PDA

View Full Version : Orioles Insider: The Reds have significantly upped their offer for Bedard



Edd Roush
12-20-2007, 12:30 PM
Belkast
Plus member since 01/06
Major League Starter Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Bel Air, Md
Posts: 1,208


Also just received info that the Reds have up'd the offer a great deal for Bedard.







Don't know what this entails, but I am afraid that Bruce now may be involved.

Why Not?
12-20-2007, 12:48 PM
We're all hoping Bruce is the addition, but who knows?

HokieRed
12-20-2007, 01:03 PM
I've predicted a weak Wayner will give in on Bruce. This is probably it.

Natty Redlocks
12-20-2007, 01:15 PM
Dang! He caved and added Norris Hopper!




I say it's Hamilton.

_Sir_Charles_
12-20-2007, 01:28 PM
Actually, the O's fans are thinking it'll be Hamilton added in.

They're pretty certain that it's already Cueto and Votto on the table for Bedard and that the Reds just upped the ante a bit for him.

The talks on the boards lately have been stuff like the Reds offered Bailey, Votto, Hamilton & Stubbs. I think that's overstating things. Nobody really knows what we've offered and what we haven't. However, this guy Belkast is in direct contact with an O's front-office guy who's in the war-room discussing trades. And if nothing else, it's very clear that the Reds are the front runners now.

Bip Roberts
12-20-2007, 02:02 PM
Cueto Votto and Hamilton... jesus christ

wpenn4
12-20-2007, 02:04 PM
I thought this one was kind of interesting from Orioles Hangout:

Which trade do you prefer (M's or Reds)? (http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php?t=56604)

Why Not?
12-20-2007, 02:08 PM
Actually, the O's fans are thinking it'll be Hamilton added in.

They're pretty certain that it's already Cueto and Votto on the table for Bedard and that the Reds just upped the ante a bit for him.

The talks on the boards lately have been stuff like the Reds offered Bailey, Votto, Hamilton & Stubbs. I think that's overstating things. Nobody really knows what we've offered and what we haven't. However, this guy Belkast is in direct contact with an O's front-office guy who's in the war-room discussing trades. And if nothing else, it's very clear that the Reds are the front runners now.


Things can change pretty quickly when there are multiple teams in talks for the same guy. I'm sure McPhail is playing the Reds and
Mariners against each other as we speak.

_Sir_Charles_
12-20-2007, 02:09 PM
I don't think it's Hamilton though. I personally think we'll deal either Hamilton OR Votto...not both. Bruce won't be in the deal either.

I'm hoping it's something like Cueto, Hamilton, Stubbs. With Bruce coming up, I think I'd rather keep Votto than Hamilton. I don't see us dealing Dunn or Junior and we simply have to unload one of our OF's. Hopper won't bring in enough, so that makes Josh the odd man out.

The think I'm really fighting over within myself is Bailey versus Cueto. We've heard (and seen) more about Bailey, but from what I hear of Johnny his control is lights-out. He doesn't have the velocity that Bailey does...but I'll take control over velocity any day of the week.

Who do you guys think has the better chance of succeeding? Bailey or Cueto?

Bip Roberts
12-20-2007, 02:27 PM
Cueto has a better chance of being a good pitcher but Bailey has the chance to become a top of the rotation lights out guy

MasonBuzz3
12-20-2007, 02:45 PM
"I also spoke to my guy about Bedard. Here is what was said..... The Reds are the clear favorite right now and actually are considering names that we thought wouldn't be discussed. Yes the name is Bruce!!!! This does not mean they have included him in the deal, because they have not. What it does mean is that he said we were told that they would be willing to entertain the idea if that's what it took to land Bedard. Well obviously acording to my guy we said Bruce would have to be in a deal. The discussions have taking place atleast 2 times today that my guy is aware of. Now my take...If AM somehow gets Bruce in a deal he will by far be the greatest addition to the team in recent memory. Either way, I love how he goes about is business."

the latest from the oriole board's "insider"

Bip Roberts
12-20-2007, 02:51 PM
God im going to barf

Stingray
12-20-2007, 03:03 PM
Any deal including Bruce + 2 more of the big 5 would make the Frank Robinson deal look good for the Reds.

If the Reds management makes a deal like this, they are idiots.

_Sir_Charles_
12-20-2007, 03:05 PM
If they include Bruce in ANY deal for Bedard it won't be anything close to what we've been seeing previously. Heck, it may even be Bruce for Bedard +1. If it's the other way around, it won't be more than Bruce +1.

ChatterRed
12-20-2007, 03:05 PM
Not what I wanted to hear.

I'd stand pat and not trade anyone at this point. The asking price is too high. When you're Detroit and either in or close to the playoffs, that is one thing. When you're Cincinnati, you have to think more long term.

Degenerate39
12-20-2007, 03:06 PM
We're all hoping Bruce is the addition, but who knows?

I hope this was a typo. I don't want to lose Bruce

Caveman Techie
12-20-2007, 03:19 PM
I hope this was a typo. I don't want to lose Bruce

I took this to mean he was an O's fan.

muethibp
12-20-2007, 03:30 PM
I took this to mean he was an O's fan.

Good detective work:

Patiently awaiting the Orioles' next winning season.

thatcoolguy_22
12-20-2007, 03:31 PM
If it is Bruce it will only take Bruce plus a Maloney for bedard.

We will still have Votto/Hamilton and Cueto/Bailey...

_Sir_Charles_
12-20-2007, 03:33 PM
Some good news. The leak that Bruce was on the table was put forth by the guy Belkast. Well, his source just busted him. Apparently McPhail fed this Belkast guy some false information to "out" him. I'm assuming that means that Bruce ISN'T on the table.

*BaseClogger*
12-20-2007, 03:33 PM
I do NOT want to lose Cueto or Bailey... they can have all the offensive prospects they want not named Jay Bruce...

mlbfan30
12-20-2007, 03:36 PM
I really don't get why the D-Backs can trade away only 1 top 50 prospect and extra for 3 years of Haren.
While the Reds would have to part with 3 top 50 prospects, or the BEST prospect and another top 50 for 2 years of Bedard

thatcoolguy_22
12-20-2007, 03:38 PM
I really don't get why the D-Backs can trade away only 1 top 50 prospect and extra for 3 years of Haren.
While the Reds would have to part with 3 top 50 prospects, or the BEST prospect and another top 50 for 2 years of Bedard

It angers me that Krivsky couldn't have worked something out with Beane. This is also the reason that I think we will never see Bedard wearing a reds uni...

Dracodave
12-20-2007, 03:39 PM
I really don't get why the D-Backs can trade away only 1 top 50 prospect and extra for 3 years of Haren.
While the Reds would have to part with 3 top 50 prospects, or the BEST prospect and another top 50 for 2 years of Bedard


If you are in the O's shoes what do you do? Play the Reds game and take Maloney, Votto/Hamilton, Ceuto/Bailey..or know the Reds need pitching period and WAIT for Bruce?

HokieRed
12-20-2007, 03:48 PM
Obviously the Orioles are going to wait until Wayner serves them us just what they want: Jay Bruce. When the Reds are ten games under in August, I hope these boards will lead the charge for the firing of an incompetent GM. In my view, we shouldn't even be talking about any of the packages mentioned for Bedard. I don't want him. I want the Reds to show some pride and walk away from ridiculous deals.

*BaseClogger*
12-20-2007, 03:53 PM
I really don't get why the D-Backs can trade away only 1 top 50 prospect and extra for 3 years of Haren.
While the Reds would have to part with 3 top 50 prospects, or the BEST prospect and another top 50 for 2 years of Bedard

My initial reaction was that I was happy the D-Backs traded for Haren, to prevent us from giving up too much talent for him. But if we end up trading for Bedard, I'm going to really regret us not going and getting the safe play in Dan Haren. An extra year on the contract, and an innings eating machine...

podgejeff_
12-20-2007, 03:55 PM
Please God no.

Wayne, if you're somehow reading this, keep Bruce. There's a reason these teams are all really trying hard to make you give him up, because he's got as much potential as anyone to be one of those stars people always remember.

Trade for Snell if you're really wanting to upgrade the rotation, but seriously, leave Bruce's name out of it. At this point, I'm starting to think the Reds will be better served walking away from the market happy with a Cordero upgrade for the bullpen. The prices seem to be getting pretty high.

*BaseClogger*
12-20-2007, 03:57 PM
Please God no.

Wayne, if you're somehow reading this, keep Bruce. There's a reason these teams are all really trying hard to make you give him up, because he's got as much potential as anyone to be one of those stars people always remember.

Trade for Snell if you're really wanting to upgrade the rotation, but seriously, leave Bruce's name out of it. At this point, I'm starting to think the Reds will be better served walking away from the market happy with a Cordero upgrade for the bullpen. The prices seem to be getting pretty high.

:thumbup:

Bip Roberts
12-20-2007, 04:33 PM
I really don't get why the D-Backs can trade away only 1 top 50 prospect and extra for 3 years of Haren.
While the Reds would have to part with 3 top 50 prospects, or the BEST prospect and another top 50 for 2 years of Bedard

Yes this a joke to me

757690
12-20-2007, 05:25 PM
I really don't get why the D-Backs can trade away only 1 top 50 prospect and extra for 3 years of Haren.
While the Reds would have to part with 3 top 50 prospects, or the BEST prospect and another top 50 for 2 years of Bedard

I know, it sucks, and is not fair. It reminds me of 1987 when the Reds were trying to acquire Rick Reuschel from the Pirates. Because the Reds had Larkin, Daniels, Jones, Stillwell and O'Neill as prospects, The Pirates wanted all of them (practically) for Reuschel. When the Reds refused to include Larkin, the Pirates traded Reuschel for a lot less than what they could have gotten from the Reds if they did not demand Larkin.

*BaseClogger*
12-20-2007, 05:32 PM
I know, it sucks, and is not fair. It reminds me of 1987 when the Reds were trying to acquire Rick Reuschel from the Pirates. Because the Reds had Larkin, Daniels, Jones, Stillwell and O'Neill as prospects, The Pirates wanted all of them (practically) for Reuschel. When the Reds refused to include Larkin, the Pirates traded Reuschel for a lot less than what they could have gotten from the Reds if they did not demand Larkin.

sucks to have a good farm system, doesn't it?:p:

Vada Pinson Fan
12-20-2007, 05:52 PM
Obviously the Orioles are going to wait until Wayner serves them us just what they want: Jay Bruce. When the Reds are ten games under in August, I hope these boards will lead the charge for the firing of an incompetent GM. In my view, we shouldn't even be talking about any of the packages mentioned for Bedard. I don't want him. I want the Reds to show some pride and walk away from ridiculous deals.

Amen! I'm in total agreement with you, HokieRed. I'm more than willing to watch Cueto and Bailey refine their skills next year as Reds and keep our boat-load of talent, meaning Bruce, Votto, Hamilton as well as Bailey, Cueto and Maloney. If Krivsky told McPhail -No Deal- and walked away, it would leave Baltimore with the lesser deal with the M's. Then McPhail comes to his senses and takes less than he (McPhail) originally wanted to. Giving up any of the Big 5 for Bedard is basically "putting all of your eggs in one basket" and that never turns out well.

Forget Bedard. Let the 2008 season be a primer for getting things in order for a nice, post season run in 2009.

BLEEDS
12-20-2007, 06:04 PM
As noted previously, this guy was fed FALSE notes to out him.

NO WAY we are dealing Bruce, no way, no how.

Cueto/Hamilton and however many other guys in AAA and below they want. That's it.

Keep Bruce and his High Ceiling. Keep Votto and his CHEAP .850+ OPS for the next 3-5 years.

2008 go with Dunn and Junior on the corners and - dare I say it - HOPPER/Freel in CF, and you got your lead-off guy. Bedard and Hopper/Freel is WAY better than Hamilton/#5 Starter...

Sure Bruce might start in 2008 in CF, but I'm not counting on it.

2009 - you are down Griffey in Right, and you have to concern yourself with a REAL 3rd OF-er, and the Dunn Free Agency decision.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

BLEEDS
12-20-2007, 06:12 PM
I thought this one was kind of interesting from Orioles Hangout:

Which trade do you prefer (M's or Reds)? (http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php?t=56604)

Seems the O's value Votto more than most of us/the Reds.

I sure hope the Reds know the real deal if they are considering trading Votto over Hamilton. Based on last year, I can't see why.

Votto slugged .900+ OPS, albeit in under 100 AB's.

Hamilton was spectacular at the plate, but his injuries have me worried or at least concerned. And, what can you give an ex-junkie to treat his pain? You know he's going to play hurt, A LOT.

Plus, we have Jay Bruce - and Dunn, and other options in the OF. We have, umm, Hatteberg at 1B. We have NOBODY behind him, and just dropped Cantu in the off-season.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

bigredbunter
12-20-2007, 06:13 PM
Giving up any of the Big 5 for Bedard is basically "putting all of your eggs in one basket" and that never turns out well.


How about judging a book by its cover? Does that ever turn out well either?

Vada Pinson Fan
12-20-2007, 06:25 PM
How about judging a book by its cover? Does that ever turn out well either?

I think these trade talks have gone on long enough than using your analogy to mean anything of substance.

Why Not?
12-20-2007, 06:26 PM
Some good news. The leak that Bruce was on the table was put forth by the guy Belkast. Well, his source just busted him. Apparently McPhail fed this Belkast guy some false information to "out" him. I'm assuming that means that Bruce ISN'T on the table.

Seems like "Belkast" was found out. Still, it's not clear if the info about the Reds offer was false or not. I don't think today's events mean Bruce is off the table OR on the table.

That guy's source clearly has an idea of what is being discussed by the Orioles' front office, but sometimes the details are foggy. I'm sure Bruce has been discussed (as have nearly every other player on both teams' rosters), but none of us need an inside man to know that.

Vada Pinson Fan
12-20-2007, 06:29 PM
Seems like "Belkast" was found out. Still, it's not clear if the info about the Reds offer was false or not. I don't think today's events mean Bruce is off the table OR on the table.

That guy's source clearly has an idea of what is being discussed by the Orioles' front office, but sometimes the details are foggy. I'm sure Bruce has been discussed (as have nearly every other player on both teams' rosters), but none of us need an inside man to know that.

Exactly. This could easily be a media fabrication.

Edd Roush
12-20-2007, 06:37 PM
As noted previously, this guy was fed FALSE notes to out him.

NO WAY we are dealing Bruce, no way, no how.

Cueto/Hamilton and however many other guys in AAA and below they want. That's it.

Keep Bruce and his High Ceiling. Keep Votto and his CHEAP .850+ OPS for the next 3-5 years.

2008 go with Dunn and Junior on the corners and - dare I say it - HOPPER/Freel in CF, and you got your lead-off guy. Bedard and Hopper/Freel is WAY better than Hamilton/#5 Starter...

Sure Bruce might start in 2008 in CF, but I'm not counting on it.

2009 - you are down Griffey in Right, and you have to concern yourself with a REAL 3rd OF-er, and the Dunn Free Agency decision.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

I am in agreeance with almost the entirety of this post. The only thing I disagree with is, if the Reds trade Hamilton/Votto for Bedard, I would like to have Adam Dunn tell me before we make the trade that he is excited by this move and wants to be a Red beyond 2008.

Trust me, I am all for having a great rotation, but I will not be a happy camper if the Reds have no offense in 2009. If we get Bedard, I would love to see Dunn re-upped beyond 2008 at least for another 2 years, which would fit the Reds' window that they are looking to compete.

bigredbunter
12-20-2007, 07:31 PM
I think these trade talks have gone on long enough than using your analogy to mean anything of substance.

Since we're throwing around old adages, you mean I'm all hat and no cattle?;)

roby
12-20-2007, 07:42 PM
Cueto Votto and Hamilton... jesus christ

Bipper: Since you brought Him up, are you aware that He died on the cross for your sins? :thumbup:

Hondo
12-20-2007, 08:10 PM
I am in agreeance with almost the entirety of this post. The only thing I disagree with is, if the Reds trade Hamilton/Votto for Bedard, I would like to have Adam Dunn tell me before we make the trade that he is excited by this move and wants to be a Red beyond 2008.

Trust me, I am all for having a great rotation, but I will not be a happy camper if the Reds have no offense in 2009. If we get Bedard, I would love to see Dunn re-upped beyond 2008 at least for another 2 years, which would fit the Reds' window that they are looking to compete.

I am confident that Adam Dunn will Love the addition of Bedard and want to be with the Organization. All that guy wants to do is win!

I think the Haren trade did wonders for the Bedard deal...

That means more prospects that are not the ELITE....

I'd love to send Edwin as the centerpiece and Keep Cueto, Hamilton, Bailey, Votto, etc...

EdwinE, Stubbs, Wood, and 1 other LOWER LEVEL Guy...

Thanks

TheBigLebowski
12-20-2007, 08:18 PM
This situation continues to scare me.

Why Not?
12-20-2007, 08:24 PM
I am in agreeance with almost the entirety of this post. The only thing I disagree with is, if the Reds trade Hamilton/Votto for Bedard, I would like to have Adam Dunn tell me before we make the trade that he is excited by this move and wants to be a Red beyond 2008.

Trust me, I am all for having a great rotation, but I will not be a happy camper if the Reds have no offense in 2009. If we get Bedard, I would love to see Dunn re-upped beyond 2008 at least for another 2 years, which would fit the Reds' window that they are looking to compete.

Ironically, the Dunn "can-we-extend-or-not" situation is exactly the scenario that is leading the Orioles to shop Bedard.

Nasty_Boy
12-20-2007, 09:50 PM
I think the Reds chances of winning are greater if they wait a year or so, rather than overpaying for next season. If they acquire Bedard, they only have him for two seasons. The odds of him resigning with the Reds is slim. So if the Reds give up their top 2 prospects + a Hamilton or few prospects outside the top 10 and they fail to win a title, then how long will it be before they're competitive again? Unless Bob decides to spend like the big boys every season, they have to hang on to Bruce and at least one of Bailey/Cueto if not both. Go after the marginal pitcher and trust your scouts, use Cueto in the bullpen, let Homer prove himself, and for God's sake release Stanton and Castro.

Bip Roberts
12-20-2007, 09:56 PM
Bipper: Since you brought Him up, are you aware that He died on the cross for your sins? :thumbup:

hallelujah :pray:

TN Red Fan
12-20-2007, 10:08 PM
Make the deal. If we don't make a move it's going to be 10 more years of .500 ball at best.

By the time Bruce, Votto, Bailey, and Cueto mature, you lose Harang, Arroyo, Phillips and Encarnacion.

That is not a formula for success.

Trade 'em. If I can do Bruce and Cueto and nobody else, that's what I'd do.

Hondo
12-20-2007, 10:13 PM
Make the deal. If we don't make a move it's going to be 10 more years of .500 ball at best.

By the time Bruce, Votto, Bailey, and Cueto mature, you lose Harang, Arroyo, Phillips and Encarnacion.

That is not a formula for success.

Trade 'em. If I can do Bruce and Cueto and nobody else, that's what I'd do.


Look what Haren netted Oakland. The Diamondbacks gave up Many Lower Level Prospects versus 2 Blue Chip ones...

Why would the Reds do it any different?

Look what the Boston Red Sox are offering for Johan Santana...

Coco Crisp and REFUSING to Include Jacoby Ellsbury.

The Reds are not going to give up Jay Bruce for Bedard.

Why? Cause no one else would either!

Thanks

Krawhitham
12-20-2007, 10:26 PM
Look what Haren netted Oakland. The Diamondbacks gave up Many Lower Level Prospects versus 2 Blue Chip ones...

Why would the Reds do it any different?

Look what the Boston Red Sox are offering for Johan Santana...

Coco Crisp and REFUSING to Include Jacoby Ellsbury.

The Reds are not going to give up Jay Bruce for Bedard.

Why? Cause no one else would either!

Thanks

Did you forget Wayne is an idiot

Bip Roberts
12-20-2007, 10:27 PM
Did you forget Wayne is an idiot

:rolleyes:

AmarilloRed
12-20-2007, 10:35 PM
Make the deal. If we don't make a move it's going to be 10 more years of .500 ball at best.

By the time Bruce, Votto, Bailey, and Cueto mature, you lose Harang, Arroyo, Phillips and Encarnacion.

That is not a formula for success.

Trade 'em. If I can do Bruce and Cueto and nobody else, that's what I'd do.

Don't make the deal at all. We can develop our prospects and wait for the 2009 free agents.

TN Red Fan
12-20-2007, 10:44 PM
Don't make the deal at all. We can develop our prospects and wait for the 2009 free agents.

Or we can win now, increase revenues, wait for the 2009 FAs and actually be able to sign some of them.

TN Red Fan
12-20-2007, 10:48 PM
Look what Haren netted Oakland. The Diamondbacks gave up Many Lower Level Prospects versus 2 Blue Chip ones...

Why would the Reds do it any different?

Look what the Boston Red Sox are offering for Johan Santana...

Coco Crisp and REFUSING to Include Jacoby Ellsbury.

The Reds are not going to give up Jay Bruce for Bedard.

Why? Cause no one else would either!

Thanks


Bedard is better than Haren.

The Yankees and Red Sox can sign any FA pitcher they want. They don't need to trade.

You only get Santana for one year and even then it's $13 million. Bedard you get for two years at $5-8 million.

Every situation is different.

Delmon Young was as close to Bruce as they get, and he got traded for Matt Garza, who's not as good as Bedard.

AmarilloRed
12-20-2007, 10:49 PM
I don't mind winning now as long as we keep our prospects. We can sign some filler free agents to take over until Bailey, Cueto , and Maloney are ready.

Nasty_Boy
12-20-2007, 11:00 PM
Bedard is better than Haren, but I'm pretty sure Haren is under contract for an extra year.

Also all of the Reds top prospects should be regulars by 2009. I think we have Phillips under control past 2009 but I think he'll be extended before then, Harang and Arroyo are both signed through/past 2009, and Edwin is still a few years away from free agency. Even though I think Todd Frazier is going to be playing 3rd by then.

GoReds33
12-20-2007, 11:03 PM
Thank God this was a setup. The win now attitude would only put us back in a situation like we were in 2 years ago after Bedard left.

gedred69
12-20-2007, 11:50 PM
I am confident that Adam Dunn will Love the addition of Bedard and want to be with the Organization. All that guy wants to do is win!

I think the Haren trade did wonders for the Bedard deal...

That means more prospects that are not the ELITE....

I'd love to send Edwin as the centerpiece and Keep Cueto, Hamilton, Bailey, Votto, etc...

EdwinE, Stubbs, Wood, and 1 other LOWER LEVEL Guy...

Thanks

I like this thought. As previously mentioned, what was given up for Haren regarding prospects, was not guys on the brink of being major impacts. It's a poker game now. Don't blink WK.

Edd Roush
12-21-2007, 12:27 AM
Ironically, the Dunn "can-we-extend-or-not" situation is exactly the scenario that is leading the Orioles to shop Bedard.

I whole heartedly disagree with this post. How are the Reds going into the '08 season the same as the Orioles going into '08? The Reds' have been adding parts to make themselves a contender (Cordero and Baker) while the Orioles are unloading their talent to rebuild (Tejada).

The Orioles laid down 100 million dollars in front of Bedard and he walked away from the table.

The Reds gave Dunner a chance to stay a Red for a longer time in '05 and he accepted the money and stayed a Red.

Bedard's only history with extensions is "no" while Dunn's only history of extensions with the Reds is "yes."

The Reds are looking to win in the near future while the Orioles are finally rebuilding. Dunner has a much better chance of being a Red in 2010 then Bedard has of being an Oriole.

Edd Roush
12-21-2007, 12:30 AM
I am confident that Adam Dunn will Love the addition of Bedard and want to be with the Organization. All that guy wants to do is win!

I think the Haren trade did wonders for the Bedard deal...

That means more prospects that are not the ELITE....

I'd love to send Edwin as the centerpiece and Keep Cueto, Hamilton, Bailey, Votto, etc...

EdwinE, Stubbs, Wood, and 1 other LOWER LEVEL Guy...

Thanks

We go from agreeing hard core to disagreeing hard core.

There is no way you could offer McPhail EdE, Stubbs, Wood and a lower guy than them and hear anything but *click*

He would be laughing his head off and then give the Mariners a call and say yea I'll take Jones, Morrow/Clement, and others.

I hate to break up your dream world but if the Reds are going to come through on their 10% chance of bringing home Bedard, they are going to have to give Bailey/Cueto AND Hamilton/Votto AND 2 or 3 of the middle prospects (Maloney, Stubbs, Wood).

ChatterRed
12-21-2007, 01:57 AM
I really don't get why the D-Backs can trade away only 1 top 50 prospect and extra for 3 years of Haren.
While the Reds would have to part with 3 top 50 prospects, or the BEST prospect and another top 50 for 2 years of Bedard


I agree. It's like the Reds are being penalized because they have 4 top 50 prospects and those with pitching are holding them hostage for everything they can get. But then another team comes along with less to offer and they're willing to take less?????

I'd hold on to them.

BEETTLEBUG
12-21-2007, 02:08 AM
Then forget it he is not worth the FARM.

Hondo
12-21-2007, 02:28 AM
I'm judt going to say that Haren was a Great Pitcher last year and started the All-Star game, and Bedard got injured...

I think the Haren deal is what the Reds need to model there deal after...

Thanks

Bigredfan#1
12-21-2007, 09:33 AM
I am confident that Adam Dunn will Love the addition of Bedard and want to be with the Organization. All that guy wants to do is win!

I think the Haren trade did wonders for the Bedard deal...

That means more prospects that are not the ELITE....

I'd love to send Edwin as the centerpiece and Keep Cueto, Hamilton, Bailey, Votto, etc...

EdwinE, Stubbs, Wood, and 1 other LOWER LEVEL Guy...

Thanks

You and me both! I like EE but I would trade him in a heartbeat to get Bedard. I'd add Votto if we can keep Baily, Cueto and BRUCE! Just don't think we can get it done without giving up at least one of the 3. At least WK hasn't blinked yet!

jmac
12-21-2007, 10:53 AM
I was just looking at Bedard's game by game stats from last year.
He had a 4 game stretch in july where he was 4-0 with
29 ip
12 hits
2 runs
41 k's
The guy can pitch. Yes I had looked at his overall stats but he seems more impressive after looking at game by game.

AmarilloRed
12-21-2007, 10:54 AM
I think the Reds should look to an alternative to Bedard. The Orioles are being greedy, he most likely would not sign an extension, and he would cost too much in prospects.

BLEEDS
12-21-2007, 11:04 AM
I am in agreeance with almost the entirety of this post. The only thing I disagree with is, if the Reds trade Hamilton/Votto for Bedard, I would like to have Adam Dunn tell me before we make the trade that he is excited by this move and wants to be a Red beyond 2008.

Trust me, I am all for having a great rotation, but I will not be a happy camper if the Reds have no offense in 2009. If we get Bedard, I would love to see Dunn re-upped beyond 2008 at least for another 2 years, which would fit the Reds' window that they are looking to compete.

I never said NOT to talk to Dunn. IMO, we should be talking LTC with him right now. I think the only reason they're not, is that MIGHT make some teams think we have MORE reason to trade one of our excessive OF-ers (Hamilton, Freel)...

I'm with that camp 1,000%. For everybody who says we can trade this guy and that guy because we have Jay Bruce, they are ALL forgetting that Bruce is for all intents and purposes the heir apparent to Griffey in 2009, and should be able to replace his numbers by then. We STILL have Dunn's production to replace, and that ain't happening with a rookie.

I would believe that once a trade is made for a pitcher of that caliber, where we'd have to give up a Hamilton or Votto (please no!), then we'd look to shore up our offense for 2009 and beyond...

PEACE

-BLEEDS

BLEEDS
12-21-2007, 11:06 AM
Or we can win now, increase revenues, wait for the 2009 FAs and actually be able to sign some of them.

DING DING DING!!! WE HAVE A WINNER!!

Show him what he's won Bob!


PEACE

-BLEEDS

TheBigLebowski
12-21-2007, 11:09 AM
I hear the Mariners have upped the ante and are now offering Roger Salkeld.

AmarilloRed
12-21-2007, 11:15 AM
DING DING DING!!! WE HAVE A WINNER!!

Show him what he's won Bob!


PEACE

-BLEEDS

We would have won a barren farm system and lose Bedard in 2 years.

BLEEDS
12-21-2007, 11:50 AM
We would have won a barren farm system and lose Bedard in 2 years.

You assume we are trading the ENTIRE Farm.
I am convinced we can make a trade without giving up TWO of the "Fab Four" - even for Bedard.

Cueto and Hamilton, and fodder - being guys who AREN'T NEAR the majors at point - can get us Bedard.

Hamilton and same fodder can get us a Blanton or similar.


We compete next year, it will increase revenues, and allow us to SPEND in 2009 FA, which we all agree is a better crop to spend on. It would also help get a guy like Dunn signed to an LTC.

Making no moves and competing for .500 isn't going to help our bottom line OR the likelihood that Free Agents would CONSIDER Cincinnati.

We didn't bring Dusty Baker in here to let his first year Starting Rotation have two guys with more than one year's experience in it. That's not a RoadMap for success.

We CAN do both, it's not one or the other.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

HokieRed
12-21-2007, 12:02 PM
I think you can be sure that if Cueto and Hamilton would have gotten Bedard, the deal would already have gone down.

TN Red Fan
12-21-2007, 01:05 PM
You guys keep assuming that the future is brighter than the present because of Votto, Bruce, Bailey and Cueto, but you're missing the point. It's not. It's exactly the same.

Look:

Votto = Phillips
Bruce = Griffey
Bailey = Harang
Cueto = Arroyo

Somebody made the argument that we shouldn't trade these guys because we haven't shown the ability to develop young talent. What about the ability to re-sign our talent? We haven't shown the willingness to spend money, either.

So it's just as unlikely that we keep Phillips, Harang and Arroyo as it is that continue to bring in good young players.


So by the time the fab-4 matures, you've lost Griffey, Phillips, Harang and Arroyo. How is that a better team? If we can't compete now, what makes anybody think we'll compete then?

I'm sorry, but small market teams don't get to compete over the long-term. Its a fact of baseball's inequity. You just can't retain your good players. When the stars align in such away that you can put a good team on the field, you do so.

And BTW, our farm system will be just as barren in 2009 if we trade these four guys as it will be if we keep them. Why? Because they won't be in the farm system anymore, they'll be in the majors. ;)

Caveman Techie
12-21-2007, 02:03 PM
I'm sorry, but small market teams don't get to compete over the long-term. Its a fact of baseball's inequity. You just can't retain your good players. When the stars align in such away that you can put a good team on the field, you do so.

And BTW, our farm system will be just as barren in 2009 if we trade these four guys as it will be if we keep them. Why? Because they won't be in the farm system anymore, they'll be in the majors. ;)


Oakland say's HI.

kaldaniels
12-21-2007, 02:07 PM
I think you can be sure that if Cueto and Hamilton would have gotten Bedard, the deal would already have gone down.

In the words of Bleeds...DING DING DING WE HAVE A WINNER.

BucksandReds
12-21-2007, 02:18 PM
You guys keep assuming that the future is brighter than the present because of Votto, Bruce, Bailey and Cueto, but you're missing the point. It's not. It's exactly the same.

Look:

Votto = Phillips
Bruce = Griffey
Bailey = Harang
Cueto = Arroyo

Somebody made the argument that we shouldn't trade these guys because we haven't shown the ability to develop young talent. What about the ability to re-sign our talent? We haven't shown the willingness to spend money, either.

So it's just as unlikely that we keep Phillips, Harang and Arroyo as it is that continue to bring in good young players.


So by the time the fab-4 matures, you've lost Griffey, Phillips, Harang and Arroyo. How is that a better team? If we can't compete now, what makes anybody think we'll compete then?



I call B.S. We have Harang and Arroyo signed through 2011 (as long as we pick up their 2011 options. That's 4 more years. Griffey has been not Griffey for 6 years. Phillips has 3 years of arbitration left. Votto will be very good next year. Even if it takes 2 more full seasons for Bailey, Bruce and Cueto to be good we'll still have 2 more full seasons with Harang and Arroyo. Patience is what is called for. Trading anything other than Hamilton and 1 of our big 4 is a very bad decision to get just 2 years of Bedard.

mlbfan30
12-21-2007, 02:26 PM
You guys keep assuming that the future is brighter than the present because of Votto, Bruce, Bailey and Cueto, but you're missing the point. It's not. It's exactly the same.

Look:

Votto = Phillips
Bruce = Griffey
Bailey = Harang
Cueto = Arroyo

Somebody made the argument that we shouldn't trade these guys because we haven't shown the ability to develop young talent. What about the ability to re-sign our talent? We haven't shown the willingness to spend money, either.

So it's just as unlikely that we keep Phillips, Harang and Arroyo as it is that continue to bring in good young players.


So by the time the fab-4 matures, you've lost Griffey, Phillips, Harang and Arroyo. How is that a better team? If we can't compete now, what makes anybody think we'll compete then?

I'm sorry, but small market teams don't get to compete over the long-term. Its a fact of baseball's inequity. You just can't retain your good players. When the stars align in such away that you can put a good team on the field, you do so.

And BTW, our farm system will be just as barren in 2009 if we trade these four guys as it will be if we keep them. Why? Because they won't be in the farm system anymore, they'll be in the majors. ;)

How long will it take them to mature though? The Reds control BP for 4 more years through the 2011 season. They have EE through the 2012 season (I think).
Also both Arroyo and Harang have club options for the 2011 season, so I wouldn't say they are being replace by Homer and Cueto, unless you mean for 2 years.

We have these players locked up through the 2011 season.
Pitchers
Cueto
Bailey
Harang
Arroyo
Belisle
Cordero
Burton

Hitters
Bruce
Votto
Hamilton
Phillips
EE

That gives us a very very nice collection of talent that should allow us to compete for 4 years.
Obviously arbitration will cause the salaries to increase, but in 5 years we might have another highly rated group of prospects that are ready for the majors.

HokieRed
12-21-2007, 02:29 PM
A technical point: are you sure we have Belisle that long?

mlbfan30
12-21-2007, 02:45 PM
Almost 100%
He is 1st year arb eligible this year, so add another 3 years to that.
He has 0.001 more years ML service than BP with 3.023.
People really underrate Belisle. He's a very good quality #5 SP, and people act like he's worthless. If he pitches like he did last year, but for the next 4 years, that's worth at least 35 Mil garenteed in FA. Would you rather have Belisle or Loshe? Loshe is probably going to make about 4/40 garenteed, while Belisle will make about 4/18 with arbitration, and the ability to non-tender him for any year if needed.

TN Red Fan
12-21-2007, 02:45 PM
That gives us a very very nice collection of talent that should allow us to compete for 4 years.


It gives us a nice collection of talent for 3 years, not 4. 2009-2011. It's two years with Bedard: 2007-2008. But you compete for 3. Keep in mind, you only have to trade one of Bailey/Cueto for Bedard, so the remaining guy can replace Bedard as #2 starter after 2008. My point is that it doesn't all have to fall apart after 2008, you can go for it in 2009 even after Bedard leaves. Then I think you have to tear it down.

We won't be good this year or the next unless we add a dominant pitcher. Heck, last year we at least had Kyle Lohse and only won 72. Now we don't even have that (we do have Cordero). You're looking at 70 wins next year and maybe 80-85 in 2008.


If I had more time, I'd project out the lineups. I just don't see how it's any different. Only Bedard and the current team is more of a sure thing than the hypothetical 2009-2011 team.

OUReds
12-21-2007, 02:46 PM
Oakland say's HI.

Billy Beane at the latest GM meeting...

"We're either going forward and going for it or cutting it down and rebuilding. There is no middle ground in our market. When we hit the bottom, small market teams like us don't bounce."

The A's of all teams understand that small market teams either have to be pursuing a window where they can compete or ruthlessly rebuilding. Which is exactly TN Reds Fans's point.

You think Beane sits around bemoaning the fact he traded away Harang for Guillen? Of course not, it helped him win that year. Beane of all people would be the harshest critic of the Red's course of action so far this year. Signing a shiny new closer without bolstering the rotation is exactly the "middle ground" he's talking about.

I'm comfortable with standing pat this year, evaluating the young pitching, then using a better FA market in 2009 to make the moves we need to compete, but only if the O's are asking the moon for Bedard. I'm also realistic in what that means. We'll probably be pretty bad next year. If we can get Bedard at an acceptable (probably non-Bruce) price, you pull the trigger. Part of a good farm system's value is what it can bring in trade.

On a side note, the O's basicly have one chip to trade to boost their rebuilding effort, Eric Bedard. Thus they are being very, very careful about trying to maximize his value. You simply cannot assume that a Cueto/Hamilton/2 lower teir prospects won't work just because it hasn't up to now. Like any good GM, McPhail is playing chicken trying to get the best deal possible. At the end of the day Bedard will get traded, and if our offer is best on the table, it'll be to us. Patience.

Why Not?
12-21-2007, 02:48 PM
I whole heartedly disagree with this post. How are the Reds going into the '08 season the same as the Orioles going into '08? The Reds' have been adding parts to make themselves a contender (Cordero and Baker) while the Orioles are unloading their talent to rebuild (Tejada).



Oh, I know the teams are different spots. I'm not implying that.

OUReds
12-21-2007, 02:54 PM
Brandon Phillips and Matt Belisle will be eligible for Free Agency in 2011.

Belisle contract info (http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_main.aspx?sport=MLB&id=3779)

BucksandReds
12-21-2007, 03:03 PM
It gives us a nice collection of talent for 3 years, not 4. 2009-2011. It's two years with Bedard: 2007-2008. But you compete for 3. Keep in mind, you only have to trade one of Bailey/Cueto for Bedard, so the remaining guy can replace Bedard as #2 starter after 2008. My point is that it doesn't all have to fall apart after 2008, you can go for it in 2009 even after Bedard leaves. Then I think you have to tear it down.

We won't be good this year or the next unless we add a dominant pitcher. Heck, last year we at least had Kyle Lohse and only won 72. Now we don't even have that (we do have Cordero). You're looking at 70 wins next year and maybe 80-85 in 2008.


If I had more time, I'd project out the lineups. I just don't see how it's any different. Only Bedard and the current team is more of a sure thing than the hypothetical 2009-2011 team.

Do you know that next season is the 2008 season? Bedard would still be under contract untill the end of the 2009 season. We would have all of those guys for 4 seasons.

TN Red Fan
12-21-2007, 03:04 PM
Another argument for competing now is that WK found a way to add some great role players in Keppinger and Hopper. I'm not sure how long we have them, but if they're gone we won't easily replace them.

They don't matter that much, of course...unless there's injuries.

TN Red Fan
12-21-2007, 03:07 PM
Do you know that next season is the 2008 season? Bedard would still be under contract untill the end of the 2009 season. We would have all of those guys for 4 seasons.

Yes, yes, I know. I was getting confused with my dates. But the point is the same.

It's three years of competing because even though we have Phillips, Harang, Arroyo for 4 more seasons, next year won't matter without another good starter.

Win now, or win later, it's a 3 year window.

BLEEDS
12-21-2007, 03:12 PM
I think you can be sure that if Cueto and Hamilton would have gotten Bedard, the deal would already have gone down.

I didn't say "would have", I said "can get". And, the deal wasn't just Cueto and Hamilton, it was a package including them.

Every day that goes by, the edge goes to the buyer, not the seller.

Probably two weeks ago, that "wouldn't have", but by the time Monday rolls around, and all the other deals have officially been inked, and everyone else is leaving the table, I BELIEVE that a Cueto, Hamilton, AND FODDER can net us Bedard.

IMO, that would be the best for us, as I see better value in Homer and Votto, to the Reds. The O's need a CF-er, and probably have soured some on Bailey, as the rest of the league might have. IMO, that's better for us.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

BucksandReds
12-21-2007, 03:15 PM
You think that w/o Bedard we have NO chance to compete in 08? You do realize that with league average bullpen last year we are over .500 and with a bullpen equal to the Cards we run away with the division right? Our SP was better than most years for the Reds and appears to be getting better (Belisle and Bailey should be better) and Harang and Arroyo are already very good. We just need to get 1 league average pitcher for cheap. Make him the number 3 or 4 starter and compete. A Bullpen of Weathers, Burton, Cordero and hopefully Cueto at some point to go along with our offense is a recipe for the playoffs. Look at the Indians. They had 3 relievers and nearly won the WS. The three they used were great. I believe that our bullpen now has that potential.
With Cordero signed, Burton from day 1, a consistent Weathers, Coffey in better shape, hopefully no Stanton or Maj we'll be light years ahead of last year.

BLEEDS
12-21-2007, 03:17 PM
I call B.S. We have Harang and Arroyo signed through 2011 (as long as we pick up their 2011 options. That's 4 more years. Griffey has been not Griffey for 6 years. Phillips has 3 years of arbitration left. Votto will be very good next year. Even if it takes 2 more full seasons for Bailey, Bruce and Cueto to be good we'll still have 2 more full seasons with Harang and Arroyo. Patience is what is called for. Trading anything other than Hamilton and 1 of our big 4 is a very bad decision to get just 2 years of Bedard.

Agreed 100%.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

TN Red Fan
12-21-2007, 03:18 PM
You think that w/o Bedard we have NO chance to compete in 08? You do realize that with league average bullpen last year we are over .500 and with a bullpen equal to the Cards we run away with the division right? Our SP was better than most years for the Reds and appears to be getting better (Belisle and Bailey should be better) and Harang and Arroyo are already very good. We just need to get 1 league average pitcher for cheap. Make him the number 3 or 4 starter and compete. A Bullpen of Weathers, Burton, Cordero and hopefully Cueto at some point to go along with our offense is a recipe for the playoffs. Look at the Indians. They had 3 relievers and nearly won the WS. The three they used were great. I believe that our bullpen now has that potential.
With Cordero signed, Burton from day 1, a consistent Weathers, Coffey in better shape, hopefully no Stanton or Maj we'll be light years ahead of last year.

Yes, we added Cordero and lost Lohse. That's the only thing that's solid. The rest is just unbridled optimism. But there's a glass half-empty for every glass half-full.

For every "we can win now without Bedard because of X,Y,Z" there's a "Homer Bailey will never develop control" or a "Joey Votto's BA dropped 20 points last year, so he's not as good as we think."

mlbfan30
12-21-2007, 03:19 PM
Brandon Phillips and Matt Belisle will be eligible for Free Agency in 2011.

Belisle contract info (http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_main.aspx?sport=MLB&id=3779)

I'm almost 100% sure that it's 4 years of Belisle and Phillips
Players have 4 years of arb
Year 1 - 2008
2 - 2009
3 - 2010
4 - 2011

In 2011 they go to FA, which is 4 more years

BLEEDS
12-21-2007, 03:22 PM
On a side note, the O's basicly have one chip to trade to boost their rebuilding effort, Eric Bedard. Thus they are being very, very careful about trying to maximize his value. You simply cannot assume that a Cueto/Hamilton/2 lower teir prospects won't work just because it hasn't up to now. Like any good GM, McPhail is playing chicken trying to get the best deal possible. At the end of the day Bedard will get traded, and if our offer is best on the table, it'll be to us. Patience.

Thank You! Common sense/Beane Moneyball wins again!

PEACE

-BLEEDS

OUReds
12-21-2007, 03:33 PM
Our SP was better than most years for the Reds and appears to be getting better

"Better then most years for the Reds" turned out to be a starters ERA of 4.86, tied for 20/21st in MLB. It's not something that's going to be fixed by a back of the rotation signing, nor three young pitchers taking their lumps while learning how to pitch in the major leagues.

While I hope the bullpen will be better, there are more problems then Cordero alone is going to solve. For every happy scenario where the setup-men solidify our bullpen, I can envision one where Wethers and Burton collapse and leave us in the same situation as last year.

Players are arbitration eligible for their 3rd through 6th years of MLB service time. In essence, most players will have 3 years of arbitration eligibility, not 4. The exception are "super 2's", but even so players are only under the team's control for the first 6 years. We only have Belisle and Phillips under our control through 2010 sadly.

TN Red Fan
12-21-2007, 03:59 PM
I'm going to make a hypothetical projection based on a worst-case (for us) Bedard trade.

I'm assuming Dunn gets a LTC and I'll leave out the bullpen, since that's the same regardless of whether we make the trade or not.

The trade is Bruce and Cueto + trash for Bedard

...Here's what it looks like for 2009-2011 if you don't make the trade.

2009
Votto
Phillips
Encarnacion
Gonzalez
Ross
Dunn
Bruce
Hamilton

Harang
Arroyo
Bailey
Belise
Cueto

2010
Votto
Phillips
Encarnacion
Gonzalez
Ross
Dunn
Bruce
Hamilton

Harang
Bailey
Arroyo
Cueto
Belise

2011
Votto
???
Encarnacion
Gonzalez
Ross
Dunn
Bruce
Hamilton

Harang
Bailey
Cueto
Arroyo
Wood?




...now, here's 2008-2010 if we do make the trade.

2008
Votto
Phillips
Encarnacion
Gonzalez
Ross
Dunn
Hamilton
Griffey

Bedard
Harang
Arroyo
Belise
Bailey

2009
Votto
Phillips
Encarnacion
Gonzalez
Ross
Dunn
Hamilton
Griffey

Bedard
Harang
Arroyo
Bailey
Belise

2010
Votto
Phillips
Encarnacion
Gonzalez
Ross
Dunn
Hamilton
???

Harang
Bailey
Arroyo
Belise
Wood?


For me, both scenarios have possibility. But the two years with Bedard look like the best possible teams we could put out there. Those are the years you have 2 aces and 2-3 solid starters in the rotation.

Now, you can make the argument that we'll be competitive without Bedard in 2008, but I could equally make the argument that we'll be competitive in 2011 if we do trade for Bedard and lose him to FA. Both years would be long-shots. Every other argument like signing other FAs or developing more prospects are true for both scenarios.

Nasty_Boy
12-21-2007, 04:24 PM
The thing that can't be predicted is the health of Bedard compared to the progression of the young pitchers. Hitting prospects come much closer to realizing their potential than young pitchers. I would much rather take my chances with our young talent in a weak NL Central, than trade young affordable players for a 2 years of a pitcher that may or may not get us over the hump. As for the bullpen, the key in my opinion is the way Bray and Coffey come back from disapointing seasons. They both have great arms and above average stuff and a return to form of both would be welcome.

bigredbunter
12-21-2007, 04:41 PM
The thing that can't be predicted is the health of Bedard compared to the progression of the young pitchers. Hitting prospects come much closer to realizing their potential than young pitchers. I would much rather take my chances with our young talent in a weak NL Central, than trade young affordable players for a 2 years of a pitcher that may or may not get us over the hump. As for the bullpen, the key in my opinion is the way Bray and Coffey come back from disapointing seasons. They both have great arms and above average stuff and a return to form of both would be welcome.

You're saying that Bedard is less predictable than Bailey/Cueto??:eek:

Nasty_Boy
12-21-2007, 05:02 PM
No, not at all. I said you can't predict Bedard's health, just like you can't predict how you young pitchers will turn out. I also said that hitting prospects pan out much more than pitching prospects.

SMcGavin
12-22-2007, 04:27 PM
"Better then most years for the Reds" turned out to be a starters ERA of 4.86, tied for 20/21st in MLB. It's not something that's going to be fixed by a back of the rotation signing, nor three young pitchers taking their lumps while learning how to pitch in the major leagues.


Yes, it is. Milton, Shearn, Saarloos, Ramirez, and Dumatrait combined for 24 starts in 2007. The ERA combined from those starts, I don't have the exact number, but it's easily over six. If you add a back of rotation guy who can give you a bunch of innings around a 5.00 ERA, the rotation is a lot better. Then you consider Belisle is a pretty sure bet to improve on his 5.32 from last year, and the 5.50 or so we got from Bailey and Livingston's 19 starts is likely to be bettered by either Bailey or Volquez.

Last year it was:
Harang 3.73
Arroyo 4.23
Belisle 5.32
Bailey/Livingston 5.50
Milton/Shearn/Saarloos/Ramirez/Dumatrait 6.00+

This year a reasonable guess could be:
Harang 3.73
Arroyo 4.23
Belisle 4.75
Bailey/Volquez/Cueto/Back of rotation FA 5.00
Bailey/Volquez/Cueto/Back of rotation FA 5.00

That is a lot better. I think the ERA from each of the #3-5 spots is a good bet to drop at least half a run from its 07 level. This is assuming only a 5.00 ERA from the kids, which is not some kind of pie in the sky optimism. Volquez in particular I could see doing much better than that.

I still think the Reds are a year away from being a real contender, but to suggest that the Reds have to add a Bedard-type to have a good rotation is foolish.

OUReds
12-22-2007, 05:41 PM
My post was made before we picked up Volquez, who I do think will put up reasonable back of the rotation numbers at least. That will certainly help.

Still, your scenario assumes no injuries, a best case season from Belisle, and significant contributions from young (volatile) players. And what would our starter's ERA be given your assumptions? Around 4.50, a lot better then we're used to seeing around here, but still half a run over what the Cubs posted last year.

4.50 would put us squarely in the middle of the league in starter ERA. I don't really consider that a "good rotation". It's hardly foolish to think that the Red's needed a mid/top of the rotation starter to realistically compete in 2008.

I think we're set up very well for 2009 and beyond, but the post you quoted was responding to a question about NEXT year.

AmarilloRed
12-22-2007, 05:53 PM
The Volquez deal gives up a chip in Josh Hamilton, and makes any further trade less likely. I think Krivsky felt McPhail was being too outrageous in his demands, so he went out and made a trade to improve the rotation. I would not be very surprised at all if the only other move the Reds made would be to pick up a #3 starter such as Colon or Hernandez to improve the rotation.

SMcGavin
12-22-2007, 06:19 PM
4.75 from Belisle is hardly a best case scenario considering he had an xFIP around 4.30 last year. I think we are a little better set up for injuries this year too, considering Cueto and Maloney are the injury replacements instead of the junk we saw last year.

I did not realize you were talking just about next season. We are certainly not going to become a studly rotation overnight, but I think the Reds rotation will be at least average in 08. With a slightly above average offense and a slightly below average bullpen, I see us as around a .500 team. That could change if Belisle, Volquez, and Bailey can all put up something around a 4.50. They are all certainly capable but the odds of all three doing it are slim.

Basically, I agree with you in that 2009 is the year. Harang and Arroyo will still be going strong, Bailey and Cueto will be 23 and coming into their own as starters, and Volquez will hopefully be turning the corner into a #2/3 type pitcher. Most of these projections don't even talk about Matt Maloney, and all he has done at every level is put up great ERAs and strikeout numbers. The rotation future is really bright, and after the Volquez deal I'd rather us stay away from landing Bedard and roll with the young, cheap kids we have. We've got enough guys with talent that a couple should hit it big.

OUReds
12-22-2007, 06:47 PM
If Belisle improves his ERA by more then the half a run you suggest, I would be absolutely shocked, even with all the data that says he was very unlucky last year. I'd love to be surprised of course.

Other then that I agree with everything you say. I highly doubt Bedard comes back now. You hope for a little luck to compete in 2008 and go for the juggular in 2009-2011.

Man, even a league average rotation would be an absolute joy to watch given what has passed for pitching around here lately. I very much look forward to it.

HeatherC1212
12-23-2007, 03:05 PM
FWIW, I think Belisle will improve this year simply because he knows a little more what to expect as a starter in the big leagues. Last year was his first year as a starter and sometimes he was fabulous and other times he was really bad. I think he'll do better having the experience of 2007 behind him now. I like the chances of our young guys coming up and doing well (thinking back to Detroit in 2006 with a relatively young pitching staff) and I really like the idea of our staff being set up for several years down the road. I'd love to get Bedard here but I'm not totally sold on giving up the farm for him.

*BaseClogger*
12-23-2007, 03:31 PM
I started another thread to discuss Belisle's value if anyone is interested...