PDA

View Full Version : Reds Listening on "About Everyone"



reds44
07-25-2009, 02:24 AM
One scout familiar with the Reds said they "are listening on about everyone."
MLBTR

Homer Bailey
07-25-2009, 03:24 AM
MLBTR

"One scout said the Reds are listening to any offers on guys on their AAA team that is masquerading as a MLB team."

Aside from Cueto, Bruce, Votto, Phillips, and Volquez, this team has no major assets.

NJReds
07-25-2009, 08:28 AM
"One scout said the Reds are listening to any offers on guys on their AAA team that is masquerading as a MLB team."

Aside from Cueto, Bruce, Votto, Phillips, and Volquez, this team has no major assets.

Shouldn't be "their MLB team masquerading as a AAA team"?

Reds1
07-25-2009, 08:33 AM
"One scout said the Reds are listening to any offers on guys on their AAA team that is masquerading as a MLB team."

Aside from Cueto, Bruce, Votto, Phillips, and Volquez, this team has no major assets.


I'd say Hannigan for a rookie might be a keeper. HE can hit and great defense. He's a keeper. You could probably throw some relievers in there as far as trade value - not so much the future.

joshnky
07-25-2009, 08:39 AM
Aside from Cueto, Bruce, Votto, Phillips, and Volquez, this team has no major assets.

So true. We might make some trades but I'm not expecting much in return. All of our trading chips are old, declining, and overpaid. One of the above would net a nice return but are likely untouchable (for obvious reasons).

Kc61
07-25-2009, 08:54 AM
So true. We might make some trades but I'm not expecting much in return. All of our trading chips are old, declining, and overpaid. One of the above would net a nice return but are likely untouchable (for obvious reasons).

There are two types of trades to expect.

1-Trade of veterans for salary relief. Not much player return. David Weathers seems to be the most likely to go, I thought the Reds were showcasing him in Los Angeles. But trading the highly paid vets will not bring you very good players or prospects, just payroll flexibility.

2-Trade of kids for veterans. The Reds have a lot of prospects to trade and they are valuable. Reds would need to be willing to take on salary for this to happen. They would have to shoot pretty high because you don't want to give away good prospects for medium level vets.

My guess is that this trade deadline we will see the first type of trade --- veterans for salary relief.

My guess is that the offseason will bring trades of kids for veterans because the FO will not be able to stand the pressure of constant losing at the major league level. And the FO would be right to add some top notch veterans because most fans aren't that interested in AA progress.

Jpup
07-25-2009, 08:55 AM
I expect Weathers to be traded to Texas and Rhodes traded to Boston or LA.

Kc61
07-25-2009, 09:00 AM
I expect Weathers to be traded to Texas and Rhodes traded to Boston or LA.


Could be. But for the Reds to be successful "sellers" they have to get rid of one major contract. Arroyo or Harang most likely. Or, sadly in my view, Cordero.

Will M
07-25-2009, 09:04 AM
If the Reds could move Arroyo, Cordero & Weathers for value I would consider the trade deadline a big plus.

Kc61 - i agree with you. ideally the Reds move vets and salary off the books now. then they could have money to either sign free agents or take on contracts this offseason. then they could also trade some of the plethora of 'B' & 'C' prospects for vets this offseason.

Raisor
07-25-2009, 09:06 AM
If the Reds could move Arroyo, Cordero & Weathers for value I would consider the trade deadline a big plus.

Kc61 - i agree with you. ideally the Reds move vets and salary off the books now. then they could have money to either sign free agents or take on contracts this offseason. then they could also trade some of the plethora of 'B' & 'C' prospects for vets this offseason.

PAYFLEX to the rescue!

We've heard that before.

Ltlabner
07-25-2009, 09:07 AM
So we get one report that Walt's really out there "making things happen" to land us Hallady, and now this one saying the team is up for sale.

I know which one I believe.

jojo
07-25-2009, 09:41 AM
We've had a few epic "Jocketty" threads since he took over. Now is probably the time to see what he's made of.....

Jpup
07-25-2009, 09:55 AM
We've had a few epic "Jocketty" threads since he took over. Now is probably the time to see what he's made of.....

He said last night that he's working on some deals or a deal. He's got 6 days to get whatever it is. He said a "bat." Brandon Phillips and Bob Miller told me in March that the Reds don't need a "bat." I bet he is singing a different tune now.

Who is that bat? What impact bats are left that are available?

jojo
07-25-2009, 09:59 AM
He said last night that he's working on some deals or a deal. He's got 6 days to get whatever it is. He said a "bat." Brandon Phillips and Bob Miller told me in March that the Reds don't need a "bat." I bet he is singing a different tune now.

Who is that bat? What impact bats are left that are available?

Is he looking for a bat to try and salvage '09 or is he looking for one that would be around a while?

traderumor
07-25-2009, 10:00 AM
He said last night that he's working on some deals or a deal. He's got 6 days to get whatever it is. He said a "bat." Brandon Phillips and Bob Miller told me in March that the Reds don't need a "bat." I bet he is singing a different tune now.

Who is that bat? What impact bats are left that are available?It would be correct that they don't need a bat. They need bats, up and down the lineup. They have a #3 hitter and a collection of lower in the order junk. Turning over position players in order to get better is going to be a challenge, esp. without giving away any gains on the pitching staff, which is currently looking equally putrid.

jojo
07-25-2009, 10:04 AM
It would be correct that they don't need a bat. They need bats, up and down the lineup. They have a #3 hitter and a collection of lower in the order junk. Turning over position players in order to get better is going to be a challenge, esp. without giving away any gains on the pitching staff, which is currently looking equally putrid.

Ya, Jocketty has no obvious easy move. The next 6 or 7 months should provide a wealth of info for the next Jocketty poll.

Jpup
07-25-2009, 10:06 AM
Is he looking for a bat to try and salvage '09 or is he looking for one that would be around a while?

He doesn't want a rental. I would guess one with, at least, 2 years on his contract. Who is out there like that? Let's see if we can figure out who Walt might be looking at. Alex Rios?

IslandRed
07-25-2009, 11:19 AM
I'm not worried about the July 31 deadline where Harang, Arroyo and Cordero are concerned. They'll be movable until August 31; no one's going to risk a waiver claim on those contracts for the sake of blocking a trade. If they do, a thank-you card may be in order.

Weathers and Rhodes are the guys that need to be moved this month, if they're going. Their salary obligations are not large, considering.

Kc61
07-25-2009, 11:26 AM
I'm not worried about the July 31 deadline where Harang, Arroyo and Cordero are concerned. They'll be movable until August 31; no one's going to risk a waiver claim on those contracts for the sake of blocking a trade. If they do, a thank-you card may be in order.

Weathers and Rhodes are the guys that need to be moved this month, if they're going. Their salary obligations are not large, considering.

Weathers is highly likely to go.

I don't see why the Reds would trade Rhodes. He's signed for next year in a reasonable deal, he's good, and there is no lefty around to replace him as a late inning reliever. Makes no sense to dump him unless there is a big return, which is unlikely.

Marc D
07-25-2009, 11:28 AM
I'm not worried about the July 31 deadline where Harang, Arroyo and Cordero are concerned. They'll be movable until August 31; no one's going to risk a waiver claim on those contracts for the sake of blocking a trade. If they do, a thank-you card may be in order.

Weathers and Rhodes are the guys that need to be moved this month, if they're going. Their salary obligations are not large, considering.


What about Hernandez?

His injury makes me think pre July 31 is a non player and this late in the year someone might pick him up off waivers if they need a backup catcher for the stretch drive. You can't offer him arb so no comp picks for letting him walk this winter.

Seems we are in a less than ideal spot in regards to him.

SMcGavin
07-25-2009, 11:28 AM
I'm not worried about the July 31 deadline where Harang, Arroyo and Cordero are concerned. They'll be movable until August 31; no one's going to risk a waiver claim on those contracts for the sake of blocking a trade. If they do, a thank-you card may be in order.

Weathers and Rhodes are the guys that need to be moved this month, if they're going. Their salary obligations are not large, considering.

If you don't think someone would pick up Harang for free you're crazy. It'd be just like Dunn last year, the first team in the picking order who still had a chance at the postseason would snap him up.

I think Cordero might get picked up by someone too. You might be right that Arroyo could clear waivers... but of course if he clears waivers, there is not much chance in trading him for value anyway.

Kc61
07-25-2009, 11:29 AM
Someone please explain the logic of dumping off Arthur Rhodes. Thanks.

SMcGavin
07-25-2009, 11:32 AM
Someone please explain the logic of dumping off Arthur Rhodes. Thanks.

He's a solid not great reliever. The Reds are going nowhere this season. They might go somewhere next season, but then again Rhodes will be 40 next season and threw a combined 35 innings the previous two seasons. I wouldn't dump him just to do it but if someone offers a decent prospect for him, he's gone.

Hap
07-25-2009, 11:40 AM
who knows?....

brandon phillips could very well be on his way out the door to cut salary.....

he is currently a better option than anyone playing second base for the Cubs...the White Sox...the Twins...the Angels...the Braves...the Giants...

Kc61
07-25-2009, 11:43 AM
He's a solid not great reliever. The Reds are going nowhere this season. They might go somewhere next season, but then again Rhodes will be 40 next season and threw a combined 35 innings the previous two seasons. I wouldn't dump him just to do it but if someone offers a decent prospect for him, he's gone.

This year he has been a great set up man. I doubt there is any lefty eighth inning guy better than Rhodes this year. He is signed cheaply for next season.

Presumably, the Reds intend to field a ballclub next season. They have no big shot lefty reliever coming up. Herrera isn't a late inning guy. Viola could make the team but isn't ready to pitch the late innings.

What could anyone offer for Rhodes in the real world that would be better than having him for next year?

What I find upsetting is Redszoners' view that any young player is better than any older player. It doesn't work that way. You need to sift through the players, young, middle and old and decide who is best suited to help your team.

The recent poll confirmed that. In almost all cases, fans want the Reds to keep the young and ditch the old. Regardless of talent, performance, etc. About 60 percent want Burton on the team next year. Yet many people want to ditch most of the veterans, even the successful ones. The Reds will never -- never -- succeed if youth is the only criterion to be on the club.

alloverjr
07-25-2009, 12:06 PM
The Reds will never -- never -- succeed if youth is the only criterion to be on the club.

Nope, only crappy. ;)

traderumor
07-25-2009, 12:32 PM
Someone please explain the logic of dumping off Arthur Rhodes. Thanks.I would be for it because he is more likely to get lit up next year as he is to repeat this year's performance. However, being in full cynic mode, he will be kept around, counted on to be the 8th inning guy next year, then blow up, but it takes Dusty three months to move him out of that role.

TheNext44
07-25-2009, 12:44 PM
Someone please explain the logic of dumping off Arthur Rhodes. Thanks.

I don't want to dump him off, but I think that team would overpay for him. He would be the best lefty reliever on the market, and teams overpay for that.

The Indians gave up Brian Giles for Ricardo Rincon. I doubt the Reds could get that good of a return for him, but maybe someone like Shairon Martis, who the Nationals got for Mike Stanton is possible.

No need to trade him, but it's worth it see what he could bring back.

OldXOhio
07-25-2009, 01:21 PM
I don't want to dump him off, but I think that team would overpay for him. He would be the best lefty reliever on the market, and teams overpay for that.



See the Phillies, particularly if a deal isn't done for Halladay. Their GM knows there is pressure for them to deal. He also knows he's got two bullpen arms now on the DL.

Raisor
07-25-2009, 01:26 PM
Someone please explain the logic of dumping off Arthur Rhodes. Thanks.

If a selloff happens, you have to move him. You could likely get a nice little prospect or two for him.

If the plan is to actually go for it next year, you don't move him.

Since I don't actually think the plan is to go for it next year, I'd move him.

Raisor
07-25-2009, 01:32 PM
The Reds will never -- never -- succeed if youth is the only criterion to be on the club.

It's never been about youth for the Reds, considering all the retreads and also-rans the Reds send out there every year.

Whatever they have been doing the past 15 years hasn't been working. Time to try something new.

Do what it takes to hire DePo. Give him the keys to the club. Give him a payroll limit, tell him to make the playoffs in the second year.

There are highschool students today that have never had their favorite team in the playoffs. That needs to change.

cincrazy
07-25-2009, 01:32 PM
We've had a few epic "Jocketty" threads since he took over. Now is probably the time to see what he's made of.....

Maybe we should wake him up so we can find out.

corkedbat
07-25-2009, 03:29 PM
I'd say Hannigan for a rookie might be a keeper. HE can hit and great defense. He's a keeper. You could probably throw some relievers in there as far as trade value - not so much the future.

Guys like Hanigan certainly aren't Untouchables, but they probably have more value to the Reds than anything they would bring in return - same for guys like Stewart & Cozart.

Dealing Cueto, Volquez and Votto is too counterproductive IMO, the Reds are too short-handed in prime, proven major-league quality players to be moving any - do what you can to add to them. I'd be willing to move Bruce, but only for the kinds of return he would have frought last year and only for needs like a quality young SS, C or a topshelf young starter. Phillips could be had for just about any useful return, along with Harang, Cordero, Weathers, Rhodes and Encarnacion. Arroyo would belong to anyone who would send along a warm body and assume 75% of his remaining contract.

I'm not as opposed to Phillips as I once was, but I still don't want him hitting in the top five of the order so that would mean that Baker would have to go.

Falls City Beer
07-25-2009, 03:34 PM
Walt Jocketty's job has gotten a whole bunch tougher since Jay Bruce became Ben Grieve instead of JD Drew. But I'm not going to count Walt out just yet. Provided he's in it for the long haul and not looking to take off after this season (which is possible).

corkedbat
07-25-2009, 04:17 PM
Someone please explain the logic of dumping off Arthur Rhodes. Thanks.

You don't dump anyone for salary savings alone (except for Arroyo). If someone will offer you a good young palyer who can help over the next 4 or 5 years, then you take it. I'm not opposed to Rhodes being on the squad next yea - I would move Weathers if possible though.

I think you move anyone for young who does not project to be here 2 to 3 years out. The Reds aren't competing this year (or next). You try to avoid getting caught with veteran big contracts that will block younger guys and eat payroll and you avoid letting vets walk without a return, if possible. They waited too long with Harang and Arroyo, you try to avoid that with EdE & BP.

IMO, you turn guys like Harang, Cordero, Rhodes, Weathers, Encarcnacion, Phillips and even Arroyo (packaged with B-level prospects if need be). Then you budget to make a run at a couple of big free agents in 2011 and try to hit the window with Votto, Cueto, Volquez, Bruce, Hanigan converging with the next wave (Stubbs, Heisey, Frazier, Cozart, Stewart, Wood, Leach, Sulbaran, etc.).


,

Caveat Emperor
07-25-2009, 04:20 PM
Walt Jocketty's job has gotten a whole bunch tougher since Jay Bruce became Ben Grieve instead of JD Drew. But I'm not going to count Walt out just yet. Provided he's in it for the long haul and not looking to take off after this season (which is possible).

To date, I haven't heard a single bit of evidence that Jocketty is looking to bolt.

GAC
07-25-2009, 04:34 PM
There was an article posted last year that Walt and Bob C basically had a hand shake agreement through 2011. But there is nothing written in stone.

And didn't Bob have to talk Walt out of retirement to come to the Reds?

I could see Walt retiring after 2010 regardless.

And that then leaves us with Bill Bavasi as his possible replacement. Oh joy!

Falls City Beer
07-25-2009, 04:46 PM
To date, I haven't heard a single bit of evidence that Jocketty is looking to bolt.

I haven't read hard evidence. But the guy's not young and a "replacement" is in house.

redsmetz
07-25-2009, 04:52 PM
So we get one report that Walt's really out there "making things happen" to land us Hallady, and now this one saying the team is up for sale.

I know which one I believe.

To say the club is "listening on 'about everyone'" really isn't the same as saying the team is up for sale. It means that virtually no one is untouchable and if a good offer is made, the deal will get one. Those are dramatically different positions. And such a stand doesn't even void Jocketty's statement that he's interested in the now without sacrificing the future. Thsoe can go hand in glove, frankly.

WMR
07-25-2009, 04:56 PM
If they make Bill Bavasi the GM that might really be it for me.

Falls City Beer
07-25-2009, 04:56 PM
If they make Bill Bavasi the GM that might really be it for me.

Me too.

traderumor
07-25-2009, 05:55 PM
If they make Bill Bavasi the GM that might really be it for me.Yea yea yea, GAC was gone if Dusty was the manager. Look where he's at ;)

WMR
07-25-2009, 06:00 PM
Yea yea yea, GAC was gone if Dusty was the manager. Look where he's at ;)

:D

As soon as I typed that post, I thought to myself, "Yeah yeah, big talker, you know you're not going to quit on the Reds."

Is GAC still rooting for the Tribe like he promised? :p:

Hoosier Red
07-25-2009, 06:01 PM
Yea yea yea, GAC was gone if Dusty was the manager. Look where he's at ;)

And do you know how many calls it took by me to Castellini to still hire Baker. I mean he was really looking to back out, but to get rid of GAC, I couldn't let that opportunity go by idly.
If I'd known GAC wasn't actually going to leave, I never would have bought 1,000,000,000 kumquats.

paulrichjr
07-25-2009, 06:32 PM
How about some cold water thrown on possible Harang deals?


http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=4355655&name=gammons_peter

Some teams reluctant to part with prospects

Saturday, July 25, 2009 |

Whether it's the Philadelphia gang that Toronto requires for Roy Halladay, or Clay Buchholz that the Indians insist upon for Victor Martinez, or the gaggle of prospects the Pirates have indicated they need to move Zach Duke, the songs remain the same. The small-market teams say they think the big-market teams overvalue prospects, and with the exception of the Red Sox and perhaps another couple of teams, one general manager after another says "there isn't any money out there."

In the Matt Holliday case, manager Tony La Russa was able to convince Cardinals ownership that, in the words of Tom Petty, "it's the wrong thing to do/but I don't care"; tomorrow may never come.

Yankees GM Brian Cashman argues that he doesn't overvalue prospects, which is why he has Phil Hughes pitching like the American League's best eighth-inning reliever, Melky Cabrera in center, Nick Swisher (obtained for Jeffrey Marquez, another pitcher in the package the Twins would've required for Johan Santana) in right and CC Sabathia on the mound, all in lieu of Santana.

When the Yankees approached Toronto about Halladay, the price was Phil Hughes, Austin Jackson and Jesus Montero. Not happening.

Red Sox GM Theo Epstein would argue that Buchholz will be a front-of-the-rotation starter under control for six years (with the ages and injuries on that staff, he may slot in behind Josh Beckett and Jon Lester this season), hence Epstein won't trade Buchholz just as he won't trade Casey Kelly or Ryan Westmoreland. Ditto Dodgers GM Ned Colletti on why he won't put Clayton Kershaw in any Halladay deal, especially since Kershaw's 0.92 ERA is the best in the National League since June 16.

It's a thin line that the Phillies are apparently drawing, the Cardinals crossed, Brewers GM Doug Melvin does not want to cross and the Angels never touch. Even if the Mariners chose to move Jarrod Washburn (who has allowed two runs in his past four starts) or Erik Bedard, they are not going to get what they gave for Bedard, or what the Rangers bilked from the Braves for Mark Teixeira.

"Cincinnati wants to move a few contracts, like either Bronson Arroyo or Aaron Harang, but we're not interested in giving players or taking on their money," says one AL GM. "Harang hasn't been the same guy since last May."

"We've looked at Doug Davis, Jon Garland, Kevin Correia, Ian Snell and the long list of available starting pitchers and do not see anyone we would give A- or B-list prospects to get," says another GM.

The advantage that the Yankees, Red Sox, Angels and Dodgers have is that they can restock their organizations, either by spending in the international market or going over slot to sign draft choices. If you are the Royals, not only are your revenues light, but the commissioner's office has threatened to take away your 2012 All-Star Game if you go ahead with the agreements you have in place with two high picks.

If you are the Rays, because you have a terrible stadium that's hard for the fans to reach, you have hugely disappointing attendance and cannot trade Wade Davis and two other prospects for Victor Martinez and his $7 million salary next season. Not when your $63 million payroll will already jump for 2010, as Jason Bartlett is a four-year arbitration case and as B.J. Upton and Matt Garza will be super twos. "If we didn't talk on everyone and explore every possibility, we'd be fools," says Andrew Friedman, the Rays' executive VP of baseball operations. So they'd deal Scott Kazmir, who to most clubs looks like a shadow of what he was two years ago, and at the end of the season they will likely see what they can get for Carl Crawford. And they'll hold on to the prospects they consider keepers.

Those teams that have been trying to take relievers and make the next Larry Andersen-Jeff Bagwell deal are finding the offers slight. Be it Jon Rauch, Takashi Saito, Matt Capps, Rafael Betancourt, John Grabow, Ron Mahay, Danys Baez or George Sherrill, the market belongs to the buyers.

redsmetz
07-25-2009, 06:45 PM
If a selloff happens, you have to move him. You could likely get a nice little prospect or two for him.

If the plan is to actually go for it next year, you don't move him.

Since I don't actually think the plan is to go for it next year, I'd move him.

I would be greatly disappointed if a "sell off" happens - someone correctly noted that's the sort of move that sets you back four to five years. Who on earth here wants that?

That's not to say there aren't players that should be available. I think Weathers would be the Reds first choice to move because if we pick up his option, he's a five & ten guy. I think Rhodes is the keeper.

I think one of Harang or Arroy couldc be moved. One will be a surplus and that's not counting any other pitching they may pick up.

But if they do the ubiquitous "burn it down," that's a non-starter for me. It kills everything that's been done over the last several years, despite the fact that too many on RZ believe nothing has been done.

KoryMac5
07-25-2009, 06:59 PM
The one thing I would be concerned about if we move Rhodes is that I think Daniel Ray is starting to hit the wall a little bit. Dusty may burn him up if he is the only lefty in the pen that he feels comfortable using. That being said I think Rhodes has more value than Weathers and I think other GM's feel that way as well.

Kc61
07-25-2009, 07:02 PM
The one thing I would be concerned about if we move Rhodes is that I think Daniel Ray is starting to hit the wall a little bit. Dusty may burn him up if he is the only lefty in the pen that he feels comfortable using. That being said I think Rhodes has more value than Weathers and I think other GM's feel that way as well.

Trading Rhodes makes no sense.

He is excellent. There is no obvious successor. He doesn't make a lot of money. He is locked up for next year.

The only way you trade him is if somebody is willing to overpay with a top 100 prospect or solid every day player.

Falls City Beer
07-25-2009, 07:03 PM
Trading Rhodes makes no sense.

He is excellent. There is no obvious successor. He doesn't make a lot of money. He is locked up for next year.

The only way you trade him is if somebody is willing to overpay with a top 100 prospect or solid every day player.

No kidding. Trading Rhodes for a bunch of dreck is just moving players to do it.

Ryan Franklin for nothing comes to mind.

IslandRed
07-25-2009, 08:35 PM
If you don't think someone would pick up Harang for free you're crazy. It'd be just like Dunn last year, the first team in the picking order who still had a chance at the postseason would snap him up.

I think Cordero might get picked up by someone too. You might be right that Arroyo could clear waivers... but of course if he clears waivers, there is not much chance in trading him for value anyway.

Free? Far from it. Anyone who claims Harang next month is on the hook for the rest of his contract if the Reds should choose not to pull him back.


Harang gets base salaries of $4.25 million this season (2007), $6.75 million in 2008, $11 million in 2009 and $12.5 million in 2010. There is a club option for 2011 at $12.75 million with a $2 million buyout.

If Harang pitches 210 innings in 2010, the option increases to $13 million. If he is traded, the option becomes mutual and increases to $14 million, with a $2.5 million buyout.

That's the rest of his salary for this year plus, at minimum, $15 million more. I can't think of any team off the top of my head that's going to do that, even if they don't have to send back the proverbial bag of balls.

A team claiming Cordero is risking an even greater salary obligation.

Dunn was a different case, being in the last year of his contract at the time.

mth123
07-25-2009, 09:01 PM
No kidding. Trading Rhodes for a bunch of dreck is just moving players to do it.

Ryan Franklin for nothing comes to mind.

At the time Ryan Franklin was a bunch of dreck.

Falls City Beer
07-25-2009, 09:12 PM
At the time Ryan Franklin was a bunch of dreck.

...Who threw hard and cost nothing.

CTA513
07-25-2009, 09:19 PM
...Who threw hard and cost nothing.

He also only wanted to be a starter

Stormy
07-25-2009, 09:21 PM
At the time Ryan Franklin was a bunch of dreck.

33+ years old, with horrid WHIP, K/9, ERA, BAA etc... No way anyone this side of Duncan turns this guy into gold at that stage of his career. He failed miserably his last years in Seattle, in Cincy and in Philly. No one saw his reinvention coming.

LoganBuck
07-25-2009, 09:23 PM
He also only wanted to be a starter

He also was coming off of a positive PED test and was wearing a scarlet letter at the time.

GAC
07-26-2009, 06:00 AM
:D

As soon as I typed that post, I thought to myself, "Yeah yeah, big talker, you know you're not going to quit on the Reds."

Is GAC still rooting for the Tribe like he promised? :p:

Yes, I am. The Tribe has been decimated by injury this year. And Grady Sizemore, who is having simply a terrible year, is KILLING my FL team, and I can't dump him!

Ask yourself this.....who will rebound faster? The Reds or Indians? ;)

Highlifeman21
07-26-2009, 10:20 AM
Yes, I am. The Tribe has been decimated by injury this year. And Grady Sizemore, who is having simply a terrible year, is KILLING my FL team, and I can't dump him!

Ask yourself this.....who will rebound faster? The Reds or Indians? ;)

The Indians, b/c they have a better core, better manager, and better FO.

OldXOhio
07-26-2009, 04:27 PM
Fay's latest in case this hasn't already been posted....


You hear all sorts of rumors as the trade deadline approaches. Here's one I heard today: Arthur Rhodes to the Dodgers for Juan Pierre.

I don't see it happening. Pierre makes $10 million next year and $8.5 million in 2011. His career on-base is .348. He's a slight upgrade over Willy Taveras. But I'd think the Reds would be looking for outfielders with more pop than Pierre

If Walt were to pull this off, I'd believe once and for all in the theory of GM "Cincinnatization".

WMR
07-26-2009, 04:47 PM
Sounds great. Just add Pierre and Rolen and we'll be all set for 2010.

Big Klu
07-26-2009, 04:56 PM
The Indians, b/c they have a better core, better manager, and better FO.

I don't know about that. Wedge is horrible--he's a compulsive tinkerer, and Shapiro has definitely worn out his welcome in Cleveland.

I would rather have Baker and Jocketty than either of them. The grass isn't always greener.

SMcGavin
07-26-2009, 04:57 PM
Free? Far from it. Anyone who claims Harang next month is on the hook for the rest of his contract if the Reds should choose not to pull him back.



That's the rest of his salary for this year plus, at minimum, $15 million more. I can't think of any team off the top of my head that's going to do that, even if they don't have to send back the proverbial bag of balls.


Free as in they wouldn't have to give up any players to acquire him. Harang's a good pitcher and his contract isn't some albatross, the claiming team would be on the hook for only a year and a half. I think there are lots of teams who would love to have him.

Falls City Beer
07-26-2009, 05:00 PM
Sounds great. Just add Pierre and Rolen and we'll be all set for 2010.

I don't know how on earth anyone can believe that the Reds are going to take on Pierre's salary subtracting only Rhodes's.

And honestly, if the Dodgers send back the difference in payroll, I'd take it because Pierre is better than either Dickerson or Taveras.

WMR
07-26-2009, 05:08 PM
I don't know how on earth anyone can believe that the Reds are going to take on Pierre's salary subtracting only Rhodes's.



Don't put words in my mouth.

I'm sure there will be an accompanying move to dump Harang so we can add the offensive dynamo Juan Pierre to cement that WS run in 2010.

Falls City Beer
07-26-2009, 05:11 PM
I'm sure there will be an accompanying move to dump Harang so we can add the offensive dynamo Juan Pierre to cement that WS run in 2010.

Why do you think Walt doesn't recognize that this team is among the bottom five rotations in the NL? Why would he trade Harang just to accommodate Pierre's salary?

IslandRed
07-26-2009, 05:15 PM
Free as in they wouldn't have to give up any players to acquire him. Harang's a good pitcher and his contract isn't some albatross, the claiming team would be on the hook for only a year and a half. I think there are lots of teams who would love to have him.

I don't think anyone would be even remotely interested in paying Harang $15 million next year (including buying out his 2011 option), given his performance over the last year-plus.

Maybe -- maybe -- a rash of injuries and a drop in the standings would trigger the Yankees' "it's just money" reflex, but that's the only way I could see a team claiming Harang at this point.

WMR
07-26-2009, 05:15 PM
Why do you think Walt doesn't recognize that this team is among the bottom five rotations in the NL? Why would he trade Harang just to accommodate Pierre's salary?

Because that would make about as much sense as signing Willy T to a 2 year contract. I'm of the opinion we don't have the real Walt in Cincinnati, we've got a succubus/doppelganger sent here from St. Louis to drain the last vestiges of excitement/interest about the Reds from the beleaguered fan base.

Scott Rolen? Juan Pierre? You think it's a coincidence that these are the types of players the Reds keep on getting mentioned with???

Falls City Beer
07-26-2009, 05:17 PM
Because that would make about as much sense as signing Willy T to a 2 year contract. I'm of the opinion we don't have the real Walt in Cincinnati, we've got a succubus/doppelganger sent here from St. Louis to drain the last vestiges of excitement/interest about the Reds from the beleaguered fan base.

Scott Rolen? Juan Pierre? You think it's a coincidence that these are the types of players the Reds keep on getting mentioned with???


I'd love to have Rolen for next year only.

Big Klu
07-26-2009, 05:22 PM
I'd love to have Rolen for next year only.

Agreed. I know some folks make an issue of Rolen's age, but he is the same age as Buddy Bell was when the Reds acquired him in 1985, and moved a young 3B with power and an erratic glove to LF (Nick Esasky).

Scrap Irony
07-26-2009, 05:24 PM
I really like Rolen. (For next year.) Plus D and a good bat. He's a gamble because of health, but he's better than EdE by 30 runs a year overall. That's 3 wins. If healthy.

WMR
07-26-2009, 05:31 PM
Should the cash-strapped Reds really be gambling 15+ million on a 36 year old third baseman with a history of back problems? Seems like a loser's gamble to me.

Big Klu
07-26-2009, 05:33 PM
Should the cash-strapped Reds really be gambling 15+ million on a 36 year old third baseman with a history of back problems? Seems like a loser's gamble to me.

Scott Rolen is only 34 years old, not 36.

WMR
07-26-2009, 05:41 PM
Scott Rolen is only 34 years old, not 36.

Okay, well he'll be 35 for all of the 2010 season (April birthday) and my ulterior point still stands.

You'd hate giving money like that to Holliday but would jump at the chance to hand it over to Rolen? I'd much rather get in bed with Holliday long-term than have a one year fling with old man Rolen who would immediately jump to the top of the list of Reds most likely to lead the team in days spent on the DL. Of course, that depends on whether or not they bring back the stellar Gonzo for another season of pretending to be a major league caliber shortstop.

It would be such a Reds move to commit 20% of the payroll to a guy who plays 50 games.

Big Klu
07-26-2009, 06:01 PM
Okay, well he'll be 35 for all of the 2010 season (April birthday) and my ulterior point still stands.

You'd hate giving money like that to Holliday but would jump at the chance to hand it over to Rolen? I'd much rather get in bed with Holliday long-term than have a one year fling with old man Rolen who would immediately jump to the top of the list of Reds most likely to lead the team in days spent on the DL. Of course, that depends on whether or not they bring back the stellar Gonzo for another season of pretending to be a major league caliber shortstop.

It would be such a Reds move to commit 20% of the payroll to a guy who plays 50 games.

My views on Holliday are clear. I want nothing to do with him on a personal level--it has nothing to do with talent, money, or anything else. Call it a vendetta. I wouldn't take him if he wanted to play for nothing (that's $0.00). Matt Holliday is the only player the Reds could acquire who would seriously make me consider walking away from them.

As for Rolen, I think that he parallels rather closely with Buddy Bell in 1985--about the same age, excellent glove at 3B, declining but still dangerous stick, possible stabilizing influence. It depends on what it costs to get him. I am not interested in overpaying.

WMR
07-26-2009, 06:07 PM
My views on Holliday are clear. I want nothing to do with him on a personal level--it has nothing to do with talent, money, or anything else. Call it a vendetta. I wouldn't take him if he wanted to play for nothing (that's $0.00). Matt Holliday is the only player the Reds could acquire who would seriously make me consider walking away from them.

As for Rolen, I think that he parallels rather closely with Buddy Bell in 1985--about the same age, excellent glove at 3B, declining but still dangerous stick, possible stabilizing influence. It depends on what it costs to get him. I am not interested in overpaying.

Have you ever posted why you dislike Holliday with such fervor or is it something private?

I hope like hell that if he were acquired it would work out like Buddy Bell in '85 but isn't it almost guaranteed that Rolen WILL get injured if the Reds acquire him? I'm sure if he somehow ended up back in St. Louis he'd win the Triple Crown.

TheNext44
07-26-2009, 06:11 PM
You hear all sorts of rumors as the trade deadline approaches. Here's one I heard today: Arthur Rhodes to the Dodgers for Juan Pierre.

I don't see it happening. Pierre makes $10 million next year and $8.5 million in 2011. His career on-base is .348. He's a slight upgrade over Willy Taveras. But I'd think the Reds would be looking for outfielders with more pop than Pierre

Money is the big issue, but if Taveras is included, which is the only way it makes sense, the Reds would only be increasing payroll by $5M over the rest of this year and all of next.

The problem with Pierre is not that he's bad, but that he is overpaid. He's a very good centerfielder, more like Patterson than Taveras, and he gets on base. As Fay mentioned, he has a lifetime .348 OBP. Add in his speed and he is exactly what Bakers wants from a leadoff hitter, and that's important, because as long as Baker is the manager, the Reds will have a speedy CF leading off.

Taveras has a negative WAR, and Pierre has a 1.5 right now. I would gladly give up Rhodes in exchange for that upgrade. Like I said, the money is the big issue.

WMR
07-26-2009, 06:14 PM
Money is the big issue, but if Taveras is included, which is the only way it makes sense, the Reds would only be increasing payroll by $5M over the rest of this year and all of next.

The problem with Pierre is not that he's bad, but that he is overpaid. He's a very good centerfielder, more like Patterson than Taveras, and he gets on base. As Fay mentioned, he has a lifetime .348 OBP. Add in his speed and he is exactly what Bakers wants from a leadoff hitter, and that's important, because as long as Baker is the manager, the Reds will have a speedy CF leading off.

Taveras has a negative WAR, and Pierre has a 1.5 right now. I would gladly give up Rhodes in exchange for that upgrade. Like I said, the money is the big issue.

Not if the GM had the stones/brains to take his toys away from him.

cincrazy
07-26-2009, 06:27 PM
Where did the Juan Pierre rumor come from? I haven't read through the whole thread, but I haven't seen this rumor anywhere to date, and I hope it doesn't happen.

Caveat Emperor
07-26-2009, 06:41 PM
Should the cash-strapped Reds really be gambling 15+ million on a 36 year old third baseman with a history of back problems?

The answer to that question is yes, without hesitation -- because the team doesn't have a plus-defending, plus-hitting third baseman on their roster or ready to be called up from the minors.

Rolen fills both those criteria and provides a solution for next season with no long-term financial commitment required (as a free-agent 3B would command).

That's a win, especially if there's some money coming back on the deal to offset the pay-bump.

Falls City Beer
07-26-2009, 06:44 PM
Where did the Juan Pierre rumor come from? I haven't read through the whole thread, but I haven't seen this rumor anywhere to date, and I hope it doesn't happen.

Fay essentially speculating. Gives zero source for the rumor.

Big Klu
07-26-2009, 07:00 PM
Fay essentially speculating. Gives zero source for the rumor.

Chris mentioned it in the telecast today. He said that internet bloggers were bouncing it around, and Fay had basically been instructed by the Enquirer to investigate the validity of the rumor.

Falls City Beer
07-26-2009, 07:01 PM
Chris mentioned it in the telecast today. He said that internet bloggers were bouncing it around, and Fay had basically been instructed by the Enquirer to investigate the validity of the rumor.

I'm guessing it'll turn up bupkis.

Big Klu
07-26-2009, 07:03 PM
I'm guessing it'll turn up bupkis.

Me too. (So did Chris and Thom, and Chris implied that Fay was of the same opinion.)

cincrazy
07-26-2009, 09:00 PM
Fay essentially speculating. Gives zero source for the rumor.

Par for the course.

And thanks for the info.

WMR
07-27-2009, 08:32 AM
The answer to that question is yes, without hesitation -- because the team doesn't have a plus-defending, plus-hitting third baseman on their roster or ready to be called up from the minors.

Rolen fills both those criteria and provides a solution for next season with no long-term financial commitment required (as a free-agent 3B would command).

That's a win, especially if there's some money coming back on the deal to offset the pay-bump.

Disagree 100%. I can think of a 100 players I'd rather spend that kind of coin on than Rolen and I'm guessing you could as well.

There's nothing wrong with long-term financial commitment if the player is chosen carefully.

Jpup
07-27-2009, 09:31 AM
TRADE WINDS

The Minnesota Twins have inquired about SS Marco Scutaro, but have been told that he will not be available until after a Roy Halladay trade happens. The Cincinnati Reds, meanwhile, doubt they can make their deal for 3B Scott Rolen. The two teams talked three weeks ago when the Reds wanted the Jays to pay half of Rolen's 2010 salary, but since then they have had a disastrous West Coast trip.

http://www.torontosun.com/sports/baseball/2009/07/27/10272396-sun.html

Benihana
07-27-2009, 09:43 AM
http://www.torontosun.com/sports/baseball/2009/07/27/10272396-sun.html

Good.

edabbs44
07-27-2009, 09:45 AM
TRADE WINDS

The Minnesota Twins have inquired about SS Marco Scutaro, but have been told that he will not be available until after a Roy Halladay trade happens. The Cincinnati Reds, meanwhile, doubt they can make their deal for 3B Scott Rolen. The two teams talked three weeks ago when the Reds wanted the Jays to pay half of Rolen's 2010 salary, but since then they have had a disastrous West Coast trip.

Agreed with Beni. Walt needs to stick his ground. if they don't want to make the deal on his terms, then walk.

HokieRed
07-27-2009, 11:39 AM
I don't understand the logic of the article, though. Seems to me the deal becomes more likely as it becomes less essential to the Reds. Toronto's motivation would presumably remain the same: they want to clear payroll. But if the sticking point was the quality of the prospects involved, then the Reds' being increasingly out of it should force Toronto to accept what WJ offers rather than demanding better.