PDA

View Full Version : Who will the Reds trade?



Kc61
07-17-2009, 05:34 PM
We're headed toward the deadline in the next two weeks. Who will they trade? Feel free to say nobody.

I'm guessing Todd Frazier and Josh Roenicke. If veterans, I'll go with Arroyo and Weathers.

Will M
07-17-2009, 05:44 PM
Easy answer - not who I want them to trade.

Serious answer - Weathers. Nice player but not worth the money owed for his 2010 option. Plus we have a lot of young RH relievers.

Hap
07-17-2009, 05:57 PM
Arroyo (to a Northeast team), Harang (to a California team), Taveras (any team could use a pinch-runner and outfield speed), Hernandez (if someone's regular catchers gets injured), Gomes (to the AL)

Scrap Irony
07-17-2009, 05:59 PM
I'm guessing Rhodes, Arroyo, Harang, and Encarnacion all go, along with Travis Wood and Josh Roenicke. Perhaps Drew Stubbs. Thinking of a huge salary purge for an off-season spending spree.

Mario-Rijo
07-17-2009, 06:09 PM
Probably not much of anyone. They will likely try to save a few bucks so I'll go with Arthur Rhodes who is probably the most likely to be sought after and with the way good bullpen arms are currently being hoarded should bring back something solid in return. I suspect Gomes and Nix will be dangled just for slight salary relief. Stormy could be dealt but for some reason I suspect he won't be. I doubt any big salaries get moved but if so Harang is the one most likely to go as he represents a solid arm for contending teams who doesn't make an alarming amount of money relatively speaking.

If I had my way it would be Weathers, Arroyo, Taveras, Gomes, and maybe EE.

RedsManRick
07-17-2009, 06:30 PM
I don't think we see much action at all. They're terrified of scaring away the fans by trading somebody who would net a return worth trading for and they don't have the guts/payroll to make a significant enough move to make a difference for this year.

If any move is made, it will be for a relatively small upgrade, if that, in the OF.

KronoRed
07-17-2009, 08:17 PM
I doubt we see any trades, it's the same old "maybe we'll get hot and win 82 games" logic that has been a Reds tradition for years.

deltachi8
07-17-2009, 08:24 PM
I think they want top move Arroyo but no one is going to bite.

I think they will move Harrang...outside shot at Weathers

Spitball
07-17-2009, 08:55 PM
I'm guessing Rhodes, Arroyo, Harang, and Encarnacion all go, along with Travis Wood and Josh Roenicke. Perhaps Drew Stubbs. Thinking of a huge salary purge for an off-season spending spree.

Just curious here, but in what scenario are the Reds dumping salary and trading top prospects?

Spitball
07-17-2009, 09:33 PM
Just curious here, but in what scenario are the Reds dumping salary and trading top prospects?

Perhaps one similar to the Brewers trading Carlos Lee to the Rangers along with top prospect Nelson Cruz for Francisco Cordero, Kevin Mench and prospect Laynce Nix. I always assumed Cruz was included because Lee was expensive and the Rangers knew that signing him was unlikely. The Rangers wanted something of value for the long run for their players.

corkedbat
07-17-2009, 09:36 PM
If the Reds had solid lineup, a great rotation and a solid lefty out of the pen was one of the final few pieces to make a pennant run, I'd take Rhodes in a heartbeat. Maybe a team in truly in that position will feel the same and offer something of value - and Jocketty will jump on it.

RedlegJake
07-17-2009, 10:27 PM
I'm with the not much action at all group. The question being who will the Reds trade rather than who do I wish they'd deal.

Degenerate39
07-17-2009, 11:34 PM
No one

MrCinatit
07-17-2009, 11:44 PM
I'd like to think Walt would see how much he can get out of Bronson, now that he is lukewarm - but I have a feeling the "we're so close" ideology will rule instead.

corkedbat
07-18-2009, 12:10 AM
Yeah, I talk about what I would try to do if I called the shots, but if we're talking really real reality here then the answer is not much to nothing at all. The same strategy of mediocrity this franchise has followed for the last decade that will likely result in the same mediocre results.

They won't trade veterans who shouldn't be part of the nucleus for the next three years for young talent that might becuse it will be harder to sell the fan base that they're in the thick of the race. They won't trade youngsters for veteran guys who might actually allow them a chance to compete either because it will cost them money.

The result is likely to be a roster in the next couple of years with five or six guys taking about 40-50%of the payroll that other clubswon't tough, with younger guys who could probably put up similar numbers blocked because of said guys making said payoll dollars.

There will probably also be the same hole in the middle of the lineup come next spring with the FO telling us all is fine because they were able to sign Cory Willy Patterson-Taveras III at a real bargain.

cincrazy
07-18-2009, 01:53 AM
I would trade Willy Taveras to the waivers, and I would accept absolutely nothing in return. I know, a hell of a trade proposal huh? I hear waivers might be ok with it, but so far the Reds are a reluctant trade partner.

Ron Madden
07-18-2009, 04:23 AM
I doubt we see any trades, it's the same old "maybe we'll get hot and win 82 games" logic that has been a Reds tradition for years.

I totally agree but I'm hopeing they can pawn Weathers, Taveras or Arroyo off on someone else

Raisor
07-18-2009, 08:37 AM
In an ironic move the Reds will trade RZ poster Krusty.

:D

Falls City Beer
07-18-2009, 10:23 AM
I'd like to think Walt would see how much he can get out of Bronson, now that he is lukewarm - but I have a feeling the "we're so close" ideology will rule instead.

Maybe. Being in fifth place (and really, they don't have the guns to leapfrog the teams in front of them--all four of those teams are much better) can kind of shake that myth out of their eyes, no matter how quixotic. Even a complete numbers traditionalist understands what fifth place means.

mth123
07-18-2009, 10:43 AM
I think this team probably doesn't do much. Despite the stuff coming from the front office, guys who could help have been moved for little last year and this season. We've seen Willingham and Swisher dealt for little. Cheap free agents like Abreu and Rivera passed on. Guys like Scott Hairston, Mark DeRosa and Nate McClouth dealt during this season. All could have helped immensely, none were dealt for huge talent or signed for huge sums of money, yet the Reds stand on the sidelines. Matching any of the deals for these guys was within the Reds means and would not have been so much in talent that the Reds couldn't have lived without it.

On the purge side of the ledger, the only guy I'd deal simply to get out from under the contract is Willy T. I'd want a decent return for Arroyo, EdE, Phillips, Harang or Cordero.

The guys on one year deals that could be dangled if the Reds fall farther back are Weathers, Hairston, Hernandez and maybe Gonzalez if he can come back. None of those guys net much if the Reds wait until August when waivers become involved. I doubt the Reds will go into sell mode before the end of July.

Chip R
07-18-2009, 11:12 AM
In an ironic move the Reds will trade RZ poster Krusty.

:D

It'd be a slobberknocker.

Red in Chicago
07-18-2009, 11:26 AM
What is this word "trade" that you speak of?;)

redsmetz
07-18-2009, 12:05 PM
I think this team probably doesn't do much. Despite the stuff coming from the front office, guys who could help have been moved for little last year and this season. We've seen Willingham and Swisher dealt for little. Cheap free agents like Abreu and Rivera passed on. Guys like Scott Hairston, Mark DeRosa and Nate McClouth dealt during this season. All could have helped immensely, none were dealt for huge talent or signed for huge sums of money, yet the Reds stand on the sidelines. Matching any of the deals for these guys was within the Reds means and would not have been so much in talent that the Reds couldn't have lived without it.

On the purge side of the ledger, the only guy I'd deal simply to get out from under the contract is Willy T. I'd want a decent return for Arroyo, EdE, Phillips, Harang or Cordero.

The guys on one year deals that could be dangled if the Reds fall farther back are Weathers, Hairston, Hernandez and maybe Gonzalez if he can come back. None of those guys net much if the Reds wait until August when waivers become involved. I doubt the Reds will go into sell mode before the end of July.

But here's what we don't know (and I doubt we can ever know) is what price we would have had to pay. We can look at a trade and say "we could have matched that," but perhaps from us the other club was asking for a player slightly higher up our ladder.

An extreme example is what Baltimore wanted for Bedard. They were asking for our top guys, Votto or Bruce or Bailey. Now I can't say what prices may have been asked, but I can't suggest that management has been working to find possible trades.

It's certainly possible that they've been timid, but I've suggested most of the season that we needed this year to see where our various players, both on the big club and in the minors, were positioning themselves and where we had true surplus of quality players available for trade. I think that's just beginning to occur. I won't venture to say who that could be (it could any number of players), but if not before the season's end, I think we'll see activity in the off season that we didn't this past year.

alexad
07-18-2009, 01:02 PM
Rhoades stayes. He is good and the Reds need that lefty coming out of the pen with experience. Weathers may go, but for no return. I still do not think this team will be sellers.

WMR
07-18-2009, 01:11 PM
I'm predicting very little movement and whatever does happen will be very boring.

LoganBuck
07-18-2009, 01:29 PM
I'm predicting very little movement and whatever does happen will be very boring.

It may generate a 250 post thread though.

Highlifeman21
07-18-2009, 02:09 PM
Bold departures:

Harang
Phillips
Arroyo (to some extent)
Masset
Cordero (if he waives the no trade)
Taveras (bold if we get anything of significance)


Predictable departures:

Bray
Maloney
Rhodes
Weathers
Hernandez
Hairston
Gomes
Nix

Scrap Irony
07-18-2009, 02:12 PM
In the off-season, you mean? Bray'll be hard to deal, as the TJ surgery demands a full season at least. Do you mean the Reds will drop him?

Mario-Rijo
07-18-2009, 02:30 PM
But here's what we don't know (and I doubt we can ever know) is what price we would have had to pay. We can look at a trade and say "we could have matched that," but perhaps from us the other club was asking for a player slightly higher up our ladder.

An extreme example is what Baltimore wanted for Bedard. They were asking for our top guys, Votto or Bruce or Bailey. Now I can't say what prices may have been asked, but I can't suggest that management has been working to find possible trades.

It's certainly possible that they've been timid, but I've suggested most of the season that we needed this year to see where our various players, both on the big club and in the minors, were positioning themselves and where we had true surplus of quality players available for trade. I think that's just beginning to occur. I won't venture to say who that could be (it could any number of players), but if not before the season's end, I think we'll see activity in the off season that we didn't this past year.


I'm not sure I agree with your example RM. The O's did get top guys in return for Bedard arguably just as good as what they were alledgedly asking for from us. I never quite understood why a team would ask for more from a team just because they maybe have more to give. Perhaps they would ask for more just because they can but wouldn't they end up still talking something relatively close if all 3 teams had a fair idea of what said player was worth to begin with?

I'll tell ya what's funny is I have brought up several trades in the past here that many here say oh no that wouldn't be enough, you know they are gonna ask for (insert good player/prospect here) only to see said player dealt for what amounts to less than what I even proposed. Granted that's a bit subjective because I don't know all these prospects but I do know quite a few of them and have in the past read BA's take after a deal and most guys dealt don't stack up from a value perspective. Sometimes we overrate but more often than not those who don't overrate go to the other extreme and underrate.

For example the Hairston deal. No question S.D. got 2 good arms however both look to be bullpen arms and both have some ways to go. If I had to give a Reds comp on them (From a Value Point of View) I'd probably suggest Travis Wood & Sam Lecure maybe. Italiano (22) has a higher ceiling than Wood but has faced some serious injuries which have also simultaneously stunted his growth as a pitcher. The other guy is 23 and has a low 90's fastball with no solid offerings beyond that yet. So I look at a Wood, Lecure package as actually better. Would I trade LeCure & Wood for Scott Hairston? Almost assuredly but I think a lesser package would have gotten it done I think Watson and LeCure would have done it and I would have been all over that. Of course there is also a PTBNL in this deal which I don't believe has been completed yet so it's possible that player is better than either. But ultimately Hairston in GABP would have done wonders for us and just cleared away some soon to be rule 5 types and maybe a solid prospect.

I'm discouraged because of the lack of trading I feel there many deals that would make us better for guys who are never gonna be cornerstone players for us and some that will have no use at all except to trade them before they fizzle out. But I'd rather they not trade if they can't tell the difference between good prospects and bad ones which I am not so sure they can. But I do hope your last paragraph comes to frutition assuming they don't trade any cornerstone players away.

Here's BA take (Free)

Oakland's second-round pick in 2005, Italiano has endured a series of injuries in his young career, including labrum surgery on his right shoulder in 2006 and a skull fracture in 2007, the result of taking a line drive to the head. The 22-year-old seems to be fully recovered this season, though the lost time means that he's pitching in only his second full season. Italiano has a live arm, and his fastball sits in the low 90s and has touched 96 mph. His curveball is a plus pitch with 12-to-6 break, and he also throws a changeup that has flashed average.

Despite having made 16 starts this year for high Class A Stockton, during which time he went 5-6, 5.63 with 75 strikeouts and 40 walks in 77 innings, Italiano may finish this season in the bullpen in an effort to keep his innings in check. With a tall delivery and awkward mechanics to go along with two plus pitches, Italiano might have been destined for the bullpen anyway.

Webb, 23, opened the season as a starter for Sacramento, but the A's moved him to the bullpen after two starts that resulted in a 6.75 ERA and a 9-to-8 strikeout-to-walk ratio. The big, projectable righthander (6-foot-6, 215 pounds) sits in the low-90s with his fastball, but he still has to refine his secondary pitches. To that point, he has worked on a curveball, changeup and slider. After moving to the River Cats' bullpen, Webb improved to a 3.82 ERA and a 30-to-7 strikeout-to-walk mark through 37 2/3 innings.


Oakland's fourth-round pick in 2004, Webb was added to San Diego's 40-man roster after the trade. He figures to make his Padres debut in the bullpen.

For the Padres, their main focus has been adding pitching depth—especially power-armed pitching depth—making this a move they felt like they had to make.

RedLegSuperStar
07-18-2009, 02:38 PM
Juan Francisco
Stormy Weathers
Carlos Fisher/ or Josh Roenicke
Todd Frazier
Willy Taveras DFA'd

Targets:
Magglio Ordonez
Matt Holliday
Erick Aybar
Nelson Cruz

Mario-Rijo
07-18-2009, 02:53 PM
Juan Francisco
Stormy Weathers
Carlos Fisher/ or Josh Roenicke
Todd Frazier
Willy Taveras DFA'd

Targets:
Magglio Ordonez
Matt Holliday
Erick Aybar
Nelson Cruz

Please no Todd Frazier going out and please no Magglio coming in.

SirFelixCat
07-19-2009, 03:55 AM
Bold departures:

Harang
Phillips
Arroyo (to some extent)
Masset
Cordero (if he waives the no trade)
Taveras (bold if we get anything of significance)


Predictable departures:

Bray
Maloney
Rhodes
Weathers
Hernandez
Hairston
Gomes
Nix

Addition by subtraction. Hell, I just want to see CD's numbers w/ a full 1/2 season playing every day.

redsfandan
07-19-2009, 04:23 PM
Looks like Weathers may have a little more appeal to a team like Detroit ...

Joel Zumaya-R- Tigers Jul. 19 - 2:00 pm et

Tigers trainer Kevin Rand said Joel Zumaya has "reaggravated the stress fracture of the right coracoid" in his right shoulder that occurred last season.

Surgery is a possibility. It's better news than a torn labrum or rotator cuff would have been, but it's still not good. While Zumaya's arm remains capable of producing 95-100 mph fastballs, it seems his shoulder can only take so much before giving out.
Source: Booth Newspapers

RedLegSuperStar
07-19-2009, 08:59 PM
Looks like Weathers may have a little more appeal to a team like Detroit ...

Weathers and Dorn for Ordonez and cash

Jpup
07-19-2009, 09:16 PM
Weathers and Dorn for Ordonez and cash

You don't want Ordonez because if he has enough plate appearances, he has to be paid 18 million next year. Nobody is going to allow that. The only way Ordonez gets another spot this year is if he is DFA'd and then signed to a new contract. No one is going to trade for his contract.

RedLegSuperStar
07-19-2009, 10:17 PM
You don't want Ordonez because if he has enough plate appearances, he has to be paid 18 million next year. Nobody is going to allow that. The only way Ordonez gets another spot this year is if he is DFA'd and then signed to a new contract. No one is going to trade for his contract.

True.. cash would have to be a lot and I'm sure it probably wouldn't get past the commisioners office.

TheNext44
07-19-2009, 10:55 PM
Don't understand why anyone would want M. Ordonez right now.

Jerry Hariston jr. is out slugging him .386 to .347. He has one more home run than Micah Owings, 4-3. He is just terrible this year, and it can't be all the parks fault.

corkedbat
07-20-2009, 12:14 AM
Odds & Ends: Lilly, White Sox, Reds, Sheets
By Mike Axisa [July 18, 2009 at 9:11pm CST]
...Hal McCoy of The Dayton Daily News says that he could see Aaron Harang and/or Bronson Arroyo moved for prospects if "the Reds nose dive before the July 31 trade deadline." ESPN.com's Buster Olney hears that Ben Sheets continues...

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/cincinnati_reds/index.html

http://www.prosportsdaily.com/mlb/reds/rumors.html

redsfandan
07-20-2009, 07:43 AM
Weathers and Dorn for Ordonez and cash
I was thinking more along the lines of Arroyo and maybe Weathers for Casey Crosby and another prospect. Crosby is a 20 year old leftie starter in A ball but his stats look pretty impressive to me (10.1 k's/9 ip, 3.18 era, 1.284 whip in 18 starts/76.1 ip). Unfortunately their farm system isn't in the best shape so he may just be their best prospect. But Detroit does need some help if they want to stay in the playoff picture.

I have a hard time believing that Ordonez has all of a sudden lost the ability to hit. But a FA maybe a better idea for left anyway (heck he could be one of them).

RANDY IN INDY
07-20-2009, 07:48 AM
Odds & Ends: Lilly, White Sox, Reds, Sheets
By Mike Axisa [July 18, 2009 at 9:11pm CST]
...Hal McCoy of The Dayton Daily News says that he could see Aaron Harang and/or Bronson Arroyo moved for prospects if "the Reds nose dive before the July 31 trade deadline." ESPN.com's Buster Olney hears that Ben Sheets continues...

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/cincinnati_reds/index.html

http://www.prosportsdaily.com/mlb/reds/rumors.html

It almost feels like that is what they are hoping for.

redsmetz
07-20-2009, 07:57 AM
Here's an interesting twist to this question. If Weathers completes the season with the Reds and we pick up his option, that gives him 10 & 5 rights (ten years or more ML experience, five with the same club). He's in season five back with the Reds. So if there is a time to trade him, we can do it now without his permission. Next year, he'll have the right to veto a trade. He probably holds as much value as any of our relievers and might be the most desirable to contending clubs. He's only been to the post-season once ('96 Yankees).

redsfandan
07-20-2009, 08:05 AM
Good point redsmetz. All the more reason to deal him now.

Jpup
07-20-2009, 09:26 AM
Here's an interesting twist to this question. If Weathers completes the season with the Reds and we pick up his option, that gives him 10 & 5 rights (ten years or more ML experience, five with the same club). He's in season five back with the Reds. So if there is a time to trade him, we can do it now without his permission. Next year, he'll have the right to veto a trade. He probably holds as much value as any of our relievers and might be the most desirable to contending clubs. He's only been to the post-season once ('96 Yankees).

I don't think he has much value as far as a trade. I can't see the Reds getting much for him. I like the guy and I'm for him staying around, but I can't see anyone other than, maybe the Dodgers, wanting to trade for him. Maybe the Reds could get a Blake Dewitt or something like that for him, but I don't know why they would want him.

redsmetz
07-20-2009, 09:10 PM
I saw mention of Brendan Harris in another thread and what the Reds got in return for him (I believe cash) and it made me realize how few "PTBNL" deals we've seen. With Wayne, we had sometimes half a dozen players coming to us - you could have done a thread on that alone guessing all the moves that still were coming.

mth123
07-21-2009, 06:19 AM
Dusty's comments about Phillips last night make me wonder if Brandon could go on the block. Dusty pretty much implied that lack of effort is an habitual problem with Phillips and what I read into it is that Dusty is fed up (again that is me reading into it). The Reds have Valaika playing 2B in AAA and maybe that would be the plan. Phillips could help a lot of teams and would bring back a lot IMO. Phillips to the Giants for Madison Bumgarner and John Bowker might be a good deal. The Reds have Sutton to look at, Vailaika in AAA and Hairston to hold the fort. It would be a downgrade for now and the defense would never be as good with any of these guys, but Bowker could probably play LF and provide some power and Bumgarner would be the team's top prospect immediately.

In spite of it all, I like Phillips and would only deal him if the return is high. Even the deal I proposed above is not something I'm certain I'd like. Not sure you could get more (like say subbing Buster Posey for Bowker) with Phillips cost increasing over the next few years.

Benihana
07-21-2009, 09:13 AM
Dusty's comments about Phillips last night make me wonder if Brandon could go on the block. Dusty pretty much implied that lack of effort is an habitual problem with Phillips and what I read into it is that Dusty is fed up (again that is me reading into it). The Reds have Valaika playing 2B in AAA and maybe that would be the plan. Phillips could help a lot of teams and would bring back a lot IMO. Phillips to the Giants for Madison Bumgarner and John Bowker might be a good deal. The Reds have Sutton to look at, Vailaika in AAA and Hairston to hold the fort. It would be a downgrade for now and the defense would never be as good with any of these guys, but Bowker could probably play LF and provide some power and Bumgarner would be the team's top prospect immediately.

In spite of it all, I like Phillips and would only deal him if the return is high. Even the deal I proposed above is not something I'm certain I'd like. Not sure you could get more (like say subbing Buster Posey for Bowker) with Phillips cost increasing over the next few years.

I like Bumgarner a lot, but this would leave two GIANT holes on the team: First, the offense would be incredibly anemic (and LH-heavy). Second, the infield defense would likely be the worst in baseball.

RedEye
07-21-2009, 09:37 AM
I like Bumgarner a lot, but this would leave two GIANT holes on the team: First, the offense would be incredibly anemic (and LH-heavy). Second, the infield defense would likely be the worst in baseball.

I really don't think the giants would deal Bumgartner for BP.

membengal
07-21-2009, 10:41 AM
As of this morning, with two left in LA and then on to Chicago, with a likely losing week staring them in the face, they are four games under .500, they are 5.5 games out of first, they have three teams to climb over to get to first, and are only three games clear of the Pirates for last place.

So, yuck. For those of us who were hoping for 82 wins (my official prediction in the official prediction thread) and an end to the consecutive losing season skid, it's looking dim, frankly, as of July 21. They look to be on their usual trajectory for somewhere between 72 and 78 wins at this point. More yuck.

So, yet again, for the umpteenth time, we come to it. Mid-July, too much payroll to have flexibility (apparently), not enough payroll to compete (apparently). Betwixt and between. Eternally.

The stakes are raised for Walt this time around. I give him an A+ for his deals last summer. Getting something of value for Griffey and Dunn was nice work, given their looming free agency. But those were obvious moves. Now is the time for Walt to live up to the faith that many have in him (and that this skeptic wants to have in this team's GM) and do something bold. It's past time to try the modified or even full-on edabbs. Identify the players with greatest value who have a sizeable contract, and flip them for young pieces that this club needs. Go Marlin. In order, I would try and deal:

1. Harang
2. Phillips
3. Cordeo
4. Arroyo
5. EE

I don't for a second think all five should be dealt, but they should try and entertain offers on all five and see what shakes free. This team continues to need a new direction, or, even, a direction, and the $45 million (or so) that is tied up in those five players is something that can be addressed to give the team some more flexibility this upcoming off-season with regard to free agency.

To be clear, I don't want any of them given away (I would reserve that for Taveras), but I would like, if the Reds identify a package that gives them MLB ready talent, particularly at, say, SS, or starting pitcher be it lefty or righty, that they go ahead and make the deal. I continue to maintain that the team's absence of an articulable plan is frustrating, because you either have to hope they have one and look through the few moves that are made to guess what it is, or resign yourself to the fact that the plan may be a modified Bengals plan, spend just enough to create the illusion of competitiveness without being actually competitive.

Which is less than ideal, from a fan's standpoint.

Kc61
07-21-2009, 10:57 AM
. Now is the time for Walt to live up to the faith that many have in him (and that this skeptic wants to have in this team's GM) and do something bold. It's past time to try the modified or even full-on edabbs. Identify the players with greatest value who have a sizeable contract, and flip them for young pieces that this club needs. Go Marlin. In order, I would try and deal:

1. Harang
2. Phillips
3. Cordeo
4. Arroyo
5. EE



Which is less than ideal, from a fan's standpoint.

Once again, I'll ask. Please identify the roadmap to success with continued stockpiling of inexperienced prospects and sending away most of the good players on the team.

For years I've heard that it's too soon to fill holes with top veterans and that the Reds should trade off their valuable veterans for more and more kids. Nobody ever explains with particularity how this works.

When will these new young guys be ready to play successfully in the majors? It takes time. We've seen Bruce, Bailey and other top prospects struggle.

Who will be left at that point? If it is 2012, say, what does the team look like?

When will the Reds be ready to actually acquire good veteran players? You seem to think 2009-10 is too soon. 2011? 2015? Just when.

The problem with this sell now-be good later idea is that it leads to an endless cycle of hoping for prospects. I respect the idea, I understand the idea, but I just don't think it works in sports today.

When do they make their move?

Benihana
07-21-2009, 11:00 AM
Once again, I'll ask. Please identify the roadmap to success with continued stockpiling of inexperienced prospects and sending away most of the good players on the team.

For years I've heard that it's too soon to fill holes with top veterans and that the Reds should trade off their valuable veterans for more and more kids. Nobody ever explains with particularity how this works.

When will these new young guys be ready to play successfully in the majors? It takes time. We've seen Bruce, Bailey and other top prospects struggle.

Who will be left at that point? If it is 2012, say, what does the team look like?

When will the Reds be ready to actually acquire good veteran players? You seem to think 2009-10 is too soon. 2011? 2015? Just when.

The problem with this sell now-be good later idea is that it leads to an endless cycle of hoping for prospects. I respect the idea, I understand the idea, but I just don't think it works in sports today.

When do they make their move?

Agreed.

I have no interest in trading Brandon Phillips, and would prefer to hang onto Aaron Harang barring an exceptional return. I would move Arroyo if a team would be willing to take down his contract and give up a prospect or two, and I would also be open to dealing Cordero if he could bring back some talent.

IMO, Phillips and Harang do not have ready replacements.
Arroyo and (to a lesser extent) Cordero do, and therefore could be expendable.

In this order, I would look to deal:

Bronson Arroyo
David Weathers
Arthur Rhodes
Francisco Cordero

With the exception of Arroyo, I would only move these guys for a nice return of talent and their full contract picked up.

membengal
07-21-2009, 11:05 AM
Florida. The Marlins have done that twice.

I will turn it back on you, KC.

Please identify the roadmap to success where the Reds hold on a to a few high-priced players but can't afford to fill in talent around them? Going back to 2000, how has that worked?

So. We come to it. Either BUILD on what is here and spend the money to bring in additional true talent and GO FOR IT,.........

OR

Move what is here that has value for true top level MLB ready talent and re-tool and go for it that way.

But CHOOSE one.

They are in-between. As always. You implicitely criticize such a plan as I have laid out (and has been laid out any number of times every year I have been on this board by one poster or another) for pushing the winning off to the future. Well, I ask you, where is the winning now? Where has the winning been under this current approach? You know as well as I that it hasn't been. At all. They are in-between approaches, and it has not worked. I don't know that it can work in this market.

Other teams that have cycled talent and had success besides Florida? Oakland. Minny. It can be done. But you have to commit to it. And you have to have the right baseball minds to make it pay off. I am told by many on here that Walt is that guy. Let's hope so. I want this team to get off the pot, so to speak. Make it so, Walt.

Chip R
07-21-2009, 11:38 AM
Other teams that have cycled talent and had success besides Florida? Oakland. Minny. It can be done. But you have to commit to it. And you have to have the right baseball minds to make it pay off. I am told by many on here that Walt is that guy. Let's hope so. I want this team to get off the pot, so to speak. Make it so, Walt.


It can be done but the odds are long and you have to have superior talent in the minors to do it. The Pirates keep doing this and they haven't got better. K.C. does it and they haven't improved and the Reds do it and don't improve.

Kc61
07-21-2009, 11:39 AM
Florida. The Marlins have done that twice.

I will turn it back on you, KC.

Please identify the roadmap to success where the Reds hold on a to a few high-priced players but can't afford to fill in talent around them? Going back to 2000, how has that worked?


Other teams that have cycled talent and had success besides Florida? Oakland. Minny. It can be done. But you have to commit to it. And you have to have the right baseball minds to make it pay off. I am told by many on here that Walt is that guy. Let's hope so. I want this team to get off the pot, so to speak. Make it so, Walt.

Actually, when the Marlins won the series, twice, they made key off-season expenditures to get there. And once they won they dumped the expensive guys. That was their model if I recall.

I am not suggesting a middle of the road approach. Not at all. I don't like the current treadmill of kids, role players, and a few solid veterans. It's not enough.

But I don't agree that this is the only alternative.

Go out and act like a major league team. Sign a major free agent hitter. Trade for another top flight pitcher. Trade for a young shortstop. Set the sights above mediocrity. The trade bait is there, the team is loaded with good prospects and some decent veteran pieces.

Can't afford it? Sell the team to someone who can. Or take the loss for a year and dare the fans to come in.

membengal
07-21-2009, 11:44 AM
It can be done but the odds are long and you have to have superior talent in the minors to do it. The Pirates keep doing this and they haven't got better. K.C. does it and they haven't improved and the Reds do it and don't improve.

I didn't say it was foolproof, Chip. There are dangers in any approach if not done well. The odds are just as long given their current approach too, no?

But is Walt really what people say he is? Then, if so, there is opportunity here. The Reds have some young pieces in place.

Here's a parallel...end of the 1987 season, Dave Parker had just turned in a monster year for Cincy. The Reds were competitive that year, relatively, too. Did that stop Cincy from dealing him that off-season? No. They moved him and brought in what turned out to be an absolutely crucial piece of the puzzle, in a young, talented, but unproven Jose Rijo.

You can't be afraid to identify talent and go get it as a franchise. Well, I guess you can, but then you will end up in Cincy's existence, forever in-between, and wondering how to get off the 76 win treadmill.

membengal
07-21-2009, 11:47 AM
Actually, when the Marlins won the series, twice, they made key off-season expenditures to get there. And once they won they dumped the expensive guys. That was their model if I recall.

I am not suggesting a middle of the road approach. Not at all. I don't like the current treadmill of kids, role players, and a few solid veterans. It's not enough.

But I don't agree that this is the only alternative.

Go out and act like a major league team. Sign a major free agent hitter. Trade for another top flight pitcher. Trade for a young shortstop. Set the sights above mediocrity. The trade bait is there, the team is loaded with good prospects and some decent veteran pieces.

Can't afford it? Sell the team to someone who can. Or take the loss for a year and dare the fans to come in.

You would choose what I have listed as option 1 (which you for some reason didn't quote), add talent and GO FOR IT. Right there with you, KC. But I don't see any indication that particular approach is on the table for BCast. For whatever reason.

So, if they won't do option one, then I advocate option 2. Divest of marketable talent, bring in guys who are MLB ready and have genuine talent of their own, and go for it that way, while freeing up some payroll flex.

But I would like them to launch on one of those two approaches. What they are doing trying to cut a middle path on not enough payroll, is leading to a cycle of less-than-mediocrity and frustration that is not easily broken.

Simply put, the in-between approach is not working. I think we have more than enough data at this point to come to that conclusion...

Kc61
07-21-2009, 11:59 AM
[QUOTE=membengal;1924871]You would choose what I have listed as option 1 (which you for some reason didn't quote), add talent and GO FOR IT. Right there with you, KC. But I don't see any indication that particular approach is on the table for BCast. For whatever reason.

QUOTE]

The sense I got from your posts is that you didn't think Option 1 was realistic and you were focused on option 2.
Forgive me if I misinterpreted.

Frankly, I'm reaching the point where I just hope for something to happen. Just to show that somebody in the FO recognizes there are fans out there who are tired of watching the same C- level of baseball.

membengal
07-21-2009, 12:02 PM
Apparently option 1 is unrealistic. Just basing that on watching the front office. But at that point, they need to move on to option 2 then. No more in-between.

Jpup
07-21-2009, 12:03 PM
Frankly, I'm reaching the point where I just hope for something to happen. Just to show that somebody in the FO recognizes there are fans out there who are tired of watching the same C- level of baseball.

Uncle Walt is asleep at the wheel. :sleep:

Chip R
07-21-2009, 12:04 PM
You can't be afraid to identify talent and go get it as a franchise. Well, I guess you can, but then you will end up in Cincy's existence, forever in-between, and wondering how to get off the 76 win treadmill.


And that's the problem. The Reds haven't been able to turn the veterans they sell off into talent. The Marlins give up Beckett and got Hanley Ramirez in return. And Beckett was one of their own. So not only can they draft and develop, they can identify prospects from other teams to trade for. All on a payroll that isn't even close to the Reds in a market that doesn't draw a lot of people to their games.

membengal
07-21-2009, 01:13 PM
And that's the problem. The Reds haven't been able to turn the veterans they sell off into talent. The Marlins give up Beckett and got Hanley Ramirez in return. And Beckett was one of their own. So not only can they draft and develop, they can identify prospects from other teams to trade for. All on a payroll that isn't even close to the Reds in a market that doesn't draw a lot of people to their games.

The bolded part is what I was referring to by mentioning the Marlins above. I like their decisiveness on stuff like that.

I want the Reds to find that kind of vision and cash in the vets before they lose value or get too hard to move.

Chip R
07-21-2009, 02:01 PM
The bolded part is what I was referring to by mentioning the Marlins above. I like their decisiveness on stuff like that.

I want the Reds to find that kind of vision and cash in the vets before they lose value or get too hard to move.


I do too but just because the Marlins can do it doesn't mean the Reds can. Even if they could, they wouldn't get nearly the haul because the players we have aren't that great. Sure, I'd like to flip Weathers for something but that something we get back isn't likely to be that attractive. Harang isn't the pitcher he was 2 years ago and even then he was underrated. Arroyo's a 4.50 ERA .500 pitcher that will give you 200 innings. Not bad to have but not likely to get a Hanley Ramirez type player in return. Cordero may fetch something nice but he's got a big contract. You pray that a team in contention's closer gets hurt or is ineffective so you can trade him to them. But that window isn't even open yet. Rhodes is a nice lefty setup man but isn't going to bring back anything special.

membengal
07-21-2009, 02:24 PM
There's a reason Weathers wasn't on my list. Nor was Rhodes. I do not have unreasonable expectations as to what guys like them will bring.

The five I listed are probably the Reds' best chance to find legit talent coming back. And, sorry, if Walt is what he is supposed to be, he can do what the Marlins have done. Or try to (Phillips may be their most marketable from a value and contract stand-point). Or he shouldn't be here.

Benihana
07-21-2009, 02:46 PM
There's a reason Weathers wasn't on my list. Nor was Rhodes. I do not have unreasonable expectations as to what guys like them will bring.

The five I listed are probably the Reds' best chance to find legit talent coming back. And, sorry, if Walt is what he is supposed to be, he can do what the Marlins have done. Or try to (Phillips may be their most marketable from a value and contract stand-point). Or he shouldn't be here.

Walt has never been a "sell" guy. He has usually been the one dealing the prospects for the big name player (Dennis Eckersley, Rickey Henderson, Dave Henderson, Harold Baines, Mark McGwire, Jim Edmonds, Scott Rolen, Mark Mulder, etc.)

I don't believe he was brought in to be a seller. Granted, the Reds chances to compete this year don't look too good at the moment. However, for the first time in many years- next year, they look like they could even be a favorite to contend for the division title at least.

Now I know that sounds ridiculous. But for the bast decade, that contention period was always 2-3 years down the road. Now it is less than a year away. I agree to an extent with the Billy Beane quote that you're either rebuilding or you're contending- there is no in between. But for right now, I think the Reds are contending- for next year. It's too late in the process to sell off all of the veterans now.

Sell a couple of the replaceable ones (Arroyo, Weathers, maybe Cordero, etc.) sure, but I would not trade Phillips or Harang unless the return blew me away.

bucksfan2
07-21-2009, 03:04 PM
Walt has never been a "sell" guy. He has usually been the one dealing the prospects for the big name player (Dennis Eckersley, Rickey Henderson, Dave Henderson, Harold Baines, Mark McGwire, Jim Edmonds, Scott Rolen, Mark Mulder, etc.)

I don't believe he was brought in to be a seller. Granted, the Reds chances to compete this year don't look too good at the moment. However, for the first time in many years- next year, they look like they could even be a favorite to contend for the division title at least.

Now I know that sounds ridiculous. But for the bast decade, that contention period was always 2-3 years down the road. Now it is less than a year away. I agree to an extent with the Billy Beane quote that you're either rebuilding or you're contending- there is no in between. But for right now, I think the Reds are contending- for next year. It's too late in the process to sell off all of the veterans now.

Sell a couple of the replaceable ones (Arroyo, Weathers, maybe Cordero, etc.) sure, but I would not trade Phillips or Harang unless the return blew me away.

I disagree with Beane's quote quite a bit in today's market. The A's had a great run back in the early 2000's that was fueled by an the development of 3 stud pitchers all at one time. It was also fueled by Beane taking advantage of a certain skill set that most organizations were overlooking. But you can't talk about the A's success without mentioning steroids. I think Beane's philosophy has really come to the end of the road and is pretty evident in the A's lack of success over the past 5 years.

I think what is hard to stomach for us Reds fans is that this season was about development. It was about building for the 2010 season. It was made even harder for us fans because we saw what kind of team the Reds had, their strengths and also their flaws. It was a season that if everything went right the Reds would find themselves in contention, but everything didn't go right. One month ago we wanted to Reds to make a move to get the team into contention, now we want the Reds to see the farm. Here are some key issues that I see for the next 6 months.

The rotation has 6 pitchers in it. Harnag, Arroyo, Volquez, Cueto, Owings, and Bailey. Where does it go from here? Do the Reds move a pitcher or two before the start of next season?

Where does the offense come from. Votto, Phillips, and Bruce should be the only shoe ins to start of the 10 season. There should be a battle for the CF job over the next 6 months as well as figuring out if Heisey or even Dickerson can hold down LF. SS is really the only position that needs a complete overhaul. Ideally a pitcher should be traded for a young, talented SS, but most of the league is looking for that type of player.

Jocketty has to do his job over next 10 days as well as the off season FA market in order to make this club better.

membengal
07-21-2009, 03:05 PM
Then Walt's the wrong guy for this job, benihana. Because if BCast won't let the GM shop, the GM had beter be adept at selling and bringing back useful pieces in return.... Otherwise, it's more of the horrible middle for this team, no way forward and no way back, and spinning wheels to 77 or so wins.

Oh, and looking at this team as it is currently constituted, I have no faith that is less-than-a-year-away or just-a-few-pieces away from contention.

They have real value in Brandon Phillips. Now. GG, power and speed, decent contract, that is the kind of guy a team like Oakland would move a this point. That is what Walt should target. And push on Harang, I think he has more value than a bunch of you are thinking. Of course the return has to be big, or you don't do the deal. But I think the return on those two just might be. Cordero too.

TheNext44
07-21-2009, 03:10 PM
One thing to remember.

Everyone was griping that Jocketty was doing nothing last season at this time. Then, right at the trading deadline, he got solid value for Griffey, and then after it, he got solid value for Dunn.

Only point being... patience.

Homer Bailey
07-21-2009, 03:22 PM
One thing to remember.

Everyone was griping that Jocketty was doing nothing last season at this time. Then, right at the trading deadline, he got solid value for Griffey, and then after it, he got solid value for Dunn.

Only point being... patience.

Not to turn it into a Dunn thread (please), but a better option IMO would have been to resign Dunn, rather than trade him for a number 5 prospect and some fringe guys. But they went the cheap route, and this was before the economic meltdown. Did Dunn end up being Type A? If so then I'd argue they didn't end up getting a lot in return for Dunn. I'd certainly rather still have him on the team. Just because he got something for Dunn doesn't mean he made the best decision on what to do with him.

The Griffey trade was obviously a good one.

Chip R
07-21-2009, 03:28 PM
Not to turn it into a Dunn thread (please), but a better option IMO would have been to resign Dunn, rather than trade him for a number 5 prospect and some fringe guys. But they went the cheap route, and this was before the economic meltdown. Did Dunn end up being Type A? If so then I'd argue they didn't end up getting a lot in return for Dunn. I'd certainly rather still have him on the team. Just because he got something for Dunn doesn't mean he made the best decision on what to do with him.



Financially, it was a good deal. On the field, not so much although we did get Owings out of it.

redsmetz
07-21-2009, 03:33 PM
Not to turn it into a Dunn thread (please), but a better option IMO would have been to resign Dunn, rather than trade him for a number 5 prospect and some fringe guys. But they went the cheap route, and this was before the economic meltdown. Did Dunn end up being Type A? If so then I'd argue they didn't end up getting a lot in return for Dunn. I'd certainly rather still have him on the team. Just because he got something for Dunn doesn't mean he made the best decision on what to do with him.

The Griffey trade was obviously a good one.

I'm not certain they took the "cheap route". I'm not sure they believed Dunn would come back. Why would he want to play here where he heard the incessant cry that he was a bum eminating from 50,000 Watts night in and night out. Heck we could have had Owings plus have resigned Dunn, but again, I doubt he'll ever play for this team again. I sure wouldn't if I were him. One of the best sluggers in years and he was basically run out of town by the mouths.

TheNext44
07-21-2009, 03:44 PM
Not to turn it into a Dunn thread (please), but a better option IMO would have been to resign Dunn, rather than trade him for a number 5 prospect and some fringe guys. But they went the cheap route, and this was before the economic meltdown. Did Dunn end up being Type A? If so then I'd argue they didn't end up getting a lot in return for Dunn. I'd certainly rather still have him on the team. Just because he got something for Dunn doesn't mean he made the best decision on what to do with him.

The Griffey trade was obviously a good one.

The deal was basically three decent players for two months of Dunn. That was better than the two draft picks the might have gotten, if they let Dunn walk, offered him arbitration, and he declined.

They then had the opportunity to re-sign him in the off season, which they could have at much less than what it would have taken to re-sign him during the season, but declined to do so. So the question of whether or not to re-sign him was irrelevant to the question of whether or not to trade him for the package they received.

I'd say, pretty shrewdly played by Jocketty.

Benihana
07-21-2009, 03:47 PM
I don't think they really wanted him back.

OK, enough of the Dunn talk.

KoryMac5
07-21-2009, 04:59 PM
Heyman of SI was just on the radio stating that Arroyo and Harang are being shopped by the Reds. Cordero was a name he also brought up as well, but went on to state the teams that need closers can't afford Cordero. He doesn't feel that either Harang or Arroyo will be moved though as both players have hefty contracts for next season. Heyman went on to state that some teams involved in the Halliday talks have even asked Toronto to take on some of his salary. If teams are playing economic hardball I could only see maybe Rhodes and Weathers being dealt by the Reds maybe Gomes and Nix as well.

Benihana
07-21-2009, 05:02 PM
Heyman of SI was just on the radio stating that Arroyo and Harang are being shopped by the Reds. Cordero was a name he also brought up as well, but went on to state the teams that need closers can't afford Cordero. He doesn't feel that either Harang or Arroyo will be moved though as both players have hefty contracts for next season. Heyman went on to state that some teams involved in the Halliday talks have even asked Toronto to take on some of his salary. If teams are playing economic hardball I could only see maybe Rhodes and Weathers being dealt by the Reds maybe Gomes and Nix as well.

Rosenthal said essentially the same thing in his article today. He said look for the Reds to move Arroyo in the offseason.

Brutus
07-21-2009, 05:17 PM
Not to turn it into a Dunn thread (please), but a better option IMO would have been to resign Dunn, rather than trade him for a number 5 prospect and some fringe guys. But they went the cheap route, and this was before the economic meltdown. Did Dunn end up being Type A? If so then I'd argue they didn't end up getting a lot in return for Dunn. I'd certainly rather still have him on the team. Just because he got something for Dunn doesn't mean he made the best decision on what to do with him.

The Griffey trade was obviously a good one.

Bronson Arroyo noted that "everyone knew" Dunn was going to ask for $100 million. You really think the Reds didn't take that into account?

Consider the market. The Reds tried unloading Dunn in July and every team took a pass. For what the Reds got out of it, and the timing, it was a decent trade.

I think the right decision was made. In order to get the draft picks, you have to offer arbitration. If Dunn accepts, then you run the risk of paying more than you had budgeted should you lose. Even Arizona did not offer him, so it was not a clear-cut decision that the Reds should have done so.

Kc61
07-21-2009, 05:22 PM
One thing to remember.

Everyone was griping that Jocketty was doing nothing last season at this time. Then, right at the trading deadline, he got solid value for Griffey, and then after it, he got solid value for Dunn.

Only point being... patience.

Those guys, Griffey and Dunn, had to be traded. They were two months from free agency. I don't see that as a positive move for the team, just trying to get something for guys destined to leave.

Patience? You've got to be kidding. The team hasn't been in the playoffs since 1995. They've had a losing record for eight consecutive seasons. How patient do you expect anyone to be?

Tell me the last major positive thing this team has done. I can't remember it.

Edit: Cordero was a major positive. Tell me another one.

Brutus
07-21-2009, 05:28 PM
Those guys, Griffey and Dunn, had to be traded. They were two months from free agency. I don't see that as a positive move for the team, just trying to get something for guys destined to leave.

Patience? You've got to be kidding. The team hasn't been in the playoffs since 1995. They've had a losing record for eight consecutive seasons. How patient do you expect anyone to be?

Tell me the last major positive thing this team has done. I can't remember it.

Edit: Cordero was a major positive. Tell me another one.

Though I can't speak for him, I think his patience remark had more to do with allowing the full trade deadline to take its course before we judge the results. I don't think he was saying people should be patient about the Reds winning, but rather be patient about what Walt Jocketty winds up doing.

Kc61
07-21-2009, 05:35 PM
Though I can't speak for him, I think his patience remark had more to do with allowing the full trade deadline to take its course before we judge the results. I don't think he was saying people should be patient about the Reds winning, but rather be patient about what Walt Jocketty winds up doing.

You're probably correct, so I'll be patient for another 10 days when the deadline occurs. I'll even include the "waiver deadline" adding another 30 days.

After 40 days I don't think I'll be patient anymore.

redsfandan
07-21-2009, 05:41 PM
Bronson Arroyo noted that "everyone knew" Dunn was going to ask for $100 million. You really think the Reds didn't take that into account?

Consider the market. The Reds tried unloading Dunn in July and every team took a pass. For what the Reds got out of it, and the timing, it was a decent trade.

I think the right decision was made. In order to get the draft picks, you have to offer arbitration. If Dunn accepts, then you run the risk of paying more than you had budgeted should you lose. Even Arizona did not offer him, so it was not a clear-cut decision that the Reds should have done so.
I agree 1000%. The writing was already on the wall. Expecting the Reds to pay $15m+/yr to any player is just not realistic.

RedLegSuperStar
07-21-2009, 05:49 PM
You're probably correct, so I'll be patient for another 10 days when the deadline occurs. I'll even include the "waiver deadline" adding another 30 days.

After 40 days I don't think I'll be patient anymore.

I am in the same boat.. I have been told every year for the past 7-8 years that winning was key. Yet every year we end up with a losing record.. Something needs to be done.

TheNext44
07-21-2009, 05:58 PM
First, I did mean patience in terms of the next 40 days. A lot can and probably will happen between now and Sept.

Second, I do think that Jocketty is thinking long term first and foremost with all of his decisions, and is more focused on building a strong organization from top to bottom than he is focused on winning this year, or even 2010.

He slowly built the Cardinals into a very solid organization, so that they would be in contention every year, and if they were close at the trading deadline he would then acquire what was needed, using the depth that he created.

I think this is his plan for the Reds. Kinda sucks right now, after 10 years of sucking, but the Reds have tried the "go for it all this year" route to many failed times for me to argue against this plan.

So while that is not what I meant, I do think patience is needed in the long term as well.

Brutus
07-21-2009, 06:03 PM
First, I did mean patience in terms of the next 40 days. A lot can and probably will happen between now and Sept.

Second, I do think that Jocketty is thinking long term first and foremost with all of his decisions, and is more focused on building a strong organization from top to bottom than he is focused on winning this year, or even 2010.

He slowly built the Cardinals into a very solid organization, so that they would be in contention every year, and if they were close at the trading deadline he would then acquire what was needed, using the depth that he created.

I think this is his plan for the Reds. Kinda sucks right now, after 10 years of sucking, but the Reds have tried the "go for it all this year" route to many failed times for me to argue against this plan.

So while that is not what I meant, I do think patience is needed in the long term as well.

I think it may have been Benihana that said this either in this thread or another, but I completely agree, at least for once the "future" i.e. long term, does not seem so far away for once. A signing here, a trade there, cleaning up a bad contract here or there and suddenly this team is a legit contender. It really is. For once not much is necessary to get this team into a good position. Jocketty, like him or not, has a proven track record of keeping teams in the mix with a mild payroll. I hope people simply have faith in his ability to get this team where it needs to be - rather this year or next.

TheNext44
07-21-2009, 06:11 PM
I think it may have been Benihana that said this either in this thread or another, but I completely agree, at least for once the "future" i.e. long term, does not seem so far away for once. A signing here, a trade there, cleaning up a bad contract here or there and suddenly this team is a legit contender. It really is. For once not much is necessary to get this team into a good position. Jocketty, like him or not, has a proven track record of keeping teams in the mix with a mild payroll. I hope people simply have faith in his ability to get this team where it needs to be - rather this year or next.

Thanks for the clarification.

I completely agree. The Reds are two years into Jocketty's plan, and are already much improved as an organization, which means it shouldn't be that long before things really turn around, and for good.

I just wanted to point out that I think that Jocketty is thinking more about the "for good" part than the turning it around this year part. And he will be thinking more about that every year that he is GM.

Ron Madden
07-22-2009, 04:05 AM
I agree 1000%. The writing was already on the wall. Expecting the Reds to pay $15m+/yr to any player is just not realistic.

15mil per year is a pretty steep price.

Again I say, "I'd rather the Reds pay productive players than waste any money on non productive players".

It aint really how much you spend that hurts you, it's how much you waste that kills you.

:(

Kc61
07-22-2009, 11:16 AM
I think this is his plan for the Reds. Kinda sucks right now, after 10 years of sucking, but the Reds have tried the "go for it all this year" route to many failed times for me to argue against this plan.

So while that is not what I meant, I do think patience is needed in the long term as well.

The Reds have never tried the "go for it all this year" route, not since the Griffey acquisition. They have tried the "let's be semi-decent this year" route, which always fails.

M2
07-22-2009, 11:38 AM
The Reds have never tried the "go for it all this year" route, not since the Griffey acquisition. They have tried the "let's be semi-decent this year" route, which always fails.

Exactly. Half-measures in the winter followed by a summertime roster striptease.

edabbs44
07-22-2009, 11:50 AM
The Reds have never tried the "go for it all this year" route, not since the Griffey acquisition. They have tried the "let's be semi-decent this year" route, which always fails.

Absolutely. Fence sitting doesn't work, and we have seen that for a long time.

Scrap Irony
07-22-2009, 11:55 AM
So, M2, you'd "go for it", yes? Does that mean this team is good enough, in your opinion, to compete?

I don't think Castellini is willing to put in the cash needed to buy a playoff spot, as it would take a LF and a SS from free agency. There is also approximately $15 million to $20 million in salary increases that will have to be paid.

Kc61
07-22-2009, 12:16 PM
So, M2, you'd "go for it", yes? Does that mean this team is good enough, in your opinion, to compete?

I don't think Castellini is willing to put in the cash needed to buy a playoff spot, as it would take a LF and a SS from free agency. There is also approximately $15 million to $20 million in salary increases that will have to be paid.


Salary increases. Every year we hear that the Reds are redeploying any money saved in player moves into salary increases. If that isn't perpetuating a bad team, I don't know what is.

The team is not good enough to compete. Why does that mean it has to dismantle and invest in young prospects?

This is the logic I don't understand and which has been a "given" in baseball recently. If you are short on talent, then you are a "seller" and should dump your few talented veterans for prospects.

But the trend of "selling" at the deadline is faced with real challenges now. In this financial climate, few teams want to acquire big contracts for 2010, like the Arroyo and Harang deals. And most teams are clinging to their young, cheap talent.

So even if you are a "sell" proponent, the harsh reality is that nobody is taking on Harang or Arroyo, eating their contracts, and giving the Reds top prospects. It is highly unlikely that this will happen.

So the Reds will actually have to improve by developing their own players and perhaps increasing their own payroll somewhat to acquire veterans.

M2
07-22-2009, 12:21 PM
So, M2, you'd "go for it", yes? Does that mean this team is good enough, in your opinion, to compete?

I don't think Castellini is willing to put in the cash needed to buy a playoff spot, as it would take a LF and a SS from free agency. There is also approximately $15 million to $20 million in salary increases that will have to be paid.

I'd break the cycle. There's no point in going for it in 2009 because this team isn't good enough to get it.

I'm not a fan of five-year plans (because they almost never work), so the question I'd be asking is who can be part of a good club from 2010-2012? Vets at the end of their rope need not apply, kids in low A need not apply. Ideally what you want is to maximize the number of players from ages 26-30 to hit that window.

I'd be focused on what I need to field a legitimate contender starting next season.

The Reds, of course, will just go through the motions and part with some older guys. Probably what they ought to do is do a complete tear down, moving Harang, Arroyo, Cordero, Weather, Rhodes, Phillips, Hernandez, Encarnacion and Gonzalez. That's not to free up cash, which the team surely wouldn't spend. Yet blowing the club to smithereens would force the management to actually think through what it is they're putting together rather than constantly reaching for the easiest piece of filler.

Benihana
07-22-2009, 12:51 PM
I'd break the cycle. There's no point in going for it in 2009 because this team isn't good enough to get it.

I'm not a fan of five-year plans (because they almost never work), so the question I'd be asking is who can be part of a good club from 2010-2012? Vets at the end of their rope need not apply, kids in low A need not apply. Ideally what you want is to maximize the number of players from ages 26-30 to hit that window.

I'd be focused on what I need to field a legitimate contender starting next season.

The Reds, of course, will just go through the motions and part with some older guys. Probably what they ought to do is do a complete tear down, moving Harang, Arroyo, Cordero, Weather, Rhodes, Phillips, Hernandez, Encarnacion and Gonzalez. That's not to free up cash, which the team surely wouldn't spend. Yet blowing the club to smithereens would force the management to actually think through what it is they're putting together rather than constantly reaching for the easiest piece of filler.

I think there is disagreement between your first suggestion (finding the best players to compete 2010-2012) and your second (complete teardown trading Harang, Phillips, Encarnacion, etc.)

I mention those three specifically because I think that they fit into your first suggestions (which I agree with.) Phillips and Encarnacion are in the age range you mention and will (theoretically) be in their primes from 2010-2012. Harang is a little older, but I think he can still contribute a lot in the next two years- maybe not be the ace he once was, but be at least a serviceable #3 workhorse.

I am in favor of trading Arroyo, Weathers, Rhodes, Hernandez, probably Cordero and maybe Harang and Encarnacion (depending on the return.) But I don't see a lot of logic in moving Phillips. While some of that does jive with what you suggested, I think the idea of "blowing the club to smithereens" to me reeks of a five year plan. Maybe it's just semantics or whatever...

RED VAN HOT
07-22-2009, 01:51 PM
A buyer trades future value for current value and takes on salary.
A seller trades current value for future value and dumps salary.

The Reds are now sellers. The injuries to Bruce and Hernandez, and the questions surrounding Volquez's return make it unlikely that they can mount a charge and overtake four rivals. It makes no sense to be a buyer.

I believe that WJ has a strategy for turning the Reds into a perennial contender. The Reds are spending money on minor league talent and are stocking each position. Clearly, this year was aimed at SS and C. Also, there is no need to rush prospects to the major leagues. When a prospect is brought up, he should be brought up to stay. By the time that player is arb eligible, he will be in his late 20's and his value will be apparent. Stubbs and Heisey, for example, will likely start next year on the Reds roster at 25. Conversely, EE reached the majors too soon. This strategy is frustrating to those of us who are impatient with losing, but it builds an organization in which everyone is being pushed by someone at the next lower level. A strong roster can be sustained at a reasonable cost. Most GM's don't have the luxury of pursuing such a strategy. I believe WJ has Castellini's confidence. Also, it is clearly on the verge or paying off.

As for bringing in ML talent, free agent contracts should be no more than two years, preferably one with an option. With clubs trimming payroll and dumping salaries, arbitration is less likely to be offered to some good players. There will be opportunities for the Reds to fill certain spots should the minor league players not be ready to move up.

SirFelixCat
07-22-2009, 01:56 PM
I think there is disagreement between your first suggestion (finding the best players to compete 2010-2012) and your second (complete teardown trading Harang, Phillips, Encarnacion, etc.)

I mention those three specifically because I think that they fit into your first suggestions (which I agree with.) Phillips and Encarnacion are in the age range you mention and will (theoretically) be in their primes from 2010-2012. Harang is a little older, but I think he can still contribute a lot in the next two years- maybe not be the ace he once was, but be at least a serviceable #3 workhorse.

I am in favor of trading Arroyo, Weathers, Rhodes, Hernandez, probably Cordero and maybe Harang and Encarnacion (depending on the return.) But I don't see a lot of logic in moving Phillips. While some of that does jive with what you suggested, I think the idea of "blowing the club to smithereens" to me reeks of a five year plan. Maybe it's just semantics or whatever...

This is pretty much where I sit too.

I agree w/ others on Walt's plan (or at least hope his sticks w/ the track record) and he's aiming to make a perennial contender. That said, I still don't see wtf he was thinking w/ the Willy T signing. That one sticks in my craw.

M2
07-22-2009, 02:13 PM
I think there is disagreement between your first suggestion (finding the best players to compete 2010-2012) and your second (complete teardown trading Harang, Phillips, Encarnacion, etc.)

They certainly are two vastly different strategies. My take is the Reds won't do the former so they might as well do the latter. Otherwise it's just more of tinker in the winter and sell in the summer.

I'll add that any real chance of making a splash in 2010 starts today. Whatever plan anyone might want to draw up for next season, some of the big changes, particularly some of the important acquisitions, need to happen before the season closes.

bucksfan2
07-22-2009, 02:18 PM
They certainly are two vastly different strategies. My take is the Reds won't do the former so they might as well do the latter. Otherwise it's just more of tinker in the winter and sell in the summer.

I'll add that any real chance of making a splash in 2010 starts today. Whatever plan anyone might want to draw up for next season, some of the big changes, particularly some of the important acquisitions, need to happen before the season closes.

I wonder if the plan for 2010 didn't start at the beginning of the season.

I also wonder if Jocketty won't make a move that makes you think "this just doesn't make sense" but will look nice come April 2010.

M2
07-22-2009, 02:31 PM
I wonder if the plan for 2010 didn't start at the beginning of the season.

I also wonder if Jocketty won't make a move that makes you think "this just doesn't make sense" but will look nice come April 2010.

You mean the Super Secret Plan For Baseball Domination?

I wonder what makes people try to invent ex post facto rationales for plans that clearly don't exist.

IslandRed
07-22-2009, 02:35 PM
A buyer trades future value for current value and takes on salary.
A seller trades current value for future value and dumps salary.


That's generally the way it works, yes. But it's worth noting that Jocketty's signature deal in St. Louis, the one for Mark McGwire, was a backwards deal -- the Cardinals were in a selling position but made a buyer's trade, gambling they could extend McGwire and have a centerpiece for future teams. I don't know if Jocketty is looking for similar opportunities in the midst of whatever selloff discussions he's having, but I'm hoping so.

Kc61
07-22-2009, 02:40 PM
That's generally the way it works, yes. But it's worth noting that Jocketty's signature deal in St. Louis, the one for Mark McGwire, was a backwards deal -- the Cardinals were in a selling position but made a buyer's trade, gambling they could extend McGwire and have a centerpiece for future teams. I don't know if Jocketty is looking for similar opportunities in the midst of whatever selloff discussions he's having, but I'm hoping so.

Matt Holliday is such a perfect fit for the Reds, excluding the all important salary factor. LF, right handed, should thrive in GABP, solid defender, would fit nicely between Votto and Bruce in lineup.

I know it's almost impossible with Boras and all, but I've felt all along that he made so much sense for the Reds.

They have the prospects to deal for him, but the cash aspect makes it so unlikely. But he would be the McGwire type pick up for Walt.

Chip R
07-22-2009, 02:59 PM
Matt Holliday is such a perfect fit for the Reds, excluding the all important salary factor. LF, right handed, should thrive in GABP, solid defender, would fit nicely between Votto and Bruce in lineup.

I know it's almost impossible with Boras and all, but I've felt all along that he made so much sense for the Reds.

They have the prospects to deal for him, but the cash aspect makes it so unlikely. But he would be the McGwire type pick up for Walt.


What about as a free agent?

Benihana
07-22-2009, 04:25 PM
What about as a free agent?

Depending on the cost, I'd be interested.

It would also be contingent upon being able to acquire a 0-2 long-term SS in exchange for one or more of the veteran pitchers though (if you assume that Cozart is not the answer.)

RedLegSuperStar
07-22-2009, 04:28 PM
What about as a free agent?

Reds would lose 2 picks and I couldn't imagine this team to make a splash such as that.. Makes to much sense.

Benihana
07-22-2009, 04:30 PM
Reds would lose 2 picks and I couldn't imagine this team to make a splash such as that.. Makes to much sense.

Not if they finish as one of the 15 worst teams. The way things are headed, that's certainly possible.

bucksfan2
07-22-2009, 04:32 PM
You mean the Super Secret Plan For Baseball Domination?

I wonder what makes people try to invent ex post facto rationales for plans that clearly don't exist.

Huh?

Homer Bailey
07-22-2009, 04:34 PM
Would 3 years $36M be enough for Holliday?

M2
07-22-2009, 04:35 PM
Huh?

I gave your fictional plan a name.

Strikes Out Looking
07-22-2009, 04:37 PM
Huh?

I believe he is saying that Walt really doesn't have a plan. I for one don't really see any plan in action (saying wait for next year isn't really a plan).

princeton
07-22-2009, 04:38 PM
Reds would lose 2 picks.


1 pick


Not if they finish as one of the 15 worst teams.

even if. only round would change

membengal
07-22-2009, 04:42 PM
You mean the Super Secret Plan For Baseball Domination?

I wonder what makes people try to invent ex post facto rationales for plans that clearly don't exist.

A fair question.

redsfandan
07-23-2009, 07:04 AM
As for bringing in ML talent, free agent contracts should be no more than two years, preferably one with an option. With clubs trimming payroll and dumping salaries, arbitration is less likely to be offered to some good players. There will be opportunities for the Reds to fill certain spots should the minor league players not be ready to move up.
I'd love it if that happened. One year with an option for good players at short and left. Let the player(s) go when internal options are ready to takeover. If only...

Would 3 years $36M be enough for Holliday?
Doubt it. Not with Boras.

Ltlabner
07-23-2009, 07:10 AM
Who the the Reds trade?

Hint: It rhymes with "mobody"