PDA

View Full Version : How about Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom?



Spitball
10-02-2007, 12:11 AM
I don't believe the Reds should entertain trading an inexpensive Bailey for a soon to be expensive Willis. However, I believe a Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom trade is much more logical.

I believe the Reds should trade any easily replaceable offensive strength, inexpensive or not, for pitching depth. The Reds have proven they can plug in retreads like Aurilia, Hatteberg, Randa, et al, but they have not found the formula for finding pitching depth.

I remember the mid-1970's and the Red Sox parlaying Ted Cox's hot September call-up into a trade for future Hall of Famer, future 20 game winner, and funky delivery guy Dennis Eckersley. Whatever happened to Cox anyway?

Personally, I'd do the trade. Votto may be a future all-star, but Willis and Lindstrum would give the Reds pitching depth. First basemen are much, much more easily developed and/or traded for than 1-3 starters plus bullpen depth.

fearofpopvol1
10-02-2007, 12:16 AM
I don't believe the Reds should entertain trading an inexpensive Bailey for a soon to be expensive Willis. However, I believe a Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom trade is much more logical.

I believe the Reds should trade any easily replaceable offensive strength, inexpensive or not, for pitching depth. The Reds have proven they can plug in retreads like Aurilia, Hatteberg, Randa, et al, but they have not found the formula for finding pitching depth.

I remember the mid-1970's and the Red Sox parlaying Ted Cox's hot September call-up into a trade for future Hall of Famer, future 20 game winner, and funky delivery guy Dennis Eckersley. Whatever happened to Cox anyway?

Personally, I'd do the trade. Votto may be a future all-star, but Willis and Lindstrum would give the Reds pitching depth. First basemen are much, much more easily developed and/or traded for than 1-3 starters plus bullpen depth.

And Cueto is expensive how? I'm all for trading (great) offense for pitching, but trading a cheap Cueto to me for an expensive Willis doesn't make any sense and sort of contradicts your argument. Many believe Cueto could be better than Bailey.

jojo
10-02-2007, 12:23 AM
I don't believe the Reds should entertain trading an inexpensive Bailey for a soon to be expensive Willis. However, I believe a Votto and Cueto for Willis and Lindstrom trade is much more logical.

I believe the Reds should trade any easily replaceable offensive strength, inexpensive or not, for pitching depth. The Reds have proven they can plug in retreads like Aurilia, Hatteberg, Randa, et al, but they have not found the formula for finding pitching depth.

I remember the mid-1970's and the Red Sox parlaying Ted Cox's hot September call-up into a trade for future Hall of Famer, future 20 game winner, and funky delivery guy Dennis Eckersley. Whatever happened to Cox anyway?

Personally, I'd do the trade. Votto may be a future all-star, but Willis and Lindstrum would give the Reds pitching depth. First basemen are much, much more easily developed and/or traded for than 1-3 starters plus bullpen depth.

I'm not that enthusiastic about the Reds trading away pitching. Cueto projects to be at least a high leverage bullpen arm. With some luck, he could even be in the rotation.

Spitball
10-02-2007, 12:28 AM
And Cueto is expensive how?

Where did I say Cueto was expensive? I just don't feel he has the near the same ceiling as Bailey.


I'm all for trading (great) offense for pitching, but trading a cheap Cueto to me for an expensive Willis doesn't make any sense and sort of contradicts your argument. Many believe Cueto could be better than Bailey.

Cueto may be better, but I very seriously doubt it. Any trade for pitching depth will have to include some inexpensive pitching quality. It is just the sign of the times. And, I would gamble with Cueto or Travis Wood before I would gamble with Bailey.

Johnny Footstool
10-02-2007, 12:44 AM
Willis is pretty bad. How many subpar years will it take to erase the memory/hype of his rookie season?

fearofpopvol1
10-02-2007, 12:53 AM
Where did I say Cueto was expensive? I just don't feel he has the near the same ceiling as Bailey.



Cueto may be better, but I very seriously doubt it. Any trade for pitching depth will have to include some inexpensive pitching quality. It is just the sign of the times. And, I would gamble with Cueto or Travis Wood before I would gamble with Bailey.

You didn't state that Cueto was expensive, but you stated that your reason for not wanting to trade Bailey was that he was inexpensive (which Cueto is also).

Bailey may have a higher ceiling (even though I think that's debateable), but he also has more trade value than Cueto does. If the Reds were willing to part with Bailey, I think they could do better than Willis in some sort of package deal with another team. I just don't think the Reds should be trying to trade any of their higher pitching prospects unless it's a can't-refuse type of deal (I would not consider Willis to be that kind of trade). Trade away offense for pitching...sure. Not pitching though.

Falls City Beer
10-02-2007, 12:54 AM
Willis is pretty bad. How many subpar years will it take to erase the memory/hype of his rookie season?

Willis has had one bad season. Yeah, it's this season, but really, he's been nearly as good as recent Harang before this season.

I do worry about his health, though. So I'd be hesitant.

Aronchis
10-02-2007, 01:04 AM
Willis has had one bad season. Yeah, it's this season, but really, he's been nearly as good as recent Harang before this season.

I do worry about his health, though. So I'd be hesitant.

Actually Willis was showing decline last year. I don't see the Reds taking on anymore expensive money in the next 2 years for the starting pitching with Harang and Arroyo already signed on.

Willis gets way to much hype on these boards. Classic early bloomer that may have a 2nd career rebound as a soft tossing lefty down the road, most likely next decade type down the road.

RedsManRick
10-02-2007, 01:13 AM
:confused::confused::confused:

You trade away expensive players on the decline. You trade for productive players who you control for a number of years cheaply. Let's not out think ourselves here.

KronoRed
10-02-2007, 03:04 AM
Willis is arbitration eligible, meaning if he's expensive and a disaster then it'll only be a one year drain and not a 3-5 year one that a bad FA signing would be.

HumnHilghtFreel
10-02-2007, 04:05 AM
I don't really get the love for Dontrelle Willis. He had an incredible start to his career, but he seems to be coming down to earth somewhat. Last year he posted a 3.87 ERA, but his BAA was .274 and this year his ERA ballooned up to 5.17 with a BAA of a whopping .294 with a 1.60 WHIP

His K/9 has stayed constant though
2005: 6.47
2006: 6.44
2007: 6.40

But his walk rate(BB/9) has started to grow
2005: 2.09
2006: 3.34
2007: 3.81

He's also started giving up a lot of HR, which as you may know, our ballpark has a penchant for giving up. My personal theory is that the league is finally adjusting to his quirky delivery and making him work harder, hence the rise in his walks.

I'd pass and keep our young talent.

RedsBaron
10-02-2007, 06:57 AM
No thanks.

Spitball
10-02-2007, 08:35 AM
Trade away offense for pitching...sure. Not pitching though.

I would hate to part with Cueto, but I don't believe anyone is going to trade quality pitching without demanding some pitching potential in return. Willis is coming off a poor season or he would demand far more than Votto and Cueto.

Who is really the bigger question mark for future big league success, Cueto or Willis? Unless it is a salary dump, a trade is a gamble.

Falls City Beer
10-02-2007, 08:43 AM
I would hate to part with Cueto, but I don't believe anyone is going to trade quality pitching without demanding some pitching potential in return. Willis is coming off a poor season or he would demand far more than Votto and Cueto.

Who is really the bigger question mark for future big league success, Cueto or Willis? Unless it is a salary dump, a trade is a gamble.

I like the thinking in this trade. I'm just a bit afraid of Willis' arm. And it's actually Votto I'm not wild about giving up.

GAC
10-02-2007, 08:52 AM
:confused::confused::confused:

You trade away expensive players on the decline. You trade for productive players who you control for a number of years cheaply. Let's not out think ourselves here.

Exactly.

Maybe we can get Lohse back? :lol:

oneupper
10-02-2007, 09:31 AM
From everything I've seen in the minor league forum, Cueto has something Bailey is lacking - command.

Very reluctant to trade Cueto. And certainly not for a soon-to-be prohibitively expensive Willis.

lollipopcurve
10-02-2007, 10:05 AM
No possible way.

Falls City Beer
10-02-2007, 10:08 AM
From everything I've seen in the minor league forum, Cueto has something Bailey is lacking - command.

Very reluctant to trade Cueto. And certainly not for a soon-to-be prohibitively expensive Willis.

Cueto's going to need a killer fastball with movement to overcome his height. He's very likely a reliever. Not that we don't need relievers.

bucksfan2
10-02-2007, 10:24 AM
There is a reason the Marlins are seriously shopping Willis. He has that herky jerky throwing motion that you usually get away with in the beginning and once people begin to pick it up you decline as a pitcher. I wonder why Florida is trying to trade Willis because this is usually about the time the Marlins get ready for a contending season.

The reds need to hedge their bets on guys like Bailey, Cueto, Votto, Bruce, etc. and not trade them away. Potential is a dangerous word but for this reds organizatoin that is what we have to wait for.

NJReds
10-02-2007, 10:34 AM
I think Willis is a risk that only a high-payroll team can make. Maybe a change of scenery helps him...maybe not. The Reds can't afford to deal top prospects on a 'what if' move like that. I'd expect to see him land with a team like the Mets or Dodgers.

flyer85
10-02-2007, 10:43 AM
I am one who is bothered by the amount of innings that Willis has piled on at such a young age and the fact that he has become less effective each season.

registerthis
10-02-2007, 10:45 AM
Willis is pretty bad. How many subpar years will it take to erase the memory/hype of his rookie season?

He's had two great seasons, two average seasons, and one awful season. It's not just his rookie year that is generating his hype--his rookie year wasn't even his best one.

registerthis
10-02-2007, 10:46 AM
Maybe we can get Lohse back? :lol:

A man can dream...

flyer85
10-02-2007, 10:46 AM
Willis is a good pitcher with excellent stuff. However, all those innings at such a young age ...

paulrichjr
10-02-2007, 11:17 AM
I think we build on guys like Cueto, Bailey, and Bruce. Votto isn't on the list because I think 1B can be found that should be close to his production (Cantu maybe).

I would be of the opinion that Josh Hamilton, Cueto, Harang, Arroyo, Bailey, Bruce, Phillips, Burton and Encarnacion are players that don't get traded for guys one year away from free agency. Everyone else is on the shelves.

RedsManRick
10-02-2007, 11:24 AM
This type of a trade is all about upside vs. downside. There's much much more of the latter than the former. If this were an 85 win team looking to take the next step, perhaps the risk would be justified.

OnBaseMachine
10-02-2007, 08:09 PM
Cueto's going to need a killer fastball with movement to overcome his height. He's very likely a reliever. Not that we don't need relievers.

Well it's a good thing Cueto has a killer fastball with three above average to plus pitches then isn't it?

Rojo
10-02-2007, 08:44 PM
I was an early prop-er for a Willis trade but only if you can steal him cheap because of his bad year.

Spitball
10-02-2007, 09:36 PM
I think Willis is worth the gamble. He has some serious innings under his belt, but I don't think his poor season had to do with health.

Really, I believe much of Willis's decline stems from the Marlins tinkering with his delivery. They have slowed his delivery to the plate with hopes, among other things, of protecting his health, but have hurt his natural flow. Hence, his velocity is down and his control is not as sharp.

The thing with Willis is he is such a great athlete with incredible balance. People stress over those mechanics, but after the balanced leg lift and body turned from the batter, he is very similar to many other successful pitchers. El Duque Hernandez is in at least his late thirties and probably in his forties, and he has similar mechanics. Vida Blue and Juan Marichal pitched into their mid thirties with higher leg kicks.

Willis has a pretty good feel for pitching. I'd take a chance on the guy and let him tinker with his own mechanics. Luis Tiant reinvented himself in the early seventies with pretty good success.

And like El Tiante, he is a showman. He will bring fans to the park if he is winning. Harang, Arroyo, Willis, Bailey, and Belisle would give the Reds the best rotation in the N.L. Central.

dougdirt
10-02-2007, 09:46 PM
I would say Zambrano, Hill, Lilly, Marquis and Marshall would be better than the Reds rotation with Willis.
Dontrelle Willis, at his current state of pitching is probably equal to or worse than Matt Belisle at his current state.... and a lot of people wanted Belisle out of the rotation LONG ago. The only difference between the two players is name recognition and the arm that they throw with. Willis had an .840 OPS Against, while playing in Florida. Matt Belisle had an .822 OPS against while playing in Cincinnati....

Why would anyone want to put him in a small baseball stadium?

jojo
10-02-2007, 09:53 PM
I would say Zambrano, Hill, Lilly, Marquis and Marshall would be better than the Reds rotation with Willis.
Dontrelle Willis, at his current state of pitching is probably equal to or worse than Matt Belisle at his current state.... and a lot of people wanted Belisle out of the rotation LONG ago. The only difference between the two players is name recognition and the arm that they throw with. Willis had an .840 OPS Against, while playing in Florida. Matt Belisle had an .822 OPS against while playing in Cincinnati....

Why would anyone want to put him in a small baseball stadium?

I'm one guy who has no problem with Belisle being in the Reds rotation next season. He had a much better year than his ERA suggests.

Falls City Beer
10-02-2007, 09:57 PM
I would say Zambrano, Hill, Lilly, Marquis and Marshall would be better than the Reds rotation with Willis.
Dontrelle Willis, at his current state of pitching is probably equal to or worse than Matt Belisle at his current state.... and a lot of people wanted Belisle out of the rotation LONG ago. The only difference between the two players is name recognition and the arm that they throw with. Willis had an .840 OPS Against, while playing in Florida. Matt Belisle had an .822 OPS against while playing in Cincinnati....

Why would anyone want to put him in a small baseball stadium?

I don't think anyone said there wasn't risk involved in acquiring Willis. Or that Willis didn't have a down year this year.

Maybe Cueto and Votto are too much to pay, but don't for a second think that acquiring a guy like Willis *couldn't* have a monster payoff, provided his arm is still in decent shape, and it is mechanical as Spitball suggests.

The gamble's the right one--the price is debatable.

dougdirt
10-02-2007, 10:02 PM
I don't think anyone said there wasn't risk involved in acquiring Willis. Or that Willis didn't have a down year this year.

Maybe Cueto and Votto are too much to pay, but don't for a second think that acquiring a guy like Willis *couldn't* have a monster payoff, provided his arm is still in decent shape, and it is mechanical as Spitball suggests.

The gamble's the right one--the price is debatable.

Sure, the gamble is right, but I wouldn't give up Cueto or Votto alone for him, much less both. For that matter, I wouldn't give up Drew Stubbs for him either. After that, we might get somewhere, but the Marlins would never take that price because someone is going to give an arm and a leg for him and pray for a rebound after two straight declining years.

Its a gamble I would much rather let someone else take at 9 million a year.

reds44
10-02-2007, 10:07 PM
I'd be much more open minded of dealing Bailey straight up for Willis the Cueto and Votto for Willis and Lindstrom.

The thing about Willis is you would be buying at a low point of his career (up until now), and know there is true ace potential in that arm.

dougdirt
10-02-2007, 10:07 PM
Jojo, I am with you on Belisle. He is fine as a guy at the back of the rotation. I was merely making a point that the guy a lot of people wanted out of the rotation pitched better than the guy we are talking about acquiring for a top 25 prospect in baseball and a guy who showed he belonged in September for the Reds this year in Joey Votto who is also a top 50 prospect....

RedsManRick
10-02-2007, 10:13 PM
The gamble's the right one--the price is debatable.

Any gamble is the right one if the price is right.

Falls City Beer
10-02-2007, 10:25 PM
Any gamble is the right one if the price is right.

I meant the "gamble" as in the target--Willis. I was being more idiomatic with the term. My apologies.

jojo
10-02-2007, 10:28 PM
Jojo, I am with you on Belisle. He is fine as a guy at the back of the rotation. I was merely making a point that the guy a lot of people wanted out of the rotation pitched better than the guy we are talking about acquiring for a top 25 prospect in baseball and a guy who showed he belonged in September for the Reds this year in Joey Votto who is also a top 50 prospect....

Ya. I don't even mind $9M for Willis because he's at least a decent bet to burn 200 IP. Giving up talent too, well, I'll pass.

RedsManRick
10-02-2007, 11:09 PM
I meant the "gamble" as in the target--Willis. I was being more idiomatic with the term. My apologies.

I understood your point. And I agree. If I could give up Maloney and Tatum, I'd be all over it. For Bailey, Votto, or Cueto, it just doesn't make sense. I'm assuming somebody will be will to part with their Votto and/or Cueto.

Patrick Bateman
10-02-2007, 11:48 PM
I'm one guy who has no problem with Belisle being in the Reds rotation next season. He had a much better year than his ERA suggests.

Yep. Belisle has been solid. About time he gets some recognition for it.

He's a decent number 4 option IMO, and I hope the Reds feel the same way.

pedro
10-02-2007, 11:57 PM
I have no problem with Belisle as a 4/5.

I think he's got a lot of potential.

reds44
10-03-2007, 12:48 AM
Yep. Belisle has been solid. About time he gets some recognition for it.

He's a decent number 4 option IMO, and I hope the Reds feel the same way.
I think he can be a decent number 4, but he's 5.32 ERA last year is not #4.

He has pretty good numbers other then that, so I agree with you that you can do worse then him.

Patrick Bateman
10-03-2007, 12:51 AM
I think he can be a decent number 4, but he's 5.32 ERA last year is not #4.

He has pretty good numbers other then that, so I agree with you that you can do worse then him.

I could care less what his ERA says.

He was supremely unlucky and he pitched in GABP. Factor in those differences and Belisle was a solid pitcher. He just needs a defense to make some plays behind him and he'll be fine.

Spitball
10-03-2007, 01:16 AM
Watching video of Willis from 2005 through 2007, I can see that he not only slows down his drive towards the plate, but in 2007 he also brought his hands up much higher before breaking into his "T" position. So, in an effort to slow himself down, he had drastically altered his hands before breaking. Significant? For a previously successful pitcher, I'd say definitely. The proof could be detected in his lack of command last year.

Another interesting aspect about Willis in 2007 is that the seven and eight batters hit about 100 points higher than the three-four hitters. Hmmm...I'm not sure what to make of that stat other than to conclude he was not bearing down/concentrating/competing at the same level. Time for a change maybe?

The guy is a pitcher with some history of success so he won't come cheaply. Cueto might be a potential starter, but we haven't seen the Reds produce too many of those since 1985. Votto might produce, but we've seen easily acquired Hatteberg and Aurilia put up decent numbers at first base in recent years. Willis may never have a lower price tag, but on moves on speculation take guts. It seems the Cardinals made their move to the next level once they traded away a bevy of pitching prospects for Darryl Kile to lead the rotation.

Gambling on a pitcher won't kill the Reds if he fails. They can continue on, but I'd like to see them take a chance.