Ok, got your attention... how about some thoughts on this. The Reds will
never be able to get anything back of value out of Jason LaRue, in fact they
will have to eat money just to unload / trade him. Why not trade Ross
instead - his value has never been higher, he probably played over his head
in the first half, and after a weak 2nd half has picked it up some lately.

Jason, playing full time will hit .250 - .265, play good to great defense
and manage the staff from behind the plate (I am not sure how - but that is
what we hear - since the bench calls all pitches anyway) better than Ross.
If he was the '07 starting catcher from the start we will get what we expect
from him - not great numbers but not overly poor either. I'm not convienced
that Ross playing all year will produce much higher numbers over Jason - all
things considered (defense behind the plate) - I say trade Ross.

My point is let's get something out of the situation - if Ross can get a
pitcher that can fill a 5th starter or reliever spot then let's do it. Or
perhaps an outfielder role? Thoughts?

"Withheld at Owners Request" <noaddr@isp.com> wrote in message
news:IfidneaqG46_P4fYnZ2dnUVZ_rGdnZ2d@giganews.com ...

The mandate has been that you improve the defense and the pitching will
magically get better.
Nobody knows exactly how much the catching position contributes to the
success or failure of a pitching staff.
One of the few things that this group has any kind of consensus about is
that Jason LaRue will NOT provide "great defense and staff management."

I'm not against trading Ross in the same way that I'm not categorically
against trading Adam Dunn. Depending on the return, it could be the right
deal.


The reds don't need any more 5th starters. They have plenty of them.
I don't believe you trade assets for a reliever, but pretty obviously Wayne
K disagrees.
Odd to think that a trading a part time catcher might improve this team by
aquiring an outfielder.

dfs

Withheld at Owners Request wrote:

If it means having to keep LaRue...abso-fucking-lutely not! Eat part of
his salary or whatever you have to do to get rid of him (LaRue) .

I say that not necessarily disagreeing with you that trading Ross while
his stock is high isn't a bad idea.


Do you ever actually watch the Reds? Good to great defense?!!! It is
really hard to take you seriously with comments like that.


LaRue is a pretty decent hitting C...but it doesn't come anywhere near
making up for his defensive game. About the only thing he's *ever* done
well was throw out potential base stealers, something that I believe he
is actually third of three in this season.


I think the writing was clearly on the wall when acquiring Ross was one
of Krivsky's first moves. He then re-signed Javy valentin for next
season and the wiritng became more bold. If not for some inopportune
timing of injuries to first jason hismefl and then Ross, I have a
strong feeling LaRue would already be elsehwhere.

I hope that is more than wishful thinking on my part, and we'll
probably know quickly, since Jason's salary increases if he's traded
after October 15th (can he even be traded before that...when does the
WS end?).

"Kevin McClave" <kmcclave@twcny.rr.com> wrote in message
news:1159381363.210436.185800@m73g2000cwd.googlegr oups.com...

He has made some outstanding plays this year, certainly better behind the
plate than Ross. He has had issues w/ passed balls I'll admit, but all in
all he is not a liability behind the plate at all.

Just some snippets from various web sites on his defense:

"LaRue's defense is another matter: Known for his ability to gun down
would-be basestealers-he punched out an astounding 61% in 2001, 45% in 2002,
winning Michael Wolverton's Golden Gun award for catchers both seasons-he's
tossed out a more pedestrian 27% and 30% the last two seasons."

"Though he has good power and can produce runs, defense is his priority.
He's become one of the game's top throwing catchers. LaRue has a knack for
gaining the respect and confidence of his pitchers and he's not afraid to
put his body in front of the ball."

"Withheld at Owners Request" <noaddr@isp.com> wrote in
anip

Jason has made vast improvements in his defensive game this year, but you go
way too far. He's setting far more of a target than he's ever set in the
past and I could be convinced that he's not a liability, but that's a far
cry from being an asset.


That's an award for throwing out baserunners on a percentage basis. That's
an easily quantifiable countable number, but it's not catcher d. I don't
think anybody has ever complained that Jason doesn't have an arm.


That's absolutely ludicrous. Watch Jason LaRue and you will see him shy away
from putting his body in front of the ball very prominently. It's to the
point where little leaguers see it. Stabbing at the ball with his mitt
instead of getting his body in front of it is exactly why he had such
problems with passed balls in the past.

dfs

Withheld at Owners Request wrote:

Well, you're about the only one I know of who still thinks that. More
power to ya, I guess.


If only that's alkl that catchers had to do defensively.


he just cant' catch it, that's all.

David Short wrote:

I think what you're probably perceiving is small sample size...he's
played less so his shortcomings are less evident. I just don't believe
that after all these years and all the tutelage he has supposedly
gotten from various people, including Johnny Bench and Bob Boone, that
he suddenly became a good defensive catcher at age 32. When he wasn't
at age 31.


Although he has not maintained even that success rate. As I pointted
out earlier, he is third among the Reds three catchers in that stat
thiis season, and 27 and 30 aren't excactly eye popping the last two
years.


Sometimes you disagree with someone and sometimes you have to wonder if
they're just saying stuff to get a rise out of people...

"Kevin McClave" <kmcclave@twcny.rr.com> wrote in message

I'm guessing.
I think Bronson Arroyo's comments about not being able to get on the same
page with LaRue was a pretty obvious snub.
I think it got Jason's attention.
I think that's why Jason has conceeded to setting a target. For years that
was one of the big buggaboo's this group had with Jason's d, he didn't set
any kind of target and thus the ump didn't have any kind of reference to
frame the pitch. Jason sets up with a target now.

Trolling? On Usenet? I'm shocked. Shocked I say.

dfs

On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 12:09:05 -0400, "Withheld at Owners Request"
<noaddr@isp.com> wrote:



Ross is arbitration eligible. Are there any rules about trading him
before that?


I wanted to trade him at the asb, as I thought that was his peak
value.

He's coming back to more of an expected level the more he's played,
the hrs earlier this week aside.

No matter what the price, we can't go into next year with the same
f'ed up catching situation.

On 27 Sep 2006 11:22:43 -0700, "Kevin McClave" <kmcclave@twcny.rr.com>
wrote:


Larue will make $5.45 million next year if traded.

Ross is arbitration eligible and will be coming off of a career year
that has him 3rd in HR for catchers depite only getting about 1/2 the
at bat as anyone else. Needlese to say, his slugging % is off the
chart.

So, he's going to get a huge raise. If you eat Larue's contract,
factor in Ross's raise and Valentin's $1.25 mil extension, you'll have
eaten up a good chunk of my Zito nest egg.

Jettisoning Larue and paying Ross makes Ross a very expensive gamble,
especially if he drops to expected crappy offensive levels next year.