PDA

View Full Version : Desperately Seeking Someone



I(heart)Freel
12-11-2008, 05:25 PM
It's been documented time and again, the next big ticket item on Walt's shopping list is a right-handed bat, preferably one that can play left field.

It is with that assumption in mind that I pose this question. Who do you WANT the Reds to go after?

I list the trading block guys first, and what they're owed next season. And then I'll list all the free agents and what they made last season.

I didn't list Jerry Hairston because we know the offer is already out there and he would be more used in centerfield with Dickerson.

Vote, and debate.

Slyder
12-11-2008, 06:05 PM
Rocco is probably the biggest risk/reward of the bunch. Former #1 pick, cant stay healthy. Didnt play horrible in the short time he played this year.

Bradley is going to be expecting a huge pay increase with the year he's coming off of.

Its probably been documented and Im just overlooking it but why did Juan Rivera only play in 100ish games the past 2 years?

Stephenk29
12-11-2008, 06:23 PM
Baldelli would be a waste of money. He even admits he is not an everyday player. He simply can't with his health condition!

redsfandan
12-11-2008, 07:58 PM
baldelli and bradley are too risky imo. rivera would be my #1 target.



...Its probably been documented and Im just overlooking it but why did Juan Rivera only play in 100ish games the past 2 years?

rivera was only able to play in 14 games in '07 due to a broken leg.

Steviejoe
12-11-2008, 08:11 PM
I like Burrell,my question as reported why he contacted the reds.The logical pick would be Rivera,but only as a backup.With Freel gone lok ay the current roster and see what the outfield would look like opening say-scarry-it was reported that cincy has about million to play with.Maybe Walt knows smothing about the non tenders and has smothing in store.

redsfandan
12-11-2008, 08:21 PM
well they have to contact somebody. seriously, he probably just wanted to check to see if the reds would be interested in him as a cheaper replacement for dunn.

why would you only want rivera as a backup steviejoe?

Steviejoe
12-11-2008, 08:26 PM
With his history,no way of knowing if you could get games out of him as a starter.More reasonable yes duriable ?

redsfandan
12-11-2008, 08:38 PM
true there's no way to know about how many games he would play but isn't that true of all players? rivera has had a couple freak injuries (in 2002 he fractured his kneecap when he collided with a golf cart in the outfield while shagging fly balls) but so has roy halladay and people don't hold that against him. part of the reason he hasn't played as many games as he has is cuz of opportunity. imo, if you hand him the opportunity to play on a regular basis he'll deliver and for not alot of money.

NatiRedGals
12-11-2008, 10:15 PM
Milton Bradley (FA) $5.25 in 08 He would totally own everybody at GABP

Slyder
12-11-2008, 10:37 PM
Milton Bradley (FA) $5.25 in 08 He would totally own everybody at GABP

He'll be too busy chasing down Cowboy and Marty for hurting his feelings during games. :D

Hopefully they'll just put an elevator in, dont want him blowing out his knee again for something stupid.:D

And yes, I wouldn't mind him in LF next season in the least bit.

NatiRedGals
12-11-2008, 10:44 PM
He'll be too busy chasing down Cowboy and Marty for hurting his feelings during games. :D

Hopefully they'll just put an elevator in, dont want him blowing out his knee again for something stupid.:D

And yes, I wouldn't mind him in LF next season in the least bit.

He would be the smart choice for the extra cash we have. :cool: Hitting fastballs like it aint no thing:thumbup:

Plus Plus
12-11-2008, 11:19 PM
Bradley is a DH who will inevitably be vastly overpayed, as he is coming off of a 1.000 ops year. He is volatile and although he is a great player, would not be something that the Reds need right now.

WildcatFan
12-11-2008, 11:45 PM
I voted for Jermaine Dye via trade. I'm not sold on a risky player like Rivera who hasn't played a full season coming off of an injury, Baldelli, who will most likely be a lifetime DH or Bradley, who is a complete head case and is coming out of a contract year. DeRosa is a good player but can't take that cleanup role that we need so badly, and Burrell is being overvalued around here because he is right-handed. Dye fits the mold of what the Reds need to contend in '09, I think.

tripleaaaron
12-12-2008, 03:13 AM
Its probably been documented and Im just overlooking it but why did Juan Rivera only play in 100ish games the past 2 years?

While he missed most of 2007 with injury, part of the reason he didn't play much in 08 is due to the fact that he was in a crowded outfield backing up Vlad, G Anderson, T Hunter and G Matthews and late season call up Kendry Morales

tripleaaaron
12-12-2008, 03:17 AM
I failed to mention Reggie Willits being in the mix as well

Ghosts of 1990
12-12-2008, 03:21 AM
I think with the depth we already have in the OF Baldelli would be a good fit. After a doctor figures out that he has lyme disease and treats it he will be a good player for a long time and can help us.

redsfandan
12-12-2008, 05:08 AM
I voted for Jermaine Dye via trade. I'm not sold on a risky player like Rivera who hasn't played a full season coming off of an injury, Baldelli, who will most likely be a lifetime DH or Bradley, who is a complete head case and is coming out of a contract year. DeRosa is a good player but can't take that cleanup role that we need so badly, and Burrell is being overvalued around here because he is right-handed. Dye fits the mold of what the Reds need to contend in '09, I think.

fwiw, rivera last played a full season coming off of an injury in .... 2008. in fact over 4 of the last 5 seasons (2004-06 & 2008) he was on the DL only once for 15 days.

here are the five anaheim outfielders who played the most in '08:

Garret Anderson has been been there since he was drafted in '90.
Vladimir Guerrero signed as a FA. His first year with anaheim was '04.
Juan Rivera signed as a FA. His first year with anaheim was '06
Gary Matthews signed as a FA. His first year with anaheim was '07.
Torii Hunter signed as a FA. His first year with anaheim was '08.

Garret Anderson and Juan Rivera are leaving. so ... do ya think they'll pick up an outfielder this year? it seems like they just can't help themselves. (this isn't a prediction but a backup OF/DH wouldn't surprise me)

And of those five outfielders that played the most Torii Hunter is the ONLY one who started at least 100 games in the outfield.

If you look at riveras stats he seems to do better the more abs he has and based on 2004-06 when he played more (391, 350, & 448 abs) 25+ hrs with a line of .290 .340 .500 .840 seems like a reasonable expectation.

redsfandan
12-12-2008, 08:47 AM
I was kinda surprised to see that Bradley and Baldelli are 2nd and 3rd in this poll so, for the hell of it, i wanted to add my take on those two.

Rocco Baldelli has always had talent and has produced when he could play but he has been diagnosed with mitochondrial disorder (not lyme disease) which causes him to tire easily (along with other symptoms). Over the last two seasons he's only been able to play in 63 games and most of those were as a DH. Could his health/stamina improve? Sure but it's far from a safe bet that he could bounce all the way back so he could play 120+ games in the outfield. Because of those concerns about his ability to play the outfield on a regular basis my bet is he'll stay in the AL where he would see alot of his ab's as a DH and would help out in the outfield when able as a backup or in a platoon.

Milton Bradley has even more talent but his 2008 season was marred by injuries, all minor, to his knee, back, quad and wrist, yet he still had the second highest at-bat and games played totals of his career. Those totals? A whopping 379 ab's and 115 games. He totaled 232 games and 843 ab's over the three previous seasons combined and has been placed on the DL eight times in the last four yeas. Add in his notorious temper and imo, he's probably the riskiest player available as far as both health and baggage and whoever signs him will have their finges crossed as long as he's on their team.

Now I know that I should probably temper my enthusiasm for Rivera and Hermida a little in favor of objectivity but regardless of who we end up with I think alot of the outfielders that have been discussed could work for us including Dye, Burrell, Ibanez, Abreu, Rivera, Hermida, Dunn and possibly Delmon Young. (I don't think Derosa has enough power to provide the protection we need for Votto and Bruce and, as I said before, Baldelli and Bradley are too risky imo). With the outfield prospects we have (Alonso, Frazier, Stubbs, Dorn, etc) I really think more than a two year deal for a FA would be unnecessary and overdoing it.

WildcatFan
12-12-2008, 09:46 AM
I understand Rivera was on the roster for a whole season, but he still saw time in just 89 games and had just 256 ABs, which translates to about half a season. Not to mention that half season was miserable at the plate: .246/.282/.438. So I still think it's a risk signing him as the big right-handed bat Walt wants. Now if you could pick him up cheap and use him as a bench/platoon guy, go for it.

redsfandan
12-12-2008, 10:20 AM
tripleaaaron and I already pointed out how crowded anaheims outfield was. 2008 was ONE year in which he was coming back from an injuy. as far as how he's done for his career here:
(the 1st # is games played, 2nd # is ab's)

2001 22 NYY AL 3 4 .000 .000 .000
2002 23 NYY AL 28 83 .265 .311 .361
2003 24 NYY AL 57 173 .266 .304 .468
2004 25 MON NL 134 391 .307 .364 .465
2005 26 LAA AL 106 350 .271 .316 .454
2006 27 LAA AL 124 448 .310 .362 .525
2007 28 LAA AL 14 43 .279 .295 .442
2008 29 LAA AL 89 256 .246 .282 .438

8 Seasons 555 1748 .284 .331 .468

the more ab's the better he looks.

ibanez just signed for $10 million/year which will likely increase the price for dunn, burrell, and abreu possibly to more than we can afford. maybe we'd still be able to afford burrell but if he costs $10 million/year is that a good investment or overspending cuz we're desperate? dye is old, sub-par defensively, and will cost $11m PLUS bailey and AT LEAST one more prospect. so how can you not even consider rivera as an option?

WildcatFan
12-12-2008, 10:34 AM
Rivera is definitely an option. If Jermaine Dye weren't on the poll, I would have voted for Rivera. But I still don't think he's the proven middle-of-the-order bat after nice years in '04 and '06. People complained about Dunn striking out too much around here, and he OPSed over .900 every year but one since 2004. Rivera's topped .800 just twice. Imagine how brutal he would look in that four-hole, which is exactly where Dusty would slap him. Dye, on the other hand, is consistently over .800 and is coming off of a very solid 2008 season where he showed he's still got it. You say he's old, but he's 35 — it's not like he's clinging to the little talent he has left.

redsfandan
12-12-2008, 11:14 AM
In 13 seasons dye has a career ops of .829 while, as a non-starter, rivera has a career ops of .799 and I've already pointed out how he does better with more ab's. Now I really wouldn't have a problem with dye just like I wouldn't have a problem with some of the others (i've said that before) but I just think rivera has to be an option and if he had an .850+ ops in 500 abs I don't think that would look brutal at all.

redsfandan
12-12-2008, 11:26 AM
Milton Bradley (FA) $5.25 in 08 He would totally own everybody at GABP


He would be the smart choice for the extra cash we have. :cool: Hitting fastballs like it aint no thing:thumbup:

Dye has only 7 votes. Bradley has almost twice that many. I'd love to hear some people explain why Bradleys injury history and baggage shouldn't be a concern cuz I just don't understand how he could be liked so much more.

Emin3mShady07
12-12-2008, 12:28 PM
In 13 seasons dye has a career ops of .829 while, as a non-starter, rivera has a career ops of .799 and I've already pointed out how he does better with more ab's. Now I really wouldn't have a problem with dye just like I wouldn't have a problem with some of the others (i've said that before) but I just think rivera has to be an option and if he had an .850+ ops in 500 abs I don't think that would look brutal at all.

For whatever reason, it may be the ballpark, Dye appears to be in his best years as a pro right now. I know his career OPS is .829, but his three year split 1.006 OPS in '06 .804 OPS in '07 and .885 OPS in '08 (and in '07 his BABIP didn't match with his LD% so he was "unlucky" so to say). That is roughly a .898 three year OPS split which is far greater than Juan Rivera's last few years with the exception being 2006 where he OPSed .887. However, his BABIP was about .33 points to high in that year LD% of 15.9% and BABIP of .312 http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/stats/players/index.php?playerId=843&firstName=Juan&lastName=Rivera which would take the monster year he had and make it into an above average, which, granted, still isn't bad, but it is doubtful In My opinion that Rivera matches Dye's production next year, so if the Reds go after Rivera because he is a cheaper option, I would think it would be a mistake (as they are going for 2009 like I have said numerous times), unless they spend that money elsewhere on a FA to upgrade another position (which Jockety does not really like to do).

Slyder
12-12-2008, 12:39 PM
Bradley's probably going to cost about the same to slightly less depending on the wording with injuries clauses than Dye and not going to cost a thing more in terms of Homer Bailey and other spects and the age of the two guys. Thats about the only reasons I would say Dye<Bradley.

redsfandan
12-12-2008, 01:37 PM
Again, I think Rivera should be an option. That's all. I never said that Rivera would be better than Dye offensively or that he'd put up elite stats. I do think his stats would improve as a starter. How much? Who knows. I said around an .850 ops. Is that so unrealistic? If he only improved to .830 would that make him bad? If all things were equal I'd probably take Dye too but they're not equal. It's not just that Rivera is cheaper cuz I also don't think that should be the only reason to get a player. He also is better defensively and won't cost any prospects. As I've said many times I'd be happy with either one but a possible Dye trade has been talked about for awhile now. And he's the only one of the poll options that I'd take over Rivera. But if a Dye trade doesn't happen the FA's left will likely cost AT LEAST $14m+ (Dunn, Abreu) or will be a lesser player (Burrell) or a riskier player (Bradley, Baldelli). And I'd put Rivera ahead of Burrell, Bradley, and Baldelli.

You (Emin3mShady07) think they want to win now. I think they want to win more now but imo, with the question marks this team will still have in march (shortstop, 3rd, center) 2010 is more realistic for a playoff spot.

BLEEDS
12-12-2008, 03:30 PM
Give me Pat the Bat.

I've heard the "He's a RH-ed version of Adam Dunn", well to me that's a Selling Point.

I'd put Milton Bradley in there as my 2nd choice; Dye as my 3rd. I'd but Abreu as my 4th.

The rest of the guys on here are back-ups and "wishful pie-in-the sky, hope he has a breakout/career year" thinking; NOT what you want to pencil in between Votto and Bruce. You don't take a flier on that, not if you're serious.

Put a vet in there for 1/2/3 years max with an option, to cover the window (which is slowly closing) and then back-fill it at the end of that timeframe.

Take a "flier" on a LF/CF-er who can split time with Dickerson, that's what Rivera/Baldelli are for. Anything more out of them is Gravy, you can't expect them to be Meat and Potatoes.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

redsfandan
12-12-2008, 03:42 PM
...I'd put Milton Bradley in there as my 2nd choice; Dye as my 3rd. I'd but Abreu as my 4th.

The rest of the guys on here are back-ups and "wishful pie-in-the sky, hope he has a breakout/career year" thinking; NOT what you want to pencil in between Votto and Bruce. You don't take a flier on that, not if you're serious.

hmmm and to expect bradley to be the answer isn't wishful thinking?


... I'd love to hear some people explain why Bradleys injury history and baggage shouldn't be a concern cuz I just don't understand how he could be liked so much more.

so sell me on bradley. cuz unless you can do that i ain't buying.

BLEEDS
12-12-2008, 04:34 PM
hmmm and to expect bradley to be the answer isn't wishful thinking?



so sell me on bradley. cuz unless you can do that i ain't buying.

Well, for starters, he hasn't had an OBP under .350 since 2002...

Sure, I know he's got injury/attitude risks. But, compared to a guy with the same injury concerns, and the HUGE question mark of IFF he can even OBP over .300, I'll take the risk on the other guy, who just played 126 games last year, and has OPS'd close to 1.000 in his last ~170 games or so - 1/4th of which were in Petco.

Risk/Reward? Not even close.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

redsfandan
12-12-2008, 05:21 PM
... Sure, I know he's got injury/attitude risks. But, compared to a guy with the same injury concerns, and the HUGE question mark of IFF he can even OBP over .300, I'll take the risk on the other guy, who just played 126 games last year, and has OPS'd close to 1.000 in his last ~170 games or so - 1/4th of which were in Petco.

Risk/Reward? Not even close.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Are you serious? I assume you are talking about Rivera although that doesn't make sense unless you only looked at 2008. Yes this year his obp was under .300 (and if you want to count all of 43 ab's in 2007 that's up to you) but every other year it was OVER .300 and for his career his obp is .331 even with 2008 included so you're wrong on that count.

Also, Rivera has been injured and on the DL ONCE in the last four years while Bradley is constantly injured and has been on the DL EIGHT times in the last four years. So you're wrong on that count too.

I asked you to sell me on Bradley and that's how you answer? Cmon is it too much to ask you to check your facts or read the previous posts at least?

I'll agree that Bradley has more talent but he's injured ALOT more than Rivera or pretty much anyone for that matter and Bradley is a headcase too so imo he's a heck of alot riskier. Sorry but imo he's way riskier, TOO risky and because of that I'm still not sold at all on him. :thumbdown

brachial pleXUs
12-12-2008, 06:35 PM
Out of all of these I think Rivera would be the smart choice. He has a history of injuries, but nothing seriously worrisome as a chronic thing. He is reasonably young, and has shown he can produce when given the chance to play every day. Here's my reasoning on why not any of the others on this list:

Jermaine Dye: Too expensive for his age on a club that's "going young"

Mark DeRosa: Glorified utilty player.

Pat Burrell: Too expensive; no defense; a right handed Adam Dunn (No knock on Dunn, but does anybody really want to see all of the inevitable "Trade Pat Burrell" and subsequent "Bring Back Pat Burrell" threads?)

Milton Bradley: Too expensive; will get injured while trying to reenact WWE Smackdown in the clubhouse (or on the field)

Rocco Baldelli: Good player, good guy, but his injury risk and mitochondrial disorder are the elephants in the room, and we need a player who can play every day.

Emin3mShady07
12-13-2008, 01:28 AM
Again, I think Rivera should be an option. That's all. I never said that Rivera would be better than Dye offensively or that he'd put up elite stats. I do think his stats would improve as a starter. How much? Who knows. I said around an .850 ops. Is that so unrealistic? If he only improved to .830 would that make him bad? If all things were equal I'd probably take Dye too but they're not equal. It's not just that Rivera is cheaper cuz I also don't think that should be the only reason to get a player. He also is better defensively and won't cost any prospects. As I've said many times I'd be happy with either one but a possible Dye trade has been talked about for awhile now. And he's the only one of the poll options that I'd take over Rivera. But if a Dye trade doesn't happen the FA's left will likely cost AT LEAST $14m+ (Dunn, Abreu) or will be a lesser player (Burrell) or a riskier player (Bradley, Baldelli). And I'd put Rivera ahead of Burrell, Bradley, and Baldelli.

You (Emin3mShady07) think they want to win now. I think they want to win more now but imo, with the question marks this team will still have in march (shortstop, 3rd, center) 2010 is more realistic for a playoff spot.

I think the reds are going for it now because of the way several of their young players contracts are structured and because of the move to acquire Ramon Hernandez, the veteran catcher the reds wanted/needed. I know the reds still have several holes, but next year, I don't think there are any for sure options down on the farm, so I believe these holes will still be there next year and the reds in house payroll will increase with contract raises already in place (Harang, Arroyo, Lincoln, Phillips which is about 8 million on its own) and other players young players hitting arb (Volquez, potentially keppinger and EE, and Jared Burton), So I really feel if the reds are going to play for one year, they have the fiscal resources to do so this year, and that money may not be there next year. And yes, Rivera would be an ok option, but I feel he has a lot of risk involved as opposed to signing burrell or trading for dye especially if the reds are playing for 2009. But if they are planning on 2010, I still feel Dye would be a better option because he would come off the payroll for 1 million, but if he is still producing and the reds get a SS and CFer they could still hang onto Dye and pay him.

redsfandan
12-13-2008, 05:17 AM
Agon is still our shortstop for now. Whether he's healthy or not is another question. But, shortstop is the ONLY position where we don't have a definite in-house prospect that could take over in 2010. Well, that's what trades and FA's are for.

As far as the raises, sure that happens every year although I wouldn't be surprised if Arroyo was dealt before 2010 and that alone would relieve us of $10m+.

Dye and Burrell would be fine. I still think the risk of Rivera is overstated especially compared to Bradley and Baldelli. But to think that anyone we put in left will be the key that puts us into the playoffs is wishful thinking. More than that needs to happen before we can think playoffs.

NatiRedGals
12-13-2008, 09:32 AM
i stick to my Milton idea now more then ever. If the cubs are seriously looking to sign him we gotta grab him or at least try to we cant let the cubs get him be scary to have to face him a lot!

BLEEDS
12-13-2008, 10:10 AM
Are you serious? I assume you are talking about Rivera although that doesn't make sense unless you only looked at 2008. Yes this year his obp was under .300 (and if you want to count all of 43 ab's in 2007 that's up to you) but every other year it was OVER .300 and for his career his obp is .331 even with 2008 included so you're wrong on that count.

Also, Rivera has been injured and on the DL ONCE in the last four years while Bradley is constantly injured and has been on the DL EIGHT times in the last four years. So you're wrong on that count too.

Yeah, silly me for talking about relevant CURRENT history, for a guy coming off of a broken leg a year ago, wherein one of his largest assets is SPEED.

If you want a detailed analysis/debate on the worthiness of Rivera, I suggest you read this novella:
http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=73017

What you'll find is that the consensus is, you MIGHT, if all things line up right, get AVERAGE production out of Rivera, you know, 4th OF type, like he's been his entire career. NOT the guy you want to call the "POWER RH IMPACT PRESENCE" to put in between Votto and Bruce.

He simply doesn't hit for enough consistency, and his one major skill doesn't age well, especially for a guy with leg injuries.



I asked you to sell me on Bradley and that's how you answer? Cmon is it too much to ask you to check your facts or read the previous posts at least?

I'll agree that Bradley has more talent but he's injured ALOT more than Rivera or pretty much anyone for that matter and Bradley is a headcase too so imo he's a heck of alot riskier. Sorry but imo he's way riskier, TOO risky and because of that I'm still not sold at all on him. :thumbdown

I don't really feel the need to "sell" Bradley to you, especially when you pretty much nailed the summary on the head here. Basically, Bradley has more talent in his pinky then Rivera has in his whole body. Sure he's a headcase - but so is Manny Ramirez, but I'd take him over Rivera too.

Actually, I don't mind Rivera - as a 4th OF bench guy who might have a miraculous season if forced into the lineup. He'd be a good complement, on the bench, at $2M per season, to guys like Bradley/Burrell/Dye who should be playing in LF every day...

PEACE

-BLEEDS

brachial pleXUs
12-13-2008, 03:49 PM
Yeah, silly me for talking about relevant CURRENT history, for a guy coming off of a broken leg a year ago, wherein one of his largest assets is SPEED

FWIW, A broken tibia is a devastating injury from which it can take a while to recover. That being said, if it heals correctly, it is healed, and actually even stronger than it was in the first place. If handled properly (and I'm sure the Angels have very good team docs), a broken leg is much less worrisome than a ligament, tendon, or muscle issue that could become chronic.

redsfandan
12-13-2008, 03:58 PM
... What you'll find is that the consensus is, you MIGHT, if all things line up right, get AVERAGE production out of Rivera, you know, 4th OF type, like he's been his entire career. NOT the guy you want to call the "POWER RH IMPACT PRESENCE" to put in between Votto and Bruce.

He simply doesn't hit for enough consistency, and his one major skill doesn't age well, especially for a guy with leg injuries.

I don't really feel the need to "sell" Bradley to you, especially when you pretty much nailed the summary on the head here. Basically, Bradley has more talent in his pinky then Rivera has in his whole body. Sure he's a headcase - but so is Manny Ramirez, but I'd take him over Rivera too.
...


That's odd, I think that's the first time I've heard that one of Riveras largest assets was speed. I've heard it was power with decent speed and plus defense. And players don't lose power as fast. Like brachial pleXUs just pointed out his poor stats in '08 were likely influenced by the injury in '07. Imo, he'll be a very nice value pick for someone cuz of that.

It seems like you want to write someone off cuz of one year and that's up to you. But it also seems like you, and some others, want to buy into a player off of one year too. Bradley had career highs in ba, obp, slg %, and ops and he did that in a contract year. Because of that, Bradley will cost ALOT more and, imo, with ALOT more risk as well. He's been in the league for 9 seasons and how many seasons has he had just 550 ab's? He didn't do it this year and in his career hasn't been able to do it even once. Now to be fair, Rivera hasn't done that either. But there's a key difference. With Rivera it was mostly cuz of lack of opportunity. With Bradley it was cuz of injuries (with the occasional suspension thrown in). In the last four years this is how many times they've been on the DL: Rivera once; Bradley EIGHT. That's not a typo, Bradley just can't stay healthy. Now if you want to pay at least $10 million + to a player that MAY be able to play in 126 games again be my guest. I just don't think it's wise to spend that much (especially with a payroll like the Reds have) on a player that's a risk to miss a month OR MORE of the season.

Talent:
Bradley >> Rivera

Cost:
Bradley >>> Rivera

Risk:
Bradley >>>>>>>> Rivera

Yeah Bradley is the more talented one but between his injury history, price tag, and temper I hope the Cubs do land him instead of us.
Fwiw, in late 1999/early 2000 we acquired another talented outfielder. He was injured alot and his big contract made it harder to make moves to win. Do we really want to see another big contract spend alot of time on the DL??

Kingspoint
12-13-2008, 04:06 PM
Not one of those players should be a RED. Edwin offers more to the team than any of them, and he's cheaper. All of those players' best years are behind them. Edwin is just entering his prime years as he is still only 25. He's shown that at his worst during his early years he's a Right-handed power hitter with an OPS of .800. During his prime years of 26, 27, 28, 29, and 30, he'll OPS between .800 and 900 each of those five seasons. There is way too much misunderstanding of EE's value. If the club doesn't like his defense at 3rd Base, put him in Left Field.

tripleaaaron
12-14-2008, 02:16 AM
Yeah, silly me for talking about relevant CURRENT history, for a guy coming off of a broken leg a year ago, wherein one of his largest assets is SPEED.


He simply doesn't hit for enough consistency, and his one major skill doesn't age well, especially for a guy with leg injuries.


Juan Rivera's greatest asset is his power, he has solid speed but he was never a base stealer he has 9 career steals and only one season with more than 1. May want to at least look at his stats before commenting on a player.

BLEEDS
12-15-2008, 09:39 AM
Is it too much to ask that people read what I wrote?!!

I said "ONE OF HIS" greatest assets - not "THE" Greatest Asset, when referencing his speed. Maybe I gave him too much credit, since he really doesn't have "Great Assets" at all, just plus power and SOME speed, along with average Defense.

Yes, "THE" Greatest Asset he has his Power, however that doesn't age well, especially for a guy with a HORRID IsoD, and I don't know if any of you realize how much lower body (read: LEGS) you use to generate Power in MLB, but let's suffice it to say it's Substantial.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

redsfandan
12-15-2008, 01:33 PM
Bleeds, he's only 30. IF the Reds pick him up it will likely be for only 1-2 years. I don't think he'll lose the power he has by the time he's 32.

WildcatFan
12-15-2008, 01:54 PM
redsfan, looks like you've sold this board on Rivera. Unfortunately, it's looking more and more like none of our options will wear a Reds uni come March.

Lockdwn11
12-15-2008, 01:56 PM
http://www.tampabay.com/sports/baseball/rays/article937268.ece


I have been seeing alot of talk about Jonny Gomes up on the ORG and I came across this link.I am not one that is for signing Gomes but I did find this interesting


ST. PETERSBURG — Outfielder Jonny Gomes was disappointed to hear he was being let go by the Rays but wanted to thank the team for the opportunity that changed, and might have saved, his life.

"If it wasn't for the Rays, I'd probably be in Iraq right now," Gomes said Saturday. "Back in '01, I had two contracts in front of me, one to go play for the Rays as an 18th-round draft pick and one to go into the Marines.

"So I may owe the Rays my life. I'm one of the few people who leaves the Rays with a smile."

Gomes, 28, has been working out in Arizona and undergoing testing to improve his vision, through contacts or laser surgery. Plus, he is getting married in February. He hopes to sign a major-league deal elsewhere but said if not, he would be open to rejoining the Rays on a minor-league one.

"All I want to do is play baseball," he said. "Obviously, I want to be in the big leagues, but I'm open to anything."

bigredbunter
12-15-2008, 02:12 PM
Juan Rivera's greatest asset is his power, he has solid speed but he was never a base stealer he has 9 career steals and only one season with more than 1. May want to at least look at his stats before commenting on a player.

O.K. then,
Rivera's hit more than 20 Hr's in a season exactly once in his career--Is that the power of which you speak?

Rivera doesn't really have consistent OB skills.

Rivera couldn't stay healthy in his 20s....He'll turn 31 this year.

If the Reds want Rivera to be the solution in the outfield, absent other signficant upgrades it's gonna be another long season.

Thankfully, WJ has proven that he usually a little better evaluator of talent than that.

Lockdwn11
12-15-2008, 02:15 PM
O.K. then,
Rivera's hit more than 20 Hr's in a season exactly once in his career--Is that the power of which you speak?

Rivera doesn't really have consistent OB skills.

Rivera couldn't stay healthy in his 20s....He'll turn 31 this year.

If the Reds want Rivera to be the solution in the outfield, absent other signficant upgrades it's gonna be another long season.

Thankfully, WJ has proven that he usually a little better evaluator of talent than that.

Who would you have WJ sign?

redsfandan
12-15-2008, 02:20 PM
redsfan, looks like you've sold this board on Rivera. Unfortunately, it's looking more and more like none of our options will wear a Reds uni come March.

I wasn't trying to sell him as THE only one for us. Just that he should be an option. Like I've said repeatedly I'd be fine with quite a few of the other options as well (Dye, Abreu, Burrell, ..). It's just a matter of cost. But I think Walt will pickup someone. We still have time.



I have been seeing alot of talk about Jonny Gomes up on the ORG and I came across this link.I am not one that is for signing Gomes but I did find this interesting. ...


Gomes definitely has power but he just doesn't make enough contact and strikes out ALOT. He could work in a platoon but not as a starter.

WildcatFan
12-15-2008, 02:21 PM
http://www.tampabay.com/sports/baseball/rays/article937268.ece


I have been seeing alot of talk about Jonny Gomes up on the ORG and I came across this link.I am not one that is for signing Gomes but I did find this interesting


ST. PETERSBURG Outfielder Jonny Gomes was disappointed to hear he was being let go by the Rays but wanted to thank the team for the opportunity that changed, and might have saved, his life.

"If it wasn't for the Rays, I'd probably be in Iraq right now," Gomes said Saturday. "Back in '01, I had two contracts in front of me, one to go play for the Rays as an 18th-round draft pick and one to go into the Marines.

"So I may owe the Rays my life. I'm one of the few people who leaves the Rays with a smile."

Gomes, 28, has been working out in Arizona and undergoing testing to improve his vision, through contacts or laser surgery. Plus, he is getting married in February. He hopes to sign a major-league deal elsewhere but said if not, he would be open to rejoining the Rays on a minor-league one.

"All I want to do is play baseball," he said. "Obviously, I want to be in the big leagues, but I'm open to anything."

I would take a pass on Gomes for less than $1 million. We saw his potential as a rookie that's a quintessential low risk/high reward move.

Lockdwn11
12-15-2008, 02:24 PM
I wasn't trying to sell him as THE only one for us. Just that he should be an option. Like I've said repeatedly I'd be fine with quite a few of the other options as well (Dye, Abreu, Burrell, ..). It's just a matter of cost. But I think Walt will pickup someone. We still have time.



Gomes definitely has power but he just doesn't make enough contact and strikes out ALOT. He could work in a platoon but not as a starter.

Thats why I found it interesting that he was undergoing testing to improve his vision, through contacts or laser surgery. If his lack of contact was do to poor eye sight he could have a break out year.

redsfandan
12-15-2008, 02:47 PM
It's possible lasik could help but he stroke out a ton every year in the minors too. He's been a DH 2/3 of the time so I'm not sure I'd expect much defensively. If he's cheap enough he could be worth a look. Especially if it's a minor league deal.


O.K. then,
Rivera's hit more than 20 Hr's in a season exactly once in his career--Is that the power of which you speak?

Rivera doesn't really have consistent OB skills.

Rivera couldn't stay healthy in his 20s....He'll turn 31 this year.

If the Reds want Rivera to be the solution in the outfield, absent other signficant upgrades it's gonna be another long season.

Thankfully, WJ has proven that he usually a little better evaluator of talent than that.

:bang: I MUST resist. :bang: I MUST resist. :deadhorse

bigredbunter
12-15-2008, 03:44 PM
Who would you have WJ sign?

FA?
Burrell maybe...also that Dunn guy... though, trades seem like a better way to go given the FA available.

The basic decision is whether or not to play for 09 or 10. If they're playing for '09, then they'll need more runs than what any of the people mentioned in this thread will provide by themselves.

Lockdwn11
12-15-2008, 03:53 PM
So you would be willing to sign Burrell to a 3-4 year contract for 10-13 million+ because thats what it will more then likely take? Dunn is not coming back, that ship has sailed. I'll pass

bigredbunter
12-15-2008, 04:12 PM
So you would be willing to sign Burrell to a 3-4 year contract for 10-13 million+ because thats what it will more then likely take? Dunn is not coming back, that ship has sailed. I'll pass

Sure, it's not my money ;)

Really though...
Burrell > Rivera

I guess you would rather sign Rivera b/c he costs less...Gives the team more payflex...Wonder when they'll be able to ride the savings to a playoff spot?

redsfandan
12-15-2008, 04:21 PM
No no no. Imo, Rivera should be an option. That's all. If you want Burrell that will work. IF he'll come here for no more than two years.

BLEEDS
12-15-2008, 04:31 PM
Sure, it's not my money ;)

Really though...
Burrell > Rivera

I guess you would rather sign Rivera b/c he costs less...Gives the team more payflex...Wonder when they'll be able to ride the savings to a playoff spot?


No no no. Imo, Rivera should be an option. That's all. If you want Burrell that will work. IF he'll come here for no more than two years.

See, we all can find a compromise!

Burrell on a 3 year deal (3rd year an option) at $42M ($13M per), pencil in LF.

Rivera on same deal for $10M. Let him compete for a bench spot, if he beats out Hopper for the 4th OF spot, he can get a start or two on the off-days, MAYBE be the platoon for Dickerson.

That's the only way Rivera is AN option instead of THE option. I don't mind him as a bench player, but we need 2 starters first.

Same for Tavares, if he was the 6th OF-er, it's not too earth-shattering - IFF he didn't play CF and have 68 SB's, which means we get Corey Patterson-lite, sans the CF Defense. As a double-header pinch runner, he's got value. If someone flew the Reds Charter plane into the side of a mountain, he could get a spot start while we waited for the bus to drive up Dorn, Stubbs and Hopper up from the minors.
As the first CF signed in the off-season, he's Death Part Deux at the SUCK HOLE we've grown accustomed to from DUHsty, because we'd stop looking for other alternatives.

This must be avoided, at all costs.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

redsfandan
12-15-2008, 04:41 PM
Not sure Burrell would take such a short term deal. It would be ugly (defensively) and for what we paid Dunn last year we'd have an obviously lesser player. Plus I'm not sure we could afford to spend quite that much. Obviously, there's no "perfect" option out there so we'll just have to see what Walt does.

BLEEDS
12-15-2008, 07:40 PM
Burrell, by all accounts, is an older version of Dunn - with a higher BA, which should make some people happier!!

If someone is going to complain about shoddy defense in the OF - at least let them have a .900 OPS to fall back on!!
As has been debated 1,000,000 times, LF is not a place where you are really that concerned about putting a Gold Glover out there, IFF he can OPS .900 and give you 30-40 HR and ~100 RBI in the middle of the lineup.

At least he's younger than Dye. And, in this FA market, you might be surprised how much (or more so how little) we might have to pay this guy to play here. We might have to give more years - heck might even be 3 with a 4th year option - but if you could get it for say $45-48M, you'd be hard-pressed to think that was a bad deal.

Call me crazy, but I'd be THRILLED with a RH bat like Burrel in between Votto and Bruce. Then, the argument is where to bat EE and BP - maybe something like this:

CF - Dickerson/RH complement
2B - BP
1B - Votto
LF - Burrell
RF - Bruce
3B - EE
SS - Agon
C - Ramirez

IFF we could talk BP into turning some of his RH hacking (esp. against RHP) into bunts/hitting it to the R side of the field to move the runner along, we might actually have a chance at putting together some offense.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

WildcatFan
12-15-2008, 07:54 PM
Again, Burrell isn't my favorite option, but unlike Dye, he won't cost Bailey and another prospect. I would hesitate to give him four years guaranteed, but like you said, if you could get him for somewhere in the neighborhood of $10-12 mil a year, I do think he would produce in that lineup

redsfandan
12-15-2008, 08:20 PM
If someone is going to complain about shoddy defense in the OF - at least let them have a .900 OPS to fall back on!!
As has been debated 1,000,000 times, LF is not a place where you are really that concerned about putting a Gold Glover out there, IFF he can OPS .900 and give you 30-40 HR and ~100 RBI in the middle of the lineup.

At least he's younger than Dye. And, in this FA market, you might be surprised how much (or more so how little) we might have to pay this guy to play here. We might have to give more years - heck might even be 3 with a 4th year option - but if you could get it for say $45-48M, you'd be hard-pressed to think that was a bad deal.


In 9 years he's had a .900 ops twice and his low was .713. He's never had 40 hrs. His career best is 37 and that was the only year he had more than 33. He's a decent bet for 30 hrs (he's had 5 seasons under 30) with 500 ab's. He made $14m+ last year. Ibanez just received a raise from around $7m to $10.5m. I bet Burrell will cost more than $12 and be overpaid

TheNext44
12-15-2008, 08:39 PM
Just my two cents about Milton Bradley.

I live in LA (I know, it sucks) and when he was traded from LA to Oakland for Ethier, every Dodger fan I know went out and celebrated. They didn't even know who Ethier was, and didn't care, they HATED Bradley! He even had good years in LA, but was such a dou%#bag, that no one wanted him on the team. He was traded soley because everyone hated him and no one wanted to play with him.
He threw tantrum after tantrum and the sports page was like a gossip column, each day reporting on the latest Bradley soap opera. Turst me, he could put up Bonds on Juice numbers and still would be a negative factor on the team. There is a reason why a player with his talent keeps moving from team to team, and it is not just that he gets injured often.
Stay away from Bradley, stay very far away.

redsfandan
12-15-2008, 08:51 PM
Stay away from Bradley, stay very far away.

Yep, too many people want to throw away alot of money cuz they're drunk on the kool-aid.

BLEEDS
12-15-2008, 09:02 PM
Burrell is worth every penny of $12M in my book - I'd even go up to $13M.

Bradley is a PERFECT fit for this team. As has been debated if there was NO risk then these guys would be WAY more expensive.
He can flat out rake, and his attitude is something DUHsty is ALLEGEDLY the exact type of manager that would be up for dealing with - you know the "players manager" moniker.
By all accounts, he was LOVED in Texas by his players in the clubhouse, just a bit emotional on the field, and has been trying to do much better both off and on the field with that, and the BIG incident was really a truly hurtful reaction to a really unfair comment by an announcer, in which he never actually got to confront him.

A 2 year deal on this guy is EXACTLY what you should gamble on, hoping he stays healthy for a full season and takes us from pretenders to contenders.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

redsfandan
12-15-2008, 09:06 PM
A 2 year deal on this guy is EXACTLY what you should gamble on, hoping he stays healthy for a full season and takes us from pretenders to contenders.


Sounds about right to me. ;)

TheNext44
12-15-2008, 09:10 PM
I would like to add a crazy name to the mix and I mean crazy in many ways.

Manny Ramirez.

Before anyone starts calling me crazy, let me explain.

I think that the only two players who were available this offseason who could singlehandedly turn the Reds into bonafide contenders are Holiday and Manny. Holdiay would only be a rental and cost both money and players (and is off the market), so Manny is the only option.

I know I just made a post about staying away from Milton Bradley because he is a cancer on the team, but I really feel that Manny is not a cancer, and actually be a leader on a young team like the Reds. I mean the Red Sox did win two World Series with him. Yes Manny is selfish, but he loves to win and loves being a superstar. I really believe that alll the crap he did last year in Boston was orchestrated by Boras to get him traded so his option would not be picked up. This way Boras gets a piece of his new contract. Once Manny was in LA, and the contract crap was behind him, he was a model citizen.

MLBtraderumors is reporting that Manny can't get a third year guaranteed.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2008/12/scioscia-asked.html

I think if the Reds offered him a $70M three year deal, $20M-09, $25M-10, $25M-11, they could sign him. This means, with no other signings, the Reds would be at $83M for the budget this year. That is affordable. He would cost two draft picks, but if the Reds make the playoffs these next two years, it would be worth it.

I really think that if you add Manny to the lineup, the Reds will make the Playoffs. That will justify the extra money in 09 and 10.

Bruce
Manny
Votto

is a very scary middle of the lineup that would score a ton of runs. Playing in GAPB, he could OPS 1000, and make the rest of the lineup better. Heck, the Reds could play Hopper as the righty platoon in CF, and Janish at SS, and it wouldn't matter, Manny would be that good.

Did anyone notice what effect he had on the Dodgers at the end of the year? Not only did he OPS over 1000, but Either and Kent who were hitting in front and behind Manny had incredible months. Either OPSed over 1000 and Kent who was OPSing in the 700, OPSed over 800 for the only time all year.

Look at his numbers playing against the AL East, by far the best pitching division in the majors. Just imagine what he could do if he played in the Central!

I would rather spend $70M on Manny for three years than $40M for three years of Burell. I say go for the gold, go for the brass ring, and put the Reds in the Playoffs this year.

TheNext44
12-15-2008, 09:19 PM
Bradley is a PERFECT fit for this team. As has been debated if there was NO risk then these guys would be WAY more expensive.
He can flat out rake, and his attitude is something DUHsty is ALLEGEDLY the exact type of manager that would be up for dealing with - you know the "players manager" moniker.
By all accounts, he was LOVED in Texas by his players in the clubhouse, just a bit emotional on the field, and has been trying to do much better both off and on the field with that, and the BIG incident was really a truly hurtful reaction to a really unfair comment by an announcer, in which he never actually got to confront him.


PEACE

-BLEEDS

I don't care if an announcer insults your mother, what Bradley did was disguisting and unexcusable. And this is not the first time he has exploded like this. He did it in Cleveland, and then in LA, and everytime he pulls his crap, he apologizes and everyone excuses him and says he is a "new man". Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me, fool me three times...??????

BLEEDS
12-15-2008, 09:25 PM
Did you just post a diatribe about the "leadership" of Manny Ramirez, and then write the cliche jargon about Milton Bradley right afterwards?!!?

Just checking....

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Mitri
12-15-2008, 10:06 PM
Bradley and Dye are the only two who would be difference-makers on next year's team.

I want Bradley. It's the sort of risk this team needs to make.

757690
12-16-2008, 03:16 AM
I would like to add a crazy name to the mix and I mean crazy in many ways.

Manny Ramirez.

Before anyone starts calling me crazy, let me explain.

I think that the only two players who were available this offseason who could singlehandedly turn the Reds into bonafide contenders are Holiday and Manny. Holdiay would only be a rental and cost both money and players (and is off the market), so Manny is the only option.

I know I just made a post about staying away from Milton Bradley because he is a cancer on the team, but I really feel that Manny is not a cancer, and actually be a leader on a young team like the Reds. I mean the Red Sox did win two World Series with him. Yes Manny is selfish, but he loves to win and loves being a superstar. I really believe that alll the crap he did last year in Boston was orchestrated by Boras to get him traded so his option would not be picked up. This way Boras gets a piece of his new contract. Once Manny was in LA, and the contract crap was behind him, he was a model citizen.

MLBtraderumors is reporting that Manny can't get a third year guaranteed.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2008/12/scioscia-asked.html

I think if the Reds offered him a $70M three year deal, $20M-09, $25M-10, $25M-11, they could sign him. This means, with no other signings, the Reds would be at $83M for the budget this year. That is affordable. He would cost two draft picks, but if the Reds make the playoffs these next two years, it would be worth it.

I really think that if you add Manny to the lineup, the Reds will make the Playoffs. That will justify the extra money in 09 and 10.

Bruce
Manny
Votto

is a very scary middle of the lineup that would score a ton of runs. Playing in GAPB, he could OPS 1000, and make the rest of the lineup better. Heck, the Reds could play Hopper as the righty platoon in CF, and Janish at SS, and it wouldn't matter, Manny would be that good.

Did anyone notice what effect he had on the Dodgers at the end of the year? Not only did he OPS over 1000, but Either and Kent who were hitting in front and behind Manny had incredible months. Either OPSed over 1000 and Kent who was OPSing in the 700, OPSed over 800 for the only time all year.

Look at his numbers playing against the AL East, by far the best pitching division in the majors. Just imagine what he could do if he played in the Central!

I would rather spend $70M on Manny for three years than $40M for three years of Burell. I say go for the gold, go for the brass ring, and put the Reds in the Playoffs this year.

Manny is already whining about retiring if he doesn't get paid what he thinks he is worth. I just don't think he would fit here in Cincinnati. Imagine the drama between him and Marty?????

bigredbunter
12-16-2008, 06:57 AM
No way Manny would come to cinci

gedred69
12-16-2008, 11:30 PM
EE to RF. Trade some young pitching prospects for Atkins to play 3rd, and bring his 100 RBI bat to another hitter's park. Wouldn't cost much---except for the young pitching maybe. Or, put Atkins in LF, leave EE at 3rd. (There's more than one Hitter's park in the NL Central BTW).

Captain Hook
12-17-2008, 01:26 AM
I think if the Reds could sign one of these guys they might have a fighting chance this year to finish with a winning record.If they could sign 2 of them them a contender maybe but thats just me dreaming.Since I'm dreaming lets pretend they are all of the sudden willing to spend............oh............say the kind of $$$$$$$$$ the yankees spend.Since this is already a waste of time I won't get into how they would get to this line up. Here are your 2009 Cincinnati Reds.

SS Rafael Furcal :beerme:
CF Matt Kemp:beerme:
1B Joey Votto
LF Manny Ramirez:beerme:
RF Jay Bruce
2B Brandon Phillips
3B Edwin Encarnacion
C Ramon Hernandez

1 CC Sabathia:beerme:
2 A.J. Burnett:beerme:
3 Edison Volquez
4 Aaron Harang
5 Johnny Cuteo

Then I wake up.

Captain Hook
12-17-2008, 01:41 AM
Had to do that......my head was beginning to hurt thinking about how I and reading about how others would spend the Reds 10-16 million they have.

redsfandan
12-17-2008, 09:09 AM
If you also replaced: BP with Utley, EE with Beltre, Hernandez with Russell Martin, and Burnett with Peavy ... I think everyone would be happy. :D

Bumstead
12-17-2008, 09:49 AM
I think the most intriguing (spelling looks bad...) option, especially after the report that his disease was misdiagnosed, is Rocco Baldelli. This guy has a lot of talent and should be reasonable salary-wise. Rivera has also put up decent numbers when he has played (I know that some of you do not like him). If you could get Burrell for 2 years and $25M, the Reds might do that. I still like trying to get Atkins and moving EE to LF or 1B (Votto would then move LF). I think he has two more years of arbitration elgibility. All of these players could fit the 2 year option which allows our really good hitting prospects to prepare for the majors.

Being realistic, the Reds can't really compete for the division title and the wild card would be really tough. I think in understanding that, letting the kids continue to gain experience and adding shorter term players (with a chance at a .500+ record) gives the fans something to be optimistic amount. Unfortunately economics do play a role here as far as how competitive we can be right now.

Just my opinion.

Bumstead

BEETTLEBUG
12-17-2008, 11:50 AM
Did anyone read over on ORG that Rocco is not as sick as they thought, he has Channelopathy. They say this more manageable so would that better our interest in him?

BLEEDS
12-17-2008, 12:38 PM
Did anyone read over on ORG that Rocco is not as sick as they thought, he has Channelopathy. They say this more manageable so would that better our interest in him?

I need to go read that. That would catapult him IMO.

My dream would be to get a Burrell/Bradley/Dye for LF, AND get a Baldelli-type to platoon with/possibly start over (with this new info) Dickerson in CF.

I agree we can't - as currently structured - be a serious consideration for anything other than a miraculous Cinderella story with any of the moves we've made thus far.

We need to upgrade a number of positions - aka as we did at catcher, but each one a little more of an upgrade - AND get a Reliable Impact, aka pencil me in for .900 OPS, RH Bat in LF.
THEN, I'd seriously start to believe in our chances.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

redsfandan
12-17-2008, 02:54 PM
Updated Diagnosis For Rocco Baldelli
By Tim Dierkes [December 17 at 11:20am CST]
WEDNESDAY: Baldelli told Marc Topkin that more sophisticated tests have revealed "his condition is a less-severe and treatable channelopathy."

TUESDAY: From Ken Bell of ABC6 out of Rhode Island:

Great news for Rocco Baldelli. A visit to the Cleveland Clinic last week revealed that doctors had misdiagnosed his illness. Baldelli missed much of last season, and when he did play, he was limited because of extreme fatigue. Doctors thought it was mitochondrial disorder, which can be fatal. The Baldelli family told me tonight that the Cleveland Clinic diagnosed his condition as channelopathy, a non-progressive, highly treatable disease.

Bell adds that the Red Sox have not contacted Baldelli, who is a free agent. The story is also being reported by WPRI 12 out of Rhode Island.

He looks like a MUCH better option now compared to before this news.

Emin3mShady07
12-17-2008, 04:28 PM
I think that a platoon of Bradley/Baldelli/Dickerson could actually be pretty good. If the guys sign for the prices listed above or at least within 2 million of them which I feel is reasonable, then the Reds could easily afford both guys. I would say you would have Bradley in LF as your everday guy and platoon Dickerson and Baldelli in CF and any days where Bradley needs a day off, move Baldelli or Dickerson to LF.

My reasoning is that Bradley is a good player and IMO worth 7-8 million. However, Bradley is getting up there in age but his OBP is largely IsoD driven so his OBP should not drop too much from this year to next. His power may decrease but he would get a little salvation from the move to GABP which should help a little. I believe Bradley could post a line of .280/.380/.470/.850 and have about 450 plate appearances. Baldelli is a plus defender and would save a run or two over the average CFer over the course of an entire year, so he should also be a plus LFer. Baldelli had a VORP of 33 runs in 2006, his breakout season, over 387 PA, so if he can produce similar numbers to '06 and bat 387 times the reds would be getting at least 800+ very productive PAs. Dickerson could be produce like he did in AAA this past season, but eve if he is just average, I think the reds could survive giving him 400 PA appearances with 800 PA from Baldelli and Bradley.

redsfandan
12-17-2008, 04:44 PM
I doubt we'd be able to land BOTH Bradley and Baldelli and if I had to pick one I'd much rather have Baldelli especially with the recent medical update on Baldelli.

Emin3mShady07
12-17-2008, 07:56 PM
I doubt we'd be able to land BOTH Bradley and Baldelli and if I had to pick one I'd much rather have Baldelli especially with the recent medical update on Baldelli.

Yeah it is wishful thinking now that Baldelli will proably get more money. I think it was plausible before because I think Bradley is undervalued and will only get 8 or 9 million and Baldelli would have only got around 4ish, now I bet he gets 6 or 7 million.

redsfandan
12-17-2008, 08:11 PM
Between his talent, his injury history, his temper, the other outfielders available, and the economy it's kinda hard to tell how much someone will pay Bradley.

BEETTLEBUG
12-17-2008, 08:39 PM
What about Baldelli and Rivera? That would be cheaper

BLEEDS
12-17-2008, 09:16 PM
What about Baldelli and Rivera? That would be cheaper

and suckier.

We've got money, why not spend it to get proven, upgraded talent, instead of two risks.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

BEETTLEBUG
12-17-2008, 10:05 PM
Hey Bleeds you are in Omaha why would you care, so who do you know that they will get then?

texasdave
12-17-2008, 11:07 PM
Just because a club has money to spend does not mean they have to spend it. If there are neither FA or trade acquisitions that fit the needs of the club at a reasonable cost I think the they should just hold on to the money for awhile. I honestly do not think this is a playoff team in 2009. Furthermore, I don't think there is a FA or trade acquisition (within reason) that will make this club a playoff team next season. So just hold on to the money and see what shakes out. Maybe a team is dumping salary at the trade deadline in 2009 and the Reds can fill their needs at that time without sacrificing as much prospect-wise. Give all the youngsters a year to improve and then make your big acquisition next off-season and make a serious run in 2010. I certainly understand that the fans are more than restless for a winner. But spending money just because a team has money to spend (without acquiring what a team really needs to make that big push) seems counter-productive to me.

BEETTLEBUG
12-18-2008, 01:53 AM
I agree texasdave Go with what we have and let the kids play. Trade mid season if we are close.

BLEEDS
12-18-2008, 11:26 AM
Hey Bleeds you are in Omaha why would you care, so who do you know that they will get then?

Oh, so you have to live in Ohio, your entire life, to root for the Reds?!?!? :mooner:

FYI, I spent my elementary to Junior High life in Cincinnati during the Big Red Machine, and then after college moved back to live through the mid 90's.


I don't KNOW who they'll get, but I sure as heck hope it's someone who can REALISTICALLY - not theoretically if the stars and heavens line up, then lightning strikes twice - replace the production of Adam Dunn.

Again, for the Record, I chose Burrell. For all of the Adam Dunn nay-sayers who can only point to his lack of BA since they don't understand any other metrics, they can look at the back of his bubblegum card and see 20+ points higher in BA and be happy with Burrell. He'll actually probably produce just hair less across the board and in win-shares, but he'd be close for probably the same or less money.

Bradley is a close second, and then Dye, and then there's a HUGE drop off from there IMO to anyone who could actually get close.
A few of those guys I wouldn't mind IN ADDITION to Burrell/Bradley/Dye, but not in lieu of.

IFF we were serious about winning, in 2009, we would (and could) sign a Burrell for LF, and get Baldelli for CF. Bruce in RF - as he should be for the next decade+ - and you've got a serious OF, and it would allow you to "look no further" at SS since you should have enough offense even if AGON isn't there - as long as you could get Dusty not to bat Janish 2nd because he's the SS.

That's what we SHOULD do. I just hope we don't end up with Wily Tavaras and Rivera as our CF/LF combo. I might skip watching this season.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

bigredbunter
12-18-2008, 05:49 PM
I agree texasdave Go with what we have and let the kids play. Trade mid season if we are close.

I don't think that was what Texasdave was saying---The point is not to "let the kids play" regardless...The idea is to evaluate the FA market realistically in terms of whether some combination of players available can put the team in contention in 2009.

What you're suggesting is certainly the strategy they've followed the past 10 years or so minus the horrifically bad free agent deals (e.g. Eric Milton).

Captain Hook
12-18-2008, 09:39 PM
I think if you can get Rivera for 5 maybe 6 million a year for no more then 2 years then get him.The only problem is we would also need to acquire one of either Dye, Burrell or Bradley to contend this year.River alone won't make too much of a difference.

If the Reds could get this done then you would have......

Dye/Burrell/Bradley for Dunn RF

Rivera for Griffey LF

Hernandez for Baco C

Bruce for Patterson CF

Much improved...just wish they would do it(is that really asking too much?)

BLEEDS
12-18-2008, 10:03 PM
I think if you can get Rivera for 5 maybe 6 million a year for no more then 2 years then get him.The only problem is we would also need to acquire one of either Dye, Burrell or Bradley to contend this year.River alone won't make too much of a difference.

If the Reds could get this done then you would have......

Dye/Burrell/Bradley for Dunn RF

Rivera for Griffey LF

Hernandez for Baco C

Bruce for Patterson CF

Much improved...just wish they would do it(is that really asking too much?)

Realistically, yes it probably is. I haven't seen many signs that our FO is ready and willing to back up their talk yet. Not since they signed Junior.

Give Marge all the heck ya want, but don't ever say she wouldn't open up the purse strings to sign players and increase the payroll. I think she did her darndest to keep that 1990 team together - even if it was based on the occasional coin flip. I know things in the farm system suffered, but I always thought she wanted to put a winner on the field.

Ever since Lindner, I've had the feeling they were only worried about the bottom line, more business than baseball folks. Castellini ALLEGEDLY is supposed to be in it to win it, and not for the money. IFF that is the case, we'd better see the payroll go up.

I'll keep saying this til I'm blue in the face - put a winner in Cincinnati, and the fans will FILL the stadium day-in, day-out, and they'll make their money. Skimping and cutting corners and playing the "but we're a small market" jazz is pure cop-out. This team has always made money - and they're making money now. Only problem is, they're doing it with 1/2 sold out stadiums and a crappy product. They COULD make the same or WAY More money if they'd up the payroll 40%, put a winner on the field, and have sold out stadiums again. Heck, they might even be able to sell hotdogs for TWO dollars then and nobody would complain!!

Okay, off my soapbox!:lastyear:

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Captain Hook
12-18-2008, 11:14 PM
Realistically thats pathetic.Reds have a great core of young guys that should do nothing but improve over the next few years and that are inexpensive.I bet anyone would have a hard time remembering when our pitching has been this strong(not just strong for the Reds but strong period).The addition of a few somewhat to kind of pricey vets could give us a very good chance to compete for the division with what would still be a team payroll that is middle of the pac.

Time will eventually run out for the Reds and 5 five years we will be rebuilding once again.I will always be a fan so I hope that you are wrong(your probably not) and WJ does make some big moves.

redsfandan
12-18-2008, 11:22 PM
... They COULD make the same or WAY More money if they'd up the payroll 40%, . ...


The scary part is I actually think you believe that. :scared:
And no, an increase in payroll, even 40%, wouldn't mean that we'd have a playoff team. There actually have been teams that spent more and didn't make the playoffs. Kinda makes me think I should've just taken naps in Econ though. If you lose money you'll make more money. huh whoda thunk it.:rolleyes:

schmidty622
12-18-2008, 11:53 PM
Looks like the Angels are going to resign Rivera.

redsfandan
12-19-2008, 12:23 AM
Didn't expect that. Well iirc, Walt was interested in Rivera, Baldelli, and Wigginton. So maybe we'll end up with Rocco and Wiggy.

BEETTLEBUG
12-19-2008, 12:30 AM
Maybe

757690
12-19-2008, 12:39 AM
Culminating all the info from all the different sources, it appeared that Rivera was the Reds first choice for LF/middle of the lineup hitter, and they were waiting for him to decided.
I imagine they move on to plan B. Who knows who that is. However, I think that they do not see Rocco as that LF middle of the linep hitter, but as a platoon partner for Dickerson. But I think he is Plan B in case Hairston turns them down too.

Not sure who the Plan B for the LF/middle of the lineup guy is. Maybe Burrell? Bradley? Dye? I think Walt really wants a big basher, and will get one, one way or the other.

redsfandan
12-19-2008, 12:49 AM
Probably Dye. I just hope it's not Bradley cuz I'd like to have a player that can have 500+ ab's.

DannyB
12-19-2008, 06:54 AM
I think if you can get Rivera for 5 maybe 6 million a year for no more then 2 years then get him.The only problem is we would also need to acquire one of either Dye, Burrell or Bradley to contend this year.River alone won't make too much of a difference.

If the Reds could get this done then you would have......

Dye/Burrell/Bradley for Dunn RF

Rivera for Griffey LF

Hernandez for Baco C

Bruce for Patterson CF

Much improved...just wish they would do it(is that really asking too much?)

I think you are really going to be dissapointed.

BigRedMachine2
12-19-2008, 08:52 AM
Bradley is a good player but I think he is better suited for the AL.

bigredbunter
12-19-2008, 09:53 AM
Culminating all the info from all the different sources, it appeared that Rivera was the Reds first choice for LF/middle of the lineup hitter, and they were waiting for him to decided.
I imagine they move on to plan B. Who knows who that is.

If Rivera was plan A, not sure I want to know what plan B is.

BLEEDS
12-19-2008, 05:06 PM
Looks like the Angels are going to resign Rivera.


THANK GOD!!!

Maybe now we can focus on a REAL LF-er.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

BLEEDS
12-19-2008, 05:10 PM
The scary part is I actually think you believe that. :scared:
And no, an increase in payroll, even 40%, wouldn't mean that we'd have a playoff team. There actually have been teams that spent more and didn't make the playoffs. Kinda makes me think I should've just taken naps in Econ though. If you lose money you'll make more money. huh whoda thunk it.:rolleyes:

I didn't say increasing the payroll would Guarantee the playoffs, quit creating strawmen, and read what I wrote.

WITH SOLD OUT STADIUMS every game, they could make money with an increase of 40% in the payroll.

Two years ago the team made a profit of $30M, and that was on an ~$65M payroll.
Do the math, an increase of 40% in the payroll = $91M - they'd STILL have made ~$4M and that's with no increased revenues.

You don't need an econ degree, just 3rd grade math.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

redsfandan
12-19-2008, 10:18 PM
BLEEDS, I did read what you wrote. You said if they "put a winner on the field". My fault for assuming you meant a playoff contender so I will apologize for that. On the other hand, you left out "from two years ago" in your previous post. You can say that I assumed different on that as well but it would have helped if you had been a little more clear about what you meant. Just from reading that post there was nothing to indicate, to me at least, that you meant a 40% increase from two years ago.

Now you're not satisfied with a 30% payroll increase from two years ago. You want a 40% increase instead. Well, how many other teams will see their '09 payroll increase 30% higher from two years ago? I've read more about teams cutting payroll than adding. Even if the payroll had been increased more and the Reds had a winning record there wouldn't be an immediate affect on attendance/revenue anyway due to two reasons. Attendance doesn't tend to increase significantly until a year after a team starts to win more. Also, with the economy in the tank people will have less discretionary income that could be spent on Reds games and that won't change overnight. And that's despite the fact that the Reds are one of the cheapest teams to be a fan of.

It's very easy to criticize the way someone spends their money or how they run their business. But, both the payroll and the spending on the minor league system have been substantially increased. So, with what the Reds have to deal with, I really can't complain in the least about how much they're expected to spend.

Captain Hook
12-20-2008, 03:51 AM
Danny B
I think we are all going to be.

Captain Hook
12-20-2008, 03:58 AM
Bradley is a good player but I think he is better suited for the AL.

I agree, but his D is not that bad and the Reds need his kind of bat or else they are losers once again.

Hondo
12-20-2008, 02:22 PM
THANK GOD!!!

Maybe now we can focus on a REAL LF-er.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

Applause to you my friend...

I don't get it either... These people concentrate on scrubs....

redsfandan
12-20-2008, 03:28 PM
... I don't get it either... These people concentrate on scrubs....

I'd like to think we're a little more open-minded about the options available. When some people say that the Reds WILL suck unless we have this player or that player or that we HAVE to spend so much money it just sounds like a pretty pessimistic, all or nothing, view of things. Usually, there's more than one way to solve a problem.

Hondo
12-21-2008, 02:04 AM
I'd like to think we're a little more open-minded about the options available. When some people say that the Reds WILL suck unless we have this player or that player or that we HAVE to spend so much money it just sounds like a pretty pessimistic, all or nothing, view of things. Usually, there's more than one way to solve a problem.

I understand being openminded, my nemisis...

But I would rather them develop young guys and play Dickerson in left than go signing scrubs like Baldelli, and Hariston to be starters...

I totally like Hariston as a Bench Player... Just not as a 550 AB guy...

BEETTLEBUG
12-21-2008, 03:56 AM
I agree but whom do you put in CF if you put Dickerson in LF?

redsfandan
12-21-2008, 02:32 PM
Baldelli definitely isn't a 'scrub' and I wouldn't call Hairston one either. I agree that Hairston shouldn't be a starting outfielder but he and Kepp would be two very solid utility players that can do a decent job if they have to fill in at 2nd/ss/3rd but yeah I don't like him as much if he's a starter in the outfield.

My only concern with Baldelli is his durability which is why I think it might make more sense for him to be in left so he would be less likely to wear down. I would be ok with Baldelli in left and Dickerson in center but then I would be concerned about who would back them up. The next best FA available that could help out in center is Jim Edmonds. So how would adding Baldelli and Edmonds sound?

BLEEDS
12-21-2008, 07:37 PM
Culminating all the info from all the different sources, it appeared that Rivera was the Reds first choice for LF/middle of the lineup hitter, and they were waiting for him to decided.
I imagine they move on to plan B. Who knows who that is. However, I think that they do not see Rocco as that LF middle of the linep hitter, but as a platoon partner for Dickerson. But I think he is Plan B in case Hairston turns them down too.

Not sure who the Plan B for the LF/middle of the lineup guy is. Maybe Burrell? Bradley? Dye? I think Walt really wants a big basher, and will get one, one way or the other.

Wow, am I glad we are looking at plan B - because if those were the plan A's, I am sure glad we didn't consumate any of those deals...

IF plan B ends up being Burrel in LF, and Baldelli to split time with (or moreso hope/plan to have him spelt by) Dickerson, then I'll be happier than a sow in poo.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

BLEEDS
12-21-2008, 07:42 PM
Applause to you my friend...

I don't get it either... These people concentrate on scrubs....

Could you imagine a Rivera in LF and Tavaras in CF?!!?!

We already were near the bottom (like 27th) in OBP as a team, these guys would have made that worse.

And, before someone comments, argue all you want, but it almost DIRECTLY correlates to Runs scored.

I can't believe we are actually now worried about SCORING runs versus our pitching. My how this team did a complete 180 from a year or so ago.

Dunn and Griffey may not be in the top 10 in OPS as they were in 2006, but that loss of offense has grown from a small leak to the Niagra Falls. If we don't address that with some REAL offensive production, we are going to be one very sorry Offense to watch next season, and no combination of Pitching and Bullpen is going to be able to overcome that.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

redsfandan
12-21-2008, 08:09 PM
IF plan B ends up being Burrel in LF, and Baldelli to split time with (or moreso hope/plan to have him spelt by) Dickerson, then I'll be happier than a sow in poo.

That would work for me. But...



I can't believe we are actually now worried about SCORING runs versus our pitching. My how this team did a complete 180 from a year or so ago.

Dunn and Griffey may not be in the top 10 in OPS as they were in 2006, but that loss of offense has grown from a small leak to the Niagra Falls. If we don't address that with some REAL offensive production, we are going to be one very sorry Offense to watch next season, and no combination of Pitching and Bullpen is going to be able to overcome that.
C'mon, we've improved at 1st (replaced Hatteberg with Votto) and rightfield (replaced Junior with Bruce). Do you really have to make it out to be worse than it is?

BLEEDS
12-21-2008, 10:51 PM
C'mon, we've improved at 1st (replaced Hatteberg with Votto) and rightfield (replaced Junior with Bruce). Do you really have to make it out to be worse than it is?

I see you are mixing years, which is what I assume your reference to Hatte/Votto was, but I'll play along....

I always said Bruce COULD replace Junior. One thing's pretty certain to occur, Jay Bruce ver 2009 will be better than Jr. ver. 2009.
When and If Bruce can replicate Junior circa 2006 is a hard bet.

Again, we're talking about replicating '08 Offense - which would be at or about 27th in RS - nevermind actually creating enough to get at, let alone above, League Average.
There are a few threads in the ORG to read if you want to dabble in RS/RA debates/analysis.
Here are a couple if you're interested, to get you started:
"Replacing the Reds' 2008 Offensive Production"
http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=73230
"Hack-O-Matics in 2009?"
http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=73240

I'm talking about replacing Dunn AND Junior, which currently looks like Jay Bruce and "Dickerson'sFantasy1.02OPSwhichwillNeverberepeatedA gain"/WillyTavares/RoccoBaldelli in no particular order.
Forgive me if I'm not tickled pink.

Look at our OBP - let alone OPS - um "Challenged" (and that is about as light of a term that I can assign it); taken from the first page of the hack-o-matics thread:



NAME PA OBP OUTR
Paul Janish 89 .270 0.71910
Jeff Keppinger 502 .310 0.68924
Ramon Hernandez 507 .308 0.68047
Jay Bruce 452 .314 0.67478
B Phillips 609 .312 0.66831
E Encarnacion 582 .340 0.64605
Jerry Hairston 297 .384 0.62626
Joey Votto 589 .368 0.62309
Ryan Hanigan 98 .367 0.60204
C Dickerson 122 .413 0.59016

Willy Taveras 538 .308 0.67658
Jermaine Dye 645 .344 0.64496
Pat Burrell 645 .367 0.62946
Yunel Escobar 587 .366 0.61840
Jeff Francoeur 653 .294 0.69066


We are simply NOT going to be able to create anything other than a bottom 3rd (AT BEST) RS team with the folks being considered - outside of getting TWO Pat-Burrell/Jermaine Dye types.
My initial hopes of a Burrell and a Baldelli (to platoon with Dickerson in CF) don't seem to cut it either, but at least it's a step closer (or moreso, a step further away from "hope everyone else takes huge steps forward and NOBODY takes a step backwards, especially the guys coming off Career Years/Small Sample Size-fueled false Euphoria).

Then there's also the HUGE issue of getting BP out of the 3/4 hole. Seems just about everyone in RZ has him in lineups batting 2nd or 6th/7th. I'm not sure how realistic that is given DUHsty's Man-Love for him, not to mention BP's ego which has already shown signs of being "just a tad" on the easily bruisable level.
Pretty much everyone agrees that he's an Out-Machine and a GIDP Master, but unless DUHsty hits his head on something between now and April, I see no way that he's being moved out of "his ideal #3 hole" which is something DUHsty has already been quoted as saying numerous times.
I can only hope that Votto's torrid end to 2008 somehow keeps him in the top 3/4 hitters in the lineup, and then only acquisition of a HUGE RH Power LF - combined with the "CF bats first, SS bats second" - pushes him to 5th or lower.
However, I am not holding my breath.

Back on topic - I agree with the sentiment that only TWO folks currently on our roster are capable of duplicating/surpassing their 2008 Numbers, to remain at <65% out rate; Votto and EE. So yes, Niagra Falls it is at this point.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

redsfandan
12-22-2008, 02:52 AM
Once again Bleeds, I'm gonna have to disagee with ya. It's interesting that you accuse me of "mixing years" when you can't even get your years straight. At least it doesn't seem like ya did cuz Juniors '06 wasn't much better than Bruces '08. This is what Junior did in '06:

109 games 428 abs 62 runs 19 doubles 27 hrs 72 rbi .252 ba .316 obp .486 slg % .802 ops

And this is what Bruce did in '08:

108 games 413 abs 63 runs 17 doubles 21 hrs 52 rbi .254 ba .314 obp .453 slg % .767 ops

I don't know about you but, with the exception of .033 pts in slg %, I don't see much difference.

Maybe you meant Juniors '05 season. You probably don't mean his '07 season cuz I think Bruce could match what Junior did that season too (or at least come pretty close). In fact, Imo, the only seasons Junior had as a Red that Bruce couldn't realistically match or exceed in '09 are 2000 and 2005. And that's it.

I've already pointed out how we're improved at 1st. I also think it wouldn't be farfetched at all to see more production out of the catcher position and even if Dickersons stats fall some like we expect he'll still definitely be a huge improvement over Patterson. And I'm one of many that thinks EE hasn't reached his full offensive potential yet. So we should be improved in at least four positions from '06 and will take a step down in probably only ONE position.

Look, if you want to take a 'glass is half full' view that's up to you. I just can't agree that things are as bleak as you seem to think.

By the way, I have to admit I get a kick out of how you throw out links to threads in the ORG for me. Last time you did that it backfired and I actually became more convinced that there was merit to what I was saying. Thanks. :)

BLEEDS
12-22-2008, 12:56 PM
Yes, my bad, I was referring to 2007 - to point to a year when they were both in the top 10 in OPS in the NL, and in fact your 2005 reference they were like the top 5/6 in all of MLB.
In the OF, not referencing 1B.

My point was their 2007/2008 Production is going to have to be replaced, in full, just to remain 27th in the league.

I gave you Bruce was/is a fine replacement for Griffey - I've been saying that for a couple years now, obviously the guy is almost 40.
Dunn on the otherhand is in his late 20's and ready to hit his prime. We can't whittle together a bunch of castoffs - and an upgrade at 1B from 2007 - and call it good.
You need a proven productive bat to put in LF, and then upgrade CF, just to get within striking distance.

More moves like Votto for Hatte, and Ramirez for Bako, yes they help, but they need to go ALONG with a Huge Reliable bat in LF, not in lieu of it.

PEACE

-BLEEDS

TheNext44
12-30-2008, 10:05 PM
I am starting to warm to the idea of Wiggington.

Signing him costs just money, and the Reds should be able to afford him, and Hairston too.

He plays 3B, EE moves to LF to platoon with Dickerson. This gives EE time to adjust to a new position. EE can fill in for Wiggington at 3B to give him rest, and Dickerson can fill in for Taveras to give him rest. Hairston can fill in for all of them. It gives the lineup a lot of flexibility.