PDA

View Full Version : Faith in Bailey, Belisle, Cueto



UPRedsFan
12-12-2007, 11:27 AM
The ongoing debate to trade or not to trade from our big 4 has got me thinking. The win now crowd is tempting to join and say let's trade whoever it takes to get Haren, Bedard, Kazmir. But Wayne K has to answer this question doesn't he?

How much confidence do we have in Bailey, Belisle, and Cueto?

Is it a better plan to let those 3 continue to improve and keep Votto, Hamilton and Bruce to supply the offense?

Bailey: Seems to have a good head on his shoulders and doesn't get rattled. He knows how good he can be. When you look at his numbers, a little better control and we have our second ace.

Belisle: Shows signs that he can be a solid #3 or #4. Last year was his first full year starting. He has the talent. It's entirely believable that he could put up 200IP and an ERA below 4.5 or better.

Cueto: Don't know much about him, but he doesn't appear to have the control issues that Homer has. He may develop quicker than we think.

So, is it a better plan to let those 3 continue to improve and save Hamilton, Votto and Bruce to supply the offense? I'd love to see Hatteberg and Freel or maybe lower level prospects get moved for another bullpen arm. And we need to sign a Lohse type starter for a year to hold down #5. But I won't be disappointed if we don't get Haren, Kazmir or Bedard.

AdamDunn
12-12-2007, 11:58 AM
Agreed. However, let's not sign Lohse. Awful the first half of the season.

Caveman Techie
12-12-2007, 12:19 PM
Actually I have less faith in Bailey. He has the most talent of anyone in the Reds system the last 15 years, but everything I hear say's he is un-teachable. I've talked with some people in the "know" and they say the reason Bailey was brought up last year was A) publicity stunt to improve ticket sales, and B) to get his fastball pounded by major leaguers to teach him the lesson that you can't be a one trick pony and survive in the majors. Every year Homer has been told he needs to develop his off-speed and breaking pitches. Yet everytime he would get in trouble he would fall back on his fastball to get him out of trouble. In the minors his fastball is good enough to get by with this, but in the majors they are going to kill him. And this is what we started to see last year.

I was overjoyed when Bailey was sent back down to the minors and after his stint on the DL to see game reports stating that he was throwing his breaking pitches for strikes. But then I see quotes like this from an article last week on MLB.com:

Since he was a first-round Draft pick in 2004, Bailey has been given goals each season from improving his mix of offspeed pitches to holding runners. Heading into a new season, he wasn't concerned about meeting people's expectations or goals.

"I don't care what people's goals for me are," he said. "If I can live up to my own expectations, then I'm by far reaching their goals. I have my goals, and that's what I stick to."

And I don't think he gets it yet. I think the only one who will keep Homer from being a superstar is Homer.

ChatterRed
12-12-2007, 01:30 PM
Actually I have less faith in Bailey. He has the most talent of anyone in the Reds system the last 15 years, but everything I hear say's he is un-teachable. I've talked with some people in the "know" and they say the reason Bailey was brought up last year was A) publicity stunt to improve ticket sales, and B) to get his fastball pounded by major leaguers to teach him the lesson that you can't be a one trick pony and survive in the majors. Every year Homer has been told he needs to develop his off-speed and breaking pitches. Yet everytime he would get in trouble he would fall back on his fastball to get him out of trouble. In the minors his fastball is good enough to get by with this, but in the majors they are going to kill him. And this is what we started to see last year.

I was overjoyed when Bailey was sent back down to the minors and after his stint on the DL to see game reports stating that he was throwing his breaking pitches for strikes. But then I see quotes like this from an article last week on MLB.com:

Since he was a first-round Draft pick in 2004, Bailey has been given goals each season from improving his mix of offspeed pitches to holding runners. Heading into a new season, he wasn't concerned about meeting people's expectations or goals.

"I don't care what people's goals for me are," he said. "If I can live up to my own expectations, then I'm by far reaching their goals. I have my goals, and that's what I stick to."

And I don't think he gets it yet. I think the only one who will keep Homer from being a superstar is Homer.


Todd Coffey redux?

Austin Kearns wouldn't listen either.......that's why he's gone.

I'm not sold on Bailey either. So many people have him penciled in as this ace on the team in a couple of years. Meanwhile Lincecum and other rookie pitchers have far exceeded what Bailey has done so far.

I'd take a proven pitcher over the "potential" of Bailey right now. Even if he succeeds, he might end up being more of a #4 or 5 starter rather than an "ace".

AdamDunn
12-12-2007, 02:19 PM
I think Bailey is at worst a #3 pitcher. A pitcher with his fastball can't fall too low.

OUReds
12-12-2007, 02:25 PM
I think there is a pretty good chance (30-40%) that all three become pretty good starting pitchers, with either Bailey or Cueto being a top of the rotation type guy.

But the chances of that happening either next year or 2009 are much, much less. If you are going to develop all three in the rotation, they are going to take their lumps. It's unrealistic to expect the rotation to perform well enough to contend in 2008 relying on Cueto and Bailey, and it's probably not realistic in 2009 either.

That means you are looking at 2010 for an acceptable rotation. Assuming everything works out the way we want it to (which god knows isn't a sure thing given the Red's history of developing starting pitching).

Then in 2011 Harang and Arroyo need resigned just as Bailey and Cueto enter their arbitration years. That essentially means a one year window for contention.

If you parlay Bailey/Cueto into an already developed top of the rotation starter though, everything changes. With Harang/Arroyo/(top pitcher)/Belisle/(filler) you are looking at a two or three year window to contend instead of one. That's huge.

I would trade Bailey/Cueto/mid-level prospect for Haren in a heartbeat, even though I do have faith in their development.

Blue
12-12-2007, 02:26 PM
I think its best to keep our prospects, otherwise, next season we may have no 1B and need two OFs. By next offseason we will know how some things will shake out with Dunn, Griffey, and the development of our other prospects. That's when we'll know whether we have the depth to make something like this work.

bigredbunter
12-12-2007, 04:45 PM
So, is it a better plan to let those 3 continue to improve and save Hamilton, Votto and Bruce to supply the offense?

I'll echo what many above have said--Krivsky's banking an awful lot on 2009 and 2010 if he's gonna sit on all of those folks and hope that one of the pitchers becomes a #2 or above and Hamilton/Votto continues to have success and Bruce fulfills the Larry Walker prophecy.
In the meantime, another 2-3 years have passed Reds fans by.

*BaseClogger*
12-12-2007, 04:55 PM
I would consider trading a Hamilton/Bailey combo, but under no circumstances do I trade Bruce or Cueto. Votto: maybe...

Vada Pinson Fan
12-12-2007, 07:21 PM
The ongoing debate to trade or not to trade from our big 4 has got me thinking. The win now crowd is tempting to join and say let's trade whoever it takes to get Haren, Bedard, Kazmir. But Wayne K has to answer this question doesn't he?

How much confidence do we have in Bailey, Belisle, and Cueto?

Is it a better plan to let those 3 continue to improve and keep Votto, Hamilton and Bruce to supply the offense?

Bailey: Seems to have a good head on his shoulders and doesn't get rattled. He knows how good he can be. When you look at his numbers, a little better control and we have our second ace.

Belisle: Shows signs that he can be a solid #3 or #4. Last year was his first full year starting. He has the talent. It's entirely believable that he could put up 200IP and an ERA below 4.5 or better.

Cueto: Don't know much about him, but he doesn't appear to have the control issues that Homer has. He may develop quicker than we think.

So, is it a better plan to let those 3 continue to improve and save Hamilton, Votto and Bruce to supply the offense? I'd love to see Hatteberg and Freel or maybe lower level prospects get moved for another bullpen arm. And we need to sign a Lohse type starter for a year to hold down #5. But I won't be disappointed if we don't get Haren, Kazmir or Bedard.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
UPRF- Exactly what you suggest is what I'm hoping the Reds will do. I am NOT in the "Win now crowd." We have some excellent talent coming aboard that we fans need to enjoy seeing the Big 4 play in Cincinnati as Reds, not somewhere else and let other fans enjoy them like our former Reds (for example) of John Wetteland, Trevor Hoffman, B.J. Ryan (coincidentally all three were/are big-time relievers) that the Reds let get away. Wetteland came from the Dodgers but Hoffman and BJ Ryan were our own minor leaguers at one time.

Keep Bruce, Votto, Bailey & Cueto- Mr.Krivsky. Don't let them get away for anyone or anything! IE- Don't trade them, period. I also include Josh Hamilton in that too. The asking price for Haren, Kazmir and Bedard is way too much. Wait until they're free agents. Our Big 4 guys +1 are special!!!

AmarilloRed
12-12-2007, 07:26 PM
I think both Bailey and Cueto are going to surprise an awful lot of people next year. I think Bailey could win 10-15 games with Cordero to help him, and Cueto could make the team out of spring training. I think both pitchers will be major contributors by 2009. Votto will establish himself as a starting first baseman next year, and Bruce will take over for Griffey starting in 2009. As for Belisle, I expect some improvement; but he will never be more than a back of the rotation starter.

Vada Pinson Fan
12-12-2007, 07:33 PM
AmarilloRed- Our crystal balls are showing us the same thing! LOL! I agree with you 100%.
Belisle will be a back of the rotation guy here and that's OK.......for now. We need to get the other pieces of the puzzle in place, hopefully before the start of the 2009 season.

AdamDunn
12-12-2007, 07:44 PM
I think there is a pretty good chance (30-40%) that all three become pretty good starting pitchers, with either Bailey or Cueto being a top of the rotation type guy.

But the chances of that happening either next year or 2009 are much, much less. If you are going to develop all three in the rotation, they are going to take their lumps. It's unrealistic to expect the rotation to perform well enough to contend in 2008 relying on Cueto and Bailey, and it's probably not realistic in 2009 either.

That means you are looking at 2010 for an acceptable rotation. Assuming everything works out the way we want it to (which god knows isn't a sure thing given the Red's history of developing starting pitching).

Then in 2011 Harang and Arroyo need resigned just as Bailey and Cueto enter their arbitration years. That essentially means a one year window for contention.

If you parlay Bailey/Cueto into an already developed top of the rotation starter though, everything changes. With Harang/Arroyo/(top pitcher)/Belisle/(filler) you are looking at a two or three year window to contend instead of one. That's huge.

I would trade Bailey/Cueto/mid-level prospect for Haren in a heartbeat, even though I do have faith in their development.

Worked for the Tigers, didn't it? Bonderman, Verlander, Zumaya, etc. Anyways, just because we MIGHT not have Harang and/or Arroyo in 2011, doesn't me we won't contend. A lots of things can happen between then.

OUReds
12-12-2007, 08:59 PM
Sure it COULD work, I just don't think it is LIKELY to work.

Every team has a best case scenario that would allow them to contend. Even the Devil Rays. It's all a matter of maximizing your chances

HokieRed
12-12-2007, 09:38 PM
One reason not to trade young players in their replacement cost. Rowand just signed with the Giants for 60 milion for 5 years. What does that make Hamilton worth over the next five years? If he becomes the player it looks like he will, probably 75 million minimum. Think of the other players that 75 million can go to.

bigredbunter
12-12-2007, 10:56 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
we fans need to enjoy seeing the Big 4 play in Cincinnati as Reds, not somewhere else and let other fans enjoy them like our former Reds (for example) of John Wetteland, Trevor Hoffman, B.J. Ryan (coincidentally all three were/are big-time relievers) that the Reds let get away. Wetteland came from the Dodgers but Hoffman and BJ Ryan were our own minor leaguers at one time.


-BJ Ryan netted us Juan Guzman for the stretch run in '99--The Reds traded a prospect so they could gear up to make the playoffs--You don't make that move?? You hold your prospect so you can enjoy them in a Reds uni in a few years rather than giving your current team what they need to win?

AmarilloRed
12-12-2007, 11:10 PM
The Reds system is finally producing after a long dry spell, but I still would wait 5 years before trading the top prospects. There is no alternative first base prospect to replace Votto, Bailey and Cueto are the best Reds prospects in 20 years, and Hamilton and Bruce are needed in case both Griffey and Dunn are not re-signed. It is a legitimate point that one or all of these prospects may not become legitimate major leaguers, but they will all be cheap alternatives for the next 5-6 years. There is no reason Bailey, Cueto or Maloney would not be the #3 or #5 starters we need next year for a much cheaper price.

roby
12-13-2007, 01:17 AM
I'm beginning to see things your way. At first, I thought that a big trade was the answer, but there is no reason to think that Harang can't be resigned in 2011. Arroyo too, if needed. These young players are going to be a blast to watch. I think that Bailey is closer to being ready than many think. Cueto should learn and develope while contributing in the bullpen this year, like Jose Rijo did when he first joined the Reds. If the Reds could land a Freddie Garcia (if healthy) or a Joe Blanton, I think they would be ready to contend this year.

757690
12-19-2007, 07:28 PM
Very interesting article from Jason Stark on espn.com.

Reason why it might be smart to have faith in the youngsters.



"We can sum up the difference between the National League and the American League these days with one little winter meetings anecdote.

We were speaking with a high-ranking official of an NL contender. We asked about a potentially earth-rattling trade we'd heard his team had kicked around.
It was there to be made. This official admitted that. His team could use the player. It had the players it would take to make the deal. But it wasn't happening. Not unless his team got realigned to the American League in the next 30 seconds, anyway.
"If we played in the other league, I'd probably do that," he said. "But in this league, I don't have to do it. If we keep the guys we'd give up, we have just as much chance to be playing in October as we would if we made the deal. So why do it?"

Good question. When you play in a league with no Yankees, no Red Sox, no Tigers, no Angels, no superpowers, it's amazing how much patience that can inspire."

HokieRed
12-19-2007, 09:06 PM
There is no evidence yet that the "Reds system" is producing anything. It looks like Dan O'Brien had some very good drafts and signees and that Jim Bowden lucked into one pick--Votto--who will help us. But the system, particularly if that means Krivsky, has not yet proved itself to have produced anything. We have some interesting prospects from Krivsky's drafts, nothing near approaching the best of O'Brien's. That's all we have at this point. It's important for the organization not to get ahead of itself and start thinking it can just trade away terrific talents like Bailey and Votto because it can always find more. There's no evidence yet that the current regime can find anything in the draft.

podgejeff_
12-21-2007, 04:03 PM
^^^^Lotzkar and Frazier disagree.

kaldaniels
12-24-2007, 01:02 AM
One reason not to trade young players in their replacement cost. Rowand just signed with the Giants for 60 milion for 5 years. What does that make Hamilton worth over the next five years? If he becomes the player it looks like he will, probably 75 million minimum. Think of the other players that 75 million can go to.

I am rooting for Josh Hamilton as a man. However...he has done NOTHING to show he is (or heading towards) a 75 million minimun at this point. He has several large steps he must take before he enters that arena.

AdamDunn
12-24-2007, 02:45 PM
^^^^Lotzkar and Frazier disagree.

We don't know how good Lotzkar and Frazier are. So far, Stubbs and Watson haven't exactly been the premier top 50 prospects in baseball-type that O'Brien produced.

TC81190
12-24-2007, 02:46 PM
I am rooting for Josh Hamilton as a man. However...he has done NOTHING to show he is (or heading towards) a 75 million minimun at this point. He has several large steps he must take before he enters that arena.

He won't be hitting free agency for a long, long time.