PDA

View Full Version : Reds Waive Bong



savafan
05-04-2006, 11:40 AM
How's that Reitsma trade look now? :p:


http://english.donga.com/srv/service.php3?bicode=070000&biid=2006050489478

MAY 04, 2006 08:29
by Seung-Kun Lee (why@donga.com)


It seems that Bong Jung-keun, the 26 year-old Cincinnati Reds player, will be returning to Korea.

It has been confirmed that Cincinnati team, who owns the rights to him, has asked to the Korea Baseball Organization (KBO) through the Major League commission how to transfer him.

Bong, who has been on the waiver list of the team before the seasonís start, is currently playing with the AA Chattanooga Lookouts. His record for the season is one win, one loss with an ERA of 5.09.

After quitting Shinil High School in 1997 to enter the majors, Bong does not have any restrictions in coming back to Korea according to KBO rules, because he left before January 1, 1999.

If Bong is to play in Korea, first he should submit an application form to the KBO before June 5, the deadline of pro baseballís first round draft. Afterwards, KBO will report this to Doosan and LG, who have priority negotiations rights to the Seoul native Bong, and the teams can announce whether or not they reached a contract within two weeks.

Bong started his life in the big leagues with the Atlanta Braves in 2002 and moved to Cincinnati in 2004. His major league career record, which has shuttled from the majors to the minors, is seven wins, four losses, and one save with an ERA of 5.17.

M2
05-04-2006, 11:41 AM
Talk about something for nothing.

kbrake
05-04-2006, 11:42 AM
The deal that just keeps getting better.

flyer85
05-04-2006, 11:42 AM
Maybe the Braves will waive Reitsma to help even it out.

flyer85
05-04-2006, 11:44 AM
At least it is wonderful proof that DanO was clueless from start to finish.

His first deal was giving away Reitsma and his last deal was acquiring the offensive black hole better known as Womack.

guttle11
05-04-2006, 11:47 AM
The title of this thread made me laugh. They should really hide that thing...

Good move, though.

LincolnparkRed
05-04-2006, 11:50 AM
Bubba Nelson was the other part of that deal right? Where did he wind up again?

flyer85
05-04-2006, 11:57 AM
Bubba Nelson was the other part of that deal right? Where did he wind up again?pitching in AA for the Padres.

M2
05-04-2006, 11:59 AM
pitching in AA for the Padres.

And poorly at that.

princeton
05-04-2006, 12:01 PM
bongs aren't good for you. This is a sign of maturity

edit

Johnny Footstool
05-04-2006, 12:01 PM
I still love DanO's attempt at a parting shot in which he basically said the plan was in place, but management and the fans didn't give it time to develop.

:rolleyes:

Puffy
05-04-2006, 12:05 PM
bongs aren't good for you.

Just ask Tommy Chong - he got a year in jail for shipping a bong across state lines.

About the trade, I hated that trade the day it was made and I hate it now. Stupid Dan O'Brien

BRM
05-04-2006, 12:05 PM
And poorly at that.

4.91 ERA, 1.36 WHIP in 18.1 innings. He does have 18 strikeouts to 5 walks though.

Unassisted
05-04-2006, 12:06 PM
Bye bye :bong:

flyer85
05-04-2006, 12:08 PM
bongs aren't good for you.the users of them generally don't care.

TRF
05-04-2006, 12:17 PM
Sorry, but I still defend the trade. In principle, it was a pitcher, with no defined role (management's fault) for two minor league pitchers highly thought of.

What happened after was bad luck. It happens. Sometime you trade Reitsma and have nothing to show for it, and other times you trade Rob Bell and get an EE.

Sometimes moves don't work out, but the principle was sound.

pedro
05-04-2006, 12:17 PM
In other news it's reported that Bong left nasty stains on the carpet in his Chattanooga apartment.

lollipopcurve
05-04-2006, 12:24 PM
I still defend the trade. In principle, it was a pitcher, with no defined role (management's fault) for two minor league pitchers highly thought of.

I understand where you're coming from, but I think it always boils down to the performance of the players involved, not some principle. You might say bad luck happened, but I'd only grant you that if the players had gotten hurt. That didn't happen here. In this case, the Reds lost a solid reliever and gained nothing. Final score: bad trade.

NastyBoy
05-04-2006, 12:24 PM
Reitsma sinking fastball would have been really nice at GABP. <<

REDREAD
05-04-2006, 12:30 PM
I still love DanO's attempt at a parting shot in which he basically said the plan was in place, but management and the fans didn't give it time to develop.

:rolleyes:

I laughed at that too. Particularly when DanO insisted that he had stocked the farm system for us.

I'm trying to think. Other than the Lizard and the 2 guys from the Randa trade, what exactly did DanO add to our system? :laugh:

pedro
05-04-2006, 12:31 PM
I laughed at that too. Particularly when DanO insisted that he had stocked the farm system for us.

I'm trying to think. Other than the Lizard and the 2 guys from the Randa trade, what exactly did DanO add to our system? :laugh:


They did draft Jay Bruce, Travis Wood, and Homer Bailey but still....

NastyBoy
05-04-2006, 12:35 PM
Sorry, but I still defend the trade. In principle, it was a pitcher, with no defined role (management's fault) for two minor league pitchers highly thought of.

What happened after was bad luck. It happens. Sometime you trade Reitsma and have nothing to show for it, and other times you trade Rob Bell and get an EE.

Sometimes moves don't work out, but the principle was sound.

Dan O'Brien did not trade for EE.... that would be Bowden.

But the baseball genius did sign Jimenez and Womack!

TRF
05-04-2006, 12:42 PM
I understand where you're coming from, but I think it always boils down to the performance of the players involved, not some principle. You might say bad luck happened, but I'd only grant you that if the players had gotten hurt. That didn't happen here. In this case, the Reds lost a solid reliever and gained nothing. Final score: bad trade.

Except Bong did get hurt, and Nelson just didn't pan out. Though I am on record as saying he wasn't really given a chance to cement his new role as closer that he aquired last season. I think Kriv wanted to be rid of most if not all DanO acquisitions. Nelson pitched well enough to at least repeat AA as closer.

savafan
05-04-2006, 12:53 PM
But the baseball genius did sign Jimenez and Womack!
Actually, he traded for Womack.

TRF
05-04-2006, 12:57 PM
I know JimBo got EE, but the point was the type of trade, not who made it.

M2
05-04-2006, 12:57 PM
Except Bong did get hurt, and Nelson just didn't pan out. Though I am on record as saying he wasn't really given a chance to cement his new role as closer that he aquired last season. I think Kriv wanted to be rid of most if not all DanO acquisitions. Nelson pitched well enough to at least repeat AA as closer.

Nelson pitched like garbage last year (too easy to hit and the hitters hit it too hard) and there's four relievers in Chattanooga right now beating the snot out of anything Bubba could deliver.

You're right that Bong got hurt, but I hardly think it matters as he was never very good to begin with. He was a Myrtle Beach mirage, something the Braves specialized in over the past decade.

I agree with you that Reitsma for prospects was a good idea in theory, but the execution of it was horrid. I thought DanO might have been onto something when the deal went down, but I was as wrong as wrong can be on that one. It was clear almost immediately that neither of these guys had the kind of stuff to warrant any high hopes. The only thing you can maybe say for DanO on that trade is maybe awful scouting pantsed him.

Handofdeath
05-04-2006, 12:58 PM
I laughed at that too. Particularly when DanO insisted that he had stocked the farm system for us.

I'm trying to think. Other than the Lizard and the 2 guys from the Randa trade, what exactly did DanO add to our system? :laugh:

You misunderstood. Dano didn't say stocked the farm system. He said he hocked the farm system

TRF
05-04-2006, 01:00 PM
I can buy into that. It's a crapshoot with Braves pitching prospects. All seem overhyped, but a lot go on to pretty decent careers too. I'm liking the resurgence in Bruce Chen's career in Baltimore. However, the idea was sound, and sometime you lose trades.

M2
05-04-2006, 01:04 PM
I can buy into that. It's a crapshoot with Braves pitching prospects. All seem overhyped, but a lot go on to pretty decent careers too. I'm liking the resurgence in Bruce Chen's career in Baltimore. However, the idea was sound, and sometime you lose trades.

Yeah, but this wasn't a trade loss. It was an abject failure to get anything of value perpetrated by a GM who routinely proved himself incompetent when it came to identifying talent.

TRF
05-04-2006, 01:07 PM
I liked the Randa/Chick, Germano trade. Which may have been blind squirrel finds nut, but i still liked it.

Puffy
05-04-2006, 01:07 PM
I agree with you that Reitsma for prospects was a good idea in theory, but the execution of it was horrid. I thought DanO might have been onto something when the deal went down, but I was as wrong as wrong can be on that one. It was clear almost immediately that neither of these guys had the kind of stuff to warrant any high hopes. The only thing you can maybe say for DanO on that trade is maybe awful scouting pantsed him.

You weren't the only one. Whats funny is that when that trade went down it was 80% positive and 20% negative. I was on the negative end so I remember all the people telling any who dared say it was a bad trade getting lampooned.

But the whole point of this post is that I really respect you for standing up and saying you were wrong - - as well as TRF who agreed with the trade then and still will defend it now. Kudos to both of you.

Cause most people now say that they always hated the trade from the git-go. In other words, they won't admit they were wrong - a funny phenomenon that happens frequently on message boards.

flyer85
05-04-2006, 01:09 PM
I understand where you're coming from, but I think it always boils down to the performance of the players involvedIt highlighted DanO's inability to judge talent. The majority of his other decisions highlighted that and his complete inability to understand how to assemble and acquire the pieces for a major league team.

The only concept DanO had a grasp of was to "build through the farm system" but that was meaningless when coupled with his inability to identify talent.

geniusMoment
05-04-2006, 01:11 PM
Chris hasn't exactly been a world beater for Atlanta. I know plenty of Braves fans who cringe every time he comes into a game. It's not like we traded a lights out closer or anything.

savafan
05-04-2006, 01:12 PM
I still say the main reason Reitsma was traded was because he took the Reds to arbitration and the former front office structure hated him for it.

M2
05-04-2006, 01:12 PM
I liked the Randa/Chick, Germano trade. Which may have been blind squirrel finds nut, but i still liked it.

I almost chewed my arm off over that deal. If anything, Chick and Germano may have less to offer than Nelson and Bong did.

I don't like trading major leaguers for crap.

If I had to point to one DanO major-leaguer-for-prospects deal and say it wasn't a complete waste it would be Corey Lidle for The Lizard, Arn van Mojo (love that anagram) and Joe Wilson. Lidle had spent most of his time in a Reds uniform soiling himself on the mound so getting a kid who actually managed to throw a quality start in the majors (even if the kid never pans out beyond that) for him isn't too bad.

flyer85
05-04-2006, 01:14 PM
I know JimBo got EE, but the point was the type of trade, not who made it.the point is the ability to identify talent. DanO had a tin ear. At this point I am not terribly high on any of DanOs supposed gems(Bailey, Wood, Bruce). If one or two pans out it would just highlight that even a blind squirrel finds a nut every now and then.

The fact that DanO threw his lot in with the likes of Wilson, Milton, Jimenez, Machado(:rolleyes:), Romano, Nelson, Bong, Hancock, Williams etc just highlights his cluelessness and stamps it with an exclamation point.

Was trying to trade Reitsma for a couple of young arms a bad idea in general? No but it only works if you can identify talent.

reds44
05-04-2006, 01:16 PM
Actually, he traded for Womack.
Didn't he trade for Jimenez too? I thought we got him from the White Sox.

flyer85
05-04-2006, 01:17 PM
Chris hasn't exactly been a world beater for Atlanta. I know plenty of Braves fans who cringe every time he comes into a game. It's not like we traded a lights out closer or anything.thats because closer isn't a role he is suited for. He gets that chance with Atlanta by default at the moment.

Reitsma is a good middle reliever and nothing more, so the concept of trading him for a couple of young arms is not a bad one. It's the execution that was flawed as DanO got left holding a bag of magic beans.

flyer85
05-04-2006, 01:19 PM
Didn't he trade for Jimenez too? I thought we got him from the White Sox.That was Leatherpants. The trade wasn't bad, it was paying him 2.5M to stay around when every else in the organization was sure he needed to go that was stupid

Caseyfan21
05-04-2006, 01:20 PM
Didn't he trade for Jimenez too? I thought we got him from the White Sox.

The White Sox DFA I belive. I think we gave up a minor league pitcher for him. The pitcher was in Double-A at the time and has not panned out. It was much like the Phillips trade, except Phillips has actually done something for us.

TRF
05-04-2006, 01:21 PM
I think Chick is similar to Pelland: talented and perpetually overpromoted. Germano is Lizard redux.

I also like Javon Moran too

CTA513
05-04-2006, 01:25 PM
Even though they didnt work out, Im just happy to see the new owners clearing out some of the junk in the minors.

Chip R
05-04-2006, 01:28 PM
I still say the main reason Reitsma was traded was because he took the Reds to arbitration and the former front office structure hated him for it.

Actually ATL was the one who pursued him. Their bullpen situation was up in the air with Smoltz moving back into the rotation and they thought Reitsma would be a good fit for them.

Puffy
05-04-2006, 01:30 PM
Its funny, but I'm with M2 on the Randa deal. As president of the Loathing Joe Randa Club you would assume I would love the deal jettisoning him out of Cincy. I liked that part of the trade, but neither Germano nor Chick excite me in the least and I fear both will be ML fodder for their careers.

Good idea trading Randa - bad execution on the return (moreso on Germano, as I am a not big on soft tossing righties at all)

Jr's Boy
05-04-2006, 01:36 PM
It's really aggravating to realize what an incompetent jack ass we had as a GM.Reitsma would have been a good compliment to this BP right now.

deltachi8
05-04-2006, 01:43 PM
I still say the main reason Reitsma was traded was because he took the Reds to arbitration and the former front office structure hated him for it.

I disagree, I think Dan O saw a chance to get two prospects, starters, who were highly thought of, so he did it. Reitsma didnt exactly break the bank in arbitration IIRC. I thought it was agood risk at the time and still think its the type of trade that he needed to make at the time. Unfortunately, either poor scouting, poor talent evaluation by Dan, bad luck or just blindness led to the wrong deal being made for Chris.

I was wrong, as it turns out, in liking this trade, but still like the idea behind the trade.

flyer85
05-04-2006, 01:43 PM
The Reitsma deal is a good example of buyer beware in dealing with the Braves. They rarely seemed to get the short end of the stick in their trades and a most of those "good prospects" end up amounting to little or nothing.

Even Beane didn't fare to well in the trade sending Hudson to Atlanta, especially in comparison to what he got for Mulder.

savafan
05-04-2006, 01:44 PM
Actually ATL was the one who pursued him. Their bullpen situation was up in the air with Smoltz moving back into the rotation and they thought Reitsma would be a good fit for them.

Are you sure about that? Smoltz didn't move back into the rotation in 2004, the year they acquired Reitsma. It wasn't until last year when they acquired Dan Kolb that Smoltz returned to starting.

flyer85
05-04-2006, 01:45 PM
I disagree, I think Dan O saw a chance to get two prospects, starters, who were highly thought of, so he did it. there are a lot of "highly thought of" prospects who never pan out(especially ones from Atlanta). Nelson had been converted to a reliever by the Braves before the trade. And there is no doubt that neither of the two was a "stuff" guy. Their arsenals screamed mediocre at best.

Chip R
05-04-2006, 01:53 PM
Are you sure about that? Smoltz didn't move back into the rotation in 2004, the year they acquired Reitsma. It wasn't until last year when they acquired Dan Kolb that Smoltz returned to starting.

Take it for what it's worth.

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?p=760344

Danny Serafini
05-04-2006, 02:20 PM
I was for the trade then, and I still think it was worth a shot. Reitsma wasn't the difference maker for the Reds that year. They needed more pitching, and they had a chance to get a couple of prospects for a setup guy. Yes, the returns were a failure, but it was the right chance to take.

And I think the reason this traded is ripped so badly is the constant overvaluing of Reitsma. Let's face it, the guy was a poor man's Todd Coffey. His best use was as an 8th inning guy. That's nice to have, but in terms of value and importance it doesn't rank that high. If you can get a decent starter for a decent setup guy you make that move every time. They wound up with a couple guys who didn't pan out, but the reasoning behind the trade was correct.

Rotater Cuff
05-04-2006, 02:37 PM
I was for the trade then, and I still think it was worth a shot. Reitsma wasn't the difference maker for the Reds that year. They needed more pitching, and they had a chance to get a couple of prospects for a setup guy. Yes, the returns were a failure, but it was the right chance to take.

And I think the reason this traded is ripped so badly is the constant overvaluing of Reitsma. Let's face it, the guy was a poor man's Todd Coffey. His best use was as an 8th inning guy. That's nice to have, but in terms of value and importance it doesn't rank that high.

I couldn't agree more. I read more rubbish about what talent Reitsma was and is. I remember vividly watching the guy sweat like a criminal, sweat so bad he couldn't field his position, and always be a little short in the stuff dept. He had a good changeup, and that was about it.

flyer85
05-04-2006, 02:43 PM
I think people being happy with a "having a good concept but with flawed execution" are what stuck the Reds in being a sad sack organization for the last 5 years.

If the execution is flawed is doesn't matter that the concept was good. And DanO proved beyond any shadow of a doubt that he could not execute any plan to build a major league roster. He was more than happy to deal off major league players(albeit mostly not very good ones) for whatever flotsam another team was willing to give.

BRM
05-04-2006, 02:44 PM
Unless I've misunderstood something, most of the posts on this thread have ripped the return for Reitsma, not the idea of trading him. I think quite a few posters here were cool with trading Reitsma, they just thought the return was junk. It really has nothing to do with overvaluing him. Bottom line is DanO sent away a solid, major league relief pitcher for two "suspects" that are now out of the organization. Like many have already stated - nice idea, poor execution. However, execution is always the key to improvement and DanO was miserable in that regard.

red-in-la
05-04-2006, 02:58 PM
Sorry, but I still defend the trade. In principle, it was a pitcher, with no defined role (management's fault) for two minor league pitchers highly thought of.

What happened after was bad luck. It happens. Sometime you trade Reitsma and have nothing to show for it, and other times you trade Rob Bell and get an EE.

Sometimes moves don't work out, but the principle was sound.

In principle....you only trade a reliever who throws 95 mph and is a major leaguer for two minor leaguers who actually have talent. To say DanO was unlucky is to says the Mike Brown was just unlucky.

As much as I was not a true Sean Casey fan, I sure who rather see him hitting 3rd right now rather than Rich Aurilia or Hatteburg.....and Williams looks to be a really bad pitcher also.

So DanO really had NO clue.....and this has always been my point.....replace Jimbo only and ONLY when you have a better alternative. WR may prove to be that, the jury is still out, but he has certainly made a NICE start. But I would have rather gone without the Dano era in between.

Crumbley
05-04-2006, 03:06 PM
I couldn't agree more. I read more rubbish about what talent Reitsma was and is. I remember vividly watching the guy sweat like a criminal, sweat so bad he couldn't field his position, and always be a little short in the stuff dept. He had a good changeup, and that was about it.
You're right. Chris Reitsma's sweat would end any chance of winning the division.

KronoRed
05-04-2006, 03:10 PM
The White Sox DFA I belive. I think we gave up a minor league pitcher for him. The pitcher was in Double-A at the time and has not panned out. It was much like the Phillips trade, except Phillips has actually done something for us.
Jimenez was pretty good for us the last part of 03 and in 2004, that's when we should have traded him because Freel arrived and did the job cheaper.

He was super suck in 05.

KronoRed
05-04-2006, 03:11 PM
Oh..and DanO is laughing at us ;)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v408/Kronosb/1.jpg

ochre
05-04-2006, 03:19 PM
What I find amazing, and I'm surprised nobody else has noted this, is that John Fay (under a korean Nom de Plume) is writing copy for the English edition of Korean Newspapers.

Johnny Footstool
05-04-2006, 03:20 PM
The White Sox DFA I belive. I think we gave up a minor league pitcher for him. The pitcher was in Double-A at the time and has not panned out. It was much like the Phillips trade, except Phillips has actually done something for us.

Jimenez had a good half-season for the Reds in 2003 and a decent 2004.

Phillips has had a great month, but that's all. He could very easily fall to DJ's level.

flyer85
05-04-2006, 03:37 PM
JPhillips has had a great month, but that's all. He could very easily fall to DJ's level.if he does hopefully he won't get a raise to ~3M.

Benihana
05-04-2006, 03:42 PM
Here marks the official end of the Dante Bichette era.

On a smiliar note, how nice is it that Denny Neagle has finally amounted to Bronson Arroyo. We finally got a quality starter back. I guess things come full circle.

Edit: And Paul O'Neill has amounted to Dave Williams. Blech.

TRF
05-04-2006, 04:17 PM
Jimenez had a good half-season for the Reds in 2003 and a decent 2004.

Phillips has had a great month, but that's all. He could very easily fall to DJ's level.

Maybe, but my thinking is DJ never recovered mentally from his car accident. dude is lucky to be alive, but plays scared.

OldXOhio
05-04-2006, 04:38 PM
I laughed at that too. Particularly when DanO insisted that he had stocked the farm system for us.

I'm trying to think. Other than the Lizard and the 2 guys from the Randa trade, what exactly did DanO add to our system? :laugh:

the best dern filing system in the business my friend

TRF
05-04-2006, 05:27 PM
A lot of guys were high on taking a flyer on Kozlowski. I was.

M2
05-05-2006, 01:58 AM
A lot of guys were high on taking a flyer on Kozlowski. I was.

I was too. It was a no-risk move.

But there's a big difference between making a waiver wire move like that and trading a useful major leaguer for immediate washouts.

savafan
05-05-2006, 01:58 AM
Think where this team could be at today had they selected Krivsky over DanO three years ago.

minus5
05-05-2006, 09:18 AM
Frankly I'll miss him.... Oh wait, that was Dong....nevermind

TRF
05-05-2006, 09:40 AM
Think where this team could be at today had they selected Krivsky over DanO three years ago.

I've thought of this, and i think only marginally better. The Reds were not for various reasons going to spend money in the beginning. I'm pretty sure Milton and Ortiz would never have been Reds, but then who was available that he could have gotten? Maybe Clement. Odalis Perez was a possibility, and maybe, maybe Ben Sheets.

But I don't know that it would have been possible to get either of those guys. I'll give DanO this. the 2005 draft was pretty solid, and a few of the 2004 guys are progressing. Plus the Dominican academy is starting to bear fruit, and the structure of that facility changed under DanO.

The man believed the Reds could build from within. I think you have to do both, and a small part of me wants to think that Dan O'Brien never thought Ortiz or Milton were long term solutions, that they were bargaining pieces to strengthen the minor league clubs. I want to believe that because I'm hoping the Reds wouldn't hire someone that, well, stupid.

Unassisted
05-05-2006, 11:36 AM
Think where this team could be at today had they selected Krivsky over DanO three years ago.I don't think Krivsky would have been as effective handcuffed to John Allen and thus he may not have survived the purge that came with the change of ownership.

2001MUgrad
05-05-2006, 11:41 AM
Just imagine if Reitsma was the closer now. I'd feel a lot more comfortable about a 1 run lead in the 9th.

15fan
05-05-2006, 11:50 AM
I almost chewed my arm off over that deal. If anything, Chick and Germano may have less to offer than Nelson and Bong did.

I don't like trading major leaguers for crap.

Let's take a walk down memory lane. Here's the Randa is traded thread.

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=38294&page=8&highlight=Randa+traded

Bill
05-06-2006, 01:14 AM
Yea OB was the worst and giving up proven pitching was unthinkable for a pitching starved organization, but if I can recall correctly, many, if not most, on the board seemed pleased with the deal at the time, picking up two young pitchers almost ready for the show.

Big Klu
05-06-2006, 02:42 AM
According to the Chattanooga website, Bong is still on the Lookouts' roster. What's the official word?

deltachi8
05-06-2006, 09:32 PM
http://news.cincypost.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060506/SPT05/605060387/1027

Bong likely to leave Reds and go home
By Marc Lancaster
Post staff reporter

Jung Keun Bong spent most of spring training in the company of his countrymen while playing in the World Baseball Classic. Now, he appears headed back home to Korea for good.

The 25-year-old left-hander has been placed on Class AA Chattanooga's temporarily inactive list and the Reds are trying to work out a deal to place him with a Korean league team. Bong was 1-1 with a 5.09 ERA in four appearances for the Lookouts, but baseball has little to do with the move, which the player requested.

Bong's father has been ill, and the pitcher simply wants to go home.

"Jung's father is a very important person in his life, and he wants to go back to Korea where his dad can be a part of everything," said Reds player development director Johnny Almaraz. "He's just not very happy here right now, and even if he was at the major league level I don't think it would make a difference. He's kind of at a crossroads in his life, and we're sensitive to how he feels. Family is the most important thing, and we understand that."

With Bong leaving the Reds, one of the most questionable trades in recent team history has officially gone for naught. The spring training 2004 deal that sent right-hander Chris Reitsma to Atlanta in exchange for touted Braves prospects Bong and Bubba Nelson already has turned out to be nothing short of a bust for the Reds.

Nelson, who still has never appeared in the majors, was released this spring and is now with the Padres' Class AA affiliate. Bong started three games for the Reds in 2004, but missed all of last season with shoulder and hand injuries.