PDA

View Full Version : How Matsuzaka may affect the Reds



Strikes Out Looking
12-15-2006, 08:22 PM
It may be a stretch but I think the Reds may have a net positive by the Red Sox signing of Matsuzaka. Here's my theory: Bronson is pining for Boston, but he has two more years left in Cincy. In two years, the Sox will have at least Matsuzaka, Beckett, Papelbon (arb-eligible) and Lester under their control. If Schilling retires after '07 they will try to replace him before '09 (when they could resign Bronson). Thus, Bronson's timing and Boston's need may not be compatable, making it easier for him to stay in Cincy.

Of course, he could devolve so much by then from his 2006 season that neither team will want him. But I'm thinking positive--and this I believe is a positive sign for the Redlegs.

TOBTTReds
12-15-2006, 08:27 PM
Barring a trade, he is a Red for 2 more years whether he dreams of Boston or not. :deadhorse

vaticanplum
12-15-2006, 08:48 PM
An awful lot can change in three baseball years...I really don't think that Arroyo will be with the Reds in three years, but I don't necessarily think he'll be with the Red Sox either.

His career to date, and baseball being what it is, both lead me to believe that he has a good chance of being a solid if not spectacular journeyman. A great way to change this would be for the Reds to spend some money and build a playoff-caliber team in the next couple years, but anyway.

KoryMac5
12-15-2006, 10:02 PM
Bronson at the end of his contract will be playing for the bright lights and the big city of New York maybe even the second city Chicago. He loves a sold out stadium and the night life to play his music. Enjoy while we have him.

Falls City Beer
12-15-2006, 10:04 PM
Bronson at the end of his contract will be playing for the bright lights and the big city of New York maybe even the second city Chicago. He loves a sold out stadium and the night life to play his music. Enjoy while we have him.

Which is fine, as I suspect he won't be all that good by the time his contract's up.

Though if I had my druthers, I'd trade him at the deadline to get max, max value from him.

deltachi8
12-15-2006, 10:40 PM
Which is fine, as I suspect he won't be all that good by the time his contract's up.

Though if I had my druthers, I'd trade him at the deadline to get max, max value from him.

As I don't believe the Reds will be a serious contender this year, if Arroyo can have a good first half, I would absolutely flip him at the deadline and grab top value for him.

steig
12-15-2006, 11:49 PM
As I don't believe the Reds will be a serious contender this year, if Arroyo can have a good first half, I would absolutely flip him at the deadline and grab top value for him.

I agree, I highly doubt he would resign with the Reds and considering the money going to Lilly and Meche, I don't think the Reds could afford him. I think Boston is the most likely team for him to sign with if he tests the FA waters. Wakefield and Shilling are getting old and won't be around for to much longer so he could be a nice pick up for boston at that point. Until then i hope to enjoy him in a reds uniform.

Jpup
12-16-2006, 01:58 AM
how about trading him now? He's a pretty decent arm and seems to be a decent guy, but his value will never be higher than it is right now.

TOBTTReds
12-16-2006, 02:40 AM
I hope/think the Reds will be contenders in 08. I would like to keep him for that unless we have 4 other better starters.

StillFunkyB
12-16-2006, 10:25 AM
The only player I would be hesitant about dealing is Harang. If you can get a good package of players for BA, then I would absolutely do it.

redsfan30
12-16-2006, 10:29 AM
I'm glad I've finally got some supporters of my trade Arroyo now concept.

His value will never be as high as it is right this second and with pitching as high valued as it is right now, I've got to think Krivsky could get a king's ransom in return.

It won't happen, but it's what I'd do.

Falls City Beer
12-16-2006, 10:38 AM
I'm glad I've finally got some supporters of my trade Arroyo now concept.

His value will never be as high as it is right this second and with pitching as high valued as it is right now, I've got to think Krivsky could get a king's ransom in return.

It won't happen, but it's what I'd do.

It's not what I want as it's simply a contingent move; if they screw up and don't get a king's ransom, it'll set the Reds back years and years once again.

redsfanmia
12-16-2006, 04:17 PM
If Krivsky had some cahones and a dead solid plan he would deal Bronson and Harang for prospects now. If the Reds ever seriously contend again these two guys will be long gone by then anyway so lets get rid of them now for young arms and plan on winning 65 games next season instead of planning on winning 75 games and winning 65 anyway.

Strikes Out Looking
12-16-2006, 04:59 PM
If Krivsky had some cahones and a dead solid plan he would deal Bronson and Harang for prospects now. If the Reds ever seriously contend again these two guys will be long gone by then anyway so lets get rid of them now for young arms and plan on winning 65 games next season instead of planning on winning 75 games and winning 65 anyway.

Hate to disagree, but teams that consistently deal their best for prospects are called the Pirates and Royals. Additionally, Bud Selig has of yet to approve the use of batting tees to stand in for pitchers. I'd keep BA and Harang as long as they are sucessful and build a staff around them rather than waiting for "prospects" to show up and pitch as well.

Falls City Beer
12-16-2006, 05:02 PM
Hate to disagree, but teams that consistently deal their best for prospects are called the Pirates and Royals. Additionally, Bud Selig has of yet to approve the use of batting tees to stand in for pitchers. I'd keep BA and Harang as long as they are sucessful and build a staff around them rather than waiting for "prospects" to show up and pitch as well.

And teams that think two starters and a terrible bullpen lead to contention get their asses handed to them.

redsfanmia
12-16-2006, 06:52 PM
Hate to disagree, but teams that consistently deal their best for prospects are called the Pirates and Royals. Additionally, Bud Selig has of yet to approve the use of batting tees to stand in for pitchers. I'd keep BA and Harang as long as they are sucessful and build a staff around them rather than waiting for "prospects" to show up and pitch as well.

Are the Pirates and Royals really worse off than the Reds are? Look just because the Reds played way above their heads last season for about 2 months doesnt mean they are contending or honestly even close to contending.

The_jbh
12-16-2006, 11:51 PM
It's not what I want as it's simply a contingent move; if they screw up and don't get a king's ransom, it'll set the Reds back years and years once again.

Not all reds fans are as pessimistic as you are, including Castellini so the only way this contingency move occurs is if the Reds are in the Cellar of the NL Central in late June. I wont disagree with you if thats the case, but then again im optimistic and think we can contend if a few chips fall in place such as Baily, Votto, the young (EE, Phillips, Coffey) improve

Highlifeman21
12-17-2006, 11:44 AM
Not all reds fans are as pessimistic as you are, including Castellini so the only way this contingency move occurs is if the Reds are in the Cellar of the NL Central in late June. I wont disagree with you if thats the case, but then again im optimistic and think we can contend if a few chips fall in place such as Baily, Votto, the young (EE, Phillips, Coffey) improve

We need more than Bailey and Votto, and improvement from EE, Phillips and Coffey to contend.

At best, Votto and Bailey start the year in AAA, and I doubt we'd see them for a September Call up, so Votto and Bailey make an impact for this team 2008 at the earliest.

EE is the only one in that trio on the "improve" list that I think still has a ceiling. We probably have seen the best Coffey has to offer, and history suggests Phillips will return to career norms and means.

Combine all this with the fact we're experiencing the aging decline of Griffey and a 3rd OF by committee, and the Reds are far from contenders in 2007.

And I didn't even mention the pitching staff (aside from Coffey).

edabbs44
12-17-2006, 10:19 PM
If Krivsky had some cahones and a dead solid plan he would deal Bronson and Harang for prospects now. If the Reds ever seriously contend again these two guys will be long gone by then anyway so lets get rid of them now for young arms and plan on winning 65 games next season instead of planning on winning 75 games and winning 65 anyway.

I couldn't agree with this more. Harang would net a sick amount of value along with Arroyo to a lesser extent. Add that to Bruce, Votto, Homer and EE and if the draft falls nicely this June, this team would look spectacular in 4 years.

Doc. Scott
12-20-2006, 09:37 PM
The Reds are probably more likely to trade Arroyo (assuming a lack of contention) if he backslides from 2006 somewhat. If he's pitching like a #1 again, the fan outcry would be too great. But if he retreats to his career norms- 4.00-4.50 ERA, etc.- he's much more likely to get shipped off for prospects.

Although his price tag for the next two years is so reasonable that I'd discourage trading him unless his assortment of breaking balls just totally loses the mojo.