PDA

View Full Version : Reds Trading Pieces



thatcoolguy_22
04-23-2007, 02:22 AM
Just bored and went through our roster searching for trade ideas and who could be brought in and whatnot. Here is what I came up with. All replacement options are only in house. I didn't feel the need to expound upon trade ideas and possibilities. There are just too many




1B
Hatteburg- What can a 38 year old, career .271 hitter bring in return? bumbkis
Conine- He does have a young body...
Replacement options-Votto

2B
Brandon Phillips- 25 yr old + glove shows signs of having ability to hit for power. If apart of the right package deal could be used to find some upgrades. Last year hit .276 17 HR
Juan Castro- A joke of a player but still Royce Clayton was traded last year...
Replacement options- Freel, Castro, Bellhorn, Keppinger

SS
Alex Gonzalez- Just signed to a 3 year 14 million $$ contract. Very light hitting but near gold glove caliber in the field. I see 0 trade value with the combo of his hitting ability/contact status.
Replacement options- Freel, Janish, Machado

3B
Edwin Encarnacion- This could be very interesting trading piece. 24 year old with pop and glove work (he can't throw to first though...) Last year hit .276 with 15 dingahs in only 406 ABs. Coupled in a group with a prospect or 2 could possibly net something the equivalent to a young Aaron Harang (i know but this is the harang I was referring to ) see http://www.baseball-reference.com/h/haranaa01.shtml notice the 2003/4 years. A relatively young pitcher with limited major league experience that has an above average ceiling
Replacement options- Freel, Aaron Herr (hit .285 with 13 HR in between AA/AAA last year) Castro

OF
Ken Griffey Jr- The same one who said "Its like a party in my mouth, and everybody is invited" - during a voice-over on The Simpsons is due to make 12 mil (or so) this year and has some unreal contract that is remaining. (32 mil left I believe correct me if I'm wrong) Could net a couple of prospects at best at this stage of his career and only to an AL team where he will be forced to DH. Also is a 10/5 guy...
Adam Dunn- Could net (by himself) a #3 type pitcher. Has a lot of money in his contract left and is also another 10/5 guy. We all know what he brings and doesn't to the table. It has been debated for ages here.
Ryan Freel- Super Utility guy and impossible to trade by himself. He would be forced to be apart of a package for us to gain anything of note. At best a AA pitcher single handedly.
Josh Hamilton- Who really knows what his trade value is. I believe we have his rights for the next 5(6?) years though. So he will remain a cheap power source for quite some time. However his trade value has never been higher. I think apart of a package he could be the marque and maybe get us a #3/#4 type starter or possibly a couple of highly regarded prospects from a team like the D-Rays/Diamond backs who each have about a zillion top 100 types.
Replacement Options-See any of the above if one is traded.

SP
Aaron Harang- Dominant pitcher led the league in Ks, IP, and tied with wins last year. Could net a kings Ransom in Prospects if a rebuilding phase was decided upon. Possibly able to bring in a Phillip Hughes+
Bronson Arroyo- Last year had a breakout posting a 3.29 ERA but was limited in wins due to poor run support. Could land a load of prospects just because a pitcher's value in the trading world has never been higher.
Kyle Lohse- Off to his fastest start ever with a 1.91 ERA. His value has never been this high before and can not get any higher. He is in a contract year and if we are out of contention by mid season he could be dealt for a plethora of prospects. A very good pitcher is worth double his weight on gold in this market.
Eric Milton- you have a better chance of winning the lottery in 3 consecutive weeks than pawning him off on some unwary team. However he has been pitching good enough to be a solid #4/5 typ pitcher this yeara but 9$ mil left?
Matt Belisle- A guy that is still young and still hasn't reached his ceiling. Could be packaged with a group for one of those power hitting RH bats we've been searching for...
Replacement options- Homer Bailey, Bobby Livingston, Phil Dumatrait, Kirk Sarloos

RP
David Weathers- Crafty kind of guy with minimal value. Does show the ability to record a save when needed though. Who really knows
Todd Coffey- Despite his 2 recent breakdowns he has shown the ability to throw a 93-95 mph fastball for strikes. last year had a 3.58 era with 78 IP. Once again though by himself he has minimal trade value must be packaged.
Basically everyone else in the pen has little to no value and will be throw ins into the ever so elusive"package"

MINORS
Homer Bailey- What else is needed to be said about this kid? Single handedly could bring in Major League talent to the starting rotation (#2/3). Number 2 overall pitching prospect (baseballamerica.com)
Joey Votto- Number 43 overall (baseballamerica.com) Shows quick hands and plate discipline with power potential. The future of the reds 1B
Jay Bruce- Number 14 overall minor league prospect (baseballamerica.com)Dynamite player that could be a cornerstoone of a trade. Send him mixed with some other major league players and possibly scratch out a dime. However he is only 19 and is still at least 2 years away from the bigs. Hitting .333 so far this year through 60+ ABs
Johnny Cueto- Among redszoners he is the heir apparent but, according the rest of civilization or baseballamerica he isn't even a top 100 minor league guy. I know only what I read from you guys and you all appeear to be rather biased ;)
Drew Stubbs- Number 88 (baseballamerica.com) So far this year he is .346 with 7 ribs and a HR. The jury is still out as far as trade potential.





Discuss

killuminati35
04-23-2007, 02:40 AM
It seems like there was some real thought put into this, but all these "lets trade this guy" threads get kind of old. It seems like people need to realize that this isn't a fantasy league or MVP on the PS2, this is the major leagues.

thatcoolguy_22
04-23-2007, 02:56 AM
It seems like there was some real thought put into this, but all these "lets trade this guy" threads get kind of old. It seems like people need to realize that this isn't a fantasy league or MVP on the PS2, this is the major leagues.

i thought this article pretty much said that. Look at every player with the exception of Lohse/EE and there really isn't anyone even remotely tradeable. And Lohse WILL be traded this year. The only real question would be possible partners. As soon as it appears that we are out of the running he is gone.


And besides brotha, this is a baseball forum where you talk about anything related to the game. There were over 5 pages about Alyssa Milano's clothing line for crying out loud. I would much rather debate trade scenarios than whether or not I should purchase a fiitted jersey for my g/f (but it lifts AND seperates)

AtomicDumpling
04-23-2007, 03:16 AM
Very good and interesting summary of the Reds' trading material.

Your analysis shows the Reds don't have the players that other teams want badly enough that they will be willing to trade us quality players good enough to improve our team this year. Any trade the Reds can make will help us next year or later. I think the best the Reds can do is trade a couple of relief pitchers to obtain a few mid-range prospects. I am thinking of the Mercker-for-Belisle trade of two years ago as an example. These kinds of trades can be made when the trade deadline approaches in August. Some team still in contention may be willing to overpay for a role player like Conine, Hatteberg, Freel, Cormier, Stanton or Weathers at that time.

If a team wants to significantly improve their team, the best time to do it is the offseason. During the season (especially this early) we would have to pay top value for any high-quality player. This means in order to bring in a quality upgrade we will have to give up the likes of Dunn, Harang, Arroyo, Bailey or Bruce. I don't think the Reds are willing to do that, but maybe they should.

The only position the Reds have an excess of capable players to use as trade bait is the bullpen. We have guys like Bray, Burton, Majewski and others that we could trade because we are not using them, but we wouldn't get any studs in return (not even Kearns or Lopez).

I keep looking for trade scenarios in which the Reds could upgrade one position without hurting another position. I can't find any real possibilities.

In my opinion the position of our greatest need is first base. If you compare our 1st base platoon to the players manning 1st base for the other 29 teams I think this is the position where we are closest to the bottom of the league. Hatteberg and Conine are decent hitters, but they play a position where nearly all the other teams have a true stud, run-producing basher to build the batting order around. Hatteberg and Conine are good backup-level / pinch-hitting guys to have around, but they are not worthy of starting at the easiest position on the field to play. Unfortunately the Reds do not have sufficient trading pieces to allow us to significantly upgrade at first base. Maybe Votto come August?

Redsnake
04-23-2007, 08:58 AM
"Adam Dunn- Could net (by himself) a #3 type pitcher. Has a lot of money in his contract left and is also another 10/5 guy. We all know what he brings and doesn't to the table. It has been debated for ages here."

When did Dunn become a 10/5 guy? He's only been in the league since 2001.
Am I missing something here.

Mr Red
04-23-2007, 09:12 AM
Thanks for the good read. You put a lot of thought and effort into this and not a whole lot (if anything) that I disagree about. More threads of this caliber would be welcome on Redszone.

Your thought process throws a couple of interesting questions out there. Would we be a stronger team with Votto manning first and Hattie/Conine coming off the bench? Could we trade E. Encarnacion (which would not be popular on this board) and make the Red's a better team?

As I said previously thanks for the good read.

thatcoolguy_22
04-23-2007, 09:32 AM
"Adam Dunn- Could net (by himself) a #3 type pitcher. Has a lot of money in his contract left and is also another 10/5 guy. We all know what he brings and doesn't to the table. It has been debated for ages here."

When did Dunn become a 10/5 guy? He's only been in the league since 2001.
Am I missing something here.

same team since 2001. I was under the assumption that it was either or, 10 years in the league or 5 with the same ball club. I could be mistaken though. :dunno:

rotnoid
04-23-2007, 11:11 AM
same team since 2001. I was under the assumption that it was either or, 10 years in the league or 5 with the same ball club. I could be mistaken though. :dunno:


It's both. Players only get 10/5 rights after 10 years of ML service and the last 5 with the same team. That's why it's a big deal for vets who leave as free agents to negotiate a no trade clause in their new contracts. They lose the 10/5 rights because the clock starts over on the 5.

REDREAD
04-23-2007, 11:29 AM
I think Edwin will be traded before the start of the 2008 season. It's pretty obvious that he has fallen out of favor. The lack of a legitimate replacement 3b won't stop Wayne from dealing him.. He'll either stick Freel there or take an old Clayton-like 3b back as part of the return haul..

If we are "close" at the deadline, I can seriously see Wayne trading Edwin for relief pitching and holding Lohse in an ill advised attempt to "go for it".

I agree that Lohse should be shopped hard at the deadline if he's still pitching well. We desparately need an influx of young talent. However, as dumb as this sounds, if Lohse pitches well this season, I think Wayne would prefer to extend him instead of trading him. That seems to be Wayne's thing.

rotnoid
04-23-2007, 11:37 AM
If we are "close" at the deadline, I can seriously see Wayne trading Edwin for relief pitching and holding Lohse in an ill advised attempt to "go for it".

I agree that Lohse should be shopped hard at the deadline if he's still pitching well. We desparately need an influx of young talent. However, as dumb as this sounds, if Lohse pitches well this season, I think Wayne would prefer to extend him instead of trading him. That seems to be Wayne's thing.

He might prefer it, but I'm not sure we can afford it. If Lohse keeps this up, the Reds might just be priced out of the market for him. Pitchers of his caliber will probably command something in the range of 3 years/$24 million (again, assuming he continues to pitch fairly well) or more. At that dollar amount, I think the Reds would be more inclined to go with the young guys they already have (and take the draft picks), based on their activity in last year's market. Having Harang and Arroyo locked up allows them some flexibility in the 3, 4, and 5 spots in the rotation.

bucksfan2
04-23-2007, 11:46 AM
Freel would be a disaster at 3b on an every day basis. Actually I want to see him at 3b as little as possible. I think you may see some of the veteran bull pen pieces get traded by the deadline. I think Weathers, Stanton, and Cormeir all could be traded at some point this year. Unfortunatly these players aren't going to get much more than a mid level prospect. A trade that I can invision is packaging Lohse with Freel. So far Lohse has looked very good and Freel could be an important piece on a playoff hopeful with his versatility and his ability to steal bases. Hatty and Conine could also be moved but they would be minor deals as well.

What I do not want to see is some of the younger players spend all of the year in AAA because the reds have a group of veteran players with MLB contracts. Maj, Bray, Votto, and even Baily need to be up on this club at some time this year. It would serve them as well as the reds no good to keep them down in Louisville all year long.

Newman4
04-23-2007, 11:52 AM
He might prefer it, but I'm not sure we can afford it. If Lohse keeps this up, the Reds might just be priced out of the market for him. Pitchers of his caliber will probably command something in the range of 3 years/$24 million (again, assuming he continues to pitch fairly well) or more. At that dollar amount, I think the Reds would be more inclined to go with the young guys they already have (and take the draft picks), based on their activity in last year's market. Having Harang and Arroyo locked up allows them some flexibility in the 3, 4, and 5 spots in the rotation.

I think Lohse at mid season is a possibility. The Reds won't spend and probably shouldn't spend 8 mil per year on him. Could be a good one if they fall out of contention.

TheBigLebowski
04-23-2007, 11:55 AM
I just don't understand why the heck everyone wants to trade Freel. He's a very useful guy, a fan favorite and, a good player. We just signed him to an extension at a rate of pay that I think is very fair.

I don't think this team, as currently constructed, can compete for a pennant. However, I do not think we're far away. We need a couple of good bullpen arms and a right-handed power bat. Still, this sort of mentality is not the fault of the fan; it is my hypothesis that fans of teams like the Reds develop this sort of "perpetual rebuilding mode" mentality. We look at players like Freel, Lohse, and Arroyo and evaluate them not on what they can do to help us win but, what prospects they can net us at the trading deadline.

This homestand really took the wind out of our collective sails but, remember that this season is not even 20 games old yet and we're in a pretty mediocre division. Griffey, Ross, and EE WILL start to hit. Our bullpen is not as good as the first 15 games demonstrated; however, it is also not as bad as the past 5. It's somewhere inbetween, which makes it serviceable.

Let's see what happens over the next couple of months before we get into sell-mode.

REDREAD
04-23-2007, 12:00 PM
He might prefer it, but I'm not sure we can afford it. If Lohse keeps this up, the Reds might just be priced out of the market for him. .

I agree. I don't think the Reds should extend Lohse. However, I could see Wayne doing it. We could absorb 8 million/year for him.. Milton's salary rolls off the books after this year. I agree with you, it would be a dumb move, but I could see Wayne wanting to resign one of his "success stories".. Just look at what he did with Ross, after Ross' career year. Yes, that was less money, but I think we have precedence.

Wayne is a little bit too loose in extending players. He has no problem giving big contracts to marginal players, and seems swayed by career years. I think Lohse is a horrible gamble. He seems like the type that would bust his butt this year for the big payday and then go back to his old self as soon as he gets the fat contract.

RedsManRick
04-23-2007, 12:00 PM
With the absolute dearth of right handed power on this club and our complete lack of 3B depth in the minors, EE can't go anywhere unless a 3B is coming back in our direction. The kid needs time and experience.

The real point is that Krivsky has taken O'Brien's imbalanced roster and flattened it out. Unfortunately, it still lacks the raw high potential talent necessary to push us being a legitimate playoff contender.

As we've seen we have a number of capable guys, but very few true impact guys. We need to turn quantity in to quality in terms of bullpen in particular. Sometimes you can naturally get quality out of quantity, but I'm not sure Coffey, Countlangus, etc. will ever be lights-out type guys. Solid ML relievers, sure. But a staff full of David Weathers' and Mike Stanton's will help you win 80 games.

Both in the field and on the staff, we need 1-2 impact players and we're going to have to create room for them. The question in my mind is who goes, and more importantly, who fills that spot? Trade Dunn and make a run at Andruw Jones? There are going to have to be familiar names moved if this team is going to take the next step. With the youth we have coming, the roster needs to be positioned to take advantage of it. It should make for an interesting year.

UGADaddy
04-23-2007, 12:02 PM
I'd like to see EdE leave so we can get the four OFs in regularly (Freel to 3B). I'd also LOVE to see either Griffey or Dunn traded, but what's the going rate for an overpriced aging RF or a LF who can't play defense and strikes out nearly every other AB? The Reds need some bats, particularly from the right side of the box, but I don't know how they're going to get them without giving up some minor league talent.

REDREAD
04-23-2007, 12:05 PM
I think Lohse at mid season is a possibility. The Reds won't spend and probably shouldn't spend 8 mil per year on him. Could be a good one if they fall out of contention.

It would be perfect to trade Lohse and then bring up Homer (if he's ready).
Heck, if Homer isn't ready, I wouldn't mind having Sarloos in the rotation the rest of the year.

If I had to bet though, I'd say that if Lohse is looking good in July, Wayne will try to extend him. Let's hope Lohse is too unreasonable and greedy and the deal doesn't get done. I'm concerned at the way the Reds really were talking Lohse up this spring. They seem to have a very high opinion of him. Obviously, I'm purely speculating here.

rotnoid
04-23-2007, 12:12 PM
If I had to bet though, I'd say that if Lohse is looking good in July, Wayne will try to extend him. Let's hope Lohse is too unreasonable and greedy and the deal doesn't get done. I'm concerned at the way the Reds really were talking Lohse up this spring. They seem to have a very high opinion of him. Obviously, I'm purely speculating here.

I agree with you. If Lohse's agent is earning his keep and Lohse is pitching reasonably well in July, he's got to test the market. It's a fair bet the Reds won't overpay.

TheBigLebowski
04-23-2007, 12:14 PM
If Lohse continues to pitch like he currently is (bear in mind, his era will probably balance out somewhere in the mid-3.00's), he's worth 8 mil to me. I'd be upset if we didn't pony up that type of cash to keep him. Reference this past off-season and the dollar value paid to some very, very average pitchers.

PuffyPig
04-23-2007, 12:22 PM
If Lohse continues to pitch like he currently is (bear in mind, his era will probably balance out somewhere in the mid-3.00's), he's worth 8 mil to me. I'd be upset if we didn't pony up that type of cash to keep him. Reference this past off-season and the dollar value paid to some very, very average pitchers.

It's very unlikely Lohse can post an ERA in the mid 3's. That's ace material these days.

If he can give us 200 innings of 4 ERA, consider ourselves blessed.

EE shouldn't be going anywhere. He's a huge part of our future. Zero chance he will be traded this year.

PuffyPig
04-23-2007, 12:28 PM
I'd like to see EdE leave so we can get the four OFs in regularly (Freel to 3B). I'd also LOVE to see either Griffey or Dunn traded, but what's the going rate for an overpriced aging RF or a LF who can't play defense and strikes out nearly every other AB? The Reds need some bats, particularly from the right side of the box, but I don't know how they're going to get them without giving up some minor league talent.


If we need RH bats so badly, why trade our best one (EE) when his value is lowest?

UGADaddy
04-23-2007, 01:00 PM
If we need RH bats so badly, why trade our best one (EE) when his value is lowest?

Best RH hitter? I know everyone on here loves EdE, but let's be honest. He's only just above a so-so hitter when he's at his best. He's currently hitting below the Mendoza Line. Conine is far and away the best righty on the team right now. I'd probably take Phillips and Freel ahead of EdE also. Valentin and AGon are also hitting better. The only righty EdE is better than right now is DRoss (how much longer is he going to see opportunities?)...and maybe Castro--maybe.

redsmetz
04-23-2007, 02:17 PM
In my opinion the position of our greatest need is first base. If you compare our 1st base platoon to the players manning 1st base for the other 29 teams I think this is the position where we are closest to the bottom of the league. Hatteberg and Conine are decent hitters, but they play a position where nearly all the other teams have a true stud, run-producing basher to build the batting order around. Hatteberg and Conine are good backup-level / pinch-hitting guys to have around, but they are not worthy of starting at the easiest position on the field to play. Unfortunately the Reds do not have sufficient trading pieces to allow us to significantly upgrade at first base. Maybe Votto come August?

I'm not as adept at a doing the comparisons, but just a quick manual check shows that Conine/Hatteberg are at:


77 AB
21 Hits
.273 Average

10 Runs
14 RBI

4 Doubles
1 Triple (did they have oxygen with Mark Berry??)
4 HR

If that's bottom of the pack, then the entire corps of First Baseman in MLB are all hitting like Hall of Famers.

Extrapolated out for a full season that's:


178 hits

34 doubles
9 triples (unlikely, yes)
34 HR

119 RBI
60 BB

I'll take that from a caretaker position, plus at those numbers, either of those players could be moved at the trade deadline if something attractive shows up. Of course, a small sample rarely works out to that sort of comparison, but you get the point. I think it's highly doubtful that our platoon is near the bottom.

thatcoolguy_22
04-23-2007, 03:05 PM
I'll take that from a caretaker position, plus at those numbers, either of those players could be moved at the trade deadline if something attractive shows up. Of course, a small sample rarely works out to that sort of comparison, but you get the point. I think it's highly doubtful that our platoon is near the bottom.

I agree completely with your idea of allowing Conine/Hatteburg finish the season on the super platoon. Also both would be great role players come July 31 that would each bring in some more young talent right when a mister J. Votto would be expecting a call-up anyways. :thumbup: However so far in this young season Votto hasn't exactly been looking like what he have copme to expect from him. His numbers in the small sample... .161BA 56AB 1 2B 1 3B 1HR 18SO .587OPS... Votto is someone I think could use an entire year in Louisville.


RH hitting...

For the record I am with keeping EE for as long as possible. He has been hitting the ball hard all year but always right at someone. Those liners will start to find the gaps here shortly and the average will start jumping. He is the best RH hitter on the team hands down. He will develop. EE is only 24 people. Granted he is no Arod(who already had over 150HR at that age with over 3000ABs) or Griffey(over 150 HR and 5 gold gloves) but he will come around and be able to hold his own IMO.

AtomicDumpling
04-23-2007, 03:27 PM
The Conine/Hatteberg numbers were based on their career numbers, not just two weeks of April extrapolated over a season. I used their career numbers, which was generous because they are both clearly well past their prime as hitters.

I am not saying they suck. I am just saying they don't stack up against the other players in the league at their position. Look at the other starting first basemen in our division: Albert Pujols (1.102 OPS in 2006), Derrick Lee (missed last year but 1.080 OPS in 2005), Lance Berkman (1.041 OPS in 2006), Prince Fielder (22 year old uber-prospect, .831 OPS in 2006), and Adam LaRoche (.941 OPS last year). Those guys make Hatteberg (37 yrs old, .767 career OPS but career year of .826 last year) and Conine (.721 OPS in 2006 and 40 yrs old) look pretty pathetic don't they?

First base is a major reason why the Reds are not very good offensively. We have decent-hitting guys playing there while our competition has GREAT-hitting guys playing there. My point was that if we are going to trade for an offensive upgrade then 1B would be the best position for the Reds to improve.

Newman4
04-23-2007, 03:37 PM
If we need RH bats so badly, why trade our best one (EE) when his value is lowest?

He has the highest upside of all the RH bats, IMO. As previously mentioned, also plays a position without a surplus of depth in the Reds system or in general really. I think Bray will help eventually. Also, Livingston and/or Homer could provide better innings than some of the in-house guys. WK won't stand for the lack of performance from the status quo bullpen. Possibly some minor trades for bullpen or RH OF bat could happen, but I don't see anything major.

redsmetz
04-23-2007, 03:51 PM
The Conine/Hatteberg numbers were based on their career numbers, not just two weeks of April extrapolated over a season. I used their career numbers, which was generous because they are both clearly well past their prime as hitters.

I am not saying they suck. I am just saying they don't stack up against the other players in the league at their position. Look at the other starting first basemen in our division: Albert Pujols (1.102 OPS in 2006), Derrick Lee (missed last year but 1.080 OPS in 2005), Lance Berkman (1.041 OPS in 2006), Prince Fielder (22 year old uber-prospect, .831 OPS in 2006), and Adam LaRoche (.941 OPS last year). Those guys make Hatteberg (37 yrs old, .767 career OPS but career year of .826 last year) and Conine (.721 OPS in 2006 and 40 yrs old) look pretty pathetic don't they?

First base is a major reason why the Reds are not very good offensively. We have decent-hitting guys playing there while our competition has GREAT-hitting guys playing there. My point was that if we are going to trade for an offensive upgrade then 1B would be the best position for the Reds to improve.

Frankly, you're talking history and I'm talking the here and now. What any player has done previously doesn't matter for now or the future. We've all understood that Hatt and Conine are holding the position for some future player. If we're getting the numbers we've gotten thus far for this season, then that's a good thing and it's as good as most of the First Basemen in the majors this season. I really don't care what their past record is - I want to know what they're doing for us now. It's absurd to say that the output of the 1B platoon is our biggest problem.

AtomicDumpling
04-23-2007, 04:06 PM
Frankly, you're talking history and I'm talking the here and now. What any player has done previously doesn't matter for now or the future. We've all understood that Hatt and Conine are holding the position for some future player. If we're getting the numbers we've gotten thus far for this season, then that's a good thing and it's as good as most of the First Basemen in the majors this season. I really don't care what their past record is - I want to know what they're doing for us now. It's absurd to say that the output of the 1B platoon is our biggest problem.

Why the hostility?

The subject of the thread is trades. I suggested that 1B is a position the Reds could easily upgrade. A quick look around the league certainly show that other teams have better first basemen than the Reds do. The list of stud first basemen in MLB is very impressive. Hatteberg and Conine are not studs. Decent hitters yes. Studs no.

I did not say that 1B is our biggest problem.

I think almost everyone looks at a player's historical performance to evaluate how they are likely to perform in the future. Is Encarnacion likely to hit .190 all season? We can predict with a high probability of success that EE will improve his batting average above .190 right? How? Because we have a much larger sample size in the past that shows he is a better hitter than that. I think we all understand the concept and agree that historical statistics are definitely relevant.

At the end of this season we will be able to look back and see that the production of Reds first basemen was not as good as 90% of the other first basemen in the league (unless Votto takes over). I think that qualifies as a situation in need of improvement.

that_guy
04-23-2007, 04:15 PM
Isn't Lohse's agent Scott Boras? At least at one point he was, and if that hasn't changed I highly doubt the Reds can afford to keep Lohse if he continues to pitch well...

membengal
04-23-2007, 04:27 PM
Hey thatcoolguy...nice summation of what is tradeable and what isn't on this team. I appreciate your effort in starting this thread.

Seems to me that (and I am NOT advocating dealing these folks) that the most tradeable commodities for the Reds are:

1. Homer Bailey
2. Aaron Harang
3. Bronson Arroyo
4. EE
5. Adam Dunn
6. Brandon Phillips
7. Ryan Freel
8. Kyle Lohse (could go up if he keeps to crank it out like he has)

The Reds' needs? A ton, across the board. But that group would bring the hightest return. Question is, how far are the Reds willing to go in turning the team over? And when?

redsmetz
04-23-2007, 04:32 PM
Why the hostility?

The subject of the thread is trades. I suggested that 1B is a position the Reds could easily upgrade. A quick look around the league certainly show that other teams have better first basemen than the Reds do. The list of stud first basemen in MLB is very impressive. Hatteberg and Conine are not studs. Decent hitters yes. Studs no.

I did not say that 1B is our biggest problem.

I think almost everyone looks at a player's historical performance to evaluate how they are likely to perform in the future. Is Encarnacion likely to hit .190 all season? We can predict with a high probability of success that EE will improve his batting average above .190 right? How? Because we have a much larger sample size in the past that shows he is a better hitter than that. I think we all understand the concept and agree that historical statistics are definitely relevant.

At the end of this season we will be able to look back and see that the production of Reds first basemen was not as good as 90% of the other first basemen in the league (unless Votto takes over). I think that qualifies as a situation in need of improvement.

Not hostility, just incredulity. You said very plainly in your first post: In my opinion the position of our greatest need is first base. I would respectfully disagree. And thus far, as I said, the platoon is being productive (not stud, agreed) and it's really among the least of our concerns.

The current slump may well be just that, a temporary slump. And as I have said in other threads, I'd rather have it now than later (although you can sink yourself in April just as easily in September). We've had a bad week and I can't say if it's indicative of how the season will play out or whether it's just a hiccup in a long season. Time will tell.

One of the hallmarks of WK's tenure, IMO, has been his ability to acquire parts without giving up any of our stud prospects so far - "The Trade" notwithstanding (which wasn't prospects). His moves have had mixed results and again, we'll see how these things play out over several years. I've been in the camp saying that we basically need to be nominally competitive in 2007aiming towards the start of a decent crop of prospects to start rolling in by 2008. I think that's still the MO in the front office. Again, we'll see.

But my incredulity was at your clear statement that 1st Base was our "greatest need" - it's not; not by a long shot.

thatcoolguy_22
04-23-2007, 07:30 PM
Hey thatcoolguy...nice summation of what is tradeable and what isn't on this team. I appreciate your effort in starting this thread.

Seems to me that (and I am NOT advocating dealing these folks) that the most tradeable commodities for the Reds are:

1. Homer Bailey
2. Aaron Harang
3. Bronson Arroyo
4. EE
5. Adam Dunn
6. Brandon Phillips
7. Ryan Freel
8. Kyle Lohse (could go up if he keeps to crank it out like he has)

The Reds' needs? A ton, across the board. But that group would bring the hightest return. Question is, how far are the Reds willing to go in turning the team over? And when?



I agree with your top 8 but the question is bold is the only real one that needs to be asked. There are trade chips out there that will hurt this team this year (1-4) and there are people that appear to be traded regardless as well (lohse). How far away the FO perceives us to be from taking the central is everything. If only a bullpen guy and a RH bat is needed it will be small trades dealing primarily with lohse and guys in the minors. However if we get to the end of July or to the offseason and we're 18 games below .500 then I could see massive roster shake-ups in the future

Razor Shines
04-23-2007, 07:52 PM
The Conine/Hatteberg numbers were based on their career numbers, not just two weeks of April extrapolated over a season. I used their career numbers, which was generous because they are both clearly well past their prime as hitters.

I am not saying they suck. I am just saying they don't stack up against the other players in the league at their position. Look at the other starting first basemen in our division: Albert Pujols (1.102 OPS in 2006), Derrick Lee (missed last year but 1.080 OPS in 2005), Lance Berkman (1.041 OPS in 2006), Prince Fielder (22 year old uber-prospect, .831 OPS in 2006), and Adam LaRoche (.941 OPS last year). Those guys make Hatteberg (37 yrs old, .767 career OPS but career year of .826 last year) and Conine (.721 OPS in 2006 and 40 yrs old) look pretty pathetic don't they?

First base is a major reason why the Reds are not very good offensively. We have decent-hitting guys playing there while our competition has GREAT-hitting guys playing there. My point was that if we are going to trade for an offensive upgrade then 1B would be the best position for the Reds to improve.

I'm with Redsmetz on this one. You're us to team's that have first basemen who play everyday and you can't compare Hatte and Conine individually to those guys. If Hatte continues to play against rhps and Conine plays vs. the lefties, they will continue to put up good numbers. The guys you listed aren't really available or players of their caliber. I think Hatte and Conine are a perfect stop gap until Votto is ready. And I think we can win this year with a platoon of Connine and Hatte, they haven't really been our problem so far. Our problem has been most of the rest of the line-up.

AtomicDumpling
04-23-2007, 08:09 PM
Not hostility, just incredulity. You said very plainly in your first post: In my opinion the position of our greatest need is first base. I would respectfully disagree. And thus far, as I said, the platoon is being productive (not stud, agreed) and it's really among the least of our concerns.

The current slump may well be just that, a temporary slump. And as I have said in other threads, I'd rather have it now than later (although you can sink yourself in April just as easily in September). We've had a bad week and I can't say if it's indicative of how the season will play out or whether it's just a hiccup in a long season. Time will tell.

One of the hallmarks of WK's tenure, IMO, has been his ability to acquire parts without giving up any of our stud prospects so far - "The Trade" notwithstanding (which wasn't prospects). His moves have had mixed results and again, we'll see how these things play out over several years. I've been in the camp saying that we basically need to be nominally competitive in 2007aiming towards the start of a decent crop of prospects to start rolling in by 2008. I think that's still the MO in the front office. Again, we'll see.

But my incredulity was at your clear statement that 1st Base was our "greatest need" - it's not; not by a long shot.

How could you be incredulous regarding the disparity between perennial All Stars and fossilized retreads? I showed very clearly why 1B is the most glaring example of a position that separates the Reds from the contenders. We have a couple of geriatric slap-hitters while the Cubs, Astros and Cardinals have top-notch sluggers producing tons of runs. That is why the Reds cannot keep up offensively.

As far as trading goes (the subject of the thread remember?), first base would be the easiest position for us to upgrade and so therefore our greatest need in terms of a trade would be to upgrade that position. If you disagree, fine. But I think many people would agree.

EE has been our weakest player so far, but most other teams do not have a third baseman that produces lots of runs either. Some do, but most don't. The number of stud hitters at 3B is not like first base around the league at all. At least EE has potential. He is still young and has shown the ability to hit in the past. Conine and Hatteberg are merely short term placeholders to throw out there until we find a better option.

I am sure more people were incredulous over your assertion that "What any player has done previously doesn't matter for now or the future" than my assertion that 1B needs an upgrade.

Razor Shines
04-23-2007, 08:19 PM
How could you be incredulous regarding the disparity between perennial All Stars and fossilized retreads? I showed very clearly why 1B is the most glaring example of a position that separates the Reds from the contenders. We have a couple of geriatric slap-hitters while the Cubs, Astros and Cardinals have top-notch sluggers producing tons of runs. That is why the Reds cannot keep up offensively.

As far as trading goes (the subject of the thread remember?), first base would be the easiest position for us to upgrade and so therefore our greatest need in terms of a trade would be to upgrade that position. If you disagree, fine. But I think many people would agree.

EE has been our weakest player so far, but most other teams do not have a third baseman that produces lots of runs either. Some do, but most don't. The number of stud hitters at 3B is not like first base around the league at all. At least EE has potential. He is still young and has shown the ability to hit in the past. Conine and Hatteberg are merely short term placeholders to throw out there until we find a better option.

I am sure more people were incredulous over your assertion that "What any player has done previously doesn't matter for now or the future" than my assertion that 1B needs an upgrade.

With who exactly are we going to trade for a first baseman that's on par with the Cubs', Cards' or Astro's first baseman? Or who are an up grade over the platoon of Hatte an Conine? Sure we could probably get someone who is individually better than either Hatte or Conine, but not someone who is going to put up better numbers than a platoon of those two will. You said they are placeholders and they are, for Joey Votto. And I can accept those two until Votto is ready.

redsmetz
04-23-2007, 08:36 PM
With who exactly are we going to trade for a first baseman that's on par with the Cubs', Cards' or Astro's first baseman? Or who are an up grade over the platoon of Hatte an Conine? Sure we could probably get someone who is individually better than either Hatte or Conine, but not someone who is going to put up better numbers than a platoon of those two will. You said they are placeholders and they are, for Joey Votto. And I can accept those two until Votto is ready.

Precisely. I couldn't have said it better.

AtomicDumpling
04-23-2007, 10:02 PM
With who exactly are we going to trade for a first baseman that's on par with the Cubs', Cards' or Astro's first baseman? Or who are an up grade over the platoon of Hatte an Conine? Sure we could probably get someone who is individually better than either Hatte or Conine, but not someone who is going to put up better numbers than a platoon of those two will. You said they are placeholders and they are, for Joey Votto. And I can accept those two until Votto is ready.

Obviously you missed my point. The point is that 1B is a weakness of the Reds. I did not say the Reds could trade for Albert Pujols. LOL

Since the thread is about trades we can't say that Votto is the answer. The original poster created this thread with the intent of identifying the trade value of the Reds' players. I think he did a good job of that. He showed that we don't have the means to acquire the likes of Pujols or Berkman. My point was that we need more offense and we do have players with enough trade value to acquire an upgrade at 1B, which was shown to be a position of weakness compared to most other teams.

Obviously this is all highly hypothetical, just like all trade conjecture. There are plenty of options to upgrade at 1B that we could afford to acquire via trade if the other team was inclined. Since 1B is the absolute easiest position to play on the field we would not be limited only to men currently playing 1B. There are several teams whose backup first basemen are superior to Hatteberg/Conine.

Just as examples I can think of off the top of my head:
Craig Wilson (age 30, career OPS .828)
Shawn Green (age 34, career OPS .855)
Ben Brousard (age 30, career OPS .793)
Kevin Millar (age 35, career OPS .839)
Ryan Klesko (age 35, career OPS .878)
Matt Stairs (age 39, career OPS .841)
Josh Phelps (age 38, career OPS .809)
Raul Ibanez (age 34, career OPS .811)


All of these players are likely to be available because they are not full time players, or in Green's case because he is in the way of the Mets best prospect Lastings Milledge, who is ready to play in the bigs.

Compare the players above to:
Scott Hatteberg (age 37, career OPS .767)
Jeff Conine (age 40, career OPS .794 but good years were long ago)

So you can clearly see that superior options at 1B are readily available if the Reds want to pay the modest price it would take to upgrade the team.
These guys would improve the team right away and could hold the fort until Votto is ready to take over.

Since the point of this thread is to identify instances where realistic trades could improve the team right now I feel that I have provided a good example. Feel free to be hostile if it makes you happy.

rotnoid
04-23-2007, 10:14 PM
Since the thread is about trades we can't say that Votto is the answer. The original poster created this thread with the intent of identifying the trade value of the Reds' players. I think he did a good job of that. He showed that we don't have the means to acquire the likes of Pujols or Berkman. My point was that we need more offense and we do have players with enough trade value to acquire an upgrade at 1B, which was shown to be a position of weakness compared to most other teams.

Obviously this is all highly hypothetical, just like all trade conjecture. There are plenty of options to upgrade at 1B that we could afford to acquire via trade if the other team was inclined. Since 1B is the absolute easiest position to play on the field we would not be limited only to men currently playing 1B. There are several teams whose backup first basemen are superior to Hatteberg/Conine.

That's the point though. Sometimes the best trade is no trade at all. We are not going to trade for anything better than the Hatte/Conine platoon without creating a hole elsewhere. Trades have to make sense for the entire team, not just the position group affected.

While it's interesting to look at position comparisons, we're talking about offense here. The best places to add to the offense are the third and fourth spots in the lineup. Right now, save Dunn (and I'm not opening that can of worms) there is no core for this offense. There isn't one guy I would choose to build a team around. Consistenly successful teams have that guy, sometimes two. Until we find that guy, whatever position he plays, there are going to be some long summers around here.

mth123
04-23-2007, 10:20 PM
Not hostility, just incredulity. You said very plainly in your first post: In my opinion the position of our greatest need is first base. I would respectfully disagree. And thus far, as I said, the platoon is being productive (not stud, agreed) and it's really among the least of our concerns.

The current slump may well be just that, a temporary slump. And as I have said in other threads, I'd rather have it now than later (although you can sink yourself in April just as easily in September). We've had a bad week and I can't say if it's indicative of how the season will play out or whether it's just a hiccup in a long season. Time will tell.

One of the hallmarks of WK's tenure, IMO, has been his ability to acquire parts without giving up any of our stud prospects so far - "The Trade" notwithstanding (which wasn't prospects). His moves have had mixed results and again, we'll see how these things play out over several years. I've been in the camp saying that we basically need to be nominally competitive in 2007aiming towards the start of a decent crop of prospects to start rolling in by 2008. I think that's still the MO in the front office. Again, we'll see.

But my incredulity was at your clear statement that 1st Base was our "greatest need" - it's not; not by a long shot.


Yeah, but the reason teams can carry good glove mediocre bats at Catcher, SS and 2B is because they have the game changing studs at 1B to make up for it. The Reds are trying to make the transition from offensive players like Griffey and Lopez up the middle to lower level offensive guys like Gonzalez and Freel (and yes compared to Griffey its a huge downgrade on offense). They are doing this without the compensating run producer manning 1B.

Conine and Hatte are doing well right now, but they won't combine for 34 HRs in 2007. Last year Conine slugged .399 with an OBP of .325. Hatte had a good year with a .389 OBP and a .436 Slg%. It will be a stretch for him to repeat that slugging % but he did have similar years in 2000, 2002 and 2004.

Conine and Hat will likely cool off at some point and some one like EdE or Dunn will pick it up. The team will likely go through the season with 2 or 3 guys hot at once and not putting enough hot bats together at the same time to be average offensively. The other 3 corners are the keys to the offense and the team is commited to defenders up the middle. 1st base is really the only place to improve IMO. Would that be a huge upgrade from these first two weeks? Probably not much, but a guy whose highs are higher and whose lows aren't as bad or prolonged would increase the chances of the team having multiple guys hitting at the same time over the course of a season. Right now there aren't enough real bats to go around.

AtomicDumpling
04-23-2007, 10:33 PM
That's the point though. Sometimes the best trade is no trade at all. We are not going to trade for anything better than the Hatte/Conine platoon without creating a hole elsewhere. Trades have to make sense for the entire team, not just the position group affected.

While it's interesting to look at position comparisons, we're talking about offense here. The best places to add to the offense are the third and fourth spots in the lineup. Right now, save Dunn (and I'm not opening that can of worms) there is no core for this offense. There isn't one guy I would choose to build a team around. Consistenly successful teams have that guy, sometimes two. Until we find that guy, whatever position he plays, there are going to be some long summers around here.

I agree with you completely. The Reds need a lot more than a better 1B to makes this a good offensive team.

I agree also that we don't have to make a trade, but because the thread was about trades I decided to toss a couple ideas out there to improve the team now.

I think we might be able to trade a couple of excess bullpen arms (we do have an excess) to get a minor improvement at one or more positions. That is if we want to improve this year's team. In my mind, this team will not contend this year even with a couple of minor upgrades. I would trade the excess bullpen arms for prospects that will be ready in two or three years because I think it will take that long for Krivsky to build a foundation for this team.

redsmetz
04-24-2007, 12:11 AM
Yeah, but the reason teams can carry good glove mediocre bats at Catcher, SS and 2B is because they have the game changing studs at 1B to make up for it. The Reds are trying to make the transition from offensive players like Griffey and Lopez up the middle to lower level offensive guys like Gonzalez and Freel (and yes compared to Griffey its a huge downgrade on offense). They are doing this without the compensating run producer manning 1B.

Conine and Hatte are doing well right now, but they won't combine for 34 HRs in 2007. Last year Conine slugged .399 with an OBP of .325. Hatte had a good year with a .389 OBP and a .436 Slg%. It will be a stretch for him to repeat that slugging % but he did have similar years in 2000, 2002 and 2004.

Conine and Hat will likely cool off at some point and some one like EdE or Dunn will pick it up. The team will likely go through the season with 2 or 3 guys hot at once and not putting enough hot bats together at the same time to be average offensively. The other 3 corners are the keys to the offense and the team is commited to defenders up the middle. 1st base is really the only place to improve IMO. Would that be a huge upgrade from these first two weeks? Probably not much, but a guy whose highs are higher and whose lows aren't as bad or prolonged would increase the chances of the team having multiple guys hitting at the same time over the course of a season. Right now there aren't enough real bats to go around.

I don't disagree with your assessment. My point was that 1B is NOT our most pressing need. Of course, I repeated my point that I don't expect a lot of 2007 - if we compete, it will be by virtue of some luck and a division that is wide open (I don't know that I agree the wide openness means this is a lousy division - I frankly think it's fairly competitive). That said, many have stated that Hatt & Conine are holding the fort while the stud player develops, hopefully by 2008 with one of them remaining as the back up. That doesn't mean either (or both) can't be traded this year. That's certainly a possibility and I think that's part of WK's method.

mth123
04-24-2007, 06:15 AM
I don't disagree with your assessment. My point was that 1B is NOT our most pressing need. Of course, I repeated my point that I don't expect a lot of 2007 - if we compete, it will be by virtue of some luck and a division that is wide open (I don't know that I agree the wide openness means this is a lousy division - I frankly think it's fairly competitive). That said, many have stated that Hatt & Conine are holding the fort while the stud player develops, hopefully by 2008 with one of them remaining as the back up. That doesn't mean either (or both) can't be traded this year. That's certainly a possibility and I think that's part of WK's method.

But it is a pressing need. Defenders up the middle + hold the fort guys at 1B = average at best offense. It became a pressing need by virtue of the exchange from Lopez/Aurilia to Gonzalez, Kearns/Pena to Freel and Ross 2006 to Ross 2007. This team is designed to be no better than average offensively and reliant upon a repeat of Ross 1st half 2006 numbers to be even that. The other moves that this team made necessitated an upgrade at 1B. Hatte/Conine even at their best aren't good enough to make up for the lack of offense up the middle as the team is currently constructed.

That is saying nothing intended to knock Hatte/Conine as much as it is knocking the make-up of the team. It was noted a number of times in the offseason that the direction to defense is great but the team is limited by the low ceiling standing on 1B. You can get by with a 1B combo like this just fine with some high offensive output at the defensive spots.

That means, to get enough offense as currently constructed, the team needs to forsake a little defense up the middle by putting Freel on 2B with Phillips at SS and Gonzo subbing for both (with Phillips moving back and forth) based on who is slumping and who is hot. Hamilton plays CF on a daily basis and another OF that can spell these guys with RH pop needs to be brought in. Only that will get enough bats with POP in the line-up at the same time and that's still pretty iffy if EdE, Dunn and Griffey don't all slug at .475 plus and Hamilton doesn't hit as the league adjusts to him. In order to stay with the defenders, who won't add compensating offense when the sluggers are slumping and whose slumps are likely to be longer and lower, a team needs game changers at the corners and Hatte and Conine are not that. I think the defenders are here to stay and I'd be surprised if you see Phillips at SS at all and we'll only see Freel in the MI on rare occassions. This team will struggle for offense by design.

redsmetz
04-24-2007, 06:46 AM
But it is a pressing need. Defenders up the middle + hold the fort guys at 1B = average at best offense. It became a pressing need by virtue of the exchange from Lopez/Aurilia to Gonzalez, Kearns/Pena to Freel and Ross 2006 to Ross 2007. This team is designed to be no better than average offensively and reliant upon a repeat of Ross 1st half 2006 numbers to be even that. The other moves that this team made necessitated an upgrade at 1B. Hatte/Conine even at their best aren't good enough to make up for the lack of offense up the middle as the team is currently constructed.

That is saying nothing intended to knock Hatte/Conine as much as it is knocking the make-up of the team. It was noted a number of times in the offseason that the direction to defense is great but the team is limited by the low ceiling standing on 1B. You can get by with a 1B combo like this just fine with some high offensive output at the defensive spots.

That means, to get enough offense as currently constructed, the team needs to forsake a little defense up the middle by putting Freel on 2B with Phillips at SS and Gonzo subbing for both (with Phillips moving back and forth) based on who is slumping and who is hot. Hamilton plays CF on a daily basis and another OF that can spell these guys with RH pop needs to be brought in. Only that will get enough bats with POP in the line-up at the same time and that's still pretty iffy if EdE, Dunn and Griffey don't all slug at .475 plus and Hamilton doesn't hit as the league adjusts to him. In order to stay with the defenders, who won't add compensating offense when the sluggers are slumping and whose slumps are likely to be longer and lower, a team needs game changers at the corners and Hatte and Conine are not that. I think the defenders are here to stay and I'd be surprised if you see Phillips at SS at all and we'll only see Freel in the MI on rare occassions. This team will struggle for offense by design.

Realistically these things are not going to happen. So many people bemoaned the signing of Gonzalez and to think now, just with a wave of your hand, we're now going to sit him? His signing to a 3 year deal was a clear acknowledgment of the need for good defense up the middle, something (along with catching help) that is sorely lacking in our system. I'm guessing that three years is about the time the FO expects before someone different comes along. The Hatt/Conine platoon, as I've said repeatedly, is a caretaker position plain and simple.

While I'd love for the 2007 team to win the division, I think it's built to stay competitive, nothing more. If everyone plays as they have for the last week, that will be an unmitigated disaster. I don't think they will. They won't be world killers, but they'll be in the thick of things. The integral point I keep saying is that we have not gotten rid of any of our top prospects in moving towards the future. The very fact that we presently have only two homegrown players on this roster means that's a good step forward, because we're approaching the day, IMO, when that will be different (NB: the 1976 Reds had 5 of their starting 9 signed by the Reds - and at least half of their pitching staff).

mth123
04-24-2007, 06:59 AM
Realistically these things are not going to happen. So many people bemoaned the signing of Gonzalez and to think now, just with a wave of your hand, we're now going to sit him? His signing to a 3 year deal was a clear acknowledgment of the need for good defense up the middle, something (along with catching help) that is sorely lacking in our system. I'm guessing that three years is about the time the FO expects before someone different comes along. The Hatt/Conine platoon, as I've said repeatedly, is a caretaker position plain and simple.

While I'd love for the 2007 team to win the division, I think it's built to stay competitive, nothing more. If everyone plays as they have for the last week, that will be an unmitigated disaster. I don't think they will. They won't be world killers, but they'll be in the thick of things. The integral point I keep saying is that we have not gotten rid of any of our top prospects in moving towards the future. The very fact that we presently have only two homegrown players on this roster means that's a good step forward, because we're approaching the day, IMO, when that will be different (NB: the 1976 Reds had 5 of their starting 9 signed by the Reds - and at least half of their pitching staff).

I know its not going to happen. I'm just saying without lights out guys on the corners something like that needs to happen to provide enough offense. I agree that competitive at best is all we can hope for and for me 2007 is about seeing which pieces step up and provide solid answers as the team marches toward true contention in 2009. That doesn't mean that I don't want to see the team win every game now that the season is in full swing.

I'm also happy that all the top prospects are still in place. Some of the lesser prospects are off to good starts. Maybe a few can be exchanged for a role player or two to help out in 2007 (or be used as backfills for major league players that are dealt). Any trade now will probably only be a tweak for 2007. There may be some young talent brought in at the deadline if the team falls from contention and guys like Lohse are pitchng well and can be auctioned to the highest bidder.

redsmetz
04-24-2007, 08:27 AM
I know its not going to happen. I'm just saying without lights out guys on the corners something like that needs to happen to provide enough offense. I agree that competitive at best is all we can hope for and for me 2007 is about seeing which pieces step up and provide solid answers as the team marches toward true contention in 2009. That doesn't mean that I don't want to see the team win every game now that the season is in full swing.

I'm also happy that all the top prospects are still in place. Some of the lesser prospects are off to good starts. Maybe a few can be exchanged for a role player or two to help out in 2007 (or be used as backfills for major league players that are dealt). Any trade now will probably only be a tweak for 2007. There may be some young talent brought in at the deadline if the team falls from contention and guys like Lohse are pitchng well and can be auctioned to the highest bidder.

I agree completely. I've never thought that Krivsky had a specific multi-year plan, but rather gradually rebuilding the entire organization while keeping a reasonably competitive team on the field in the interim years. You know, "Rome wasn't built in a day" etc.

I was reading Fay's analysis (which I guess he's going to do regularly now) and he kept writing about Krivsky going down to Louisville (a planned trip per WK) and that it wasn't to shore up the ML team right now and saying it wasn't time to panic. Fay wrote "that's not what fans want to hear." I thought that he's not talking for me - it's way too early to panic, it's way to early to start throwing people overboard. It's a small slice of the seasonal pie and we've got players who aren't going to hit below .200 all season - it will level out.

Ltlabner
04-24-2007, 09:18 AM
Yeah, but the reason teams can carry good glove mediocre bats at Catcher, SS and 2B is because they have the game changing studs at 1B to make up for it. The Reds are trying to make the transition from offensive players like Griffey and Lopez up the middle to lower level offensive guys like Gonzalez and Freel (and yes compared to Griffey its a huge downgrade on offense). They are doing this without the compensating run producer manning 1B. .

Transition....might be the key word here.

Transitions take time. No, I'm not saying he has 15 years to get it done, but you can't just retool an orgination that has been in rot for years quickly. The players you want might not be available at the time you want them, you might have contracts on your team that last longer than you like, trades or FA's acquired might not play to the level you expect them to, etc etc. That doesn't even include working with the players you inherrited who might not play the game in the style that fits your new direction.

I'm not saying Wanye's been prefect in all his moves (he hasn't), or we should all shut up for the next 4 years (we shouldn't) until some magical time limit has passed, but at the same time, retooling an organzatonal mindset (hit lots of homers and forget about actually catching a ball or pitching) doesn't just happen over night.

bucksfan2
04-24-2007, 09:48 AM
I think one of the biggest problems with this organization is that the MLB club needs an overhaul. They are too left handed heavy in the hitting order. They need a lot of production from Dunn and Jr. in order to stay competitive. And their only prospect that is close to being ready is another lefty. The problem with most of the reds top trading pieces is that they are the people who you are going to build your club around. They dont have the luxery of having an all star at one position while having a prospect waiting in the wings at AAA who could be used as trade bait. Their bull pen has a bunch of veterans who are signed to MLB contracts that are blocking the way of some promising younger players who could greatly benefit from a spot on the big league roster. Their starting rotation is their only position of depth that the reds have. Lohse is the only pitcher that I could see the reds trading but I also think that they will look to sign him before they trade him. My top trading options that the reds would consider moving are

Griffey
Dunn
Lohse

The problems I forsee are, can the reds afford to trade Griffey and take a attendance hit. When healthy he still has some pop left in his bat and hopefully can become a more productive player playing out in right. I dont see Dunn being moved because of his production. Also he has a very reasonable option for a starting outfielder for next year. Just look at the contracts that were shelled out to the likes of Mathews jr. and Pierre. Lohse could be moved but with the premium placed on starting pitching I forsee the reds trying to sign him before the trading deadline comes.

REDREAD
04-24-2007, 11:05 AM
If we need RH bats so badly, why trade our best one (EE) when his value is lowest?

Because EdE is in the doghouse.. That's why I think he's got a good chance of being traded.

The same logic pushed Kearns and Lopez out the door.

I could seriously see Edwin get traded for some pitching and the other teams inferior 3b..

I don't agree with trading EdE.. I agree with you, he should be kept. I think Wayne will at least shop him around though.