PDA

View Full Version : Cantu/Valenzuela



flyer85
06-09-2008, 12:41 PM
Chris Welsh commented on a broadcast this weekend that Cantu was DFAed one day before the Rule V draft where they selected Valenzuela(which baffled everyone at the time). Welsh said that when Sergio came to camp that he looked so bad in warmups that the Reds to never put him in a ST game before sending him back to the Braves.

WVRedsFan
06-09-2008, 01:47 PM
Wow. How stupid can you get. I really thought Cantu had a use on this club, but I am repeatedly told no. If (and it's just that, an if) they DFA'd Cantu in hopes that V. would supply that need, it is really thowing stuff at the wall to see if it will stick IMHO.

RedsManRick
06-09-2008, 01:50 PM
I really don't know what they were smoking when they picked Valenzuela. I don't care what scouting report you get on what stuff he might possess, when a guy is getting rocked hard in A ball, walking more than he strikes out, he doesn't merit Rule V selection.

flyer85
06-09-2008, 01:51 PM
I just thought it was humorous that when the Reds picked this guy nobody even knew who he was ... and then I have never heard of a player looking so bad in warmups they don't even pitch him in a game. I found it all quite amusing.

RedlegJake
06-09-2008, 01:55 PM
I think the Reds decision to DFA Cantu had a lot to do with the fact he had told them he was not interested in returning in the backup role and wouldn't be happy with that, also the Reds decided to pick up Hatte's option and saw that making Cantu expendable. He's also a subpar defender on such a plane that he makes Votto or EE look like GGs. Valenzuela was a bad move and the connection to the Rule 5 pick makes the Cantu move seem dumber than it really was. I'll repeat --this is NOT the guy who'd be the big RH bat off the bench. I'm glad he's gone. Let the Fish have him and his errors.

flyer85
06-09-2008, 01:56 PM
I think the Reds decision to DFA Cantu had a lot to do with the fact he had told them he was not interested in returning in the backup role the reason they DFAed him was that they didn't want to go to arbitration.

fearofpopvol1
06-09-2008, 01:58 PM
I thought the bigger issue with Cantu was arbitration eligible and the fact that he was due to be overpaid was the reason the Reds ultimately cut ties. Plus, with the Reds, Cantu was bench bound. Would you want to overpay for another bench player?

Cantu would be a solid bench player to have, but no way I want him starting unless it was at 1B and even then, Votto > Cantu.

RedlegJake
06-09-2008, 01:58 PM
the reason they DFAed him was that they didn't want to go to arbitration.

That works, too. As long as they moved him.

flyer85
06-09-2008, 02:18 PM
Plus, with the Reds, Cantu was bench bound. Would you want to overpay for another bench player? better than paying Hatteberg. Why trade for Cantu if you weren't going willing to go to arbitration?

It was another WK not being able to see the forest for the trees. He kept Hatty who was a decent player with a cheap option but he didn't fit the 2008 Reds. WK could have gone a long way to have kept his job if he had assembled complementary parts instead of redundant ones.

pahster
06-09-2008, 02:19 PM
better than paying Hatteberg. Why trade for Cantu if you weren't going willing to go to arbitration?


Maybe the Reds didn't like what they saw.

Far East
06-09-2008, 02:22 PM
...He's also a subpar defender on such a plane that he makes Votto or EE look like GGs... I'm glad he's gone. Let the Fish have him and his errors.

A. Cantu looked much better at 1st first base than he now does at 3B.

B. I wonder what pitching or other asset Cantu might have brought to the Reds in a trade/package. What might Florida be able to get for him now?

flyer85
06-09-2008, 02:23 PM
Maybe the Reds didn't like what they saw.seeing as he OPSed 874 after coming over it doesn't seem as if performance was the issue. The issue was if they were going to keep both Hatty and Votto then Cantu had no real place on the team.

pahster
06-09-2008, 02:32 PM
seeing as he OPSed 874 after coming over it doesn't seem as if performance was the issue. The issue was if they were going to keep both Hatty and Votto then Cantu had no real place on the team.

Maybe the front office chose to eschew Cantu's 57 ABs as a Red last year in favor of his career numbers. As of right now, he has a career line of .275/.316/.457, which includes just under 250 good PAs this year. His career numbers were awful at the end of last season, so I can't blame the Reds for dumping him. I'm unsure as to why they picked him up in the first place. He doesn't hit well enough to play 1st and he can't handle 3rd (and definitely not 2nd). Heck, he might even be a butcher at 1st.

If Cantu can keep his IsoD up as he has so far this year, he can help whatever team he's on. I don't think that's too likely based on his career, though. That said, he's only 26, so it's not entirely out of the question, but hitters normally don't just run into plate patience.

flyer85
06-09-2008, 02:37 PM
I'm unsure as to why they picked him up in the first place. He doesn't hit well enough to play 1st and he can't handle 3rd (and definitely not 2nd). which were all things that were known before trading for him. So one of the moves was senseless.

pahster
06-09-2008, 02:44 PM
which were all things that were known before trading for him. So one of the moves was senseless.

His acquisition was senseless. Letting him go was fine.

fearofpopvol1
06-09-2008, 03:42 PM
Pahster pretty much took all the words right out of my mouth.

I also think that the reason he was acquired was because there was some uncertainty about Votto needing a platoon partner. Hatteberg, based on his performance the previous 2 seasons was not overpaid for $1.75 million. I think Wayne had hoped that he could move Hatte in a deal given that his salary was reasonable, but was unsuccessful. I don't think it's that big of a deal.

REDREAD
06-09-2008, 06:13 PM
the reason they DFAed him was that they didn't want to go to arbitration.

Although that makes the decision to acquire him puzzling. They knew Cantu was arb eligible when they traded for him. I guess they thought they could settle before arb and sign him cheap? I don't know.

The other arguments about Cantu's various flaws.. poor defender, planned to resign Hat, etc also make me wonder why Wayne traded for him in the first place..

KronoRed
06-09-2008, 06:20 PM
Cantu was acquired before Votto came up probably as just in case insurance, the Reds didn't give up much to get him either and got rid him before they had to pay much, smart move, his past numbers didn't give any indication he was worth anything to this team.

Far East
06-09-2008, 06:36 PM
...The issue was if they were going to keep both Hatty and Votto then Cantu had no real place on the team.
So ................................ they chose to keep two left hand hitting first basemen!!

WVRedsFan
06-09-2008, 07:27 PM
better than paying Hatteberg. Why trade for Cantu if you weren't going willing to go to arbitration?

It was another WK not being able to see the forest for the trees. He kept Hatty who was a decent player with a cheap option but he didn't fit the 2008 Reds. WK could have gone a long way to have kept his job if he had assembled complementary parts instead of redundant ones.

My thoughts exactly.

I'll agree that Cantu wasn't the solution, but neither was Hatteberg, so the acquisition is puzzling just like a lot of moves he made.

WVRedsFan
06-09-2008, 07:28 PM
Cantu was acquired before Votto came up probably as just in case insurance, the Reds didn't give up much to get him either and got rid him before they had to pay much, smart move, his past numbers didn't give any indication he was worth anything to this team.

single-handedly beat the Reds, though, didn't he? 8-12 in the series so far.

Every player has a use and Cantu's is his bat. He didn't fit with the Reds, but neither do a lot of players on this roster.

GAC
06-10-2008, 10:33 PM
I don't care what anyone says.... I remember the guy last year saying he was not interested in a utility/part time role, and wanted to play every day. He had a promising 2005 season, then saw things fall off, and wanted the opportunity to resurrect his career. That meant a starting role. He wasn't going to get that with the Reds.

Yes - the fact he was arb eligible may also have played into the decision; but it wasn't the sole reason as to why.

Respectfully - we're lamenting, wringing our hands, over marginal role players like a Cantu and a Cody Ross, who, when you look at their overall numbers (and splits) have their faults. The the only reason they are given the opportunity to start is because it's the cheapskate Florida Marlins.

Cantu isn't stupid. Being primarily a 2Bman (who has a terrible glove), he looked around this INF and saw he was going to have one heck of a hard time cracking this lineup.

Foresight is everything. But look at what existed at that time, not looking back. Going into this season, and around the horn 1B to 3rd, we had Votto/Hatte, Phillips, Gonzo, and Encarnacion. With Kepp as the 5th INFer. You also have to add in Freel.

Hatte was already under contract. He had already proved his worth. A .300 hitter who carried a .391 OB%, .455 SLG%, .846 OPS while with the Reds on 06/07. He was retained for the '08 season as a reasonably cheap insurance back-up for Votto at 1B.


single-handedly beat the Reds, though, didn't he? 8-12 in the series so far.

That doesn't mean jack WV and you know it. ;)

Cody Ross hits a game winning walk off Hr vs Cordero and all of a sudden people are wishing we still had him.

Again - foresight is everything. Go back and look at the situation at that time when a guy like Patterson wasn't even an afterthought. He was caught in a roster crunch in LA who either had to deal him or lose him. So they basically gave him away for a minor league player to be named later. And for the month he was a Red he was in limbo due to a finger injury.

Would I rather have Ross over Patterson? Probably. Anyone got a coin for the flip?

Patterson beats him hands down from a defensive perspective. Both are OB% challenged. Ross currently has a .294 OB%. Most of the scouting reports I've read show him to be a very streaky performer, very undisciplined, a free swinger, who couldn't hit right-handed pitching if his mother's life depended on it. Ross' splits are nothing to brag about.

With me - it's not even about Ross vs Patterson. I look at Ross' career numbers, and he's not an answer the Reds need.

Having a Cantu and/or Ross would not vastly improve this Reds team. Nor are they the answer.

We seem to be searching for answers in all the wrong places IMHO.

WVRedsFan
06-11-2008, 12:37 AM
GAC:

I don't really want either guy. There's no place to play them, but I guess what I'm saying is this. They can hit. We have several players on this team that cannot. Patterson, Janish, Ross, Bako. We have guys who can't hit leftys and guys who can't hit right-handers to the extreme. We have catchers who can't catch and pitchers who cannot pitch, but we are offensively challenged most of all.

I want change because it's looking more like the same old thing where the Reds play uninspired baseball and our castoffs kill us because our pitchers either don't read the scouting report or there isn't one (or don't have the talent to execute the scouting report). Same thing over and over. I'm worn out watching this.

camisadelgolf
06-11-2008, 12:26 PM
I really don't know what they were smoking when they picked Valenzuela. I don't care what scouting report you get on what stuff he might possess, when a guy is getting rocked hard in A ball, walking more than he strikes out, he doesn't merit Rule V selection.

I was thinking the same thing after the pick, but a lot of people were wondering what the Reds were smoking after acquiring Josh Hamilton (no pun intended). It sounds like Valenzuela looked really good for a brief period of time in Mexico, and the Reds were wondering if he had turned a corner. It was a relatively small price to pay for what could have been a very big reward. It didn't work out, and I don't think the Reds deserve to be criticized for it. If you want to criticize the acquisition of Cantu, well, from what I've heard, Cantu made it apparent after the season that he had no interest in being a Red (due to lack of playing time), so I don't really see the acquisition of Valenzuela as more than a loss of $25,000 since Cantu was out the door anyway. Besides, it's looking more and more like the trade for Cantu was about acquiring Shaun Cumberland, who is having a breakout year in AA (check out his BB/K ratio this year). The Reds traded Calvin Medlock, a middle reliever with very limited upside and has pitched mediocre at AAA this year, and Brian Shackelford, who I believe has since retired.

Shaun Cumberland
http://minors.baseball-reference.com/players.cgi?pid=3378

GAC
06-11-2008, 10:18 PM
GAC:

I don't really want either guy. There's no place to play them, but I guess what I'm saying is this. They can hit..... we have guys who can't hit leftys and guys who can't hit right-handers to the extreme.......but we are offensively challenged most of all.

And we'd still be offensively challenged with either of these two guys too. You talk of guys who can/cannot hit lefties/righties, etc. Take a good look at these two guys splits.


I want change because it's looking more like the same old thing where the Reds play uninspired baseball and our castoffs kill us because our pitchers either don't read the scouting report or there isn't one (or don't have the talent to execute the scouting report). Same thing over and over. I'm worn out watching this.

I understand people's frustration. Yes, this team needs change. But it needs the right kind of change. And lamenting over two players, who are now ex-Reds, simply because during this last series they lit us up... and yet we did split the series with them.... is not the kind of change we need on this team.

Remember....when the Marlins were in Cincy last month we swept them. Ross didn't even play, other then a couple PH opps. That shows how much faith even the Marlins have in him.

WVRedsFan
06-11-2008, 10:32 PM
I understand people's frustration. Yes, this team needs change. But it needs the right kind of change. And lamenting over two players, who are now ex-Reds, simply because during this last series they lit us up... and yet we did split the series with them.... is not the kind of change we need on this team.

Remember....when the Marlins were in Cincy last month we swept them. Ross didn't even play, other then a couple PH opps. That shows how much faith even the Marlins have in him.

It's just frustration, GAC. Frustration with getting beaten by a bunch of scrubs. Watching this team hitting at the first pitch and grounding out to second, etc.

By July, I'll be in full "I don't give a hoot" mode and quit watching so much. In fact, I'm not watching tonight. It was a good move.

HokieRed
06-11-2008, 10:37 PM
It's hard for me to understand why a guy hitting .293/14/39/.873 wouldn't be part of the kind of change we need on this punchless ballclub.

CTA513
06-11-2008, 10:50 PM
It's hard for me to understand why a guy hitting .293/14/39/.873 wouldn't be part of the kind of change we need on this punchless ballclub.

The Reds already have enough guys that can't field or have no range and adding him would make them even worse defensively.

HokieRed
06-11-2008, 10:55 PM
Why couldn't he play 1b with Votto in left?

CTA513
06-11-2008, 11:02 PM
Why couldn't he play 1b with Votto in left?

They are not going to bench a player making around $13 million so Votto can play left.

HokieRed
06-11-2008, 11:06 PM
Then Votto and Cantu could have split time until Dunn could be moved, as it's now obvious must be done--because a team with this many unsolved problems can hardly afford to spend $80 for 5 on solving only one of those problems.

KronoRed
06-11-2008, 11:17 PM
It's hard for me to understand why a guy hitting .293/14/39/.873 wouldn't be part of the kind of change we need on this punchless ballclub.

Because his past numbers didn't give much indication he was going to OPS .873

Lets see where he's at in October.

reds44
06-11-2008, 11:55 PM
Cantu is outproducing whatever the Reds got in return for him (nothing) and the same thing goes for Cody Ross.

Both players, while not special, would be nice to have off the bench instead of Andy Phillips, Jolbert Cabrera, Corey Patterson, and (insert any catcher).

Blitz Dorsey
06-12-2008, 12:04 AM
Krivsky botched a lot of the "little moves" ... the little moves that non-high revenue teams need to get right. Cutting Cantu and getting stuck with guys like Andy Phillips instead is the reason Wayne Krivsky will never be a GM again.

And even a lot of the big moves Krivsky got wrong. He makes a great trade to land Arroyo, then jumps the gun on re-signing Arroyo (giving him too much $$ when he still had 2 years left on his deal). Giving too much $$ to guys like David Ross after one good year out of nowhere. Krivsky made some good moves -- by far the best being landing Josh Hamilton for nothing and then flipping him for a potential ace pitcher for years. However, looking at the overall resume, it's easy to see why he was canned. I thought they should have given him more time when the news first came down, but it's becoming more clear every day that he wasn't the man for the job.

BuckeyeRedleg
06-12-2008, 01:23 AM
Cantu is outproducing whatever the Reds got in return for him (nothing) and the same thing goes for Cody Ross.

Both players, while not special, would be nice to have off the bench instead of Andy Phillips, Jolbert Cabrera, Corey Patterson, and (insert any catcher).


Amen.

WVRedsFan
06-12-2008, 01:32 AM
Krivsky botched a lot of the "little moves" ... the little moves that non-high revenue teams need to get right. Cutting Cantu and getting stuck with guys like Andy Phillips instead is the reason Wayne Krivsky will never be a GM again.

No, WK will never be a GM again and formulating a roster is the reason which you have so adequately mentioned.


And even a lot of the big moves Krivsky got wrong. He makes a great trade to land Arroyo, then jumps the gun on re-signing Arroyo (giving him too much $$ when he still had 2 years left on his deal). Giving too much $$ to guys like David Ross after one good year out of nowhere. Krivsky made some good moves -- by far the best being landing Josh Hamilton for nothing and then flipping him for a potential ace pitcher for years. However, looking at the overall resume, it's easy to see why he was canned. I thought they should have given him more time when the news first came down, but it's becoming more clear every day that he wasn't the man for the job.

Of the 39 moves Krivsky made in the short time he was GM, I thought jumping the gun and signing Arroyo was impulsive (surprising for such a conservative guy), and the bigger contracts to Freel and Ross were un-called for. I have a feeling that no one else wanted those two (proven by shopping them both over the winter if rumors are correct), so why open up the vault door to them? Wayne made some fantastic moves and some really boneheaded decisions. I still don't like how he was dismissed, but it has always been clear why. Castelini didn't like him and he couldn't put together a winning roster, even with 39 moves. The impatience of the owner caught up to him. But I'm going to type one more thing. If Krivsky could have been given five more years, this team would still be winning about 75 games a year. He just didn't have what it takes to field a winning team.

GAC
06-12-2008, 09:27 PM
Cantu is outproducing whatever the Reds got in return for him (nothing) and the same thing goes for Cody Ross.

Both players, while not special, would be nice to have off the bench instead of Andy Phillips, Jolbert Cabrera, Corey Patterson, and (insert any catcher).


That's all true. And yes, I'd love to have either Cantu and/or Ross on this bench. But if the guy wasn't going to stay here to sit the bench, and had the opportunity to start elsewhere, then it's all a mote point isn't it?