PDA

View Full Version : Would you take back the Josh Hamilton trade if you could?



WMR
05-18-2008, 12:41 PM
I wouldn't. Edi has been nails. Does everyone feel the same way?

Redhook
05-18-2008, 12:52 PM
I voted no as well, but boy do I wish it was Dunn going to Texas instead of Hammy.

mth123
05-18-2008, 12:54 PM
Depends. Can we get him straight up for Griffey? Sure.

Do we have to give Volquez back? No way.

Screwball
05-18-2008, 12:54 PM
397 ERA+ trumps 162 OPS+.

*BaseClogger*
05-18-2008, 01:06 PM
Enough Hamilton threads. Really.

mth123
05-18-2008, 01:09 PM
I misread the question and voted yes. Put me down for no on taking back the trade.

The_jbh
05-18-2008, 01:16 PM
Absolutely not. Have a lights out starter is certainly more valuable than a great hitter... granted im not sold Volquez will be our #1 or Hamilton will keep up his production/stay healthy, I think this trade was just a fantastic deal for both parties.

I do still have fantasies of an OF of Dunn Hamilton Bruce though

WMR
05-18-2008, 01:17 PM
Enough Hamilton threads. Really.

Enough posting in threads in which you're not interested in adding actual content. Really.

WMR
05-18-2008, 01:18 PM
Absolutely not. Have a lights out starter is certainly more valuable than a great hitter... granted im not sold Volquez will be our #1 or Hamilton will keep up his production/stay healthy, I think this trade was just a fantastic deal for both parties.

I do still have fantasies of an OF of Dunn Hamilton Bruce though

Me too. :D

dougdirt
05-18-2008, 01:19 PM
Hamilton has more value in terms of to a team.... but finding top quality, young starting pitching that you control for a long time is tougher to replace or acquire.

WMR
05-18-2008, 01:21 PM
Hamilton has more value in terms of to a team.... but finding top quality, young starting pitching that you control for a long time is tougher to replace or acquire.

If the Rangers were interested in flipping Hamilton, what sort of bounty could they receive right now?

Jpup
05-18-2008, 01:23 PM
I would rather have Hamilton. It's not even close IMO.

PuffyPig
05-18-2008, 01:28 PM
If the Rangers were interested in flipping Hamilton, what sort of bounty could they receive right now?

Something less than Volquez.

That's the cost of obtaining starting pitching.

I think the fact that Hamilton was not viewed as a long term answer in CF (much like Bruce) made him available, as Bruce has RF locked up.

A Dunn/Hamilton/Bruce OF would be great offensively, but below average defensively.

WMR
05-18-2008, 01:29 PM
Something less than Volquez.

That's the cost of obtaining starting pitching.

I think the fact that Hamilton was not viewed as a long term answer in CF (much like Bruce) made him available, as Bruce has RF locked up.

A Dunn/Hamilton/Bruce OF would be great offensively, but below average defensively.

What if it were Hamilton/Patterson/Bruce?

That might be the best defensive outfield in MLB.

Jpup
05-18-2008, 01:30 PM
What if it were Hamilton/Patterson/Bruce?

That might be the best defensive outfield in MLB.

Patterson isn't the answer to any question.

WMR
05-18-2008, 01:31 PM
Patterson isn't the answer to any question.

Batting 8th on a team with Hamilton and Bruce he'd be just dandy. Until Stubbs arrives anyway. :evil:

icehole3
05-18-2008, 01:32 PM
I'd like to see how Hamilton holds up in the oppressive Texas heat, Volquez is doing special things, no way would I take him back. I went to the Rangers message board at ESPN and some are upset that Josh came out in the middle of an important game the other day because he was exhausted, what happens when the heat hits???

http://www.SternFanNetwork.com/forum/images/smilies/Animations/dontknow.gif

Redmachine2003
05-18-2008, 01:39 PM
only if I could replace him with Dunn and give the Rangers 6 million dolloars of Dunn's contract.

RedsManRick
05-18-2008, 01:41 PM
Both guys are insanely hot right now. The justification of the trade had very little to do with how the guys would perform short-term. Let's see where they are in October... and 2010.

PuffyPig
05-18-2008, 02:00 PM
What if it were Hamilton/Patterson/Bruce?

That might be the best defensive outfield in MLB.

:thumbup:

But we couldn't have both Hamilton and Volquez.

Blitz Dorsey
05-18-2008, 02:58 PM
You have got to be crapping me. I thought I was going to be in the vast minority here. Instead, it's the other way around.

For the record, the fact that our No. 1 prospect (and the No. 1 overall prospect in Major League Baseball) is a left-handed hitting outfielder tips the scales for me.

RedFanAlways1966
05-18-2008, 03:05 PM
REDS starters this year = 4.66 ERA.
REDS starters w/ out EV = 5.53 ERA.

No brainer IMO. I have seen lots of offense in Cincy in the 21st century... and lots of losing. Do the math. See pitching.

Highlifeman21
05-18-2008, 04:29 PM
I voted no as well, but boy do I wish it was Dunn going to Texas instead of Hammy.

Blasphemy.

And I have a feeling Dunn wouldn't have gotten us Volquez. Dunn's value remains highest as he stays a member of the Cincinnati Reds.

Wanna watch that value plummet? Trade him for peanuts (which will happen), or let him walk and get the consolation draft pick(s) prize. Both of those are lose-lose.

GAC
05-18-2008, 04:30 PM
Josh is good...... but can he pitch? ;)

Highlifeman21
05-18-2008, 04:42 PM
I would rather have Hamilton. It's not even close IMO.

How is it not even close?

nate
05-18-2008, 04:45 PM
I wouldn't take it back.

Not even if you double-dog dared me.

guttle11
05-18-2008, 04:47 PM
Of course I would. I'd even give the Rangers a minor league player along with Hammy.

What Volquez has brought to the Reds cannot be replaced by an outfielder. Just look at what Bronson making 2 good starts has done for the Reds this past week. Volquez is doing that every 5th day. Good starting pitching just matters more than a good hitter.

WMR
05-18-2008, 04:48 PM
Of course I would. I'd even give the Rangers a minor league player along with Hammy.

What Volquez has brought to the Reds cannot be replaced by an outfielder. Just look at what Bronson making 2 good starts has done for the Reds this past week. Volquez is doing that every 5th day. Good starting pitching just matters more than a good hitter.

So you mean you wouldn't? ;)

KronoRed
05-18-2008, 04:56 PM
Nope, great trade.

Blitz Dorsey
05-18-2008, 05:07 PM
Plus no way I'm giving Herrera back just because Josh Hamilton is on pace for like 500 RBIs. I need me some 5-6, 145-pound lefty junk ballers in the pen.

BTW, Herrera's 2008 numbers combined AA/AAA: 3-0, 1.48 ERA, 30.1 IP, 19 H, 21 K, 8 BB, 19 G, 2 saves (both at Louisville). Not too shabby for a "throw in" and he's not just a LOOGY. He gets RHH out consistently as well and is best when he gets to pitch a full inning or an inning-plus.

Cedric
05-18-2008, 05:08 PM
Great trade and one that could be remembered as a turning point in this franchise recent history. How can you question this trade? I love Hamilton but he's one bad day away from never playing again. That's a HUGE risk considering the guaranteed money he's going to command.

Blitz Dorsey
05-18-2008, 05:11 PM
So you mean you wouldn't? ;)

I think he was distracted by your avitar. I know I was. Yaough she hot, I'll even root for UK if she wears tight shirts all the time. Oh wait, she already does.

WMR
05-18-2008, 05:13 PM
I think he was distracted by your avitar. I know I was. Yaough she hot, I'll even root for UK if she wears tight shirts all the time. Oh wait, she already does.

:lol:

I find myself losing my train of thought as I read over what I just posted.

Jpup
05-18-2008, 05:35 PM
How is it not even close?

Volquez pitches every 5 days. Hamilton plays everyday. He is more valuable IMO.

membengal
05-18-2008, 05:39 PM
JPup, that's the kind of thinking that has helped create losing seasons since 2000 began.

This team had to pitch better, somehow, someway. It all begins there. So, yeah, having a stud like Volquez on the mound every 5th day is ridiculously valuable.

In fact, here's a game, do you think there is any player in baseball that the D-backs would trade Brandon Webb for straight up at this point? I really don't think there is...

fearofpopvol1
05-18-2008, 05:42 PM
Not a chance.

guttle11
05-18-2008, 05:51 PM
So you mean you wouldn't? ;)

I think. :p:

IslandRed
05-18-2008, 06:10 PM
Basic rule of thumb: A hitter can help his team win every day. A starting pitcher only pitches once every five games, but has a far greater impact on that one game. It roughly evens out, I guess.

It's worth considering, though, that measuring the fundamental confrontation in baseball -- the batter faced/plate appearance -- swings in favor of the starting pitcher. As of this minute on ESPN.com, Derrek Lee leads the NL with 197 plate appearances. There are 103 National League pitchers who have faced more than 197 batters, led by Aaron Harang's 280.

Jpup
05-18-2008, 06:40 PM
JPup, that's the kind of thinking that has helped create losing seasons since 2000 began.

This team had to pitch better, somehow, someway. It all begins there. So, yeah, having a stud like Volquez on the mound every 5th day is ridiculously valuable.

In fact, here's a game, do you think there is any player in baseball that the D-backs would trade Brandon Webb for straight up at this point? I really don't think there is...

They would for Alex Rodriguez or Albert Pujols. Josh Hamilton is putting up those kind of numbers and it's no real surprise.

membengal
05-18-2008, 06:47 PM
I flat disagree that they would give him up for even Pujols.

AmarilloRed
05-18-2008, 07:13 PM
I would still make the Hamilton trade. We needed starting pitching(we still do), and Volquez turned out better than we could have expected. It is too bad we had to give up an outfielder as talented as Hamilton, but it was the price we had to pay.

vaticanplum
05-18-2008, 07:16 PM
Great trade and one that could be remembered as a turning point in this franchise recent history. How can you question this trade? I love Hamilton but he's one bad day away from never playing again. That's a HUGE risk considering the guaranteed money he's going to command.

If Hamilton turns into Cal Ripken Jr. (and I hope he does) and Volquez evens out next week, I'll still think it was a good trade. Pitching trumps all other needs and the Reds went for it with a bargaining chip they were smart to get in the first place. End of story.

Benihana
05-18-2008, 07:19 PM
If a pitching-starved team can give up an everyday player for a young dominant starting pitcher, you do that trade every day of the week- no matter what kind of potential that young hitter has.

Ask the Red Sox.

Factor in Hamilton's drug/injury questions and Bruce's presence in AAA and it's a no-brainer. Not even close.

Jpup
05-18-2008, 07:45 PM
If a pitching-starved team can give up an everyday player for a young dominant starting pitcher, you do that trade every day of the week- no matter what kind of potential that young hitter has.

Ask the Red Sox.

Factor in Hamilton's drug/injury questions and Bruce's presence in AAA and it's a no-brainer. Not even close.

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me how Jay Bruce has anything to do with Josh Hamilton. The Reds are going to needs some bats next year, really bad, if they don't lock up Dunn. I'm afraid they are not going to. I guess we should all, including myself, move on, because Josh isn't coming back and Edinson is a very good pitcher.

Will M
05-18-2008, 08:48 PM
1. i thought Dunn should have gone instead of Hamilton. mainly due to Hamilton's strong defense. an outfield of Bruce-Patterson-Hamilton would have been awesome defensively! i have been told by several posters there was 'no way' we could have gotten someone like Volquez for dunn.

2. we did get a pitcher back who looks very good

3. it is water under the bridge. kinda like 'the trade'.

membengal
05-18-2008, 08:53 PM
I'm still waiting for someone to tell me how Jay Bruce has anything to do with Josh Hamilton. The Reds are going to needs some bats next year, really bad, if they don't lock up Dunn. I'm afraid they are not going to. I guess we should all, including myself, move on, because Josh isn't coming back and Edinson is a very good pitcher.

We keep mentioning Bruce because he is an in-house replacement for the lost production (should the team ever bring him up...),

PuffyPig
05-18-2008, 08:53 PM
1. i thought Dunn should have gone instead of Hamilton. mainly due to Hamilton's strong defense. an outfield of Bruce-Patterson-Hamilton would have been awesome defensively! i have been told by several posters there was 'no way' we could have gotten someone like Volquez for dunn.

2. we did get a pitcher back who looks very good

3. it is water under the bridge. kinda like 'the trade'.


Dunn had a no trade contract to about June 15, 2008.

And it didn't matter.Texas wanted a very good OF who was cheap.

They wanted Hamilton.

PuffyPig
05-18-2008, 08:56 PM
I'm still waiting for someone to tell me how Jay Bruce has anything to do with Josh Hamilton.

Bruce's long term postion with the Reds is RF.

Hamilton does not project tobe a long term answer in CF either.

Therefore, Hamilton would likely eventually play LF for the Reds.

That's the connection.

Caveat Emperor
05-18-2008, 09:27 PM
I make the trade 100 times out of 100.

Having said that, I don't think its a good idea to evaluate a trade before each respective player cools down from their hot start.

Lets see where we're at 1 year from now.

coachw513
05-18-2008, 09:41 PM
Loved Hamilton then, love him now...still wear his jersey I bought last year, and with great pride...but would make this trade again 100 out of 100 times...and would do it even if Volquez had Cueto's numbers...

OnBaseMachine
05-18-2008, 11:35 PM
No.

I like Hamilton but the Reds need Volquez more than Hamilton IMO.

KronoRed
05-18-2008, 11:40 PM
Dunn had a no trade contract to about June 15, 2008.

And it didn't matter.Texas wanted a very good OF who was cheap.

They wanted Hamilton.

Yep and it can't be said enough, Dunn would not have brought what Hamilton brought and to say he would have and Krivsky is to blame for not doing so is just bunk.

REDREAD
05-19-2008, 01:32 AM
I'd take Hamilton. I knew I'd be in the vast minority.. I agree with JPup.. true 5 tool players that are potential MVPs are just as hard to get as starting pitchers.

I know people are worried about Josh being fragile, but long term, on average, position players are always a better bet to stay healthy than starting pitchers (on average).

Part of the reason that we've had this 6 game winning streak is because Dunn has really gotten hot. That's what an impact bat can do for a team.. Yes, Dunn didn't do it all himself, but he was a big contributor. I'd love to have Hamilton on this team.

That said, I consider the trade a tossup at this point. Not saying it was a bad trade. I'd just prefer to have Hamilton.

Highlifeman21
05-19-2008, 01:53 AM
Volquez pitches every 5 days. Hamilton plays everyday. He is more valuable IMO.

So you're essentially comparing what Volquez does every start, aka every 5 days, to what Hamilton does over a 5 day period, aka the time between each Volquez start.

If you don't look at it that way, then pitchers lose value completely (especially starters) b/c they only get the ball once every 5th day, whereas position players play everyday.

Right?

Buckeye33
05-19-2008, 02:13 AM
I know Beckett was more established when he was traded to the Red Sox, but do you think the Sox would even think twice about giving up Hanley Ramirez for Beckett again?

Dominate pitching > great offense

Jpup
05-19-2008, 01:58 PM
So you're essentially comparing what Volquez does every start, aka every 5 days, to what Hamilton does over a 5 day period, aka the time between each Volquez start.

If you don't look at it that way, then pitchers lose value completely (especially starters) b/c they only get the ball once every 5th day, whereas position players play everyday.

Right?

basically.

Highlifeman21
05-19-2008, 06:56 PM
Volquez has put together a solid body of work in 2008, thus far.

We know what he's done every 5th day, but what's Josh Hamilton done every 5th day? Glad you asked...


Josh Hamilton "Every 5th Day"

March 31st - April 5th
AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB K OBP SLG OPS AVG
19 2 6 2 1 1 5 3 4 .409 .684 1.093 .316

April 6th - April 11th
AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB K OBP SLG OPS AVG
21 2 5 1 0 1 6 0 1 .238 .429 .667 .238

April 12th - April 16th
AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB K OBP SLG OPS AVG
21 4 8 2 0 1 4 5 2 .500 .619 1.119 .381

April 17th - April 21st
AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB K OBP SLG OPS AVG
21 3 6 2 0 1 4 0 3 .286 .524 .810 .296

April 22nd - April 26th
AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB K OBP SLG OPS AVG
19 2 7 2 0 0 6 3 3 .455 .474 .929 .368

April 27th - May 2nd
AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB K OBP SLG OPS AVG
21 3 6 1 0 2 7 0 2 .286 .619 .905 .286

May 3rd - May 7th
AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB K OBP SLG OPS AVG
15 1 2 0 0 1 4 2 5 .211 .333 .544 .133

May 8th - May 12th
AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB K OBP SLG OPS AVG
23 5 9 3 1 1 7 2 4 .440 .739 1.179 .391

May 13th - May 17th
AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB K OBP SLG OPS AVG
15 5 7 0 1 2 6 2 0 .529 1.000 1.529 .467


If you look at the 5 day groupings of what Hamilton's done thus far in 2008, he clearly has had some successes, but also has had two "bad starts". His 5 day samplings from April 6th thru April 11th, and May 3rd thru May 7th were not his best.

The amazing part of the numbers that Hamilton's put up in 2008 to this point also include 8 games where he took an O for, and failed to walk in the same game.

Draw what you will from this, but I think this shows that Hamilton for Volquez has been that unicorn of a trade known as an "even swap".

fearofpopvol1
05-19-2008, 07:00 PM
I'm pretty sure he'll be out of the lineup again tonight. It'll be interesting to watch and track this injury as it pertains to not only now, but the future as well.

klw
05-19-2008, 07:48 PM
Four pages on this thread and only one mention of Herrera in the deal. He has done a wonderful job this year. So when this trade is analyzed we need to include him in the discussion. It wasn't only Volquez that the Reds picked up.
http://louisville.bats.milb.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?n=Herrera%20%28H%2C%204%29&pos=P&sid=t416&t=p_pbp&pid=502609

reds44
05-19-2008, 07:50 PM
No.

I would have rather tried to trade Griffey or Dunn rather than Hamilton though.

kaldaniels
05-19-2008, 07:54 PM
No.

I would have rather tried to trade Griffey or Dunn rather than Hamilton though.

Can't we assume at this point that Griffey or Dunn would not have gotten us Volquez. Would've been nice...but I just don't see that one happening. That's just me though.

VR
05-19-2008, 08:31 PM
Can't we assume at this point that Griffey or Dunn would not have gotten us Volquez. Would've been nice...but I just don't see that one happening. That's just me though.

I don't know why we'd assume that kal. Was there anything in the media about who initiated the talks, what the negotiations looked like? Unlike the Jimbo years, everything Kriv did was hush hush. For all we know, the Rangers may have asked for Dunn, and Kriv countered w/ Hammy. Or, Kriv offerred Hammy for Herrera, and the Rangers said only if they could throw in EV. :)

Patrick Bateman
05-19-2008, 08:35 PM
I don't know why we'd assume that kal. Was there anything in the media about who initiated the talks, what the negotiations looked like? Unlike the Jimbo years, everything Kriv did was hush hush. For all we know, the Rangers may have asked for Dunn, and Kriv countered w/ Hammy. Or, Kriv offerred Hammy for Herrera, and the Rangers said only if they could throw in EV. :)

The Rangers came to the Krivsky explicitely asking for Hamilton. That's who they wanted.... not Griffey, not Dunn, etc. Because of his contract situation, and upside, Hamilton had waaay more value than the like. There is a large enough valley to assume that the Rangers weren't going to suddenly settle for a much less valuable commodity.

Krivsky said the only way Hamilton was being moved to Texas was if Volquez was part of the return package. The Reds wanted a big ticket pitcher, and the cost was Hamilton. Considering the Reds have been in no rush to lock up Dunn long term, you can assume that they wouold have jumped at the chane to replace Hamilton with Dunn.

vaticanplum
05-19-2008, 08:53 PM
I don't know why we'd assume that kal. Was there anything in the media about who initiated the talks, what the negotiations looked like? Unlike the Jimbo years, everything Kriv did was hush hush. For all we know, the Rangers may have asked for Dunn, and Kriv countered w/ Hammy. Or, Kriv offerred Hammy for Herrera, and the Rangers said only if they could throw in EV. :)

Hamilton:

1. is the one of the three who could be traded to any team
2. is the youngest of the three
3. is dirt, dirt cheap and will be so for a few more years...which, given Hamilton's history and fragility, may in a worst-case scenario be the only few years that mean anything to a team

It makes perfect sense that the Rangers wanted Hamilton above the other two. It would have made negative sense for them to ask for Griffey or Dunn given the cost alone. After 2008, either Dunn or Griffey would have been gone or expensive. Hamilton is possibly the greatest deal in baseball right now.

The Reds were very lucky to have him as a trading chip, and I've no doubt that was in their heads from the moment they picked him up. Had he failed, he would have not been a great cost. Because he succeeded, he was worth a fortune no matter what they chose to do with him.

nate
05-19-2008, 09:25 PM
Hamilton:

1. is the one of the three who could be traded to any team
2. is the youngest of the three
3. is dirt, dirt cheap and will be so for a few more years...which, given Hamilton's history and fragility, may in a worst-case scenario be the only few years that mean anything to a team

It makes perfect sense that the Rangers wanted Hamilton above the other two. It would have made negative sense for them to ask for Griffey or Dunn given the cost alone. After 2008, either Dunn or Griffey would have been gone or expensive. Hamilton is possibly the greatest deal in baseball right now.

The Reds were very lucky to have him as a trading chip, and I've no doubt that was in their heads from the moment they picked him up. Had he failed, he would have not been a great cost. Because he succeeded, he was worth a fortune no matter what they chose to do with him.

Well said.

I would add, "Besides Volquez, Hamilton is possibly the greatest deal in baseball right now."

kaldaniels
05-19-2008, 09:28 PM
The Rangers came to the Krivsky explicitely asking for Hamilton. That's who they wanted.... not Griffey, not Dunn, etc. Because of his contract situation, and upside, Hamilton had waaay more value than the like. There is a large enough valley to assume that the Rangers weren't going to suddenly settle for a much less valuable commodity.

Krivsky said the only way Hamilton was being moved to Texas was if Volquez was part of the return package. The Reds wanted a big ticket pitcher, and the cost was Hamilton. Considering the Reds have been in no rush to lock up Dunn long term, you can assume that they wouold have jumped at the chane to replace Hamilton with Dunn.

I agree with you on all counts AK...but would you have a link or an article that states so. I wish the complaints that we didn't trade Jr. or Dunn for EV would go away for good.

RedsManRick
05-19-2008, 09:30 PM
Just want to throw it out there that Volquez has the highest VORP of any pitcher in baseball at 25.8. Among position players, Hamilton is 11th with 21.2.

Patrick Bateman
05-19-2008, 09:43 PM
I agree with you on all counts AK...but would you have a link or an article that states so. I wish the complaints that we didn't trade Jr. or Dunn for EV would go away for good.

From Jon Daniels:


"We knew we weren't going to be able to bring in somebody like Josh without giving up a significant piece," Daniels said. "We tried a number of different variations. When it became apparent it wasn't going to happen without the package we put together, we felt Josh was more critical for us going forward, and we were comfortable."

This clearly shows Daniels going specifically after Hamilton, and the Reds refusal to budge without Volquez' inclusion. Clearly a deal centred around the Rangers trying to get Hamilton, rather than the Reds approaching the Rangers about the different ways of getting Volquez.

kaldaniels
05-19-2008, 10:13 PM
:thumbup:
From Jon Daniels:



This clearly shows Daniels going specifically after Hamilton, and the Reds refusal to budge without Volquez' inclusion. Clearly a deal centred around the Rangers trying to get Hamilton, rather than the Reds approaching the Rangers about the different ways of getting Volquez.

Thank you sir. :thumbup:

Sea Ray
05-20-2008, 01:05 PM
As I recall the Rangers wanted someone who could play CF. That's another reason they went for Josh over Dunn or Griffey

Dom Heffner
05-20-2008, 01:20 PM
I take back the trade every day of the week.

Volquez has been wonderful. Can he be wonderful as long as Hamilton is going to be wonderful? No way.

Volquez helps you once or twice a week. Hamilton helps you everyday.

westofyou
05-20-2008, 01:24 PM
Hitting is way overrated in Reds country, time to tilt the scales.

M2
05-20-2008, 01:28 PM
These poll results may be the greatest example of buyer's satisfaction I've ever seen.

RedsManRick
05-20-2008, 01:50 PM
I take back the trade every day of the week.

Volquez has been wonderful. Can he be wonderful as long as Hamilton is going to be wonderful? No way.

Volquez helps you once or twice a week. Hamilton helps you everyday.

So the scope of that help isn't important. If Volquez is 5 times as helpful every 5th day, doesn't that balance out. Or is there inherent value in "every day" nature?

Would you rather get a dime every day or 3 quarters once a week?

On any given day, Hamilton can stink and his team can still win. And he can have a huge day and not guarantee his team a win. If Volquez stinks, his team is pretty much guaranteed to lose -- and vice versa.

You could also make the argument about the difficult of finding top level talent. Going back to VORP, there are 13 position players at 20.0 or higher right now and 26 who topped 50.0 last year. There are 4 pitchers currently at 20.0 or higher and were 16 that topped 50.0 last year. Obviously that's just one way to measure it, but it clearly suggests to me that incredibly productive pitchers are more valuable than incredibly productive hitters, due if nothing else to their rarity.

But the real kicker for me is that Hamilton is two years older than Volquez. Hamilton is likely in his prime and should start his decline as he gets expensive. Volquez has a little longer, and thus should remain more productive through his arbitration years.

BuckeyeRedleg
05-20-2008, 01:55 PM
One also has to consider that Josh Hamilton at 27 (tomorrow) quite possibly has the body of a 30 year old, or worse.

You can never underestimate the years he has knocked off his body from the drug abuse and, as mentioned several times before, you have to worry about a possible relapse.

Dom Heffner
05-20-2008, 07:40 PM
Hitting is way overrated in Reds country, time to tilt the scales.


The Reds needed a middle reliever more than anything, didn't they?

They had the worst 7th inning ERA in baseball, I think.

RedsManRick
05-20-2008, 07:53 PM
One also has to consider that Josh Hamilton at 27 (tomorrow) quite possibly has the body of a 30 year old, or worse.

You can never underestimate the years he has knocked off his body from the drug abuse and, as mentioned several times before, you have to worry about a possible relapse.

To be fair, while I'm sure the drug use damaged his body in ways none of us really understands, that he wasn't playing baseball saved his body from a lot of wear and tear as well.

It's a reasonable conversation to be sure, but if you want to play the body condition card, you have to consider the whole picture.

Dom Heffner
05-20-2008, 08:03 PM
I dunno. I just see why you trade Hamilton at a position where we have no depth after this year to get a guy that helps us in a year where we are going nowhere.

I don't like the injury risk with pitchers, most of them aren't effective year after year, and Hamilton is a guy whose talent for the price is unmatched.

I love Edinson, don't get me wrong. I just wouldn't have done that deal, stil wouldn't knowing what I know now, and I would take it back in a heartbeat.

That"dream" outfield of Dunn, Griffey, and Bruce is looking more and more like Bruce.

AmarilloRed
05-20-2008, 08:09 PM
We needed starting pitching, and Josh Hamilton was the price. Dunn or Griffey would not have gotten Volquez because they were expensive and their contracts were coming to an end. Josh on the other hand was young, talented, and inexpensive for a long time. There were some concerns about his being injury-prone and his past drug use, but the trade was made in spite of these concerns.
There is no doubt the trade has hurt the Reds offense, because we lost a player who was our lead-off hitter and a young talented starting outfielder.Freel, Hopper,and Patterson are at best borderline starting outfielders. Griffey's skills are fading fast, and we are going to have difficulty re-signing Dunn.

I would still make the trade, but the offense is going to miss Hamilton in the short-term.

gonelong
05-21-2008, 12:27 AM
If you are the Reds and you don't make that deal then you aren't even trying in my book. I'd do it every time and its turned out even better than expected to date.

GL

westofyou
05-21-2008, 12:15 PM
The Reds needed a middle reliever more than anything, didn't they?

They had the worst 7th inning ERA in baseball, I think.

Middle relief?

How about starters?

List the Reds produced starters since you hit middle school.

List the Reds produced hitters.

List the championships they've won during that time.

Middle relief?

Yeah that and some of everything else.