the leadoff spot, but last year Keppinger's OBP was .310 and Phillips' was .312. Hairston of course had a high OBP in a small sample. But the truth is the Reds have no leadoff hitter. Adding Taveras is not creating a new problem.
4. I have seen a few people, like Joe Sheehan, talk about the Reds' being a "sleeper" etc. I don't see it. The team has nice four-man base to a rotation, and couple of nice players, but that is it. The holes--SS, leadoff, CF, team OBP--are huge, crucial, and hard to fill. I suggested that the team try to sign Juan Rivera and Cesar Izturis; I also suggested that they jump in with a big bid for Rafael Furcal. It is possible that none of those guys would ever go to Cincinnati, but I also never heard anything that indicated the Reds were interested. IOW, they seem to be going no place and they do need somebody to play CF. I also said months ago that the Reds would be after Pierre, but this is cheaper, apparently.

As to what to do now, Orlando Hudson is a FA. I would suggest getting a little creative and seeing if they can sign Hudson to a two-year deal and then moving Phillips back to SS. Keppinger is a utility guy--and Hudson's .367 OBP last year makes him Rickey Henderson on this team.