PDA

View Full Version : POLL: Who would YOU trade for Blanton



BLEEDS
02-13-2008, 04:32 PM
Already done in the ORG, but incomplete IMO, so let's see how the SunDeck figures in.

I am not including Bruce, and not including any scenarios where more comes back in the deal.

Don't think of what you'd PREFER to trade, think of your ABSOLUTE threshold, your MAX limit

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Bip Roberts
02-13-2008, 04:42 PM
picked the 4th option, and there is no chance I change my mind about it.

Degenerate39
02-13-2008, 06:46 PM
Most I would trade is Maloney and some other prospects that aren't the big 4.

Caveman Techie
02-13-2008, 07:24 PM
I picked Votto + AAA/AA prospect. But man I had to hover for a long time over the selection with my mouse before I clicked it. :)

gedred69
02-13-2008, 08:38 PM
There are enough prospects in the system other than the untouchable 5 that will pan out either here or somewhere in the next 2-3 years. That is the most I'd give up. There are too many guys that got what it takes at more than one position for the Reds to hang on to all of them anyway. (For one, look at 3rd base up and down the system).

jmac
02-13-2008, 08:44 PM
#4 for me. Though I like Blanton , I would not include the big boys in a trade.
Haren ? Yes ! Bedard ? Yes ! Santana? Yes !
Blanton, No. A few days ago, I would have said yes to Bailey but my mind has changed since then.

Handofdeath
02-13-2008, 08:46 PM
Bailey and a mid level prospect from AAA.

AmarilloRed
02-14-2008, 01:32 AM
I think a deal could be done without one of the Big 4. I would start with Maloney, Stubbs, Keppinger and go from there.

SMcGavin
02-14-2008, 01:53 AM
I've decided on option #4 as well. I decided on it after reading RedsManRick's excellent post on the ORG entitled "Cueto, Belisle, Bailey, Maloney, Volquez" (maybe not in that order). You should go read it, but the best line was this:

"And I think it should give up pause about the "need" to go out and trade multiple prospects for a proven league average guy. As you make that assertion, are you comparing that veteran to Reds rotations of the last decade, or to the crew of guys likely to man the rotation in 2008 and beyond?"

I'd have killed for a couple of league average starters for most of my Reds-watching life. But now is not then.

BLEEDS
02-14-2008, 11:27 AM
I've decided on option #4 as well. I decided on it after reading RedsManRick's excellent post on the ORG entitled "Cueto, Belisle, Bailey, Maloney, Volquez" (maybe not in that order). You should go read it, but the best line was this:

"And I think it should give up pause about the "need" to go out and trade multiple prospects for a proven league average guy. As you make that assertion, are you comparing that veteran to Reds rotations of the last decade, or to the crew of guys likely to man the rotation in 2008 and beyond?"

I'd have killed for a couple of league average starters for most of my Reds-watching life. But now is not then.

I read that thread, and there are just as many guys who disagreed with that sentiment as there were who agreed.

I'm somewhere in the middle. While I love the PROMISE that all these guys have, I don't necessarily want to wait to see how 1 or 2 of them maybe DON'T pan out, while watching this teams' current window (08-09) close.

Sure, I'd LOVE for us to trade only prospects not named Bailey/Cueto/Votto/Volquez for Blanton, but I'd put my LIMIT at Bailey or Cueto and some other non-MLB ready prospects, so I chose that one.

I think people WAY undervalue what a 200+ inning "league average (or better)" ERA horse would do for this team. It would also save us from having to ask these young guys to pitch 160+ innings in the Bigs this year, something none of them is really ready for yet, IMO.

Best case scenario - Bailey AND Cueto start the year out in AAA, but I don't see that happening without making a trade for a proven vet (i.e. Affeldt is not the answer).

PEACE

-BLEEDS

XU Lou
02-14-2008, 11:39 AM
Good poll, I too hovered over my decision (3 vs. 4). In the end I ended up with 4. I don't consider Blanton valuable enough to trade our best 1B or possible stud pitching prospect. I agree that the other pitchers we have pursued did have enough value to do so.

Bleed, I agree that Blanton's greatest value is in eating up innings and that is a great attribute when you have young pitchers to develop. It would be ironic to trade the same young pitching for that attribute. Thus, the reason I only considered trading Votto...I just couldn't pull the trigger.

Newman4
02-14-2008, 12:21 PM
I picked #4. Stubbs, Maloney and two others. I wish we could've gotten in on the Haren deal instead.

Bip Roberts
02-14-2008, 01:17 PM
I dont think all our young guys will pan out but Id hate to trade Blanton for one and find out we traded the wrong guy guy down the road.

wlf WV
02-14-2008, 01:31 PM
Blanton's not Haren so why trade as much or more value for him.Oakland set the precedent .The market is right for Oakland,Cincinnati should have patience,as said before Blanton is not going to give the same as Bedard or Haren.Krivsky made this mistake with Nationals,hope it doesn't happen again.

ChatterRed
02-14-2008, 02:26 PM
Bailey and a mid level prospect from AAA.


x2. Smartest guy on the board so far. :D

smoke6
02-14-2008, 02:37 PM
Anybody not named Votto, Bailey, Cueto, or Bruce, but I doubt a deal would get done without any one of them.

Carolina Red
02-14-2008, 06:18 PM
Volquez for Blanton straight up.

SMcGavin
02-14-2008, 07:43 PM
I read that thread, and there are just as many guys who disagreed with that sentiment as there were who agreed.

I'm somewhere in the middle. While I love the PROMISE that all these guys have, I don't necessarily want to wait to see how 1 or 2 of them maybe DON'T pan out, while watching this teams' current window (08-09) close.

Sure, I'd LOVE for us to trade only prospects not named Bailey/Cueto/Votto/Volquez for Blanton, but I'd put my LIMIT at Bailey or Cueto and some other non-MLB ready prospects, so I chose that one.

I think people WAY undervalue what a 200+ inning "league average (or better)" ERA horse would do for this team. It would also save us from having to ask these young guys to pitch 160+ innings in the Bigs this year, something none of them is really ready for yet, IMO.

Best case scenario - Bailey AND Cueto start the year out in AAA, but I don't see that happening without making a trade for a proven vet (i.e. Affeldt is not the answer).

PEACE

-BLEEDS

A couple of things I don't agree with:
1. I don't think 08 is part of our window for contention. A rookie Votto, rookie Bruce, the kid pitchers still getting their feet. If we won 90 games this year I'd be pleasantly shocked.
2. Let's assume we do have a chance to contend in 09 (I think we do). Are you really sure Blanton is gonna be better than Volquez/Cueto/Bailey in 2009? Let's say you do Bailey for Blanton. You don't think it's possible Bailey throws 180-190 innings of league average baseball in 2009? If you make the trade and that happens, you've jacked up your salary and severely damaged our next window for contention, when Blanton leaves for FA and Bailey would have four more solid years under our control. I don't think the reward of Blanton is enough to justify that risk.
3. Why don't you think Volquez and Cueto are ready to throw 160 innings in MLB? Volquez threw almost 180 innings last year. In the bigs he went 5 2/3 innings per start. Even if he doesn't improve on that, over 30 starts thats 170 innings. Cueto threw 160 innings last year plus a significant amount in winter league. I think it's reasonable to have concerns about Bailey's durability but I'm confident either Cueto or Volquez could put up 175 innings this year without too much trouble.

GoReds33
02-14-2008, 08:57 PM
I voted for Votto and a AAA of AA prospect. That's because I have no problem trading Votto for pitching. We should be set for runs atleast the next couple of years already.

jmac
02-14-2008, 09:25 PM
We should be set for runs atleast the next couple of years already.
Just curious, with this probably Jr's last year as a red and Dunn's contract situation unresolved, how do you figure ?
BP-EE-Bruce-Votto seems pretty formidable.
Add Dunn to the mix and we keep it rolling offensively.
Subtract Dunn and Votto and we may be the Oakland A's East.