PDA

View Full Version : Buyers? Sellers? How About Neither?



Edskin
07-12-2009, 05:33 PM
It's that time of the year, when 80% of the fan population realizes we have no chance and want the Reds to "sell"-- partly to better the team, and let's face it, partly out of frustration. The other 20% are still in the clouds, drooling at the fact that we are only 4.5 games out and want us to "buy" in order to make a run this year.

But is it OK to prefer neither of the above options?

That's where I am.

I do not believe the Reds are anywhere near contention this year, but I also no longer believe that we are years away from getting there. There is enough young talent on the team and down on the farm to give me hope that with the right tweaks and good bounces, the Reds could contend for year as early as next year.

We obviously have the untouchables that make no sense to deal for anything less than an all-time blockbuster: Votto, Volquez, Cueto, Bruce.

We also have anothe tier of slightly older players in or near their primes, that COULD be dealt if we had our eyes on rebuilding, but not if we want to win soon: Harang, Phillips, Edwin, Roenicke, Masset.

In addition, we have another group of younger guys and/or role players that aren't really attractive on the market, but could be valuable parts to a good team given the right roles: Dickerson, Hanigan, Hairston, Gomes, Nix, Hererra.

The list of guys who make sense to trade and also have the potential to net a nice return is very, very small.

I don't think anyone would care or shed a tear if we dealt Arroyo, but I think many fans overrate his value. Is Bronson really going to help a true contender get over the top? His numbers are below average and his production has consistently dipped. I don't think the Yankees, Red Sox, or Dodgers will be dangling anything of value for him. Some teams may be willing to take on his salary if they give up nothing to get him, but that isn't going to do much to excite Reds fans.

Weathers and Rhodes also make perfect sense, but again, I think we probably overrate their value--especially Weathers. I do think that Rhodes may be inticing enough to a contender for them to give up a decent prospect for Rhodes, but nothing special.

In the end, there are two players on this team that I would actively dangle:

Rhodes for the reasons stated above and.....

Cordero. I know he has a no trade clause, but I'd imagine he'd waive it in order to go to a contender. I think Coco is at the sunset of his best years and maybe having one last nice hurrah as a top closer this year. I fear if we finally had other things in place in a year or two, that he'd be done and we'd have a major hole in that role. If we dealt him now, it would give us a chance to develop another closer before we REALLY needed one.

Having said that, dealing Coco is very unrealistic for a variety of reasons. That leaves us with Rhodes as the ONLY guy on this roster that truly makes sense to trade.

For me, I see enough from this team right now to exhibit patience-- I wonder if Walt feels the same way?

flyer85
07-12-2009, 05:48 PM
sell if you can get a decent return ... there is no reason to give players away

Falls City Beer
07-12-2009, 05:50 PM
sell if you can get a decent return ... there is no reason to give players away

I agree. It's a putrid trade market. Be wary of buyers.

Edit: buying/selling confusion.

reds44
07-12-2009, 05:56 PM
I'd try to deal Harang while he still has value. I only see him going downhill fromn here. I'd say the same for Arroyo but I'm not sure if he has any value left anyway.

Brutus
07-12-2009, 05:57 PM
I agree. It's a putrid trade market. Be wary of other sellers.

Actually, most people believe it's a sellers market. Right now, so few teams are willing to sell off, that those that do could get a ransom in return.

I'm really not sure what I think the Reds should do. I would hate to have a team sell this close to first... but I also think there are too many things going wrong right now to resurrect their chances. It might not be a bad idea to partially retool and have a strong team ready for 2010.

Falls City Beer
07-12-2009, 06:05 PM
Actually, most people believe it's a sellers market. Right now, so few teams are willing to sell off, that those that do could get a ransom in return.

I'm really not sure what I think the Reds should do. I would hate to have a team sell this close to first... but I also think there are too many things going wrong right now to resurrect their chances. It might not be a bad idea to partially retool and have a strong team ready for 2010.

I meant beware of "buyers" not sellers. :cool:

Your points are well-taken.

Marc D
07-12-2009, 07:31 PM
The M's just got 2 decent prospects for a player worse than WT. As stated above its a sellers market. It's time for some bold moves and a chance to build a consistent winner.

Harang
Cordero
Rhodes
Weathers
Hernandez
Nix
Gomes
Hairston
Tavaras

None of them outside of possibly Cordero are realistically part of the solution past 2010. Imo you get as much as possible for as many as possible. What does it matter if we finish 4th or 6th in 2009? I'd prefer to punt the season and get the better draft pick.

Edskin
07-12-2009, 08:16 PM
Marc-

I disagree. The Reds aren't going anywhere this year, but I do think we could be real contenders next year if a few guys pan out and we get a few breaks. And I think guys like Nix, Hernandez, and Hairston could all play roles on a winner. I would of course deal them if we were somehow able to get good returns, but despite the fact that it's a sellers market, I don't think any of those guys will net anything decent.

We've been "selling" for almost a decade now. I think it might be time to "stand pat" a bit.

Marc D
07-12-2009, 08:28 PM
Marc-

I disagree. The Reds aren't going anywhere this year, but I do think we could be real contenders next year if a few guys pan out and we get a few breaks. And I think guys like Nix, Hernandez, and Hairston could all play roles on a winner. I would of course deal them if we were somehow able to get good returns, but despite the fact that it's a sellers market, I don't think any of those guys will net anything decent.

We've been "selling" for almost a decade now. I think it might be time to "stand pat" a bit.


Everything of course is predicated on some form of meaningful return.

I'm saying I would move all those guys for as much as I could get if I had faith in the GM to make more good decisions than bad. In the real world all I can say is I'm unsure at best as to what to think of Walt after this past off seasons moves.

I don't think standing pat does anything positive for us but we need more Tavaras type moves like Custer needed more indians. Staying the same is better than getting worse I guess.

Big Klu
07-12-2009, 08:30 PM
Cordero. I know he has a no trade clause, but I'd imagine he'd waive it in order to go to a contender. I think Coco is at the sunset of his best years and maybe having one last nice hurrah as a top closer this year. I fear if we finally had other things in place in a year or two, that he'd be done and we'd have a major hole in that role. If we dealt him now, it would give us a chance to develop another closer before we REALLY needed one.

Having said that, dealing Coco is very unrealistic for a variety of reasons. That leaves us with Rhodes as the ONLY guy on this roster that truly makes sense to trade.

For me, I see enough from this team right now to exhibit patience-- I wonder if Walt feels the same way?

I disagree that Cordero would waive his no-trade clause just to go to a contender. I do think that he would waive it for one thing--money, lots of it. If he is traded, then he would likely be going to a team that already has a closer (otherwise they probably wouldn't be a contender), so he would have to accept a set-up role. The problem is that would hurt him the next time contract talks roll around, because the big money is in saves (which he wouldn't be getting anymore). So I figure he would want his payday up front. Additionally, I figure that the Reds would likely have to foot the bill for this extra coin, as the other club wouldn't want to pony up extra jack for a set-up man.

Will M
07-12-2009, 08:57 PM
Anyone not signed for 2010 that has any value gets traded. This includes Weathers, Gomes & Hernandez. Nix & Hairston have little value.

Try to pawn off Arroyo and his contract on some team desperate for pitching.
This should be Walt's #1 goal over the next 2 weeks.

If someone wanted to give us value for Cordero and he would waive his no trade clause I would move him also.

Keepers:
C Hanigan
1B Votto
2B Phillips
SS
3B EE
LF
CF Dickerson
RF Bruce
Bench: Janish

SP: Cueto, Harang, Volquez, Bailey & Owings
RP: Cordero (NTC), Rhodes, Masset, Herrara, Fisher, Burton, Roniecke

Not a bad start for a 2010 team with the talent we have in AAA/AA.

Edskin
07-12-2009, 09:55 PM
I disagree that Cordero would waive his no-trade clause just to go to a contender. I do think that he would waive it for one thing--money, lots of it. If he is traded, then he would likely be going to a team that already has a closer (otherwise they probably wouldn't be a contender), so he would have to accept a set-up role. The problem is that would hurt him the next time contract talks roll around, because the big money is in saves (which he wouldn't be getting anymore). So I figure he would want his payday up front. Additionally, I figure that the Reds would likely have to foot the bill for this extra coin, as the other club wouldn't want to pony up extra jack for a set-up man.

You might be right about waiving his clause-- but I do agree that a Cordero trade is unlikely to the point of being a pointless discussion. It's just that if I was Walt, I'd be throwing his name out there.

And let me clarify one thing:

It's only "selling," if you are trading away players that are currently helping you win in order to get future returns. Trading Harang, Phillips, Masset, etc. would be "selling" IMO. Trading guys like Arroyo or Taveras is just smart.

The whole idea behind the buyers vs. sellers thing is the whole "do we give up on this year?" notion. But honestly, if we traded Arroyo, Taveras, Weathers, and Nix tomorrow, I'm really not sure it would even cost us a win THIS year in the longrun.

Marc D
07-12-2009, 10:02 PM
The whole idea behind the buyers vs. sellers thing is the whole "do we give up on this year?" notion. But honestly, if we traded Arroyo, Taveras, Weathers, and Nix tomorrow, I'm really not sure it would even cost us a win THIS year in the longrun.


Hitters Vorp
Tavaras: -10.6
Nix: 6

Pitchers Vorp
Arroyo: -3.6
Weathers: 9

I'm strangely ok with it.