PDA

View Full Version : RUMOR - RUMOR: Kearns' possible destination



red-in-la
02-19-2006, 04:01 PM
My source has heard this from one of HIS sources, so it is at least third hand....it is so iffy in terms of a RUMOR that I almost didn't post it......so some of you more informed may want to read no further....but here it is.

Apparently there is the framework of a deal in place, which is dependent upon the ST health of several players (who are not in the trade) that would have the Reds make a multi-player deal with an unknown AL West team.

The Reds would send Kearns, Homer Bailey and Edwin Encarnacion to this unidentified AL West team for a "difference maker" starting pitcher, a 2B prospect and a PTBNL.

I am not saying I like this or that it makes any sense, I am just passing along what my source told me.

Apparently, the two players on the Reds who have to show they are "healthy" are Paul Wilson and Eric Milton. My source says that someone very very high up in the Reds believes that if Wilson and Milton can show they can produce around 200 innings a piece, then this higher up person believes that adding a "difference maker" pitcher could make the Reds competitive (I hate that word).

The other part of this is that if Kearns is traded, Dunn will stay at 1B and Denorfia will become the starting RF.

OnBaseMachine
02-19-2006, 04:05 PM
If true, for Kearns, Homer, and Edwin Encarnacion, the return had better be Rich Harden as the difference maker, Kevin Melillo as the 2B prospect...or else we get the bad end of the deal.

Or

Ervin Santana, Brandon Wood, and Dallas McPherson from the Angels.

Aronchis
02-19-2006, 04:07 PM
You really need to stop. Not only is this not true, but any "rumor" that is "waiting" for the Reds to "see" if Wilson and Milton can pitch 200 innings is a load of..............

johngalt
02-19-2006, 04:08 PM
What about Bartolo Colon and Howie Kendrick along with the PTBNL? That seems like a possibility too.

traderumor
02-19-2006, 04:11 PM
You really need to stop. Not only is this not true, but any "rumor" that is "waiting" for the Reds to "see" if Wilson and Milton can pitch 200 innings is a load of..............Exactly.

red-in-la
02-19-2006, 04:13 PM
Good thought OBM...since I know little about the AL West (other than the Angels). My source's personal opinion was that the pitcher was Danny Haren (ex-Card starter) but he did not know that for sure.

I believe that the term "difference maker" was used because it isn't a true Ace like Harden.

It could be John Lackey from the Angels or Meche from the Mariners....just my thoughts.

red-in-la
02-19-2006, 04:15 PM
You really need to stop. Not only is this not true, but any "rumor" that is "waiting" for the Reds to "see" if Wilson and Milton can pitch 200 innings is a load of..............

I have no idea if it is true.....that's why they call it a rumor. I said I almost didn't post it because I had my doubts. Sorry if you don't like the info....I said early on, many of you might not want to even bother reading it.

Tommyjohn25
02-19-2006, 04:16 PM
You really need to stop. Not only is this not true, but any "rumor" that is "waiting" for the Reds to "see" if Wilson and Milton can pitch 200 innings is a load of..............


I see nothing wrong with posting a rumor. It was clarified more than once that it likely untrue. This makes for good conversation while all of us are drooling over seeing Reds baseball again in a month and a half.

As for the rumor, not sure how I feel about it. But i've stated that if we get a true ace in our rotation, I would be satisfied.

Tommyjohn25
02-19-2006, 04:19 PM
Good thought OBM...since I know little about the AL West (other than the Angels). My source's personal opinion was that the pitcher was Danny Haren (ex-Card starter) but he did not know that for sure.

I believe that the term "difference maker" was used because it isn't a true Ace like Harden.

It could be John Lackey from the Angels or Meche from the Mariners....just my thoughts.

Ugh, don't know if i'd give up that much for anybody on THAT list. But maybe I'm over valuing due to my Reds colored beer goggles.

OnBaseMachine
02-19-2006, 04:25 PM
Good thought OBM...since I know little about the AL West (other than the Angels). My source's personal opinion was that the pitcher was Danny Haren (ex-Card starter) but he did not know that for sure.

I believe that the term "difference maker" was used because it isn't a true Ace like Harden.

It could be John Lackey from the Angels or Meche from the Mariners....just my thoughts.

Lackey is a solid pitcher but not a difference maker. Meche has bene hurt a lot, and at this point is no better than what we got.

For our best pitching prospect(by default), Austin Kearns, and EE, I want either Harden, Haren, or Santana - along with Melillo or Kendrick/Wood. McPherson would have to be included in the deal if it involved the Angels.

wheels
02-19-2006, 04:44 PM
The idea that EE would be involved in a deal makes me a bit squeamish.

That is, unless they're getting a SS in return and subsequently slide Felipe over to third.

That's probably not what Krivsky is (allegedly) considering though. If a trade happened we'd get to see a whole lot of Aurilia and Womack.

Barbarossa
02-19-2006, 05:01 PM
I could see the Reds trading Kearns for pitching. Could even see trading Encarnacion for pitching. But trading Homer Bailey for pitching? Nah.:thumbdown

WVRed
02-19-2006, 05:05 PM
I have a feeling it would be Ervin Santana and Howie Kendrick. Just my guess.

Edskin
02-19-2006, 05:11 PM
I'd much rather live with Womack and Aurilia with an actual "difference making" starting pitcher, then keep the status quo. Any deal that nets us ACTUAL above-average starting pitchers is a good deal.

KronoRed
02-19-2006, 05:13 PM
I'm afraid of any deal like this

Aronchis
02-19-2006, 05:13 PM
I'd much rather live with Womack and Aurilia with an actual "difference making" starting pitcher, then keep the status quo. Any deal that nets us ACTUAL above-average starting pitchers is a good deal.

Not if EE is included. Guys like him don't grow on tree's. How undervalued he is now and how missed he would be if let go.

traderumor
02-19-2006, 05:17 PM
I have no idea if it is true.....that's why they call it a rumor. I said I almost didn't post it because I had my doubts. Sorry if you don't like the info....I said early on, many of you might not want to even bother reading it.I think you should have trusted your first instinct

Redsland
02-19-2006, 05:24 PM
There's no harm in floating a rumor.

ril's shown himself to have a few bugs hidden in a few planters. And it's interesting to "know" who's being talked about and what their preceived value is. On both sides.

The health issue will scuttle this one, but at least we "know" what the FO is up to. Impact pitching is being sought at this very moment. EE's available. So is Bailey. I think all of that is interesting and fodder for discussion.

Spitball
02-19-2006, 05:29 PM
Hmmm...I'm thinking the Angels and Dodgers have too much wealth in the youth department to trade a difference maker for youth. The Padres might take that package for Peavy...and that package has the sounds of a possible deal for Zito.

Redsland
02-19-2006, 05:36 PM
After rereading, another interesting thing I notice is that Denorfia would fill the hole in the lineup (in RF) rather than Hatteberg (at 1B). Recall that last week the press was saying Denorfia would probably be headed to Louisville. So apparently if we add pitching, we're going with youth over vets.

pedro
02-19-2006, 05:48 PM
Ok, say it's the Padres and that deal is on the table for Peavy, Josh Barfield and a PTNL?

I might do that.

Jpup
02-19-2006, 05:48 PM
My source has heard this from one of HIS sources, so it is at least third hand....it is so iffy in terms of a RUMOR that I almost didn't post it......so some of you more informed may want to read no further....but here it is.

Apparently there is the framework of a deal in place, which is dependent upon the ST health of several players (who are not in the trade) that would have the Reds make a multi-player deal with an unknown AL West team.

The Reds would send Kearns, Homer Bailey and Edwin Encarnacion to this unidentified AL West team for a "difference maker" starting pitcher, a 2B prospect and a PTBNL.

I am not saying I like this or that it makes any sense, I am just passing along what my source told me.

Apparently, the two players on the Reds who have to show they are "healthy" are Paul Wilson and Eric Milton. My source says that someone very very high up in the Reds believes that if Wilson and Milton can show they can produce around 200 innings a piece, then this higher up person believes that adding a "difference maker" pitcher could make the Reds competitive (I hate that word).

The other part of this is that if Kearns is traded, Dunn will stay at 1B and Denorfia will become the starting RF.

I can't see this at all. Trading EdE would be a huge mistake and I am not in favor of trading Bailey or Kearns either. I hope it's just a rumor.

westofyou
02-19-2006, 05:54 PM
The Reds would send Kearns, Homer Bailey and Edwin Encarnacion to this unidentified AL West team for a "difference maker" starting pitcher, a 2B prospect and a PTBNL.Teams don't not dig themselves out of holes quickly by trading 3 players, whom they control for a few more years for prospects and a starting pitcher.


I'd much rather live with Womack and Aurilia with an actual "difference making" starting pitcher, then keep the status quo. Any deal that nets us ACTUAL above-average starting pitchers is a good deal.

Couldn't disagree more, Womack and Aurilia will be collecting their pension when EE is still playing, any starter for that package would be more magic beans than cow.

reds44
02-19-2006, 06:01 PM
All I know is if we are giving up Kearns, and are #1 and #2 prospects, we better be getting a 100% sure difference making pitcher, and a helluva 2nd base prospect.

Spitball
02-19-2006, 06:10 PM
Wait, I guessed the Padres and then realized the rumor involved an AL West team. It could be Zito and Kevin Melillo. I'm afraid I'd do it unless something better is offered. The Reds can develop outfielders. The Reds can develop third basemen. They can't develop starting pitchers, especially those of Zito's quality. Bailey might buck the trend, but history is against him developing.

If Zito is on the move, Beane will surely want a team's top starting prospect. I'm not sure Bailey is "major league ready" enough to fit his formula.

corkedbat
02-19-2006, 06:22 PM
If Milton can work 200+ innings there's no telling how many HRs he can give up.

Falls City Beer
02-19-2006, 06:23 PM
I doubt that there's anything to this. But I'd gladly surrender Bailey, Kearns and Encarnacion for an ace--even one in his late 20s, early 30s. I know everyone's jazzed about jettisoning the front office--but I'm more stoked by the notion of chucking the old players. With the exception of someone like Dunn, offense grows on trees. If you're not a total idiot, you can field a contending offense year in and year out.

Good lord, this sounds like a dream come true. Nevertheless, a dream.

westofyou
02-19-2006, 06:26 PM
If you're not a total idiot, you can field a contending offense year in and year out. That's true but world class 3rd basemen don't grow on trees and have eluded the Reds almost as regularly as pitching has.

reds44
02-19-2006, 06:28 PM
Wait, I guessed the Padres and then realized the rumor involved an AL West team. It could be Zito and Kevin Melillo. I'm afraid I'd do it unless something better is offered. The Reds can develop outfielders. The Reds can develop third basemen. They can't develop starting pitchers, especially those of Zito's quality. Bailey might buck the trend, but history is against him developing.

If Zito is on the move, Beane will surely want a team's top starting prospect. I'm not sure Bailey is "major league ready" enough to fit his formula.
Very good point.

reds44
02-19-2006, 06:33 PM
Wait, if this did go down what would happen to the lineup? Would Freel go over to 3rd? Or would RA go to 3rd and Freel, Womack, and the prospect battle it out at 2nd? Who would bat 4th?

To be complete honest with you this trade seems more fantasy, then reality. It just seems wierd trading Kearns, and your 2 best prospects in the same deal. I am not saying it would be a bad deal, just soemthing you don't see all the time.

corkedbat
02-19-2006, 06:34 PM
It all depends on the pitcher. I wouldn't do Encarnacion alone for Meche, let alone throw in Kearns and Bailey to add a 2B and a prospect. If it were a name top of the rotation stud like Harden or someone of similar potential, I'd go for it.

What if it's Zito and Meillo plus a PBTNL? Zito's certainly a name starter, but I'm a little gun-shy aroung him.

It would leave you with Freel/Aurilla at 3B, unless there's a late-signing FA out there that I'm not aware of. Maybe the Pirate's would do a Milton-for-Randa deal. :cool:

westofyou
02-19-2006, 06:35 PM
The A's have an expensive 3rd sacker who has more than a few gold gloves.

TOBTTReds
02-19-2006, 06:37 PM
With the exception of someone like Dunn, offense grows on trees. If you're not a total idiot, you can field a contending offense year in and year out.

Good lord, this sounds like a dream come true. Nevertheless, a dream.

I disagree with this. You only feel it grows on trees because you are a Reds fans. You know Braves fans think good pitching grows on trees.

If offense grew on trees, the Astros would have dominated the world, and the Cubs would have made the playoffs.

I understand that the REDS could field a contending offense if we traded those guys, but even an ace-type pitcher wouldn't help this team be better than .500 if our offense falls back this year.

The Brewers had an average offense (16th in runs scored), and above average pitching (10th in ERA) and still were .500.

corkedbat
02-19-2006, 06:37 PM
Sorry spitball, missed your mention of Zito. That was my thought too if this has legs.

pedro
02-19-2006, 06:37 PM
I think the Angels are the only logical team for this rumor.

WVRed
02-19-2006, 06:46 PM
I think the Angels are the only logical team for this rumor.

Not necessarily, Texas is possible.

Ian Kinsler and one of the DVD trio.(Danks, Volquez, and Diamond for those following at home)

westofyou
02-19-2006, 06:49 PM
Not necessarily, Texas is possible.They wouldn't be able to get EE back and they need offense like a the Reds do.

Johnny Footstool
02-19-2006, 06:55 PM
So the Reds give up their hottest commodity (Kearns), the best prospect to come out of their system recently (EE), and the top-rated prospect in the organization (Bailey) in a deal for one non-ace pitcher, a 2B prospect, and a PTBNL?

Sounds like your source is smoking crack.

lollipopcurve
02-19-2006, 06:56 PM
I think the Angels are the only logical team for this rumor.

I'd love to see Howie Kendrick come to the Reds. I just don't see the Angels sacrificing a starter at this point. They're pretty thin there, and Colon is considered something of a question mark, health/conditioning-wise.
The only team with in the AL West with spare pitching is Oakland.

lollipopcurve
02-19-2006, 06:59 PM
So the Reds give up their hottest commodity (Kearns), the best prospect to come out of their system recently (EE), and the top-rated prospect in the organization (Bailey) in a deal for one non-ace pitcher, a 2B prospect, and a PTBNL?

I agree that it seems like someone's wishful thinking. I'm sure Krivsky can make a deal like this -- I just hope he's not that desperate to "make something happen."

pedro
02-19-2006, 07:07 PM
Not necessarily, Texas is possible.

Ian Kinsler and one of the DVD trio.(Danks, Volquez, and Diamond for those following at home)


What SP do they Rangers have to offer who is a difference maker NOW?

KearnsyEars
02-19-2006, 07:10 PM
no way, aint gonna happen

KronoRed
02-19-2006, 07:33 PM
What SP do they Rangers have to offer who is a difference maker NOW?
Do they still have Chan Ho?


;)

Spitball
02-19-2006, 07:40 PM
I think the Angels are the only logical team for this rumor.

The Angels have one of the deepest systems in all of baseball. They are contenders. I just can't believe they would move a difference maker starter for youth.

M2
02-19-2006, 07:46 PM
The A's have Eric Chavez. The Mariners have Adrian Beltre. The Rangers have Hank Blalock. I can't imagine Encarnacion's heading to any of those places.

The Angels just dealt for Edgardo Alfonso with Chone Figgins and Dallas McPherson as backup options and perhaps Brandon Wood coming as soon as 2007. Encarnacion to that division just doesn't seem to make a lot of sense. At best it would be a case of a team bleeding the Reds for no real reason.

I doubt Krivsky, or anybody really, would put up with that. So that's a gaping hole off the jump.

The Rangers and and Mariners don't have much in the way of pitching to deal either.

r-i-l, I've got to agree with what others saying, this one sounds like wishful thinking on someone's part.

OnBaseMachine
02-19-2006, 07:50 PM
This is a little off topic, but I was just thinking of something. Remember last December when someone on here reported that the Reds and Angels were close to a deal that would send Dustin Moseley to an AL West team for a right handed pitcher? Everyone was speculating it was John Lackey...it turned out to be Ramon Ortiz.

Too bad for us that it wasn't Lackey. He had a great year last year - 1.33 WHIP, 3.44 ERA and 199 strikeouts in 209 innings. Our rotation would be in much better shape had Lackey been the righthander instead of Ortiz.

Spitball
02-19-2006, 07:56 PM
The A's have an expensive 3rd sacker who has more than a few gold gloves.

True, but Beene's deals are rarely one tiered. I'd expect there would be some additional movement with the deal.

flyer85
02-19-2006, 09:30 PM
I have a feeling it would be Ervin Santana and Howie Kendrick. Just my guess.My thought but the last thing the Angels need is a 3B. They have Mcpherson and having followed Wood the consensus seems to be he will end up at 3rd and Aybar will be the SS.

I see this deal as a non-starter for the Reds anyway(even if it is Colon or Lackey).

flyer85
02-19-2006, 09:34 PM
I'd love to see Howie Kendrick come to the Reds. There are a bunch of Angel prospects that I like better than Kendrick who can hit but plays very questionable defense at best, and as a 2B there is no where else to go.

flyer85
02-19-2006, 09:37 PM
The Angels have one of the deepest systems in all of baseball. They creatinly have a large number of close to major league ready impact type prospects. They and Arizona seem to have the best group of close to major league ready top prospects.

Krusty
02-19-2006, 09:51 PM
This has Barry Zito and Oakland written all over it. Look at the Hudson's and Mulder's deals last year. Young and cheaper talent that consisted of some of the better young prospects from the Braves and Cardinals.

westofyou
02-19-2006, 09:53 PM
Look at the Hudson's and Mulder's deals last year.
Two trades to shore up playoff teasm, obtaining Zito is an ear rings on a pig move for a team as shallow and awash with faults as the Reds are.

Krusty
02-19-2006, 09:55 PM
Two trades to shore up playoff teasm, obtaining Zito is an ear rings on a pig move for a team as shallow and awash with faults as the Reds are.

But it would be the first trade during Castanelli's ownership. It would send a message to Reds fans they will do anything to right the ship. Acquiring Zito would be a step in that direction.

Do I agree that is the way to go? Depends on how Krivsky sees things.

westofyou
02-19-2006, 09:57 PM
It would send a message to Reds fans they will do anything to right the ship.

People used to go to the doctor to "bleed" themselves of the sickness they had.

That's what this "proposal" is the baseball equivalent of.

flyer85
02-19-2006, 10:00 PM
Zito would be worthless to the Reds. One amd done on a team that needs a lot more pitching than just him.

Krusty
02-19-2006, 10:02 PM
So which way is it? You don't want to trade Dunn or other Reds that could bring in young talent in rebuilding this club and at the same time gain payroll flexibility. Yet others don't want to bring in successful pitchers like Zito because we are several years from contending.

So the way people are sounding, Dan O'Brien's approach is the way to go.......pay alittle attention to the major league club and keep status quo while take the time rebuilding the club to be a possible contender five years from now.

(Hey WOY, this isn't directed at you but the nature of the thread.)

flyer85
02-19-2006, 10:08 PM
DanO built nothing. He had some opportunities and tear it down by trading the likes of Graves, Casey, Jr, Wilson and others when they had value and chose to do nothing.

Everyone wants a shortcut. Guess what, there aren't any. They have to develop their own pitching because their farm system is so devoid of any real talent they can't afford to trade any productive offensive player because there is no replacement in the minors.

The last Reds regime made the bed that the current one has to lie in which is they to have to wait until the farm system can produce some semblance of major league pitching.

Trading away the cheap years of young players for the expensive years of older players is no way to build a foundation for future success.

gonelong
02-19-2006, 10:10 PM
It would send a message to Reds fans they will do anything to right the ship.

That would show me they are more intested in public opinion then putting a winner on the field. Save the statements for press conferences, not baseball transactions.

GL

westofyou
02-19-2006, 10:12 PM
Maximize the value of your players by not overpaying for past performances (IE Eric Milton) Build the offense around Dunn and levearge the corner players who are approaching becoming costly into a player who isn't getting paid for something he already did. Chase some on the cusp pitchers and defense up the middle and leave the Zitos and their ilk for teams that are closer to competing.

The fact is WK said on the radio that the franchise was not as close as the owner thought it was and that part of his job now was helping everybody understand where they are and how long it will take to to turn it around.

Trades should be looked at assumng that player aquired will be there (be owned by the Reds) to help the team the following 2-3 years, Barry Zito is completely the oposite of that.

Krusty
02-19-2006, 10:13 PM
DanO built nothing. He had some opportunities and tear it down by trading the likes of Graves, Casey, Jr, Wilson and others when they had value and chose to do nothing.

Everyone wants a shortcut. Guess what, there aren't any. They have to develop their own pitching because their farm system is so devoid of any real talent they can't afford to trade any productive offensive player because there is no replacement in the minors.

The last Reds regime made the bed that the current one has to lie in which is they to have to wait until the farm system can produce some semblance of major league pitching.

Trading away the cheap years of young players for the expensive years of older players is no way to build a foundation for future success.

Here's the problem......Dunn and Griffey's salaries makes up one third of the payroll. There is no way you can be successful when two players are getting that much of the payroll. You would think the Reds would have learned when Larkin and Griffey took up a third of the payroll. Minnesota, Cleveland and Oakland showed that you have to spread the payroll among several players.

There should be no sacred cows. If you want to do it right, then you put everyone on the trading block and try to get the best packages of young talent in return while gaining payroll flexibility.

Falls City Beer
02-19-2006, 10:14 PM
Zito would be worthless to the Reds. One amd done on a team that needs a lot more pitching than just him.

No more or less useless than Encarnacion and Kearns--I agree, either way, contending is a long shot, but we know just how long of a long shot it is with Kearns and Encarnacion. We don't know how long it is with Zito. Something tells me it's a lot, lot closer with Zito minus Kearns and Encarnacion.

Look, I'd be making the same kinds of suggestions for pitching acquisitions even if the Reds had no surplus of offense. But they do have a surplus, which only doubles my confidence in a move like this, if there's any reality to it, and by "it," I mean a deal involving a Zito caliber pitcher.

reds44
02-19-2006, 10:15 PM
For all of you saying Zito would be worthless:

If it is Zito we would be getting, I am sure we wouldn't pull the trigger on the deal until we got him to agree to an extension. I don't see it being Zito though, because we don't have the money for him. A deal for some like that that would have to include Dunn, Junior, or Eric P. Milton.

Ervin Santan and the Angels seem like the most compatable team to deal with.

westofyou
02-19-2006, 10:15 PM
. There is no way you can be successful when two players are getting that much of the payroll.

Yes there is and one way isn't trading away starting 3rd baseman and Rf's who make 2.2 Million together.

Krusty
02-19-2006, 10:17 PM
People can say what they want about me banging my drum about trading Adam Dunn but trading Adam Dunn would bring us a return that the Indians got when they traded Bartolo Colon to Montreal.

And one more thing.....if it will be three to five years before the Reds are contenders again, don't you think Junior might be more receptive finishing his career playing for a contender that could possibly go to the World Series. What's a Hall of Fame career if you didn't even go to one World Series? Junior would be the next Ernie Banks.

reds44
02-19-2006, 10:18 PM
People can say what they want about me banging my drum about trading Adam Dunn but trading Adam Dunn would bring us a return that the Indians got when they traded Bartolo Colon to Montreal.

I agree. If you want this team to show drastic improvement quickly, Dunn needs to be traded. Otherwise you are going to have to trade something like a promising Kearns, and 2 of your top 3 prospects.

westofyou
02-19-2006, 10:21 PM
People can say what they want about me banging my drum about trading Adam Dunn but trading Adam Dunn would bring us a return that the Indians got when they traded Bartolo Colon to Montreal.
No it wouldn't.

This era has made pitching a premium and the fact that MLB let the Expos cannibalize their system in hopes of generating the owners some more money out of their red handed step child only proves that.

A. Pitching is really scarce

B. Minaya screwed the Expos and now he can beat up on them as well

Krusty
02-19-2006, 10:21 PM
I agree. If you want this team to show drastic improvement quickly, Dunn needs to be traded. Otherwise you are going to have to trade a promising Kearns, and 2 of your top 3 prospects.

As the Sporting News Ken Rosenthal wrote in his past column, trading Adam Dunn would have fans hating Krivsky for doing it. But it might end up being the best thing for the franchise and rebuilding this team and gaining payroll flexiblity.

Signing Dunn to a two-year deal makes it more sweet for other teams to be interested in him.

flyer85
02-19-2006, 10:21 PM
Here's the problem......Dunn and Griffey's salaries makes up one third of the payroll. There is no way you can be successful when two players are getting that much of the payroll. Sure you can. It is all about value, not about how much. If the Reds have expensive guys who don't produce they are in a hole they can't likely climb out of. When you have expensive guys they just have to be offset by inexpensive guys who also give a lot of production. That's exactly how the A's won paying a lot of money to guys like Tejada, Giambi, Damon, Dye, etc while enjoying the inexpensive years of Mulder, Hudson and Zito.

There is no formula for salary construction of a roster to ensure success, it is simply to put together a roster(in total) that is productive in terms of the amount of money spent.

BP posted a column on the Dunn article and what a good deal it is likely to be for the Reds because even though they will pay him 31M over three years his PECOTA forecasts 38M in earned value. Contrast that to the Konerko deal where he will be paid 60M with earned value of 19M leaving a 41M dollar deficit. The Reds need to focus on those positive earned value contracts and stay away from the huge negative ones(like Milton and Jr).

reds44
02-19-2006, 10:24 PM
As the Sporting News Ken Rosenthal wrote in his past column, trading Adam Dunn would have fans hating Krivsky for doing it. But it might end up being the best thing for the franchise and rebuilding this team and gaining payroll flexiblity.

Signing Dunn to a two-year deal makes it more sweet for other teams to be interested in him.
If we started to win, fans would get over trading him in a heartbeat.

Krusty
02-19-2006, 10:25 PM
Sure you can. It is all about value, not about how much. If the Reds have expensive guys who don't produce they are in a hole they can't likely climb out of. When you have expensive guys they just have to be offset by inexpensive guys who also give a lot of production. That's exactly how the A's won paying a lot of money to guys like Tejada, Giambi, Damon, Dye, etc while enjoying the inexpensive years of Mulder, Hudson and Zito.

There is no formula for salary construction of a roster to ensure success, it is simply to put together a roster(in total) that is productive in terms of the amount of money spent.

BP posted a column on the Dunn article and what a good deal it is likely to be for the Reds because even though they will pay him 31M over three years his PECOTA forecasts 38M in earned value. Contrast that to the Konerko deal where he will be paid 60M with earned value of 19M leaving a 41M dollar deficit. The Reds need to focus on those positive earned value contracts and stay away from the huge negative ones(like Milton and Jr).

Like I said, two players's salaries that consists of one third of the payroll won't make this team contenders. When Larkin and Junior were on the Reds, the team had no payroll room to pay for starting pitching. Maybe the payroll will be bumped up to 65 million but with arbitration eligible players like Lopez, Kearns and Pena getting increases each year, there is no room to bring in competent pitching. That is more reason why you need to move the likes of Dunn and Griffey for cheaper talent.

flyer85
02-19-2006, 10:27 PM
As the Sporting News Ken Rosenthal wrote in his past column, trading Adam Dunn would have fans hating Krivsky for doing it. But it might end up being the best thing for the franchise and rebuilding this team and gaining payroll flexiblity.this team doesn't need increased payroll flexibility at the moment. This offseason there was nothing to spend it on.

They need to build. It is am simple as that. If the FO agrees the best way to build is to trade Dunn, then go for it. But the payroll flexibility crap is red herring. The Reds have little to spend it on internally and nothing to spend it on externally.

Krusty
02-19-2006, 10:28 PM
If we started to win, fans would get over trading him in a heartbeat.

If we started to win.

Based on the past five years, do you see anything that would change that? What good is having Griffey and Dunn on this team if they continue to lose?

reds44
02-19-2006, 10:28 PM
If we started to win.

Based on the past five years, do you see anything that would change that? What good is having Griffey and Dunn on this team if they continue to lose?
You are making my point for me.

westofyou
02-19-2006, 10:30 PM
Like I said, two players's salaries that consists of one third of the payroll won't make this team contenders.

88-74 - 58 Million dollar payroll

Jason Kendall $ 10,571,429
Eric Chavez $ 8,500,000


$ 19,071,429 33% of the total payroll.

flyer85
02-19-2006, 10:31 PM
Like I said, two players's salaries that consists of one third of the payroll won't make this team contenders. Nor will having a roster comprised of paying everyone 2.5M dollars. It is all about production and talent not the salary composition of your roster.

The Reds don't have enough talent on their roster to win(at least without a huge dose of luck and career years).

The previous regime had a chance to do what the Marlins did this offseason and tear down the roster while acquiring a bunch of young pitching(hoping 2-3 pan out). They chose not to and chose to buy high and sell low and we see how that has worked out.

flyer85
02-19-2006, 10:35 PM
88-74 - 58 Million dollar payroll

Jason Kendall $ 10,571,429
Eric Chavez $ 8,500,000


$ 19,071,429 33% of the total payroll.
and this year the Cards are going to spend 26.5M on two players which is almost 1/3 of their payroll. I guess they aren't planning on winning this season.

This year the A's will spend $21M on the above pair, likely more than a third.

Krusty
02-19-2006, 10:41 PM
Nor will having a roster comprised of paying everyone 2.5M dollars. It is all about production and talent not the salary composition of your roster.

The Reds don't have enough talent on their roster to win(at least without a huge dose of luck and career years).

The previous regime had a chance to do what the Marlins did this offseason and tear down the roster while acquiring a bunch of young pitching(hoping 2-3 pan out). They chose not to and chose to buy high and sell low and we see how that has worked out.

And the Reds need to take the Marlins approach. Look at the deal with Boston. They insisted Boston take Lowell if they wanted Beckett that bad. And they got young talent and payroll flexiblity. Florida got top shortstop prospect Hanley Ramirez along with pitchers Anibal Sanchez and Jesus Delgado. They also got the Red Sox to take the entire $18 million owed to Lowell


If someone wants Adam Dunn bad enough, you make them take Eric Milton too. You get young players in return and payroll flexibility for down the road.

flyer85
02-19-2006, 10:47 PM
And the Reds need to take the Marlins approach. Look at the deal with Boston. They insisted Boston take Lowell if they wanted Beckett that bad. And they got young talent and payroll flexiblity.

If someone wants Adam Dunn bad enough, you make them take Eric Milton too. You get young players in return and payroll flexibility for down the road.The point is you have to have a plan. A plan where you decide who you want to build around and who you don't need. Marlins decided to build around Willis and Carbrera and traded everyone else. The Reds couldn't do it under DanO because they were rubbing their rabbits foot hoping to win now while half heartedly implementing a long term building plan. I really haven't seen anything that tells me the current regime is not going to try the same thing. The difference may only be that there is no way Krivsky could be as incompetent as DanO was.

Falls City Beer
02-19-2006, 10:49 PM
No. It's very simple. Very.

Keep irreplaceable talent (Dunn). Trade replaceable talent (Kearns, Pena, Encarnacion if you must) for less replaceable talent (Zito, Livan, Clement). All the while flip cusp-y talent like Lopez and said acquired older pitchers for an even greater return than what Kearns or Encarnacion could POSSIBLY bring in in young pitching by themselves.

What's a huge fallacy is falling in love with young offensive talent just because it's young, cheap, offensive talent. Sure, it's a fine commodity, but not even close to the most valuable commodity in baseball. There's plenty more where that came from.

flyer85
02-19-2006, 10:55 PM
No. It's very simple. Very.

Keep irreplaceable talent (Dunn). Trade replaceable talent (Kearns, Pena, Encarnacion if you must) for less replaceable talent (Zito, Livan, Clement). All the while flip cusp-y talent like Lopez and said acquired older pitchers for an even greater return than what Kearns or Encarnacion could POSSIBLY bring in in young pitching by themselves.

What's a huge fallacy is falling in love with young offensive talent just because it's young, cheap, offensive talent. Sure, it's a fine commodity, but not even close to the most valuable commodity in baseball. There's plenty more where that came from.
Reminds of a Paul D quote about the trick in baseball is solving the huge salary inefficiency in the middle.

The stars deserve their money and will earn it. The bottom of the payroll guys will earn it. What baseball still loves to do is pay players huge dollars for average or less production(the inefficiency in the middle).

The key is identifying the players who deserve the money while refusing to dole it out to those who don't. The high payroll teams maybe can spend their way out of those mistakes. the small payroll teams cannot.

KronoRed
02-19-2006, 11:10 PM
If someone wants Adam Dunn bad enough, you make them take Eric Milton too. You get young players in return and payroll flexibility for down the road.
Everything that Dunn can bring Lopez can bring as well, and with Lopez having Boras as an agent we should expect him to demand a HUGE deal in the near future.

reds44
02-19-2006, 11:13 PM
Everything that Dunn can bring Lopez can bring as well, and with Lopez having Boras as an agent we should expect him to demand a HUGE deal in the near future.
If FeLo puts up numbers like he did last year this year, I would take him over Dunn.

SteelSD
02-19-2006, 11:40 PM
Here's the problem......Dunn and Griffey's salaries makes up one third of the payroll. There is no way you can be successful when two players are getting that much of the payroll. You would think the Reds would have learned when Larkin and Griffey took up a third of the payroll. Minnesota, Cleveland and Oakland showed that you have to spread the payroll among several players.

In 2003, the A's produced a team payroll of 50.26 M with Jermaine Dye (11.7M) and Keith Foulke (6.0M). That's 35% of the A's payroll tied up in two guys. Won 96 games that year they did. In 2002, Dye and Justice took up 35.5% of the A's payroll between them. In 2003, the Marlins spent about 31% of their total payroll on Ivan Rodriguez and Luis Castillo. Brad Radke and Torii Hunter take up about a third of Minnesota's payroll. Thank god they've finally got their "Milton" (Joe Mays) off their payroll.

In short, small market teams CAN spend a third of their payroll on two guys (particularly if they're a productive pair). The idea that teams can't win when they do that is a myth. What small market teams can't do is spend 15 millon dollars on guys like Eric Milton, Paul Wilson, and Ramon Ortiz. When they do that, they can't afford to tack on million dollar mistakes like Joe Randa, Tony Womack, and Rich Aurilia. Those investments might seem low-dollar, but they add up.

It's not front-line investments that will kill a small market franchise. It's the mistakes they make on chumps.

M2
02-20-2006, 01:01 AM
If the deal was Kearns and Bailey (and maybe a toss-in from the minors) for Zito and Melillo, I'd be all for it.

Zito's going to be a free agent after this season and a prototype RF and the Red's top-rated prospect is a pretty fair return for the guy. Kearns by himself likely would be better than what Beane got for Hudson. Encarnacion is my jump-off point with that one. The A's don't need him and the Reds are overpaying if he's in there.

I've got no problem rolling the dice on bringing in Zito and trying to keep him. Kearns only has two years before he's a free agent and Bailey could be anything, but those are two of the big chits the Reds have at the moment and that's as far as I'd be willing to go for Zito.

KearnsyEars
02-20-2006, 03:13 AM
No. It's very simple. Very.

Keep irreplaceable talent (Dunn). Trade replaceable talent (Kearns, Pena, Encarnacion if you must) for less replaceable talent (Zito, Livan, Clement). All the while flip cusp-y talent like Lopez and said acquired older pitchers for an even greater return than what Kearns or Encarnacion could POSSIBLY bring in in young pitching by themselves.

What's a huge fallacy is falling in love with young offensive talent just because it's young, cheap, offensive talent. Sure, it's a fine commodity, but not even close to the most valuable commodity in baseball. There's plenty more where that came from.

that is a GREAT post

Gainesville Red
02-20-2006, 04:49 AM
Yeah, I agree. I was kind of on the fence until I read that post.

membengal
02-20-2006, 08:20 AM
I am with WOY and others in here, I don't understand how a trade where the Reds send three of their most tradeable commodities at one time for a pitcher on the cusp of free agency AND who has been FAR from stellar the last few years pitching in a canyon is a rumor I am supposed to be excited about.

Kearns for Zito straight up? OK. Anyone else in that kind of deal, unless it's Womack and/or Aurilia? Not OK.

Edit:

He was basically Aaron Harang last year. Put Harang in an A's uniform and tell me you are ready to deal EE, Bailey and Kearns for him and do it with a straight face...

I like Harang, a lot, but let's be real here.

lollipopcurve
02-20-2006, 08:21 AM
I don't want Zito (one-year and gone, guaranteed), especially for something like Kearns and Bailey (disastrous trade, in my opinion), Contreras (old), Clement (bad contract) or Livan (old, massive workload in recent years).

No one is going to argue that pitching is the most valuable commodity, but the Reds are the last team that should be sacrificing their best young talent for 1-2 years of a veteran pitcher. The team needs arms they can control for a few years. Bailey is a keeper for down the road, in my opinion. Free agency next winter could help. A smart trade will help. Perhaps even a nice #1 draft choice this year will help about the time Bailey is ready. By that time, Zito will be on a LTC with a west coast team (or perhaps in NY), Contreras and Livan will likely be out of baseball, and Clement, at the rate, he's going, will be with his 8th franchise.

WVRed
02-20-2006, 08:44 AM
I am with WOY and others in here, I don't understand how a trade where the Reds send three of their most tradeable commodities at one time for a pitcher on the cusp of free agency AND who has been FAR from stellar the last few years pitching in a canyon is a rumor I am supposed to be excited about.

Kearns for Zito straight up? OK. Anyone else in that kind of deal, unless it's Womack and/or Aurilia? Not OK.

Edit:

He was basically Aaron Harang last year. Put Harang in an A's uniform and tell me you are ready to deal EE, Bailey and Kearns for him and do it with a straight face...

I like Harang, a lot, but let's be real here.

Do that deal straight up, and Billy Beane and probably the rest of baseball is laughing in our face.

Falls City Beer
02-20-2006, 08:51 AM
I don't want Zito (one-year and gone, guaranteed), especially for something like Kearns and Bailey (disastrous trade, in my opinion), Contreras (old), Clement (bad contract) or Livan (old, massive workload in recent years).

No one is going to argue that pitching is the most valuable commodity, but the Reds are the last team that should be sacrificing their best young talent for 1-2 years of a veteran pitcher. The team needs arms they can control for a few years. Bailey is a keeper for down the road, in my opinion. Free agency next winter could help. A smart trade will help. Perhaps even a nice #1 draft choice this year will help about the time Bailey is ready. By that time, Zito will be on a LTC with a west coast team (or perhaps in NY), Contreras and Livan will likely be out of baseball, and Clement, at the rate, he's going, will be with his 8th franchise.

But by limiting your choices to high-end young arms that they can control for a few years, you are limiting your choices for growth to the barest sliver of the pitching market--in short, you are wishing upon a star here.

You HAVE to explore several avenues to turn this thing around, not "hope to grow the minors" or "get that ONE trade that will net us a young, cheap MLB-ready arm" (the equivalent of hitting the PowerBall); the realpolitik of baseball means taking chances, moving bodies, alchemizing lesser chips into somewhat better chips and continually cycling your commodities. Not sitting there waiting for THAT ONE TRADE to come down the chute. Guess what? It's not coming down the chute. You have to make it happen.

Falls City Beer
02-20-2006, 09:00 AM
Edit:

He was basically Aaron Harang last year. Put Harang in an A's uniform and tell me you are ready to deal EE, Bailey and Kearns for him and do it with a straight face...

I like Harang, a lot, but let's be real here.

Zito is equivalent to Harang?!

Good lord, that was good for a morning chuckle. Zito's OPSA, in the AL, was .665; Harang's, in the altogether judyish NL Central was .747. They aren't in the same galaxy.

Spitball
02-20-2006, 09:14 AM
The A's might not need Encarnacion right now, but you never know with Beene. He falls in and out of love with players, especially the high priced ones. He might be ready to move Chavez to gain some payroll room.

Fall City already said it, but the Reds need pitching. They have offense. You will have to overpay a bit to get pitching for offense, but which is harder to develop?

Besides, come the end of July, the Reds might be able to spin the guy around for pitching depth (major league ready pitching prospects).

traderumor
02-20-2006, 09:14 AM
Reminds of a Paul D quote about the trick in baseball is solving the huge salary inefficiency in the middle.

The stars deserve their money and will earn it. The bottom of the payroll guys will earn it. What baseball still loves to do is pay players huge dollars for average or less production(the inefficiency in the middle).

The key is identifying the players who deserve the money while refusing to dole it out to those who don't. The high payroll teams maybe can spend their way out of those mistakes. the small payroll teams cannot.This is a great point and to me what separates the good GMs from the one's getting fired after a few years at the helm. Like paying Milton 8M a year, or Jeff Weaver wanting $40M for 4 years.

traderumor
02-20-2006, 09:18 AM
Zito is equivalent to Harang?!

Good lord, that was good for a morning chuckle. Zito's OPSA, in the AL, was .665; Harang's, in the altogether judyish NL Central was .747. They aren't in the same galaxy.Yea, Zito definitely did a great job as the senior member of the staff after Hudson and Mulder were dealt. I agree he would be a good acquisition according to a trade in the vein of the one M2 supported, for Kearns and Bailey.

Johnny Footstool
02-20-2006, 09:24 AM
There's plenty more where that came from.

No, there isn't. Cheap offensive talent that can perform above MLB average is not something you find in abundance. It might seem that way because the Reds have recently been blessed with that commodity, but there are a dozen other MLB teams who are scratching and overpaying for bats.

If you're going to give up your only in-demand commodity, get more in return than just a band-aid for a broken arm.

Falls City Beer
02-20-2006, 09:30 AM
No, there isn't. Cheap offensive talent that can perform above MLB average is not something you find in abundance. It might seem that way because the Reds have recently been blessed with that commodity, but there are a dozen other MLB teams who are scratching and overpaying for bats.

If you're going to give up your only in-demand commodity, get more in return than just a band-aid for a broken arm.

If Zito's a band-aid, what does that make Kearns and Bailey? A tongue depressor?

Look, I too think, with M2, that it would be ill-advised to dump three chits for one, so I'm all for shopping without Encarnacion. But come on, Kearns and Bailey for Zito? You'd be out of your mind to pass that up.

Offense is all over the place; if you're smart, you can make do, as the Twins, Atlanta, Oakland, and Astros have with the bare essentials offensive-wise and continually compete. Take advantage of the Reds bumper-crop of offense, don't sit on it and watch it rot beneath you.

Spitball
02-20-2006, 09:33 AM
No, there isn't. Cheap offensive talent that can perform above MLB average is not something you find in abundance. It might seem that way because the Reds have recently been blessed with that commodity, but there are a dozen other MLB teams who are scratching and overpaying for bats.

If you're going to give up your only in-demand commodity, get more in return than just a band-aid for a broken arm.

Part of the reason the Reds have a surplus is because GAB inflates the Aurilias and Lopezes. The Reds can put people out there and get offense. They need pitchers. Zito is not only a very good pitcher but he could be spun in July for young pitching depth.

TOBTTReds
02-20-2006, 09:35 AM
No, there isn't. Cheap offensive talent that can perform above MLB average is not something you find in abundance. It might seem that way because the Reds have recently been blessed with that commodity, but there are a dozen other MLB teams who are scratching and overpaying for bats.

If you're going to give up your only in-demand commodity, get more in return than just a band-aid for a broken arm.

I agree. In another post or earlier in this one I mentioned that people HERE think young offense grows on trees. It doesn't. Braves fans think pitching grows on trees. We need to craddle our young offense, deal it for great pitching if we can. If we can't then do not make the trade. Do not trade Homer Bailey unless it is for a current stud, or someone in the making higher in a system with just as much ceiling. AK, EE, and Homer for someone better yield a no doubt Ace, an infielder, and a middle of the road prospect.

lollipopcurve
02-20-2006, 09:48 AM
"hope to grow the minors" or "get that ONE trade that will net us a young, cheap MLB-ready arm" (the equivalent of hitting the PowerBall); the realpolitik of baseball means taking chances, moving bodies, alchemizing lesser chips into somewhat better chips and continually cycling your commodities. Not sitting there waiting for THAT ONE TRADE to come down the chute. Guess what? It's not coming down the chute. You have to make it happen.

Seems to me you're the one advocating for that one big trade. And I don't understand what alchemizing is -- sounds just like counting on one good trade after another. That's a crapshoot, not a plan.

As my post said, there are several avenues to follow. Free agency (a market the Reds will explore more now with the ownership change), signing amateur talent, trading for talent you have a chance to keep for more than a year or two. All these avenues manage risk by allowing the team time to evaluate what they have and/or acquire talent without sacrificing talent. In my view, this is a far better way to go than banking on some magic sequence of talent-for-talent swaps.

Part of what I'm saying is that I don't like the veteran arms out there right now -- don't like their age or their contract status. For the Reds to hurry up and make a deal for the sake of making something happen doesn't make sense to me if the players available are expensive rentals. Come 2007 you may be holding the bag. The time for taking risks is when you're on the verge of winning something -- in the meantime, make trades that don't create holes, hold onto your best minor leaguers, especially pitchers, see what you can get in FA (next year is a good year for pitchers), spend on amateur talent (in the draft and Latin America).

Getting that young arm you can control for a few years may be hard to do, but I don't buy that it's impossible for the Reds, who have an abundance of power in this era of the home run. Teams need guys who slug just about as much as they need pitching.

membengal
02-20-2006, 09:53 AM
Zito's 2005 stats: 3.86 ERA in 228 innings pitched, 171 Ks to 89 walks, 185 hits allowed.

Harang's 2005 stats: 3.83 ERA in 211 innings pitched, 163 Ks to 51 walks, 217 hits allowed.

Zito walked more, and allowed fewer hits. Harang walked less and allowed more hits. And, Zito did his pitching in far friendlier surroundings than Harang.

Yes, they are in a lot of meaningful ways, the same pitcher. Mind you, I like Harang, a lot. But sending who this rumor is proposing the Reds send for Zito is insane. Simply insane. Particularly when he is one year from walking. Laughable.

Now way all three...m a y b e Bailey and Kearns, but would rather do it Kearns straight up for Zito. That would be worth it.

Edit: And, FCB, if you think Zito can maintain an OPSA of below .700 pitching in Great American, well, you and I can agree to disagree on that. If he were to come here, his OPSA would come up, I think, toward where Harang is.

Again, I like Harang, but deals have to make some sense...

westofyou
02-20-2006, 10:02 AM
Zito had 16 RSAA and so did Harang, stick Harang in the cold night baseball by the Bay in that ballpark and watch his OPS against drop, reverse the situation and watch Zito's rise.

Johnny Footstool
02-20-2006, 10:18 AM
If Zito's a band-aid, what does that make Kearns and Bailey? A tongue depressor?

Look, I too think, with M2, that it would be ill-advised to dump three chits for one, so I'm all for shopping without Encarnacion. But come on, Kearns and Bailey for Zito? You'd be out of your mind to pass that up.

Your hottest commodity and your top pitching prospect traded for a one-year rental for a team that's going nowhere in 2006? That's a good way to cripple a franchise.


Part of the reason the Reds have a surplus is because GAB inflates the Aurilias and Lopezes. The Reds can put people out there and get offense. They need pitchers. Zito is not only a very good pitcher but he could be spun in July for young pitching depth.

Then why not simply trade Kearns, Bailey, and Encarnacion for young pitching depth? Those three would bring a better return now than a deadline-deal for Zito, whose value would be lowered by his GAB-inflated ERA and his impending free agency.

RedsManRick
02-20-2006, 10:33 AM
Zito misses bats, but he's also a flyball ball pitcher who walks people. I'm not saying I wouldn't want him on my team generally speaking, but if we make a trade of that scope, it needs to be for the right pitcher. A flyball pitcher, who walks guys, has 1 year left on his deal, and has talked at length about loving california is probably not who we should be trying to acquire.

traderumor
02-20-2006, 10:36 AM
Zito's 2005 stats: 3.86 ERA in 228 innings pitched, 171 Ks to 89 walks, 185 hits allowed.

Harang's 2005 stats: 3.83 ERA in 211 innings pitched, 163 Ks to 51 walks, 217 hits allowed.

Zito walked more, and allowed fewer hits. Harang walked less and allowed more hits. And, Zito did his pitching in far friendlier surroundings than Harang.

Yes, they are in a lot of meaningful ways, the same pitcher. Mind you, I like Harang, a lot. But sending who this rumor is proposing the Reds send for Zito is insane. Simply insane. Particularly when he is one year from walking. Laughable.

Now way all three...m a y b e Bailey and Kearns, but would rather do it Kearns straight up for Zito. That would be worth it.

Edit: And, FCB, if you think Zito can maintain an OPSA of below .700 pitching in Great American, well, you and I can agree to disagree on that. If he were to come here, his OPSA would come up, I think, toward where Harang is.

Again, I like Harang, but deals have to make some sense...

I'm thinking that it might be a quick jump to assume a good pitcher's numbers are going up in GAB. Consider that Harang's numbers were significantly better at home last year than on the road:

Home ERA: 3.31
Road ERA: 4.30

Home WHIP: 1.17
Away WHIP: 1.35

Home SLG: .416
Away SLG: .446

Home HR/9: .98
Away HR/9: .89

Interestingly, Zito had a lower Road ERA and only a slightly lower WHIP at home and about the same Home/Road SLG:

Home ERA: 4.05
Away ERA: 3.66

Home WHIP: 1.16
Away WHIP: 1.24

Home SLG: .367
Away SLG: .355

Home HR/9: 1.00
Away HR/9: 1.06

Falls City Beer
02-20-2006, 11:00 AM
Your hottest commodity and your top pitching prospect traded for a one-year rental for a team that's going nowhere in 2006? That's a good way to cripple a franchise.



Then why not simply trade Kearns, Bailey, and Encarnacion for young pitching depth? Those three would bring a better return now than a deadline-deal for Zito, whose value would be lowered by his GAB-inflated ERA and his impending free agency.


If you're wringing your hands over how to best cash-in Kearns, I submit that the best time to have done that has well passed us by. Get what you can get for him. Same goes for Bailey--no point in jealously guarding a 19 year old who will likely never see a MLB mound (and that's just statistics, folks), when a certain commodity is staring you in the face.

I'd trade for Zito to keep him, myself. I'd try to extend him--consider tying up payroll in Zito and Dunn versus what we've had in the past sounds like smart apportioning of payroll.

Just listen to what some of you are saying: "No, I don't want a top-ten MLB starter; I want to keep Kearns and Bailey in the hopes that they can be traded for unproven pitching prospects." This is what losing does to people's minds.

osuceltic
02-20-2006, 11:04 AM
I'm thinking that it might be a quick jump to assume a good pitcher's numbers are going up in GAB. Consider that Harang's numbers were significantly better at home last year than on the road:

Home ERA: 3.31
Road ERA: 4.30

Home WHIP: 1.17
Away WHIP: 1.35

Home SLG: .416
Away SLG: .446

Home HR/9: .98
Away HR/9: .89

Interestingly, Zito had a lower Road ERA and only a slightly lower WHIP at home and about the same Home/Road SLG:

Home ERA: 4.05
Away ERA: 3.66

Home WHIP: 1.16
Away WHIP: 1.24

Home SLG: .367
Away SLG: .355

Home HR/9: 1.00
Away HR/9: 1.06

Great post. It's amazing how good pitchers seem to be good pitchers anywhere and bad pitchers seem to be bad pitchers anywhere. Milton is a bad pitcher. GAB has little to do with it.

Besides, as I've said before, both teams play there. Opposing pitchers, if the park is as unforgiving as some would have us believe, will put up numbers just as bad. And the Reds' offense should be that much more potent playing there, right?

Zito is a good pitcher. He'll be a good pitcher anywhere. This trade amounts to Kearns, who is living off of production from three years ago (and is nearing free agency), Encarnacion, who is a decent prospect but hardly the can't-miss guy some suggest, and Homer Bailey, who would be overcoming tremendous odds to ever be as good as even Eric Milton was last season, for Barry Zito.

Personally, I do this trade every day and twice on Sunday.

westofyou
02-20-2006, 11:05 AM
Just listen to what some of you are saying: "No, I don't want a top-ten MLB starter; I want to keep Kearns and Bailey in the hopes that they can be traded for unproven pitching prospects." This is what losing does to people's minds.

Zito isn't top ten and the Reds would do themselves well to find pitchers like Haren on the cusp, like the 30's Reds did with Derringer and Walters.

Falls City Beer
02-20-2006, 11:09 AM
Zito isn't top ten and the Reds would do themselves well to find pitchers like Haren on the cusp, like the 30's Reds did with Derringer and Walters.

Zito is a top ten starter. Absolutely he is, particularly when you consider his career to date.

Everyone wants a Haren. Everyone. There are about three or four floating around in MLB / minors at any given time. And often they can be had for very little, because for them to be surrendered means the club they're on a) doesn't need them too badly or b) grossly undervalues them.

And who's to say you can't nab a Zito AND hunt down Harens?

M2
02-20-2006, 11:09 AM
Your hottest commodity and your top pitching prospect traded for a one-year rental for a team that's going nowhere in 2006? That's a good way to cripple a franchise.

A few thoughts:

A) Kearns isn't the Reds' hottest commodity, though I'd only be trading him to a team that expects him to be a fine player in 2006.

B) I'd be demanding a prospect with Zito. The Reds have a personnel shortage. They have to get back as many bodies as they deal at the moment. Melillo is the guy I'd want and the A's can afford to move him.

C) You're right about the risk. It's way high. If you make this deal it has to be done with the organizational commitment to make Zito an offer he can't refuse should it come to that.

D) There are, however, some mitigating factors on the risk. Kearns only has two years left before free agency, so it's one year you'd be sacrificing on the major league component of the deal. Would I be willing to risk one year of control over an OF in an attempt to land and keep a quality SP? You bet. Bailey's the wild card. Some folks love him. Others have their suspicions. Even those who have their suspicions might be wary of moving Bailey for a pitcher who could jump ship after a year, leaving the organizational cupboard bare when future opportunities present themselves. To that my counter is: No one said this would be easy. It's like jumping the fountains at Caesar's Palace. It's can be done, but not without risking that you'll break every bone in your body.

Heath
02-20-2006, 11:11 AM
If the Reds reach for soon-to-be FA pitchers, they should ask for a 72-hour window to try to ask for an extension.

Personally, I'm not a big Barry Zito fan. I'm afraid he might regress in Cincinnati.

KronoRed
02-20-2006, 11:19 AM
If FeLo puts up numbers like he did last year this year, I would take him over Dunn.
I disagree, Dunn is on the way to being a superstar, IMO Lopez will be good but not great.

wheels
02-20-2006, 11:22 AM
Oh I'm not anti Zito by any stretch , but I'm not happy about the thought of losing Kearns, Encarnacion, and Bailey to get him.

The Reds had a shot at getting Zito last offseason, and they were giving up Kearns to get him. DanO balked at the deal when Beane also decided to ask for Votto to be added at the last minute.

Kearns and Bailey for Zito? I'd do it, but only if I was planning on keeping Zito around for longer than one season.

And I would not plan on making Hatteberg the everday first baseman because of the deal.

M2
02-20-2006, 11:30 AM
If the Reds reach for soon-to-be FA pitchers, they should ask for a 72-hour window to try to ask for an extension.

Personally, I'm not a big Barry Zito fan. I'm afraid he might regress in Cincinnati.

If you ink Zito to an extension as part of the deal, that raises the price you have to pay for him in trade. In the security/talent tradeoff, I'd rather risk security to save myself the talent, particularly when the organizational talent is so thin.

I like Zito, but concede that he certainly could slide. In defense of the idea I'll note that we kicked around various permutations of Kearns and stuff for Zito last year and if the Reds had dealt Kearns, Richie Gardner and Joey Votto for Zito at that time I'm guessing we'd all be pretty happy with it today. Obviously that doesn't speak to Zito's future value, but he clearly had more game last year than his naysayers predicted.

IslandRed
02-20-2006, 11:38 AM
C) You're right about the risk. It's way high. If you make this deal it has to be done with the organizational commitment to make Zito an offer he can't refuse should it come to that.

Therein lies my source of hesitation for a deal like this -- we've said before that a lower-payroll team like the Reds has to get above-average bang for the buck. Guys like Zito are signing for money that few people think they'll actually earn over the life of the contract. I can see that for a missing-piece kind of deal, but that's not where we are. Maybe if it was someone other than Zito. I think his next 4-5 years are going to be good but not great, not worth breaking the bank either in money or trading chips. For a different pitcher, Kearns + Bailey would be a price I'd pay.

M2
02-20-2006, 11:51 AM
Therein lies my source of hesitation for a deal like this -- we've said before that a lower-payroll team like the Reds has to get above-average bang for the buck. Guys like Zito are signing for money that few people think they'll actually earn over the life of the contract. I can see that for a missing-piece kind of deal, but that's not where we are. Maybe if it was someone other than Zito. I think his next 4-5 years are going to be good but not great, not worth breaking the bank either in money or trading chips. For a different pitcher, Kearns + Bailey would be a price I'd pay.

A lot probably depends on league revenues. Supposedly everyone's got an extra kitty to spend and the Reds' amount has gone largely untouched.

As for good vs. great, we'd all like to have Johan Santana or Roy Oswalt, but even if they got shopped it's unlikely the Reds could land them. IMO, if the Reds can build the rotation around three guys who can throw 200+ IP with a sub-4.00 ERA on a regular basis, they'd be in good shape. If I could get that from Zito, I'd look to save money elsewhere. It's always been my philosophy that you should pay for what you need.

RedsManRick
02-20-2006, 12:23 PM
. IMO, if the Reds can build the rotation around three guys who can throw 200+ IP with a sub-4.00 ERA on a regular basis, they'd be in good shape. If I could get that from Zito, I'd look to save money elsewhere. It's always been my philosophy that you should pay for what you need.

Agreed 100%. I'd much rather pay 12MM for a Barry Zito and get a 5.30 ERA out of an Elizardo Ramirez at the 5 spot in the rotation (or a Josh Hancock....) then spend 5 Mil on a Paul Wilson or Ramon Oritz. As has been pointed out, the worst values are in the middle of the talent pool. It's paying good money to guys whose marginal contributions are minimal that kills a team who can't buy itself out of it's mistakes.

That said, I'm against a Zito trade primarily because there's somewhere between a 0% and a fat chance that he signs an extension here. I'm all for making a big trade and paying a legit ace godo money, but it's a trade we can't afford to screw up.

traderumor
02-20-2006, 12:25 PM
Agreed 100%. I'd much rather pay 12MM for a Barry Zito and get a 5.30 ERA out of an Elizardo Ramirez at the 5 spot in the rotation (or a Josh Hancock....) then spend 5 Mil on a Paul Wilson or Ramon Oritz. As has been pointed out, the worst values are in the middle of the talent pool. It's paying good money to guys who's marginal contributions are minimal that kills a team who can't buy itself out of it's mistakes.

That said, I'm against a Zito trade primarily because there's somewhere between a 0% and a fat chance that he signs an extension here. I'm all for making a big trade and paying a legit ace godo money, but it's a trade we can't afford to screw up.
There is no way you or anyone else on this board knows if he would sign with a particular team or not.

Johnny Footstool
02-20-2006, 12:34 PM
If you're wringing your hands over how to best cash-in Kearns, I submit that the best time to have done that has well passed us by. Get what you can get for him. Same goes for Bailey--no point in jealously guarding a 19 year old who will likely never see a MLB mound (and that's just statistics, folks), when a certain commodity is staring you in the face.

I'd trade for Zito to keep him, myself. I'd try to extend him--consider tying up payroll in Zito and Dunn versus what we've had in the past sounds like smart apportioning of payroll.

Just listen to what some of you are saying: "No, I don't want a top-ten MLB starter; I want to keep Kearns and Bailey in the hopes that they can be traded for unproven pitching prospects." This is what losing does to people's minds.

I don't dislike Zito. I'd love for the Reds to acquire him. If he had two or three years left on his contract, I'd do the deal in a heartbeat. But the risk is way too high in this situation.

Listen to what you're saying, too. "I'm willing to give up two of the organization's only real commodities for a one-year rental of a pitcher that every rich, contending MLB team will be after in free agency, and I'm gambling that he'll love Cincinnati so much that he'll forsake a chance to pitch for an elite World Series contender." That's what a lack of quality pitching does to people's minds.

Pass on the trade, then go all-out to sign Zito as a free agent.


A) Kearns isn't the Reds' hottest commodity, though I'd only be trading him to a team that expects him to be a fine player in 2006.

Aside from Dunn, which Reds player are other teams asking about the most? The Cards, Cubs, Royals, Indians, etc. are all after Kearns. I'll bet a package of Kearns and Bailey could pry away some top-flight prospects like J.P. Howell from the Royals. Then the Reds could throw crazy money at Zito in free agency.

RedsManRick
02-20-2006, 12:48 PM
There is no way you or anyone else on this board knows if he would sign with a particular team or not.

2 things...

1.) Yes. Exactly. And that is why we should not trade our primary assets for somebody with 1 year left on a contract without a window involved.

2.) I have seen multiple interviews where Zito talked about surfing, how he erally enjoys living in California, and how he'd like to spend his whole career on the West Coast. Now I understand that doesn't mean a whole lot on the face of it, but Cincy isn't exactly a town that caters to surfers who like to go on late night TV and date celebrities. Further, it's not likely we'll outspend the numerous other teams who would make him offers were he to go to FA, the homer friendliness scares some pitchers, and we don't have the best track record of being competitive over the past decade. There just seems to be very little incentive for him to sign here.

If you're gonna make that big move, you don't want that much risk involved.

traderumor
02-20-2006, 12:55 PM
I don't dislike Zito. I'd love for the Reds to acquire him. If he had two or three years left on his contract, I'd do the deal in a heartbeat. But the risk is way too high in this situation.

Listen to what you're saying, too. "I'm willing to give up two of the organization's only real commodities for a one-year rental of a pitcher that every rich, contending MLB team will be after in free agency, and I'm gambling that he'll love Cincinnati so much that he'll forsake a chance to pitch for an elite World Series contender." That's what a lack of quality pitching does to people's minds.

Pass on the trade, then go all-out to sign Zito as a free agent.



Aside from Dunn, which Reds player are other teams asking about the most? The Cards, Cubs, Royals, Indians, etc. are all after Kearns. I'll bet a package of Kearns and Bailey could pry away some top-flight prospects like J.P. Howell from the Royals. Then the Reds could throw crazy money at Zito in free agency.
I'd say that's backwards. You try to trade and the contract negotiation is a part of getting the deal done. Waiting until he hits the open market is likely to inflate his price. If you want him, use some talent to help pay the price. I would much rather mitigate the risk with the future performance of Kearns than I would several millions of dollars of open market free agent inflation in the next three or four budgets.

traderumor
02-20-2006, 12:58 PM
2 things...

1.) Yes. Exactly. And that is why we should not trade our primary assets for somebody with 1 year left on a contract without a window involved.

2.) I have seen multiple interviews where Zito talked about surfing, how he erally enjoys living in California, and how he'd like to spend his whole career on the West Coast. Now I understand that doesn't mean a whole lot on the face of it, but Cincy isn't exactly a town that caters to surfers who like to go on late night TV and date celebrities. Further, it's not likely we'll outspend the numerous other teams who would make him offers were he to go to FA, the homer friendliness scares some pitchers, and we don't have the best track record of being competitive over the past decade. There just seems to be very little incentive for him to sign here.

If you're gonna make that big move, you don't want that much risk involved.
What one would like to do and what they end up doing are often two different things. For example, Adam Dunn would prefer being in Texas fishing with crawldads, yet here he is on the Ohio River and seems to be willing to stay in the near term. In other words, the talk of baseball players in interviews is pretty flimsy evidence on why a team should not pursue a player.

pedro
02-20-2006, 12:58 PM
Trading for Zito at this point would be stupid IMO. The Reds already have three soft tossing lefties in the rotation, they don't need a fourth, even if he is a good pitcher like Zito. If the Reds are going to trade for a starter it needs to be someone who can actually throw a little heat and it needs to be someone who is more than 1 year from FA.

RedsManRick
02-20-2006, 01:12 PM
What one would like to do and what they end up doing are often two different things. For example, Adam Dunn would prefer being in Texas fishing with crawldads, yet here he is on the Ohio River and seems to be willing to stay in the near term. In other words, the talk of baseball players in interviews is pretty flimsy evidence on why a team should not pursue a player.

So ignore his comments completely? Fair enough -- I thought I already conceded that point. You still think it's a good idea to trade Kearns and Bailey for only 1 gaurenteed year of a player who most likely won't make you a playoff contender during that year? Who also most likely will not give you any kind of a discount if he does resign. In otherwords, you are trading Kearns and Bailey for the right to begin negotiations with him 8 months before everybody else. Hmm..

All the talk about California is simply icing on the cake.

traderumor
02-20-2006, 01:32 PM
So ignore his comments completely? Fair enough -- I thought I already conceded that point. You still think it's a good idea to trade Kearns and Bailey for only 1 gaurenteed year of a player who most likely won't make you a playoff contender during that year? Who also most likely will not give you any kind of a discount if he does resign. In otherwords, you are trading Kearns and Bailey for the right to begin negotiations with him 8 months before everybody else. Hmm..

All the talk about California is simply icing on the cake.
Yup, ignore them. As for characterizing what I would do if that is on the table, you missed it. I said the free agency issue is resolved as a part of the deal or no deal.

WVRed
02-20-2006, 01:40 PM
The more I think about it, a deal with the Angels would make little sense for them. Why would they want Kearns?

As of right now, this is what the Angels depth chart looks like.

C-Jeff Mathis, Jose Molina
1B-Casey Kotchman, Darin Erstad
2B-Adam Kennedy, Egardo Alfonzo
3B-Chone Figgins, Robb Quinlan
SS-Orlando Cabrera, Maicer Izturis
LF-Garrett Anderson, Juan Rivera
CF-Darin Erstad, Chone Figgins
RF-Vladimir Guerrero, Juan Rivera
DH-Dallas McPherson

Now if you look toward the future, it makes this trade even bleaker.

Brandon Wood is a top 5 prospect in the game right now, and has even elicited comparisons to Cal Ripken. However, as he fills out, its entirely possible that he would need to shift to 3B. The Angels also have Howie Kendrick, who has been mentioned, and Erick Aybar, another top SS prospect. So lets assume that Aybar goes to SS, Kendrick to 2B, and Wood to 3B, when Darin Erstad's contract is up or he is traded and Orlando Cabrera is traded, then Chone Figgins will go to CF.

Angels 2008 starting lineup.

C-Jeff Mathis
1B-Casey Kotchman
2B-Howie Kendrick
3B-Brandon Wood
SS-Erick Aybar
LF-Garrett Anderson or FA signing
CF-Chone Figgins
RF-Vladimir Guerrero
DH-Kendry Morales

It makes sense for the Reds, but it doesnt make sense for the Angels.

Johnny Footstool
02-20-2006, 02:58 PM
I'd say that's backwards. You try to trade and the contract negotiation is a part of getting the deal done. Waiting until he hits the open market is likely to inflate his price. If you want him, use some talent to help pay the price. I would much rather mitigate the risk with the future performance of Kearns than I would several millions of dollars of open market free agent inflation in the next three or four budgets.

If contract negotiation was part of the deal, I'd say do it. Without it, the trade is idiotic.

Clemson
02-20-2006, 03:12 PM
Barry Zito - S - Athletics


Although talks are expected this spring, GM Billy Beane remains pessimistic about getting a deal done with Barry Zito, who is eligible for free agency at season's end.
"When you look at last year's free-agent market," Beane said, "you'll see the going rate for a pitcher is prohibitive, and Barry would have been the best guy out there. ... The fact is, if Barry's contract comes to an end, he's going to be an attractive free agent and it's going to be a challenge for anyone to sign him, let alone the A's." Zito hasn't indicated that he'd give the A's a discount. Feb. 20 - 2:16 pm et
Source: San Francisco Chronicle


think something may be cooking?

KronoRed
02-20-2006, 03:38 PM
Not with us.

TeamBoone
02-20-2006, 03:38 PM
From Marc's blog:

Sunday, February 19, 2006
Astacio on Reds' radar

SARASOTA -- According to some people in the know, the Reds have pondered bringing one of the few remaining free-agent starters, Pedro Astacio, to Cincinnati.

I heard about that earlier today, then went looking for info and found the San Diego Union-Tribune story from Saturday that mentions the Reds' possible interest. If you check out that story and the earlier mention of Astacio's dealings with the Rockies, you can see that jockeying over money probably is the main holdup for the Reds at the moment. The Reds likely have a bit more leverage now just because it's so late in the game, but I doubt they would completely cave just for the sake of getting a deal done.

If there is common ground to be had, though, it's conceivable that Astacio could be a Red by sometime this week. The Reds have made it known they're looking for more pitchers, and if they could get Astacio for a reasonable price (while holding onto all of their outfielders), they at least would get some more competition in camp and a viable fallback if Paul Wilson isn't ready to start the season.

Spitball
02-20-2006, 06:35 PM
From Marc's blog:

Sunday, February 19, 2006
Astacio on Reds' radar

SARASOTA -- According to some people in the know, the Reds have pondered bringing one of the few remaining free-agent starters, Pedro Astacio, to Cincinnati.

I heard about that earlier today, then went looking for info and found the San Diego Union-Tribune story from Saturday that mentions the Reds' possible interest. If you check out that story and the earlier mention of Astacio's dealings with the Rockies, you can see that jockeying over money probably is the main holdup for the Reds at the moment. The Reds likely have a bit more leverage now just because it's so late in the game, but I doubt they would completely cave just for the sake of getting a deal done.

If there is common ground to be had, though, it's conceivable that Astacio could be a Red by sometime this week. The Reds have made it known they're looking for more pitchers, and if they could get Astacio for a reasonable price (while holding onto all of their outfielders), they at least would get some more competition in camp and a viable fallback if Paul Wilson isn't ready to start the season.

He's not the right Pedro.

Jaycint
02-20-2006, 06:42 PM
Zito is a top ten starter. Absolutely he is, particularly when you consider his career to date.



No. He's not. Not even the best on his own team. You can keep saying it over and over but that doesn't necesarrily make it so. Off the top of my head:

Jake Peavy
Johan Santana
Roy Oswalt
Carlos Zambrano
Ben Sheets
Mark Beurhle
Pedro Martinez
Chris Carpenter
Roy Halladay
Dontrelle Willis
Roger Clemens
Josh Beckett
Tim Hudson
Rich Harden

I'm sure I could find a few others if I went and looked. Subjective of course but I'd take any of those guys over Zito.

Falls City Beer
02-20-2006, 06:52 PM
No. He's not. Not even the best on his own team. You can keep saying it over and over but that doesn't necesarrily make it so. Off the top of my head:

Jake Peavy
Johan Santana
Roy Oswalt
Carlos Zambrano
Ben Sheets
Mark Beurhle
Pedro Martinez
Chris Carpenter
Roy Halladay
Dontrelle Willis
Roger Clemens
Josh Beckett
Tim Hudson
Rich Harden

I'm sure I could find a few others if I went and looked.

Mark Buerhle?
Roy Halladay (when's the last time this guy's had a healthy season?)?
Clemens technically is retired right now.
Tim Hudson?
Jake Peavy?
Josh Beckett?

I'll give you the others, but those above are lesser pitchers than Zito, mostly because they can't stay healthy. So you have eight in the above list who are either equal to or better than Zito.

Jaycint
02-20-2006, 06:58 PM
Mark Buerhle?
Roy Halladay (when's the last time this guy's had a healthy season?)?
Clemens technically is retired right now.
Tim Hudson?
Jake Peavy?
Josh Beckett?

I'll give you the others, but those above are lesser pitchers than Zito, mostly because they can't stay healthy. So you have eight in the above list who are either equal to or better than Zito.

See that's where the whole subjectivity part comes in I guess. Jake Peavy is an absolute stud with awesome K numbers and a fabulous ERA to boot. Him over Zito is a no-brainer to me. I'll give you Beckett's injury issues but I still take the chance on him staying healthy and would rather have him than Zito. Buerhle is one of the most underrated pitchers in the game in my opinion.

pedro
02-20-2006, 07:01 PM
Mark Buerhle?
Roy Halladay (when's the last time this guy's had a healthy season?)?
Clemens technically is retired right now.
Tim Hudson?
Jake Peavy?
Josh Beckett?

I'll give you the others, but those above are lesser pitchers than Zito, mostly because they can't stay healthy. So you have eight in the above list who are either equal to or better than Zito.

Jake Peavy through 203 innings last year. He's better than Zito IMO.

Zito's agood picther, but you are really overrating his value IMO.

cincyinco
02-20-2006, 07:31 PM
Mark Buerhle?
Roy Halladay (when's the last time this guy's had a healthy season?)?
Clemens technically is retired right now.
Tim Hudson?
Jake Peavy?
Josh Beckett?

I'll give you the others, but those above are lesser pitchers than Zito, mostly because they can't stay healthy. So you have eight in the above list who are either equal to or better than Zito.

Roy Halladay was only out last year after taking a line drive off the ankle. He was 12-4, 2.41 ERA, 108K, 18BB and an 0.91WHIP. Its been 2 years in a row he's been injured, and one of which, last year, was a fluke injury. Linedrive off the ankle. Nothing to do with his arm.

Lets be serious FCB. I understand the value a Zito would bring to this team, but he is nowhere near the value of a pitcher like Doc, or Peavy for that matter.

Falls City Beer
02-20-2006, 07:40 PM
Roy Halladay was only out last year after taking a line drive off the ankle. He was 12-4, 2.41 ERA, 108K, 18BB and an 0.91WHIP. Its been 2 years in a row he's been injured, and one of which, last year, was a fluke injury. Linedrive off the ankle. Nothing to do with his arm.

Lets be serious FCB. I understand the value a Zito would bring to this team, but he is nowhere near the value of a pitcher like Doc, or Peavy for that matter.

It looks like Peavy's probably a bad call on my part--he looks to have put his injury problems behind him.

But I stand by the Halladay remark. The guy's not been the consistent producer that Zito's been in each of his major league seasons. No, Zito doesn't have the sexy K numbers, but the guy is about as big a guarantee as you're going to find in baseball.

westofyou
02-20-2006, 07:49 PM
The guy's not been the consistent producer that Zito's been in each of his major league seasons.Throw out his horrible 2000 season and he trumps Zito in RSAA, ERA, and winning percentage.


CAREER
2001-2005

RSAA RSAA ERA IP PCT W L
1 Randy Johnson 194 2.93 1095 .672 84 41
2 Pedro Martinez 184 2.78 936.2 .720 72 28
3 Tim Hudson 153 3.19 1094 .652 75 40
4 Roy Halladay 148 3.16 885.1 .695 66 29
5 Curt Schilling 146 3.35 1004 .695 82 36
6 Roy Oswalt 137 3.07 980.2 .680 83 39
7 Johan Santana 136 2.96 770 .722 57 22
8 Mark Buehrle 132 3.61 1172.2 .609 81 52
9 Roger Clemens 119 3.30 1037.2 .730 81 30
10 Barry Zito 112 3.56 1116.2 .617 79 49

TOBTTReds
02-20-2006, 07:53 PM
nm

cincyinco
02-20-2006, 07:55 PM
It looks like Peavy's probably a bad call on my part--he looks to have put his injury problems behind him.

But I stand by the Halladay remark. The guy's not been the consistent producer that Zito's been in each of his major league seasons. No, Zito doesn't have the sexy K numbers, but the guy is about as big a guarantee as you're going to find in baseball.

On what grounds are you standing behind your Halladay remark? I'd say Halladay, aside from his 2004, has been a model of consistency.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/players/6134/career;_ylt=Auek2WsaeliLr3BOImLRdZeFCLcF

ERA/WHIP/K/BB
2001: 3.16/1.16/96/25 in 105.1 Innings.
2002: 2.93/1.19/168/62 in 239.1 Innings.
2003: 3.25/1.07/204/34 in 266.0 Innings.
2004: 4.20/1.35/95/39 in 133.0 Innings - arm trouble all year.
2005: 2.41/0.96/108/18 in 141.2 Innings - injured due to taking a line drive off the ankle. I contend he would have won the Cy Young if he had remained healthy.

Roy Halladay has been Cy Young material in 2002, 2003(which he WON btw) and 2005 before his ankle cracked. Thats a fluke injury I dont think you can really hold against him in the same manner as you could the 2004 injury. It doesn't really support your argument in the same way. Zito hasn't shown me he's at that level the last 2 years. He's solid yes, but he's not pitching at the same level as Doc Hallday.

corkedbat
02-20-2006, 08:32 PM
I never really appreciated Rijo when he was in his prime. I'm not sure what pitcher I'd takeover what other pitcher, but I'd really give anything for WK to come up with a pitcher who's a joy to watch every fifth day (no offense, Mr. Harang).

Falls City Beer
02-20-2006, 08:50 PM
On what grounds are you standing behind your Halladay remark? I'd say Halladay, aside from his 2004, has been a model of consistency.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/players/6134/career;_ylt=Auek2WsaeliLr3BOImLRdZeFCLcF

ERA/WHIP/K/BB
2001: 3.16/1.16/96/25 in 105.1 Innings.
2002: 2.93/1.19/168/62 in 239.1 Innings.
2003: 3.25/1.07/204/34 in 266.0 Innings.
2004: 4.20/1.35/95/39 in 133.0 Innings - arm trouble all year.
2005: 2.41/0.96/108/18 in 141.2 Innings - injured due to taking a line drive off the ankle. I contend he would have won the Cy Young if he had remained healthy.

Roy Halladay has been Cy Young material in 2002, 2003(which he WON btw) and 2005 before his ankle cracked. Thats a fluke injury I dont think you can really hold against him in the same manner as you could the 2004 injury. It doesn't really support your argument in the same way. Zito hasn't shown me he's at that level the last 2 years. He's solid yes, but he's not pitching at the same level as Doc Hallday.

Sure, Halladay's burned more brightly at times than Zito--2002-03 he was pretty much all-universe. But what can I say, I value health--outside of those two seasons, he's been a huge question mark health wise, accidents or no (though his injuries have mostly been arm-related). I dislike gimpy players.

cincyinco
02-20-2006, 09:26 PM
Sure, Halladay's burned more brightly at times than Zito--2002-03 he was pretty much all-universe. But what can I say, I value health--outside of those two seasons, he's been a huge question mark health wise, accidents or no (though his injuries have mostly been arm-related). I dislike gimpy players.

I understand.. Health is a big issue for pitchers, especially for a team like the Reds. And Zito was pretty damn good in 02/03.. but he hasn't been nearly as good since... Halladay's been consistently good when healthy. And I dont think Halladay can be classified as a gimp. He's had 1 year of arm trouble in '04. Its not like he's suffering from KGJunioritus with his arm.

Health aside, I pick Halladay over Zito every time. And I think most people would too.

Heath
02-20-2006, 10:14 PM
He's not the right Pedro.

I can name about 10 other Pedro's that I'd prefer before Pistachio.

Krusty
02-21-2006, 12:42 AM
We all are assuming that Zito would be the big fish that the Reds would go after. But, A's lineup is pretty much set and I think the A's would wait till the trading deadline in July to move Zito.

One team we are discounting here is the Indians. They still need a rightfielder because they aren't pleased with Casey Blake in RF. It is no secret that they want Austin Kearns. Maybe Jake Westbrook won't get the deal done but what if it was C.C. Sabathia? Say the Reds offered Kearns, Mercker and a prospect for Sabathia? Would you do it?

Jaycint
02-21-2006, 07:04 AM
We all are assuming that Zito would be the big fish that the Reds would go after. But, A's lineup is pretty much set and I think the A's would wait till the trading deadline in July to move Zito.

One team we are discounting here is the Indians. They still need a rightfielder because they aren't pleased with Casey Blake in RF. It is no secret that they want Austin Kearns. Maybe Jake Westbrook won't get the deal done but what if it was C.C. Sabathia? Say the Reds offered Kearns, Mercker and a prospect for Sabathia? Would you do it?

I'd be willing to give either Kearns and a mid-level prospect or Kearns and Mercker for him. I don't know if I would go three guys deep for him though. Looking at his stats he's only had one year with an ERA under 4. He's probably a slight upgrade over most of what we have in the rotation but I wouldn't break the bank for him.

Patrick Bateman
02-21-2006, 08:35 AM
He's (Sabathia) probably a slight upgrade over most of what we have in the rotation but I wouldn't break the bank for him.

Probably a slight upgrage????

Have you seen our starting rotation recently???

traderumor
02-21-2006, 09:18 AM
We all are assuming that Zito would be the big fish that the Reds would go after. But, A's lineup is pretty much set and I think the A's would wait till the trading deadline in July to move Zito.

One team we are discounting here is the Indians. They still need a rightfielder because they aren't pleased with Casey Blake in RF. It is no secret that they want Austin Kearns. Maybe Jake Westbrook won't get the deal done but what if it was C.C. Sabathia? Say the Reds offered Kearns, Mercker and a prospect for Sabathia? Would you do it?
Yea, I've thrown out Sabathia for Kearns (principally) and was told no way would the Indians give us an "established" pitcher for an overvalued Kearns. I still think the Indians would deal Sabathia for Kearns and a sweetener because of his inconsistency and fear of arm troubles since he's been in the majors since his teens.

osuceltic
02-21-2006, 10:09 AM
Roy Halladay was only out last year after taking a line drive off the ankle. He was 12-4, 2.41 ERA, 108K, 18BB and an 0.91WHIP. Its been 2 years in a row he's been injured, and one of which, last year, was a fluke injury. Linedrive off the ankle. Nothing to do with his arm.

Lets be serious FCB. I understand the value a Zito would bring to this team, but he is nowhere near the value of a pitcher like Doc, or Peavy for that matter.
This is all just quibbling. If Zito isn't top-10, he's pretty damn close.

When do you try to win? When do you stop waiting for Kearns? How far does a pitcher have to be from free agency to make it worth it?

If you can get a pitcher like Zito (and a prospect, according to the rumor ... don't forget that) for Kearns, Encarnacion and a low-level pitching prospect, you do it every time. You open up the checkbook and give him big money. He's as close to a sure thing as there is. If you're not going to pay for him, what will you ever pay for?

Krusty
02-21-2006, 10:11 AM
I have searched the net and can't get even a scent of this rumor.

westofyou
02-21-2006, 10:13 AM
I have searched the net and can't get even a scent of this rumor.
Because The Reds aren't going to trade Edwin.

Because the Reds aren't going to aquire a pitcher 1 year from Free Agency

Because no teams in the west need the aforementioned package.

Because it's the Mary Celeste of trade talk.

RedsManRick
02-21-2006, 10:18 AM
This is all just quibbling. If Zito isn't top-10, he's pretty damn close.

When do you try to win? When do you stop waiting for Kearns? How far does a pitcher have to be from free agency to make it worth it?

If you can get a pitcher like Zito (and a prospect, according to the rumor ... don't forget that) for Kearns, Encarnacion and a low-level pitching prospect, you do it every time. You open up the checkbook and give him big money. He's as close to a sure thing as there is. If you're not going to pay for him, what will you ever pay for?

We opened up the wallet 2 offseasons ago for a number of pitchers and the only one who took our money was Eric Milton. It's not just offering the highest dollar amount. We can all argue about it, but if you really think that having Zito on board for 1 year gives a real legitimate chance to sign him when he hits free agency and gets offers from the Dodgers, Mets, Yankees, Red Sox, etc., then fine, it makes sense to do the deal. But personally I think we have a snowball's chance in hell to sign him, whether we have him on board for a year or just pursue him in free agency like everybody else.

He's a legit ace and would greatly improve our staff. However, it is not worth Kearns, EE, and Bailey just to have him for 1 year before we have to compete with everybody else for him in FA. That just doesn't make good sense.

Jaycint
02-21-2006, 10:59 AM
Probably a slight upgrage????

Have you seen our starting rotation recently???

Yeah I've seen it. Have you looked up Sabathia's numbers? I did this morning, absolutely nothing jumpos out at me.

No doubt Sabathia upgrades our rotation but that's some damning praise right there. He is a "name" guy because he burst on the scene at a young age and has some decent but not outstanding K numbers. There are lots of guys out there that may not have his catchy name but have identical numbers that we could probably get cheaper.

registerthis
02-21-2006, 11:17 AM
Yeah I've seen it. Have you looked up Sabathia's numbers? I did this morning, absolutely nothing jumpos out at me.

No doubt Sabathia upgrades our rotation but that's some damning praise right there. He is a "name" guy because he burst on the scene at a young age and has some decent but not outstanding K numbers. There are lots of guys out there that may not have his catchy name but have identical numbers that we could probably get cheaper.

But do those guys have hot girlfriends like C.C. does, Jay? That's the truly vexing question here.

KronoRed
02-21-2006, 12:27 PM
Probably a slight upgrage????

Have you seen our starting rotation recently???
People said the same about Milton, "He's an upgrade"! ;)

Jaycint
02-21-2006, 12:27 PM
But do those guys have hot girlfriends like C.C. does, Jay? That's the truly vexing question here.


Haha true, I forgot to take that into account. Can we trade for her and have him stay in Cleveland?

Patrick Bateman
02-21-2006, 12:33 PM
People said the same about Milton, "He's an upgrade"! ;)

There's a pretty big difference between C.C and Milton. Sabathia may be overrated, but he would still be our second best pitcher easily.

KearnsyEars
02-21-2006, 01:27 PM
I don't think Kearns is going anywhere. I honestly think we'll see Kearns get one last shot as a Red. I think that this is his year to prove whether or not he's going to be involved in the long term plans or not.