PDA

View Full Version : Why We Shouldn't Make Any Major Trades



mlbfan30
12-04-2007, 04:49 PM
The real problem is the history the Reds farm system has had. It has been absolutely horrible for so many years, many people in baseball in general probably still think that. They will always undervalue the Reds prospects because they view the system as so bad, it's "impossible" to produce good players. The Reds might have the better player in reality but that doesn't matter. GM's will view Cueto as a middle prospect because the Reds havn't shown they can develop pitching. Votto is a middle prospect because he isn't a good fielder or doesn't have enough power. (He should have never played LF and he can hit 25-30 HR with 0.475 SLG). Trading our prospects in general will be the Ultimate sell low. Considering this and also the fact the WK is viewed as desperate, it creates an atmosphere where we could get ripped off. (Using the "trade" as an example of taking advantage of due to being desperate). I would not give up any of the big 4, and trade Hamilton/EE only for proven quality players on the incline.

Do you agree? I know the Reds want a SP.... but why is that exactly? They don't even trust their own system (Cueto/Maloney/Belisle) enough due to its historical lack of success.

ChatterRed
12-04-2007, 04:54 PM
...and just how much quality starting pitching has the Reds system produced?

More reason to go out and get some.

Ahhhorsepoo
12-04-2007, 04:58 PM
the outfield prospects we have produced have all been EXTREMELY ACCEPTED around the league..

Jefferson24
12-04-2007, 05:01 PM
I would rather see the Reds sit on their good players and prospects for now. Spend some money after 08 in the free agent market and then make a push in 09. 09 is really our best shot at this point. Give those young guys a chance to mature another year and we could really have something special in 09.

Ahhhorsepoo
12-04-2007, 05:04 PM
yeah but in 09 we will have done something stupid like signed dunn to a LTD instead of getting ANYTHING out of him..

*BaseClogger*
12-04-2007, 05:05 PM
I agree that we shouldn't trade any of our prospects, and I wouldn't trade EE because we need a RH power bat. I like Hamilton, but he is by far the most expendable and therefore I would move him for a starting pitcher (Sure, trading Griffey would be sweet, but you have to trade something to get something)...

mlbfan30
12-04-2007, 05:05 PM
Hamilton is viewed as an injury prone, very risky player. He is to some degree, but I don't think it's as bad as they make it out to be.
Bruce is top tier and everyone knows that. He is kind of the exception because he is the #1 prospect.

My entire point is the the minor leagues have improved dramatically over the past few years. Why suddenly sell low when we finally have something we should trust.

Ahhhorsepoo
12-04-2007, 05:08 PM
Hamilton is viewed as an injury prone, very risky player. He is to some degree, but I don't think it's as bad as they make it out to be.
Bruce is top tier and everyone knows that. He is kind of the exception because he is the #1 prospect.

My entire point is the the minor leagues have improved dramatically over the past few years. Why suddenly sell low when we finally have something we should trust.

that is exactly why you sell players like EdE, Dunn, and Freel if someone wants him... heck maybe even lizard in another deal... to get players in positions your minor leagues havent quite developed..

mlbfan30
12-04-2007, 05:22 PM
that is exactly why you sell players like EdE, Dunn, and Freel if someone wants him... heck maybe even lizard in another deal... to get players in positions your minor leagues havent quite developed..

You can't trade Dunn anyway, and he IS WORTH what he is being payed this year. Would you rather have Guillen for 11 mil? A LTC for Dunn is not a bad idea and should have at least been discussed this off season. If WK decides they 100% won't extend him then they should look to trade him in July if they are out of it completely.

EE is an avg bat with an improving glove. He should only be traded for a SP that has no major flaws (No Lowry/Willis/etc). He is a nice RH bat in the lineup.

Freel should have been traded awhile ago when his value was high. He has no major role anymore and should be traded for (hopefully) a good minor league ML ready reliever

Vada Pinson Fan
12-04-2007, 07:10 PM
The real problem is the history the Reds farm system has had. It has been absolutely horrible for so many years, many people in baseball in general probably still think that. They will always undervalue the Reds prospects because they view the system as so bad, it's "impossible" to produce good players. The Reds might have the better player in reality but that doesn't matter. GM's will view Cueto as a middle prospect because the Reds haven't shown they can develop pitching. Votto is a middle prospect because he isn't a good fielder or doesn't have enough power. (He should have never played LF and he can hit 25-30 HR with 0.475 SLG). Trading our prospects in general will be the Ultimate sell low. Considering this and also the fact the WK is viewed as desperate, it creates an atmosphere where we could get ripped off. (Using the "trade" as an example of taking advantage of due to being desperate). I would not give up any of the big 4, and trade Hamilton/EE only for pr oven quality players on the incline.

Do you agree? I know the Reds want a SP.... but why is that exactly? They don't even trust their own system (Cueto/Maloney/Belisle) enough due to its historical lack of success.

I agree with you but the Reds have a relatively new ownership, front office and scouts. I throw history out the window in the case of the Reds past not producing very many home-grown pitchers in the last 30 years. It's a new regime with an owner that wants to win and is putting his money where his mouth is. The farm system is now producing at a high level and I don't believe other GM's can discount that fact and have it hold water, so to speak.

If the Reds don't get a frontine starting pitcher, I'll be ok with that. Here's why- after looking around at mlb.com today, I saw a quote from Giants GM Brian Sabean stating that he would probably pull Cain and Lincecum off the market "unless we are totally blown away by an offer." I imagine the other GM's that possess stud starting pitchers will want to be blown away by an offer before accepting as well. If this is what Wayne Krivsky is running into, then don't trade the Reds future away. The Reds only weakness that has no potential remedy from the minors, at least for a few years, is the starting catcher's position. Everywhere else we are covered by an above average position player or better. Even the starting pitching with Harang, Arroyo, Bailey, Belisle and a pick from Shearn, Cueto or even Maloney is doable. I can accept this for 2008. Hopefully we pick up a catcher in trade or maybe even get LoDuca.

757690
12-04-2007, 07:23 PM
Recent history has shown that more time than not, trading your top prospects for veterans backfires and does not turn teams into contenders. See Orioles, Blue jays, Dodgers, Giants and even the Yankees (they won the WS year after years with their own prospects, then went elsewhere and haven't won in 8 years)...
Teams that keep their prospects tend to become contenders and stay contenders for awhile. See Rockies, Diamondbacks, Angels, Indians, Tigers, Padres....

CRedsLarkin11
12-04-2007, 08:04 PM
I'm not in favor of it either especially if it involves Bailey or Bruce(which I would say it would have to if we plan to get anything back) but I am on the fence though because I find it really hard to believe that the Reds will contend with the current pitching staff.

AmarilloRed
12-04-2007, 08:26 PM
It all depends on what you expect from your prospects. Do you think Homer Bailey will only be a #4 starter in 5 years, or will he be a #1 starter who can win 20 games within 2 years. Is Votto a league average first baseman, or a potential All-Star? It really all depends on what the Reds front office expect their prospects will do at the major league level, and is that less or more than what they would get back in a trade. The Reds currently have 2 highly-rated pitching prospects, and a certain amount of talent among their positional player prospects. I have always been of the opinion that we should only trade the Big 4 for a proven front-line starter, and that still stands. We are weak in starting pitching right now, but Belisle and Bailey could both make vast improvement next year. I hope we can make the best trade for starting pitching we can, but I will not be disappointed if we make no trades.

gedred69
12-04-2007, 09:12 PM
Recent history has shown that more time than not, trading your top prospects for veterans backfires and does not turn teams into contenders. See Orioles, Blue jays, Dodgers, Giants and even the Yankees (they won the WS year after years with their own prospects, then went elsewhere and haven't won in 8 years)...
Teams that keep their prospects tend to become contenders and stay contenders for awhile. See Rockies, Diamondbacks, Angels, Indians, Tigers, Padres....

I would add the Twins as a team that builds well from within as well. (Mauer injured slowed them a bit last year though). I agree with the backfire on trading or losing top prospects. Point is, don't give anything up unless you get = value, and that value better fit the need. There are teams that are as desperate for offense as the Reds are for pitching. Find a fair match or pass.