PDA

View Full Version : I Think There is a Winner in the Volquez/Hamilton Swap



TheBigLebowski
08-05-2008, 08:40 PM
And it is the Texas Rangers.

No question whatsoever.

EV started off nails but has returned to Earth in a BIG way. He's still a good pitcher and will likely be a #3-type starter for us for a long time but he simply does not appear to be an ace.

Josh Hamilton stroked his 27th HR of the year tonight and drove in his 108th run. That's right - 108 runs. 7 steals, 73 runs scored and a staggering .922 OPS. He put on a record-breaking show at the Home Run Derby that none of us are likely to forget. Meanwhile, Volquez is continuing his descent towards reality tonight by getting beaten about the field by the Brew Crew.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not second-guessing Krivsky or the trade. It was the right deal to make at the time and Volquez certainly isn't a bust. Just sayin'...if I could take it back at this point, I would.

LouisvilleCARDS
08-05-2008, 08:48 PM
And Hamilton won't fall back to earth at some point? Probably next year? Give me a break. Volquez hasn't pitched well tonight, but that doesn't prove a damn thing. I'm doubting Hamilton will EVER match the numbers he put up this year, PERIOD.

I'm so sick of these "OMG I have to declare an official trade winner" threads. Really, hasn't 2006 tought anything?

kpresidente
08-05-2008, 09:02 PM
Uhhh, not quite.....


Volquez is 9th in the ML in ERA and 6th in wins on this lousy team. Hamilton is only 17th in OPS and 14th in RC/27.

Add to that the fact that Volquez pitches in a hitters park and Hamilton hits in a hitters park (Rangers Ballpark is even more a hitters park than GABP.)

Add to that Volquez is younger. Hamilton is in the middle of his prime. Volquez is still a couple years away.

Add to that that pitchers are more important than hitters.


All in all, you couldn't be more wrong. To this point, the Reds have unequivocally won the trade, although I doubt the Rangers are complaining.

HeatherC1212
08-05-2008, 09:40 PM
It also helps Josh that his teammates are getting on base around him so he has had tons of opportunities for RBIs. I don't think he has as many if he's on just about any other team. Aren't the Rangers one of the top offensive teams this year? :eek:

I think the trade was a win for both sides. We got a strong pitcher that we desperately needed and they got someone to help their offense. What's so wrong with simply saying both teams got a great deal in this trade?

Griffey012
08-05-2008, 09:44 PM
And it is the Texas Rangers.

No question whatsoever.

EV started off nails but has returned to Earth in a BIG way. He's still a good pitcher and will likely be a #3-type starter for us for a long time but he simply does not appear to be an ace.

Josh Hamilton stroked his 27th HR of the year tonight and drove in his 108th run. That's right - 108 runs. 7 steals, 73 runs scored and a staggering .922 OPS. He put on a record-breaking show at the Home Run Derby that none of us are likely to forget. Meanwhile, Volquez is continuing his descent towards reality tonight by getting beaten about the field by the Brew Crew.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not second-guessing Krivsky or the trade. It was the right deal to make at the time and Volquez certainly isn't a bust. Just sayin'...if I could take it back at this point, I would.

Sorry EV didnt have the best first full season in major league history. He is running into the dog days of summer. It gets to be a long big league grind in your first full season at the ML level. His stuff is nasty, hard moving fastball, nasty change, solid breaker. What else does he have to do. And as far as being a solid #3 for us, who are our 1 and 2. Are we signing CC in the off season? Cueto will be a solid 3 for us for a long time, with EV and Harang in front.

demas863
08-05-2008, 11:08 PM
It's clear that as EV makes the rounds and has been seen two, three or four times by each team, hitters are adjusting and Volquez isn't. Did he throw a breaking ball tonite? Don't remember seeing one although I didn't watch the game from start to finish. Granted the slider is not his best pitch but you just can't go with a fastball and changeup. He should throw the slider once in a while even if not for a strike, perhaps when ahead in the count. Otherwise hitters will just sit on the fastball and adjust to the changeup - and that fellow Zoners is what they're doing. If one were to run the stats for his last dozen games or so (and I haven't) I think you'd find his stats to be mediocre at best. Does anyone know of a successful starter with but two pitches?

Ghosts of 1990
08-05-2008, 11:32 PM
I'd rather have Hamilton but its just my opinion

Red in Atl
08-06-2008, 12:05 AM
Take the Griffey money and sign Halladay...

Halladay
Harang
Volquez
Arroyo
Cueto

Texas can have Hamilton, pitching wins...

goreds2
08-06-2008, 12:06 AM
I'd rather have Hamilton but its just my opinion

I am fine with the trade either way.

His bat is obvious but if we still had Hamilton, I would have appreciated his glove and throwing arm more than anything.

Jr's Boy
08-06-2008, 12:18 AM
And Volquez doesn't need someone to hold his hand every where he goes either.

killuminati35
08-06-2008, 12:28 AM
The Reds' problem for most of this decade has been a severe lack of pitching. They were going to have to give up somebody decent to get somebody decent in return. This team will never win coveting power hitting outfielders over pitching.

I still love this trade.

mroby85
08-06-2008, 12:57 AM
I loved Josh Hamilton, and hated to see him go, I didn't think they should trade him at the time, however the return has turned out better than I expected it to, so i'm not going to complain a ton. I'd probably prefer Hamilton over Volquez, but it's close enough that i'm not going to make a big deal out of it. Depends on what you need most, and i think the reds need both.

Oxilon
08-06-2008, 01:07 AM
Hilirious. What, the guy didn't go 7 innings allowing only one run and K'g 10? That's all he did the first half, and as is the case with all young pitchers, they seem to hit a bump in the road in the latter half (a little one at that).

And a #3? If he's only a #3 whose a #1 than? Sorry but Sandy Koufax and mid 90's Randy Johnson aren't available anymore. Volquez and Cueto are going to be the next '01 Schilling-Johnson in a few years -- they're that good.

laxtonto
08-06-2008, 01:11 AM
I stated this a month ago and Im going to say the same thing again. EV's main problem is that our expectations now will never meet up to the hype of his early parts on the season.

Some of his early success was due to a low BABIP and a non existant HR rate.

Add that to a new league, good luck on his choice of opposition, a jump in his gb rate and a drop in his walk rate. Combine those things together you get great results.

The league adjusted, lady luck got fickle and EV has regressed back toward some of his career numbers and EV is starting to reach the max (144) in his career IP total.

Hamilton will put up great number in Texas. There is no better place or environment for him right now. My true fear is not that EV will regress further which i still expect, but that Hamilton continues to get better just with more plate appearances and actually getting time to play baseball after his long layoff.

NarrowStairs
08-06-2008, 01:49 AM
Don't forget that the best player in this trade may be in Louisville right now.

ChatterRed
08-06-2008, 02:45 AM
Don't forget that the best player in this trade may be in Louisville right now.

Excuse me?

kpresidente
08-06-2008, 03:52 AM
Excuse me?

I think by "best player" he meant "a nice throw-in." Right, NarrowStairs?

AFalcon10
08-06-2008, 02:18 PM
Don't forget that the best player in this trade may be in Louisville right now.


Almost spit my sunflower seeds out after that one. Granted I love Danny Hereras twisted offspeed pitches and I think he will be a valueable asset to the Reds bullpen sooner than most think.. but EV and Ham are two of the best players in the game.. period.

BuckU
08-06-2008, 02:23 PM
How can you conclude this after two-thirds of a season? Ask again in 3 years.

Kingspoint
08-06-2008, 11:23 PM
When one team wins a World Series, then we'll see.

kpresidente
08-07-2008, 04:15 PM
When one team wins a World Series, then we'll see.

You don't really buy into that kind of reasoning, do you?

Jack Burton
08-07-2008, 04:34 PM
As of right now the edge goes to the Rangers, Hamilton is the front runner in the AL MVP race at this point.

kpresidente
08-07-2008, 04:37 PM
As of right now the edge goes to the Rangers, Hamilton is the front runner in the AL MVP race at this point.

He's not even the best hitter on his own team.

Jim Fazio
08-07-2008, 04:52 PM
The deal does now and I think will always favor the Rangers. You don't trade a talent like Hamilton for a pitcher who will play in 30-35 games a season and only have his good stuff in 20-25 of those. Hamilton has proved to be over his problems and looks like he will play a full season. He's an absolute stud that will haunt the Reds for years trading him. And the way Volquez has looked recently, he looks like a 3-5th pitcher in the rotation. I hated the trade then and do big time now. Everytime Hamilton comes to the plate I say to myself, I can't believe the Reds traded him.

Oxilon
08-07-2008, 07:07 PM
The deal does now and I think will always favor the Rangers. You don't trade a talent like Hamilton for a pitcher who will play in 30-35 games a season and only have his good stuff in 20-25 of those.

First off, this is Volquez's first complete major league season and, as dominate as he was, he's only going to get better. So your 20-25 range in quality starts is going to jump to the 30-35 range in a year or two.

And last time I checked, pitching and defense wins you games in the playoffs. We've been down the offense road for years now and it had gotten us nowhere. Now the Reds change the status quo (pitching and defense rather offense) and people are upset. I'm sorry but if you can land a Cy Young candidate pitcher who is only 24 without giving up one yourself, you make that trade every day of the week and twice on Sundays.


Hamilton has proved to be over his problems and looks like he will play a full season. He's an absolute stud that will haunt the Reds for years trading him. And the way Volquez has looked recently, he looks like a 3-5th pitcher in the rotation. I hated the trade then and do big time now. Everytime Hamilton comes to the plate I say to myself, I can't believe the Reds traded him.

Hamilton is 27. He's in the prime of his career, a career in which endured heavy drug use. If he's able to play ten more years in this league, and that's a big 'if,' he's only going to be a shadow of himself than.

And Volquez is only going to be a 3rd-5th starter? Where did you pull that brainbuster from? This is going to be his first full season and all he was, was basically the NL Cy Young for the first half of the season. Yes, he did cool down some in the second, but he's still going to receive Cy Young votes at the end -- and one more thing...he's only 24! He's only going to get better.

BlastFurnace
08-07-2008, 10:19 PM
:clap::clap::clap:
The deal does now and I think will always favor the Rangers. You don't trade a talent like Hamilton for a pitcher who will play in 30-35 games a season and only have his good stuff in 20-25 of those. Hamilton has proved to be over his problems and looks like he will play a full season. He's an absolute stud that will haunt the Reds for years trading him. And the way Volquez has looked recently, he looks like a 3-5th pitcher in the rotation. I hated the trade then and do big time now. Everytime Hamilton comes to the plate I say to myself, I can't believe the Reds traded him.

:clap:

I agree completely!

George Foster
08-07-2008, 11:41 PM
I saw a great sign someone made at the Texas vs. New York game in Arrlington Wed. night. It said, " Superman wears Josh Hamilton pajamas."

That pretty much sums up how I fell about the trade. I changed my sig. to it!

Oxilon
08-08-2008, 12:03 AM
Alright, all the trade nay-sers, let me pose this question to you. Say we didn't make the trade last season and kept Hamilton. How would the outfield have been? Dunn/Hamilton/Griffey Jr. What about Bruce?

daBeast
08-08-2008, 12:16 AM
trade volquez for big papi

The Snow Chief
08-08-2008, 08:29 AM
The thing is, the Reds have an outfielder whose OPS is better than the "staggering" OPS Josh Hamilton is putting up. He is not appreciated. I'll take the pitcher with #1 starter stuff who has not yet hit his prime every day of the week and twice on Sundays.

Caveman Techie
08-08-2008, 09:22 AM
The deal does now and I think will always favor the Rangers. You don't trade a talent like Hamilton for a pitcher who will play in 30-35 games a season and only have his good stuff in 20-25 of those. Hamilton has proved to be over his problems and looks like he will play a full season. He's an absolute stud that will haunt the Reds for years trading him. And the way Volquez has looked recently, he looks like a 3-5th pitcher in the rotation. I hated the trade then and do big time now. Everytime Hamilton comes to the plate I say to myself, I can't believe the Reds traded him.

I'm sorry but I disagree. I will "ALWAYS" trade a talented position player for a younger, talented pitcher everyday of the week. Pitching wins. Offense can be found elswhere.

markymark69
08-08-2008, 09:37 AM
We need to remember, he would probably be batting lead-off if he were, or at least he would have spent some time there, because we do not have a true lead-off hitter when Hairston is out.

So his RBI chances would not be as plentiful, plus as someone else wrote, the table setters have done a great job on base in Texas, not so for the Reds, outside of Hairston.

I'll take a pitcher with 13 wins and a sub-3.00 ERA at this point over a player who would not have 108 RBI's if he were on this team.

BTW, Texas will not make the playoffs either. So it's really hard to say that they are the winner of the trade.

Plus, if you haven't learned by now, pitching wins championships. Granted, you have to have offense, but we've been down that road, where we've had tremendous offense (not this year) and little to no pitching and we haven't fared well in the past.

A key problem this year, not enough pitching. Add Harang's normal numbers to Volquez and this team is vastly different, despite the black hole known as the fifth spot in the rotation and the bottom of third of the Reds offense.

So, just hold off on declaring Texas the winner in the Hamilton trade. Besides, what does hitting 28 home runs in the first round of the home run derby have to do with who was the winner in the trade?

BlastFurnace
08-08-2008, 02:16 PM
Alright, all the trade nay-sers, let me pose this question to you. Say we didn't make the trade last season and kept Hamilton. How would the outfield have been? Dunn/Hamilton/Griffey Jr. What about Bruce?

Griffey would have been traded anyway. I like Dunn/Hamilton/Bruce

Oxilon
08-08-2008, 03:26 PM
Griffey would have been traded anyway. I like Dunn/Hamilton/Bruce

So you would have had Bruce in Louisville up until the deadline? Yeah, I'm sure that would have went real well.

And than what's our rotation look like than? Harang/Arroyo/Cueto/Bailey/Fogg? Maybe Thompson? We could have a lineup full of Hamilton's and we still wouldn't go to the playoffs with two rookies, an league average pitcher, and career 5th compiling our rotation.

Oh, and not to mention a Bruce/Hamilton/Dunn outfield would be pretty porous defensively and would have no range what's so ever.

bgwilly31
08-08-2008, 05:14 PM
Texas can have Hamilton, pitching wins...


Well obviously this year hasnt taught you a dayum thing now has it.

Isnt our bullpen in the top 5 in the league.

Didnt we have an starting all star caliber pitcher and a couple other strong pitchers this season.

Whats our record again?

If you actually watched all the games this season you might realize how many games we've lost where we score 3 or less runs.

You have to score more than 2-3 runs in a ball game to win in the majors period.

At this point. If the reds dont hit homeruns they dont score more than 3 runs in a ball game.

bgwilly31
08-08-2008, 05:25 PM
So you would have had Bruce in Louisville up until the deadline? Yeah, I'm sure that would have went real well.

And than what's our rotation look like than? Harang/Arroyo/Cueto/Bailey/Fogg? Maybe Thompson? We could have a lineup full of Hamilton's and we still wouldn't go to the playoffs with two rookies, an league average pitcher, and career 5th compiling our rotation.

Oh, and not to mention a Bruce/Hamilton/Dunn outfield would be pretty porous defensively and would have no range what's so ever.

Ur nuts.

Do you even get to watch all the games?

I would kill for bruce/hamilton/dunn outfield.
Bruce isnt slow. Neither is hamilton. They both have ROCKET arms.
regardless the offense production would out weigh the downfalls tremendously.

Also the comment you made about a team full of hamiltons. :rolleyes:

Right. team avg. over .300 and a team total of 216 homeruns thus far. (thats 2 runs per game just in homeruns.) Even saying nobody is on base.

The reds would 40 games over .500 with all hamiltons at the plate.

And our pitching wouldnt be THAT bad. If harang had a decent year, Arroyo is coming around, Cueto is doing great, Baily/fogg. thompson rotating them around. With our stellar bullpen this year. Our pitching staff isnt instantly terrible if you remove EV>.

SultanOfSwing
08-08-2008, 05:26 PM
He's not even the best hitter on his own team.

Or the 2nd best.

BlastFurnace
08-08-2008, 06:13 PM
So you would have had Bruce in Louisville up until the deadline? Yeah, I'm sure that would have went real well.

And than what's our rotation look like than? Harang/Arroyo/Cueto/Bailey/Fogg? Maybe Thompson? We could have a lineup full of Hamilton's and we still wouldn't go to the playoffs with two rookies, an league average pitcher, and career 5th compiling our rotation.

Oh, and not to mention a Bruce/Hamilton/Dunn outfield would be pretty porous defensively and would have no range what's so ever.

No offense, but have you ever watched Hamilton in the outfield. Slow....please! He has a rocket arm, has very nice range, and would be a tremendous improvement over anything our roster. He's not a liability at all in the field. And...I apologize, but I didn't notice the winning record that the Harang/Cueto/Volquez/Bailey/Fogg/Arroyo has brought us this year.

The answer was trading Griffey before the season began for whatever we could get. As much of a fan of Griffey as I am, we needed to forget the 600th HR and do what was needed.

I would have rather have had the Dunn/Hamilton/Bruce outfield since the beginning of the season.

Once again...what is the Reds record right now with Volquez? What is the Rangers record right now?

BlastFurnace
08-08-2008, 06:38 PM
Or the 2nd best.

Ok...who is #1 and 2 on the Rangers. Kinsler? Young? Bradley? Ask any Rangers insider and they will tell you that Josh is the best offensive player on the team.

SultanOfSwing
08-08-2008, 08:28 PM
Ok...who is #1 and 2 on the Rangers. Kinsler? Young? Bradley? Ask any Rangers insider and they will tell you that Josh is the best offensive player on the team.
Kinsler and Bradley (Speaking strictly on this year's performance. Bradley is too mercurial otherwise). Young isn't in their class (or even that close).

I disagree. Bradley is clearly putting up the best offensive numbers. If the Rangers do well, Kinsler should have a good shot at MVP (but he won't). The best thing Hamilton has is RBIs. But remember, he only has those because of the talent surrounding him.

Don't get me wrong, I believe Hamilton is very, very good hitter. However, he is also very overrated. If he wasn't a feel-good story and a former Red, he wouldn't be nearly this praised, IMO. People around here tend to act like he is already in the class of Pujols, ARod, and MCab. He is not even close yet (and I don't believe he ever will). Dunn is clearly the better offensive player and all things considered probably the better player overall. Take a look at his home/road splits. IMO, that will give you a better idea of Hamilton's offensive value.

Oxilon
08-11-2008, 01:10 AM
Ur nuts.

Do you even get to watch all the games?

I would kill for bruce/hamilton/dunn outfield.
Bruce isnt slow. Neither is hamilton. They both have ROCKET arms.
regardless the offense production would out weigh the downfalls tremendously.


None of them are true CFs and you act as if Hamilton is durable. Sorry but this isn't a fantasy league, you can't just plug guys into the lineup with their bat alone. :rolleyes:


Also the comment you made about a team full of hamiltons. :rolleyes:

Right. team avg. over .300 and a team total of 216 homeruns thus far. (thats 2 runs per game just in homeruns.) Even saying nobody is on base.

The reds would 40 games over .500 with all hamiltons at the plate.

Hyperbole maybe? Hard to sneak those fastballs by your pure genius I suppose... :rolleyes:


And our pitching wouldnt be THAT bad. If harang had a decent year, Arroyo is coming around, Cueto is doing great, Baily/fogg. thompson rotating them around. With our stellar bullpen this year. Our pitching staff isnt instantly terrible if you remove EV>.

Hm...so IF Harang was having a decent year, and IF Arroyo was coming around? Um, sorry, wrong. Both are having down years, so you have your #1 and #2 playing poorly. Throw in a rookie (Cueto doing great? What the F' are you talking about? Sure, his making great strides as a rookie, but he's still a rookie and he's not going to really help us much this season). Than you want a rotation of Bailey, Fogg, and Thompson for the 4th and 5th spots? I'm really glad you're not the GM. You could just chalk up automatic losses with that idea. And yes, not only is our pitching staff terrible if you remove EV, but it removes a lot of great potential from it for a year or two from now.

It's not a hard concept to understand, but last time I checked teams win World Series more often than not with great pitchign and defense, not hitting. If it was hitting, wouldn't the Reds have won the World Series a few times in the early part of the decade. :rolleyes:

Here's a run down between Hamilton and Volquez:
Age: Volquez by several years
Position: Volquez by a large margin
Skill: Push (When Volquez is Hamilton's age, he'll be in the running for Cy Young Awards)
Durability: Volquez by a large margin
More Valuable: Volquez again. Young, good, affordable pitching is much more harder to come by, and thus more valuable. It's not hard to find a good corner OF, but it is hard to find a top of the rotation pitcher who's only 24.

Oxilon
08-11-2008, 01:25 AM
No offense, but have you ever watched Hamilton in the outfield. Slow....please! He has a rocket arm, has very nice range, and would be a tremendous improvement over anything our roster. He's not a liability at all in the field.

First off, yes Hamilton has a good arm...which would make him a good RF. Unfortunately for him, not only is he not the most durable player around, but his range isn't best suited for CF.


And...I apologize, but I didn't notice the winning record that the Harang/Cueto/Volquez/Bailey/Fogg/Arroyo has brought us this year.

:laugh:

I'm sorry, but are you saying if we would have kept Hamilton, we'd be a winning team right now? Riiiiight...
I'm sorry, but the Reds are closer to competing with Volquez penciled into their rotation for the next decade than they are with Hamilton in RF. Again, it's not some noval concept that's hard to understand. Good pitching >>> Good hitting. And you point out that our rotation with Volquez didn't win us anything this year. Thanks for proving my point...imagine how dreadful the Reds would have been without him in it. I mean, with how much Harang and Arroyo have disappointed, Cueto's rookie struggles, and end of the rotation filler in Josh Fogg, Homer Bailey (it's exactly what he's been this season) and Daryl Thompson, it's as if it's 2003 again. I mean, why don't you bring up the likes of Jimmy Haynes and Jimmy Anderson while you're at it.


The answer was trading Griffey before the season began for whatever we could get. As much of a fan of Griffey as I am, we needed to forget the 600th HR and do what was needed.

Baseball is a business first and formost. If you understood that, than you'd realize the PR and ticket sales hit the Reds would take from trading Griffey before #600. It'd be a disaster, basically telling the fans the Reds FO have already signaled the white flags before the season has started.


I would have rather have had the Dunn/Hamilton/Bruce outfield since the beginning of the season.

Once again...what is the Reds record right now with Volquez? What is the Rangers record right now?

Is it Volquez's fault the Reds are a bad team? No. Infact, if it weren't for him, only God knows how many more blowouts there would have been. And your second reasoning is horrible and not even applicable. The Rangers are where they are because they have a great lineup from top to bottom, that includes Hamilton, rather Hamilton himself. Ian Kinsler, Michael Young, Max Ramirez, Murphy, Milton Bradley...it's a complete lineup from top to bottom. And Hamilton's not even the best hitter on his team, maybe not even the 2nd or even 3rd best (Ian Kinsler and Milton Bradley are hitting better). But, back to the original point...the comparison of Volquez's effect on the Reds against Hamilton's to the Rangers makes absolutely no sense whatsoever and isn't even applicable to any type of rational argument.

kpresidente
08-11-2008, 08:57 AM
We're 26th in the ML in ERA with Volquez (starters are 28th). We're 22nd in the ML in runs scored without Hamilton.

Obviously, pitching has been a bigger problem for us than hitting. That's why those who would rather have Hamilton don't have a clue.

LouisvilleCARDS
08-17-2008, 05:16 PM
And it is the Texas Rangers.

No question whatsoever.

EV started off nails but has returned to Earth in a BIG way. He's still a good pitcher and will likely be a #3-type starter for us for a long time but he simply does not appear to be an ace.

Josh Hamilton stroked his 27th HR of the year tonight and drove in his 108th run. That's right - 108 runs. 7 steals, 73 runs scored and a staggering .922 OPS. He put on a record-breaking show at the Home Run Derby that none of us are likely to forget. Meanwhile, Volquez is continuing his descent towards reality tonight by getting beaten about the field by the Brew Crew.




Bump, for such great analysis. :rolleyes: Guy gets a couple days off and has went 14 IP with 1 ER versus the Brewers and Cardinals, two playoff contending team, and put himself right back in the Cy Young chase. Ugh. I just HATE when guys return to earth like that.

JWP
08-17-2008, 05:19 PM
Bump, for such great analysis. :rolleyes: Guy gets a couple days off and has went 14 IP with 1 ER versus the Brewers and Cardinals, two playoff contending team, and put himself right back in the Cy Young chase. Ugh. I just HATE when guys return to earth like that.

I wouldn't say that Volquez is in the Cy Young chase anymore.

kpresidente
08-17-2008, 05:24 PM
I wouldn't say that Volquez is in the Cy Young chase anymore.

I'd say it's between him, Lincecum and Webb, with the nod going to Lincecum at the moment.

Aces Wild
08-17-2008, 07:07 PM
I wouldn't say that Volquez is in the Cy Young chase anymore.

Why wouldn't he be?? Volquez has held teams to 1 or less runs in over half of his starts, and has been nothing short of spectacular (save the month of July). He's currently 15-5 (on a crappy team no less) and owns a 2.73 ERA..........as well as being among the league leaders in strikeouts. He is our ace, and if the Reds were smart they would sign him to a lengthy contract extention to lock him up for as long as possible.


Oh and I'll take a stud pitcher over a hitter any day. Wayne won this trade hands down imo. Too bad he handed out so many bad contracts, because he did do some nice things while he was here..........and Edinson is one of them.

Lockdwn11
08-17-2008, 07:45 PM
If you took Volquez off this team and put Hamilton back on it I would guess and this is just a guess but it would mean 10 more loses then we have right now.

DTCromer
08-17-2008, 10:05 PM
It's threads like this that make me embarrassed to be a Reds fan.

Again, look at the long-term people. Not just 1 season or 4.5 months of baseball.

Manut Bol
08-17-2008, 11:55 PM
Josh Hamilton will hit the crack pipe again one day. They all come crawling back.

Az. Reds Fan
08-18-2008, 12:03 AM
Josh Hamilton will hit the crack pipe again one day. They all come crawling back.

Yikes...that's pretty harsh

Like many others on this board, I wish nothing but the best for Josh

Rob387
08-18-2008, 03:32 PM
when is the last time a Reds pitcher had an ERA under 3 at this point in the season?

Ahhhorsepoo
08-18-2008, 03:41 PM
elmer dessens in 2002 had an era of 2.89 as of september 1st.. and ended with an era of 3.03.. and his record was 7-8...

markymark69
08-18-2008, 03:50 PM
elmer dessens in 2002 had an era of 2.89 as of september 1st.. and ended with an era of 3.03.. and his record was 7-8...

Elmer Dessens couldn't throw 96 mph and back it up with a tremendous change-up.

Ahhhorsepoo
08-18-2008, 03:53 PM
what was robs question though?! I didnt think it had anything to do with what kind of pitches he threw....

but maybe i see where you are going with that..
dessens was on a career year.. while volquez still has tons of upside..?!

Betterread
08-18-2008, 11:31 PM
It's threads like this that make me embarrassed to be a Reds fan.

Again, look at the long-term people. Not just 1 season or 4.5 months of baseball.
Yes. Its embarrassing to comprehend that people that saw Hamilton play a year in front of them can't remember how truly special his talents were. If you can't remember how he exceptionally he played the game, you just don't comprehend greatness. I feel sorry for you if you think Volquez is as good a pitcher as Hamilton is a field player.
Greatness is short-term, long term and endures.

Oxilon
08-19-2008, 03:04 PM
Yes. Its embarrassing to comprehend that people that saw Hamilton play a year in front of them can't remember how truly special his talents were. If you can't remember how he exceptionally he played the game, you just don't comprehend greatness. I feel sorry for you if you think Volquez is as good a pitcher as Hamilton is a field player.
Greatness is short-term, long term and endures.

Alright, since you still don't believe it was a good trade for the Reds, how about I throw this bone at you. The Reds are now apparently rebuilding. Who would you rather have, a 25 year old pitcher who is in contention for the NL Cy Young in his first full major league season or a 27 year old OF who has endeared several years of drug use and isn't very durable.

Ahhhorsepoo
08-19-2008, 03:09 PM
why didnt you mention that the 27 year old will probably win the MVP? and maybe a GG..

Betterread
08-19-2008, 08:42 PM
Alright, since you still don't believe it was a good trade for the Reds, how about I throw this bone at you. The Reds are now apparently rebuilding. Who would you rather have, a 25 year old pitcher who is in contention for the NL Cy Young in his first full major league season or a 27 year old OF who has endeared several years of drug use and isn't very durable.
.
I understand Volquez' importance to the Reds. He is, by a substantial margin, the best pitcher on the team and is the #1 or 2 starter the Reds desperately needed (with all due respect to Aaron Harang and his apologists).

To answer your question, I would rather have Hamilton, drug use in his past and all.
You know of course, that many people you know, and many people who make decisions that impact your life, have used drugs. They may or may not admit it. Drug use in America is pretty well documented to be an aspect that touches many people's lives. Many people overcome it. I don't know if Hamilton will do so, but I hope he is one of those successful people.

tommycash
08-20-2008, 08:58 AM
why didnt you mention that the 27 year old will probably win the MVP? and maybe a GG..

I don't think he will probably win the MVP. I also don't think Volquez will win the CY Young. I am one of those people who believe that both teams faired pretty good in this trade. Everybody wants to point out that Volquez had his struggles this year in June and July (mainly just July), but Hamilton turned out not to be Superman either and there is still time left on the season.

All of Hamilton's numbers have decreased since June 2. These stats are from Yahoo Sports

June 2
AVG. 331, OBP. 375, SLG. .623, OPS. 998
Today
AVG. .301, OBP. 366, SLG. 542, OPS. 908

After starting the year on a tear Hamilton had 3 months of this:
June: 97 AB, 5 HR, 19 RBI, .278 AVG, .349 OBP, .464 SLG, .813 OPS
July: 101 AB, 6 HR, 24 RBI, .287 AVG, .365 OBP, .515 SLG, .880 OPS
August: 61 AB, 3 HR, 10 RBI, .262 AVG, .384 OBP, .475 SLG, .859 OPS

To me those stats show that Hamilton is on the decline for the year. Now I am not saying that he is playing terrible, but he is on the decline. Carlos Quentin is on the upswing, so I think he has better chances of MVP (IMHO).

Now lets look at Volquez. At June 4, his ERA was 1.32 for the season and everyone was calling him CY Young. Since then, his ERA has climbed to 2.73. Seems like a lot of people think he is starting to decline because of those numbers. I don't think anyone ever thought he was going to keep his numbers in the 1's in ERA (if you did, come on). His splits for the summer months go as follows:June 3-1, 3.45 ERA, 1.18 WHIP
July: 3-1 4.59 ERA, 1.57 WHIP
August: 2-1, 3.40 ERA, 1.34

While not a spectacular set of stats, I think it shows that while Volquez has had struggles too, he is improving on his numbers since the last month ended, while Hamilton dropped in his (except in OBP).

And ponder this too: his home and road totals tell a little story about Volquez.
At home where hitters are king, his totals are 7-2, 3.40 ERA (which is well below ((better than)) league average), and a 1.46 WHIP. On the Road (where in the past the Reds have been horrible) 8-3, 2.04 ERA, 1.28 WHIP. Hitters get the advantage of playing in many hitter friendly parks, but pitchers (unless they have one at home) seldon get to pitch in pitcher friendly parks.

Not to mention that this trade really wont have a winner until we see what both can do over at least a 3 year period. ANd we did get Herrera in the deal, so if he does well at all it is a bonus in the Volquez comlumn.

Brian
08-20-2008, 01:13 PM
tommy sums it up well, the grandstanding that this is a bad trade for the Reds is pretty silly, especially at this point. Volq has been very solid, with a rough patch in the middle, which nearly all pitchers have, even great ones. I think the best way to evaluate a trade early on is by asking if you'd do it again. I certainly would, good pitching trumps good batting/field play every time. That's not to disparage Hamilto, he's been very good, but as noted by others, there are valid concerns about his ability to do this for the next several years.

Oxilon
08-22-2008, 12:15 PM
.

You know of course, that many people you know, and many people who make decisions that impact your life, have used drugs. They may or may not admit it. Drug use in America is pretty well documented to be an aspect that touches many people's lives. Many people overcome it. I don't know if Hamilton will do so, but I hope he is one of those successful people.

Yes, I fully understand that, except there's a big difference between the CEO of a Fortune 500 company or the President doing cocaine when he was in college rather that of a professional athlete.

The CEO and President have no need to be in excellent physical condition to perform their job whereas professional athletes do. With the several years Hamilton was under the influence, he was hurting his body and he'll be suffering from the consequences for quite some time as his durability will always be a question. That's a big issue, just ask Reds fans about Griffey.

Betterread
08-22-2008, 03:21 PM
Yes, I fully understand that, except there's a big difference between the CEO of a Fortune 500 company or the President doing cocaine when he was in college rather that of a professional athlete.

The CEO and President have no need to be in excellent physical condition to perform their job whereas professional athletes do. With the several years Hamilton was under the influence, he was hurting his body and he'll be suffering from the consequences for quite some time as his durability will always be a question. That's a big issue, just ask Reds fans about Griffey.
The point I was trying to make was that more people than you know have overcome addictions to hard drugs.
But to address your point that Hamilton has damaged his body and will bear that damage for the rest of his life and this is a factor may impact his durability. I agree with you. Your point is obviously true. Along with thousands of other factors that impact future durability of pro ballplayers, including pitching 175 innings a year at the highest professional level, which Hamilton doesn't have to worry about, yet (you never know how the Rangers will use him - he used to throw >90 mph in HS).