PDA

View Full Version : Chase Headley



Old school 1983
05-16-2013, 03:05 PM
There have been threads about many trade targets but Headley is my prime choice for a few reasons.

1. He instantly fixes the two and four hole
2. He plays good defense
3. High obp
4. Leaves more questions answered than created while leaving options in the outfield. If we have him ludwick can slide right into left and not have the pressure of batting four. Hamilton if ready could go to center and put choo in left. We could trade for a cf and slide choo over
5. Would be costly, but not as costly as say a Stanton.
6. Shifting from a pitchers park to a hitters park would spike his numbers

Well there is my case. Any options as for yea or nea. What would it take to get him? Or any other info/input on Headley?

Johnny Fan
05-16-2013, 03:29 PM
There have been threads about many trade targets but Headley is my prime choice for a few reasons.

1. He instantly fixes the two and four hole
2. He plays good defense
3. High obp
4. Leaves more questions answered than created while leaving options in the outfield. If we have him ludwick can slide right into left and not have the pressure of batting four. Hamilton if ready could go to center and put choo in left. We could trade for a cf and slide choo over
5. Would be costly, but not as costly as say a Stanton.
6. Shifting from a pitchers park to a hitters park would spike his numbers

Well there is my case. Any options as for yea or nea. What would it take to get him? Or any other info/input on Headley?

I don't see him as that much of an improvement over Fraizer given what it would take to get him from SD and then the cost to sign him to a new contract.

Vottomatic
05-16-2013, 03:34 PM
There have been threads about many trade targets but Headley is my prime choice for a few reasons.

1. He instantly fixes the two and four hole
2. He plays good defense
3. High obp
4. Leaves more questions answered than created while leaving options in the outfield. If we have him ludwick can slide right into left and not have the pressure of batting four. Hamilton if ready could go to center and put choo in left. We could trade for a cf and slide choo over
5. Would be costly, but not as costly as say a Stanton.
6. Shifting from a pitchers park to a hitters park would spike his numbers

Well there is my case. Any options as for yea or nea. What would it take to get him? Or any other info/input on Headley?

That all sounds great until you wake up from the dream and have to figure out how to pay his $8.6M salary this year and his huge increase in arbitration next year (2014), possibly $12M+. And then in 2015, you have to come up with a new third baseman because Headley walks in free agency.

I'd love to trade for David Wright of the Mets, but paying his $20M per season salary is a problem. :thumbup:

Old school 1983
05-16-2013, 03:41 PM
That all sounds great until you wake up from the dream and have to figure out how to pay his $8.6M salary this year and his huge increase in arbitration next year (2014), possibly $12M+. And then in 2015, you have to come up with a new third baseman because Headley walks in free agency.

I'd love to trade for David Wright of the Mets, but paying his $20M per season salary is a problem. :thumbup:

We were all geeked up to pay that much for Stanton or choo. I think he coukd make a bigger impact than stanton on the team as a whole and combined with hamilton be more impactful than frazier and choo. I think he makes the reds a super legit World Series contender for the next two years. So if because of him we get a title in at least one of those he can walk and ill be happy. Maybe we could resign him too. Weirder things have happened.

Old school 1983
05-16-2013, 03:42 PM
I don't see him as that much of an improvement over Fraizer given what it would take to get him from SD and then the cost to sign him to a new contract.

I'm just interested what an upgrade over Frazier looks like all things considered?

Alpha Zero
05-16-2013, 03:45 PM
If the Reds are going to give up a haul of players in a deal, I want more than a year and a half of control over the acquired player. I was okay with acquiring Choo for one season because the Reds only gave up one potential impact position player and got an elite level guy in return. The Reds would likely have to give up quite a bit more for Headley, and there are more questions surrounding Headley than there were with Choo.

Old school 1983
05-16-2013, 03:45 PM
And David wright has never realistically been in the trade market like Headley has.

Vottomatic
05-16-2013, 03:56 PM
So.......what would it take to get Headley in trade?

Leake and Frazier? Or more? Add Corcino?

If the Reds could afford to do the deal for the rest of 2013 and all of 2014, I would strongly consider it, depending on who they have to give up.

Frazier, I have no problem with. He's cheap, under control, and replace Headley for the Padres. Leake would probably do well in Petco. Corcino has done very well up until this season and he's turning things around now. He's a top 3 or 4 prospect in the Reds organization.

I'm not giving up Cingrani, Stephenson or Travieso. Probably not Hamilton either.

Vottomatic
05-16-2013, 03:56 PM
So.......what would it take to get Headley in trade?

Leake and Frazier? Or more? Add Corcino?

If the Reds could afford to do the deal for the rest of 2013 and all of 2014, I would strongly consider it, depending on who they have to give up.

Frazier, I have no problem with. He's cheap, under control, and replace Headley for the Padres. Leake would probably do well in Petco. Corcino has done very well up until this season and he's turning things around now. He's a top 3 or 4 prospect in the Reds organization.

I'm not giving up Cingrani, Stephenson or Travieso. Probably not Hamilton either.

Old school 1983
05-16-2013, 04:07 PM
So.......what would it take to get Headley in trade?

Leake and Frazier? Or more? Add Corcino?

If the Reds could afford to do the deal for the rest of 2013 and all of 2014, I would strongly consider it, depending on who they have to give up.

Frazier, I have no problem with. He's cheap, under control, and replace Headley for the Padres. Leake would probably do well in Petco. Corcino has done very well up until this season and he's turning things around now. He's a top 3 or 4 prospect in the Reds organization.

I'm not giving up Cingrani, Stephenson or Travieso. Probably not Hamilton either.

I think I'd go Frazier and Lutz for sure. Frazier for the reasons you listed and lutz because he has no real future with the reds unless Bruce or Votto are moved which is unlikely. Next I give the padres a choice. Cisco or Romano. Both have great upside but neither factor largely into the reds plans. Then I give them another choice. Leake or cingrani. Both have pros and cons against them. If the pads choose leake I give them corcino. If they choose cingrani I give them sharky Rogers. After that the reds have bullpen pieces like Arredondo or ondrusek that could be thrown in to sweeten the deal.

Now if the front office feels really brave and thinks that cingrani is the real deal they could offer bailey lutz and Frazier. I think that's a stretch but it is an option.

Old school 1983
05-16-2013, 04:25 PM
If the Reds are going to give up a haul of players in a deal, I want more than a year and a half of control over the acquired player. I was okay with acquiring Choo for one season because the Reds only gave up one potential impact position player and got an elite level guy in return. The Reds would likely have to give up quite a bit more for Headley, and there are more questions surrounding Headley than there were with Choo.

What questions surround Headley? I see the major question with choo his play in center still being an issue.

Johnny Fan
05-16-2013, 04:29 PM
So.......what would it take to get Headley in trade?

Leake and Frazier? Or more? Add Corcino?

If the Reds could afford to do the deal for the rest of 2013 and all of 2014, I would strongly consider it, depending on who they have to give up.

Frazier, I have no problem with. He's cheap, under control, and replace Headley for the Padres. Leake would probably do well in Petco. Corcino has done very well up until this season and he's turning things around now. He's a top 3 or 4 prospect in the Reds organization.

I'm not giving up Cingrani, Stephenson or Travieso. Probably not Hamilton either.

So far Corcino is NOT having a good 2013...

Johnny Fan
05-16-2013, 04:31 PM
What questions surround Headley? I see the major question with choo his play in center still being an issue.

It's all about what you have. We have Frazier who is a solid player so far and pretty cheap. Adding Headly is going to cost you quality players and cash. Choo replaced someone who was not very good and produced in a position we needed real help. There is ZERO chance he will be a Red after this year, so instead of looking at Headley, I would be looking for a leadoff CF, cause sorry folks Hamilton won't be the answer for another couple of seasons.

Vottomatic
05-16-2013, 04:35 PM
Re-sign Choo.
Trade for Headley and Fowler.

Don't give up any starters other than Leake.
Don't give up any of the bullpen.
Don't give up any position players other than Frazier.

I'd be shocked if this team didn't stand a good chance at a World Series title at that point.

Frazier, Leake, Corcino, Guillon for Headley.
Hamilton, Stephenson for Fowler.

Now that we've successfully wiped out our farm system........lol.......uh, well. Here goes the lineup:

LF Choo (LH)
3B Headley (RH) - 2012 - 31 HR's, 115 rbi
1B Votto (LH)
2B Phillips (RH)
RF Bruce (LH)
CF Fowler (SH)
C Hanigan (RH)
SS Cozart (RH)

My acquisition of Fowler is because I like him, but mainly to play CF and move Choo to LF. I'd even consider moving Fowler into the 5-spot because he is a high OBP guy. Makes contact. And he's a switch-hitter, so it doesn't upset the handedness of the lineup.

But the farm system would be destroyed if we did all that.

Fun to play with, but not happening.

Old school 1983
05-16-2013, 04:37 PM
It's all about what you have. We have Frazier who is a solid player so far and pretty cheap. Adding Headly is going to cost you quality players and cash. Choo replaced someone who was not very good and produced in a position we needed real help. There is ZERO chance he will be a Red after this year, so instead of looking at Headley, I would be looking for a leadoff CF, cause sorry folks Hamilton won't be the answer for another couple of seasons.

Hamilton will probably be ready by the end of this year. He will appear for the reds this year unless he suffers a massive injury. No question in my mind. Frazier is not as productive as people think. Most of his numbers were had against average to below average pitching and teams in games the reds would probably win anyway. He gives you very little against anything over above average pitching. Headley instantly makes this team waaaayyyyy better. Protects votto. Allows Bruce to be protected by ludwick in case of his return and leaves the option for a further trade of a center fielder that you mentioned. Sure you'd have to give things up for him but he instantly makes your team an even bigger force in the playoffs this year and next even with Hamilton in center. I think a combo of Hamilton Phillips 1 2 has a comparable obp to choo cozart this year. Easy

Old school 1983
05-16-2013, 04:38 PM
Re-sign Choo.
Trade for Headley and Fowler.

Don't give up any starters other than Leake.
Don't give up any of the bullpen.
Don't give up any position players other than Frazier.

I'd be shocked if this team didn't stand a good chance at a World Series title at that point.

Frazier, Leake, Corcino, Guillon for Headley.
Hamilton, Stephenson for Fowler.

Now that we've successfully wiped out our farm system........lol.......uh, well. Here goes the lineup:

LF Choo (LH)
3B Headley (RH) - 2012 - 31 HR's, 115 rbi
1B Votto (LH)
2B Phillips (RH)
RF Bruce (LH)
CF Fowler (SH)
C Hanigan (RH)
SS Cozart (RH)

My acquisition of Fowler is because I like him, but mainly to play CF and move Choo to LF. I'd even consider moving Fowler into the 5-spot because he is a high OBP guy. Makes contact. And he's a switch-hitter, so it doesn't upset the handedness of the lineup.

But the farm system would be destroyed if we did all that.

Fun to play with, but not happening.

I like fowler too but there'd be no need to wipe the system to acquire him. Hamilton would do just fine or we could try for a dejesus for much less.

Old school 1983
05-16-2013, 04:40 PM
Headley didn't break the bank there. Fowler did.

Old school 1983
05-16-2013, 04:44 PM
You're trying to prove your point by sarcastically adding players I've never mentioned. Cingrani could be great but then again he could go jack Armstrong too. I'm willing to let the padres take that risk if they want him and if we got Headley. I never said trade Hamilton Stephenson or Travieso here. That was you.

Vottomatic
05-16-2013, 05:01 PM
You're trying to prove your point by sarcastically adding players I've never mentioned. Cingrani could be great but then again he could go jack Armstrong too. I'm willing to let the padres take that risk if they want him and if we got Headley. I never said trade Hamilton Stephenson or Travieso here. That was you.

Geez. Paranoid much?

I didn't attribute any of that post to you. :confused:

Opposing hitters batting .202 against Cingrani in 5 starts. Batting .307 against Leake in 8 starts.

Hamilton isn't ready for the majors this year and I seriously doubt next year. I'd quit counting on him, as you so strongly do.

If it wasn't obvious to you, my last grandiose trade proposal was pretty far-fetched.........farm system depleting..........and kind of a tongue and cheek post. :p

All of this playing GM is making my head spin.

As I said somewhere, can't remember what thread at this point, most likely............if Walt wants to bolster LF..........it will be a reasonable salary dump by a last place team for the likes of Alex Rios, Josh Willingham, Soriano (Cubs) or Bautista (Toronto). I'm sure there's others. And probably a load of cash coming with them.

If we're keeping it real........that's probably the reality. :thumbup:

Old school 1983
05-16-2013, 05:16 PM
Geez. Paranoid much?

I didn't attribute any of that post to you. :confused:

Opposing hitters batting .202 against Cingrani in 5 starts. Batting .307 against Leake in 8 starts.

Hamilton isn't ready for the majors this year and I seriously doubt next year. I'd quit counting on him, as you so strongly do.

If it wasn't obvious to you, my last grandiose trade proposal was pretty far-fetched.........farm system depleting..........and kind of a tongue and cheek post. :p

All of this playing GM is making my head spin.

As I said somewhere, can't remember what thread at this point, most likely............if Walt wants to bolster LF..........it will be a reasonable salary dump by a last place team for the likes of Alex Rios, Josh Willingham, Soriano (Cubs) or Bautista (Toronto). I'm sure there's others. And probably a load of cash coming with them.

If we're keeping it real........that's probably the reality. :thumbup:

Willingham or rios would be welcomed additions IMO. I have faith in billy. Not directed at you but I think a lot of reds fans are wanting to be the one to say see I told you so if he fails. Honestly if he's not injured or traded he should be on the playoff roster bc his speed even as a pinch runner could change the game. But really I see the reds window as this year next and the year after. This year is the only guaranteed year with choo. I think that is why they need to make a big splash and really go for it. I'm not saying sacrificing the farm, but really you are going to have to give up a nice piece you don't want to to get a star caliber player and that's just the way it is. Cingrani is a nice piece to have but on this team I don't see him as an absolute necessity.

Alpha Zero
05-16-2013, 06:12 PM
What questions surround Headley? I see the major question with choo his play in center still being an issue.

Maybe the fact that he had never posted an OPS north of .780 prior to last year? Or that he never hit more than 12 HRs in a season prior to last year? He's a good on base guy and he plays sterling defense, but I think there's legitimate concern that he's not really as good as he showed last year. I'm not positive that he's the kind of player you give up a massive haul to obtain.

Old school 1983
05-16-2013, 07:09 PM
Maybe the fact that he had never posted an OPS north of .780 prior to last year? Or that he never hit more than 12 HRs in a season prior to last year? He's a good on base guy and he plays sterling defense, but I think there's legitimate concern that he's not really as good as he showed last year. I'm not positive that he's the kind of player you give up a massive haul to obtain.

He plays in a ballpark that is pretty much Death Valley for hitters. He's already hit four homers this year despite missing time. Headley has a consistent track record of being able to reach base and give good at bats. Two qualities thst the reds lack outside of choo and votto. Coupled with the year he had last year I think that it's pretty good evidence that he will be able to drive runs in and hit for power in the bandbox that is GABP. A lot if his doubles will be homers and that will raise the slugging and ops. Plus hell give you another guy to get on and give RBI chances to Bruce and ludwick when he returns. His D will be a huge upgrade too. It'll give the reds an entire infield of gold glove candidates. His power will play in GABP and so will is on base ability. His glove will save runs. He'd be well worth the players it costs to get him.

Alpha Zero
05-16-2013, 11:28 PM
He plays in a ballpark that is pretty much Death Valley for hitters. He's already hit four homers this year despite missing time. Headley has a consistent track record of being able to reach base and give good at bats. Two qualities thst the reds lack outside of choo and votto. Coupled with the year he had last year I think that it's pretty good evidence that he will be able to drive runs in and hit for power in the bandbox that is GABP. A lot if his doubles will be homers and that will raise the slugging and ops. Plus hell give you another guy to get on and give RBI chances to Bruce and ludwick when he returns. His D will be a huge upgrade too. It'll give the reds an entire infield of gold glove candidates. His power will play in GABP and so will is on base ability. His glove will save runs. He'd be well worth the players it costs to get him.

Headley would almost certainly be an upgrade over Frazier. I'd never try to refute that, but I think the concerns that I mentioned are still valid. I can't count the number of times I've heard that player X's bat would be so much better if he could just get out of Petco. How did that work out for Adrian Gonzalez? He has been about the same, or maybe even a little worse since leaving Petco. Petco is definitely a pitcher's park, but I feel like its actual impact is usually overblown, just as the GABP effect is often overstated in the opposite direction.

With all that said, Headley's splits show that he is much better on the road, so maybe he would be much better outside of Petco. I just don't know, and I don't know if I'm willing to give up a lot of prospects to find out over a brief one and a half year period.

I personally think the Reds need to focus on locking up their pitching core (mainly Latos) and rebuilding the farm over the next few years. Hamilton, Winker, Stephenson, and Cingrani is a good start, but the cupboard is pretty bare after that. It may not be as exciting as a blockbuster trade, but that's how teams like the Cardinals remain competitive year after year.

Old school 1983
05-16-2013, 11:48 PM
Headley would almost certainly be an upgrade over Frazier. I'd never try to refute that, but I think the concerns that I mentioned are still valid. I can't count the number of times I've heard that player X's bat would be so much better if he could just get out of Petco. How did that work out for Adrian Gonzalez? He has been about the same, or maybe even a little worse since leaving Petco. Petco is definitely a pitcher's park, but I feel like its actual impact is usually overblown, just as the GABP effect is often overstated in the opposite direction.

With all that said, Headley's splits show that he is much better on the road, so maybe he would be much better outside of Petco. I just don't know, and I don't know if I'm willing to give up a lot of prospects to find out over a brief one and a half year period.

I personally think the Reds need to focus on locking up their pitching core (mainly Latos) and rebuilding the farm over the next few years. Hamilton, Winker, Stephenson, and Cingrani is a good start, but the cupboard is pretty bare after that. It may not be as exciting as a blockbuster trade, but that's how teams like the Cardinals remain competitive year after year.

The cardinals also bring in big bats via free agency. Berkman, Beltran, holiday. Sure their prospects are good but the center of their order is outside guys. I'd like to lock up our pitching but I really feel like the reds window to really go for it is the next three years. Especially this year because you have no promise of choo coming back. If I thought the reds were a year or two from really making a push then I'd say stockpile. The push is now. Lets not deplete the farm but use a few guys to get a guy who can make an impact now. We will get at least a pick back next year with choo and maybe arroyo. If we continue to draft well the farm will stay stocked.

Old school 1983
05-16-2013, 11:51 PM
Having just said all of that I realize that Headley isn't the sexiest name out there. Like a Stanton but I really believe his impact would be huge beyond his personal stats. He would solidify the entire lineup and bring an infield defense of all gold glove caliber guys. Not only can he drive runs in but he gets on base too. I think he'd be the total package for the reds.

TitosLoveChild
05-17-2013, 01:24 AM
We were all geeked up to pay that much for Stanton or choo. I think he coukd make a bigger impact than stanton on the team as a whole and combined with hamilton be more impactful than frazier and choo. I think he makes the reds a super legit World Series contender for the next two years. So if because of him we get a title in at least one of those he can walk and ill be happy. Maybe we could resign him too. Weirder things have happened.

I disagree with this. There is little chance, even including defense, that Chase and Hamilton will be more impactful than Frazier and Choo in the next two years. Hamilton isn't Trout or Harper. He isn't going to be impactful with the bat in the next couple years thus probably wont be a factor in a World Series run during that time.

Old school 1983
05-17-2013, 06:44 AM
I disagree with this. There is little chance, even including defense, that Chase and Hamilton will be more impactful than Frazier and Choo in the next two years. Hamilton isn't Trout or Harper. He isn't going to be impactful with the bat in the next couple years thus probably wont be a factor in a World Series run during that time.

If Hamilton can just bat second and have a 300 obp or so he'd be an impact. He gets on and you can't throw votto crap in the dirt or Hamilton steals you have to pitch to him. Or anyone else for that matter. His impact wouldn't come through just his numbers. Baseball is more than numbers. A lot of people here don't get that. And in a playoff run off the bench this year he could be a massive impact. Say bottom of the ninth. Hanigan gets a single. Billy pinch runs, and no it's not the same as Robinson pinch running. Billy is a distraction on the bases and can steal anytime. The slightest mistake by the pitcher billy can move up or the ball is crushed. Seems super impactful to me. I know choo has been great so far but Headley is a better hitter plus choo D in center is subpar. Frazier is currently hitting himself out of the league and I don't care if he can hit for power against guys who get cut by the marlins. Billy's defense in center and headleys at third is probably enough to make a bigger impact. Factor in how Headley will stack the lineup and what hamiltons speed will do is way more impactful. Plus this year they could both be here with choo. Way better than the team we have right now. No brainer.

Old school 1983
05-17-2013, 07:59 AM
Next year or at the end of this year at the earliest Hamilton will not have to be Harper or trout to make an impact on this team. He'll never put up a huge ops or any stat like that. His impact will come from the distraction he causes while bring on base while other players like votto hit. Also it'll come in the form of the pressure hell put in the defense with his speed and the threat of the bunt every at bat. Headleys impact will be beyond the numbers too. He will instantly make the 4 hole better the 2 hole better (for obvious reasons). He'll also make the three hole better bc hell protect votto. He'll make Bruce better because even if headleys power drops big time, which I don't think it will, he still gets on base a lot, and would give Bruce more RBI chances. Bruce would be better too because when ludwick returns he will be protected by a better hitter than Frazier. So Headley gives you the chance to improve 5 lineup spots plus improve the defense. Seems like that's an impact beyond the tradition stats or SABR stats to me.

Old school 1983
05-17-2013, 08:06 AM
And in my eyes the hole in the team is not left field. We have our left fielder playing center and a good left fielder on the DL. This teams holes are at center and third. Sure I think it'd be great to get a left fielder but I think that creates more questions than it answers unless you could get a stud like Stanton. Even then it leaves choo in center and arguably the weakest player on the field Frazier at third.

Johnny Fan
05-17-2013, 08:57 AM
And in my eyes the hole in the team is not left field. We have our left fielder playing center and a good left fielder on the DL. This teams holes are at center and third. Sure I think it'd be great to get a left fielder but I think that creates more questions than it answers unless you could get a stud like Stanton. Even then it leaves choo in center and arguably the weakest player on the field Frazier at third.

In the 40+ games so far, how has Choo's play in CF and Frazier at third been an issue? Are they Gold Glove players, probably not, but in no way are they a negative in the field.

Alpha Zero
05-17-2013, 09:16 AM
In the 40+ games so far, how has Choo's play in CF and Frazier at third been an issue? Are they Gold Glove players, probably not, but in no way are they a negative in the field.

Choo hasn't been a disaster in CF like some thought, but he's definitely below average out there. He belongs in a corner spot if the Reds plan on retaining him moving forward.

On the other hand, Frazier is a fine defensive 3B. Fangraphs' metrics rate him as just slightly above average with the glove, and I think that I agree with that assessment. I'm not sure why there seems to be some dissatisfaction with his defense. Maybe it's a symptom of watching Rolen pick it over there for the past few years?

Old school 1983
05-17-2013, 09:55 AM
In the 40+ games so far, how has Choo's play in CF and Frazier at third been an issue? Are they Gold Glove players, probably not, but in no way are they a negative in the field.

It's not the plays they are making errors on. It's the balls they don't get too. It's more noticeable in center. Lets use last night as an example. With a decent experienced major league centerfielder or with a guy with huge speed like Hamilton that triple may be an out. I think they showed Stubbs making a similar play last year. In the series in Washington, I think it may have been. The arroyo game I remember a double in between choo and Bruce that a normal cf gets. It lead to a big inning. Choo gets bad reads and bad jumps and looks uncomfortable on balls to center all the time.

Frazier is harder to see but IMO and to the scorn of many here I see his reactions at third being slow especially to the SS side. He is looking more comfortable there but still to me doesn't look so. And if we got Headley, there is no arguing whose D is better. Plus Frazier is hitting 220 something right now and looks lost at the plate. People can point to his ops and RBI but from what I've seen most of that has come against below average teams or below average pitching in games that the reds would probably win anyway. It's not every impactful.

Old school 1983
05-17-2013, 09:58 AM
Choo hasn't been a disaster in CF like some thought, but he's definitely below average out there. He belongs in a corner spot if the Reds plan on retaining him moving forward.

On the other hand, Frazier is a fine defensive 3B. Fangraphs' metrics rate him as just slightly above average with the glove, and I think that I agree with that assessment. I'm not sure why there seems to be some dissatisfaction with his defense. Maybe it's a symptom of watching Rolen pick it over there for the past few years?

Definitely could be rolen. Fan graphs does have a disclaimer on UZR ratings on their page too. I would t be too worried about fraziers D of his bat was good. It has been anything but. He has a decent ops still and a good RBI total but IMO those numbers are skewed because they have come against so so pitching in games where the reds more than likely win anyway and thereful less impactful. His overall approach at the plate seem undisciplined too. He just seems to be flailing at times. That's all good if you're going to hit 40 bombs but he's not.

Old school 1983
05-17-2013, 10:03 AM
But really those are the weak spots. We can be like oh they haven't been terrible or we could make them top notch at third and improve center and improve the offense at the same time with a trade for Headley. At that point it wouldn't be they have been servicable or not too bad it'd be holy crap did you just see that play that guy made?

Old school 1983
05-17-2013, 10:19 AM
http://www.fangraphs.com/library/defense/uzr/

Seethe area that says context for the disclaimer-like writing

Johnny Fan
05-17-2013, 10:32 AM
It's not the plays they are making errors on. It's the balls they don't get too. It's more noticeable in center. Lets use last night as an example. With a decent experienced major league centerfielder or with a guy with huge speed like Hamilton that triple may be an out. I think they showed Stubbs making a similar play last year. In the series in Washington, I think it may have been. The arroyo game I remember a double in between choo and Bruce that a normal cf gets. It lead to a big inning. Choo gets bad reads and bad jumps and looks uncomfortable on balls to center all the time.

Frazier is harder to see but IMO and to the scorn of many here I see his reactions at third being slow especially to the SS side. He is looking more comfortable there but still to me doesn't look so. And if we got Headley, there is no arguing whose D is better. Plus Frazier is hitting 220 something right now and looks lost at the plate. People can point to his ops and RBI but from what I've seen most of that has come against below average teams or below average pitching in games that the reds would probably win anyway. It's not every impactful.


I guess we are watching different games, because overall I don't see that much issue with Choo in CF and what little issue there might be, his bat has more then covered that in spades. I doubt highly that either Stubbs or Hamilton get to that tripple last night, plus lets not forget, Hamilton has no arm, that was his knock at SS, think how much worse that will be playing CF.

Old school 1983
05-17-2013, 10:33 AM
I guess we are watching different games, because overall I don't see that much issue with Choo in CF and what little issue there might be, his bat has more then covered that in spades. I doubt highly that either Stubbs or Hamilton get to that tripple last night, plus lets not forget, Hamilton has no arm, that was his knock at SS, think how much worse that will be playing CF.

I've heard different reports on Hamiltons arm. I'm not going to knock the job choo has done. For the tools he has he's done a good job but much better can be had.

Johnny Fan
05-17-2013, 10:33 AM
Choo hasn't been a disaster in CF like some thought, but he's definitely below average out there. He belongs in a corner spot if the Reds plan on retaining him moving forward.

On the other hand, Frazier is a fine defensive 3B. Fangraphs' metrics rate him as just slightly above average with the glove, and I think that I agree with that assessment. I'm not sure why there seems to be some dissatisfaction with his defense. Maybe it's a symptom of watching Rolen pick it over there for the past few years?

I would be shocked if Choo is a Reds next year. His number even if they tail off a bit this season are going to demand monies we just don't have or would result in a loss of other talent. I love Choo, but Reds don't have resources other teams do and that won't change.

Johnny Fan
05-17-2013, 10:35 AM
I've heard different reports on Hamiltons arm. I'm not going to knock the job choo has done. For the tools he has he's done a good job but much better can be had.

Better what? Of the 40+ games so far how many has Choo cost us due to his play in CF, compared to how much his bat has assisted in wins. Simple question, is this team right now with a less then great CF who is producing at the plate or a great CF who can't hit?

Old school 1983
05-17-2013, 10:41 AM
Better what? Of the 40+ games so far how many has Choo cost us due to his play in CF, compared to how much his bat has assisted in wins. Simple question, is this team right now with a less then great CF who is producing at the plate or a great CF who can't hit?

Or choo in left a great centerfielder who can cause things to happen with speed and Headley at third. That's the question for the rest of this year. Or keep choo in center ludwick in left layer and Headley at third. And that's my point. Headley give you the option to fill out the outfield in a variety of ways while filling the need for a four hole hitter. If we get a left fielder out outfield will be a jumbled mess next year. If we give up Hamilton to get a left fielder we have no guaranteed cf.

Vottomatic
05-17-2013, 12:17 PM
Better what? Of the 40+ games so far how many has Choo cost us due to his play in CF, compared to how much his bat has assisted in wins. Simple question, is this team right now with a less then great CF who is producing at the plate or a great CF who can't hit?

We were 3 games over .500 last year after 41 games. We're 9 games over .500 this year with that crappy CFer we have. ;) :laugh:

Just think how well we'd be doing if we still had Stubbs defense in CF and his 2 HR's, 41 K's, and .305 OBP..........we'd be dealin'!

Old school 1983
05-17-2013, 12:43 PM
Better what? Of the 40+ games so far how many has Choo cost us due to his play in CF, compared to how much his bat has assisted in wins. Simple question, is this team right now with a less then great CF who is producing at the plate or a great CF who can't hit?

Sure his bat makes up for his defense but wouldn't you want the option to have his bat and better defense in the lineup. The only stats that matter in the playoffs are wins and the pitching is much tougher. It'd be a shame if it cost us then and he couldn't get a hit to make up for it.

Old school 1983
05-17-2013, 12:45 PM
We were 3 games over .500 last year after 41 games. We're 9 games over .500 this year with that crappy CFer we have. ;) :laugh:

Just think how well we'd be doing if we still had Stubbs defense in CF and his 2 HR's, 41 K's, and .305 OBP..........we'd be dealin'!

Stubbs have never been mentioned on this thread. No one ever said they wish they had Stubbs out there. Choo is an improvement with the bat and it makes up for some of his defensive shortcomings. No one called for Stubbs. I was calling to improve upon the club we have. I was saying if we got Headley we'd have the option of shifting choo to left and using a guy in center who is better at defense whether it be Hamilton or an outside guy or a guy like Robinson. There is no argument how the team wouldn't be better than it is right now if that situation were to occur that makes any sense.

Third total improvement with Headley. Left total improvement with choo. Center. Defensive improvement even if we stick heisey out there let alone someone who can hit consistently or a guy with awesome speed like billy. Team better than now. No argument.

Johnny Fan
05-17-2013, 01:38 PM
Stubbs have never been mentioned on this thread. No one ever said they wish they had Stubbs out there. Choo is an improvement with the bat and it makes up for some of his defensive shortcomings. No one called for Stubbs. I was calling to improve upon the club we have. I was saying if we got Headley we'd have the option of shifting choo to left and using a guy in center who is better at defense whether it be Hamilton or an outside guy or a guy like Robinson. There is no argument how the team wouldn't be better than it is right now if that situation were to occur that makes any sense.

Third total improvement with Headley. Left total improvement with choo. Center. Defensive improvement even if we stick heisey out there let alone someone who can hit consistently or a guy with awesome speed like billy. Team better than now. No argument.

How much better do you see the Reds if they would add Headley at the expense of say Hamilton and Leake or Hamilton and Cigirini?

Old school 1983
05-17-2013, 01:47 PM
How much better do you see the Reds if they would add Headley at the expense of say Hamilton and Leake or Hamilton and Cigirini?

I wouldn't use Hamilton. If that were the case id go another route. Everyone lives cingrani right now but he does have refinements to make. He is not a necessity. Nor is leake. I could take the loss of one of them.

Old school 1983
05-17-2013, 01:48 PM
We were 3 games over .500 last year after 41 games. We're 9 games over .500 this year with that crappy CFer we have. ;) :laugh:

Just think how well we'd be doing if we still had Stubbs defense in CF and his 2 HR's, 41 K's, and .305 OBP..........we'd be dealin'!

What's your real opinion of choos defense and whether he ought to be moved. You've posted in other threads you'd rather see him in left.

Alpha Zero
05-17-2013, 01:51 PM
Stubbs have never been mentioned on this thread. No one ever said they wish they had Stubbs out there. Choo is an improvement with the bat and it makes up for some of his defensive shortcomings. No one called for Stubbs. I was calling to improve upon the club we have. I was saying if we got Headley we'd have the option of shifting choo to left and using a guy in center who is better at defense whether it be Hamilton or an outside guy or a guy like Robinson. There is no argument how the team wouldn't be better than it is right now if that situation were to occur that makes any sense.

Third total improvement with Headley. Left total improvement with choo. Center. Defensive improvement even if we stick heisey out there let alone someone who can hit consistently or a guy with awesome speed like billy. Team better than now. No argument.

Look, we agree there's little doubt the configuration of players mentioned above is better than what the Reds have now, but I still think the prospect cost is prohibitive. You've said before in this topic that you think the Reds have a 3 year window where they have a good chance to win the World Series and should basically go "all in" during that window.

I say that's thinking small. The Cardinals are perpetual contenders. Why can't the Reds be as well? Keeping the prospect pipeline primed with great pitching talent is a must for a long period of sustained excellence. I'm not willing to part with any of Stephenson, Cingrani, or Travieso at this point in time, and I'm fairly certain the Reds would have to let go of at least one of those arms to acquire Headley for a year and a half. It's just not worth it to me.

The Reds acquired Latos by dealing from a position of strength. Alonso and Grandal were blocked by Votto and Mesoraco for at least the next six years at the time of the trade. The Reds don't currently have that kind of depth in the system, except at SP, and we all know about the volatility of arms. The Reds can afford to make a small deal or two, but I don't think that the time for a rent-a-star acquisition is now unless the Padres don't want much in return (fat chance).

Alpha Zero
05-17-2013, 01:59 PM
I wouldn't use Hamilton. If that were the case id go another route. Everyone lives cingrani right now but he does have refinements to make. He is not a necessity. Nor is leake. I could take the loss of one of them.

If one of Cingrani or Leake is dealt, you basically have zero pitching depth in the event of another injury this year. Unless you count Armando Galarraga as depth. You've also weakened the 2014 club by trading away the heir apparent to Arroyo's rotation slot.

Johnny Fan
05-17-2013, 02:19 PM
What's your real opinion of choos defense and whether he ought to be moved. You've posted in other threads you'd rather see him in left.

At the production we are getting right now from Choo at the plate, it would take a total colapse in CF for me to even consider moving him. His play in CF has been in my opinion above what I expected and well we don't even have to go into what he has done at the plate. Choo right now is the BEST player on this team, without question, now that may change as the season progesses, but after 41 games there is no one more valuable to this team then Choo.

Vottomatic
05-17-2013, 03:24 PM
Stubbs have never been mentioned on this thread. No one ever said they wish they had Stubbs out there. Choo is an improvement with the bat and it makes up for some of his defensive shortcomings. No one called for Stubbs. I was calling to improve upon the club we have. I was saying if we got Headley we'd have the option of shifting choo to left and using a guy in center who is better at defense whether it be Hamilton or an outside guy or a guy like Robinson. There is no argument how the team wouldn't be better than it is right now if that situation were to occur that makes any sense.

Third total improvement with Headley. Left total improvement with choo. Center. Defensive improvement even if we stick heisey out there let alone someone who can hit consistently or a guy with awesome speed like billy. Team better than now. No argument.

I hope your forking over the money to pay everybody because the Reds don't have it. :laugh:

While we're at adding Headley and Stanton, let's go after Tulowitzki too! :thumbup:

SpiritofStLouis
05-17-2013, 03:58 PM
So.......what would it take to get Headley in trade?

Leake and Frazier? Or more? Add Corcino?

If the Reds could afford to do the deal for the rest of 2013 and all of 2014, I would strongly consider it, depending on who they have to give up.

Frazier, I have no problem with. He's cheap, under control, and replace Headley for the Padres. Leake would probably do well in Petco. Corcino has done very well up until this season and he's turning things around now. He's a top 3 or 4 prospect in the Reds organization.

I'm not giving up Cingrani, Stephenson or Travieso. Probably not Hamilton either.

Then you won't get him. The Padres, if they trade him, will want young arms.

RedlegJake
05-17-2013, 04:05 PM
Don't mess with the pitching. Headley is not worth what he would cost. SD has no real reason to dump him and would demand a Latos like return. There is a point where you conserve what prospects you have to keep a viable farm that can feed a contender. IMO, the Reds are at that point. Arroyo is gone next year and likely Bailey the year after. Corcino, Cingrani, Rogers and Stephenson need to stay. If the Reds get two solid starters from 4 prospect arms they are ahead of the odds. I don't want to see a 2015 squad with 2008 pitching because we traded starting prospects for 1.5 years of upgraded offense!

Old school 1983
05-17-2013, 04:14 PM
I hope your forking over the money to pay everybody because the Reds don't have it. :laugh:

While we're at adding Headley and Stanton, let's go after Tulowitzki too! :thumbup:

Umm. You're mister Stanton and he'd cost more in prospects and cash down the line. Headley would require less prospects and less long term financial obligation.

Old school 1983
05-17-2013, 04:16 PM
At the production we are getting right now from Choo at the plate, it would take a total colapse in CF for me to even consider moving him. His play in CF has been in my opinion above what I expected and well we don't even have to go into what he has done at the plate. Choo right now is the BEST player on this team, without question, now that may change as the season progesses, but after 41 games there is no one more valuable to this team then Choo.

I totally agree choo is one of the best offensive players on the team if not the best. I have 0 issues with his bat. I'm not talking about moving him from the team. I'm talking about moving him to left field so the team D could improve. I'd not trade choo this year for any reason.

Old school 1983
05-17-2013, 04:23 PM
Don't mess with the pitching. Headley is not worth what he would cost. SD has no real reason to dump him and would demand a Latos like return. There is a point where you conserve what prospects you have to keep a viable farm that can feed a contender. IMO, the Reds are at that point. Arroyo is gone next year and likely Bailey the year after. Corcino, Cingrani, Rogers and Stephenson need to stay. If the Reds get two solid starters from 4 prospect arms they are ahead of the odds. I don't want to see a 2015 squad with 2008 pitching because we traded starting prospects for 1.5 years of upgraded offense!

Arroyo is gone next year. Chapman could slide into his slot. Bailey is gone the year after. Corcino or maybe even Stephenson could be ready by that point. Even by then a guy we haven't heard of yet could step up or be drafted by the reds with a pick they'd gain from losing choo and possibly arroyo. I'm not in anyway saying drain the farm completely. I'm saying lets look at this pragmatically and use our heads to see what prospects we could live without in order to make the team better. That's what good teams do. They don't hoard prospects. I'd love to hoard the pitching but the fact of the matter is right now that is our position if strength at the moment. Even to get a rios or willingham we'd probably be talking about giving up a leake or cingrani. If the padres would want anything more than leake or cingrani and a mix if other major league players and prospects then I'd move on from the trade. If we trade one pitching prospect or a good one and a lesser one that does not guarantee a 2008 like rotation.

Old school 1983
05-17-2013, 04:28 PM
If one of Cingrani or Leake is dealt, you basically have zero pitching depth in the event of another injury this year. Unless you count Armando Galarraga as depth. You've also weakened the 2014 club by trading away the heir apparent to Arroyo's rotation slot.

You still have depth. It's a contingency plan. It may or may not happen. Headley would be in the line up for sure. Plus it wouldn't automatically be galarragga. Corcino is in AAA vilareal is. Parra has started. So has lecure and Simon. Next year chapman could slide into arroyos spot. There are options out there. Lets not fear a what if that may or may not happen.

Old school 1983
05-17-2013, 04:36 PM
Look, we agree there's little doubt the configuration of players mentioned above is better than what the Reds have now, but I still think the prospect cost is prohibitive. You've said before in this topic that you think the Reds have a 3 year window where they have a good chance to win the World Series and should basically go "all in" during that window.

I say that's thinking small. The Cardinals are perpetual contenders. Why can't the Reds be as well? Keeping the prospect pipeline primed with great pitching talent is a must for a long period of sustained excellence. I'm not willing to part with any of Stephenson, Cingrani, or Travieso at this point in time, and I'm fairly certain the Reds would have to let go of at least one of those arms to acquire Headley for a year and a half. It's just not worth it to me.

The Reds acquired Latos by dealing from a position of strength. Alonso and Grandal were blocked by Votto and Mesoraco for at least the next six years at the time of the trade. The Reds don't currently have that kind of depth in the system, except at SP, and we all know about the volatility of arms. The Reds can afford to make a small deal or two, but I don't think that the time for a rent-a-star acquisition is now unless the Padres don't want much in return (fat chance).

I think people are misunderstanding me. I'm not saying dump the farm on Headley or any player for that matter. I'm saying lets use our heads and not say we want to hoard all of our prospects. Lets use our heads and see who we could part with and make the team better. Every trade is not like the latos trade where you can deal from a position of power and acquire need. Sometimes a little risk is involved to get a reward.

The thought that the cards have built their great winning tradition through their farm alone is flawed as well. If we look back on their best teams from the mud 2000s they had Edmonds rolen isrighausen, carpenter key components brought in from other teams. Even when pujols arrived McGwire acquired from Oakland was still on the team. In order to establish a long tradition of winning you need both inside and outside talent. Once you get your guys and the outside talent set and I feel the reds are close to this point, you can do more hoarding and let your prospects develop longer and become complete plays and file them into the lineup as secondary contributors that are very ready for the bigs while the vets lead the way. Much like the cards are now. Before you reach that point you may have to part with a few to get a nice veteran piece or rush a guy a little but to fill a spot.

RedlegJake
05-17-2013, 04:44 PM
Lets also not get locked into the idea that something has to be done. The weather is heating as is the offense as many predicted. You cannot hoard prozpects by baseball rules. Play em or lose em. And as yet none of our prospects are against that cliff so there is no need to push em out just yet. Which guys are real and which end up busted? The more time to evalute the more accurate final choices are likely to be. Its way too soon to look outside...time for that in July. Plus good end of year rentals can be had a lot cheaper then. Sometimes a C prospect and taking the rest of a guys contract can land a nice player then. Plus needs may be better clarified.

CySeymour
05-17-2013, 04:54 PM
I think people are misunderstanding me. I'm not saying dump the farm on Headley or any player for that matter. I'm saying lets use our heads and not say we want to hoard all of our prospects. Lets use our heads and see who we could part with and make the team better. Every trade is not like the latos trade where you can deal from a position of power and acquire need. Sometimes a little risk is involved to get a reward.


I think this is a good point. I do think the team needs to be careful with dealing away too much pitching (not that you are advocating that) since Arroyo is likely gone after this season and the big three of Cueto, Latos and Bailey are all gonna need to be paid at some point soon, so it's possible one of those 3 could be dealt in the off season. Somewhat like what the Rays do.

Old school 1983
05-17-2013, 05:03 PM
I think this is a good point. I do think the team needs to be careful with dealing away too much pitching (not that you are advocating that) since Arroyo is likely gone after this season and the big three of Cueto, Latos and Bailey are all gonna need to be paid at some point soon, so it's possible one of those 3 could be dealt in the off season. Somewhat like what the Rays do.

I'd like to see all three of those kept through the season unless we get blown away with a deal. I like what cingrani has shown and I think leake as vast potential to improve but if they could be used in a deal as a centerpiece to get someone like Headley it'd be irresponsible not to explore that. Trading one prospect or two to improve your team is not dumping the farm and actually could be a good move in the long run if the guys who evaluate your talent do a good job. Sure you may get burned sometimes but there are just as many times that you don't.

Old school 1983
05-17-2013, 05:09 PM
All things considered. That choo is here only for sure this year and he is one of our best players, our big three pitchers are here and not quite demanding huge paydays yet, votto is in his prime, Phillips will probably begin to decline soon and the fact that our bullpen is stocked I think this year should be the year to go out at the deadline and take a risk and bring in an impact guy. 2010 was too early. We had no real chance. Last year we sat on our hands as far as a leadoff guy and didnt get out of the first round. We are on the cusp of greatness. I think it needs pushed over the top. I have faith in Walt to make the right move.

Vottomatic
05-17-2013, 05:32 PM
Then you won't get him. The Padres, if they trade him, will want young arms.

I don't want Headley. Too much money now and soon as a FA.

Vottomatic
05-17-2013, 05:34 PM
Umm. You're mister Stanton and he'd cost more in prospects and cash down the line. Headley would require less prospects and less long term financial obligation.

Uh.....no. I'm not.

I played along and played GM. But in the end, I decided I didn't want him based on what has to be given up.

When serious, I've clearly stated if a trade happens, it will be a salary dump of a Rios, Willingham, or other candidates.

You're the one proposing gutting the farm and pushing the payroll into Yankees territory. :laugh:

Vottomatic
05-17-2013, 05:40 PM
Let's keep it real.

1. Other than maybe Cingrani, there's no serious help coming from the farm system this year, including Hamilton. Hamilton won't be ready this season.
2. Payroll is maxed out. I've seen figures around $106M. Never dreamed I'd see that.
3. The farm system is down this year and won't merit much in a trade unless you want to give up on Stephenson, Travieso, Cingrani, or Hamilton.
4. Bailey, Latos, Cueto are all the verge of another big payday between 2015 and 2016. The Reds can't afford to pay them all. Thus giving up our top pitching prospects would be very stupid and shortsighted.


It is what it is. Pray Ludwick comes back healthy and hitting. Enjoy Choo while we have him.

It's fun to play GM for the Reds. But reality goes out the door quickly when it happens. :laugh:

Old school 1983
05-17-2013, 05:51 PM
Uh.....no. I'm not.

I played along and played GM. But in the end, I decided I didn't want him based on what has to be given up.

When serious, I've clearly stated if a trade happens, it will be a salary dump of a Rios, Willingham, or other candidates.

You're the one proposing gutting the farm and pushing the payroll into Yankees territory. :laugh:

I've never said I'd gut the farm for Headley. Did you not read my trade proposal?

Frazier-place taken anyway
Lutz-no real place for him
Choice of one-Cisco or Romano
Choice between leake or cingrani
If leake then they get corcino
If cingrani then Rogers
Ondrusek and or Arredondo as sweetners

I see no gutting. You'll keep one of leake or cingrani. You'll keep one of Rogers or corcino. You'll keep one of Romano or Cisco. The rest if the guys are fringe guys on our roster have no real spot or would be replaced. No gutting occurs. The salary doesn't go up an insane amount.

You weren't playing along on the Stanton thing either. That was you topic of focus on every thread. I thought he'd cost too much. I pointed that out to you. I don't want him at that cost. If anyone was playing it was me.

Old school 1983
05-17-2013, 05:52 PM
Let's keep it real.

1. Other than maybe Cingrani, there's no serious help coming from the farm system this year, including Hamilton. Hamilton won't be ready this season.
2. Payroll is maxed out. I've seen figures around $106M. Never dreamed I'd see that.
3. The farm system is down this year and won't merit much in a trade unless you want to give up on Stephenson, Travieso, Cingrani, or Hamilton.
4. Bailey, Latos, Cueto are all the verge of another big payday between 2015 and 2016. The Reds can't afford to pay them all. Thus giving up our top pitching prospects would be very stupid and shortsighted.


It is what it is. Pray Ludwick comes back healthy and hitting. Enjoy Choo while we have him.

It's fun to play GM for the Reds. But reality goes out the door quickly when it happens. :laugh:

I've seen Walt make some unreal things happen while he's been here. Doing things wed never dreamed of. I have faith he can do it again.

Old school 1983
05-17-2013, 05:56 PM
As far as Hamilton. Last year I understood. He had no position he played at a major league level at so no call up for the post season. This year I think he can handle center if need be. If he is not on the playoff roster it is totally irresponsible in my opinion. His speed could be game changing even as a pinch runner. That could mean a win if a slower guy gets on in a late inning situation. It will lead to wins and wins are the only stat that matters in the playoffs.

Vottomatic
05-17-2013, 06:18 PM
I've never said I'd gut the farm for Headley. Did you not read my trade proposal?

Frazier-place taken anyway
Lutz-no real place for him
Choice of one-Cisco or Romano
Choice between leake or cingrani
If leake then they get corcino
If cingrani then Rogers
Ondrusek and or Arredondo as sweetners

I see no gutting. You'll keep one of leake or cingrani. You'll keep one of Rogers or corcino. You'll keep one of Romano or Cisco. The rest if the guys are fringe guys on our roster have no real spot or would be replaced. No gutting occurs. The salary doesn't go up an insane amount.

You weren't playing along on the Stanton thing either. That was you topic of focus on every thread. I thought he'd cost too much. I pointed that out to you. I don't want him at that cost. If anyone was playing it was me.

:laugh: :lol: :eek: :D :p

I started out wanting to get Stanton and changed my mind. I guess that's not allowed.

I've been far more realistic than you have.

Have a nice life.

Old school 1983
05-17-2013, 06:19 PM
:laugh: :lol: :eek: :D :p

I started out wanting to get Stanton and changed my mind. I guess that's not allowed.

I've been far more realistic than you have.

Have a nice life.

Have a nice life? Do I get my class ring back too?

Alpha Zero
05-17-2013, 07:00 PM
I've never said I'd gut the farm for Headley. Did you not read my trade proposal?

Frazier-place taken anyway
Lutz-no real place for him
Choice of one-Cisco or Romano
Choice between leake or cingrani
If leake then they get corcino
If cingrani then Rogers
Ondrusek and or Arredondo as sweetners

I see no gutting. You'll keep one of leake or cingrani. You'll keep one of Rogers or corcino. You'll keep one of Romano or Cisco. The rest if the guys are fringe guys on our roster have no real spot or would be replaced. No gutting occurs. The salary doesn't go up an insane amount.

You weren't playing along on the Stanton thing either. That was you topic of focus on every thread. I thought he'd cost too much. I pointed that out to you. I don't want him at that cost. If anyone was playing it was me.

So we're doing a 6-for-1 deal plus the potential for more sweeteners on the Reds' side? Kind of sounds like a video game trade where you just hope you can overwhelm the AI with quantity instead of quality.

I mean, Leake or Cingrani plus Frazier might be a decent start, but the rest of the guys in your proposed deal have extremely limited trade value despite the fact that a few of them do have a little upside. If we're being realistic, the Padres would want at least one more very good prospect in addition to the two guys mentioned above, and that's more than I'm willing to part with for a temporary fix. I might be down for it if Headley had 3 more years of control, but he doesn't.

Old school 1983
05-17-2013, 07:05 PM
So we're doing a 6-for-1 deal plus the potential for more sweeteners on the Reds' side? Kind of sounds like a video game trade where you just hope you can overwhelm the AI with quantity instead of quality.

I mean, Leake or Cingrani plus Frazier might be a decent start, but the rest of the guys in your proposed deal have extremely limited trade value despite the fact that a few of them do have a little upside. If we're being realistic, the Padres would want at least one more very good prospect in addition to the two guys mentioned above, and that's more than I'm willing to part with for a temporary fix. I might be down for it if Headley had 3 more years of control, but he doesn't.

Latos was traded for a ton of guys but that was real life not a video game. In my trade the padres get pitching and near every level and its plus potential or has current performance. Lutz and Frazier would add pop to their lineup. Ondrusek and Arredondo would be better than any pen piece they have short of street. Maybe gregorson. Seems like its a bunch if guys we don't absolutely need. Plus if they want a Travieso that's fine with me. Pull out the Cisco and Romano part and add him. I don't think it'd take that though. Even if we go realistic and go for rios or willingham they are going to want leake or cingrani.

Alpha Zero
05-17-2013, 07:06 PM
You still have depth. It's a contingency plan. It may or may not happen. Headley would be in the line up for sure. Plus it wouldn't automatically be galarragga. Corcino is in AAA vilareal is. Parra has started. So has lecure and Simon. Next year chapman could slide into arroyos spot. There are options out there. Lets not fear a what if that may or may not happen.

Corcino has been terrible at AAA due to massive control issues. He is not close to ready. Villarreal has an ERA over 4.50 the past two years at AAA. I don't want Parra anywhere near the bullpen or the rotation. Simon or Lecure might be able to spot start, but I wouldn't want to stick either in the rotation for an extended period of time. The depth is not good past Cingrani.

Old school 1983
05-17-2013, 07:07 PM
I think I just need to stop posting here and sit back and laugh at it like I used to. Ill catch you later redszone.

Alpha Zero
05-17-2013, 07:11 PM
Latos was traded for a ton of guys but that was real life not a video game. In my trade the padres get pitching and near every level and its plus potential or has current performance. Lutz and Frazier would add pop to their lineup. Ondrusek and Arredondo would be better than any pen piece they have short of street. Maybe gregorson. Seems like its a bunch if guys we don't absolutely need. Plus if they want a Travieso that's fine with me. Pull out the Cisco and Romano part and add him. I don't think it'd take that though. Even if we go realistic and go for rios or willingham they are going to want leake or cingrani.

Latos was a 4-for-1 and the Reds got 4 years of a young, elite SP, probably the most valuable commodity in baseball.

Alpha Zero
05-17-2013, 07:15 PM
I think I just need to stop posting here and sit back and laugh at it like I used to. Ill catch you later redszone.

Apologies if I said something offensive. I'm not trying to upset anyone. I'm just tossing out my opinion. Just because we don't agree on this one doesn't mean you should necessarily abandon the forums.

SpiritofStLouis
05-17-2013, 11:23 PM
I don't want Headley. Too much money now and soon as a FA.

I think you're right.

SpiritofStLouis
05-17-2013, 11:24 PM
Uh.....no. I'm not.

I played along and played GM. But in the end, I decided I didn't want him based on what has to be given up.

When serious, I've clearly stated if a trade happens, it will be a salary dump of a Rios, Willingham, or other candidates.

You're the one proposing gutting the farm and pushing the payroll into Yankees territory. :laugh:

That would be my guess. It's not like the Reds are floundering.

Old school 1983
05-18-2013, 05:57 AM
That would be my guess. It's not like the Reds are floundering.

A trade like that would be a waste if a prospect for a player that is redundant with ludwick when he returns. Plus theyd want cingrani or leake. At least the twins will. Why do you think we didnt get span at the deadline last year? they wanted more for willingham too. It clogs the outfield up even more and leaves choo in center. I know the padres publically say they don't want to trade Headley, but in reality teams say stuff like that all of the time and just do the opposite. Your cardinals used to do trades like this all of the time. Get a guy who is about to peak towards the end of his contract and then lock him up. They are talking 5 years around 85 for him on MLB trade rumors. People are lining up to pay that to choo. Headley fills a position with no heir apparent and fills a need in the batting order, is younger and IMO is equal to if not better than choo. Sure it's a risk but every trade is not the latos trade. Risk is involved and if you only get him for a year and a half and don't demolish the farm in the process and the reds win a title in those years ill consider it a win.

And another thing about this site in general. I'm just so sick of seeing guys who make an honest evaluation of the reds be called whiners and knee jerkers and various other things. This team has issues beating good teams. This team had issues beating good pitching. They lack professional hitters and the lineup is very one dimensional. Combine that with dustys questionable lineup construction and you have what we have. A team that feasts on bad pitching and poor teams while looking overmatched against quality opponents. The bats aren't heating up. We've played poor teams like the brewers, marlins and cubs and our record is skewed because of it. Sure you're supposed to best those teams but you need to beat them and play the better teams well. The reds just don't do that. They are offensive pieces short and choo is mot a centerfielder. and anyone who wants to deny that has blinders on and is kidding theirselves. I was never saying to go out and make a knee jerk trade that drains the system right now. Our pitching and beating up on bad teams will carry us til then. I was saying lets wait until the deadline when stuff opens up more but not be afraid to use some prospects, and yes even pitching prospects to help this team over the hump. They are sorely lacking professional hitters, speed and solid defense at certain positions. Rentals for the rest of this year are a bigger waste of prospects than a guy like Headley would ever be. Guys like willingham and rios while I'd welcome them clog the outfield and go not fix the defense out there. One guy that'd be a rental and do the same stuff as Headley but for very short term and cheaper and minus some if the D is Michael young but people seem to hate him here so lets ignore his professional at bats and approach because he just doesn't ops high enough. To get a player like we want even a higher name rental that isn't young pitching will probably have to go and let's not fool ourselves into thinking this team is complete. It's not. Now I'm out.

SpiritofStLouis
05-18-2013, 08:07 AM
Here's where things stand as of now, per SI.com.

Here are a couple of the pertinent parts...


SAN DIEGO (AP) Padres third baseman Chase Headley ran into club executive chairman Ron Fowler at Petco Park on Friday and explained why he doesn't want a contract extension to be negotiated during the season.

Later, Headley told reporters that it has been a distraction ever since Fowler said Wednesday that he has given general manager Josh Byrnes permission to begin negotiations that would make Headley the highest-paid player in club history.

"I would say so. I'm trying to pour water on the fire as much as I can," Headley said. "This is why I didn't want to do it during the season. I wanted it to be about what's taking place on the field. The reasoning for my wanting to do this in the offseason and not the regular season is because I know me better than anybody else. For me to go out and play the best that I can, not only for myself but this team, more importantly, I need to be completely focused on the field. That's the sole and only purpose behind it."



Asked if he's confident something can be done in the offseason, Headley said: "I'm hopeful. There's always that risk. But I think both sides entered into that risk by not getting something done during the offseason. We made it clear that this is where we stood on it. If there is a deal to be done it would be done during the offseason."

Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/mlb/news/20130504/chase-headley-contract-extension-padres-distraction.ap/#ixzz2Te3ujuEl

Old school 1983
05-20-2013, 11:57 AM
I'm really confused to why I got raked over the coals suggesting we bring in a good professional veteran player like Headley, or any other proven all star commodity, for some of our prospects, in the line of thinking we can't break up the farm. Then people are advocating trading the same guys I mentioned and more in a top ranked prospect who hasn't proven a thing in the majors and would only be a fix batting second. I understand he'd be around longer than the veteran and be cheaper, but still no matter the ranking profar is still a prospect. I think a combination of cingrani Hamilton Stephenson and chapman would over the next ten years do more than profar. Plus profar would not put us over the top thus year the way a proven veteran 4 hole hitter would. And furthermore I don't think one would cost Hamilton cingrani and Stephenson. That's highway robbery unless the player is an all starter let alone a shortstop prospect. We are trying to build a world series winner here while keeping the farm as intact as possible. Profar would t go as far to putting the reds over the top as a proven 4 hole type bat, plus people are talking about dealing for a prospect for three of our top prospects and our closer. Guys think this through.

Furthermore, I wouldn't trade those guys for a guy like Stanton, but if they did I'd be way more ok with that than profar. Stanton fixes a premier line up spot the four hole and the two hole by shifting Phillips there. Plus Stanton has years of control, is young, and has a record of proven major league performance!!!

If the reds are in the ball park to win a World Series right now. That is the only reason I'd advocate trading prospects for an impact player that can bat 4. It could get us to win it all. If it'd only get us to a division championship or maybe one series win in the playoffs it'd be a bad move. Profar wouldn't improve the team the way a proven 4 hole veteran bat would. Plus the price people are talking about paying would kill the farm and hurt the current team. We are in a win immediately situation while maintaining the farm for the future. Not rebuild mode where we can dump prospects on more prospects.

Alpha Zero
05-20-2013, 12:15 PM
I'm really confused to why I got raked over the coals suggesting we bring in a good professional veteran player like Headley, or any other proven all star commodity, for some of our prospects, in the line of thinking we can't break up the farm. Then people are advocating trading the same guys I mentioned and more in a top ranked prospect who hasn't proven a thing in the majors and would only be a fix batting second. I understand he'd be around longer than the veteran and be cheaper, but still no matter the ranking profar is still a prospect. I think a combination of cingrani Hamilton Stephenson and chapman would over the next ten years do more than profar. Plus profar would not put us over the top thus year the way a proven veteran 4 hole hitter would. And furthermore I don't think one would cost Hamilton cingrani and Stephenson. That's highway robbery unless the player is an all starter let alone a shortstop prospect. We are trying to build a world series winner here while keeping the farm as intact as possible. Profar would t go as far to putting the reds over the top as a proven 4 hole type bat, plus people are talking about dealing for a prospect for three of our top prospects and our closer. Guys think this through.

There is definitely a lot of uncertainty with prospects, and there's a good chance that Headley is better now than Profar ever will be. I personally wouldn't trade for either guy unless it can be done without giving up any of Leake, Cingrani, Winker, Stephenson, and Travieso. That's obviously not very likely.

I think the consideration that you continue to overlook time and time again is contract situation and years of control. Yes, in a vacuum Headley is the obvious choice of the two if you're simply looking to improve the club for this year and next. However, if you're looking down the road and trying to build a competitive team for the next 5 or 6 years, Profar might make more sense.

Neither argument is inherently right. It's simply a difference in philosophy. I also don't think anyone is trying to "rake you over the coals." I think there are just some differing viewpoints and it can be frustrating when they don't align with your own. The is a forum for discussion, and this is a good one.

Old school 1983
05-20-2013, 12:22 PM
There is definitely a lot of uncertainty with prospects, and there's a good chance that Headley is better now than Profar ever will be. I personally wouldn't trade for either guy unless it can be done without giving up any of Leake, Cingrani, Winker, Stephenson, and Travieso. That's obviously not very likely.

I think the consideration that you continue to overlook time and time again is contract situation and years of control. Yes, in a vacuum Headley is the obvious choice of the two if you're simply looking to improve the club for this year and next. However, if you're looking down the road and trying to build a competitive team for the next 5 or 6 years, Profar might make more sense.

Neither argument is inherently right. It's simply a difference in philosophy. I also don't think anyone is trying to "rake you over the coals." I think there are just some differing viewpoints and it can be frustrating when they don't align with your own. The is a forum for discussion, and this is a good one.

I completely understand the years and control. That's why I say trading for Headley would be a risk. You run the risk of not being able to keep him around long term. I wasn't just speaking of Headley though. I was just taking about any proven all star caliber 4 bat in general. It'd do more for the team than profar would during the time frame in which a World Series victory is a realistic possibility. I'd never ever ever give the package they are talking about for profar for Headley. That'd be stupidity of the highest order. But if you could get a guy like Headley for maybe one or maybe two of those guys be able to go for it and keep the additional pieces for the future than dumping them all on profar a piece that wouldn't make the team as much better as Headley immediately and wreck the farm in the process leaves me scratching my head.

Vottomatic
05-20-2013, 12:30 PM
I'm really confused to why I got raked over the coals suggesting we bring in a good professional veteran player like Headley, or any other proven all star commodity, for some of our prospects, in the line of thinking we can't break up the farm. Then people are advocating trading the same guys I mentioned and more in a top ranked prospect who hasn't proven a thing in the majors and would only be a fix batting second. I understand he'd be around longer than the veteran and be cheaper, but still no matter the ranking profar is still a prospect. I think a combination of cingrani Hamilton Stephenson and chapman would over the next ten years do more than profar. Plus profar would not put us over the top thus year the way a proven veteran 4 hole hitter would. And furthermore I don't think one would cost Hamilton cingrani and Stephenson. That's highway robbery unless the player is an all starter let alone a shortstop prospect. We are trying to build a world series winner here while keeping the farm as intact as possible. Profar would t go as far to putting the reds over the top as a proven 4 hole type bat, plus people are talking about dealing for a prospect for three of our top prospects and our closer. Guys think this through.

Furthermore, I wouldn't trade those guys for a guy like Stanton, but if they did I'd be way more ok with that than profar. Stanton fixes a premier line up spot the four hole and the two hole by shifting Phillips there. Plus Stanton has years of control, is young, and has a record of proven major league performance!!!

If the reds are in the ball park to win a World Series right now. That is the only reason I'd advocate trading prospects for an impact player that can bat 4. It could get us to win it all. If it'd only get us to a division championship or maybe one series win in the playoffs it'd be a bad move. Profar wouldn't improve the team the way a proven 4 hole veteran bat would. Plus the price people are talking about paying would kill the farm and hurt the current team. We are in a win immediately situation while maintaining the farm for the future. Not rebuild mode where we can dump prospects on more prospects.

As you can see on the Profar threads.........there is a huge concern in gutting the already depleted farm system.

If you read the Krivsky tribute thread............he is praised for not trading away Votto, Bruce, etc.....and having patience as our prospects develop.

Finally, every player you trade for obviously brings additional payroll unless you're doing a salary dump of your own high priced player for cheap prospects in return. Acquiring Stanton eventually kicks up the payroll, as I believe he is arbitration eligible this offseason or next........and due for a big increase. Headley is a free agent in 2015, I believe and already makes $8.6M. Reds payroll is already over $100M. And nobody knows what direction Castellini is willing to go with the payroll. They've surprised us so far........but then again, the surprises might be over.

I don't think anyone is questioning that Headley would improve the team. I think they're questioning giving up so much for a short term solution.......meaning not many people think he can be signed long term with the Reds, considering all their current signings and other important ones on the horizon such as the starting pitching staff. Therefore, he's considered a rental.

While I think trading for Profar is a pipe dream, it's more in the direction of how Walt likes to trade...........obtaining guys under control for awhile, like Latos was.

I think these are the issues. The solutions are masked in secrecy with Reds management. :thumbup:

Old school 1983
05-20-2013, 12:52 PM
As you can see on the Profar threads.........there is a huge concern in gutting the already depleted farm system.

If you read the Krivsky tribute thread............he is praised for not trading away Votto, Bruce, etc.....and having patience as our prospects develop.

Finally, every player you trade for obviously brings additional payroll unless you're doing a salary dump of your own high priced player for cheap prospects in return. Acquiring Stanton eventually kicks up the payroll, as I believe he is arbitration eligible this offseason or next........and due for a big increase. Headley is a free agent in 2015, I believe and already makes $8.6M. Reds payroll is already over $100M. And nobody knows what direction Castellini is willing to go with the payroll. They've surprised us so far........but then again, the surprises might be over.

I don't think anyone is questioning that Headley would improve the team. I think they're questioning giving up so much for a short term solution.......meaning not many people think he can be signed long term with the Reds, considering all their current signings and other important ones on the horizon such as the starting pitching staff. Therefore, he's considered a rental.

While I think trading for Profar is a pipe dream, it's more in the direction of how Walt likes to trade...........obtaining guys under control for awhile, like Latos was.

I think these are the issues. The solutions are masked in secrecy with Reds management. :thumbup:

I totally understand the monetary and years of control arguments with Stanton and especially Headley. If Headley was acquired thered have to be a salary dump somewhere. I get profar COULD be a star and if he does hell want money down the road too. The fact of the matter is that the reds are in a win now situation. That doesn't mean all in and forget the future. It simply means they should gear moves towards winning now while preserving the system. Trading for profar does neither. It wouldn't make the impact that a four hole bat, not even necessarily Headley or Stanton would make plus it depletes the farm.

I completely understand that profar is a higher rated prospect than our guys but our guys are not chopped liver. They are very good prospects. If its mean the situation the reds are in, and I'm going to trade those guys I'm going to put it into a guy that I know has a real major league track record, and would make an immediate impact on the reds major league roster. They are more or less saying lets make an all in move for a prospect, that while elite level, is still just a prospect, and may or may not pan out to the level of his projections.

Alpha Zero
05-20-2013, 12:56 PM
I completely understand the years and control. That's why I say trading for Headley would be a risk. You run the risk of not being able to keep him around long term. I wasn't just speaking of Headley though. I was just taking about any proven all star caliber 4 bat in general. It'd do more for the team than profar would during the time frame in which a World Series victory is a realistic possibility. I'd never ever ever give the package they are talking about for profar for Headley. That'd be stupidity of the highest order. But if you could get a guy like Headley for maybe one or maybe two of those guys be able to go for it and keep the additional pieces for the future than dumping them all on profar a piece that wouldn't make the team as much better as Headley immediately and wreck the farm in the process leaves me scratching my head.

I agree that giving up tons of prospects for Profar is a bad idea. That proposal wasn't even a part of this thread, so I'm not sure how it's all that relevant to the discussion at hand. There are people out there who would give up the Reds' entire farm system for a Stanton or Headley or whoever.

My personal preference is to develop the majority of the talent from within and only make significant trades if the acquired player is a definite upgrade and has a decent amount of team control left and the departing players are pretty clearly blocked for at least a couple of years. I'm willing to make rare exceptions to this rule, but those would be few and far between.

It's all about the potential risk and reward. I'm a pretty conservative guy, so I'm more inclined to stick with what I've got and seek out improvements where I can at the right price. I understand that others (probably Walt Jocketty included) are less risk averse than I am, so it wouldn't really surprise me to see the Reds acquire a guy like Headley. I just personally wouldn't do it unless the prospect price was relatively low or there was some level of certainty that he could be signed to a contract extension.

Old school 1983
05-20-2013, 01:21 PM
I agree that giving up tons of prospects for Profar is a bad idea. That proposal wasn't even a part of this thread, so I'm not sure how it's all that relevant to the discussion at hand. There are people out there who would give up the Reds' entire farm system for a Stanton or Headley or whoever.

My personal preference is to develop the majority of the talent from within and only make significant trades if the acquired player is a definite upgrade and has a decent amount of team control left and the departing players are pretty clearly blocked for at least a couple of years. I'm willing to make rare exceptions to this rule, but those would be few and far between.

It's all about the potential risk and reward. I'm a pretty conservative guy, so I'm more inclined to stick with what I've got and seek out improvements where I can at the right price. I understand that others (probably Walt Jocketty included) are less risk averse than I am, so it wouldn't really surprise me to see the Reds acquire a guy like Headley. I just personally wouldn't do it unless the prospect price was relatively low or there was some level of certainty that he could be signed to a contract extension.

I saw the idea of it and some of the guys posting in favor of it on ORG were guys criticizing me here. I'd have posted on org if I could but I can't so I saw them as somewhat parallel ideas.

It's seems we have similar lines of thought on who to trade and how to do it than I think we originally perceived. I by no means want to guy but I do want to make good choices and trade for upgrades that don't clog our major league roster.

Generally I'm pretty conservative too. I think you should hang into prospects unless its a legitimate upgrade to go for a World Series title. If you're trading for guys so you can win a wild card or division that's a waste to me. I see the reds in a win it all type of way this year so I think they should trade accordingly.

Alpha Zero
05-20-2013, 01:39 PM
If you're trading for guys so you can win a wild card or division that's a waste to me. I see the reds in a win it all type of way this year so I think they should trade accordingly.

Yes, I think we agree for the most part, but I think the above comment shows where we differ. Once you win the division, my opinion is that everything beyond that is pretty much a crapshoot. Does anyone really believe that the Giants were the best team in baseball in 2010 or 2012? Or that the Cardinals were the best team in 2011? You construct your team to give you the best chance to make the playoffs. As long as you have good pitching, pretty much anything can happen after that. I would never compromise sustained regular season success for a marginally better chance to win it all in one year because quite often the best team does not actually win the World Series.

Old school 1983
05-20-2013, 02:17 PM
Yes, I think we agree for the most part, but I think the above comment shows where we differ. Once you win the division, my opinion is that everything beyond that is pretty much a crapshoot. Does anyone really believe that the Giants were the best team in baseball in 2010 or 2012? Or that the Cardinals were the best team in 2011? You construct your team to give you the best chance to make the playoffs. As long as you have good pitching, pretty much anything can happen after that. I would never compromise sustained regular season success for a marginally better chance to win it all in one year because quite often the best team does not actually win the World Series.

I agree that the playoffs has become more of a crapshoot with the addition of wild cards and the all star game determining home field. I also think that the 2011 cards made the appropriate moves to make them a better team in the playoffs. The team that won the series was not the unstable unit that won 88 games. Last year the giants went out and got Scutaro and Pence, a guy I wanted, and won the title. I think the only thing that saved the giants was that cueto got hurt, but after that point they made the necessary moves to make a world series run. The best regular season team may not win, but the team with the best playoff roster and grit generally comes out on top even if it is an 88 win cards team. I think the reds have an excellent regular season team. It'll probably get them in the playoffs. They have an average playoff team though IMO. Just too many undisciplined hitters and a guy playing out of position in center.

Old school 1983
05-20-2013, 02:33 PM
I really think a lot of the recent expansion of the playoffs, certain teams not getting homefield, and the all star game deciding WS homefield has drastically cheapened regular season performance. Unfortunately it is the system the reds are playing in. You start off with a good regular season team and them at the deadline you gear up and playoffize your roster. Unfortunately the regular season and playoffs are two different beasts. I think the playoffs while a small bit of a crapshoot, isn't a total one. It displays the importance of a good tactical manger, the front office being able to make the right moves at the deadline, and the skills of the players as a whole and a group. Often times the team that wins is not the best regular season team, but the team best set up for the playoffs by the front office and has a good tactical manger. So while the best team from the season doesn't always win, the team that has a total package of good players, good manager, and a front office that makes moves to playoffize the roster does. Honestly right now the reds do not have a good playoff manager, and have an average playoff roster. On the otherhand they have a good regular season manager and excellent regular season roster. It's a trade off

FanoftheGame34
05-23-2013, 02:03 PM
I love to see the Reds get a consistent third basemen other than Rolen, who though I love, was consistently hurt, and Frazier, who seems mostly just consistently below average. I know it may deplete out darn system a little the reds could afford that hit as far as young talent is concerned. In response to salary; Bronson most likely won't be back next year and you'd have him under contract for long enough to really stabilize the teams salary while keeping Headley. Most importantly though. I fully agree that a switch hitter in the four spot that a pitcher would think twice about throwing to would give a tremendous increase to the output of players like Bruce, votto, Phillips, cozart, and whoever is catching. So pretty much Headley would benefit the play of the whole team offensively and his defensive improvement is, in my mind, unquestioned. He's the kind of player that doesn't need a line of misinterpreted stats to defend his play. He can just flat out do it. (and not be a hard working average third basemen at best)

FanoftheGame34
05-23-2013, 02:20 PM
I love to see the Reds get a consistent third basemen other than Rolen, who though I love, was consistently hurt, and Frazier, who seems mostly just consistently below average. I know it may deplete out darn system a little the reds could afford that hit as far as young talent is concerned. In response to salary; Bronson most likely won't be back next year and you'd have him under contract for long enough to really stabilize the teams salary while keeping Headley. Most importantly though. I fully agree that a switch hitter in the four spot that a pitcher would think twice about throwing to would give a tremendous increase to the output of players like Bruce, votto, Phillips, cozart, and whoever is catching. So pretty much Headley would benefit the play of the whole team offensively and his defensive improvement is, in my mind, unquestioned. He's the kind of player that doesn't need a line of misinterpreted stats to defend his play. He can just flat out do it. (and not be a hard working average third basemen at best)

RedsBrick
05-23-2013, 02:28 PM
Coming into last season, Headley's career high water marks were 12 HR/64 RBI. Then all of a sudden last season he bombs 31/115 and his OPS jumps 100+ points from his previous high....Hmmmmmm. I'm not sayin', I'm just sayin'...

Old school 1983
05-23-2013, 03:30 PM
Coming into last season, Headley's career high water marks were 12 HR/64 RBI. Then all of a sudden last season he bombs 31/115 and his OPS jumps 100+ points from his previous high....Hmmmmmm. I'm not sayin', I'm just sayin'...

If the best argument you can have to not want a guy is a shaded PED accusation then maybe it's not the strongest argument.

FanoftheGame34
05-23-2013, 03:38 PM
Coming into last season, Headley's career high water marks were 12 HR/64 RBI. Then all of a sudden last season he bombs 31/115 and his OPS jumps 100+ points from his previous high....Hmmmmmm. I'm not sayin', I'm just sayin'...

Headley was a good player with a skill set that gave him great potential to put together those kind of numbers. He was sound and needed work. Frazier just doesn't have that baseline set of skills that is required to be a difference maker. I'd take 50 RBI's and a .250 avg. versus tough competition over Fraziers 25 home runs and .230 avg. versus the worst players on mediocre teams without a second thought. Headley has the ability to be average to elite. Fraziers ability range is from four A to average at best. I don't see how there really can be much real argument opposing that fact. Headley is better and would put this team into better position to win.

RedlegJake
05-23-2013, 03:48 PM
Headley was a good player with a skill set that gave him great potential to put together those kind of numbers. He was sound and needed work. Frazier just doesn't have that baseline set of skills that is required to be a difference maker. I'd take 50 RBI's and a .250 avg. versus tough competition over Fraziers 25 home runs and .230 avg. versus the worst players on mediocre teams without a second thought. Headley has the ability to be average to elite. Fraziers ability range is from four A to average at best. I don't see how there really can be much real argument opposing that fact. Headley is better and would put this team into better position to win.

Headley is better. Just ignoring dollars and the potential cost to acquire, of course he'd be a great pickup...but...you can't ignore those things.

And the "Frazier only hits poor pitching" You just described most hitters except for a rare few like Votto, Holliday, Choo etc. And if you comp their lines good pitching vs bad even they have worse numbers against elite pitching. That's why its elite. Show me the numbers on Frazier winning teams vs losing teams.

FanoftheGame34
05-23-2013, 04:13 PM
Of course the best pitchers in the league have a better chance to get the elite hitters out. That's why theyre "elite" I figured that was just too obvious to be said. So wouldn't you rather have a player who will give a good at bat against those top pitchers over a guy who strikes out or weakly hits into an out in four or less pitches? Not much of an argument from that perspective. And as far as contract goes. You'd have two years to work out what it would take to resign him and I truly don't believe the players that would be given up would hurt the reds farm system. Even if you couldn't resign him though. Wouldn't you rather have a team with a top notch third basemen for two years over a team with a mediocre third baseman? For those two years. Our lineups key players aren't getting any younger and at Fraziers age we can't wait for him to tap into this unseen potential. Our chance just won't be there.

RedsBrick
05-23-2013, 04:38 PM
I'm not for or against acquiring Chase Headley. I don't think the Reds will, but I don't have an opinion either way. He seems like a fine player. Not great, but fine.

Jumps in production of that magnitude, especially outside what has been normal for a career, seems odd to me. Did it just take him 5 years to figure it out and he's going to continue with similar numbers? Or was 2012 an anomaly? No one knows.

If it was my money, I don't think there's $8mm difference in production, especially considering Headley's arb eligible after this year, and that figure will probably go up, and a FA after next while Frazier's arb eligible in '15 and isn't a FA until '18.

RedlegJake
05-23-2013, 04:47 PM
RedsBrick...you make too much sense.

RedsBrick
05-23-2013, 05:01 PM
RedsBrick...you make too much sense.

Ha! I'm like you RedlegJake, if the Reds are going to go out and acquire someone, I think there are more pressing needs than 3B. With the uncertainty of Ludwick's injury...and production abilities once he does come back (how long will it take him to get up to speed?), I might look at finding someone for LF.

Old school 1983
05-23-2013, 05:04 PM
I'm not for or against acquiring Chase Headley. I don't think the Reds will, but I don't have an opinion either way. He seems like a fine player. Not great, but fine.

Jumps in production of that magnitude, especially outside what has been normal for a career, seems odd to me. Did it just take him 5 years to figure it out and he's going to continue with similar numbers? Or was 2012 an anomaly? No one knows.

If it was my money, I don't think there's $8mm difference in production, especially considering Headley's arb eligible after this year, and that figure will probably go up, and a FA after next while Frazier's arb eligible in '15 and isn't a FA until '18.

Lets just throw out last year for Headley. His obp will create many more opportunities for reds players. We've seen that effect with choo first hand. His average for the past three seasons has been around 280. Throw that in a reds lineup that gets on base at a great rate and he probably easily has 100 RBI even in a down year. His defense is excellent. No arguing.

And furthermore the steroid accusations are weak. We could say the same for Frazier ( I don't think he's juicing) but he goes from an average power prospect to a guy who is hitting one and no handed homers? It's a weak argument. Extremely weak.

And the funnier thing is the guys that people say would be easy target rentals like willingham Bautista and rios are all older, would clog up the outfield, would cost pitching too, and are still signed through next year to large contracts and there'd have to be moves made to keep them around.

I just don't get this. The cardinals in the mid 2000s with jocketty made moves like this and became the best team in the national league in a similar market, but now it's unwise for the reds to do the same thing under the same GM and its a bad idea? I just don't get it. Lets get some guy on the downward spiral that will clog up the outfield next year, make resigning choo or arroyo harder while not giving their level of production, and to top it off they'd be costing a prospect or stunting the development of one at the big leagues.

And if Frazier is on the MLB let alone the reds in 2018 ill be shocked.

Old school 1983
05-23-2013, 05:12 PM
Ha! I'm like you RedlegJake, if the Reds are going to go out and acquire someone, I think there are more pressing needs than 3B. With the uncertainty of Ludwick's injury...and production abilities once he does come back (how long will it take him to get up to speed?), I might look at finding someone for LF.

Lets get a left fielder! The narrow minded solution. Unless its an elite guy it'll block ludwick who makes 14 mil next year, lessens the chances of resigning choo because the guy you'd bring in. Jake has said willingham, Bautista and rios in the past. Would make big money and block choo. Even if we can keep choo we are playing with three left fielders! Brilliant!

Bringing in a guy that helps you win now in your core players prime, that doesn't block the outfield or resigning of choo or the potential call up of Hamilton or development of lutz is such a dumb idea. Who cares if he had and excellent year last year and his numbers in the other years project him in a bad light because he played in a pitchers park on horrible teams. We have the toddfather. Maybe his powerful swing and miss will save us from the fire coming out of the smokestacks in right after our pitching strikes out the side and he leads off the next inning

Old school 1983
05-23-2013, 07:19 PM
I'm still scratching my head over this. Headley is near elite level and would make the team better and could fit into the payroll given that choo and arroyo do not come back next year. If you could find a way to dump ludwick on a Yankees or Red Sox type then even better. I know you'd have to give up farm pieces(I'd consider anyone but Hamilton and maybe Stephenson) but the plays I think you'd have to give up are not crucial to the reds success in the immediate future. Plus if choo and arroyo walk you instantly get two supplemental picks to recoup the loss. Plus when you lose those players their spots can easily be taken by other players who are already in the team. Hamilton takes choos spot and chapman takes arroyos and Broxton or Hoover becomes the closer or Walt gets one in the offseason. They've been easy to come by. Sure Headley would only be guaranteed to stay through the 2014 season but that time is the prime years for the reds to win it all. Votto isn't getting any younger. He will probably start to decline in 2 to 3 years. It can be argued that Phillips has already started to. Bruce is really the only core player where age does not concern me. But the fact if the matter is this team won't get younger. Our top three pitchers are only guaranteed to be here through 2014 before baileys contract is up then latos' the next year. The reds need to go for it. I understand building for the future and budgets but I think he could fit under the budget plus the players given up to acquire him could be quickly replenished with the supplemental first round picks gained from choo and arroyo. Plus the minor league system isn't a stagnant pool of players. There will be other drafts with many rounds. Guys we've barely heard if in the system could break out and become great prospects. Two years and two chances to wins title is a lot of time to rebuild a farm and figure out budgets. I think both could be done, while solidifying a major league roster to take us from in the World Series ballpark where we are now down to the diamond seats.