PDA

View Full Version : Update from Fay on Hairston, Baldelli, and Taveras



OnBaseMachine
12-19-2008, 05:49 PM
Talking to Jocketty
Posted by JohnFay at 12/19/2008 5:00 PM EST on Cincinnati.com

The Reds quest for a right-handed-hitting outfielder is now centered on Jerry Hairston Jr., Rocco Baldelli and Willy Taveras.

Walt Jocketty hadn't gotten official word that the Reds were out of the Juan Rivera sweepstakes. But he had heard the report that Rivera had signed a three-year deal with the Angels.

"His agent told me they had a three-year deal out there," Jocketty said. "I told him we probably wouldn't go three. So that makes sense."

Jocketty made talked to agent for Jerry Hairston Jr. and Rocco Baldelli (it's the same guy).

"Just briefly," Jocketty said. "He was in and out of meetings."

The Reds have an offer out to Hairston. They remain interested in Baldelli. A new report on Baldelli's mysterious ailment came out Wednesday. It makes him a much more attractive option for the Reds. He could play center or left. He's a middle-of-the-order bat when healthy.

The Reds also are believed to have an offer out to Taveras, who they see as solution to the leadoff/center field spot.

I thought there was a good chance that the Reds would sign Rivera. But I can see why they were hesitant to offer a three-year deal.

http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=blog07&plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3ae57bcc87-152a-4f72-96fb-cc08b1f396efPost%3a91cbaefb-65bd-4faf-9529-a5b76eee7194&sid=sitelife.cincinnati.com

Taveras :rolleyes:

Raisor
12-19-2008, 05:51 PM
Run for your lives!!!

http://www.gamerevolution.com/images/misc/galactus.jpg

hippie07
12-19-2008, 05:54 PM
I hope its not Hairston or Baldelli... why not both??

So... looks like WJ is looking at Baldelli/Dickerson in LF and Taveras in CF... that is SO not cool...

Baldelli/Dickerson would be an excellent CF option... If Baldelli is your middle of the order RH hitter -- which i question? then, great.. also sign Abreu for LF. We need offense and now.

remdog
12-19-2008, 05:56 PM
Anyone else out there now regreting not pulling the trigger on Juan Rivera?

Rem

RedLegSuperStar
12-19-2008, 06:03 PM
I hope its not Hairston or Baldelli... why not both??

So... looks like WJ is looking at Baldelli/Dickerson in LF and Taveras in CF... that is SO not cool...

Baldelli/Dickerson would be an excellent CF option... If Baldelli is your middle of the order RH hitter -- which i question? then, great.. also sign Abreu for LF. We need offense and now.

hippy.. I'm down with you! I would like to have both as well. Hairston I think is waiting for Seattle. I think offering a incentive laden contract to Baldelli would be best with probably a guaranteed 2010 if he meets certain game/AB goals.

Blitz Dorsey
12-19-2008, 06:05 PM
Remember all that talk towards the end of the season that the Reds were going to be "major players" on the free agent market? I tried not laughing then.

However, it's actually not very funny. I've seen this movie before and it doesn't end well.

RedLegSuperStar
12-19-2008, 06:05 PM
Anyone else out there now regreting not pulling the trigger on Juan Rivera?

Rem

three years was iffy I guess for Walt. The deal seems pretty decent though being 3 years / 12+MM.. He'd probably get more production/playing time here. Guess the Cali weather and 3 years was enough.

RedLegSuperStar
12-19-2008, 06:10 PM
on Fays comments of this blog:


LandoftheReds:

Baldelli is worth a flier, but not for 3 years. Taveras is worth a flier, but not for 3 years. Jerry Hairston was the 3rd or 4th best player on the Reds last year. He created 83 runs on 261 AB's. sign him. He was our best SS and by comparison Jeff Keppinger created 88 runs in 459 AB's.

Keppinger grounded into 14 DP's, tops on the team. Votto grounded into 7.

Hairston? He grounded into ZERO double plays and can steal a base 15 of 18

Pretty nice stat as Hairston might be able to take over SS duties if AGon can't go.

OnBaseMachine
12-19-2008, 06:11 PM
Hairston is an awful shortstop. I don't want any part of him at SS. Shortstop is one of most important defensive positions on the field.

camisadelgolf
12-19-2008, 06:12 PM
GIDP is a great way to judge a shortstop. I hope Hairston is the opening day shortstop.



wait wut.

edabbs44
12-19-2008, 06:13 PM
Pretty nice stat as Hairston might be able to take over SS duties if AGon can't go.

Hairston was living in a fantasy world last season.

RedLegSuperStar
12-19-2008, 06:13 PM
Remember all that talk towards the end of the season that the Reds were going to be "major players" on the free agent market? I tried not laughing then.

However, it's actually not very funny. I've seen this movie before and it doesn't end well.

Actually all the talk was how they were going to improve this team through the trade route first then through Free Agency. But I don't recall them being major players. I never would invision the Reds signing Teixiera, Manny, CC, Burnett, Wood, or Furcal.

RedLegSuperStar
12-19-2008, 06:15 PM
GIDP is a great way to judge a shortstop. I hope Hairston is the opening day shortstop.



wait wut.

I'm not saying that.. but having him in the lineup helped this team last year. Everyone seems to be against Keppinger as a starter again this year. Was just a suggestion.

remdog
12-19-2008, 06:16 PM
I still don't understand the luv for Baldelli given that he is a HUGE, HUGE,Huge! health risk. :confused:

Rem

remdog
12-19-2008, 06:17 PM
Remember all that talk towards the end of the season that the Reds were going to be "major players" on the free agent market? I tried not laughing then.

However, it's actually not very funny. I've seen this movie before and it doesn't end well.

Unfortunately, it looks like they decided to make a sequel. :rolleyes:

Rem

hippie07
12-19-2008, 06:18 PM
Actually all the talk was how they were going to improve this team through the trade route first then through Free Agency. But I don't recall them being major players. I never would invision the Reds signing Teixiera, Manny, CC, Burnett, Wood, or Furcal.

I think the talk was .. w/ all the money freed up w/ Dunn & Griffey's departure plus WJ saying payroll would increase.. some media guys were guessing that the Reds could be major players in free agency..

meanwhile WJ kept saying he was focusing on trades first, so i think i've heard a little of both..

either way i'm disappointed as of yet, but we're a ways off from spring training, so i'll keep my fingers crossed.

Scrap Irony
12-19-2008, 06:21 PM
IF Cincinnati sign both Baldelli and Hairston, the OF has a chance to be a combination of Dickerson/ Hairston/ Baldelli in LF and CF, with Bruce manning RF.

To me, that means a couple things:

1) Danny Dorn has a chance to open up some eyes during Spring Training and wrest LF away from... no one.
2) Votto better be practicing with an OF mitt (and/or Frazier is the new Carolina LF).

That Red OF has a chance to be among the best in baseball defensively the eight games all players are healthy.

RedsManRick
12-19-2008, 06:30 PM
If Tavares is the solution, I'm going to assume that one of the following is the problem:

1) How do we give Dusty enough rope...?
2) Given that we're not going to win anything, how can we at least make things more fun?

remdog
12-19-2008, 06:33 PM
If Tavares is the solution, I'm going to assume that one of the following is the problem:

1) How do we give Dusty enough rope...?
2) Given that we're not going to win anything, how can we at least make things more fun?

We hang a Dusty Baker pinata here at Redszone every day and go at it. :)

What? You say we did that last year!?! Drat!

Rem

flyer85
12-19-2008, 06:41 PM
The possibility of seeing Taveras in CF and batting leadoff on opening day continue to grow

M2
12-19-2008, 06:43 PM
Run for your lives!!!

http://www.gamerevolution.com/images/misc/galactus.jpg

Does that mean John Fay is this guy?

http://www.fantastic-four.nl/Terrax02.jpg

jojo
12-19-2008, 06:47 PM
If they bumble their way into taking a chance of Baldelli, I could live with it.

Raisor
12-19-2008, 06:50 PM
Does that mean John Fay is this guy?



More like

http://francemarvel.free.fr/images/encyclopedie/i/impossibleman/ImpossibleMan4.jpg

*pop*

HokieRed
12-19-2008, 06:50 PM
Does anyone think it's unlikely we'd have offers out to both Hairston and Taveras at the same time?

Raisor
12-19-2008, 06:52 PM
Does anyone think it's unlikely we'd have offers out to both Hairston and Taveras at the same time?

Not really, no.

flyer85
12-19-2008, 06:52 PM
Does anyone think it's unlikely we'd have offers out to both Hairston and Taveras at the same time?
I have no idea what to think ... anything is possible. If there is a plan it is hard to decipher.

blumj
12-19-2008, 06:56 PM
I still don't understand the luv for Baldelli given that he is a HUGE, HUGE,Huge! health risk. :confused:

Rem
I would think it's because he's also hugely talented. At least, he was, and still appears to be whenever he has played lately.

M2
12-19-2008, 06:57 PM
I thought the point of a RH OF bat was to have the guy hit in the middle of the lineup. Outside of Baldelli (career .445 SLG), it doesn't sound like the club is looking for anyone even vaguely capable of doing the job.

I always thought the RH obsession was dopey, but now it's getting absurd. The Reds need a big bat in the middle of the lineup, not a RHB in the name of having a RHB. Hairston and Taveras are bench players. Baldelli hasn't played more than 100 games in a season since 2004. Come on Walt, it's time for the adults to set things straight.

M2
12-19-2008, 06:58 PM
More like

http://francemarvel.free.fr/images/encyclopedie/i/impossibleman/ImpossibleMan4.jpg

*pop*

I like that. We can call him Impossible John.

Tom Servo
12-19-2008, 06:59 PM
Baldelli yes!
Taveras no!
Hairston maybe!

Always Red
12-19-2008, 07:17 PM
I thought the point of a RH OF bat was to have the guy hit in the middle of the lineup. Outside of Baldelli (career .445 SLG), it doesn't sound like the club is looking for anyone even vaguely capable of doing the job.

I always thought the RH obsession was dopey, but now it's getting absurd. The Reds need a big bat in the middle of the lineup, not a RHB in the name of having a RHB. Hairston and Tavares are bench players. Baldelli hasn't played more than 100 games in a season since 2004. Come on Walt, it's time for the adults to set things straight.

This is the post of the day.

I've been very patient, but...

All I want for Christmas is a flippin hitter- LH, RH, SH, I don't care. GABP is a great place to hit the blasted ball. Get a bat, put him in LF and cut him loose!

Most folks in town couldn't wait to get rid of Dunn and Griffey. Well, their wish came true, and we are left with- what? No offense like the end of last year. Oh, and we had Hairston then and still couldn't score any runs!

Imagine- Jerry Hairston could be the Reds big off season FA signing!

Well, just maybe fruit and vegetable sales are way off? It's bad out there, I know. I mean the Sox can't even afford to sign Tex.

Any word on ticket sales? Are the renewals way down for next year? I would bet that they are....

Falls City Beer
12-19-2008, 07:21 PM
What these names the Reds have been associated with have in common is that they're poormouth answers.

Highlifeman21
12-19-2008, 07:22 PM
Anyone else out there now regreting not pulling the trigger on Juan Rivera?

Rem

Absolutely not.

Ltlabner
12-19-2008, 07:23 PM
What these names the Reds have been associated with have in common is that they're poormouth answers.

Either they are keeping their powder dry for a big move later on, or this is as good as it gets in terms of what they are willing to spend.

I'm afraid I already know the direction this is heading.

hebroncougar
12-19-2008, 07:25 PM
Chris Stynes > Jerry Hairston Jr. This team is going nowhere.

Ltlabner
12-19-2008, 07:27 PM
I thought the point of a RH OF bat was to have the guy hit in the middle of the lineup. Outside of Baldelli (career .445 SLG), it doesn't sound like the club is looking for anyone even vaguely capable of doing the job.

For a team that desperately needs to score more runs, and just lost their main big bat, they certainly don't seem in a big hurry to get real bats.

Jerry Harriston and Willy Taveras.....seriously?

Always Red
12-19-2008, 07:27 PM
This team is going nowhere.

Fast

flyer85
12-19-2008, 07:27 PM
This team is going nowhere.very likely, unless the pitching steps up can carries the team

RedsManRick
12-19-2008, 07:29 PM
This is the post of the day.

I've been very patient, but...

All I want for Christmas is a flippin hitter- LH, RH, SH, I don't care. GABP is a great place to hit the blasted ball. Get a bat, put him in LF and cut him loose!

Most folks in town couldn't wait to get rid of Dunn and Griffey. Well, their wish came true, and we are left with- what? No offense like the end of last year. Oh, and we had Hairston then and still couldn't score any runs!

Imagine- Jerry Hairston could be the Reds big off season FA signing!

Well, just maybe fruit and vegetable sales are way off? It's bad out there, I know. I mean the Sox can't even afford to sign Tex.

Any word on ticket sales? Are the renewals way down for next year? I would bet that they are....

Exactly. All you need to know about the 2009 Reds offense at this point is that 2 of our top 3 run producers are gone and not coming back (Dunn and the 2008 version of Jerry Hairston). Heck, our #6 guy in VORP was Chris Dickerson's 122 PA imitation of Manny Ramirez.

Barring significant advances from Bruce, EE, and Phillips, this offense is going to be very hard pressed to score 700 runs. While I'm optimistic that our run prevention will take another step forward to the ~750 range, even .500 is a dream at this point.

What's funny is that I'm not scared of Tavares making a few million bucks and leading of for us 2009. I could live (very unhappily) with that because I've already given up on 2009. I'm worried about him making a few million bucks and being given a multi-year deal, Clarkorfia'ing Dickerson and locking us in to Dustyball for the foreseeable future.

flyer85
12-19-2008, 07:30 PM
I always thought the RH obsession was dopey, but now it's getting absurd. The Reds need a big bat in the middle of the lineup, not a RHB in the name of having a RHB. Hairston and Tavares are bench players. Baldelli hasn't played more than 100 games in a season since 2004. Come on Walt, it's time for the adults to set things straight.which is why from the outside it is hard to figure out what they are trying to do ... unless Walt is blowing smoke.

Ltlabner
12-19-2008, 07:31 PM
I'm worried about him making a few million bucks and being given a multi-year deal, Clarkorfia'ing Dickerson and locking us in to Dustyball for the foreseeable future.

I just died inside.

edabbs44
12-19-2008, 07:32 PM
I have no idea what to think ... anything is possible. If there is a plan it is hard to decipher.

I am starting to think that the plan is not to get involved with contracts that are going to hinder the long-term progress of this team.

Last year it was "We need a closer? Let's pay the most money ever for a closer!" No thought was given to the fact that the team sucked with or without the richest closer ever, or that the worst years of his contract will be spent when this team might be able to make some noise. Now we have an aging reliever who is owed $30MM+ for the next 3 years. Nice.

Looking at the FA landscape...it doesn't appear as if this team will be able to transform into a winner this season. So, IMO, Walt should be looking at guys to fill the gaps who have upside and may be able to be turned around at the deadline for prospects or who might warrant a draft pick next season if they get them to sign a one year deal. Or guys who will be here when this team is ready to compete, whenever the FO thinks is achievable.

Don't screw up 2010 and beyond just because you have to "win now". If the payroll stays low, then great. More money to spend when the time is right.

Raisor
12-19-2008, 07:32 PM
very likely, unless the pitching steps up can carries the team

If the team can maintain their RS from last year (and at this point, that's a big if), the RA will need to improve by 175 -200 runs for this team to make the playoffs.

:eek:

KronoRed
12-19-2008, 07:34 PM
These names really don't get one excited for 2009.

RedEye
12-19-2008, 07:34 PM
Hairston
Taveras
Baldelli

Three very difficult names to spell.

I'm really sorry, folks. I've just got this pet peeve. Really, my apologies.

camisadelgolf
12-19-2008, 07:35 PM
I'm not saying that.. but having him in the lineup helped this team last year. Everyone seems to be against Keppinger as a starter again this year. Was just a suggestion.

I was just taking a jab at Fay because the GIDP of players like Joey Votto had nothing to do with what his article was about.

edabbs44
12-19-2008, 07:38 PM
If the team can maintain their RS from last year (and at this point, that's a big if), the RA will need to improve by 175 -200 runs for this team to make the playoffs.

:eek:

The only way that will be an issue is if they were expected to make the playoffs. And I think it is a foregone conclusion that they won't be playing in October this upcoming season.

So the way to assess Walt's offseason, for me, is as follows:

1) Is he acquiring players who might improve the long term success of this franchise?

2) Is he not committing payroll recklessly where it might hinder the future of the team?

If the answer is yes, then good job.

Right now, he could go out and get Abreu, who would help the offense out for 2009. But if that means giving the guy a 3-4 year deal, do we want that? Is the bump in offense in 2009 worth the 2010-2011 years? Will he get them to where they need to be? I am thinking no. And then we'd be cursing this guys contract when the youngsters are hitting their stride. Like we will be doing with Cordero.

CougarQuest
12-19-2008, 07:42 PM
Chris Stynes > Jerry Hairston Jr.

A) Alcohol consumption?
B) Hurting teammates?
C) Payday?
D) Dirty Uniform Parts?
E) Age?
F) Texas Hold'em?
G) All the above?

Mainspark
12-19-2008, 07:46 PM
Rotoworld's take on this (below) is that the Reds might be forced to consider options including the ever-popular Jim Edmonds and aging Kenny Lofton.

After losing out on Juan Rivera, the Reds are focusing on Rocco Baldelli, Jerry Hairston Jr. and Willy Taveras in their search for a right-handed-hitting outfielder.
The Reds need two outfielders, especially if someone from this group is going to be one of them. Baldelli would likely be quite a bit more productive than Hairston or Taveras, but he can't be counted on to stay on the field. If they expand and start looking at left-handed hitters, Jim Edmonds could be an option. Kenny Lofton might also be a possibility with the Reds looking for a leadoff hitter.

Ltlabner
12-19-2008, 07:48 PM
Jim Edmonds?

Oh dear God.

remdog
12-19-2008, 07:49 PM
Rotoworld's take on this (below) is that the Reds might be forced to consider options including the ever-popular Jim Edmonds and aging Kenny Lofton.

After losing out on Juan Rivera, the Reds are focusing on Rocco Baldelli, Jerry Hairston Jr. and Willy Taveras in their search for a right-handed-hitting outfielder.
The Reds need two outfielders, especially if someone from this group is going to be one of them. Baldelli would likely be quite a bit more productive than Hairston or Taveras, but he can't be counted on to stay on the field. If they expand and start looking at left-handed hitters, Jim Edmonds could be an option. Kenny Lofton might also be a possibility with the Reds looking for a leadoff hitter.

This is getting worse by the minute.

Rem

Ltlabner
12-19-2008, 07:52 PM
This is getting worse by the minute.

Rem

For once I'm in total agreement with you.

If Edmonds and Lofton are your plan B, your plan A really, really sucked.

Highlifeman21
12-19-2008, 07:53 PM
For once I'm in total agreement with you.

If Edmonds and Lofton are your plan B, your plan A really, really sucked.

The better question though, what's plan C?

KronoRed
12-19-2008, 07:54 PM
Is the plan "warm bodies that aren't dead?"

Ltlabner
12-19-2008, 07:55 PM
The better question though, what's plan C?

Sammy Sosa? George Foster?

Always Red
12-19-2008, 07:55 PM
This is getting worse by the minute.

Rem

Agreed. In desperation, I'll take both Taveras and Baldelli and try to make a year of it and stick it out until 2010.

nate
12-19-2008, 07:55 PM
I've just read this thread and I've come to this conclusion:

Oy vey.

Highlifeman21
12-19-2008, 07:56 PM
Sammy Sosa?

Well that would certainly be entertaining.

CougarQuest
12-19-2008, 07:56 PM
The better question though, what's plan C?
Boss and GIK in exchange for free tickets to each game.

remdog
12-19-2008, 07:57 PM
For once I'm in total agreement with you.

If Edmonds and Lofton are your plan B, your plan A really, really sucked.

That's actually for twice, even if it was a year and a half ago. :p:

I'm guessing that we're seeing the real plan A right now which makes your statement a HUGE understatement. No disrespect.....'cause I agree with your assessment.

Rem

Raisor
12-19-2008, 07:58 PM
Rotoworld's take on this (below) is that the Reds might be forced to consider options including the ever-popular Jim Edmonds and aging Kenny Lofton.



Great Shades of Elvis!


Run for your lives!!!

http://www.gamerevolution.com/images/misc/galactus.jpg

Ltlabner
12-19-2008, 08:01 PM
I'm guessing that we're seeing the real plan A right now which makes your statement a HUGE understatement. No disrespect.....'cause I agree with your assessment.

Rem

Damn...could this all be some big rope-a-dope negotiating ploy by the Waltster? Because these names are just plain whacked out.

Otherwise I'm going to take up high-stakes bingo this summer instead of going to the old ball yard.

Falls City Beer
12-19-2008, 08:02 PM
I'd say Lofton and Edmonds are strictly speculation at this point.

Raisor
12-19-2008, 08:04 PM
I'd say Lofton and Edmonds are strictly speculation at this point.


If they start mentioning Phil Bradley or Dave Henderson, we're doomed.

CougarQuest
12-19-2008, 08:05 PM
Rotoworld's take on this (below) is that the Reds might be forced to consider options including the ever-popular Jim Edmonds and aging Kenny Lofton.

After losing out on Juan Rivera, the Reds are focusing on Rocco Baldelli, Jerry Hairston Jr. and Willy Taveras in their search for a right-handed-hitting outfielder.
The Reds need two outfielders, especially if someone from this group is going to be one of them. Baldelli would likely be quite a bit more productive than Hairston or Taveras, but he can't be counted on to stay on the field. If they expand and start looking at left-handed hitters, Jim Edmonds could be an option. Kenny Lofton might also be a possibility with the Reds looking for a leadoff hitter.

Someone from Rotoworld has hit the pipe one too many times. Your mother tried to warn you it would cause brain damage, now look what you've gone and done.

Raisor
12-19-2008, 08:06 PM
Someone from Rotoworld has hit the pipe one too many times. Your mother tried to warn you it would cause brain damage, now look what you've gone and done.

Are Edmonds and/or Loften that far of a stretch when Willy Taveras is being discussed?

HokieRed
12-19-2008, 08:07 PM
a. I'm afraid the big move was the one that didn't quite happen: Dye.
b. If we do only innocuous things but don't compromise 2010 and beyond, I'll be moderately happy.

Ltlabner
12-19-2008, 08:08 PM
I overhead an "insider" talking about Ozzie Smith being the "big named" target for short this year.

I'm not sure what would be worse, Jim Edmonds on the baseball diamond or listening to George Grande yapping about Jim Edmonds.

Ltlabner
12-19-2008, 08:09 PM
If we do only innocuous things but don't compromise 2010 and beyond, I'll be moderately happy.

Somehow having an offseason best labeled as "at least we didn't screw up 2010" isn't inspiring.

It's still way early in the offseason but I'm not thrilled with the direction thus far.

M2
12-19-2008, 08:11 PM
If they start mentioning Phil Bradley or Dave Henderson, we're doomed.

Hey, Phil Bradley left the game with hits left in his bat.

Raisor
12-19-2008, 08:11 PM
Anyone know the injury status of Matt Diaz?

He missed most of the last year, but in his last 790 AB's he's at

.318 .350 .456 .806

Would be a good guy off the bench if he's not out for the year.

Raisor
12-19-2008, 08:13 PM
Hey, Phil Bradley left the game with hits left in his bat.

If he put them in the bank with a good rate, he could be the answer!

Always Red
12-19-2008, 08:16 PM
If they start mentioning Phil Bradley or Dave Henderson, we're doomed.

Paul Householder and Duane Walker?

Ltlabner
12-19-2008, 08:17 PM
Paul Householder and Duane Walker?

I said Foster earlier, but I really think he might be a target.

He's always down at GABP anyway.

Always Red
12-19-2008, 08:20 PM
I said Foster earlier, but I really think he might be a target.

He's always down at GABP anyway.

He's still in pretty good shape, too.

I watched Duane Walker hit 2 HR in one game off Nolan Ryan early on in his career and thought he was the next big thing.

I missed, badly.

edabbs44
12-19-2008, 08:25 PM
Somehow having an offseason best labeled as "at least we didn't screw up 2010" isn't inspiring.

Not inspiring, but at least we won't be going intp 2010 groaning about Abreu's declining production and the dead $25MM being paid to him and Cordero.

M2
12-19-2008, 08:30 PM
Paul Householder and Duane Walker?

Nope, they hit SH and LH, but Gary Redus and Jerome Walton might be hot properties.

jesusfan
12-19-2008, 08:36 PM
Why can't we just sign Dunn and Baldelli and be done... Dunn-LF, Dickerson/Baldelli-CF, Bruce-RF. Is that so hard? Baldelli @ 3 per year and Dunn 10 per year wouldn't be over budget. That line-up has speed and power!

1. Rocco Baldelli/Dickerson-CF
2. Jay Bruce- RF
3. Joey Votto-1st
4. Edwin Encarnacion-3rd
5. Adam Dunn-LF
6. Brandon Phillips-2nd
7. Ramon Hernandez-C
8. Alex Gonzalez/Keppinger-SS
9. Pitcher

Always Red
12-19-2008, 08:41 PM
Why can't we just sign Dunn and Baldelli and be done... Dunn-LF, Dickerson/Baldelli-CF, Bruce-RF. Is that so hard? Baldelli @ 3 per year and Dunn 10 per year wouldn't be over budget. That line-up has speed and power!

1. Rocco Baldelli/Dickerson-CF
2. Jay Bruce- 2nd
3. Joey Votto-1st
4. Edwin Encarnacion-3rd
5. Adam Dunn-LF
6. Brandon Phillips-2nd
7. Ramon Hernandez-C
8. Alex Gonzalez/Keppinger-SS
9. Pitcher

Jesus, we've been through this a million times-everyone knows that Dunn bats 6th, the SS bats 2nd and Phillips bats cleanup!! :D

Always Red
12-19-2008, 08:41 PM
Nope, they hit SH and LH, but Gary Redus and Jerome Walton might be hot properties.

Gary Redus- he's handy whenever you need a pop-up.

M2
12-19-2008, 08:48 PM
Not inspiring, but at least we won't be going intp 2010 groaning about Abreu's declining production and the dead $25MM being paid to him and Cordero.

Speak for yourself, Abreu might actually make this offense functional. He'd be a great guy to have around a pack of young bats. The man's a walking hitting clinic.

And no one in the system is taking the closer job from Cordero for at least another two seasons, so maybe his contract will run one year too long. Big whoop.

Ltlabner
12-19-2008, 08:52 PM
And no one in the system is taking the closer job from Cordero for at least another two seasons, so maybe his contract will run one year too long. Big whoop.

Don't you know, M2? All big contract players, by definition, are bad.

We ought to be able to build a MLB team for $10,000,000 total. Like the good old days.

Tom Servo
12-19-2008, 08:57 PM
Seriously, if these are the targets Walt should go back to his original idea of making a trade for an outfielder. It doesn't have to be Dye, just somebody decent. See if the Cardinals have given up on Chris Duncan or something similar.

edabbs44
12-19-2008, 09:08 PM
Speak for yourself, Abreu might actually make this offense functional. He'd be a great guy to have around a pack of young bats. The man's a walking hitting clinic.

And no one in the system is taking the closer job from Cordero for at least another two seasons, so maybe his contract will run one year too long. Big whoop.

Nothing says wasted money like $46MM for a closer on a 75 win team.

edabbs44
12-19-2008, 09:09 PM
Don't you know, M2? All big contract players, by definition, are bad.

We ought to be able to build a MLB team for $10,000,000 total. Like the good old days.

Big contract players on a bad team are frequently bad. Especially if they are over the hill and under contract for multiple seasons.

M2
12-19-2008, 09:46 PM
Nothing says wasted money like $46MM for a closer on a 75 win team.

Totally not his fault. The Reds went from 16th in the NL in bullpen ERA in 2007 to 3rd in 2008. Cordero's not holding anybody back. He's established order in the pen. I don't care if the Reds spend money on players who do their jobs well.

edabbs44
12-19-2008, 09:53 PM
Totally not his fault. The Reds went from 16th in the NL in bullpen ERA in 2007 to 3rd in 2008. Cordero's not holding anybody back. He's established order in the pen. I don't care if the Reds spend money on players who do their jobs well.

He was tied for 4th best ERA in the pen. So he hd some help in lowering that ERA. But, even with that tremendous turnaround, they were still hideous.

I'm not saying that Cordero wasn't effective, but the bottom line is that the team sucked. If SD goes out and signs Manny to a 4 year, $100MM deal tomorrow and he hits .300/.400/.550, how is that going to be viewed? As a win for the franchise? Even when they win 70 games?

My theory is to be realistic and stick with it. If Jocketty's plan is to build the organization top to bottom and be a contender in 3 years, then Abreu isn't the smartest move out there. But if they think that they can win this season, then they better go get Abreu, Burrell and another effective starter.

Going halfway is foolish. Stop after Abreu and watch the team win 75 games instead of 72 and increase payroll while doing that. Brilliant.

jojo
12-19-2008, 10:14 PM
The Cordero signing wasn't a banner moment for the franchise.

OnBaseMachine
12-19-2008, 10:17 PM
The Cordero signing wasn't a banner moment for the franchise.

Yeah, they should have signed Carlos Silva instead. :D

M2
12-19-2008, 10:20 PM
I'm not saying that Cordero wasn't effective, but the bottom line is that the team sucked.

Then why not affix the blame to the players who weren't effective instead of the ones who were?

Cordero and an orderly bullpen will be key to anything the Reds hope to accomplish over the next two to three years.

And Bob Abreu should have at least two good years left in his stick. In this market, he might be had for 2 years, $22M.

My preference would be a young guy like Delmon Young or Jeremy Hermida, but you're going to have to be an awfully good player to out-hit Bob Abreu.

jojo
12-19-2008, 10:26 PM
Yeah, they should have signed Carlos Silva instead. :D

Funny the Silva and Cordero contracts are conflated-neither GM responsible is still a GM.

edabbs44
12-19-2008, 10:36 PM
Then why not affix the blame to the players who weren't effective instead of the ones who were?

Cordero and an orderly bullpen will be key to anything the Reds hope to accomplish over the next two to three years.

And Bob Abreu should have at least two good years left in his stick. In this market, he might be had for 2 years, $22M.

My preference would be a young guy like Delmon Young or Jeremy Hermida, but you're going to have to be an awfully good player to out-hit Bob Abreu.

I didn't affix any blame on Cordero. What I am saying is that Cincy shouldn't be looking to spend a material amount of money unless they truly believe that the player being paid is going to be part of the solution. Not the potential part of a solution (as in the player being successful), but being a part of an actual winning team in Cincinnati.

And, from what they are saying, your numbers are way off on Abreu:


Abreu: Right player, wrong price?

Bobby Abreu has produced six straight 100-RBI seasons, averaged 159 games the past eight years and built a .405 career on-base percentage.

Why, then, isn't he getting more play on the free-agent market?

Evidently, his price is too high.

Abreu, who turns 35 on March 11, is looking for a three-year, $48 million contract, one executive says. He earned $16 million last season with the Yankees, who declined to offer him arbitration.

It's understandable that Abreu wants a multi-year deal without a paycut from his 2008 salary. His problem is that the market is flooded with left-handed hitting outfield/DH types.

Raul Ibanez signed a three-year, $31.5 million contract with the Phillies. Adam Dunn, Garret Anderson, Jason Giambi and Ken Griffey Jr. remain free agents, as does switch-hitter Milton Bradley.

Abreu ranked 34th among major-league right fielders last season according to the plus-minus ratings on Bill James Online. However, his baserunning is superior to the hitters left on the market, one executive says.



http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/8945572/Scioscia-could-see-Manny-in-Angels-uniform

OnBaseMachine
12-19-2008, 10:36 PM
The difference is Silva is an awful pitcher while Cordero is a very good bullpen arm.

Ltlabner
12-19-2008, 10:39 PM
What I am saying is that Cincy shouldn't be looking to spend a material amount of money unless they truly believe that the player being paid is going to be part of the solution. Not the potential part of a solution (as in the player being successful), but being a part of an actual winning team in Cincinnati.

How else are you going to get a winning team other than by players being successful? :confused:

I can never follow your "logic". You don't want players who only add a couple of wins, but then argue that a team like the Reds can only afford players who only add a couple of wins (i.e. no big contracts such as Dunn, Cordero, et al).

If we can't afford a big time player, as you have argued many times, that means we target a lot of players who add a few wins here or a win there. But because one single player potentially only takes us from 72 to 73 wins they aren't the right player for the "solution" and are therefore useless.

Seems like you just go round and round and never really get anywhere with that approach.

jojo
12-19-2008, 10:42 PM
The difference is Silva is an awful pitcher while Cordero is a very good bullpen arm.

The similarity-they're both signed to bad contracts that a talented GM could've avoided.

blumj
12-19-2008, 10:56 PM
The difference is Silva is an awful pitcher while Cordero is a very good bullpen arm.
Doesn't it seem just a little backwards to build a near $20M bullpen, then go scrounging around for the cheapest available cleanup hitter?

M2
12-19-2008, 10:57 PM
I didn't affix any blame on Cordero. What I am saying is that Cincy shouldn't be looking to spend a material amount of money unless they truly believe that the player being paid is going to be part of the solution. Not the potential part of a solution (as in the player being successful), but being a part of an actual winning team in Cincinnati.

That's just semantics. Until you've actually got a winning club then all anyone can be is a potential part of a winning team. Cordero did his job and set off the desired successful cascade effect in the bullpen. Once again, I don't care if the Reds spend money on effective players. In fact, I'm for it.


And, from what they are saying, your numbers are way off on Abreu

Let's pretend I don't think Abreu will get what he's asking for - and apparently no one else does either ("Evidently, his price is too high.").

M2
12-19-2008, 11:19 PM
The similarity-they're both signed to bad contracts that a talented GM could've avoided.

Did he do his job? Yes he did.

Did it settle what had been a toxic bullpen for the previous 4.5 seasons? Yes it did.

Does it look like he's capable of doing that for at least another 2 seasons? Yes it does.

While I agree it is possible to find less expensive, completely effective closers. We just witnessed the worst bullpen run the Reds have had during most of our lifetimes (the Reds generally got quality bullpen work from 1959-2003, or at least July 2003). We actually saw something remarkable last season. The Reds had a problem and more or less fixed it. The ... Reds ... fixed ... something. It boggles the mind. The Reds don't do that. Not fixing things is what the Reds have been all about this decade.

So they pay for a closer. Even if that's not what you would have done, even if it's not your theoretical preference on how to divvy up the pie, can't you at least acknowledge that it's worked out well so far with the potential to keeping working out the same way in the future?

jojo
12-19-2008, 11:33 PM
Did he do his job? Yes he did.

Did it settle what had been a toxic bullpen for the previous 4.5 seasons? Yes it did.

Does it look like he's capable of doing that for at least another 2 seasons? Yes it does.

While I agree it is possible to find less expensive, completely effective closers. We just witnessed the worst bullpen run the Reds have had during most of our lifetimes (the Reds generally got quality bullpen work from 1959-2003, or at least July 2003). We actually saw something remarkable last season. The Reds had a problem and more or less fixed it. The ... Reds ... fixed ... something. It boggles the mind. The Reds don't do that. Not fixing things is what the Reds have been all about this decade.

So they pay for a closer. Even if that's not what you would have done, even if it's not your theoretical preference on how to divvy up the pie, can't you at least acknowledge that it's worked out well so far with the potential to keeping working out the same way in the future?

The bullpen could easily be flammable in '09 and half of Cordero's contract will most likely have been for naught (even if the pen repeats the '08 performance).

His contract was at least a year too long and about twice too much money while the Reds aren't sniffing pay dirt. IMHO, it's not really being harsh to suggest there should be a good justification for making the decision they did with Cordero. The Reds went to the most expensive body shop around and put a shiny paint job on a car that had no transmission with an engine in need of an overhaul. Sure the old paint job needed work but, I'm not really seeing how it's a success at this point.

fearofpopvol1
12-19-2008, 11:44 PM
I am starting to think that the plan is not to get involved with contracts that are going to hinder the long-term progress of this team.

Last year it was "We need a closer? Let's pay the most money ever for a closer!" No thought was given to the fact that the team sucked with or without the richest closer ever, or that the worst years of his contract will be spent when this team might be able to make some noise. Now we have an aging reliever who is owed $30MM+ for the next 3 years. Nice.

Looking at the FA landscape...it doesn't appear as if this team will be able to transform into a winner this season. So, IMO, Walt should be looking at guys to fill the gaps who have upside and may be able to be turned around at the deadline for prospects or who might warrant a draft pick next season if they get them to sign a one year deal. Or guys who will be here when this team is ready to compete, whenever the FO thinks is achievable.

Don't screw up 2010 and beyond just because you have to "win now". If the payroll stays low, then great. More money to spend when the time is right.

I think this post is absolutely spot on.

paintmered
12-19-2008, 11:47 PM
The bullpen could easily be flammable in '09 and half of Cordero's contract will most likely have been for naught (even if the pen repeats the '08 performance).

His contract was at least a year too long and about twice too much money while the Reds aren't sniffing pay dirt. IMHO, it's not really being harsh to suggest there should be a good justification for making the decision they did with Cordero. The Reds went to the most expensive body shop around and put a shiny paint job on a car that had no transmission with an engine in need of an overhaul. I'm not really seeing how it's a success at this point.

Playing devil's advocate here... Who's to say that the Reds could have landed Cordero (or another established closer) for less money? It's not as if free agents are breaking down the door to play in Cincinnati.

When he signed, it was universally understood that we overpaid for him. Most were okay with that as it filled a major need. I was okay with it then and I still am. I'm not suggesting that the Reds should repeat the strategy with other free agents, but it made sense with Cordero considering the condition of the Reds bullpen at the time.

The fact that closers like K-Rod signed for half as much as Cordero this off-season is not relevant. The options were limited last year and if we didn't sign Cordero, we'd have thirteen threads talking about fixing the bullpen.

edabbs44
12-20-2008, 12:05 AM
How else are you going to get a winning team other than by players being successful? :confused:

I can never follow your "logic". You don't want players who only add a couple of wins, but then argue that a team like the Reds can only afford players who only add a couple of wins (i.e. no big contracts such as Dunn, Cordero, et al).

If we can't afford a big time player, as you have argued many times, that means we target a lot of players who add a few wins here or a win there. But because one single player potentially only takes us from 72 to 73 wins they aren't the right player for the "solution" and are therefore useless.

Seems like you just go round and round and never really get anywhere with that approach.

My "logic" isn't that complicated.

Last year's team wasn't a player away. They go out and drop $46MM on a closer. They end up at the bottom of the standings and basically wasted the probable best year of Cordero's stint on a crap season.

This year's team isn't a player away. So if they go and get a legit bat and a few spare parts, what will that result in? 75 wins? So there is year two of Cordero flushed down the toilet along with the first year of the hitter they acquire.

Year three? Well, you have a deteriorating Cordero and the second year of the vet hitter. It is also decision time on Harang and Arroyo, who are getting up there in age.

Hopefully you catch my drift by now.

So, as always, I would recommend two directions for this team. Either go get what you need through trades and FAs where you can actually have a solid belief that this team can compete, or look to reduce payroll, draft the BPA every round, and stockpile youth to build around your young core.

Then, when the team is ready to roll, you jump into the FA pool and go get what you need to finish off the roster by using your payroll flexibility to your advantage.

Not complicated. If they are going to get Abreu (hypothetically), then go for it and get Burrell also, trade some youth for a legit SS and try and get a solid starter. Don't spend $12MM on one piece of the puzzle and then add a few bench guys. That, to me, will be more disappointing than doing nothing.

M2
12-20-2008, 12:14 AM
The bullpen could easily be flammable in '09 and half of Cordero's contract will most likely have been for naught (even if the pen repeats the '08 performance).

It easily could have been flammable last year too. It wasn't. And I repeat, can't you at least acknowledge that it's worked out well so far with the potential to keep working out the same way in the future? I'm not saying it's guaranteed to work. It's not what I would have done, but of all the things to hate on the Reds, Cordero's contract is near the back of the line.

And what do I care if the Reds save money just because they're bad? At least part of the team isn't brutally awful.


His contract was at least a year too long and about twice too much money while the Reds aren't sniffing pay dirt. IMHO, it's not really being harsh to suggest there should be a good justification for making the decision they did with Cordero. The Reds went to the most expensive body shop around and put a shiny paint job on a car that had no transmission with an engine in need of an overhaul. Sure the old paint job needed work but, I'm not really seeing how it's a success at this point.

By that standard the Reds should release everyone who played for the club in 2008. There are good players on bad teams and successes within failures. The bullpen shaved roughly 67 runs off of what it allowed in 2007. That's a success. There's no way to call it anything but a success. Cordero was brought in to close down games and put the rest of the pen into some semblance of order. It worked. Got to tell you, any player who's a central part of a 67-run swing in the right direction is all right by me.

edabbs44
12-20-2008, 12:16 AM
The fact that closers like K-Rod signed for half as much as Cordero this off-season is not relevant. The options were limited last year and if we didn't sign Cordero, we'd have thirteen threads talking about fixing the bullpen.

Sure it is...Cincy didn't have to go and get Cordero last year. He was a luxury that was not needed. A sub 80 win team having the richest closer in history is comical.

Kc61
12-20-2008, 12:20 AM
Just a guess --

The Hairston, Baldelli, Taveras names are all for one outfield spot -- a guy who can play centerfield everyday or platooning with Dickerson.

Left field still remains open and I'm hoping that the Reds still intend to get an established power hitter for that spot.

The only one of the three who could possibly hit in the middle of the order is Baldelli, but he hasn't been healthy. It's impossible for me to believe that a GM would expect Baldelli to play 150 games holding down an outfield spot hitting third or fourth.

It's possible that Walt intends to use Taveras every day with a platoon of Dickerson/Baldelli or Dickerson/Hairston in left. I guess.

Probably wishful thinking, but Walt must realize that these names don't resolve the big bat situation.

Speculating, maybe one of these three gets signed soon with the more powerful bat for January or even early February.

I just don't believe Walt is giving up on 2009. At minimum, he's going to want to be a possible wild card contender and obviously needs a real bat to do that.

pahster
12-20-2008, 12:25 AM
I wouldn't be opposed to Edmonds being brought in to platoon in LF. He still beats right handed pitching around pretty well. Of course, were he to sign with the Reds I wouldn't be surprised if The Dusty ran him out in center everyday, "respect" and all.

M2
12-20-2008, 12:37 AM
I wouldn't be opposed to Edmonds being brought in to platoon in LF. He still beats right handed pitching around pretty well. Of course, were he to sign with the Reds I wouldn't be surprised if The Dusty ran him out in center everyday, "respect" and all.

Edmonds must play CF.

CF must bat leadoff.

Edmonds does not bat leadoff.

But Edmonds must play CF ...

That conundrum might cause Dusty to explode.

remdog
12-20-2008, 12:39 AM
Not complicated. If they are going to get Abreu (hypothetically), then go for it and get Burrell also, trade some youth for a legit SS and try and get a solid starter. Don't spend $12MM on one piece of the puzzle and then add a few bench guys. That, to me, will be more disappointing than doing nothing.

I'm pretty much in agreement with that.

At the start of this 'off-season feeding frenzy' I was good with moving Freel to shore up the catching for the near-term with Hernandez. One postion upgraded.

I liked the idea of moving Homer and some 'spare parts' for Dye. Second position upgraded (from where the Reds were after sending Dunn away).

Sign Juan Rivera to a reasonable contract for three years? Yep. I'd have been on board for that too. The guy's only 30. Inexpensive. Can play LF or RF. Certainly a better choice than Norris Hopper for OF #4. Again, the OF upgraded.

Now, here's where it would have gotten dicey: the Reds have enough 'back of the rotation' candidates to find a #5 starter---Owings, Massett, Rameriez, Maloney---that they could reasonably expect some improvement over Josh Fogg, et al. However, there is still a big hole in the middle of that infield---SS. Do you risk trading Arroyo to get a young player to plug that hole or do you think you'll keep Bronson and trust your offense enough to carry Kepp or Janish as the everyday guy?

Tough call. You're one card short. Do you want to draw to an inside straight or try for a flush?

So far, the Reds have done only one of the above moves. As edabbs said above, either you're going for it or conserve your capital and wait for the next hand (season). Right now, I'm getting the feeling that the Reds are hoping that 'two of a kind' will win the whole pot or they're waiting for the next hand.

Rem

jojo
12-20-2008, 12:43 AM
Playing devil's advocate here... Who's to say that the Reds could have landed Cordero (or another established closer) for less money? It's not as if free agents are breaking down the door to play in Cincinnati.

When he signed, it was universally understood that we overpaid for him. Most were okay with that as it filled a major need. I was okay with it then and I still am. I'm not suggesting that the Reds should repeat the strategy with other free agents, but it made sense with Cordero considering the condition of the Reds bullpen at the time.

The fact that closers like K-Rod signed for half as much as Cordero this off-season is not relevant. The options were limited last year and if we didn't sign Cordero, we'd have thirteen threads talking about fixing the bullpen.

I think the important question was did the Reds really need to sign Cordero?

These issues were discussed pretty thoroughly in quite a few threads at the time of his signing. Here's at least one that might make an interesting reread:

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=64187&highlight=cordero

I apparently was frothing from my soapbox after the news hit (BTW, the Astros basically gave Lidge away during the same time period):


I've agreed that Cordero improves the Reds. I also consider Cordero to be a high leverage arm (though last year probably shouldn't be the norm we should expect). I haven't even argued opportunity costs (so I really don't feel the burden to cite any). Here's the crux of my soapbox speil:

My comments have been philosophical. The bullpen is populated by the biggest pool of potential players known to man (it's the run prevention version of the DH). Basically it's the easiest job in baseball-all a pitcher has to do is command at most two pitches, he gets to throw them at maximum velocity, is required to do this for ususally at most 20-25 pitches and most often it's against the most favoable matchup for his skillset. On top of this, the contrived construction known as the closer has cemented the notion that the 9th inning must be locked down thus artificially causing the overvaluation of arms that are percieved to fit the role (i.e. a huge inefficiency has been created that can be exploited). The bullpen is where smart teams show their mettle and overpays should really only occur because, well, some teams just have the luxury to leverage payroll (i.e. NYN, NYA, etc) and they can afford to not give a damn.

How hard is it to get that guy to lock down your ninth inning (i.e. a guy with the peripherals that are associated with closers)? I think it mostly just takes a little bit of brains-money doesn't seem to be a prerequisite. For instance, JJ Putz was basically a non-prospect coming up (think flamed out starter that hopefully could be a useful bullpen guy). Nathan was basically reclaimed from the failed starter heap (and we all know the deal that brought him to Minnesota). Rafael Soriano was acquired for a replacement level player (Soriano's peripherals are better than Cordero's). Jarod Burrton cost $50,000. Lidge cost the Phillies a handshake. Bobby Jenks was a waiver wire pickup. Saito was signed by the Dodgers as a free agent and I think he's making $1M (though he might get a raise). Joe Borowski was signed to a bank-breaking $4M by the Indians (and really few would've penciled him in as their "lock down guy"). Valverde and F. Rodriguez were drafted by their teams. Also drafted by his current team, Papelbon was a 4th round pick that the Redsox converted from a starter because he lacks a true starter's arsenal. Kevin Gregg was basically a minor league free agent pickup for the Angels who later flipped him to the Marlins for Chris Resop. As sucky as I think Weathers is, he converted the same percentage of saves as Cordero did last season (and it was a career year for Cordero based upon his peripherals). Heck, Todd Jones, the reclamation project with the peripherals of a middle reliever, has converted a higher percentage of saves over the last three seasons than Cordero (and that's with ignoring Cordero's 2006 season).

The inability of the Reds to put together a workable bullpen has tweaked me to no end the last few seasons (I think every Reds fan feels that pain). Stuff happens as we all know but it's a symptom of incompetence to chronically fail here IMHO. That the Reds could only address this issue via the route they finally took with Cordero is the culminating step in their futility. It irks me to no end. So once again, my foaming at the mouth rant has nothing really to do with Cordero per se or his chances of pitching well. It's all about the Reds FO and what I percieve to be their chances of ever building something good that lasts. On the surface it looks like the Reds are turning a corner in their commitment to winning (new big name manager, increasing payroll) but really where it matters most-their ability to compete with the smart FOs and thus increase their chances of being competitive every season- they've got a troubling trackrecord that doesn't seem to really be turning a corner....


I think this is more a case of perception than reality. Here's why I'd argue that:

Lidge has a five year track record of 12.6 K/g and 3.8 BB/g. He's had two truly dominant years where his BB/9 dipped below 3. In comparison, Cordero's career BB/9 is almost half a walk worse (and this is with Lidge being associated with control issues). Cordero has only posted a K/9 above 12 once (last season) with his next highest total being 10.3. He's only topped 10 K/9 a total of 3 times in his 9 year career. For those who care about saves as a stat (I think it's a silly stat), Lidge has a higher save percentage for his career than Cordero. Basically if Lidge is a poor comp for Cordero it's because Lidge is more dominant.

BTW, the Reds probably bought the best bullpen arm they could get on the market (thus they were forced to pay inflated prices). I'm not crying that the world is ending. I'm just sad that this is how they apparently have to address the problem..... This next statement is obviously a matter of philosophy but I think dumping tons of money on your pen is the ultimate white flag for your FO...it's like telling the world, we just can't run our organisation intelligently.


This probably makes the Reds bullpen better next year but I agree with the philosophy your post espouses. The Reds overpaid ($ and years) to address a perceived problem. In many ways buying a closer in free agency is like waiting until 6pm on Christmas eve to do you gift shopping. This might work out, but it's not how teams that are ahead of the curve do it....

Concerning Cordero, basically the Reds committed a ton of money over a long time for a guy coming off of a career year (basically K'd 3 more per 9 and walked about 1.5 fewer per 9 than his career averages) that saw him convert the same % of saves as Weathers converted for the Reds in '07. Cordero will be 33 in '08 and really is a lesser version of Brad Lidge when looking at his peripherals. A cynic might suggest that the Reds just gave Weathers a huge raise and extension in order to fix their 7th inning (really shouldn't Burton be considered the hopeful heir to high leverage situations?).

The Reds are paying Cordero for the '07 model. Lets hope '08 doesn't represent the introduction of a retro look for him....

Really, I don't think anything has happened since the Cordero signing that makes the above arguments weaker.

jojo
12-20-2008, 12:48 AM
Got to tell you, any player who's a central part of a 67-run swing in the right direction is all right by me.

I'm not sure why 67 runs would be attributed to Cordero.

jojo
12-20-2008, 01:09 AM
“In baseball, if you convince yourself you need a certain player, you’ve already lost. One player doesn’t have that much impact. It’s about building organizations. It’s not about adding players.

“There’s no player you can have to make up for an inherent weakness in the organization—a foundational weakness. You need to build the foundation up where you don’t need that one player. Yeah, you can pursue that player. He may be a great fit. But if it doesn’t work out or if the money gets ridiculous, you can turn to another player.”

M2
12-20-2008, 01:26 AM
I'm not sure why 67 runs would be attributed to Cordero.

Because the plan, as it was laid out, was that a quality closer could come in, carry the load at the back of the bullpen and allow others to settle into roles where they could succeed. It was one of those holistic ideas that you kind of hate, but it worked.

Quite frankly, I don't think there's a case that it would have worked without a consistent closer. Did that have to be Cordero? No. Yet it was Cordero, no escaping that. And if he continues to do that job it makes that much easier to assemble the pieces in front of him. The good news is he's been consistent, durable and he throws a good number of innings for a closer.

Inarguably he was the key component to a bullpen plan that netted a 67-run swing in the right direction. I'm not attributing it all to him, but credit where it's due man.

It may not be what you or I would have done. So what. The ... Reds ... fixed ... something.

P.S. Theo's offering Mark Teixeira completely insane money. 20M+ for that guy? Please. As much as I agree with the sentiment that you need to walk away from certain deals, I'm still not going to get up in arms over a guy who did his job.

jojo
12-20-2008, 02:05 AM
Teixeira is a 4.5 to 5 win player. At $20M, the BoSox would actually be pinching him a bit (assuming $5M/win holds in this market). Given the BoSox are in a three way arms race within their division for the revenue jackpot associated with making the playoffs, it doesn't seem too crazy for them to be willing to pay something akin to market rates for a marquee player.

Jpup
12-20-2008, 02:31 AM
Surely Jocketty is just messing around with Fay, right?

Krusty
12-20-2008, 03:33 AM
I don't know why everyone is sweating over every little thing coming out of Uncle Walt's mouth at the moment. We got almost two months before spring training. The big name free agents haven't even sign yet. And the major trades are still in the discussion stages. It is all about posturing right now and teams showing their poker faces.

If you ask me, here is what I could see down the pipeline:

1. That Dye for Bailey deal isn't dead. Kenny Williams wants more than just Bailey and the Reds don't want to give up more for possibly a one year player. This deal just need the finishing touches which is another minor league player.

2. Colorado's Garett Atkins. If Uncle Walt acquires Atkins, I could see Encarnacion shift to LF. A Bailey for Atkins deal won't get it done but if you substitute with Bronson Arroyo you might have something cooking.

3. Florida's Jorge Cantu, Jermey Hermedia and Dan Uggla are all arbitration eligible. We all know that is a four letter for the Fishes of Florida. Expect at least one of these guys to be move.

4. We all know Walt's former team, the Cardinals, have a glut of outfielders and have minor leaguer Coby Rasmus in the minors too. So, would a Bailey for Rasmus deal work? And how about Ryan Ludwick? Cards might move him while his worth is the highest it will probably get.

5. We know San Diego is having a firesale. Brian Giles is out there. So is Kevin Kouzmanoff. Both righthanded hitters. Figure who you give up to get at least one or both of them.

6. Anyone would like to take a flier on Andrew Jones if the Dodgers are willing to absorb the majority of his contract in the final year?

7. Hey, Melky Cabrera is still available since that Yankee-Brewer trade fell through.

8. Speaking of firesales, maybe the Mariners will part with third baseman Adrian Beltre for a package of Dickerson, Bailey and Roenicke?

Mario-Rijo
12-20-2008, 04:13 AM
I don't know why everyone is sweating over every little thing coming out of Uncle Walt's mouth at the moment. We got almost two months before spring training. The big name free agents haven't even sign yet. And the major trades are still in the discussion stages. It is all about posturing right now and teams showing their poker faces.

If you ask me, here is what I could see down the pipeline:

1. That Dye for Bailey deal isn't dead. Kenny Williams wants more than just Bailey and the Reds don't want to give up more for possibly a one year player. This deal just need the finishing touches which is another minor league player.

2. Colorado's Garett Atkins. If Uncle Walt acquires Atkins, I could see Encarnacion shift to LF. A Bailey for Atkins deal won't get it done but if you substitute with Bronson Arroyo you might have something cooking.

3. Florida's Jorge Cantu, Jermey Hermedia and Dan Uggla are all arbitration eligible. We all know that is a four letter for the Fishes of Florida. Expect at least one of these guys to be move.

4. We all know Walt's former team, the Cardinals, have a glut of outfielders and have minor leaguer Coby Rasmus in the minors too. So, would a Bailey for Rasmus deal work? And how about Ryan Ludwick? Cards might move him while his worth is the highest it will probably get.

5. We know San Diego is having a firesale. Brian Giles is out there. So is Kevin Kouzmanoff. Both righthanded hitters. Figure who you give up to get at least one or both of them.

6. Anyone would like to take a flier on Andrew Jones if the Dodgers are willing to absorb the majority of his contract in the final year?

7. Hey, Melky Cabrera is still available since that Yankee-Brewer trade fell through.

8. Speaking of firesales, maybe the Mariners will part with third baseman Adrian Beltre for a package of Dickerson, Bailey and Roenicke?

Brian Giles is LH, but I could think worse options presently mainly the ones being discussed Taveras, Edmonds, Lofton. Heck might as well throw Bonds on the list.

Krusty
12-20-2008, 04:24 AM
Actually Baldelli could be another Josh Hamilton story for the Reds. Guy finds success after injury and illness kept him from reaching his potential....especially if there is a cure for his illness.

Now if Jockerty can sign Baldelli and Taveras to one year deal with club options for a second year, along with trading for Jermaine Dye, I could live with that. No longterm commitments but a nice complement to the young core on this roster.

GAC
12-20-2008, 04:30 AM
Remember all that talk towards the end of the season that the Reds were going to be "major players" on the free agent market? I tried not laughing then.

Me too. And I was one who said then they wouldn't make any big splashes due to some nice raises due a few guys and arb cases.

What is our set starting OF right now? Bruce. Who else?

We're looking at an offense that will be lucky to create 700 runs with their "make things happen" offense, and with a pitching staff, even if there is improvement, that will allow close to 800.

Not pretty.

Mario-Rijo
12-20-2008, 04:36 AM
Me too. And I was one who said then they wouldn't make any big splashes due to some nice raises due a few guys and arb cases.

What is our set starting OF right now? Bruce. Who else?

We're looking at an offense that will be lucky to create 700 runs with their "make things happen" offense, and with a pitching staff, even if there is improvement, that will allow close to 800.

Not pretty.

I doubt the dollars are really playing that much of a factor. They could have afforded Dye they just preferred not too. I say give 'em Bailey & Sean Watson ask them for 1.5 mill and if they don't do it make the trade anyway.

Krusty
12-20-2008, 05:12 AM
The Reds don't just trade away Junior and Dunn and not have some kind of idea how they are going to replace their run production for the 2009 season. Jockerty isn't that dumb.

Highlifeman21
12-20-2008, 05:23 AM
The Reds don't just trade away Junior and Dunn and not have some kind of idea how they are going to replace their run production for the 2009 season. Jockerty isn't that dumb.

So far he is.

Their production isn't even remotely replaced yet.

Krusty
12-20-2008, 05:34 AM
So far he is.

Their production isn't even remotely replaced yet.

And yet there is two months before the start of spring training. Throw another log on the Hot Stove, please.

Krusty
12-20-2008, 05:56 AM
Don't know if this was posted but this was taken from Yahoo Sports:

Fri Dec 19, 2008 6:45 am EST

Improved prognosis makes Baldelli appealing to RedsAs the Cincinnati Reds continue to look to add a right-handed hitting outfielder, free agent Rocco Baldelli just became that much more appealing, according to MLB.com. Cincinnati has had its eye on Baldelli for a while now, but with Wednesday's news that Baldelli's illness is much more treatable and non-progresive than originially diagnnosed, the Reds appear to be increasing their interest in the former Tampa Bay outfielder

Reds GM Walt Jocketty told the Cincinnati Enquirer on Wednesday: "I haven't talked to his agent [since the report came out]. But if it's not as critical as it was thought to be, that changes the way we see him. I'm sure it changes it for a lot of clubs."

Baldelli's agent has already spoken with numerous teams, including the Rays, this offseason, though it can be assumed that Baldelli will now have more leverage in negotiations since his health is no longer a serious question mark.

Baldelli is just one option Cincinnati is exploring in its pursuit of a right-handed hitting outfielder. The Reds have had discussions with the agent for Juan Rivera. The Reds are also believed to be exploring the possibility of negotiating with Pat Burrell.

Source: MLB.com

Related: Pat Burrell, Juan Rivera, Rocco Baldelli, Cincinnati Reds

Ltlabner
12-20-2008, 08:34 AM
can't you at least acknowledge that it's worked out well so far with the potential to keeping working out the same way in the future?

In short, no. They won't.


Not complicated. If they are going to get Abreu (hypothetically), then go for it and get Burrell also, trade some youth for a legit SS and try and get a solid starter. Don't spend $12MM on one piece of the puzzle and then add a few bench guys. That, to me, will be more disappointing than doing nothing.

So we should go get Burrel while Dunn was too expensive to have around? Solid reasoning there.

Trying to "aim" for a particular year is patently silly. You take talent from the market when it is available. If another stud rotation pitcher becomes available should we pass because what we really need is a couple big bats? Obviously not.

The pen was in shambles. A decent closer was available. We took him. The pen got batter. How you can refuse that is progress is beyond me.

How dumb would it be to pass on a closer because your team "wasn't ready" only to find out later in the offseason that the couple of other pieces you needed were suddenly available. Then we'd hear nothing but complaining about "why did he get some big bats when our bullpen is so weak?".

And no, I'm not particularly a big fan of the "closer" concept. But if you have a shot at talent you take it. Period. Improve the team when you can. That Wayne pretty much stopped making moves doesn't change the wisdom of grabbing talent when it's available.


Reds GM Walt Jocketty told the Cincinnati Enquirer on Wednesday: "I haven't talked to his agent [since the report came out]. But if it's not as critical as it was thought to be, that changes the way we see him. I'm sure it changes it for a lot of clubs."

Is it me or does it seem like many of the reported trade rumors have an associated story where Walt is quoted as saying, "we haven't talked to them in weeks".

I'm starting to wonder if Walt is letting these "potential deal" rumors out in some sort of Machiavellian master plan to help negotiations later on. Likely they are just rumors that take on a life of their own, but it's still odd how many people Walt claims he hasn't spoken with.

Highlifeman21
12-20-2008, 08:38 AM
And yet there is two months before the start of spring training. Throw another log on the Hot Stove, please.

I'm hoping something happens, b/c right now these Reds ain't lookin' good going into 2009.

Jpup
12-20-2008, 09:39 AM
You don't want Brian Giles, he's is some hot water right now.

RedEye
12-20-2008, 09:42 AM
You don't want Brian Giles, he's is some hot water right now.

Say what?

Jpup
12-20-2008, 09:44 AM
http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/2008/dec/18/padres-giles/?padres



Giles underwent anger management to resolve 2006 misdemeanor charge

Brent Schrotenboer (Contact)

Thursday, December 18, 2008

Padres outfielder Brian Giles entered into a plea agreement for a misdemeanor domestic violence charge that stemmed from a video-recorded incident at a Phoenix bar on Aug. 27, 2006.

Giles, 37, was required to complete anger-management counseling as part of the deal in exchange for the case being dropped, said John Tutelman of the Phoenix city attorney's office. After his counseling was completed, the case was dropped this past February.

Giles' alleged domestic violence history has come to light after the former girlfriend, Cheri Olvera, recently sued him for more than $10 million, alleging a string of abuse, including batterings while she was pregnant.

Giles and his agent have declined comment.

Security camera video of the incident in Phoenix was obtained by Phoenix police and has circulated on the Internet in the wake of Olvera's suit. A police report of the incident corroborates what happened with witnesses.

Witnesses in the report said Giles and Olvera had an argument at the bar. Giles then left the bar, came back after two minutes, grabbed Olvera and forced her to walk out. In the hallway to the exit, witnesses say Giles raised his right hand and hit Olvera on the back of her neck and side of her face, forcing her to the ground. The video shows a person hitting the ground in the hallway.

Giles and the Padres had flown to Arizona that day after a 6-3 loss at Colorado in which Giles went 1-for-4 including a solo home run in the ninth inning. The Padres began a series with the Arizona Diamondbacks the next day.

In the wake of the incident, Olvera didn't cooperate with police. “I wish you guys wouldn't do anything about it,” she told police, according to the report.

Olvera's attorney, Cary Goldstein, said this is typical of domestic violence victims and explains why other incidents between the couple did not involve police. In Phoenix, the incident was public and had witnesses, at least one of whom called the police.

“Abused women severely fear their abusers, and they fear harm to their family,” Goldstein said. “Their self-esteem is demolished. Their lives are being controlled by their abusers, and they feel like they have no choice. They seek to protect the abuser, and they want to believe the abuser won't do it again, that he didn't mean it.”

Olvera's palimony suit states that the couple maintained a “marriage-like relationship from in or about 2002 to April 2008” but never married because of Giles' violence toward her.

Giles, a native of El Cajon, is to make $9 million in 2009, the final season of his contract with the Padres. Padres CEO Sandy Alderson issued a statement this week that said, “While we will not comment on the specifics of the lawsuit, abusive behavior in any form, by any member of the Padres organization, against anyone, violates the basic values of the Padres organization and is not condoned.”

If you follow the link, there is a short security video of the incident.

Highlifeman21
12-20-2008, 10:21 AM
This thread down in the SunDeck (http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=73222) seems to think that signing Baldelli, Taveras, and then platooning Taveras/Dickerson and sticking with Bruce in RF is the best thing possible for the Reds.

Interesting read... I suggest everyone take a glance at it.

Most of the posts could have very well been written by Franchester, himself.

edabbs44
12-20-2008, 10:36 AM
So we should go get Burrel while Dunn was too expensive to have around? Solid reasoning there.

Forget about Dunn. Dunn is over.

I was using names of people who actually have a possibility of being acquired. But if it reads better and gives you false hope with Dunn's name in the scenario, then feel free to replace Burrell. Because the scenario still makes sense for what I am saying.


Trying to "aim" for a particular year is patently silly. You take talent from the market when it is available. If another stud rotation pitcher becomes available should we pass because what we really need is a couple big bats? Obviously not.

It is more like aiming for a particular range of years. Why spend money on expensive veterans if the team isn't going to come close to sniffing the playoffs? Save up the money until the time is right for the right guy.

Now obviously they should acquire people who will be valuable when their goal time period is here. But I think it was obvious that Cordero will probably not be as effective in 2010-2011. And that's when this team should be kicking it into high gear, if it is played right.


The pen was in shambles. A decent closer was available. We took him. The pen got batter. How you can refuse that is progress is beyond me.

It is progress. But did the end justify the means? That contract and an early draft pick. So far, the returns have been atrocious.

He could save 50 games next season with a 1.25 ERA. If they win in the mid 70s again, it will still make little sense.


How dumb would it be to pass on a closer because your team "wasn't ready" only to find out later in the offseason that the couple of other pieces you needed were suddenly available. Then we'd hear nothing but complaining about "why did he get some big bats when our bullpen is so weak?".

Unlikely scenario based upon where the team was last off-season and based upon what they actually did.


And no, I'm not particularly a big fan of the "closer" concept. But if you have a shot at talent you take it. Period. Improve the team when you can. That Wayne pretty much stopped making moves doesn't change the wisdom of grabbing talent when it's available.

Improve the team in a reasonable manner.

As I sadi earlier, if you were a Seatle fan would you be happy if they went out and got Manny for a 4 yr, $100MM committment?

westofyou
12-20-2008, 10:39 AM
The Reds don't just trade away Junior and Dunn and not have some kind of idea how they are going to replace their run production for the 2009 season. Jockerty isn't that dumb.

His name is Jocketty

edabbs44
12-20-2008, 11:15 AM
So far he is.

Their production isn't even remotely replaced yet.

We're talking about how Cincy will be able to replace Jr's production...correct?

That's a non-issue.

Ltlabner
12-20-2008, 11:16 AM
Forget about Dunn. Dunn is over.

Before you argued that the team couldn't "afford" to have so much money wrapped up in Dunn. Now you are saying we should go get Burrell who will likely cost the same (or more) and give you the same (or less).

There's no consistancy whatsoever in your arguments.

You either have to make a lot of little moves (that in isolation don't change things much) or several big moves (that cost money). Yet you argue against both.

You consistently argue against anything short of pouring money into drafts and praying everything falls into place at some magical point in the future.


So far, the returns have been atrocious.

Providing structure to the bullpen and helping lower the overall RA/performance of the pen is atrocious?

Wow.

Highlifeman21
12-20-2008, 11:16 AM
We're talking about how Cincy will be able to replace Jr's production...correct?

That's a non-issue.

Junior and Dunn combined.

Replacing their production.

Ltlabner
12-20-2008, 11:18 AM
Junior and Dunn combined.

Replacing their production.

And the cold, hard reality is we have to replace their production and then add a whole fistful of runs in addition.

Why can't people grasp that?

alexad
12-20-2008, 11:23 AM
Why do we want an aging outfield when everyone thought Griffey was too old? Dunn was young and we unloaded him. Is there an outfielder out there better than the numbers Dunn would have put up with the Reds.

Highlifeman21
12-20-2008, 11:26 AM
And the cold, hard reality is we have to replace their production and then add a whole fistful of runs in addition.

Why can't people grasp that?

Some people seem to cling to the hope that Harang will return to any form not resembling his 2008, that Arroyo will not regress to his career mean(s), that Volquez will at least duplicate (if not improve) his 2008, and that Cueto will have a "lite" version of Volquez's 2008 in 2009.

Those same people cling to the hope that Cordero, Burton and now Arthur freakin' Rhodes will anchor our pen, and that we're all set. By my estimation, that means we'll carry 5 arms (5th SP, 4 more MR) that won't have a drastic negative impact on whatever the other 7 can muster? I just don't buy it.

Even if our 2009 mirrors the 2008 pitching, in order to make up the RA/RS gap, as you've aptly pointed out, we need to add to our RS while we're replacing Dunn and Junior's production. Even if we replace Dunn and Junior with equal production, we're still giving up more Runs than we're scoring (which is never good).

To put your point into perspective, bringing Dunn back isn't enough. We'd need to bring Dunn back, and then add another Dunn to the lineup to pump life into this pedestrian offense.

So yeah, re-sign Hairston. Sign Baldelli. Sign Taveras. While they'll have some minimal impact on the RA side of the equation (due to the fact we'll be upgrading LF defense, so we can hope for a 20 run improvement from one of these guys, right?), having these 3 on our roster doesn't = the loss of Dunn, so unless these 3 can improve the RA side of the equation by saving the Reds 100 runs allowed, we've done nothing to help the RS side of the equation.

Falls City Beer
12-20-2008, 11:26 AM
Is there an outfielder out there better than the numbers Dunn would have put up with the Reds.

Probably not, but Griffey should be easy to replace; throw in his atrocious defense and Griffey's basically replacement level in 2008.

Highlifeman21
12-20-2008, 11:27 AM
Why do we want an aging outfield when everyone thought Griffey was too old? Dunn was young and we unloaded him. Is there an outfielder out there better than the numbers Dunn would have put up with the Reds.

Given that we presumably let Dunn go b/c he would cost too much (North of $13 Million per year), then no. I can't think of anyone out there that we can afford for under $13 Million per year that would put up better numbers than Dunn that we can feasibly obtain.

RedEye
12-20-2008, 11:32 AM
Given that we presumably let Dunn go b/c he would cost too much (North of $13 Million per year), then no. I can't think of anyone out there that we can afford for under $13 Million per year that would put up better numbers than Dunn that we can feasibly obtain.

I'm not sure we know this is the case. Obviously money always plays a role, but I get the feeling that Dunner was just not WJ's kind of player as a total package. WJ has always valued defense, and I think he wanted to go that direction with his OF. Whether or not he ultimately does so remains an open question--but if he gets, say, Baldelli and Taveras, I think it is safe to say the OF D will be quite a bit improved. Offense... not so much.

Highlifeman21
12-20-2008, 11:37 AM
I'm not sure we know this is the case. Obviously money always plays a role, but I get the feeling that Dunner was just not WJ's kind of player as a total package. WJ has always valued defense, and I think he wanted to go that direction with his OF. Whether or not he ultimately does so remains an open question--but if he gets, say, Baldelli and Taveras, I think it is safe to say the OF D will be quite a bit improved. Offense... not so much.

You're right that we don't know for sure.

But, if WJ signs Burrell to anything more than $12 Million per season, we'll know it was b/c WJ didn't want Dunn to be a Red.

But, if WJ signs Burrell, then he'll confirm to us that he knows LF D is meaningless, and that while he certainly might desire good D at other positions, LF won't be one of them.

RedLegSuperStar
12-20-2008, 11:38 AM
We're talking about how Cincy will be able to replace Jr's production...correct?

That's a non-issue.

Anothing thing is Junior and Dunn put butts in seats. Who is going to bring people to the park equivalent to those two? Production combined isn't going to be seen on this roster for a coulpe years unless they spend the money or trade some chips to get it.

Falls City Beer
12-20-2008, 11:39 AM
Anothing thing is Junior and Dunn put butts in seats. Who is going to bring people to the park equivalent to those two? Production combined isn't going to be seen on this roster for a coulpe years unless they spend the money or trade some chips to get it.

Winning is the only thing that matters. Winning consistently that is.

RedEye
12-20-2008, 11:47 AM
You're right that we don't know for sure.

But, if WJ signs Burrell to anything more than $12 Million per season, we'll know it was b/c WJ didn't want Dunn to be a Red.

But, if WJ signs Burrell, then he'll confirm to us that he knows LF D is meaningless, and that while he certainly might desire good D at other positions, LF won't be one of them.

I agree that if the Reds sign Burrell, it would seem to be a clear sign that Dunn just wasn't Walt's type of player.

However, I'm not completely confident that it won't also mean at least one of the following things:

a) Burrell seems to be a better defensive OF to folks who "just watch games" and judge his skills based on less perceivable awkwardness than Dunn.
b) Burrell is the RH drill bit that seems to best complement the team's young LH hitters.
c) Burrell is just a contingency plan C after several other options didn't pan out.

Any of these, mind you, could still mean that when initially making the choice not to sign Dunn, Walt had defense as a main priority.

I like to think the Reds FO is operating according to a long-term vision based on statistical analysis and scouting in tandem. Unfortunately, I don't think they are. The way Walt solves this OF problem will go a long way towards telling us how things are going.

penantboundreds
12-20-2008, 12:21 PM
I got tired of reading the negativity in this thread so if this has been posted I apologize, but is there anything wrong with throwing out names to the media, no one has even been signed and we "are going no-where fast"....wait, what...?

I've been a fan for a long time, a real long time, I also am a Bengals fan, I know negAtivity is a pretty easy feeling to have after watching these teams. However, keep in mind the market is absolutely slow this off-season, and most teams have done absolutely nothing, or nothing regarding major-league contracts. Keep some positive hope that something will get done this off-season.

In Walt I trust.

AmarilloRed
12-20-2008, 12:26 PM
I think a lot of the market is waiting on Mark Texeira to see what sort of deal he can get. You will see a lot of the free agency outfielders start to get their deals after that.

edabbs44
12-20-2008, 12:31 PM
Anothing thing is Junior and Dunn put butts in seats. Who is going to bring people to the park equivalent to those two? Production combined isn't going to be seen on this roster for a coulpe years unless they spend the money or trade some chips to get it.

Jr hasn't been a legit draw in years.

dougdirt
12-20-2008, 12:42 PM
Replacing the offense?

Dunn and Griffey led to the Reds having about 129 RC over there 732 AB's.
Bako and Patterson led to the Reds having about 58 RC in 665 AB's.

So if the Reds get just league average (.792 OPS) for 732 AB's for LF/RF (http://www.baseball-reference.com/pi/bsplit.cgi?lg=ML&team=TOT&year=2008) its worth ~113 RC.
Now if the Reds get just league average at C/CF to replace the 665 AB's given to Patterson and Bako then thats worth ~89 RC.

So Dunn/Griffey/Bako/Patterson was worth 129+58= 187 RC
Replacing them with just league average in 2009 is worth 113+89= 202 RC.

Losing Dunn/Griffey isn't nearly as bad as losing Bako and Patterson is good. If the Reds can wind up getting even better than league average to replace those guys (LF/RF was about .792 OPS and C/CF was about .734 OPS) then they are increasing their run differential even more.

camisadelgolf
12-20-2008, 12:43 PM
Replacing the offense?

Dunn and Griffey led to the Reds having about 129 RC over there 732 AB's.
Bako and Patterson led to the Reds having about 58 RC in 665 AB's.

So if the Reds get just league average (.792 OPS) for 732 AB's for LF/RF (http://www.baseball-reference.com/pi/bsplit.cgi?lg=ML&team=TOT&year=2008) its worth ~113 RC.
Now if the Reds get just league average at C/CF to replace the 665 AB's given to Patterson and Bako then thats worth ~89 RC.

So Dunn/Griffey/Bako/Patterson was worth 129+58= 187 RC
Replacing them with just league average in 2009 is worth 113+89= 202 RC.

Losing Dunn/Griffey isn't nearly as bad as losing Bako and Patterson is good. If the Reds can wind up getting even better than league average to replace those guys (LF/RF was about .792 OPS and C/CF was about .734 OPS) then they are increasing their run differential even more.

I hope you don't mind, but I just stole this post for a thread I started a few minutes ago.

edabbs44
12-20-2008, 12:46 PM
Before you argued that the team couldn't "afford" to have so much money wrapped up in Dunn. Now you are saying we should go get Burrell who will likely cost the same (or more) and give you the same (or less).

There's no consistancy whatsoever in your arguments.

You either have to make a lot of little moves (that in isolation don't change things much) or several big moves (that cost money). Yet you argue against both.

You consistently argue against anything short of pouring money into drafts and praying everything falls into place at some magical point in the future.

Not true at all. Not sure where you are referencing me saying that Cincy cannot afford to have so much money wrapped up in Dunn. Not sure where you think I was against "several big moves". I have been as consistent as possible. Either go for it or don't. If you do, spend money on difference makers, not Stanton and Gonzalez. And spend enough to have a legit shot at winning. If you don't, then spend that money on the future. Not on the previously named stiffs.

That has been my position for ever. The reason why it seems like I have been all for the future is because this organization has obviously not been 100% invested in the present. And if they aren't going to legitimately try and win now, then don't try at all. Spending record breaking money on an aging closer when the rest of team isn't up to snuff is just a waste of money. At the time of the signing I was cautiously pro-Cordero, with the caveat that they needed to make more moves to make that one a positive. That's been my position all along.


Providing structure to the bullpen and helping lower the overall RA/performance of the pen is atrocious?

Wow.

The returns have been atrocious, not the bullpen's performance. In case you didn't hear, the Reds sucked last season. Cincy could have a 0.00 bullpen era this year and it won't be worth a damn if they only win 75 games again.

Improving the bullpen at the expense of the rest of the team isn't smart baseball. Krivsky spent an inordinate amt of time, energy and money to get the bullpen to where it was last year. It only took him 2+ calendar years of borderline obsessive compulsive behavior and tons of cash to make the bullpen a winner. Obviously that wasn't the only thing wrong with the team, even though he acted like it was. And that's why I think he did a lousy job as GM. He didn't do well on the macro level of the position. He had a few very nice moves, but overall he struggled.

If the FO just faced facts the past two years and planned for the future, this team would have tons of payroll flexibility and more young talent in house. Instead, we have some sorry seasons under our belt and money locked up in a few guys who we'd probably rather not.

Highlifeman21
12-20-2008, 01:43 PM
Replacing the offense?

Dunn and Griffey led to the Reds having about 129 RC over there 732 AB's.
Bako and Patterson led to the Reds having about 58 RC in 665 AB's.

So if the Reds get just league average (.792 OPS) for 732 AB's for LF/RF (http://www.baseball-reference.com/pi/bsplit.cgi?lg=ML&team=TOT&year=2008) its worth ~113 RC.
Now if the Reds get just league average at C/CF to replace the 665 AB's given to Patterson and Bako then thats worth ~89 RC.

So Dunn/Griffey/Bako/Patterson was worth 129+58= 187 RC
Replacing them with just league average in 2009 is worth 113+89= 202 RC.

Losing Dunn/Griffey isn't nearly as bad as losing Bako and Patterson is good. If the Reds can wind up getting even better than league average to replace those guys (LF/RF was about .792 OPS and C/CF was about .734 OPS) then they are increasing their run differential even more.

This doesn't change the fact that in order to have post-season dreams for 2009, we'll need to replace the lost offense with more than what we lost.

So, while replacing what we lost with league average is a nice theory, we'll need to replace what we lost with better than league average just to finish above .500, let alone try to win the Wild Card.

dougdirt
12-20-2008, 02:11 PM
This doesn't change the fact that in order to have post-season dreams for 2009, we'll need to replace the lost offense with more than what we lost.

So, while replacing what we lost with league average is a nice theory, we'll need to replace what we lost with better than league average just to finish above .500, let alone try to win the Wild Card.

I don't know if we need better than league average to finish above .500 to be honest. The pitching looks improved from the rotation and the bullpen. The offense and defense both look to be in better shape as well.

Yeah, to overcome last years runs allowed we have to add more than league average offense, but I don't think next years team allows as many runs because the defense will likely be better (replacing Dunn/Griffey will help a ton) and the pitching should be better, thus resulting in a lower runs allowed total, drawing things closer.

Jpup
12-20-2008, 02:33 PM
Until we see Tex and Manny sign, we are not going to see anything happen IMO. I think I am going to hibernate until that happens.:(

OnBaseMachine
12-21-2008, 02:15 AM
I'd look into signing Joe Crede to a one or two year deal and moving EdE to left field. With the league adjustment, Crede could put up league average or slightly better numbers while playing some of the best defense in baseball at his position. Here's a nice writeup on him:

Free Agent Bargain: Joe Crede

by Dave Cameron - October 28, 2008 · Filed under Daily Graphings

So, this time, I swear, the free agent bargain is actually a free agent.

Much like with Juan Rivera, this potential bargain was a tremendous player in 2006 - he hit .283/.323/.506, good for a 0.71 WPA/LI in 586 plate appearances. The power overcame the low on base rate, and he was a somewhat above average hitter. Meanwhile, John Dewan’s +/- system had him at +31 plays at his position, a staggering total that profiled him as an elite defender. As a third baseman, the combination of above average bat and remarkably awesome glove made him one of the game’s under-appeciated stars.

I’m guessing that practically no one has figured out that I’m talking about Joe Crede, because he certainly didn’t get much publicity for his outstanding 2006 at the time. As defensive performances get more notoriety, however, we can look back at that season and recognize it as one of the best under-the-radar seasons in recent history.

However, in 2007, Crede’s balky balk finally went out, and he had to undergo season ending back surgery. Those back problems cut his 2008 season short as well, and over the last two years, he’s been limited to just 551 plate appearances while playing through pain. His reliability is a real question, and the White Sox are expected to go another direction in their quest for a full time third baseman.

Now, I’m not a doctor, so don’t take this as any kind of endorsement of his future health. For all I know, his back problems could be career ending. However, if they’re not, and the medical people can figure out how to keep him on the field, his 2008 performance should assure potential GMs that Crede can still play.

The power is still there - he had a .212 ISO, built on 36 extra base hits in just 335 at-bats. His contact rate was identical to his 2006 performance, so it doesn’t appear he had to adjust his swing to compensate for the pain. Contact and power are the building blocks of a good hitter, and Crede’s abilities in those areas didn’t seem to suffer when he was on the field.

Defensively, it’s pretty much the same story. He’s played just over 1,200 innings at third base the last two years, basically a full season’s worth of games, and +/- has him at +24 plays over that time. Even as a step down from his +31 in 2006, it’s a great rating. You could conservatively drop his true talent level to +15, accounting for more aging, and he’d still be among the very best hot corner defenders around.

In terms of on field skills, Crede projects as something close to a league average hitter with defense that’s worth +1.5 to +2.0 wins above an average third baseman. Over a full season, that would make Crede a +3.5 to +4 win player. If he was completely healthy, we’d expect him to get something like $15 million a year in a long term deal.

But he’s not healthy, and so he’s not going to get anything close to that. It’d be shocking if he got anything beyond a one year offer with a team option for 2010. But if he can stay on the field, even for 100-120 games a year, he’s got the abilities to play at an all-star level. Right now, he’s Milton Bradley with less attitude problems, and there are probably quite a few teams who wish they would have taken a chance on Bradley last winter.

It all depends on his health, because there shouldn’t be too many questions about Joe Crede’s abilities to help a winning team when he’s on the field.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/free-agent-bargain-joe-crede

reds44
12-21-2008, 02:37 AM
Stay away from Crede and his bad back.

camisadelgolf
12-21-2008, 07:38 AM
Stay away from Crede and his bad back.

For the most part, I agree with this, but if the Reds acquired Crede and Jonny Gomes for left field, I think the Reds could do worse. The reason I wouldn't be disappointed is because it would mean the Reds didn't sacrifice the future to fool themselves into thinking they could win the 2009 pennant. A combination of Crede and Gomes could at least get the Reds to be a .500 team, and it wouldn't hamstring them for 2010, when the Reds might actually be ready to compete.

RedLegSuperStar
12-21-2008, 07:59 AM
What makes 2010 the year the Reds compete? Harang, Arroyo, and Phillips will all see raises. Hernandez will have a option or buyout. Edwin will get a raise. CoCo will still make a lot. Is it cause we could potentially have Alonso, Stubbs, Valaika, Frazier, Maloney, and Thompson all ready?

Krusty
12-21-2008, 08:25 AM
Put me down for acquiring both Taveras and Baldelli and signing them to two-year deals. Taveras in CF and Baldelli in LF with Dickerson as a fourth outfielder. That will give time for Drew Stubbs to develop. The lineup wouldn't look bad either.

1. Taveras CF
2. Phillips 2b
3. Votto lb
4. Baldelli LF
5. Bruce RF
6. Encarnacion 3b
7. Hernandez c
8. Gonzalez ss

Could be better but definitely could be alot worse. But if all it costs is money with no longterm commitments while keeping all the prospects and the pitching intact, go ahead Walt and get Baldelli and Taveras too.

Jpup
12-21-2008, 08:31 AM
Put me down for acquiring both Taveras and Baldelli and signing them to two-year deals. Taveras in CF and Baldelli in LF with Dickerson as a fourth outfielder. That will give time for Drew Stubbs to develop. The lineup wouldn't look bad either.

1. Taveras CF
2. Phillips 2b
3. Votto lb
4. Baldelli LF
5. Bruce RF
6. Encarnacion 3b
7. Hernandez c
8. Gonzalez ss

Could be better but definitely could be alot worse. But if all it costs is money with no longterm commitments while keeping all the prospects and the pitching intact, go ahead Walt and get Baldelli and Taveras too.

You can't be serious about getting Taveras.:confused:

Krusty
12-21-2008, 08:35 AM
You can't be serious about getting Taveras.:confused:


Yes I am. As long as you're not committing big money to a longterm contract. A two year deal might work. Heck, Cincinnati never had great leadoff hitters since Rose. We even had Deion Sanders in the OF and leading off for the Reds. If Taveras finds a way to get on base (and look beyond his paltry numbers from last year), that sets the table for the others. You tell me you can get Taveras and Baldalli along with keeping all the young prospects while having payroll flexiblity and the pitching remains intact.....I'll tell Taveras where to sign on the doted line.

Raisor
12-21-2008, 08:49 AM
If Taveras finds a way to get on base (and look beyond his paltry numbers from last year), .

In 2008, 19 NL leadoff hitters had 200+ PA's (in the leadoff spot).

Here is their story.

They created a combined 1,093.4 runs in 7370 PA's (RC includes SB's btw).

That's 89 RC per 600 PA's.

In Willy's career, he's put up the following RC numbers (which gives credit to SB's once again).

05 66.06 per 600 pa
06 66.66 per 600 pa
07 84.54 per 600 pa
08 63.24 per 600 PA

Even in his best year (07) he was still 5 runs short of AVERAGE. In his three other seasons he's an average of -24 runs created per 600 PA's. For the four years, he's about 20 runs short of being average.

This is not a guy you want even for "depth", let alone starting for you. Let alone giving two years to.

Jpup
12-21-2008, 09:06 AM
Yes I am. As long as you're not committing big money to a longterm contract. A two year deal might work. Heck, Cincinnati never had great leadoff hitters since Rose. We even had Deion Sanders in the OF and leading off for the Reds. If Taveras finds a way to get on base (and look beyond his paltry numbers from last year), that sets the table for the others. You tell me you can get Taveras and Baldalli along with keeping all the young prospects while having payroll flexiblity and the pitching remains intact.....I'll tell Taveras where to sign on the doted line.

Patterson part II.

camisadelgolf
12-21-2008, 09:06 AM
What makes 2010 the year the Reds compete? Harang, Arroyo, and Phillips will all see raises. Hernandez will have a option or buyout. Edwin will get a raise. CoCo will still make a lot. Is it cause we could potentially have Alonso, Stubbs, Valaika, Frazier, Maloney, and Thompson all ready?

It may be heard to believe, but the Reds could actually be in better financial position in 2010 than 2009. Alex Gonzalez, Ramon Hernandez, and Dave Weathers should be off the books, which is nearly $16 million, and the combined raises of Phillips, Harang, and Arroyo will total only $5 million. That leaves $11 million to help cover the raises that Bray, Burton, Encarnacion, and Keppinger will get through arbitration. That would leave, in my estimation, about $15 million for free agent signings.

CF Drew Stubbs
LF Joey Votto
1B Yonder Alonso
3B Edwin Encarnacion
RF Jay Bruce
2B Brandon Phillips
SS Chris Valaika
C Ryan Hanigan

C Wilkin Castillo
IF Jeff Keppinger
IF Todd Frazier
OF Chris Dickerson
OF Danny Dorn

SP Edinson Volquez
SP Aaron Harang
SP Johnny Cueto
SP Bronson Arroyo
SP Micah Owings

CL Francisco Cordero
RP Jared Burton
RP Bill Bray
RP Mike Lincoln
RP Arthur Rhodes
RP Josh Roenicke
RP Ramon Ramirez

Like I said, the Reds would have about $15 million for free agent acquisitions, and that's not to mention all the prospects who could be traded for the improvements at various positions like catcher, shortstop, and center field.
Daryl Thompson
Homer Bailey
Sean Watson
Adam Rosales
Danny Ray Herrera
Carlos Fisher
Robert Manuel
Sam LeCure
Nick Masset
Danny Richar
Paul Janish
Craig Tatum
Logan Parker
Juan Francisco
Chris Heisey
Sean Henry
Jordan Smith
Travis Wood
Alex Smit
Dallas Buck
Pedro Viola
Zach Stewart
Ben Jukich
Jeremy Horst
Justin Reed
Zack Cozart
Nefi Soto
Devin Mesoraco
etc.

Between all the players listed above, I'm pretty sure the Reds could acquire at least one impact player. The young nucleus should be improved, and it's a very affordable team. I have many reasons to be much more excited about 2010 than 2009.

Wheelhouse
12-21-2008, 09:12 AM
You can't be serious about getting Taveras.:confused:

Why not. If he gets anywhere near his 2007 OBP of .367 he'll score a TON of runs.

Jpup
12-21-2008, 09:14 AM
Why not. If he gets anywhere near his 2007 OBP of .367 he'll score a TON of runs.

If I pick the right numbers, I'll win the lottery, but neither is likely.

Highlifeman21
12-21-2008, 09:15 AM
Why not. If he gets anywhere near his 2007 OBP of .367 he'll score a TON of runs.

So you're cherry picking the only year he's had a decent OBP, and hoping he can repeat that outlier?

pahster
12-21-2008, 09:32 AM
Todd Frazier won't be sitting on the bench when he comes up.

camisadelgolf
12-21-2008, 09:36 AM
Todd Frazier won't be sitting on the bench when he comes up.

I agree. I think what will ultimately happen is that Encarnacion or Votto will be traded for a shortstop or catcher.

M2
12-21-2008, 11:52 AM
Put me down for acquiring both Taveras and Baldelli and signing them to two-year deals. Taveras in CF and Baldelli in LF with Dickerson as a fourth outfielder. That will give time for Drew Stubbs to develop. The lineup wouldn't look bad either.

1. Taveras CF
2. Phillips 2b
3. Votto lb
4. Baldelli LF
5. Bruce RF
6. Encarnacion 3b
7. Hernandez c
8. Gonzalez ss

Could be better but definitely could be alot worse. But if all it costs is money with no longterm commitments while keeping all the prospects and the pitching intact, go ahead Walt and get Baldelli and Taveras too.

RHPs would eat that lineup alive.

CougarQuest
12-21-2008, 11:55 AM
RHPs would eat that lineup alive.
Yeah, but how many RHP's are there out there?

Heath
12-21-2008, 11:56 AM
RHPs would eat that lineup alive.

I hate to see the RC on that one.

OnBaseMachine
12-21-2008, 12:09 PM
Put me down for acquiring both Taveras and Baldelli and signing them to two-year deals. Taveras in CF and Baldelli in LF with Dickerson as a fourth outfielder. That will give time for Drew Stubbs to develop. The lineup wouldn't look bad either.

1. Taveras CF
2. Phillips 2b
3. Votto lb
4. Baldelli LF
5. Bruce RF
6. Encarnacion 3b
7. Hernandez c
8. Gonzalez ss

Could be better but definitely could be alot worse. But if all it costs is money with no longterm commitments while keeping all the prospects and the pitching intact, go ahead Walt and get Baldelli and Taveras too.

Willy Taveras sucks. Any lineup with Taveras at the top is probably going to be a bad lineup.

Raisor
12-21-2008, 12:53 PM
Yeah, but how many RHP's are there out there?

assuming you're serious, about 75% of the pitchers in the league.

Raisor
12-21-2008, 12:56 PM
Why not. If he gets anywhere near his 2007 OBP of .367 he'll score a TON of runs.


..and if my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a wagon.

AmarilloRed
12-21-2008, 12:57 PM
Why not. If he gets anywhere near his 2007 OBP of .367 he'll score a TON of runs.

He had a BA of .320 in 2007 which was a major reason his OBP was that high. I don't see Taveras hitting .320 again.

RedsManRick
12-21-2008, 01:20 PM
Why not. If he gets anywhere near his 2007 OBP of .367 he'll score a TON of runs.

That's a true statement. But the key is the "IF". You don't sign a guy because of what is possible. You sign a guy because of what is likely.

Why would we expect Taveras to put up a .367 OBP again? Should we expect him to have a .371 BABIP again?

In 2007, Taveras' BABIP was so high because he was bunting like a mad man. He had 38 bunt base hits, double the #2 guy, Juan Pierre. In 2008, Tavares had 24 bunt base hits, #2 behind Carlos Gomez, who had 30. In 2006, he tied for first with 21 bunt base hits. He was tied with Juan Pierre and (gasp) Corey Patterson.

Taveras' game depends almost entirely on how often he's able to bunt for a base hit. He tries to do so more than anybody else in baseball. He's Norris Hopper with a bit more speed. I think he can be a valuable guy to have around as 5th OF, Designated bunter, and pinch runner.

But for a team and a city that couldn't stand a guy because he had too narrow a skill set, it would be quite ironic to sign a guy who's only skill is being able to run really fast. Though I guess we've been down this road before. Tavares' skill set is frighteningly similar to Deion Sanders. Hey, Deion sure was fun to watch; probably more fun to manage too. That's what counts.

HokieRed
12-21-2008, 01:28 PM
This year's lineup versus righties:
1.Dickerson
2.EE
3.Bruce
4.Votto
5.Edmonds
6.Hernandez
7.Phillips
8.Gonzalez

Ltlabner
12-21-2008, 03:53 PM
If Taveras finds a way to get on base (and look beyond his paltry numbers from last year), that sets the table for the others.


NAME YEAR PA OBP SLG OUTR SB% VORP EqA RAR RAP
Willy Taveras 2008 538 .308 .296 .67658 90.7% 2.0 .238 4.2 -19.2
Willy Taveras 2007 408 .367 .382 .62745 78.6% 16.4 .261 12.5 -1.8
Willy Taveras 2006 587 .333 .338 .66099 78.6% 5.1 .242 6.9 -12.4
Willy Taveras 2005 635 .325 .341 .65984 75.6% 4.9 .242 7.3 -15.7


I'm just going to keep posting these numbers.

Looking beyond the paltry 2008 OBP numbers you have one good year and 2 blah years. So in total you have 1 horable year, 2 blah years and 1 good year (in terms of OBP).

And you want to bet 300 leadoff PA's that he'll repeat the 1 good year and not be closer to the 3 other years? That doesn't strike me as a good bet.

That's all before you get to his mediocre stolen base rate, horrible EqA's for 3 of the 4 years and never once scoring more runs than a average Center Fielder.



Why not. If he gets anywhere near his 2007 OBP of .367 he'll score a TON of runs.

Tavaras played for a team that went to the World Series in 2007. Yet despite having an OBP of .367 he did not, in fact, score a TON of runs. In fact, he scored 1.8 less runs than an average CF. On a World Series competitive squad in his supposed "career" year that people keep clinging too.

Do.Not.Want

Caveat Emperor
12-21-2008, 07:37 PM
Put me down for acquiring both Taveras and Baldelli and signing them to two-year deals.

Signing Taveras ensures you'll have a noodle-sticked out-machine at the top of the lineup, every night, for two seasons.

Signing Baldelli ensures you'll see Norris Hopper in the outfield for a minimum of 70 games.

You'll excuse me if I go and empty my stomach into the nearest toilet.

HokieRed
12-21-2008, 07:52 PM
Signing Taveras ensures you'll have a noodle-sticked out-machine at the top of the lineup, every night, for two seasons.

Signing Baldelli ensures you'll see Norris Hopper in the outfield for a minimum of 70 games.

Two reasons I am beginning to think signing Jim Edmonds will be a good idea.
__________________

KronoRed
12-21-2008, 08:57 PM
Signing Taveras ensures you'll have a noodle-sticked out-machine at the top of the lineup, every night, for two seasons.


We had one last year as well, it seems the plan is to make sure there are always 1 or 2 outs before the good hitters come up, maybe some sort of "real baseball players drive in runs with outs" type of thing :D

REDREAD
12-21-2008, 11:59 PM
Did he do his job? Yes he did.

While I agree it is possible to find less expensive, completely effective closers. We just witnessed the worst bullpen run the Reds have had during most of our lifetimes (the Reds generally got quality bullpen work from 1959-2003, or at least July 2003). We actually saw something remarkable last season. The Reds had a problem and more or less fixed it. The ... Reds ... fixed ... something. It boggles the mind.

I think this is a great point. Let's put aside the price tag for Cordero.

In terms of talent, this was easily the best FA signing Wayne made. Easily.
Cordero did his job, and he's a good bet to continue to do his job.

Maybe the Reds overpaid a bit. How much did they really overpay though? Maybe 3-4 million per year? Would people be complaining if Cordero's contract was only 7-8 million per year?

Let's say for the sake of argument that the Reds overpaid by 3 million/year. Sure, that's not optimal use of money, but I'd much rather them lose 3 million by overpaying a good player than giving a contract to a bad player. Example.. the bad Freel extension cost the club about 7-8 million. I forget the exact amount, but the point is that it's very easy to lose money.

I'd much rather overpay a good player than waste money on a bad player.
At least the team gets value from the good player.

Ron Madden
12-22-2008, 12:08 AM
I'd much rather overpay a good player than waste money on a bad player.
At least the team gets value from the good player.



Agreed, I've been sayin' this for the last four years.

REDREAD
12-22-2008, 12:12 AM
I'm not sure we know this is the case. Obviously money always plays a role, but I get the feeling that Dunner was just not WJ's kind of player as a total package. WJ has always valued defense, and I think he wanted to go that direction with his OF. Whether or not he ultimately does so remains an open question--but if he gets, say, Baldelli and Taveras, I think it is safe to say the OF D will be quite a bit improved. Offense... not so much.


I don't think Dunn wanted to come back to Cincy.

Maybe he'd come back if we offered him 20 million/year or something like that, but I don't think the reasoning of "Well, if we can afford Burell, why not just get Dunn?" holds.

Dunn wanted out, in my opinion. I have no proof, but he's mentioned disliking the radio guys, wanting to play for a winner, and Arroyo suggested that he wanted much more years and $$ than the Reds were willing to even consider.

FA isn't like the supermarket where you can get whoever you want if you have the cash. I think the main reason the Reds did deal Dunn to AZ was because Walt knew Dunn was not an option for 2009. The bridge is burned, for whatever reason.

wheels
12-22-2008, 08:39 AM
I'd much rather overpay a good player than waste money on a bad player.
At least the team gets value from the good player.

Except you want them to bring in Taveras.

Zing!:p:

Ltlabner
12-22-2008, 08:50 AM
I'd much rather overpay a good player than waste money on a bad player. At least the team gets value from the good player.

Agree 100%. I've argued many times that I'd rather overpay a productive player by $1,000,000 than pay a totally unproductive player $1.

Which is why we should stay far, far, far, far away from Taveras.

Baldelli might be a good option as long as (1) the price is right (2) you plan on him riding the DL at some point. Not my fav choice but it would at least be a fresh face and new approach.

edabbs44
12-22-2008, 08:51 AM
I think this is a great point. Let's put aside the price tag for Cordero.

In terms of talent, this was easily the best FA signing Wayne made. Easily.
Cordero did his job, and he's a good bet to continue to do his job.

Maybe the Reds overpaid a bit. How much did they really overpay though? Maybe 3-4 million per year? Would people be complaining if Cordero's contract was only 7-8 million per year?

Let's say for the sake of argument that the Reds overpaid by 3 million/year. Sure, that's not optimal use of money, but I'd much rather them lose 3 million by overpaying a good player than giving a contract to a bad player. Example.. the bad Freel extension cost the club about 7-8 million. I forget the exact amount, but the point is that it's very easy to lose money.

I'd much rather overpay a good player than waste money on a bad player.
At least the team gets value from the good player.

I think the length of the contract is another issue.

RedEye
12-22-2008, 09:01 AM
I think the length of the contract is another issue.

Exactly. I think at the time of the Cordero signing, most people were on board for the first two years or so. It seemed, at the time, like Coco would probably remain a decent-to-dominant closer for the next two seasons. What you worry about is the back end of the deal, when he gets older and starts to decline in skill--but still gets overpaid.

Don't get me wrong, I agree that the Cordero signing--at least conceptually--was a strong move. I just worry that the money and length of the contract are going to bite us in the keister.

RedEye
12-22-2008, 09:03 AM
I don't think Dunn wanted to come back to Cincy.

Maybe he'd come back if we offered him 20 million/year or something like that, but I don't think the reasoning of "Well, if we can afford Burell, why not just get Dunn?" holds.

Dunn wanted out, in my opinion. I have no proof, but he's mentioned disliking the radio guys, wanting to play for a winner, and Arroyo suggested that he wanted much more years and $$ than the Reds were willing to even consider.

FA isn't like the supermarket where you can get whoever you want if you have the cash. I think the main reason the Reds did deal Dunn to AZ was because Walt knew Dunn was not an option for 2009. The bridge is burned, for whatever reason.

Well, I can't say I disagree. Really, both of our opinions are pure speculation... and I think very likely the decision was some combination of them (Dunn not wanting any part of the Reds, WJ wanting better OF defense). It's not an either-or scenario we're dealing with here, most likely.

M2
12-22-2008, 09:43 AM
Dunn wanted out because playing for the Reds is like dating Ruth Buzzi while a parade of supermodels saunter in front of you.

RichRed
12-22-2008, 10:37 AM
Dunn wanted out because playing for the Reds is like dating Ruth Buzzi while a parade of supermodels saunter in front of you.

Ouch. The truth hurts. Sock it to me.

wheels
12-22-2008, 10:45 AM
Who's Ruth Buzzi?

westofyou
12-22-2008, 10:56 AM
Who's Ruth Buzzi?

Laugh In... there I dated myself

http://www.walnettosinc.com/images/ruth_buzzi1.jpg

Her most famous character was the dowdy spinster Gladys Ormphby, clad in brown with her bun hairdo covered by a visible hairnet. In most sketches, she used her lethal purse, with which she would flail away at anyone who sought to take advantage of her. On Laugh-In, Gladys most often appeared as the unwilling object of the advances of Arte Johnson's "dirty old man" character Tyrone.

In a typical exchange, Tyrone would accost Gladys and ask, "Do you believe in the hereafter?" Gladys snapped, "Of course I do!" Delighted, Tyrone shot back, "Then you know what I'm here after!"

M2
12-22-2008, 10:58 AM
Who's Ruth Buzzi?

She was on Laugh-In

http://bittenandbound.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/ruth-buzzi-little-old-lady-with-a-mean-umbrella.jpg

And Lost Saucer

http://dennisthevizsla.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/lostsaucer.jpg

westofyou
12-22-2008, 11:00 AM
She was on Laugh-In

http://bittenandbound.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/ruth-buzzi-little-old-lady-with-a-mean-umbrella.jpg

And Lost Saucer

http://dennisthevizsla.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/lostsaucer.jpg

Lost Saucer?

That show had noting on Big John Little John.

http://www.70slivekidvid.com/bjlj/transf1.gif

wheels
12-22-2008, 11:02 AM
She looks kinda sexy in that space suit, though.

M2
12-22-2008, 11:10 AM
Lost Saucer?

That show had noting on Big John Little John.

I'm old fashioned. I believe the measure of a successful Hollywood career is how many times did you work with Billy Barty.

M2
12-22-2008, 11:11 AM
She looks kinda sexy in that space suit, though.

You're looking at Jim Nabors. Buzzi's the one on the right.

RedEye
12-22-2008, 11:17 AM
Apologies if this Enquirer version of Fay's report has already been posted on this thread:

Edit: whoops... duh.. that's the article that freaking STARTED this thread. Too much egg nog er something. Sorry.