PDA

View Full Version : Are the Reds possibly looking at him too?



redsfan4445
11-07-2006, 08:25 PM
per mlbtraderumors.com

Teams Interested In Maholm
Spoke to a scout today who passed along some Pirates info. He mentioned that a couple of teams are expressing interest in 24 year-old southpaw Paul Maholm because of his easy mechanics and ability to keep the ball in the park.

Maholm posted a 0.97 HR per nine innings mark this season in 176 innings. If we are to adjust Maholm's HR per flyball rate to average (10.7%), his HR/9 falls to 0.83 per nine innings. My own projections have Maholm posting a 4.62 ERA and 1.47 WHIP in 195 innings next season. I can see his control progressing a bit, and he's a good low-risk, low-cost acquisition. Put a decent defense behind the guy and he might surprise you.

Joseph
11-07-2006, 10:08 PM
I assume he's still Pirates property, so the question is, less what he's capable of, and more what we'd have to send to Pittsburgh to get him.

If it's a B prospect, sure, ok. If it's an A prospect, or solid major leaguer, then I have to think long and hard on it because I've seen him get shelled when he's not on.

GriffeyRocks80
11-08-2006, 12:07 AM
His stats on ESPN.com don't look too bad, though I'd have to agree with only sending a B-level prospect to acquire him. Though his numbers aren't bad, they're not worth giving up top-level talent to get. This, however, is just my humble opinion.

RL

Topcat
11-08-2006, 03:25 AM
I assume he's still Pirates property, so the question is, less what he's capable of, and more what we'd have to send to Pittsburgh to get him.

If it's a B prospect, sure, ok. If it's an A prospect, or solid major leaguer, then I have to think long and hard on it because I've seen him get shelled when he's not on.


My question is why would they trade him? He is cheap and has shown signs of being decent? Next ? is why trade him within the division?

toledodan
11-08-2006, 03:46 AM
the pirates owe us one after trading casey for dave williams!

TOBTTReds
11-08-2006, 12:41 PM
the pirates owe us one after trading casey for dave williams!

What did the Pirates get by acquiring Casey? What did Detroit give them?

Redsland
11-08-2006, 12:47 PM
.
First baseman Sean Casey was dealt to the Detroit Tigers for minor-league pitcher Brian Rogers, who was 3-2 with a 2.39 ERA in 37 appearances at Class AA Erie.

M2
11-08-2006, 01:12 PM
I'm a big fan of Maholm's, always have been. He had a pretty solid break-in season in 2006.

I'd be surprised if Pittsburgh would consider dealing him, but I'd see if I could get them interested in something built around Maholm for Joey Votto.

lollipopcurve
11-08-2006, 01:18 PM
but I'd see if I could get them interested in something built around Maholm for Joey Votto.

Never.

Let's look back at this one in 2-3 years....

M2
11-08-2006, 01:20 PM
Never.

Let's look back at this one in 2-3 years....

Yeah, you'd never get anywhere trading AA 1Bs for major league pitchers.

lollipopcurve
11-08-2006, 01:49 PM
Yeah, you'd never get anywhere trading AA 1Bs for major league pitchers.

Only time will tell. It's not like you should Votto for any major league pitcher.

As with the draft, the rub is in who the players are. I happen to like Votto a lot, and Maholm only a little.

M2
11-08-2006, 02:14 PM
It's not like you should Votto for any major league pitcher.

I don't consider a 24-year-old lefty who's was a well-regarded prospect in both college and the minors (where he had a 3.10 ERA) and who's accomplished at keeping the ball on the ground and in the park and who's acquitted himself fairly well in his first full-time go at major league hitters to be just "any major league pitcher."

If anything, it's a fairly extreme reach on my part to assert that the Reds could get Maholm for something built around Votto.

lollipopcurve
11-08-2006, 02:25 PM
I don't consider a 24-year-old lefty who's was a well-regarded prospect in both college and the minors (where he had a 3.10 ERA) and who's accomplished at keeping the ball on the ground and in the park and who's acquitted himself fairly well in his first full-time go at major league hitters to be just "any major league pitcher."

I know that. But you seem to be claiming some kind of conceptual high ground with this...


Yeah, you'd never get anywhere trading AA 1Bs for major league pitchers.

Where Maholm is the "major league pitcher" and Votto is the "AA hitter." As if any trade built on that conceptual framework would be a good one. Those are your categories, not mine.

Again, it comes down to how much you like the individual players. I happen to like Votto better than you do, and Maholm less. That's all I'm saying. Let's see what happens down the road with these guys.

M2
11-08-2006, 02:39 PM
I know that. But you seem to be claiming some kind of conceptual high ground with this...

Don't know if it's conceptual high ground, but it seems to me it's easier to find a 1B than a good, young LHP. Add in that the pitcher has served a good chunk of his major league apprenticeship and the 1B has his in front of him (and likely he won't be starting it in earnest until 2008) then it just makes the deal all the more enticing.


Again, it comes down to how much you like the individual players. I happen to like Votto better than you do, and Maholm less. That's all I'm saying. Let's see what happens down the road with these guys.

I'll take a wild guess that if Maholm was Reds property and Votto was Pirates property, you'd like Maholm better and Votto less. As for the Reds, waiting to see what happens down the road is the exact sort of crippling stasis that's plague the franchise during the 21st century. If Maholm could be had for a package featuring Votto, and that's a fairly sizable if, then the Reds need to make a decision. Wait and see is just reflexive inaction. From where I sit, there aren't enough arms on the roster and in the system for the team to think it's in any sort of decent shape vis-a-vis the rotation in the immediate or over the next five years. My take is that it ought to take action and do something about it.

lollipopcurve
11-08-2006, 04:32 PM
I'll take a wild guess that if Maholm was Reds property and Votto was Pirates property, you'd like Maholm better and Votto less.

I've already given you several reasons for why I like Votto. None mentioned the uniform. Yet, I guess, no debate between us can be without a condescending dig like this. Why is that?

I'm willing to debate this out some, but frankly I get sick of the lack of respect. It's stupid.

M2
11-08-2006, 05:18 PM
I've already given you several reasons for why I like Votto. None mentioned the uniform. Yet, I guess, no debate between us can be without a condescending dig like this. Why is that?

I'm willing to debate this out some, but frankly I get sick of the lack of respect. It's stupid.

You tend to like guys in the home uniform. Nothing wrong with it (it's a good fan reflex in fact), but in recent years it's caused you to overvalue/overestimate certain Reds properties (I'm thinking in particulary about the 2005 pitching staff and Dave Williams).

You actually haven't provided any reasons here as to why the Reds shouldn't put Votto on the block for a young arm like Maholm other than you like Votto quite a bit and Maholm not as much. For instance, how soon can the Reds expect Votto to become a plus 1B? I don't think it's particularly likely that he'll get there before 2009 -- one more year in the minors, one year of learning on the job. Given that Maholm's been better than league average through his first 217.1 IP (104 ERA+) I'm thinking he's a pretty good bet to be a 200+ IP, sub-4.00 ERA guy by 2008, possibly by next season. He's got four pitches, a real good head on his shoulders and good athleticism (something I value highly for a LHP).

Now perhaps you think Maholm won't get any better than he was this year at age 23/24 or you think the Reds won't really need what he can provide or that Votto will provide something the franchise won't easily replace. I don't really know. You haven't touched upon any of that. All I know is that you've made a blanket statement that no way you'd deal Votto for Maholm without any detail attached to it. I'd think most people would recognize that Maholm is probably the more highly-valued of the two in the baseball world and, since I don't see anything coming from you other than a stubborn insistence that Votto will be better in some nebulous fashion, what I'm left with is this likely being a case of you overvaluing the in-house commodity.

For instance, if the Reds had a 24-year-old LHP who'd been a first round draft pick in 2003, spent three years on the team's top 10 prospects list and done a fair job in his rookie season do I think you'd be willing to deal him for, say, James Loney or Joe Koshansky? No, I sincerely doubt you would. You were high on Brandon Claussen. I find it unlikely you'd be down on a kid like Maholm if he were Reds property.

And if you feel disrespected by that, I don't care. You can explain to me where I'm wrong and I'll gladly listen.

lollipopcurve
11-08-2006, 06:33 PM
You actually haven't provided any reasons here as to why the Reds shouldn't put Votto on the block for a young arm like Maholm other than you like Votto quite a bit and Maholm not as much.

That's because you've shifted the debate from Maholm for Votto to a pitcher "like Maholm" for Votto. There are young pitchers I like better (like Bonderman), but Votto won't fetch guys like that.


For instance, how soon can the Reds expect Votto to become a plus 1B? I don't think it's particularly likely that he'll get there before 2009 -- one more year in the minors, one year of learning on the job.

2008. Like I said, I like him better than you do.


Given that Maholm's been better than league average through his first 217.1 IP (104 ERA+) I'm thinking he's a pretty good bet to be a 200+ IP, sub-4.00 ERA guy by 2008, possibly by next season. He's got four pitches, a real good head on his shoulders and good athleticism (something I value highly for a LHP).

Good points. Tell me more about the athleticism. I see a 24-year-old who weighs 230 (at what? 6'1"), and I worry.
I also see a very high walk rate -- worrisome for a supposedly polished college lefty who is not a power pitcher, and WHIP above 1.6.


Now perhaps you think Maholm won't get any better than he was this year at age 23/24 or you think the Reds won't really need what he can provide or that Votto will provide something the franchise won't easily replace. I don't really know.

You are correct in some of this. I think Maholm will improve, but I don't think he's got much of a chance to get out of 4th/5th starter territory. If he doesn't stop walking people, he won't be in a rotation for long, either. I see bigger downside than upside. The crux for me is the offensive dropoff the Reds have undergone, sure to continue if Griffey continues to slide. With the trade of Kearns, I am thinking Dunn won't want to stay beyond 08, and given his lack of improvement, I think the team would be wise to see if he can bring back a more certain commodity than a pitcher like Maholm -- either this offseason or next. Bonderman for Dunn (plus others), as rumored, is a better bet than Votto for Maholm in my book. Let the team ride with Harang/Arroyo/a legit guy like Bonderman for a couple years, then by 09, assuming they lock up Harang and the player acquired for Dunn, you've got Homer in the rotation and a relatively young and cheap middle of the order including EdE, Votto and Bruce. That young offense allows you to pay your starters -- and to graze the middleground for offensive complements, who won't cost much, will be readily available and will be willing to come mash in GAB. If the middle of the order is thin, that extra big bat is going to cost big bucks.

All I got time for, and it's hurried, but that's how I lay it out from here to 09. Basically, I like good young pitchers as much as anyone, but I think the answer is going to be to get as good as you can with Dunn, not an iffy proposition like Maholm for a hitter who going to be cheap and productive as soon as 08.

M2
11-08-2006, 07:31 PM
That's because you've shifted the debate from Maholm for Votto to a pitcher "like Maholm" for Votto. There are young pitchers I like better (like Bonderman), but Votto won't fetch guys like that.

Well, I think it's probably more practical to talk about pitchers, like Maholm, whom Votto might fetch (though it's a reach)


2008. Like I said, I like him better than you do.

And I like Prince Fielder better than Votto and all he was able to produce in his rookie campaign was an average effort at 1B. Conor Jackson, an all-world prospect, produced a slightly below average effort for a 1B. Adrian Gonzalez had a good season, but he was roughly were Votto is in 2004. Point here being that even the top prospects need an adjustment period and I've yet to see much of an argument for why Votto will be an exception.


Good points. Tell me more about the athleticism. I see a 24-year-old who weighs 230 (at what? 6'1"), and I worry.
I also see a very high walk rate -- worrisome for a supposedly polished college lefty who is not a power pitcher, and WHIP above 1.6.

Allowing some baserunners and not whiffing as many people as you should is par for the course with a young pitcher. Justin Verlander went through that this year too and he's as powerful a power pitcher as has ever been built.

Maholm fields his position extremely well and holds runners well too. He could drop some weight, but he's fairly nimble out there even with that.


You are correct in some of this. I think Maholm will improve, but I don't think he's got much of a chance to get out of 4th/5th starter territory. If he doesn't stop walking people, he won't be in a rotation for long, either. I see bigger downside than upside.

He's already basically giving #4 quality right now (176 IP, 95 ERA+). So if he improves you're pretty much looking at a #3 guy. I can where he might get stuck as a pure league average guy like Jeff Suppan, Jon Garland or Mark Redman before his recent collapse. I don't worry about the walks that much. He's young and he pitches off the Tom Glavine model, who also walks too many people. Keep the ball on the ground and from leaving the park, which Maholm does, and that'll bail you out a good percentage of the time. Maholm strikes me as the sort of LHP who specializes in making the other team work extra hard to beat him. He does a nice job of making the opposition move only 90 feet at a time.


The crux for me is the offensive dropoff the Reds have undergone, sure to continue if Griffey continues to slide. With the trade of Kearns, I am thinking Dunn won't want to stay beyond 08

I worry about the offense too. Yet the part that worries me least is being able to find 1Bs to fit into the mix. If Votto was a CF, I'd consider him nearly untouchable, but there's always another 1B around the next corner. The Reds still need pitching and there simply isn't enough of it on the way up from the minors for the team to sit pat. Maholm will be cheap for the next two seasons, so the team could save money on him.


All I got time for, and it's hurried, but that's how I lay it out from here to 09. Basically, I like good young pitchers as much as anyone, but I think the answer is going to be to get as good as you can with Dunn, not an iffy proposition like Maholm for a hitter who going to be cheap and productive as soon as 08.

My concerns are '07 and '08. That's the Arroyo-Harang window. I'm not opposed to trading Dunn, though I put a high price on his head, but the offensive picture for the next two years gets pretty grim without him around. My take is there's always some "if" with anybody you trade for. If there wasn't, he wouldn't be on the market. If you trade Dunn, you'll be getting back some question marks too. The Tigers probably won't seriously shop Bonderman until his "ifs" rise. To me the real art in baseball trading is identifying the guys who'll bust through their ifs.

VI_RedsFan
11-08-2006, 09:16 PM
With the rumors about Lieber, I would love to see us go after Maholm and Lieber to improve the rotation for next year. Let's say we send Ross to the Phils for Lieber, and send a prospect or two to the Bucs for Maholm. That gives us a veteran pitcher and a young stud to throw into the rotation in 07. Here's what it would look like:

Harang
Arroyo
Lieber
Maholm
Milton

Put Lohse in the bullpen, then I say we would have solid starting pitching heading into next year. But that is just one of our many weaknesses...

lollipopcurve
11-08-2006, 09:20 PM
To me the real art in baseball trading is identifying the guys who'll bust through their ifs.

Agreed. All well-argued, M2. In the end, I like the road Votto has traveled, and, as I said in a previous post, he has really busted his butt to go from a high school with no baseball team in Toronto to where he is now. I like him better than Conor Jackson simply because he's a lefty, and I think the Fielder comparison is a good one. Bottom line is that I think he's a sure thing to be at least a #5 hitter, maybe a #3. Key word is "sure." I think the Reds can slot him in for a core offensive spot from 2008-2012 or thereabouts, and when you can do that with a young player, it really helps in building a plan. I don't want to see the 07-08 window take that big a bite out of 09 and beyond. The Reds currently have a weak offense, weak up the middle defense and no closer. I'd rather see them use the FA market and sign middle/bottom of the market guys to maybe make the team respectable for a couple years while buying time for guys like Votto, Bruce and Homer. Trading these top prospects (and, mind you, these guys ARE excellent prospects, not figments of my overheated imagination) for an outside shot at the wild card in the next two years seems imprudent to me.

More later....

M2
11-08-2006, 11:26 PM
I can see blowing it all up and trying to rebuild around Encarnacion, Phillips and what the club's got in the minors. My take on that is if you're going to do it, don't do it half way. Get a king's ransom for Harang and for Arroyo. Let Dunn come back, post gaudy numbers and then deal him. You've got to go after it like the Marlins have.

But I think either way, the franchise needs to make a choice. Either the next two years are the priority or it's 2009 and beyond. There simply isn't enough talent to serve both masters in that. Mind you, even if I was aiming for 2009 and beyond, I'd still be dealing Votto for Maholm. Obviously you're counting on Bailey in that scenario, but somebody's got to be there pitching with him.

MississippiRed
11-09-2006, 12:05 PM
If the Reds don't blow up the offense in the off-season, Maholm could be a very good pick-up. I expect his walks will decrease when he has a little more faith in his offense scoring runs.

I am admittedly biased in liking Maholm, as I saw him pitch in college many times. He was a "Friday night starter" in the SEC, where he pitched against other team's best starter in a lot of 2-1 and 1-0 games. He was extremely successful. It's not MLB, but it is pretty good baseball and he was dominant.