PDA

View Full Version : Ricciardi: Jays "Have To Listen" On Halladay



redsfandan
07-07-2009, 11:29 AM
Ricciardi: Jays "Have To Listen" On Halladay By Ben Nicholson-Smith [July 7 at 8:20am CST]

Roy Halladay might be the best pitcher in the game; he's definitely the best pitcher on the trade market. Jays GM J.P. Ricciardi told Ken Rosenthal of FOX Sports that he's ready to listen to offers for his ace pitcher.

"We have to see what's out there," Ricciardi said. "I'm not saying we're going to shop him. But if something makes sense, we at least have to listen. We're more toward listening than we've ever been."

We heard hints that Halladay could be available yesterday, but now there's no doubt: the Jays are ready to part with him in the right deal. Rosenthal believes "Halladay is a goner," saying it's "almost impossible to stop" the process of selling a player once it starts, but Ricciardi said the Jays won't deal Halladay if the right offer doesn't surface.

Given teams' unwillingness to take on salary and part with prospects, there's no guarantee that the Jays will receive a blockbuster offer. Halladay has a no trade clause and is under contract for this year ($14.25MM) and next ($15.75MM). The Jays also owe Alex Rios and Vernon Wells about $160MM over the next five seasons, which could make it harder to pay Halladay.
--------------------------------------------------

Roy Halladay's Potential Suitors By Ben Nicholson-Smith [July 7 at 8:54am CST]

Ken Rosenthal of FOX Sports reports that the Jays are open to offers for Roy Halladay. This doesn't mean the Jays will deal heir ace; it just means they'll consider moving him for the right group of players. Here is Rosenthal's "largely speculative" list of possible destinations for the Jays righty:

•Yankees - Rosenthal says the Jays will not hesitate to dangle Halladay to the Yankees and Red Sox. Phil Hughes could head an offer.
•Red Sox - The Red Sox could start an offer with Clay Buchholz, but they may prefer to hold onto Buchholz or use him as a trade chip to try and lure Victor Martinez away from the Indians.
•Phillies - Rosenthal hears they've asked about Halladay repeatedly in recent years. The Phillies have an appealing group of prospects, but they could have trouble taking on the $7MM remaining on Doc's deal.
•White Sox - The White Sox were in on Jake Peavy, so they could make a play for Halladay. As Rosenthal says, Clayton Richard and Aaron Poreda wouldn't be enough, but they also have Gordon Beckham.
•Dodgers - They'd likely have to part with Chad Billingsley or Clayton Kershaw to obtain Halladay.
•Rangers - The Rangers have the prospects, but not the money.
•Cubs - Until Jim Hendry gets the go-ahead to add payroll the Cubs are an unlikely destination, especially because they don't have big-name prospects to tempt the Jays.
•Angels - Probably lack the premium pieces the Jays would seek.
•Brewers - Alcides Escobar would appeal to the Jays, who don't have an answer at short after Marco Scutaro becomes a free agent this year. But Escobar's untouchable, and probably wouldn't net Halladay on his own.
•Mets - Omar Minaya would have to empty the farm system to acquire Halladay.
•Braves - Rosenthal says they're a longshot, especially since they have pitching depth already.
•I see the Phillies and Brewers as the best fits, since they crave pitching, have young talent and play in another league.

traderumor
07-07-2009, 11:34 AM
And to the loser of the Halladay sweepstakes, I present to you Aaron Harang.

Homer Bailey
07-07-2009, 11:41 AM
And to the loser of the Halladay sweepstakes, I present to you Aaron Harang.

And to a loser in general, I present to you, Bronson Arroyo.

M2
07-07-2009, 11:45 AM
And to the loser of the Halladay sweepstakes, I present to you Aaron Harang.

Yep. I expect he'll be a hot property in another two weeks.

As for Halladay, I'd love to see the Brewers make that deal.

Benihana
07-07-2009, 11:49 AM
And to a loser in general, I present to you, Bronson Arroyo.

:laugh:

That was great!

Benihana
07-07-2009, 11:50 AM
And to the loser of the Halladay sweepstakes, I present to you Aaron Harang.

Harang for Alcides Escobar and a flyer on Manny Parra?

Too much? Too little? NWIH we deal with the Brewers?

edabbs44
07-07-2009, 11:54 AM
Harang for Alcides Escobar and a flyer on Manny Parra?

Too much? Too little? NWIH we deal with the Brewers?

I think having issues with dealing inter-division is overrated.

Falls City Beer
07-07-2009, 12:17 PM
The Reds would set themselves back at least three seasons without getting a starter in return for Harang. This rotation is a hot mess even with Harang. Take him out, and c'est le deluge.

Benihana
07-07-2009, 12:22 PM
The Reds would set themselves back at least three seasons without getting a starter in return for Harang. This rotation is a hot mess even with Harang. Take him out, and c'est le deluge.

I agree, and yet you voted for the only deal without a starter in the other thread. Manny Parra, if corrected properly, could be at least a solid #4 (and lefty) in the rotation for years to come. Phil Hughes and J.A. Happ are a couple other names I'd like to hear in the conversation.

Raisor
07-07-2009, 12:24 PM
The Reds would set themselves back at least three seasons without getting a starter in return for Harang. This rotation is a hot mess even with Harang. Take him out, and c'est le deluge.

100% agree. You HAVE to get a major league ready arm and a power prospect at a non power position if you're trading AH.

Falls City Beer
07-07-2009, 12:24 PM
I agree, and yet you voted for the Matt Kemp deal in the other thread. Manny Parra, if corrected properly, could be at least a solid #4 (and lefty) in the rotation for years to come. Phil Hughes and J.A. Happ are a couple other names I'd like to hear in the conversation.

Manny Parra is garbage and Happ isn't going anywhere. I chose the Kemp deal because it's the only realistic one, and therefore, the best of the proposed deals.

Though, choosing between the Kemp deal and nothing, I'm leaning towards just keeping Harang. The pitching future of this organization is very, very bleak (Volquez is a huge question mark, probably continually; Cueto is awfully short, and has had a balky back at least twice that we know of).

Benihana
07-07-2009, 12:32 PM
Manny Parra is garbage and Happ isn't going anywhere. I chose the Kemp deal because it's the only realistic one, and therefore, the best of the proposed deals.

The Yankees deal is realistic. I believe the other ones would at least be considered as well.


Though, choosing between the Kemp deal and nothing, I'm leaning towards just keeping Harang.

I'm not arguing against keeping Harang- in fact, I've argued for it vehemently many times in recent weeks. "None of the above" was quoted in text as an option for the poll.


The pitching future of this organization is very, very bleak (Volquez is a huge question mark, probably continually; Cueto is awfully short, and has had a balky back at least twice that we know of).

Blah, blah, blah. We've been hearing this from you for a while now. Other gems of yours include "Volquez is finished and he'll be in Louisville within a month" (in May '08, less than 1/3 of the way through to a 17-6, 3.21 ERA season) etc. Your doomsday talk is getting old. I agree the Reds need to get a quality young starter (at least) in exchange for Harang, but stop with your ridiculous hyperbole already. There are many, many teams that would gladly swap their pitching future with the Reds right now, especially when you look beyond this season.

Falls City Beer
07-07-2009, 12:38 PM
The Yankees deal is realistic. I believe the other ones would at least be considered as well.



I'm not arguing against keeping Harang- in fact, I've argued for it vehemently many times in recent weeks. "None of the above" was quoted in text as an option for the poll.



Blah, blah, blah. We've been hearing this from you for a while now. Other gems of yours include "Volquez is finished and he'll be in Louisville within a month" (in May '08, less than 1/3 of the way through to a 17-6, 3.21 ERA season) etc. Your doomsday talk is getting old. I agree the Reds need to get a quality young starter (at least) in exchange for Harang, but stop with your ridiculous hyperbole already. There are many, many teams that would gladly swap their pitching future with the Reds right now, especially when you look beyond this season.


Let me know when this organization produces a pitching staff in the upper half of the NL.

Hyperbole is believing against any logic or history that this organization has pitching figured out on any level. I'm merely an observer of a status quo I've been following for 15 seasons (minus 99).

Is it doomsday to point out that this organization is now tenth in RA in the NL this season?

jojo
07-07-2009, 12:39 PM
Harang for Alcides Escobar and a flyer on Manny Parra?

Too much? Too little? NWIH we deal with the Brewers?

I don't think the Brewers would do that-he's the guy that might tempt them to flip Hardy for an arm rental or as part of some bigger shenanigan.

Benihana
07-07-2009, 12:47 PM
Let me know when this organization produces a pitching staff in the upper half of the NL.

Hyperbole is believing against any logic or history that this organization has pitching figured out on any level. I'm merely an observer of a status quo I've been following for 15 seasons (minus 99).

Only a short while ago on this same board, it used to be "Let me know when this organization produces a pitching prospect with any kind of success. There hasn't been one in XX years, and if history is any indication..." Now there is Cueto, Bailey, Stewart, etc.


Is it doomsday to point out that this organization is now tenth in RA in the NL this season?

No, but cherry-picking statistics (after the last two days) is an immature and intellectually lazy tactic.

There's no doubt the rotation is not in good shape at the current moment. But the pitching future of this organization is anything but "very, very bleak." Name 10 teams you would happily swap the Reds' pitching future for, considering names like Cueto, Volquez, Harang (locked up for 2 more years), Bailey, Owings, Stewart, Wood, Leake, etc. If the future was so "very, very bleak" then you could easily find 10 teams who you would happily trade pitching futures with (considering that's only the top 1/3 of the league,) right?

And this doesn't even make mention of the bullpen, which is currently one of the best in baseball and has several young arms well-positioned for the future (that is so very, very bleak.)

Falls City Beer
07-07-2009, 12:52 PM
There's no doubt the rotation is not in good shape at the current moment. But the pitching future of this organization is anything but "very, very bleak." Name 10 teams you would happily swap the Reds' pitching future for, considering names like Cueto, Volquez, Harang (locked up for 2 more years), Bailey, Owings, Stewart, Wood, Leake, etc. If the future was so very, very bleak then you could easily find 10 teams who you would happily trade places with (considering that's only the top 1/3 of the league,) right?

And this doesn't even make mention of the bullpen, which is currently one of the best in baseball and has several young arms well-positioned for the future (that is so very, very bleak.)

I'd only swap pitching with the Reds if I were the Nats, Pads, Mets, or Astros. I can't speak to the AL as I don't follow it as closely.



No, but cherry-picking statistics (after the last two days) is an immature and intellectually lazy tactic.

Please. I saw this coming for a long time and pointed repeatedly to my reasons: diminished K's, rise in BBs.

Spare me your johnny-come-lately pieties.

What happened the last two days is simply the full-throated expression of this team's pitching reality.

At best, this team's pitching fortunes are tenuous; at worst, we're staring at continued obscurity for seasons to come. Are they better than some of this decade's iterations? Sure, I've said so repeatedly. But so what? They're still not good.

Benihana
07-07-2009, 01:19 PM
Please. I saw this coming for a long time and pointed repeatedly to my reasons: diminished K's, rise in BBs.

Spare me your johnny-come-lately pieties.

What happened the last two days is simply the full-throated expression of this team's pitching reality.

At best, this team's pitching fortunes are tenuous; at worst, we're staring at continued obscurity for seasons to come. Are they better than some of this decade's iterations? Sure, I've said so repeatedly. But so what? They're still not good.

I'm not arguing for the strength of the rotation this year. It's clearly in shambles at the moment, and that is almost entirely attributable to Arroyo's implosion and Volquez's injury: Owings is still a better-than-average #5, Cueto has been a #1 (his performance last night notwithstanding) and Harang is still Harang- hence both of our reluctance to part with him.

But in terms of the future, you are just way off base...


I'd only swap pitching with the Reds if I were the Nats, Pads, Mets, or Astros. I can't speak to the AL as I don't follow it as closely.


Please name me eight starting pitchers from the Pirates that you would rather have in your organization for the future than Cueto, Volquez, Harang, Bailey, Owings, Stewart, Wood, and Leake. The Rockies? The Brewers? Hell, your beloved Cardinals? And of course, you don't know enough about the AL- just take 1/2 of baseball out of the equation for argument's sake...

jojo
07-07-2009, 01:24 PM
I think most teams would find Cueto, Volquez, Harang and Bailey to be attractive additions to their organizations.

Falls City Beer
07-07-2009, 01:32 PM
I think most teams would find Cueto, Volquez, Harang and Bailey to be attractive additions to their organizations.

These guys represent a huge spectrum of ability and ceiling. While I guess no one would turn down these pitchers, none of them is without his warts, by any stretch.

Benihana
07-07-2009, 01:47 PM
These guys represent a huge spectrum of ability and ceiling. While I guess no one would turn down these pitchers, none of them is without his warts, by any stretch.

I'm still waiting...

Falls City Beer
07-07-2009, 01:58 PM
I'm still waiting...

Your question is basically meaningless; you're demanding quantity when quality is ultimately more important.

jojo
07-07-2009, 02:07 PM
These guys represent a huge spectrum of ability and ceiling. While I guess no one would turn down these pitchers, none of them is without his warts, by any stretch.

There are a precious few pitchers who aren't without warts if "warts" is defined as a deviation from the ideal (i.e plus command/plus make 'em miss ability/plus groundball tendencies). I think that definition is a pretty reasonable one but i don't want to incorrectly characterize your definition.

All pitchers are largely a composite of the pitching trifecta that in some way presents a compromise relative to the ideal.

Harang, Cueto and Volquez would command considerable trade value if offered at the deadline because they are above average composites. Bailey is still more promise than product but he's not without trade value either.

I really don't know what Reds fans would hope for if the current collection in the rotation isn't acceptable. This is especially true if recent history colors expectations.

OnBaseMachine
07-07-2009, 02:10 PM
There are a precious few pitchers who aren't without warts if "warts" is defined as a deviation from the ideal (i.e plus command/plus make 'em miss ability/plus groundball tendencies). I think that definition is a pretty reasonable one but i don't want to incorrectly characterize your definition.

All pitchers are largely a composite of the pitching trifecta that in some way presents a compromise relative to the ideal.

Harang, Cueto and Volquez would command considerable trade value if offered at the deadline because they are above average composites. Bailey is still more promise than product but he's not without trade value either.

I really don't know what Reds fans would hope for if the current collection in the rotation isn't acceptable. This is especially true if recent history colors expectations.

Nice post.

I think some people expect the Reds to have five Hall-of-Famers in the rotation. That's just not realistic. There aren't too many rotations out there that have a better 1-2-3 than Cueto/Harang/Volquez. If Homer Bailey continues to pitch like he did Friday night, the Reds could have four above average starters going into 2010.

Falls City Beer
07-07-2009, 02:13 PM
There are a precious few pitchers who aren't without warts if "warts" is defined as a deviation from the ideal (i.e plus command/plus make 'em miss ability/plus groundball tendencies). I think that definition is a pretty reasonable one but i don't want to incorrectly characterize your definition.

All pitchers are largely a composite of the pitching trifecta that in some way presents a compromise relative to the ideal.

Harang, Cueto and Volquez would command considerable trade value if offered at the deadline because they are above average composites. Bailey is still more promise than product but he's not without trade value either.

I really don't know what Reds fans would hope for if the current collection in the rotation isn't acceptable. This is especially true if recent history colors expectations.


I'd argue on the sliding scale of promise<--->product, that Volquez and Cueto tack much further to the left descriptor than the one on the right.

Highlifeman21
07-07-2009, 02:17 PM
Nice post.

I think some people expect the Reds to have five Hall-of-Famers in the rotation.

There aren't too many rotations out there that have a better 1-2-3 than Cueto/Harang/Volquez.

But which Volquez will the Reds get from this point forward? The 2008 Volquez, or the injured 2009 Volquez? Or the pre-Reds Volquez?

Cueto and Harang I agree are a good 1-2, but at this point Volquez is at best a wild card.

jojo
07-07-2009, 02:20 PM
I'd argue on the sliding scale of promise<--->product, that Volquez and Cueto tack much further to the left descriptor than the one on the right.

It's reasonable to argue that Volquez fights with command and that Cueto is not nearly as interesting with a Krate in the 6's versus one in the 8's.

That said, it's not determined that the numbers both have posted in the half season thus far are pointing to a trend that would require consultation with a cosmetic surgeon.

Falls City Beer
07-07-2009, 02:22 PM
But which Volquez will the Reds get from this point forward? The 2008 Volquez, or the injured 2009 Volquez? Or the pre-Reds Volquez?

Cueto and Harang I agree are a good 1-2, but at this point Volquez is at best a wild card.

I'd argue that 24 year old with repeated back injuries is also a wild card. Harang is really the only pitching stake the Reds have in the ground. Owings to a lesser degree.

fearofpopvol1
07-07-2009, 03:16 PM
I'd argue on the sliding scale of promise<--->product, that Volquez and Cueto tack much further to the left descriptor than the one on the right.

You had previously pimped Cueto the entire season...crowning him the Reds only "true ace." He has one bad start (a tulmutuous one to be sure) and all of a sudden, he's "short," "has major questions backs" and insert every other possible criticism.

Sometimes, expectations run a little wild.

Benihana
07-07-2009, 03:38 PM
You had previously pimped Cueto the entire season...crowning him the Reds only "true ace." He has one bad start (a tulmutuous one to be sure) and all of a sudden, he's "short," "has major questions backs" and insert every other possible criticism.

Sometimes, Falls City Beer's expectations run a little wild.

Fixed that for ya.

Red Heeler
07-07-2009, 03:40 PM
Rather than hoping to "cash in" by having the second best pitcher on the market, I would like to see the Reds load for bear and be the buyers of the best pitcher on the market.

Reds trade:
1. Yonder Alonso
2. Drew Stubbs
3. Travis Wood
4. Matt Maloney
5. Juan Francisco
6. Bronson Arroyo

Jays trade:
1. Roy Halliday
2. Alex Rios

The Jays get some PayFlex in the years to come and a pretty decent haul of prospects. The Reds get the true ace at the top of the rotation that they need. Rios is a gamble, but if he returns to form, he would give the Reds another big bat for the OF. I'd be willing to take the $$$ gamble in return for having to pay less in prospect talent.

Benihana
07-07-2009, 03:42 PM
I'd be willing to take the $$$ gamble in return for having to pay less in prospect talent.

Sure you would, but would BobC? I don't think so.

Red Heeler
07-07-2009, 04:05 PM
Sure you would, but would BobC? I don't think so.

Pennants fly forever, Bob. The Reds would go into next year with a rotation that looks like this:
Roy Halliday
Johnny Cueto
Aaron Harang
Edinson Volquez
Homer Bailey

To borrow Princeton's phrase, that is the kind of rotation that can steal a championship. If Rios can OPS .800-.850 with his defense, then the LF problem is solved. The Reds would still have plenty of resources to go out and solve the SS hole.

Falls City Beer
07-07-2009, 04:31 PM
Fixed that for ya.

I have the gumption to demand quality. No apologies for that.

M2
07-07-2009, 04:33 PM
Rather than hoping to "cash in" by having the second best pitcher on the market, I would like to see the Reds load for bear and be the buyers of the best pitcher on the market.

Reds trade:
1. Yonder Alonso
2. Drew Stubbs
3. Travis Wood
4. Matt Maloney
5. Juan Francisco
6. Bronson Arroyo

Jays trade:
1. Roy Halliday
2. Alex Rios

The Jays get some PayFlex in the years to come and a pretty decent haul of prospects. The Reds get the true ace at the top of the rotation that they need. Rios is a gamble, but if he returns to form, he would give the Reds another big bat for the OF. I'd be willing to take the $$$ gamble in return for having to pay less in prospect talent.

Now that's what I call thinking big.

Falls City Beer
07-07-2009, 04:33 PM
You had previously pimped Cueto the entire season...crowning him the Reds only "true ace." He has one bad start (a tulmutuous one to be sure) and all of a sudden, he's "short," "has major questions backs" and insert every other possible criticism.

Sometimes, expectations run a little wild.

He has been very good. But like any sane fan, when I see a 24 year old pitcher have his back flare up not once, but twice, I have to wonder....

Highlifeman21
07-07-2009, 04:33 PM
I have the gumption to demand quality. No apologies for that.

The Reds should apologize to the fans for having neither quality or quantity of depth over The Lost Decade.

Highlifeman21
07-07-2009, 04:36 PM
Rather than hoping to "cash in" by having the second best pitcher on the market, I would like to see the Reds load for bear and be the buyers of the best pitcher on the market.

Reds trade:
1. Yonder Alonso
2. Drew Stubbs
3. Travis Wood
4. Matt Maloney
5. Juan Francisco
6. Bronson Arroyo

Jays trade:
1. Roy Halliday
2. Alex Rios

The Jays get some PayFlex in the years to come and a pretty decent haul of prospects. The Reds get the true ace at the top of the rotation that they need. Rios is a gamble, but if he returns to form, he would give the Reds another big bat for the OF. I'd be willing to take the $$$ gamble in return for having to pay less in prospect talent.

At least you're thinkin'...

We'd have to give better pieces than Stubbs, Wood and Maloney if the Blue Jays have to accept Bronson Arroyo as a salary dump.

I would suggest something more along the lines of

Alonso
Stubbs
Cozart
Wood
Fisher
Arroyo

For Doc & Rios

Falls City Beer
07-07-2009, 04:39 PM
Arroyo's going nowhere, folks.

There are few more prohibitive contracts in MLB than his.

BRM
07-07-2009, 04:40 PM
Arroyo's going nowhere, folks.

Except maybe the DL. I can't imagine anyone would take him in a trade.

Benihana
07-07-2009, 04:48 PM
Arroyo's going nowhere, folks.

There are few more prohibitive contracts in MLB than his.

And Rios (and Wells) are two of 'em. While that kind of blockbuster is pure fantasy, it is certainly interesting- for both sides.

Benihana
07-07-2009, 04:50 PM
Your question is basically meaningless; you're demanding quantity when quality is ultimately more important.

So give me quality...

If you make a preposterous statement, be prepared to back it up. Otherwise you are becoming purely a sensationalist.

Falls City Beer
07-07-2009, 05:48 PM
So give me quality...

If you make a preposterous statement, be prepared to back it up. Otherwise you are becoming purely a sensationalist.

Zach Duke has been as good as Cueto and Maholm has been as good as Harang; Ohlendorf has been about as good as Owings, and Snell has been better than Arroyo.

So no, I doubt the Bucs would swap a very similar starting staff numbers-wise for a more expensive version of the same.

But I'm sure you'll be around to move the goal posts back once more....

Benihana
07-07-2009, 05:50 PM
Zach Duke has been as good as Cueto and Maholm has been as good as Harang; Ohlendorf has been about as good as Owings, and Snell has been better than Arroyo.

So no, I doubt the Bucs would swap a very similar starting staff numbers-wise for a more expensive version of the same.

But I'm sure you'll be around to move the goal posts back once more....

Um, you're forgetting the 25 year old who went 17-6 with a 3.21 ERA last year, not to mention guys like Bailey and Stewart...

And considering the Pirates have called Snell and his contract a mistake, have demoted him to the minors and are trying to trade him for a bag of balls, I'm not sure they're too excited about him being a part of Pittsburgh's pitching future...

Not moving the goalposts back, just holding you accountable for your claims which you can almost never defend...

Falls City Beer
07-07-2009, 05:52 PM
Um, you're forgetting the 25 year old who went 17-6 with a 3.21 ERA last year...

Am I?

Don't see him on the 25-man. Let me know when he throws more than one good game in 2009.

Falls City Beer
07-07-2009, 05:56 PM
And considering the Pirates have called Snell and his contract a mistake, have demoted him to the minors and are trying to trade him for a bag of balls, I'm not sure they're too excited about him being a part of Pittsburgh's pitching future...

Or maybe they're just being proactive about their struggling pitchers, instead of letting them pitch every 5th day because they have an egregious contract.

Benihana
07-07-2009, 05:56 PM
Am I?

Don't see him on the 25-man. Let me know when he throws more than one good game in 2009.

Might as well write him off now. He's certainly not a piece of the pitching future.

Is Snell on the 25-man? How is his 2009 going? Has he been better than Bronson Arroyo? Oops, there goes three more claims you can't defend...

Falls City Beer
07-07-2009, 05:58 PM
Might as well write him off now. He's certainly not a piece of the pitching future.

Is Snell on the 25-man?

Fair point, but I like his chances to be on some team's 25 man and actually producing next season over Arroyo's. Unlike Arroyo, he's young and has an okay shot at being decent for a few seasons yet.

Benihana
07-07-2009, 06:02 PM
Fair point, but I like his chances to be on some team's 25 man and actually producing next season over Arroyo's. Unlike Arroyo, he's young and has an okay shot at being decent for a few seasons yet.

I actually don't mind Snell, and have even advocated pursuing him. But would I (or any GM in baseball) rather have him and his contract more than Volquez? Not a chance in hell. I actually think probably every team in Baseball would even rather have Bailey than Snell and his contract. So please, continue with your argument. It's going well so far...

Falls City Beer
07-07-2009, 06:04 PM
I actually don't mind Snell, and have even advocated pursuing him. But would I (or any GM in baseball) rather have him and his contract more than Volquez? Not a chance in hell. So please, continue with your argument. It's going well so far...

Well, it's not the either/or you're positing. The Reds are getting a good deal less bang for their buck from their rotation than the Bucs.

Falls City Beer
07-07-2009, 06:05 PM
Might as well write him off now. He's certainly not a piece of the pitching future.

Is Snell on the 25-man? How is his 2009 going? Has he been better than Bronson Arroyo? Oops, there goes three more claims you can't defend...

Yes. Ian Snell has been better than Bronson Arroyo this season. Without a doubt. I'll let you tangle with the straw men and shell-gaming you've become expert in in this thread. It really is impossible to keep up with your shifting arguments.

Red Heeler
07-07-2009, 06:05 PM
At least you're thinkin'...

We'd have to give better pieces than Stubbs, Wood and Maloney if the Blue Jays have to accept Bronson Arroyo as a salary dump.

I would suggest something more along the lines of

Alonso
Stubbs
Cozart
Wood
Fisher
Arroyo

For Doc & Rios

I figure Arroyo is the cost of the Reds taking on Rios as a salary dump.

Falls City Beer
07-07-2009, 06:10 PM
I figure Arroyo is the cost of the Reds taking on Rios as a salary dump.

I like Rios' odds at recovery better than Arroyo's. I take it you do too.

Benihana
07-07-2009, 06:12 PM
Yes. Ian Snell has been better than Bronson Arroyo this season. Without a doubt.

Pretty similar I'd say, and that's in what has obviously been Arroyo's outlier year. Let's look at 2 years (or 3, or 4- whatever you want) and see who's been better.

But that's beside the point. You wanted to compare pitching futures.

So even if I gave you your points (which are patently false):

Cueto = Duke (despite Cueto being 3 years younger)
Harang = Maholm (not even close if you want to look at this year)
Owings = Ohlendorf (despite Owings being the same age with a superior career ERA and WHIP)

you still have no answer for Volquez, Bailey, Stewart, etc.

I think I've made my point. I'm done arguing. You know, the whole arguing with a fool thing...

Benihana
07-07-2009, 06:15 PM
I like Rios' odds at recovery better than Arroyo's. I take it you do too.

As do I. Unfortunately though, we know what the reaction will be when BC and his budget cronies take a look at the years left on Rios' deal.

Scrap Irony
07-07-2009, 06:22 PM
You know, while you harp of FCB for his lack of proof in baking up his suppositions, it's not exactly like this idea of Cincinnati refusing to add cash has any legs. At all. Castellini has bumped the minor league budget, begun to spend real money in Latin America, and has kept his team monies at around the same level despite a pretty radical recession around the country.

So kettle, prove the pot's black.

I think a Rios deal is probably not a good idea, not only because of the contract, but because his skills aren't what you need out of a left fielder. If the Reds were in the market for a CF, he'd be a pretty decent gamble. But, because of Dickerson, Taveras (sigh), Stubbs, and Hesiey, they need little help in center.

Left fielders need to hit the ball hard and consistently. Rios, for all his leather, does not do that enough. Or at least not enough to make a deal for him a no-brainer.

Benihana
07-07-2009, 06:27 PM
You know, while you harp of FCB for his lack of proof in baking up his suppositions, it's not exactly like this idea of Cincinnati refusing to add cash has any legs. At all. Castellini has bumped the minor league budget, begun to spend real money in Latin America, and has kept his team monies at around the same level despite a pretty radical recession around the country.

So kettle, prove the pot's black.

Let's just say I know something when it comes to the Reds taking on a huge contract right now. That's all I can say about that. I like the money they've been throwing at LA/player development, but signing a couple guys for $2-3MM is quite different than taking on one underperforming player with >$60MM owed to him (and character questions. Don't forget, Griffey was shipped out of town immediately after his cut-throat gesture- that stuff doesn't play well with BC.) But for argument's sake, I'll take on your challenge (and FWIW, I'd like to do a deal like this)...


I think a Rios deal is probably not a good idea, not only because of the contract, but because his skills aren't what you need out of a left fielder. If the Reds were in the market for a CF, he'd be a pretty decent gamble. But, because of Dickerson, Taveras (sigh), Stubbs, and Hesiey, they need little help in center.

Left fielders need to hit the ball hard and consistently. Rios, for all his leather, does not do that enough. Or at least not enough to make a deal for him a no-brainer.

I agree with this logic. But I think you're failing to see the bigger picture:

Rios wouldn't play LF, he would play RF- where defense does matter. And now meet your new Left Fielder: Jay Bruce. And if Bruce doesn't "hit the ball hard enough" (or even consistently enough) in the future, the Reds are dead in the water anyway.

Scrap Irony
07-07-2009, 06:31 PM
So you're saying you have "insider information" but can't/won't share?

Uh, okay.

But that's not exactly proving anything, is it?

And, as to Bruce in LF, why? He's, right now, the best RF in the National League and a deserving Gold Glove.

Red Heeler
07-07-2009, 06:32 PM
I like Rios' odds at recovery better than Arroyo's. I take it you do too.

Sure I do. It's the only reason to trade Arroyo for him. If they both flop, then the team holding Arroyo is only paying for one year of yuck instead five.

Benihana
07-07-2009, 06:37 PM
So you're saying you have "insider information" but can't/won't share?

Uh, okay.

But that's not exactly proving anything, is it?

Like I said previously in another thread, the recession really had an impact on the Reds ownership and their risk tolerance, more so than some other clubs. I'd be happy to continue that conversation over PM, but not here.


And, as to Bruce in LF, why? He's, right now, the best RF in the National League and a deserving Gold Glove.

Which would give the Reds three potential Gold Glovers in the OF. How's that for rebuilding team defense?

I'm assuming you'd agree that Bruce *should* hit enough (in the future) for a LF?

15fan
07-07-2009, 06:37 PM
Votto for Halladay.

Scrap Irony
07-07-2009, 06:40 PM
I'm assuming you'd agree that Bruce *should* hit enough (in the future) for a LF?

But his arm, range, and speed all scream RF. Why pay millions for outstanding defense and a questionable bat when it's practically free elsewhere?

Benihana
07-07-2009, 06:40 PM
Votto for Halladay.

No thanks- not with Halladay only signed for one more season. We've been through this already when Johan Santana was available.

Benihana
07-07-2009, 06:43 PM
But his arm, range, and speed all scream RF. Why pay millions for outstanding defense and a questionable bat when it's practically free elsewhere?

It's all predicated on Rios bouncing back, at least, to some degree. If he's a league-average RF offensively and a Gold Glover defensively, it might be worth it. Especially if you can net out Arroyo's sunk cost.

(Not to mention, acquiring Roy Halladay.)

Heisey/Dickerson CF
Votto 1B
Rios RF
Bruce LF
Encarnacion 3B
Phillips 2B
Hanigan C
Janish/Cozart SS

Halladay
Cueto
Volquez
Harang
Bailey

Worth it?

Sounds like a WS contender to me.

Falls City Beer
07-07-2009, 06:44 PM
Votto for Halladay.

Sign me up. Though they'll ask for pitching in return as well.

Highlifeman21
07-07-2009, 06:48 PM
I figure Arroyo is the cost of the Reds taking on Rios as a salary dump.

But Rios can actually produce.

Arroyo now has an albatross of a contract based on his lack of production.

Red Heeler
07-07-2009, 07:07 PM
Sign me up. Though they'll ask for pitching in return as well.

Would we get Mario Soto to counsel Halliday on how to win with absolutely no offensive support?

Benihana
07-07-2009, 07:08 PM
Would we get Mario Soto to counsel Halliday on how to win with absolutely no offensive support?

No I think Aaron Harang could do that by himself.

Red Heeler
07-07-2009, 07:15 PM
No I think Aaron Harang could do that by himself.

Harang has never experienced the kind of neutered offense that Soto suffered through in the early '80s. Without Votto, the Reds would be dipping down to that level. If Alonso (or anyone else) were beating up AAA, I would give some thought to a Votto + for Halliday exchange.

Ltlabner
07-07-2009, 09:01 PM
I'd argue that 24 year old with repeated back injuries is also a wild card.

So then you'd agree your Cards are equally foolish for having so much wrapped up into a 34 year old, oft-injured pitcher to anchor their staff?


Harang is really the only pitching stake the Reds have in the ground. Owings to a lesser degree.

So now Harang is a "stake in the ground" despite all the sniping you've done at him? And despite your constant harping on Owings now he's apparently some semblance of reliability in your book?


Zach Duke has been as good as Cueto and Maholm has been as good as Harang; Ohlendorf has been about as good as Owings, and Snell has been better than Arroyo.

So no, I doubt the Bucs would swap a very similar starting staff numbers-wise for a more expensive version of the same.

So now you're trying to make the case that the Bucs starting staff is acceptable despite them pitching at the same level as the Reds staff you have incessantly declared as hideous? How is that "having the gumption to demand quality" ?

More confounding is that you apparently are giving them bonus points for having built their staff on the cheap. That's despite having screamed at the the Reds organization over the years for claiming to be "poor-mouth".

Nailing the jello of your reasoning to the wall of logic is becoming more and more difficult.

Falls City Beer
07-07-2009, 09:36 PM
So then you'd agree your Cards are equally foolish for having so much wrapped up into a 34 year old, oft-injured pitcher to anchor their staff?



So now Harang is a "stake in the ground" despite all the sniping you've done at him? And despite your constant harping on Owings now he's apparently some semblance of reliability in your book?



So now you're trying to make the case that the Bucs starting staff is acceptable despite them pitching at the same level as the Reds staff you have incessantly declared as hideous? How is that "having the gumption to demand quality" ?

More confounding is that you apparently are giving them bonus points for having built their staff on the cheap. That's despite having screamed at the the Reds organization over the years for claiming to be "poor-mouth".

Nailing the jello of your reasoning to the wall of logic is becoming more and more difficult.

Maybe you can feed that jello to all the strawmen you've set up.

I find these points answer none of my arguments much less take into consideration their context.

My recommendation is that you read the discussion again. I'm not going to spoonfeed my points to you.

Ltlabner
07-07-2009, 09:41 PM
My recommendation is that you read the discussion again.

No need.

When you weave the individual notes of your song(s) together you find there's really no discernible music.

Falls City Beer
07-07-2009, 09:46 PM
No need.

When you weave the individual notes of your song(s) together you find there's really no discernible music.

It's a simple argument when you get down to it--accurate, but unexciting: the rotation is seriously overappreciated.

It may not go down smooth, but it was correct from the get-go, and folks en masse don't like it when they're wrong.

Ltlabner
07-07-2009, 09:50 PM
It's a simple argument when you get down to it--accurate, but unexciting: the rotation is seriously overappreciated.

It may not go down smooth, but it was correct from the get-go, and folks en masse don't like it when they're wrong.

Volquez: Injured
Cueto: Possibly Injured
Arroyo: Dealing with health issues (CTS) aka: injured

I'd say it's got nothing to do with being over-appreciated and everything to do with injuries (in the short-term at least).

That you've been proclaiming doom for years, and can now warp the facts to fit your worldview doesn't make it "correct".

Falls City Beer
07-07-2009, 09:51 PM
That you've been proclaiming doom for years, and can now warp the facts to fit your worldview doesn't make it "correct".

So have you. I'm not sure where that gets us. I guess I've been doing it longer, so there's that.

Scrap Irony
07-07-2009, 10:02 PM
Volquez: Injured
Cueto: Possibly Injured
Arroyo: Dealing with health issues (CTS) aka: injured

There's only one truly injured starter. Arroyo's been dealing with carpel tunnel for years and you're assuming Cueto's injured. They've been scuffling and are not as good as some have insisted.

I don't see why he gets attacked for that.

15fan
07-07-2009, 11:53 PM
Sign me up. Though they'll ask for pitching in return as well.

And since they're dumping salary, they'll want cheap pitching, too. So we'll talk Votto + a good young pitcher in exchange for Halladay plus ________.

They have any young MI talent or a 3b worth taking? A good young catcher? A young CF who can go get it and get on base? Reds have plenty of holes in the organization that could be addressed via an expanded trade.

15fan
07-07-2009, 11:55 PM
No thanks- not with Halladay only signed for one more season. We've been through this already when Johan Santana was available.

And we've also been through the logic that Halladay's short contract is what makes him potentially available for cents on the dollar.

fearofpopvol1
07-08-2009, 01:26 AM
So have you. I'm not sure where that gets us. I guess I've been doing it longer, so there's that.

The problem is that the expectations you set for REDS PLAYERS are often times unrealistic. You'll praise a Reds player when he is doing well and then berate him to inexplicable proportions when he's in a slump or has had a rough outing. Then you'll try to compare said Reds player to player X of another team and say how much better player X is, when in reality, player X usually has as many flaws (in many cases more) than said Reds player. Outside of a few very elite players (I mean, maybe 10 tops in all of baseball), all players are prone to bad slumps and horrible outings. Your beloved Chris Carpenter (who you've regularly painted to be the reincarnation of Bob Gibson) had hit a noticeable rough slump prior to his last start against the Reds. No criticism from you there.

So for some reason, at least in your view, Reds players have a thinner margin of error than Player X does. Maybe it's because you pay closer attention to said Reds players more often than you do to player X...I don't know. But either way, the logic is faulty and flawed.

redsfan4445
07-08-2009, 01:33 AM
ouch!!! Lets pray the Cardinals or Brewers don't get Halladay!!!


per mlb trade rumours:

"MLB.com's Jordan Bastian has a source that says over a dozen teams have asked about Halladay, with the most serious interest expressed by the Cardinals, Yankees, Mets, Brewers, Dodgers, Angels and Red Sox."

Brutus
07-08-2009, 01:35 AM
ouch!!! Lets pray the Cardinals or Brewers don't get Halladay!!!


per mlb trade rumours:

"MLB.com's Jordan Bastian has a source that says over a dozen teams have asked about Halladay, with the most serious interest expressed by the Cardinals, Yankees, Mets, Brewers, Dodgers, Angels and Red Sox."

The Cards' don't have the goods to get Halladay. I'm really not worried about them. The Brewers, on the other hand, are a team I could see being in the mix.

redsfan4445
07-09-2009, 12:35 AM
Well looks like the Cardinals are after him DANG IT!!!

"Cardinals Have "Real" Interest In Halladay
By Drew Silva [July 8 at 9:34pm CST]

According to Joe Strauss of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, the Cardinals' interest in Blue Jays ace Roy Halladay is very real.

Here's what Strauss tweeted just a moment ago: Asked about the price tag for Halladay, a club source said: "Give Ricciardi all our minor-league rosters and let him circle any 5 names."

A deal with the Cardinals would start with Brett Wallace, and might also include shortstop Pete Kozma, catcher Bryan Anderson, outfielder Daryl Jones and/or right-hander Clay Mortensen. We're just throwing the Birds' top prospects out on the table, but that's what it's going to take. According to Erik Manning of FutureRedbirds.net, via the Post-Dispatch's Bernie Miklasz, the Jays "showed a lot of pre-draft interest" in both Wallace and Kozma."

cincrazy
07-09-2009, 12:49 AM
Well looks like the Cardinals are after him DANG IT!!!

"Cardinals Have "Real" Interest In Halladay
By Drew Silva [July 8 at 9:34pm CST]

According to Joe Strauss of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, the Cardinals' interest in Blue Jays ace Roy Halladay is very real.

Here's what Strauss tweeted just a moment ago: Asked about the price tag for Halladay, a club source said: "Give Ricciardi all our minor-league rosters and let him circle any 5 names."

A deal with the Cardinals would start with Brett Wallace, and might also include shortstop Pete Kozma, catcher Bryan Anderson, outfielder Daryl Jones and/or right-hander Clay Mortensen. We're just throwing the Birds' top prospects out on the table, but that's what it's going to take. According to Erik Manning of FutureRedbirds.net, via the Post-Dispatch's Bernie Miklasz, the Jays "showed a lot of pre-draft interest" in both Wallace and Kozma."

Unless they throw Colby Rasmus in that mix, I don't see it coming close to happening.

redsfan4445
07-15-2009, 03:43 PM
just posted.. Cards are going to try and get Halladay!!

Cards Willing To Make Strong Offer For Halladay
By Ben Nicholson-Smith [July 15 at 1:29pm CST]
The Cardinals are prepared to offer talent for Roy Halladay, but they're not going to disassemble their entire system to acquire the Jays ace, according to Joe Strauss of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

"We may be able to give up an arm or a leg," a Cardinals source told Strauss. "But we're not going to sacrifice the whole body."


Strauss hears that the Jays want major league-ready pitching in return for Halladay. This could pose a problem for the Cards, as they may have to surrender Jess Todd or Francisco Samuel to complete the Mark DeRosa deal. The Blue Jays wanted top Cards prospect Brett Wallace in the 2008 draft.


Not only do the Cards have a history of pulling off big trades (Larry Walker, Scott Rolen), they have a history of picking up former Blue Jays starters. Chris Carpenter, Woody Williams and Pat Hentgen all pitched for the Jays then the Cardinals.

traderumor
07-15-2009, 04:01 PM
Interesting that the Cards were supposedly tapped out of money for Holliday, but they can take on Halliday. While I understand the reasoning from a baseball perspective, it seems they may have been a bit dishonest in their cash position.

kaldaniels
07-15-2009, 04:27 PM
Interesting that the Cards were supposedly tapped out of money for Holliday, but they can take on Halliday. While I understand the reasoning from a baseball perspective, it seems they may have been a bit dishonest in their cash position.

Mastering the art of the bluff is an admirable GM quality. Fair game.

traderumor
07-15-2009, 04:39 PM
Mastering the art of the bluff is an admirable GM quality. Fair game.They still have work to do on their poker face :)

Brutus
07-15-2009, 05:25 PM
They still have work to do on their poker face :)

Perhaps they already have. Has anyone considered maybe they're trying to drive the price up on the Brewers?

Teams don't publicly make these kinds of statements and lose their leverage without a reason. While I think it's very true they would like Halladay, I think they're trying to primarily force the market to protect their division.

traderumor
07-15-2009, 05:45 PM
Perhaps they already have. Has anyone considered maybe they're trying to drive the price up on the Brewers?

Teams don't publicly make these kinds of statements and lose their leverage without a reason. While I think it's very true they would like Halladay, I think they're trying to primarily force the market to protect their division.Sure, that is possible. I don't know that the Brewers can do anything, though. Halliday is pretty pricey, both in cash and prospects, and they dealt some of the future away last year for Sabathia.

Highlifeman21
07-15-2009, 10:14 PM
Even if the Reds get Halladay, they aren't making the playoffs.

The Brewers or the Cards can have him.

Sure, I'd love to have Halladay, but the problem is that even if we give up the kids on the farm that probably won't amount to much in the bigs, we still have nothing in the bigs for acquiring Halladay to make sense.

Anyone listen to Mike & Mike Monday & Tuesday where they talked about you give whatever it takes in terms of prospects to get proven talent?

Falls City Beer
07-15-2009, 10:17 PM
Even if the Reds get Halladay, they aren't making the playoffs.

The Brewers or the Cards can have him.

Sure, I'd love to have Halladay, but the problem is that even if we give up the kids on the farm that probably won't amount to much in the bigs, we still have nothing in the bigs for acquiring Halladay to make sense.

Anyone listen to Mike & Mike Monday & Tuesday where they talked about you give whatever it takes in terms of prospects to get proven talent?

Honestly, the Reds are pretty much going to stay ghetto-ized without acquiring a bona fide ace (they don't have one--anywhere in their system). And Halladay's available. I'm not married to a single soul on the 25-man or the minors (barring Alonso). Get it done.

lollipopcurve
07-15-2009, 10:20 PM
Halladay can say where he goes -- with that well-publicized roster of contending teams bidding on him, he's not going to approve a trade to Cincy. Just the way it is.

Falls City Beer
07-15-2009, 10:21 PM
Halladay can say where he goes -- with that well-publicized roster of contending teams bidding on him, he's not going to approve a trade to Cincy. Just the way it is.

That's the spirit.

Highlifeman21
07-15-2009, 10:24 PM
Honestly, the Reds are pretty much going to stay ghetto-ized without acquiring a bona fide ace (they don't have one--anywhere in their system). And Halladay's available. I'm not married to a single soul on the 25-man or the minors (barring Alonso). Get it done.

My point, which you bolded, was that either of those teams can have him b/c even if we get him we're more than just him away from the playoffs, given this craptastic 25 man roster.

You're absolutely right that we need a bonafide ace, and I would empty the cupboard to get Halladay, but what's the point when we're just going to surround Halladay with crap?

I also think that part of the problem with the Reds is that their prospects are just that, prospects, and as far as prospects go they're meh. Alonso's about the only prospect that remotely excites me. The rest of them? Send them all to Toronto.

Falls City Beer
07-15-2009, 10:27 PM
My point, which you bolded, was that either of those teams can have him b/c even if we get him we're more than just him away from the playoffs, given this craptastic 25 man roster.

You're absolutely right that we need a bonafide ace, and I would empty the cupboard to get Halladay, but what's the point when we're just going to surround Halladay with crap?

I also think that part of the problem with the Reds is that their prospects are just that, prospects, and as far as prospects go they're meh. Alonso's about the only prospect that remotely excites me. The rest of them? Send them all to Toronto.

Halladay plus Cueto is an awfully solid 1-2. It gets dodgy after that. But dynasties are built on 1-2 marauders.

Offense is a moveable (and cheap) feast.

Nail the 1-2, everything else falls into place. Don't, and you're scrambling around forever, putting out fires.

Highlifeman21
07-15-2009, 10:34 PM
Halladay plus Cueto is an awfully solid 1-2. It gets dodgy after that. But dynasties are built on 1-2 marauders.

Offense is a moveable (and cheap) feast.

Nail the 1-2, everything else falls into place. Don't, and you're scrambling around forever, putting out fires.

Sign me up for Halladay & Cueto, but do we have enough ammo to ship to Toronto for Halladay?

Toronto might be perfect for Votto, although it could also be completely the opposite of perfect for him since he's playing in front of his family 81 nights a year. That's a lot of pressure.

I don't think Toronto would go for it, since it would defeat the purpose of trading away Halladay, but what if we structured a deal around Harang and pieces? On 1 hand, if we send them Harang, we're essentially swapping salaries and tacking on some extra goodies for Toronto to sweeten the deal. Maybe one of those extra goodies is Volquez? Maybe it's EE (since Todd Frazier's the next big thing, right?), maybe it's Stubbs?

If we're keeping Cueto, I'm not convinced that we'd have enough to send to Toronto for Halladay, but I'm sure within the next hours posters will come out of the woodwork to prove me wrong...

Falls City Beer
07-15-2009, 10:36 PM
If we're keeping Cueto, I'm not convinced that we'd have enough to send to Toronto for Halladay, but I'm sure within the next hours posters will come out of the woodwork to prove me wrong...

Yeah, I don't know. But yes, I'm sure we'll get the bull goose bozo on the minors' treasures.

*BaseClogger*
07-15-2009, 10:37 PM
Halladay plus Cueto is an awfully solid 1-2. It gets dodgy after that. But dynasties are built on 1-2 marauders.

Offense is a moveable (and cheap) feast.

Nail the 1-2, everything else falls into place. Don't, and you're scrambling around forever, putting out fires.

It's going to be tough to start a dynasty when Halladay only has one and a half years left on his contract...

Falls City Beer
07-15-2009, 10:38 PM
It's going to be tough to start a dynasty when Halladay only has one and a half years left on his contract...

Well, if Walt's extended the same luxury as Wayne, they'll extend him.

Highlifeman21
07-15-2009, 10:41 PM
Well, if Walt's extended the same luxury as Wayne, they'll extend him.

Hopefully Walt is, b/c if you trade for Halladay you gotta extend him for at least 2 years after his current deal expires.

*BaseClogger*
07-15-2009, 10:44 PM
No way Halladay settles for a two year extension in Cincinnati, and as was duely noted you can't compare the caliber of Harang and Halladay...

Falls City Beer
07-15-2009, 10:47 PM
No way Halladay settles for a two year extension in Cincinnati, and as was duely noted you can't compare the caliber of Harang and Halladay...

I don't think I said anything about a two year extension. Sure, it'll take more than that.

*BaseClogger*
07-15-2009, 10:47 PM
I don't think I said anything about a two year extension. Sure, it'll take more than that.

Roy Halladay doesn't want to extend in Cincinnati...

Falls City Beer
07-15-2009, 10:48 PM
Roy Halladay doesn't want to extend in Cincinnati...

It's entirely possible. Hey, aim low, right?

M2
07-15-2009, 10:48 PM
Honestly, the Reds are pretty much going to stay ghetto-ized without acquiring a bona fide ace (they don't have one--anywhere in their system). And Halladay's available. I'm not married to a single soul on the 25-man or the minors (barring Alonso). Get it done.

I like the philosophy you're spinning here, but you recognize that the Reds wouldn't give a moment of serious consideration to this, don't you?

I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just saying the Reds aren't going there.

Falls City Beer
07-15-2009, 10:50 PM
I like the philosophy you're spinning here, but you recognize that the Reds wouldn't give a moment of serious consideration to this, don't you?

I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just saying the Reds aren't going there.

Permanent ghetto.

M2
07-15-2009, 10:54 PM
Permanent ghetto.

I couldn't agree more.

But it does mean the idea you're having is way too big for the Reds.

backbencher
07-15-2009, 11:38 PM
Permanent ghetto.

Tautology.

The Reds have the second-lowest ticket prices and the third-smallest media market in MLB. And those numbers are trending in the wrong direction.

Roy Halladay plus the Reds' current 2010 LTC commitments/buyouts would put the Reds over their 2009 payroll. That's $15.75MM for Halladay, $56MM for Harang/Arroyo/Cordero/Phillips/Rhodes/Lincoln/Alonso/Phillips/EdE plus $1.9MM to buy out Hernandez/Gonzalez/Weathers. Assuming a 10% payroll bump, to $82MM, that leaves a little north of $8MM to fill 16 roster slots. Sound workable?

Or, let's suppose that Halladay is interested purely in money, not in his team. What would it take to be the high bidder for his services in 2011 - $18MM, minimum? (CC got $23MM.) The Reds are on the hook for $11MM for Phillips, $12MM for Cordero and $4MM for Harang/Arroyo (assuming buyouts) for 2011. That's $45MM for three slots on the roster.

Assuming another 10% annual increase in payroll, that would leave $45MM for 22 roster slots. Seem like a winner?


I love the idea of building around pitching. I love more the idea of having a dominant top two. I strongly question the possibility of doing that when one of the top two is a free-agent signing.

lollipopcurve
07-16-2009, 10:55 AM
Hey, aim low, right?

I'll say it again -- you're tilting at windmills here. Halladay wants to win -- he has said so. This means it's entirely logical to think he would not approve a trade to a team that is a longshot to win. At least choose reasonable targets -- guys who don't have no-trade clauses. Then, you can fantasize about unloading salary in separate deals and signing your guy long term. Who? I don't know, Vazquez, Bedard, Washburn, Maholm, Davis. Obviously, none is Halladay, but any would be a solid staff upgrade.

How about bailing AZ out by taking a chance on Brandon Webb? Send 'em a solid prospect or two for the chance to rehab him, if the medical looks possibly fixable (certainly up in the air). Maybe you get your FOR guy by 2011, following surgery.

Again, the very 1st consideration in discussing Halladay as a trade target is in assessing whether he would waive his no-trade to come to Cincinnati. I have yet to see an argument that says he would, much less an even mildly persuasive one.

Falls City Beer
07-16-2009, 12:21 PM
I'll say it again -- you're tilting at windmills here. Halladay wants to win -- he has said so. This means it's entirely logical to think he would not approve a trade to a team that is a longshot to win. At least choose reasonable targets -- guys who don't have no-trade clauses. Then, you can fantasize about unloading salary in separate deals and signing your guy long term. Who? I don't know, Vazquez, Bedard, Washburn, Maholm, Davis. Obviously, none is Halladay, but any would be a solid staff upgrade.

How about bailing AZ out by taking a chance on Brandon Webb? Send 'em a solid prospect or two for the chance to rehab him, if the medical looks possibly fixable (certainly up in the air). Maybe you get your FOR guy by 2011, following surgery.

Again, the very 1st consideration in discussing Halladay as a trade target is in assessing whether he would waive his no-trade to come to Cincinnati. I have yet to see an argument that says he would, much less an even mildly persuasive one.


Yeah, I don't care if it's not Halladay, but it has to be TOR. This joint is lousy with #4's.

jojo
07-16-2009, 02:13 PM
If collecting arms like Harang, Cueto and Volquez isn't good enough, then it doesn't matter who's name is on the GM's door.

membengal
07-16-2009, 02:58 PM
Yeah, I don't care if it's not Halladay, but it has to be TOR. This joint is lousy with #4's.

Excellent. Some more LOLgers for my cup.

redsfandan
07-18-2009, 03:21 AM
Halladay Could Demand A Trade After The Season If Traded By Mike Axisa [July 17 at 7:12pm CST]

Todd Zolecki of MLB.com reminds us of a rarely used rule that could possibly come into play if Roy Halladay is moved before this year's trade deadline. If a player signed a multi-year extension before October 2006 and is traded during the life of the contract, the player can then demand a trade during the offseason. If the team falls to trade the player by March 15th, he becomes a free agent. Halladay signed a three year, $40MM extension in March of '06.

Javier Vazquez is the only player to take advantage of this rule in recent years, when he demanded a trade out of Arizona following the 2005 season. Since he already has a no trade clause it's unlikely Halladay will end up with a team he doesn't want to play for, but he could use this rule as leverage to get a contract extension after the season. That last part is just speculation on my part, though.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Full Story | Comments (18) | Categories: Roy Halladay | Toronto Blue Jays
So whoever trades for him may have to meet his price in an extension or he could bolt and become a FA and the club could look stupid for paying a kings ransom for a player that doesn't stick around. And I think I read that Toronto won't allow a window for any club to try to negotiate an extension. Still want to trade for him?

bucksfan2
07-18-2009, 10:47 AM
So whoever trades for him may have to meet his price in an extension or he could bolt and become a FA and the club could look stupid for paying a kings ransom for a player that doesn't stick around. And I think I read that Toronto won't allow a window for any club to try to negotiate an extension. Still want to trade for him?

Not really. It may lower the asking price, but it would be just like trading for a one month rental.

I know the Jays are saying that they won't offer a window to negotiate a new contract. But if the asking prices if right I think they will allow that window. The Jays are just using the no negotiation window as a bargaining chip.

redsfandan
07-18-2009, 12:06 PM
Yes they could open up a window for another team to negotiate with him. He may also decide that he may want to see what happens in free agency. I just think that unless I had a payroll like NY, Boston, LA, etc he may cost too much to trade for. That's all.

blumj
07-19-2009, 04:06 PM
Are we sure the rule still applies even though he'd have to waive his NTC in order to be traded?

redsfandan
07-20-2009, 09:02 AM
My understanding is Hallday has both his NTC and "the rule". Everyone wants him, he can pick whoever has the best shot at the playoffs, and he could choose to be a FA in a few months. Must be nice to be him

Jpup
07-20-2009, 10:28 AM
My understanding is Hallday has both his NTC and "the rule". Everyone wants him, he can pick whoever has the best shot at the playoffs, and he could choose to be a FA in a few months. Must be nice to be him

He would be wise to go to LA and pitch in that pitcher's haven.

Orenda
07-22-2009, 08:55 PM
Steve Phillips advocating selling the soul for Roy Halladay, he just said he would deal Clayton Kershaw for Roy Halladay. No shocker as to why he is a former GM.