I’ll miss you, Scott and Miguel. But not too, too much. (Photos by Keith Allison/Flickr)

It’s a strange thing – though generally the Reds had very low turnover this offseason, the opening day roster will still feel very “new look”, thanks to the lack of Scott Rolen and Miguel Cairo. Neither player will be suiting up for the Reds in the 2013 season. Miguel Cairo has taken a position with the Reds, as a Special Assistant to the GM. While Scott Rolen has not said what he’ll be doing, he won’t be attending camp with the Reds, and it’s hard to see him joining the team midseason without significant injury to the current roster. Rolen’s ambivalence this off-season suggests that he’s not ready to leave baseball just yet. It’s not impossible for him to end up with some team in 2013, but I think it’s more likely that he’ll end up taking some time off, and maybe gradually inching into management positions – but he’s said he wants to spend more time with his family.

Cairo and Rolen haven’t defined the recent Reds teams, but they’ve been a mainstay since 2010 – as part of Walt Jocketty’s Veteran Presence Former-Cardinals Initiative. (It’s like the Avengers Initiative, but with less pecs and more shoulder injuries.) Rolen was brought in to provide a more stable presence (offensively and defensively) at third base in a trade that sent Edwin Encarnacion, Zack Stewart (who?) and Josh Roenicke (who?) to the Blue Jays, while Cairo came in as a free agent in the following offseason.

2010 was definitely the best year for CaiRolen – Rolen was great everywhere, at the plate, in the field, in the the clubhouse, and Cairo was pretty excellent for a bench player. 2011 went a little haywire: Cairo still provided league average offense, but had an increased responsibility, thanks to Rolen’s injury problems. That was only one of the multiple failures with the 2011 team, but it surely showed us one of the potential drawbacks of older players. 2012 was a bit of a return to form for Rolen, but the 37-year-old was still subpar, especially with a young fun like Frazier knocking down the door. Meanwhile, Cairo sank into the pit that was the 2012 Reds bench.

Here is Rolen’s final line with the Reds:

And Cairo’s:

By the numbers, at least, Rolen and Cairo won’t be hard to replace. Rolen was worth about 1.1 WAR last year, while Frazier was worth 2.8 (in more playing time, overall). More time will exacerbate Frazier’s slightly below average fielding, but then again, settling into one position might improve Todd’s defensive skills. Still, the projections see Frazier as about a 3 win player in 2013, and I agree.

Cairo was rated as worth -1 wins last year. Infield bench replacements look likely to be Jack Hannahan, and Jason Donald. Hannahan was worth about 0.5 wins (~300 PA, 750 innings) with the Indians last year, and Donald was worth -0.4 wins (~130 PA, 300 innings). Neither are spectacular options, but bench guys rarely are. In any case, they can almost certainly match the work of Valdex and Cairo last year.

Of course, the line on both Cairo and Rolen has been their role as veteran clubhouse leaders. While I, like most interneters, have no direct knowledge of this, the stories do suggest that this was of some importance. I certainly appreciated their ability to not be involved in scandals, and even to not say anything that caused too much of a stir. A team of 25 of those guys might be a little boring, but a couple of solid presences is always appreciated.

In 2013, though, the team has changed in substance. Joey Votto is not promising youngster – he’s an MVP who’s been to the post-season twice, and overcome multiple struggles. Brandon Phillips is now a part of the fabric of this team, you have guys like Bruce and Hanigan who have been around for awhile. There are still older, experienced players around – like Arroyo in the rotation, and Ludwick in the outfield. Mostly, though, when I look at this team, I see a team that has grown together. They know each other’s quirks and idiosyncracies. They’ve won and lost together.

This graphic (supposedly) represents the Reds defense in 2011. (The plays and balls in zone numbers are really basic numbers available from fangraphs. The playing time percentages are based on innings played.) That 2011 team sucked, but the defense was highly rated – ranking 2nd in overall UZR in the NL, and 4th in fielding percentage. We also topped the NL, and were second only to Tampa Bay in MLB, in defensive efficiency rating – the most basic rating of how many balls in play get fielded.

Fast forward to 2012, and it’s suddenly no longer the case. Hal McCoy and Dusty have commented on it recently: but mostly in terms of a error-licious Cubs series. But it’s more than just that. We’re actually still 4th in fielding percentage. But our team total UZR and DER have dropped to almost exactly league average. Here’s what the same graph looks like for this season:

» Continue reading “Why Is The Reds Defense So Much Worse In 2012?”

Oh Miguel, I'm sure this doesn't include you. (It totally does) (Photo by Keith Allison/Flickr)

The bench. Role players. Unsung heroes. [Pretend I wrote some more longwinded prose about the excellent, gritty, grinder-y, underappreciated baseball players who don't get to play as often as other baseball players. Usually because they aren't as good.]

Bench players are awesome, I’m a big fan. I even proposed becoming Melvin Mora’s biggest fan. That’s dedication to bench players. Are they that important to a team’s winning? Maybe?

In any case, I decided to look at the relative strengths of the NL benches. Essentially, I just went to each team’s baseball reference page, and looked at the position players not listed as starters. Was this a perfect evaluation? No. I think bb-ref just takes the highest number of games started at a single position to determine the starters, and everyone else just falls into the bench by nature. Not perfect, but it’s probably the only reasonable way to do it.

And the Reds bench ranks dead last in OPS. That’s probably means we’re not doing great, any way you cut it. We’re last in AVG/OBP/SLG individually as well. Our bench wins the sabrmetric triple butt award. It’s funny, Heisey/Rolen/Mesoraco, who are the top three in playing time on the bench all have OPS’s at least a little above the bench average. There’s just enough Cairo/Valdez/Harris to drag down the average.

Here’s the data:

Yeah, our bench is  undefendably terrible offensively. Here’s why I don’t care that much:

1. We’re in first place. Obviously we have something else going for us. Could it be good starters? I think it could!

2. Offense isn’t the only important thing about a bench. I’m not sure how we stack up defensively, but I like to tell myself it’s not as bad.

3. We don’t have that many at-bats, comparatively, from our terrible bench. This is partially because we haven’t had so much in the way of injuries as other teams. There is Scott Rolen, of course, but he was out long enough to have Todd Frazier qualify as the starting third baseman. (I’d say that means Rolen is helping to pull down our bench rating, but he does technically have a higher OPS than the bench as a whole).

4. SMALL SAMPLE SIZE! Yay! IMPERFECT SAMPLING METHOD! Double yay!

Here’s one reason I might kind of care.

1. So, what if the team has more injuries/wears down in the second half? What do we have to take our starters’ places? Crap, that’s what.

So there you have it. Important news item: Our bench sucks. It doesn’t matter a lot. I just thought you should know.