PDA

View Full Version : Reds trade Dustin Moseley for Ramon Ortiz



Pages : 1 [2]

puca
12-15-2004, 08:02 AM
If this is the type of pitcher that Dan O and his scouts target then we are in for a bumpy ride. There is so much not to like about Ortiz.

DoogMinAmo
12-15-2004, 08:03 AM
I think its a neutral deal and the Ortiz' of this world is what you get for $3.5M these days.

The Ortizs AND Wilsons for 3.5 mil ;) , thats the state of baseball economics.

flyer85
12-15-2004, 08:16 AM
One thing that strikes me about the reactions is "it doesn't fit with what the Reds are trying to do."

I am now not sure I have any idea what the Reds are trying to do. I guess it could make some sense if they sign him to a 2 year not overly expensive deal. If not, I have no idea how this helps the Reds in the long term

lollipopcurve
12-15-2004, 08:25 AM
I have mixed feelings, but my tendency is to "close rank" behind the organization and support what's been done, choosing to look at the positives. I choose hope over despair.

Sorry to see Dustin go. As a fan who follows the organization closely from the bottom up, it would have been nice to see Moseley break into the majors with the Reds. He always seemed to be considered a second-class prospect, by nationals and locals alike, and I saw him as an underdog who kept fighting his way toward the top, even as he endured the death of his father. When was the last time the Reds had a high school draftee break into their starting rotation? I can't think of a single example. Would have loved to see Moseley do it.

Ortiz. What's to like? Stuff. Some flamboyance. Something to prove. A definite improvement in the starting rotation, I think. A sign that the front office recognizes that we should try to make some hay while we've got that great young offense in the barn. And, he's new and different, and I always root for those players.

I ask the stat guys... how does Anaheim rank as a pitcher's park? If Ortiz' numbers as a starter are park-adjusted over his entire career, how does he measure vs. all American league starters in the same time frame (all AL starts made in that time)? I may have missed something, but I haven't seen a single reference to park-adjusted stats for him, while this was the drumbeat in evaluating Paul Wilson.

traderumor
12-15-2004, 08:30 AM
I am now not sure I have any idea what the Reds are trying to do. I guess it could make some sense if they sign him to a 2 year not overly expensive deal. If not, I have no idea how this helps the Reds in the long termDanO's made it pretty clear that this is a deal made with the short term in mind. Those kind of deals need to be made. I would just like to see them get some real help with the short-term in mind instead of churning like an Ortiz deal does. The only positive I can see out of this deal is that the talent swap was fair.

In other words, we didn't give up a top prospect, which I realize folks have their opinions of Moseley that differs from mine, and I'm sure they'll be here to post his stats the first time he does something positive for his new organization. :)

RedsFan75
12-15-2004, 08:31 AM
If Ortiz turns out to be as good as Wilson, I'll like it. Hopefully he'll be better. Personally, I'd have tryed to pick up a good FA, and kept Moseley to hopefully crack the roster later, after a solid year at Louisville.

iammrred
12-15-2004, 08:42 AM
There's plenty to like.

Did you see the Reds' rotation last year?

buckeyenut
12-15-2004, 08:46 AM
Please put this stuff in the other thread

johngalt
12-15-2004, 08:59 AM
I really like this trade for a couple of reasons.

1.) First and foremost, it adds a quality arm to the rotation. Judging by the success a guy like Wilson had with this team last year, I think Ortiz should have a very good year. And he's actually got stuff.

2.) It forces some real competition between Claussen and Hancock for the fifth spot. Competition should (doesn't always, but should) bring out the best in those guys. IMO, the ideal situation would be Claussen winning the fifth spot and Hancock becoming the long man/swing man out of the bullpen. I think he would do very well in that role.

3.) Whether you liked Moseley as a potential starter or not (personally I think Dustin could have been a contributor this year), this Reds front office just didn't seem as high on him as Bowden did. In that way, I don't mind losing him because I don't think he was really going to get that shot here anyway. If you're not gonna use him, deal him for someone you will.

4.) Contract wise, Ortiz is still under the Reds control through 2006. That means barring a horrible 2005, we should have at least Ortiz and Wilson in the rotation the next two years. Harang, Hudson and/or Claussen keep improving and you add another starter in the next offseason, and then you start to have a decent enough rotation to go with a very good lineup for a run in 2006.

5.) I know a lot of people are talking about Ortiz's money being spent better, but IMO, this team needs both Ortiz and Wilson more than it needs Clement. We need as many quality starts as possible. Clement would be a great improvement, but we'd still be looking at Hancock, Harang, Hudson and Claussen the other four days. With Ortiz and Wilson, the quality start percentage dramatically increases.

Gary Redus
12-15-2004, 09:06 AM
The odds are better that Ortiz will win 10 games this year than a AAA pitcher. There is always a risk in trades but has the potential to be a big win. Serious teams trade unproven prospects with potential for major league players. I am thrilled to see us on the other end of a moving involving a minor league player.

macro
12-15-2004, 09:13 AM
*

Krusty
12-15-2004, 09:36 AM
Still, why trade for a guy who would have been non-tendered next week?

redsfan30
12-15-2004, 09:38 AM
We traded a young pitcher who might blossom into a good mlb player for a guy whos had one good year and hes 31.
Key word of your entire post.....might. If Dustin Mosely ever turns out to be a 15 game winner with a sub 4.00 ERA in the Major Leagues, I will consider this a bad move.

We get a proven Major League pitcher who still has room to improve. He is 10 games over .500 for his career. He has World Series experience. He was not happy where he was last year and a change of senery is just what he needs. How many of our starting pitchers have drawn comparisons to Pedro Martinez?

There is not much wrong with this trade.

REDREAD
12-15-2004, 09:41 AM
I'd much rather use the money to lock up Dunn or to at least have some flexibility with it.

That sounds like a good idea in theory. I'm not being sarcastic, but how do you sell that idea to John Allen and Dunn?

My wild guess is that Dunn gets 4-5 million this year. If he repeats a monster year in 2005, does he get 6-9 million the following year? Probably.

To "lock Dunn up" now is probably impossible. He's at the end of the rainbow now (arbitration). That ship has sailed. Now the Reds would probably have to grossly overpay to lock Dunn up. OF seldom have career ending injuries like pitchers do.

So, are you willing to give Dunn 3 years and 24+ million? Because in all seriousness, I think that's what it would take now -- a price figure that isn't going to save you any money in the arb years. And if you want to sign him into his free agent years, I imagine it would get even more astronomical.

IMO, the Reds bungled their chance to sign Dunn longterm. They aren't going to save any money doing it now that Dunn has the arbitration hammer.

Redmachine2003
12-15-2004, 09:44 AM
Still, why trade for a guy who would have been non-tendered next week?
So you are saying that a decent pitcher making around 3-4 mill a year is not tradeable and would have been non tendered in a time when pitching is in demand. I don't think so.

REDREAD
12-15-2004, 09:48 AM
Originally Posted by Cedric
I forgot to mention the worst part about this trade if it goes down, non tendering DJ because of this.

I'm guessing that if DJ is nontendered, it would've happened anyway. Seeing Miley in the press say that he's got to play Freel everyday and seeing DanO bent on putting Kearns at 3b really squeezes DJ.

If the Reds had an ounce of sense, they'd put Freel at 3b, keep DJ at 2b, and use Wily Mo as the super 4th OF. In the near future, DanO is going to be forced to trade Dunn or Kearns. That's why this whole Kearns to 3b thing is insane (particularly with Jr's health). I'd even go so far to say that if DanO had
foresight, he'd try to sign Wily Mo longterm in preparation for dealing one of Kearns/Dunn. Or sign Kearns longterm now while his stock is down.

Signing Pena or Kearns long term is a risk now, but that's the time to do it.. if you wait until it's a sure thing (like Dunn now), it's too late, and you save no money. I'm not saying to overpay Pena/Kearns, but it should be explored.

johngalt
12-15-2004, 09:51 AM
Still, why trade for a guy who would have been non-tendered next week?

Maybe because there's interest from other teams and you don't want to get in a bidding war over a guy who may want more money to sign here.

Buckeye33
12-15-2004, 09:53 AM
Still, why trade for a guy who would have been non-tendered next week?

Because if the Reds didn't trade for him and the Angels non-tendered him (which no one knows would have happened) there would be very little chance he would have signed with the Reds. And he pobably would have made 3.5 mill/yr as a FA, maybe more anyways.

westofyou
12-15-2004, 09:54 AM
I wouldn't give WMP and his amazing "power bat" a LT contract now, I'd overpay for OB% but not power only.

westofyou
12-15-2004, 09:55 AM
Maybe because there's interest from other teams and you don't want to get in a bidding war over a guy who may want more money to sign here.

Are you implying that the baseball business isn't taking place in a vaccum? ;)

Falls City Beer
12-15-2004, 09:56 AM
I wouldn't give WMP and his amazing "power bat" a LT contract now, I'd overpay for OB% but not power only.

No kidding--a LTC to Pena after this bone-headed trade? There's only so much I can handle. :dflynn:

johngalt
12-15-2004, 09:59 AM
Are you implying that the baseball business isn't taking place in a vaccum? ;)

Am I taking that huge leap? :)

REDREAD
12-15-2004, 10:00 AM
I am now not sure I have any idea what the Reds are trying to do. I guess it could make some sense if they sign him to a 2 year not overly expensive deal. If not, I have no idea how this helps the Reds in the long term

Keeps the fans interested.. that's how it helps the team long term. IMO, when rebuilding you shouldn't completely give up on the ML product. If you neglect the ML product, there's not going to be any fans left in 2112 when the team finallly contends.

OldXOhio
12-15-2004, 10:06 AM
I'd even go so far to say that if DanO had foresight, he'd try to sign Wily Mo longterm in preparation for dealing one of Kearns/Dunn. Or sign Kearns longterm now while his stock is down.



not much of a sample size yet to justify signing WMP long term - I'd call doing that something other than foresight.

agree with you about Kearns though. I think the Reds know exactly what they've got in AK. At this point, I wouldn't consider him near the risk WMP is.

Chip R
12-15-2004, 10:07 AM
I'm guessing that if DJ is nontendered, it would've happened anyway. Seeing Miley in the press say that he's got to play Freel everyday and seeing DanO bent on putting Kearns at 3b really squeezes DJ.

If the Reds had an ounce of sense, they'd put Freel at 3b, keep DJ at 2b, and use Wily Mo as the super 4th OF. In the near future, DanO is going to be forced to trade Dunn or Kearns. That's why this whole Kearns to 3b thing is insane (particularly with Jr's health). I'd even go so far to say that if DanO had foresight, he'd try to sign Wily Mo longterm in preparation for dealing one of Kearns/Dunn. Or sign Kearns longterm now while his stock is down.

Looking at DanO's quotes in the paper today, it appears that D'Lo may be at 2nd come Opening Day. I understand the theory of non-tendering D'Lo or trading him. Freel could play 2nd and he's a better leadoff hitter than D'Lo. But perhaps the Reds are thinking it's better to keep Freel in reserve so when Jr. gets hurt they can shift Kearns back to the OF and slide Freel in at 3rd. Freel also gives you an extra OF and IF off the bench.

The thing about WMP is that he needs to play as much as possible. He might get 400 ABs as the 4th OF because of Jr.'s inevitable injury. And Kearns isn't exactly Mr. Durability either. But the stars may align and both may be healthy the whole season. That doesn't give Pena much playing time save for the occassional start and pinch hitting appearance.

REDREAD
12-15-2004, 10:19 AM
I wouldn't give WMP and his amazing "power bat" a LT contract now, I'd overpay for OB% but not power only.

All depends on what he's asking for.. He's probably asking for two much.. But hypotethically.. for 5 million over 3 years, I'd consider it. That way, he's an expensive backup if he doesn't work out. Would Wily Mo do it? Probably not, but now's the time to ask (when he's an unestablished 4th OF). Actually, the time to ask would've been before the talk of moving Kearns to 3b...

REDREAD
12-15-2004, 10:23 AM
not much of a sample size yet to justify signing WMP long term - I'd call doing that something other than foresight.
.

Yes, it's clearly a risk. But that's why you might get him to sign for something like a total of 5 million over 3 years. I'm not suggesting that we offer him something like 8 million year ;) You try to get him to sign a Michael Tucker type contract now and hope he blossoms. If he fails, you haven't lost that much money.

A small market team has to take some risks, IMO. Playing it cautious with Dunn has now made it virtually impossible to sign him longterm at a discount.

REDREAD
12-15-2004, 10:29 AM
The thing about WMP is that he needs to play as much as possible. He might get 400 ABs as the 4th OF because of Jr.'s inevitable injury. And Kearns isn't exactly Mr. Durability either. But the stars may align and both may be healthy the whole season. That doesn't give Pena much playing time save for the occassional start and pinch hitting appearance.

I see your point.. but is it worth throwing away DJ and being commited to this infield experiment just to give Wily Mo more at bats? IMO, that's a horrible plan.

I don't know what the Reds are thinking but if they think Wily Mo is a true stud (and that's why they are moving Kearns to 3b), then they might as well trade Kearns for pitching.

If they are moving Kearns to 3b simply because they have no 3b, they might as well just keep Freel and DJ starting at 2b/3b and let Wily Mo fill in the OF.
Or they could start the season with Kearns at 3b and Freel as the supersub.
That way if the Kearns experiment blows up, they have a backkup.

I like Wily Mo as much as anyone on this board, but it's crazy to throw away DJ and play Kearns out of position to accomodate Pena. He's not that good.
If his development gets stunted a little bit by only getting 400 AB, I can live with that. I think it's inevitable that Kearns or Dunn will be traded within 2 years anyway.

44Magnum
12-15-2004, 10:33 AM
I like the trade. He is already the Reds best starter.

johngalt
12-15-2004, 10:47 AM
Keeps the fans interested.. that's how it helps the team long term. IMO, when rebuilding you shouldn't completely give up on the ML product. If you neglect the ML product, there's not going to be any fans left in 2112 when the team finallly contends.

Yeah, exactly. You need to do some things to keep people interested in the present. That's why Plan A (getting Mulder) would have worked wonders, especially since he's still relatively young too. This isn't too bad of a Plan B though really.

PinchRunner
12-15-2004, 10:58 AM
I like the trade. He is already the Reds best starter.

Yep...now if we can get an Ace and #2 we should be fine.

westofyou
12-15-2004, 10:58 AM
The Angels also inked Byrd to a 1 year contract at 5 million bucks a year, a 34 year old witha a career 4.33 era is getting some jack after missing all of 2003 and part of 2004. (Jon Leiber kinda)

Anyway, here's his last 2 season and the jettisoned pitcher.


H/9 BR/9 SO/9 BB/9 SO/BB

9.28 12.92 6.25 3.24 1.93 - 525 innings Ramon

9.16 12.83 6.42 3.30 1.95 - 342 innings Bryd


Any opinion on that signing?

Looks pretty "pricy" to me.

And the market goes up.

traderumor
12-15-2004, 11:07 AM
I'm glad someone finally pointed out that the "non-tender" waiting game can be an incredibly frustrating exercise. It netted us nothing last year, and if there was someone they targeted (debating whether he should be one in the first place is another subject), then dealing instead of waiting and crossing their fingers was a good move.

But then, I'm sure none of that was considered and only after it was pointed out at Redszone was the oversight realized.

I think the skinny is that we gave up an average prospect that was not likely to even sniff the majors until next year in this org. for an average vet (he has been a little better than league average in ERA most years) that was likely to get an average wage for his talents no matter who signed him. Considering that, getting a league average pitcher on a staff full of 5+ ERA types (aka below average) is sadly an improvement.

westofyou
12-15-2004, 11:10 AM
I think the skinny is that we gave up an average prospect that was not likely to even sniff the majors until next year in this org. for an average vet (he has been a little better than league average in ERA most years) that was likely to get an average wage for his talents no matter who signed him. Considering that, getting a league average pitcher on a staff full of 5+ ERA types (aka below average) is sadly an improvement.

Even the 3 little pigs had to move from a straw house to a stick house before they could build one of brick.

MWM
12-15-2004, 11:15 AM
Making marginal to bad trades just to do something to keep fans interested is NOT in any way, shape, or form good for long-term business. On the contrary, it's just BAD business. There's one and ONLY one way to keep fans interested in the long run, and we all know what that is. So if the trade isn't going to help in that respect, it does NOTHING for the long term health of the franchise.

traderumor
12-15-2004, 11:16 AM
Even the 3 little pigs had to move from a straw house to a stick house before they could build one of brick.I agree. Obviously (to coin DanO's new favorite word) we would love to go out and pick up a top shelf pitcher or have one in the minors on the cusp of breaking out. I have a feeling that no one is offering us that, even for Dunn. So, you take what you can get when you can get it. And good luck DMos, hope you prosper from here on out.

traderumor
12-15-2004, 11:17 AM
Making marginal to bad trades just to do something to keep fans interested is NOT in any way, shape, or form good for long-term business. On the contrary, it's just BAD business. There's one and ONLY one way to keep fans interested in the long run, and we all know what that is. So if the trade isn't going to help in that respect, it does NOTHING for the long term health of the franchise.

So please tell me how disinterested fans help the long-term health of the franchise?

MWM
12-15-2004, 11:19 AM
So please tell me how disinterested fans help the long-term health of the franchise?

They don't. That's my point. Because your question assumes that I buy the argument that trades like these keep fans interested. I don't believe that.Wins and losses are the ONLY thing that keeps them interested in the long term. How many fans do you think will be interested in this trade by next week beyond the die-hards here at RedsZone?

Chip R
12-15-2004, 11:21 AM
I see your point.. but is it worth throwing away DJ and being commited to this infield experiment just to give Wily Mo more at bats? IMO, that's a horrible plan.

I'm not saying that they should get rid of D'Lo. I'm not even suggesting that they are considering it. What I'm saying is I can see their logic in keeping Freel on the bench and keeping D'Lo at 2nd. But I could also understand getting rid of D'Lo and plugging Freel in at 2nd. Like I said, he's a better leadoff hitter and he's more versatile. Of course versatility isn't something you want in a guy who is supposed to be your starter at 2nd. It's nice but since you are planning to start him most of the time, it's not really what you're looking for. But if you get rid of D'Lo you really shorten your bench for the inevitable injury. And God forbid we put Machado in there full time. :eek:

REDREAD
12-15-2004, 11:30 AM
Making marginal to bad trades just to do something to keep fans interested is NOT in any way, shape, or form good for long-term business. On the contrary, it's just BAD business. There's one and ONLY one way to keep fans interested in the long run, and we all know what that is. So if the trade isn't going to help in that respect, it does NOTHING for the long term health of the franchise.

But if the boss isn't willing to do what is best for the long run (I'm guessing you mean to either build a Cleveland/Oakland farm system or sign a true #1),
then why not do the best you can do?

IMO, winning keeps the fans interested, short term and long term. A 110 loss season does damage to the fan base that takes a long time to recover from.

Ortiz is a step towards respectablity, IMO. Until the team gets respectable, there's no reason to think a Clement, Perez, etc would even want to come here (unless they were grossly overpaid). There's probably 10 teams with at least some interest in Perez/Clement.. How are the Reds going to be guaranteed to win that bidding war?

As far as the farm goes, Allen is unwilling to pour 6 million/year into the farm like Cleveland and Oakland have done in the past to get the pipeline moving.
We could've signed Markalis, Sowers, Kazmir, and some other guys if the money was available and been much better off in the farm department.

REDREAD
12-15-2004, 11:31 AM
I'm not saying that they should get rid of D'Lo. ... And God forbid we put Machado in there full time. :eek:

Yeah, I know you weren't suggesting it, just saying it from the Reds' point of view. I didn't word my response carefully.

I do hope they don't nontender DJ.. that would be stupidity, IMO.

Gary Redus
12-15-2004, 11:32 AM
I have a hard time understanding the assumption that Freel all of the sudden has figured out how to be an every day player at this stage of his career. If there is concern regarding payroll - non-tender Reidling but keep DLo. With the fraility of Junior, the potential of WillyMo crashing and burning, pitchers knocking the bat out of Freel's hands, limited offensive options at shortstop - you can't give away a major league player like DJ.

MWM
12-15-2004, 11:33 AM
But if the boss isn't willing to do what is best for the long run (I'm guessing you mean to either build a Cleveland/Oakland farm system or sign a true #1),
then why not do the best you can do?


I guess I reject the notion that this was the best they could do.

And I don't agree that this was a step in the right direction.

traderumor
12-15-2004, 11:34 AM
They don't. That's my point. Because your question assumes that I buy the argument that trades like these keep fans interested. I don't believe that.Wins and losses are the ONLY thing that keeps them interested in the long term. How many fans do you think will be interested in this trade by next week beyond the die-hards here at RedsZone?
It isn't about the trade keeping them interested. I don't think that's the mind set of anyone who is OK with the move. I believe the opinion is that it does improve the rotation, whether we like how much it does or not. Based on the current state of our pitching staff, an average major league pitcher added to the worst staff in the majors last year should mean a few more victories.

Also, I haven't seen opinions that this trade knocks their socks off. But the cost was reasonable in talent and in what we'll have to pay him. So, the fallout should be an improvement in the overall rotation and in a middle reliever as a lower quality starter was just bumped to the bullpen where that person is probably better suited. The rest of the house of cards such as Dunn's LTC money and non-tendering Jiminez are unrelated.

OldXOhio
12-15-2004, 11:36 AM
I have a hard time understanding the assumption that Freel all of the sudden has figured out how to be an every day player at this stage of his career.

He's 28 years old....this is supposed to be the time in his career when he does figure that out. Based on what we saw in 2004, it looks like he has.

MWM
12-15-2004, 11:36 AM
tr, I don't believe that this trade really helps the rotation, even a little. I don't see him being any better than Corey Lidle was this year, so I don't view this as an improvement. See the stats Stormy put regarding his last two years as a starter.

lollipopcurve
12-15-2004, 11:39 AM
Saying they "could have done better" is easy. But unverifiable. Just doesn't hold water in any "thumbs up/thumbs down" debate about the trade, in my opinion.

MWM
12-15-2004, 11:43 AM
Saying they "could have done better" is easy. But unverifiable.

Not if you believe doing NOTHING would have been better.

REDREAD
12-15-2004, 11:49 AM
I guess I reject the notion that this was the best they could do.

And I don't agree that this was a step in the right direction.

Ok, I can see your point.. My premise was that Ortiz is an upgrade to the rotation, but if you disagree with that premise, I can see your point.

I like the trade, but I do acknowledge that it's risky, and might blow up in our faces. Ortiz might stink up the place in 2005.. Maybe I'm too giddy about the thought of Hancock being out of the rotation and Robertson being pushed one slot deeper on the depth chart.

letsgojunior
12-15-2004, 11:50 AM
Wrong. I never stated or implied that I could do a better job than Bowden. Neither have I called any fellow poster "arrogant" (at least, not since the days of Richard Hand...) I do point out that there's a culture of sports fans who cross the line regularly from "active rooting" to "show him the door!" If you want to take the Philadelphia road to caustic complaining, I have no means to prevent you. Just don't expect me to join the pile.

I was referring to your first post "Yes, there are 30 MLB jobs in MLB and at least 30 folks on here who think its child's play." I haven't seen a single poster mindlessly blast O'Brien - rather they've mostly stated the reasons they dislike the trade, and why it doesn't fit in with our long-term plans. I don't like the move - I think his W/L total was inflated by great run support, I think he gives up a lot of home runs, I think he is a potential attitude problem... but I don't think the job is simple and I don't think those sort of remarks imply that at all.

I'm just curious - what posts in this thread are in line with what you would consider "Philadelphia level caustic complaining." Granted there are always a few bad apples in any sports city who will complain about anything, but what I'm seeing here is intelligent, informed discussion about the future of the franchise and what this move does for it. I think this is a decidedly positive Reds board compared to others I've briefly read. And given the results we've seen over the past 5 seasons (i.e. one winning season, front office strife, complaints about fans by the FO, little to no moves which legitimately upgrade the team, deals torpedoed over minimal financial considerations, trades which can't be considered true baseball trades, embarrassing public relations gaffes, numerous employees leaving with disparaging comments....), what exactly is there to be positive about? The Reds have been plenty guilty of breeding ill will with their fanbase - why should we be doing backflips over the acquisition of a guy with mediocre stats, at the loss of one of one of our best prospects? And NOT acting happy over this acquisition certainly doesn't imply that a person is a bad fan, a complainer, or a malcontent. It simply means they care enough about the team to want the direction to improve.

traderumor
12-15-2004, 11:54 AM
tr, I don't believe that this trade really helps the rotation, even a little. I don't see him being any better than Corey Lidle was this year, so I don't view this as an improvement. See the stats Stormy put regarding his last two years as a starter.I've seen the stats, also read every post on this thread. We've come to different conclusions based on the available data. I expect Ortiz to post an ERA somewhere in the mid 4s, give up 25-30 HRs (although that is the number with the most variance, I imagine), have about a 1.40 WHIP, and about 6 Ks per 9. Do you think there were any options we had before the trade that would post those types of numbers going out there every fifth day? Obviously, my numbers could be optimisitic from your point of view, but they are in line with his career numbers.

Also, I do not agree with your "hurting the long-term" conclusion. Moseley may or may not ever be an average major league starting pitcher and this acquisition is within this year's and next year's budget. It is a short-term deal. Not a great one, not a bad one, I think a little teeny little bit of a positive move for the 2005 Cincinnati Reds.

Just make sure to remind me of all this in the game threads this summer when Ortiz has given up four homers in the first inning ;)

zombie-a-go-go
12-15-2004, 11:56 AM
Stop making sense, lgj.

traderumor
12-15-2004, 12:01 PM
I've seen this stated several times, but considering what "best" means with regards to our best pitching prospects, I wouldn't consider Moseley to be one of the overall top prospects, but a middling prospect at best in the context of the overall prospect market. Thus, an average Major League pitcher in return for a possible future average Major League pitcher is about the expected return. It's a matter of wanting your average Major Leaguer now or in 2007.

M2
12-15-2004, 12:21 PM
Even the 3 little pigs had to move from a straw house to a stick house before they could build one of brick.

Moral of the story was the was the straw and stick houses weren't such good ideas. FWIW, I consider this another strawhouse move. What you've got is a lot people saying "Well, it is shelter." Meanwhile I'm sitting here thinking about what's going to happen when the wolf comes.

westofyou
12-15-2004, 12:24 PM
Moral of the story was the was the straw and stick houses weren't such good ideas. FWIW, I consider this another strawhouse move. What you've got is a lot people saying "Well, it is shelter." Meanwhile I'm sitting here thinking about what's going to happen when the wolf comes.

Yep, but in this case the Reds have been sleeping in the open air.

And what does it matter if the wolf comes?

They already know he's coming.

MWM
12-15-2004, 12:28 PM
I've seen the stats, also read every post on this thread. We've come to different conclusions based on the available data. I expect Ortiz to post an ERA somewhere in the mid 4s, give up 25-30 HRs (although that is the number with the most variance, I imagine), have about a 1.40 WHIP, and about 6 Ks per 9. Do you think there were any options we had before the trade that would post those types of numbers going out there every fifth day? Obviously, my numbers could be optimisitic from your point of view, but they are in line with his career numbers.

That's the jist of our disagreement. You're much more optimistic of what Ortiz will produce.

M2
12-15-2004, 12:39 PM
lollipop, Ortiz scores a 99 for ERA+ for his career, just a hair below league average.

Though Stormy touched upon the problem with taking that number at face value. Ortiz has crashed and burned as a starter the past two seasons. He had an 82 ERA+ in 2003 and, while I don't have his ERA+ as a starter for last season, he had a 5.47 ERA against a park-adjusted league average of 4.59 (not to mention an .875 OPS against as a starter). So he'd have probably been around an 85 ERA+ for his rotation work in 2004.

Thanks to his relief work he came out with a 104 ERA+ for the season, but, much like Jimmy Haynes in 2002 (ERA+ 107), his peripherals indicate that ERA should have been higher and that it probably will rise this season.

On a separate note, nice to see DanO acknowledge that Moseley wasn't going to be a factor until at least 2006. If he's capable of recognizing the longer timeline associated with pitching development on a consistent basis then he can take his foot off the gas pedal of the team's pitching promotion policy. That should lead to better performances across the board, leading to better trade bait in the offseason and better brand name recognition for the Reds' farm system. Sounds like he might only be a step away.

traderumor
12-15-2004, 12:40 PM
That's the jist of our disagreement. You're much more optimistic of what Ortiz will produce.

One thing I noticed is that according to BP factors on baseball-reference.com, GABP favors pitchers more than Edison Field. GABP has a factor of 92 while Edison is 99, with 100 being neutral and >100 favors batters and vice versa for <100. Anyone else have some park factors to consider?

westofyou
12-15-2004, 12:44 PM
One thing I noticed is that according to BP factors on baseball-reference.com, GABP favors pitchers more than Edison Field. GABP has a factor of 92 while Edison is 99, with 100 being neutral and >100 favors batters and vice versa for <100. Anyone else have some park factors to consider?

Edison 2002-2003 was a 96 LHB and 101 RHB park - 98 average - with a 92 average in Runs scored (scored best fielding 86)

That's from the Billl James Handbook last year (new one ain't here yet)

M2
12-15-2004, 12:46 PM
Yep, but in this case the Reds have been sleeping in the open air.

And what does it matter if the wolf comes?

They already know he's coming.

That's why you start buying bricks. Maybe you don't get the house completed by the time the wolf shows up on opening day, but the strawhouse isn't any different than sleeping in the open air. Survive as best you can, keep building with bricks and then someday when the wolf shows you'll be warming your hocks from the barcalounger in front of your fireplace.

If you really needed some straw there's always the Jamey Wrights and Ron Villones of the world.

westofyou
12-15-2004, 12:52 PM
Mosley is probably just a stick as opposed to a brick...... strawmen like Wright and Villone (who was offered arb) would elicit equal comparisons to chaft here as well.

M2
12-15-2004, 01:01 PM
Mosley is probably just a stick as opposed to a brick...... strawmen like Wright and Villone (who was offered arb) would elicit equal comparisons to chaft here as well.

I don't care about Moseley, not one little bit.

And cheaper guys like Wright and Villone (who unfortunately got counted as a reliever and not a starter on the free agent compensation lists) would have left some cash around to go brick shopping.

I expected the Reds to bring in some chaft just to get through the 2005 season. The sin is they've spent a premium on chaft, blocking the door to better moves in the coming weeks and months.

traderumor
12-15-2004, 01:05 PM
That's why you start buying bricks. Maybe you don't get the house completed by the time the wolf shows up on opening day, but the strawhouse isn't any different than sleeping in the open air. Survive as best you can, keep building with bricks and then someday when the wolf shows you'll be warming your hocks from the barcalounger in front of your fireplace.

If you really needed some straw there's always the Jamey Wrights and Ron Villones of the world.But the three little pigs have looked at the bricks and their checkbook and decided they can only afford to make bricks themselves instead of buying bricks that someone else made. Then, they only had enough to get sticks, which is better than the open air and the strawhouse that they lived in before. Not much better, and certainly not strong enough to withstand the wolf (playoffs), but a little stronger than the one they had before. But those bricks can be hard to come by, and they're just learning how to make them, so for now, its sticks, straw or open air.

M2
12-15-2004, 01:18 PM
But the three little pigs have looked at the bricks and their checkbook and decided they can only afford to make bricks themselves instead of buying bricks that someone else made. Then, they only had enough to get sticks, which is better than the open air and the strawhouse that they lived in before. Not much better, and certainly not strong enough to withstand the wolf (playoffs), but a little stronger than the one they had before. But those bricks can be hard to come by, and they're just learning how to make them, so for now, its sticks, straw or open air.

My wolf is the regular season. That's when the guys with the bats show up and start trying to dismantle what you've built.

And $8M is $8M. Make it work. Are you going to sit there and tell me no one's going to emerge from this offseason with a good pitcher who costs less than $8M? Of course you're not. We haven't even hit arbitration filings yet, who knows what that's going to shake loose. Who knows what some team unhappy with the way the offseason has shaped up will be willing to trade in January and February. If the Reds made that decision then that's a case of having the wrong people in charge.

I don't want the Reds run by folks who toss up their hands and say, "Well, we can't do any better." I want it run by folks who roll up their sleeves and say, "Well, we've got to do better."

OldXOhio
12-15-2004, 01:21 PM
Who's to say the excess cash would have been used to go brick shopping? The three little pigs may have decided to invest their added wealth in other ventures besides their real property.

Falls City Beer
12-15-2004, 01:26 PM
We haven't even hit arbitration filings yet, who knows what that's going to shake loose.


Wait a minute...I thought you were the one who wanted the FO to get going, not wait.
;)

gonelong
12-15-2004, 01:30 PM
Not much better, and certainly not strong enough to withstand the wolf (playoffs), but a little stronger than the one they had before. But those bricks can be hard to come by, and they're just learning how to make them, so for now, its sticks, straw or open air.

The wolf isn't the playoffs, its the fan apathy. Keep sleeping out in the open and eventually the fans will find shelter elsewhere. Stocking up on straw and sticks may slow the wolf down, but in the long run you'd better get some bricks. Every stick you buy puts off buying a brick, and thats the sin.

Bricks are hard to come by, all the more reason to get them whenever you can and however you can. Sticks and straw are laying all over the place just ready to be picked up at any time.

GL

traderumor
12-15-2004, 01:31 PM
M2,

I don't see any indication by OB that he hasn't rolled up his sleeves with respect to the pitching staff. He may not be quite as aggressive as we'd like, and the choices have not involved top shelf players on either ends. So far, I'm not buying your assumption that it's ONLY a matter of self-imposed limitations by thinking small. Keep working, though, I might.

With that said, the one thing I would have liked to see them do if they bring in an Ortiz is have also let Wilson walk and sign Clement or Perez at their rate of $7-8M. They could have been as aggressive as necessary to get it done. I doubt that they were, if they even considered those two because they considered either too price by themselves. They opted to take Wilson.

Tony Cloninger
12-15-2004, 01:42 PM
I am partial to Little Red Riding Hood.

If you read the original book...it's real bizzare and gross.

osuceltic
12-15-2004, 01:50 PM
Are you going to sit there and tell me no one's going to emerge from this offseason with a good pitcher who costs less than $8M?

No, but we're not going to be able to identify that pitcher right now. I don't care if Clement signs for $7 million a year or Perez or whoever you want to pick out (although the chances of those things happening appear to be slim to none).

Sure, there will be a guy (maybe even Ramon Ortiz!) who emerges as the steal of the offseason. What you're complaining about is the Reds haven't made the moves you want. Never mind if those moves may be impossible in the real world.

Who knows what Ortiz will do? I have a hard time criticizing the move, or the two signings today. These seem like improvements without much sacrifice. You think the money could be better spent. Maybe. But if Ortiz wins 15 games with an ERA under 4.0, I'd say you're wrong. Heck, in this market, if he wins 10 games with an ERA under 4.50, he's probably considered a decent investment.

I'm not sold on this front office either, but I don't think these moves warrant a fit. These are reasonable, defensible baseball moves with decent upside and relatively little downside.

MWM
12-15-2004, 01:59 PM
I don't see any indication by OB that he hasn't rolled up his sleeves with respect to the pitching staff.

What more evidence do you need other than the lack of a decent pitching staff? Or even the acquisition of anything that even slightly resembles a high potential pitcher.

gonelong
12-15-2004, 02:01 PM
Who's to say the excess cash would have been used to go brick shopping?

Either way, that possibility is not even on the table any more. That alone is enough to make me huff and puff. :)

GL

westofyou
12-15-2004, 02:02 PM
What more evidence do you need other than the lack of a decent pitching staff? Or even the acquisition of anything that even slightly resembles a high potential pitcher.

Obviously the Reds aren't gonna spring for the primo stuff, they're content to grow their own and partake in ditch weed until the crop comes in.

Problem is all that shake, stems and seeds can give you a hell of a headache and sometimes the smell is so bad it can keep people away.

Falls City Beer
12-15-2004, 02:05 PM
Obviously the Reds aren't gonna spring for the primo stuff, they're content to grow their own and partake in ditch weed until the crop comes in.

Problem is all that shake, stems and seeds can give you a hell of a headache and sometimes the smell is so bad it can keep people away.


These metaphors... :pimp:

Red Leader
12-15-2004, 02:07 PM
I know.

The three little pigs, DanO and the big bad wolf smoke cheeba? :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

I always thought DanO was into the schwag. ;)

:MandJ: :MandJ:

Redsland
12-15-2004, 02:18 PM
That reminds me, what ever happened to the poster named "wolfwolfwolf"?

:)

OldXOhio
12-15-2004, 02:22 PM
Either way, that possibility is not even on the table any more. That alone is enough to make me huff and puff. :)

GL

That's just it GL - I don't believe the possibility ever was on the table to begin with.

traderumor
12-15-2004, 02:38 PM
What more evidence do you need other than the lack of a decent pitching staff? Or even the acquisition of anything that even slightly resembles a high potential pitcher.Now you're talking about acumen. The jury is still out on that, but the early returns are not good. That I'll grant. M2 seemed to be saying that DanO is shrugging his shoulders with a defeatist attitude, at least that is what I read. I do not agree with that assessment. I see someone trying to work with the resources he has with limited success thus far.

Honestly, I still think that there are unrealistic expectations as to how easily one can overhaul a pitching staff, from the majors to the minors. That does not excuse last year's disaster or give any one a free pass. The obvious band-aid would be to acquire at least one significant free agent last season and this season. DanO went the "draft and develop" direction, and has sprinkled in a few deals that brought in slightly better prospects from other organizations than we had when he got here, e.g. Elizardo, Hancock, Bubba and Bong. You seem to be looking for dramatic and drastic.

MWM
12-15-2004, 02:40 PM
Lack of effort, or lack or compentence. 6 of one.......

Puffy
12-15-2004, 02:46 PM
I am so confused - are the Reds the wolf, the house or the basket full of goodies?? And who is Little Red Riding Hood, and did Aunt Bee bring the bean pies??

cReds1
12-15-2004, 02:48 PM
i thought our brainiac GM said he would not touch the farm pitching system? I guess that is over with. WS here we come. :MandJ:

Let me just say this was a classic move to let's try to get to .500 move. Nothing else to say except, zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

M2
12-15-2004, 03:53 PM
Lack of effort, or lack or compentence. 6 of one.......

What he said.

My standard for Dan O'Brien is can he deliver something better than the worst pitching staff in team history. If not he should be fired and Reds fans should get to throw rocks at him as he exits the team offices.

REDREAD
12-15-2004, 03:55 PM
My standard for Dan O'Brien is can he deliver something better than the worst pitching staff in team history. If not he should be fired and Reds fans should get to throw rocks at him as he exits the team offices.

That sounds like fun.. can we get a few throws at Allen and Carl too? :MandJ:

traderumor
12-15-2004, 04:01 PM
What he said.

My standard for Dan O'Brien is can he deliver something better than the worst pitching staff in team history. If not he should be fired and Reds fans should get to throw rocks at him as he exits the team offices.I think that's most folks' standard on here. However, is the expectation steady improvement or to go from the worst staff in the league to one of the best overnight?

MWM
12-15-2004, 04:21 PM
I think that's most folks' standard on here. However, is the expectation steady improvement or to go from the worst staff in the league to one of the best overnight?

"Steady" can mean so many things. An investment that yields a .5% annual return is steady. But don't plan on getting rich by it.

traderumor
12-15-2004, 04:32 PM
Ok, to be more specific, after the last two years, to be in the top 8-10 overall in the league would be a reasonable improvement for 2005. That would probably put your staff near the league average, which to me would be steady improvement. That also would probably put the Reds on the smiling side of .500 (for those of you missing George Grande this winter).

M2
12-15-2004, 04:35 PM
I think that's most folks' standard on here. However, is the expectation steady improvement or to go from the worst staff in the league to one of the best overnight?

My expectation? Well, that's opening a can of worms. In a sane world, a pitching staff that doesn't make me wince would be my expectation.

But I'm a Reds fan and it's been four seasons since the team I root for supplied me with one of those.

I think a fair expectation would be that the team have an ERA below 5.00. That would at least give you the impression they might be trending toward mediocre. It would be nice to be less than a complete embarrasment.

But that's not the standard I'm employing. All I'm saying is that DanO had better deliver something better than the worst pitching staff in Reds history. The ERA bar for that is set at 5.19. That's not really asking much, better than the worst pitching staff in team history. Of course it's a bunny hop O'Brien failed to make in 2004.

I could see it going either way right now. Though as much time as we've spent talking about the new arms that DanO's brought in, I maintain his go-to guy in this quest is still the head groundskeeper.

MWM
12-15-2004, 04:35 PM
tr, mark me down as someone who thinks the Reds will again be one of the worst three non-Colorado pithing staff in the majors this year. And you can hold me to that. Going into the season, I don't see any real improvement.

SteelSD
12-15-2004, 04:38 PM
I think that's most folks' standard on here. However, is the expectation steady improvement or to go from the worst staff in the league to one of the best overnight?

tr, I think that's a fair question. But the answer is a lot more complicated and really hinges on where the team is right now.

If the Reds were in such a position that they could turn into a winning ballclub by creeping up the performance ladder in an area, then ok. Let's marginally improve where needed.

But considering where the Reds actually have been, marginal improvment in any area doesn't get them anywhere close to where they need to be. Continuing the path of marginal improvement simply means that by the time one area (ie. the rotation) finally gets good enough to be helpful, another area has priced itself out of town (ie. Dunn, Kearns, whoever).

From the Reds' position, losing anything to promote slight, gradual upward performance creep means that the ambulance may end up arriving...but not until after the patient is beyond saving.

Basically, the acquisition of Ramon Ortiz replaces Cory Lidle's slot in the rotation without improving that slot by an appreciable margain, if at all. And the Reds spent more resources than they did to acquire Lidle in terms of both capital and talent cost. By doing that, we're assured that we won't see the kind of talent influx that would actually accelerate a performance gain to the point of it being meaningful.

Simply put, for the Reds that strategy is pointless because three to four years from now is far far too late given the current club makeup and current performance level.

I feel like I'm attending a course called "Wheel Spinning 101" with Professor Dan O'Brien at the chalkboard.

wheels
12-15-2004, 04:40 PM
I maintain his go-to guy in this quest is still the head groundskeeper.

What a coincincedence:

One of my customers: "So who's gonna be the number one starter now?"

Me: "The Head Groundskeeper..."

Customer: "Not good"

Me: "Not good."

MikeS21
12-15-2004, 04:40 PM
After digesting this trade for a while, here's by take:

1) DMos was the most notable among the many cookie cutter pitching prospects JimBo and his henchmen brought into the farm system. By cookie cutter, I mean a right-hander who had a decent breaking ball, but had a very average fastball. Gillman, Reith, Basham, Hall, Belisle - and some folks would argue Gruler - all fit into that same mold. While Moseley was high on the Reds' list, most would have to agree that in the larger scheme of things, he wasn't anyone to get overly excited about. As others have said, trading away Moseley doesn't contradict DanO's plan for building through the farm system. With guys like Gardner and Pauly around, we can survive without DMos.

2) There were no guarantees the Angels were going to non-tender Ortiz. Had they non-tendered him, he would have become a FA and the Reds would have lost out in the inevitable bidding war.

3) There were also no guarantees that had the Reds saved their money and pursued Clement or Perez that they would have landed either pitcher. Had this been the case, most would have complained about DanO not doing anything.

4) Ortiz is nothing special. I'm about as excited over Ortiz as I was over the signing of Haynes, Anderson, and Lidle. But I had that same knot in the stomach when they signed Paul Wilson, too. I don't think he is the answer, nor do I think he is a disaster.

I think the thing that bugs me the most is that Ortiz is the kind of guy the Braves, the Cardinals, the Yankees, or the Mariners would sign to be back of the rotation (#4 or #5) filler. OTOH, the Reds are thinking of him as a #2 starter. Which makes sense for a team who thinks Paul Wilson is a #1 starter.

5) Finally, this episode also is a painful reminder of the sorry state of talent within this organization. The thing is that for whatever reason - there are probably only about four players in the entire organization - ie. Dunn, Kearns, Pena, and EddyE - who could be flipped for talent that might actually help this team. But the flip side is that if you traded any of the four, you are seriously weakening what would otherwise be a future strength. Even if you traded, say Kearns for a decent pitcher, that would only translate into losing games by a score of 3-1 instead of 7-4.

Many hound DanO because of his lack of aquisitions at the ML level. I don't fault him there because he already told us that was going to happen. But the one area I have been extremely disappointed with OB in is his inability to produce a viable minor league prospect. I've seen reorganization, I've seen new scouts and advisors, I've seen demotions and promotions among minor league instructors, I've heard Tim Neahring talk up prospects like a used car salesman, and I've even heard the word "plan" thrown around. But there's one thing that missing that I haven't seen. And that's progress. I'm having a real hard time seeing any difference between where the farm system is now than where it was a year ago when DanO took over.

In the 2004 edition of the BA Prospect Handbook, the Reds were ranked #26 out of thirty teams as far as minor league talent. I have to tell you that I am dreading to see the 2005 rankings because I am 99% sure the Reds will DROP to an even lower position. I was extremely disappointed in the June 2004 draft. Granted, Homer Bailey could turn into a stud. But, given the track record of most high school pitching prospects, there's a better chance he'll wind up a dud.

Most of you who have been around here for awhile know that I tend to be one who calls for a little slack to be cut for the GM. But this GM promised to build through the farm system, and I haven't see any signs of it yet. Perhaps a year is too soon to expect visable results. I'm not asking for a miracle, only for an upgrade. But if the 2005 draft is as disappointing as the 2004 draft, I'm afraid my patience with Mr. O'Brien will officially run out.

SteelSD
12-15-2004, 04:43 PM
Ok, to be more specific, after the last two years, to be in the top 8-10 overall in the league would be a reasonable improvement for 2005. That would probably put your staff near the league average, which to me would be steady improvement. That also would probably put the Reds on the smiling side of .500 (for those of you missing George Grande this winter).

tr, to end up in the top 8-10 in the NL in team ERA, the Runs would have to allow about 162 fewer Earned Runs than they allowed last season.

Uh-uh. Not with this staff.

MWM
12-15-2004, 04:45 PM
I'm willing to bet anyone who will take it that Corey Lidle outperforms Ramon Ortiz in 2005. Any taker?

flyer85
12-15-2004, 04:45 PM
MikeS21,

Can't argue with any of that. The 2004 draft will be judged on the success of one player, Homer Bailey. At least he is different from most other Reds in that he has a plus, plus fastball. Cincinnati needs him to arrive by 2007.

M2
12-15-2004, 05:03 PM
Cincinnati needs him to arrive by 2007.

That's like saying you need to hit the Power Ball jackpot in order to pay your bills.

Red Leader
12-15-2004, 05:05 PM
That's like saying you need to hit the Power Ball jackpot in order to pay your bills.

:MandJ: Excellently put, M2. :thumbup:

MWM
12-15-2004, 05:08 PM
This thread needs to go in the archives just for its brilliant use of metaphors.

Puffy
12-15-2004, 05:10 PM
I'm willing to bet anyone who will take it that Corey Lidle outperforms Ramon Ortiz in 2005. Any taker?

I'll take it.

MWM
12-15-2004, 05:19 PM
I'll take it.

Name the bet. And I don't the cheap stuff either. :p:

Puffy
12-15-2004, 05:22 PM
Name the bet. And I don't the cheap stuff either. :p:

Ahhhhh, no, no, no - you started the bet, so you get to call it :allovrjr:

Redsland
12-15-2004, 05:23 PM
This thread needs to go in the archives just for its brilliant use of metaphors.
Ah, but beyond a certain point, our archives are like the Library at Alexandria.


:)

MWM
12-15-2004, 05:44 PM
Ahhhhh, no, no, no - you started the bet, so you get to call it :allovrjr:

I'll have to take some time to think about what I want.

M2
12-15-2004, 05:46 PM
Ah, but beyond a certain point, our archives are like the Library at Alexandria.

Actually I think we're underarchived. I'm amazed we never got the 2003 Lidle signing thread in the archives. Likewise, Sandy's 1940 World Series thread isn't in there. A lot of pre-season predictions didn't make it either.

Redsland
12-15-2004, 09:42 PM
Agreed. I meant in the sense that the Library of Alexandria's collection, which was once the pride of antiquity, is now lost. Not unlike countless "Caption This Picture" threads. ;)

M2
12-15-2004, 09:45 PM
Agreed. I meant in the sense that the Library of Alexandria's collection, which was once the pride of antiquity, is now lost. Not unlike countless "Caption This Picture" threads. ;)

So if this thread isn't preserved we could be looking at a new Dark Ages, hmm ...

CougarQuest
12-15-2004, 10:55 PM
I'm willing to bet anyone who will take it that Corey Lidle outperforms Ramon Ortiz in 2005. Any taker?
What are the categories to define "outperforms"?

MWM
12-15-2004, 11:00 PM
What are the categories to define "outperforms"?

Name it. All of them. OPS against, WHIP, ERA (park adjusted).

wheels
12-15-2004, 11:02 PM
Not that I'm all about Ramon MWM, but I just have a strong distaste for what Lidle brings to the mound.

Maybe I don't have enough familiarity with Ortiz to breed that type of contempt, but I'll take that bet.

Just for the fun of it...Not that I'm confident that I'll win or anything.

Jpup
12-16-2004, 07:48 AM
Here is the question I ask myself after this trade. Are the Reds a better baseball team today than they were yesterday because of this deal? The answer has to be yes. I really like the trade. I think he will win 12 or 13 games.

Everyone seams to think that not tendering DeAngelo Jimenez another contract is a bad thing. Guys, it's DeAngelo Jimenez, Ryan Freel is a better player and cheaper too.

Maybe this means that the "Kearns Project" is going well.

I'm optimistic. :thumbup:

DoogMinAmo
12-16-2004, 07:59 AM
Here is the question I ask myself after this trade. Are the Reds a better baseball team today than they were yesterday because of this deal? The answer has to be yes. I really like the trade. I think he will win 12 or 13 games.

Everyone seams to think that not tendering DeAngelo Jimenez another contract is a bad thing. Guys, it's DeAngelo Jimenez, Ryan Freel is a better player and cheaper too.

Maybe this means that the "Kearns Project" is going well.

I'm optimistic. :thumbup:

Better player or not, its not wise to get caught up in a "is not, is too" arguement. However, you can not deny that Jimenez indeed has SOME value, and it would be wise to capitalize. Nontendering, as far as I am concerned, is not even an option. We sign him, we either play him or trade him, end of story. Nontendering is reserved for players with very little or distant past, and no future, of which Jimenez is neither. Stat line:

.270 AVG, .364 OBP, 12 HRs, 13 SB, 67 RBI, and most importantly, he led the league in pitches taken per at bat. I see value there.

Ravenlord
12-16-2004, 08:05 AM
Everyone seams to think that not tendering DeAngelo Jimenez another contract is a bad thing. Guys, it's DeAngelo Jimenez, Ryan Freel is a better player and cheaper too.the play Freel at 3B and put Kearns back to where he's useful defensivly.

Jimenez vs. other MLB seconbasemen:
AVG 13th (270)
OBP t-4th (364)
SLG 13th (394)
OPS 11th (758)
# Pit 2nd (2715)
P/PA t-1st (4.2)
Walks 2nd (82)
RC 8th (82.5)
RC/27 t-11th (5.08)
SecA 5th (281)

FPCT 3rd (990)
RF 12th (4.90)
ZR 4th (834)

lollipopcurve
12-16-2004, 08:47 AM
The stats on D'Angelo don't lie, except for the fielding stats, which I think it would be safe to say have been inflated by the long infield grass at GAB. Are there home-away splits on fielding stats?

Ravenlord
12-16-2004, 09:07 AM
The stats on D'Angelo don't lie, except for the fielding stats, which I think it would be safe to say have been inflated by the long infield grass at GAB. Are there home-away splits on fielding stats?
not on what i have to work with. but the 88 games i kept score on (41 away) have his fielding percentage better on the road. the grass wouldn't affect his Range Factor, but would effect his Zone Rating. but considering how high he is on the ZR scale, i don't think he could be lower than 5th or 6th factoring out the grass at Cinci.

Falls City Beer
12-16-2004, 09:41 AM
I'm willing to bet anyone who will take it that Corey Lidle outperforms Ramon Ortiz in 2005. Any taker?

There's not one doubt in my mind that Lidle will outperform Ortiz in 2005. Everything in their statistical profiles suggests that will be the case.

Ravenlord
12-16-2004, 09:44 AM
There's not one doubt in my mind that Lidle will outperform Ortiz in 2005. Everything in their statistical profiles suggests that will be the case.
i'll agree with that. when i get done finsishing my Christmas shopping today, i'll start working on some of my 2005 projections.

oregonred
12-16-2004, 02:52 PM
This is one of the most entertainiming/best threads I've ever seen on the forum.

Sure I'd like Clement instead, but I doubt the Reds were ever going to outbid the Angels et. al. at 10M per for Clement... but I'm fine with the deal as it upgraded a pathetic staff. You've got a guy with some tools, playoff experience and some past success under control for a couple of years. History shows he'll be a disaster in a Reds uniform (the Dempster law of Gulletization), but at least you've got a guy who has the POTENTIAL to be a solid starter. With the Cards/Braves he magically wins 18 and posts a 4 ERA, with the Reds...

Gardner, Pauly, Wagner and Coffee weren't in the deal which makes this trade anything but a disaster and low risk.

IMO, Ortiz would NOT have been non-tendered. The Angeles bought out his option for 100K not to have to pay $5.5M next season. They would have budgeted the $3.5-3.8 he'd get in arbitration. These guys have a $100M payroll and cash to burn remember?

The market for serviceable #3 type guys with any service time is $4-5M. That's just reality. In this case at least the Reds aren't committed to anything beyond 2006 with Wilson and beyond the present with Ortiz.

princeton
12-16-2004, 03:06 PM
There's not one doubt in my mind that Lidle will outperform Ortiz in 2005.

such conviction. Since you've already coughed up a child without batting an eye, how's about we go with something more interesting?

Care to bet your soul on it?

Red Leader
12-16-2004, 03:28 PM
such conviction. Since you've already coughed up a child without batting an eye, how's about we go with something more interesting?

Care to bet your soul on it?

How about 1 year's subscription to redszone for everyone that has posted in this thread? :eek: