PDA

View Full Version : Cardinals after a setup guy.. not done making them even better



redsfan4445
07-29-2009, 08:48 PM
gets so old seeing the Cardinals (BOB and Walt's Old team) ALWAYS do their best for their fans!!

Cardinals After Relievers?
By Eddie Schmid [July 29 at 7:37pm CST]

WEDNESDAY: Strauss has more on the proceedings. He says the Cardinals are "definitely pushing" for a right-handed setup man. There's "strong internal support" to obtain Chad Qualls, but the search is "apparently directed elsewhere."

PuffyPig
07-29-2009, 09:15 PM
WEDNESDAY: Strauss has more on the proceedings. He says the Cardinals are "definitely pushing" for a right-handed setup man. There's "strong internal support" to obtain Chad Qualls, but the search is "apparently directed elsewhere."

I'm not surprised they are looking for RH set up help.

Firstly, have you seen Motte and Kinney pitching lately? They look like Janish out there.

Secondly, they've traded Perez, Todd, Gregorson and Worrell already this year.

Brutus
07-29-2009, 09:20 PM
gets so old seeing the Cardinals (BOB and Walt's Old team) ALWAYS do their best for their fans!!

Cardinals After Relievers?
By Eddie Schmid [July 29 at 7:37pm CST]

WEDNESDAY: Strauss has more on the proceedings. He says the Cardinals are "definitely pushing" for a right-handed setup man. There's "strong internal support" to obtain Chad Qualls, but the search is "apparently directed elsewhere."

When Bob Castellini said he wanted to do that a few days ago, did you see the reaction on this board because of it?

If the Reds broke down and actually traded some prospects to make the team better for this year, it would not be well received because of how far behind in the standings they are. So in essence, it's only OK to make your team better if the fans believe it's worth it.

We all can sit here and recount the results of the last 10 years. There's a clear history of trepidation, inadequate judgment of talent, misuse of funds and questionable personnel decisions. We get it. But I think the "must be nice" mantra is becoming a worn down cliche. Not a single deal gets linked on these boards without that very addendum attached.

FWIW, I really believe the market is not helping the Reds at this point in time. That does not excuse anyone for past transgressions, but the market is awful as of now. Very few top prospects are being traded and for the most part, the guys being traded have more value than the guys the Reds are willing to part with. It's a buyer's market (which is strange), but yet the Reds are not in a position where they should be buying, unless it helps them beyond this season.

Falls City Beer
07-29-2009, 09:22 PM
It's a buyer's market (which is strange), but yet the Reds are not in a position where they should be buying, unless it helps them beyond this season.

Respectfully, this is a load of crap. If it means breaking this nauseating cycle, you buy. You buy and buy and buy. It can help beyond this season if it helps at all.

You do whatever it takes not to be what this team is.

Brutus
07-29-2009, 09:27 PM
Respectfully, this is a load of crap. If it means breaking this nauseating cycle, you buy. You buy and buy and buy. It can help beyond this season if it helps at all.

You do whatever it takes not to be what this team is.

Why break a nauseating cycle just to prove a point? If I can acquire players without giving up the organization's top talent, fine. But I don't trade future stars for rentals, just to hope I can leap frog 3-4 teams in the standings and prove to fans on Redszone.com that I'm willing to break the habits of organization's past. That's the surest way to continue to set the franchise back.

Falls City Beer
07-29-2009, 09:30 PM
Why break a nauseating cycle just to prove a point? If I can acquire players without giving up the organization's top talent, fine. But I don't trade future stars for rentals, just to hope I can leap frog 3-4 teams in the standings and prove to fans on Redszone.com that I'm willing to break the habits of organization's past. That's the surest way to continue to set the franchise back.

This team is simply continuing the status quo of the last decade. What on earth do you think this iteration's going to yield that is different from the ones that came before?

Stormy
07-29-2009, 09:40 PM
When Bob Castellini said he wanted to do that a few days ago, did you see the reaction on this board because of it?

FWIW, I really believe the market is not helping the Reds at this point in time. That does not excuse anyone for past transgressions, but the market is awful as of now. Very few top prospects are being traded and for the most part, the guys being traded have more value than the guys the Reds are willing to part with. It's a buyer's market (which is strange), but yet the Reds are not in a position where they should be buying, unless it helps them beyond this season.

Forget the past decade, there is an exceptionally embarrassing product being run out on the field everyday, right now. Bob Castellini's remarks are not well received, because he's largely responsible for this sham, and because he's couching his remarks in the context that he believes this team is still in contention mode. If that's just PR, he needs some new speech writers. If it's his actual perception, he needs a straight jacket.

The worst offense in baseball, a pitching staff with an astronomical team ERA in the past month+, getting plastered by a last place team that averages 3.83 runs a game, en route to dropping 8 of our last 9. No one is upset with the threat of action taken to make the team better, they're upset that the current manifestation is a travesty, and our F.O. is taking no action while telling us that 'they're still in the hunt.' Place the blame where it belongs, not with the fan base.

Stormy
07-29-2009, 09:41 PM
Respectfully, this is a load of crap. If it means breaking this nauseating cycle, you buy. You buy and buy and buy. It can help beyond this season if it helps at all.

You do whatever it takes not to be what this team is.

You're a revelation these days, and I like it!

BuckeyeRedleg
07-29-2009, 09:43 PM
Forget the past decade, there is an exceptionally embarrassing product being run out on the field everyday, right now. Bob Castellini's remarks are not well received, because he's largely responsible for this sham, and because he's couching his remarks in the context that he believes this team is still in contention mode. If that's just PR, he needs some new speech writers. If it's his actual perception, he needs a straight jacket.

The worst offense in baseball, a pitching staff with an astronomical team ERA in the past month+, getting plastered by a last place team that averages 3.83 runs a game, en route to dropping 8 of our last 9. No one is upset with the threat of action taken to make the team better, they're upset that the current manifestation is a travesty, and our F.O. is taking no action while telling us that 'they're still in the hunt.' Place the blame where it belongs, not with the fan base.

This ^^^^^ is money.

Brutus
07-29-2009, 09:43 PM
This team is simply continuing the status quo of the last decade. What on earth do you think this iteration's going to yield that is different from the ones that came before?

I can't answer that within any certainty. If I could, or anyone could, they should be hired because clearly they would have the answers that no one in the organization has had for 10 years.

But I know one thing: selling off young talent to acquire 2 months worth of production, on a team getting close to 10 games out of first place and trailing four different teams is not the way to break the cycle. Make a Scott Rolen trade if you can. If the Reds could make a Roy Halladay trade, do that too (since he has another year left).

But unless any talent has a big old (C) club option for 2010 or I see more than just 1-year remaining on their contract, stay away. Stay very far away. No need to bust the farm up for the rest of this season.

In the offseason, I would expect (hope) Jocketty does what I expect and starts making some moves to put this team in a position for next year. I do believe they're close. But I don't see much upside in making any moves the next 36 hours unless that move will also help beyond September 30.

Falls City Beer
07-29-2009, 09:46 PM
Forget the past decade, there is an exceptionally embarrassing product being run out on the field everyday, right now. Bob Castellini's remarks are not well received, because he's largely responsible for this sham, and because he's couching his remarks in the context that he believes this team is still in contention mode. If that's just PR, he needs some new speech writers. If it's his actual perception, he needs a straight jacket.

The worst offense in baseball, a pitching staff with an astronomical team ERA in the past month+, getting plastered by a last place team that averages 3.83 runs a game, en route to dropping 8 of our last 9. No one is upset with the threat of action taken to make the team better, they're upset that the current manifestation is a travesty, and our F.O. is taking no action while telling us that 'they're still in the hunt.' Place the blame where it belongs, not with the fan base.

No kidding. This team is at the bottom; the organization knows it's at the bottom. They're beyond irrelevant. But for crying out loud, have the self-respect not to lie.

Falls City Beer
07-29-2009, 09:48 PM
I can't answer that within any certainty. If I could, or anyone could, they should be hired because clearly they would have the answers that no one in the organization has had for 10 years.

But I know one thing: selling off young talent to acquire 2 months worth of production, on a team getting close to 10 games out of first place and trailing four different teams is not the way to break the cycle. Make a Scott Rolen trade if you can. If the Reds could make a Roy Halladay trade, do that too (since he has another year left).

But unless any talent has a big old (C) club option for 2010 or I see more than just 1-year remaining on their contract, stay away. Stay very far away. No need to bust the farm up for the rest of this season.

In the offseason, I would expect (hope) Jocketty does what I expect and starts making some moves to put this team in a position for next year. I do believe they're close. But I don't see much upside in making any moves the next 36 hours unless that move will also help beyond September 30.

Oh, I've heard about the farm. I've heard all about the farm. I've heard about it my whole life.

Stormy
07-29-2009, 09:51 PM
In the offseason, I would expect (hope) Jocketty does what I expect and starts making some moves to put this team in a position for next year. I do believe they're close. But I don't see much upside in making any moves the next 36 hours unless that move will also help beyond September 30.

I don't see how it is going to be any easier to move any of these cumbersome contracts in the offseason. I see nothing imminent, aside from the hope of Volquez's return, that makes the Reds inherently more of a contender than they were heading into 2009. So, economic recovery hopes excepted, why would Walt be any more proactive this offseason than he was last offseason?

I don't want to mortgage a single facet of the farm for short-term players, but this many months in Walt certainly should have identified innumerable ways to make a club this full of holes, better. And yet we're still awaiting the first of those additions, and the timetable keeps getting pushed back.

Brutus
07-29-2009, 09:53 PM
Forget the past decade, there is an exceptionally embarrassing product being run out on the field everyday, right now. Bob Castellini's remarks are not well received, because he's largely responsible for this sham, and because he's couching his remarks in the context that he believes this team is still in contention mode. If that's just PR, he needs some new speech writers. If it's his actual perception, he needs a straight jacket.

The worst offense in baseball, a pitching staff with an astronomical team ERA in the past month+, getting plastered by a last place team that averages 3.83 runs a game, en route to dropping 8 of our last 9. No one is upset with the threat of action taken to make the team better, they're upset that the current manifestation is a travesty, and our F.O. is taking no action while telling us that 'they're still in the hunt.' Place the blame where it belongs, not with the fan base.

Responsible for this sham? You must have missed the Forbes link for the Reds' team profile that showed they've raised payroll in three consecutive seasons. Small step for man, giant leap for this franchise kind.

Perhaps they're not taking any action because they don't want to mortgage anything off in a season when they, perhaps, don't actually have the same intentions as they tell the media? I'm not sure where people get off thinking any club or franchise actually tells the media their real intentions. That's absolutely, categorically and totally false. I know this because it's my line of work. Sound bites, puff pieces and interesting Ledes are nice and all, but they're meaningless and if you're getting frustrated, in part, because of what you're being told through these methods of public relations, then you'll never be happy with the intentions of the club.

Teams don't typically make moves in June if they have talent. They like to wait to build up the demand. I'm not sure there was much out there the Reds could have reasonably acquired to stop the bleeding. When you have players dropping like flies to injuries, what do you really expect? Few teams can withstand that kind of fortune if they were not deep to begin with.

I really don't think, after the injuries started and the slump began, there was any magical beans that was going to cure this team. I'd much rather let Walt Jocketty do what he's going to do and re-arm for 2010. That is, in my opinion, what his plan has been to begin with. So don't bust that up. Just because people can't see his plan, does not mean it does not exist. That is not to say it does either, but it's too early to make that determination.

BuckeyeRedleg
07-29-2009, 09:55 PM
Responsible for this sham? You must have missed the Forbes link for the Reds' team profile that showed they've raised payroll in three consecutive seasons. Small step for man, giant leap for this franchise kind.

Perhaps they're not taking any action because they don't want to mortgage anything off in a season when they, perhaps, don't actually have the same intentions as they tell the media? I'm not sure where people get off thinking any club or franchise actually tells the media their real intentions. That's absolutely, categorically and totally false. I know this because it's my line of work. Sound bites, puff pieces and interesting Ledes are nice and all, but they're meaningless and if you're getting frustrated, in part, because of what you're being told through these methods of public relations, then you'll never be happy with the intentions of the club.

Teams don't typically make moves in June if they have talent. They like to wait to build up the demand. I'm not sure there was much out there the Reds could have reasonably acquired to stop the bleeding. When you have players dropping like flies to injuries, what do you really expect? Few teams can withstand that kind of fortune if they were not deep to begin with.

I really don't think, after the injuries started and the slump began, there was any magical beans that was going to cure this team. I'd much rather let Walt Jocketty do what he's going to do and re-arm for 2010. That is, in my opinion, what his plan has been to begin with. So don't bust that up. Just because people can't see his plan, does not mean it does not exist. That is not to say it does either, but it's too early to make that determination.

Are you a Castellini?

Falls City Beer
07-29-2009, 09:57 PM
I don't see how it is going to be any easier to move any of these cumbersome contracts in the offseason. I see nothing imminent, aside from the hope of Volquez's return, that makes the Reds inherently more of a contender than they were heading into 2009. So, economic recovery hopes excepted, why would Walt be any more proactive this offseason than he was last offseason?

I don't want to mortgage a single facet of the farm for short-term players, but this many months in Walt certainly should have identified innumerable ways to make a club this full of holes, better. And yet we're still awaiting the first of those additions, and the timetable keeps getting pushed back.

Except this is a red herring. No one would ever make the argument that they should trade any prospects for only two months of a player in a dead season.

Now this group of clowns can grouse about Harang's and Arroyo's contracts and use them as an excuse for not making the team better.

Kc61
07-29-2009, 09:59 PM
Why break a nauseating cycle just to prove a point? If I can acquire players without giving up the organization's top talent, fine. But I don't trade future stars for rentals, just to hope I can leap frog 3-4 teams in the standings and prove to fans on Redszone.com that I'm willing to break the habits of organization's past. That's the surest way to continue to set the franchise back.

Of course, rentals don't make sense. Nobody would rent a player in late July of a dead season.

Future stars? Every kid isn't a future star, it is up to managment to make correct judgments on which young players to trade.

But the pattern does have to stop. The Reds draft and hold -- they stockpile kids and seldom cash them in for proven talent. And the Reds seldom make significant free agent signings.

Everyone criticizes the Cordero signing. My view is opposite. His excellent performance shows that if you spend on real good free agents you can acquire value.

Spend wisely but spend. Draft wisely but trade some guys for good veterans. The pattern does need to change.

Stormy
07-29-2009, 09:59 PM
Except this is a red herring. No one would ever make the argument that they should trade any prospects for only two months of a player in a dead season.

Now this group of clowns can grouse about Harang's and Arroyo's contracts and use them as an excuse for not making the team better.

Exactly, on both counts.

Caveat Emperor
07-29-2009, 09:59 PM
Are you a Castellini?

No, he's making too much sense to be one of them.

Brutus
07-29-2009, 10:00 PM
Are you a Castellini?

Absolutely not. I simply refuse to place blame on any one individual for a franchise that has undergone four owners, four general managers and six managers in a period of 10 years. Especially if the guy has had controlling interest just over three years.

And right now the Reds' big problem is that they have two burdensome contracts (Harang & Arroyo) of pitchers that seemingly have little or no trade value.

Not a good situation for flexibility to do things with your club, while trying to meet a budget and have such troublesome 'assets' to liquidate.

Falls City Beer
07-29-2009, 10:04 PM
Absolutely not. I simply refuse to place blame on any one individual for a franchise that has undergone four owners, four general managers and six managers in a period of 10 years. Especially if the guy has had controlling interest just over three years.

And right now the Reds' big problem is that they have two burdensome contracts (Harang & Arroyo) of pitchers that seemingly have little or no trade value.

Not a good situation for flexibility to do things with your club, while trying to meet a budget and have such troublesome 'assets' to liquidate.

Take heart: one of these days, when all the crap is off the roster, they'll only be spending a record low $10 million on payroll.

And they'll still suck.

Caveat Emperor
07-29-2009, 10:05 PM
Now this group of clowns can grouse about Harang's and Arroyo's contracts and use them as an excuse for not making the team better.

So your argument, essentially, is that Cast should eat those two contracts, ship Harang and Arroyo + Cash to anyone who will give back value, and then add additional payroll to bring proven major leaguers onto the roster?

Because really, that's the only way the team gets to where you want them to be -- and I put the odds of the owner eating $20+ million AND spending additional money at next to zero.

Highlifeman21
07-29-2009, 10:05 PM
I can't answer that within any certainty. If I could, or anyone could, they should be hired because clearly they would have the answers that no one in the organization has had for 10 years.

But I know one thing: selling off young talent to acquire 2 months worth of production, on a team getting close to 10 games out of first place and trailing four different teams is not the way to break the cycle. Make a Scott Rolen trade if you can. If the Reds could make a Roy Halladay trade, do that too (since he has another year left).

But unless any talent has a big old (C) club option for 2010 or I see more than just 1-year remaining on their contract, stay away. Stay very far away. No need to bust the farm up for the rest of this season.

In the offseason, I would expect (hope) Jocketty does what I expect and starts making some moves to put this team in a position for next year. I do believe they're close. But I don't see much upside in making any moves the next 36 hours unless that move will also help beyond September 30.

... b/c putting all our eggs in the "the farm's gonna save/help us" basket's really worked since the turn of the century, no?

Falls City Beer
07-29-2009, 10:07 PM
So your argument, essentially, is that Cast should eat those two contracts, ship Harang and Arroyo + Cash to anyone who will give back value, and then add additional payroll to bring proven major leaguers onto the roster?

Because really, that's the only way the team gets to where you want them to be.

Why not?

edabbs44
07-29-2009, 10:13 PM
Why not?

Because the reality is that, while trying to win, you also need to have enough revenue to keep the lights on. I don't have access to their books but I'm not sure that they bring in enough cash to act like that.

Caveat Emperor
07-29-2009, 10:13 PM
Why not?

I think it's reasonable for the fans to expect an effort to win on the part of ownership.

I think it's unreasonable for the fans to expect the owner to lose money doing it. This is a business, and the people involved are businessmen and investors. They didn't buy the team to throw money down the rabbit hole -- they bought it to make money and build value. Competition is good, but it has to make fiscal sense.

Brutus
07-29-2009, 10:15 PM
... b/c putting all our eggs in the "the farm's gonna save/help us" basket's really worked since the turn of the century, no?

Except, for once, people other than just Reds' fans actually commend the organizational depth. Before it was just fans clinging to hope based on the farm. But now there's actual reason to be hopeful of that.

Look at the homegrown and traded talent starting to filter onto the 25-man roster:

* Joey Votto
* Jay Bruce
* Johnny Cueto
* Edinson Volquez by way of a nifty Rule-5 acquisition in Josh Hamilton
* Nick Masset by way of a trade of Griffey
* Carlos Fisher
* Josh Roenicke
* Drew Stubbs or Chris Heisey
* Travis Wood
* Ryan Hanigan
* Chris Dickerson
* Todd Frazier
* Yonder Alonso
* Zach Stewart
* Mike Leake is said to be on a fast track once he signs

Point is, the Reds are in a position where they can actually start filtering in homegrown talent instead of having to rely on free agency and trades. The depth and increase in the scouting department (which goes unnoticed here that the ownership has poured a lot more into scouting) has finally started paying slow dividends.

The reason there has been so much pressure on Homer Bailey is because Reds fans had little else to rest their hopes on. It's not going to be that way over the next 12-18 months. There's a lot of legit talent, both high-ceiling and tremendous bench depth, on its way up.

It's ironic that the biggest obstacle to the organization right now is that of contracts that the Reds spent money on. Unfortunately, it was (in the case of Arroyo) not money well spent. Thereby, perhaps it's the distribution of funds that is the problem rather than the amount spent.

Stormy
07-29-2009, 10:15 PM
Brutus, my problem with Bob and Walt's PR isn't about whether or not I believe their spin, but rather that in this instance, their inaction matches their rhetoric. 'We're not selling because we can still contend' is all well and good if you're using it as leverage to actually sell higher, but it's credibility eroding when it's used in this manner.

You'd think an owner who is already on this many managers and general managers, who just proclaimed in 2008, "We're just not going to lose anymore." Might be motivated to at least give it the old college try in 2009, but after another punt of a season, and a 1.5 year period where we haven't added a single piece to the long-term puzzle, we're supposed to believe that the invisible plan was for 2010 all along?

Might as well be groundhog day, sonny and cher on the radio, and waiting for the GABP to be built before we really get serious about contending.

Falls City Beer
07-29-2009, 10:15 PM
Because the reality is that, while trying to win, you also need to have enough revenue to keep the lights on. I don't have access to their books but I'm not sure that they bring in enough cash to act like that.

Who said they have to pay out the nose for MLB talent? Or that they have to eat Harang's or Arroyo's contracts? They could almost certainly move one or the other of them. Seriously, the strategy is: do nothing. Collect some recyclable aluminum cans, but be sure to ultimately do nothing to help the MLB product. That's strictly verboten.

I(heart)Freel
07-29-2009, 10:20 PM
I think I would prefer to wait for the re-enforcements before I start marching up the hill. You've had enough of waiting. Fine. Good luck with that, going up to "take that hill" with only half your battalion.

I'm willing to wait a little longer til I know there's a stream of soldiers behind me. In case the guy next to me falls, I know someone else is right behind him.

I see the target. I like some of the guys around me. But I'm still waiting a little longer, because there is, as they say, safety in numbers. Especially for a small-market army like ours.

Falls City Beer
07-29-2009, 10:23 PM
I think I would prefer to wait for the re-enforcements before I start marching up the hill. You've had enough of waiting. Fine. Good luck with that, going up to "take that hill" with only half your battalion.

I'm willing to wait a little longer til I know there's a stream of soldiers behind me. In case the guy next to me falls, I know someone else is right behind him.

I see the target. I like some of the guys around me. But I'm still waiting a little longer, because there is, as they say, safety in numbers. Especially for a small-market army like ours.

Farms don't produce forever, and they almost never produce simultaneously. Just ask the Brewers. One and done; sure they got a taste, but now they've slipped back into the void.

Fortune favors the brave.

Brutus
07-29-2009, 10:26 PM
Brutus, my problem with Bob and Walt's PR isn't about whether or not I believe their spin, but rather that in this instance, their inaction matches their rhetoric. 'We're not selling because we can still contend' is all well and good if you're using it as leverage to actually sell higher, but it's credibility eroding when it's used in this manner.

You'd think an owner who is already on this many managers and general managers, who just proclaimed in 2008, "We're just not going to lose anymore." Might be motivated to at least give it the old college try in 2009, but after another punt of a season, and a 1.5 year period where we haven't added a single piece to the long-term puzzle, we're supposed to believe that the invisible plan was for 2010 all along?

Might as well be groundhog day, sonny and cher on the radio, and waiting for the GABP to be built before we really get serious about contending.

I actually don't like that Castellini came out and said they wanted to be buyers, and still compete. I would rather he said little at all than said something he did not believe to be truth. But I understand why he did it. He was laying the groundwork for any possible deal that could be seen as throwing in the towel, even if they did not view it that way.

To answer your question about 2010, I believe that's what Jocketty has planned since he took over in the middle of last season. I truly believe Jocketty saw what he had with the young pitching and knew he had Griffey and Dunn's contracts about to be taken off the books, and decided he was not going to drastically alter the makeup of the 2009 roster. Even without drastically doing that, someone posted the 25-man roster has been well over half turned over.

I'm not saying it was Castellini's plan, but I believe Jocketty is the one decided it would be best to plan for next year. Sooner or later, or at least no later than this offseason, he's going to have to get some moves made to make that plan work. It's a shame, though, that the Reds need to get Arroyo's salary off the books to allow additional wiggle room. I think if they're able to do that (which may happen in August as he'll surely pass waivers), the team might look better to start 2010.

M2
07-29-2009, 10:26 PM
Maybe if Baker stopped abusing Harang and Arroyo they'd recover a bit, pitch better and make significant contributions in 2010. Just sayin'.

BuckeyeRedleg
07-29-2009, 10:28 PM
Maybe if Baker stopped abusing Harang and Arroyo they'd recover a bit, pitch better and make significant contributions in 2010. Just sayin'.

Yes, that 8th inning was necessary tonight, huh?

edabbs44
07-29-2009, 10:28 PM
Who said they have to pay out the nose for MLB talent? Or that they have to eat Harang's or Arroyo's contracts? They could almost certainly move one or the other of them. Seriously, the strategy is: do nothing. Collect some recyclable aluminum cans, but be sure to ultimately do nothing to help the MLB product. That's strictly verboten.

Your response of "why not?" was to that exact scenario.

And I can't see them getting anyone to take on either contract without Cincy eating 50% or so.

Falls City Beer
07-29-2009, 10:30 PM
Yes, that 8th inning was necessary tonight, huh?

Since when is 120 pitches abuse? Hey I'm all for shutting those two stiffs down for the remainder of the season.

M2
07-29-2009, 10:32 PM
Yes, that 8th inning was necessary tonight, huh?

He would seem to be undermining that whole 2010 plan thingamabob.

Meanwhile, back to the Cardinals, anyone interested in Tyler Greene? I imagine he could be had for a middle reliever.

M2
07-29-2009, 10:32 PM
Since when is 120 pitches abuse?

Since 1993.

Kc61
07-29-2009, 10:34 PM
So everyone buys into the idea that these two pitching contracts, which expire in a year, are strangling this team.

I don't. Even with Harang, Arroyo and Cordero the Reds have a modest payroll. If they wanted to acquire another couple of good veterans it's hard to imagine they couldn't.

Personally, I doubt that the Reds have top stars looming in the minor leagues, i don't think they will win until they spend the seed money to have more good major league players. Maybe I'm wrong, I hope so.

But ask yourself, if Jay Bruce, a great prospect, is hitting .207 this year how long will it take lesser prospects to blossom at the major league level? It could be a very long time before the current philosophy results in a winner.

PuffyPig
07-29-2009, 10:35 PM
Meanwhile, back to the Cardinals, anyone interested in Tyler Greene? I imagine he could be had for a middle reliever.


I imagine he could be had for a bucket of catfish. But why overpay?

BuckeyeRedleg
07-29-2009, 10:35 PM
Since when is 120 pitches abuse? Hey I'm all for shutting those two stiffs down for the remainder of the season.

No reason to send Harang out into the 8th. Wasn't like he was working on a shutout or even a win for that matter.

Pretty much silly and inexcusable, but par for the course.

M2, I wouldn't trade with the Cards. It's a no-win.

Falls City Beer
07-29-2009, 10:35 PM
So everyone buys into the idea that these two pitching contracts, which expire in a year, are strangling this team.

I don't. Even with Harang, Arroyo and Cordero the Reds have a modest payroll. If they wanted to acquire another couple of good veterans it's hard to imagine they couldn't.

Personally, I don't think the Reds have top stars in the minor leagues, i don't think they will win until they spend the seed money to have more good major league players. Maybe I'm wrong, I hope so.

But ask yourself, if Jay Bruce, a great prospect, is hitting .207 this year how long will it take lesser prospects to blossom at the major league level? It could be a very long time before the current philosophy results in a winner.

I agree.

Highlifeman21
07-29-2009, 10:36 PM
Except, for once, people other than just Reds' fans actually commend the organizational depth. Before it was just fans clinging to hope based on the farm. But now there's actual reason to be hopeful of that.

Look at the homegrown and traded talent starting to filter onto the 25-man roster:

* Joey Votto
* Jay Bruce
* Johnny Cueto
* Edinson Volquez by way of a nifty Rule-5 acquisition in Josh Hamilton
* Nick Masset by way of a trade of Griffey
* Carlos Fisher
* Josh Roenicke
* Drew Stubbs or Chris Heisey
* Travis Wood
* Ryan Hanigan
* Chris Dickerson
* Todd Frazier
* Yonder Alonso
* Zach Stewart
* Mike Leake is said to be on a fast track once he signs

Point is, the Reds are in a position where they can actually start filtering in homegrown talent instead of having to rely on free agency and trades. The depth and increase in the scouting department (which goes unnoticed here that the ownership has poured a lot more into scouting) has finally started paying slow dividends.

The reason there has been so much pressure on Homer Bailey is because Reds fans had little else to rest their hopes on. It's not going to be that way over the next 12-18 months. There's a lot of legit talent, both high-ceiling and tremendous bench depth, on its way up.

It's ironic that the biggest obstacle to the organization right now is that of contracts that the Reds spent money on. Unfortunately, it was (in the case of Arroyo) not money well spent. Thereby, perhaps it's the distribution of funds that is the problem rather than the amount spent.

Starting to filter onto the 25 man roster you say?

What do these guys have in common?

* Drew Stubbs or Chris Heisey
* Travis Wood
* Todd Frazier
* Yonder Alonso
* Zach Stewart
* Mike Leake

I'm sure you know that none of them have ever appeared on the 25 man roster, so until they've done so, they haven't done squat in a Reds uniform.

What do these guys have in common?

* Edinson Volquez
* Nick Masset

Answer: Our farm had nothing to do with them. So, to give our farm credit for developing either of these is highly inaccurate.



While I'd love to hope that the Reds have turned the corner in terms of developing young talent, it remains to be seen if this is actually the case. It seems like some of our kids have developed in spite of our farm.

Bailey, Mesoraco, they certainly haven't fared well from the farm to the show, now have they?

Highlifeman21
07-29-2009, 10:42 PM
Maybe if Baker stopped abusing Harang and Arroyo they'd recover a bit, pitch better and make significant contributions in 2010. Just sayin'.

I was told in a separate thread that The Dusty is doing nothing of the sort...

M2
07-29-2009, 10:44 PM
So everyone buys into the idea that these two pitching contracts, which expire in a year, are strangling this team.

I don't. Even with Harang, Arroyo and Cordero the Reds have a modest payroll. If they wanted to acquire another couple of good veterans it's hard to imagine they couldn't.

Personally, I don't think the Reds have top stars in the minor leagues, i don't think they will win until they spend the seed money to have more good major league players. Maybe I'm wrong, I hope so.

But ask yourself, if Jay Bruce, a great prospect, is hitting .207 this year how long will it take lesser prospects to blossom at the major league level? It could be a very long time before the current philosophy results in a winner.

I agree with you. The next wave of help is, optimistically, two seasons away in terms of making a positive impact.

If 2010 is the plan then Walt needs to start collecting bodies, large numbers of bodies.

Brutus
07-29-2009, 10:44 PM
Starting to filter onto the 25 man roster you say?

What do these guys have in common?

* Drew Stubbs or Chris Heisey
* Travis Wood
* Todd Frazier
* Yonder Alonso
* Zach Stewart
* Mike Leake

I'm sure you know that none of them have ever appeared on the 25 man roster, so until they've done so, they haven't done squat in a Reds uniform.

What do these guys have in common?

* Edinson Volquez
* Nick Masset

Answer: Our farm had nothing to do with them. So, to give our farm credit for developing either of these is highly inaccurate.



While I'd love to hope that the Reds have turned the corner in terms of developing young talent, it remains to be seen if this is actually the case. It seems like some of our kids have developed in spite of our farm.

Bailey, Mesoraco, they certainly haven't fared well from the farm to the show, now have they?

I noted that Volquez and Masset were traded for in my list. But the bottom line is they're part of the organization.

I meant to add on the 25-man roster or ready to make an appearance soon (hence when I said about to start filtering in over the next 12-18 months).

You're using Bailey and Mesoraco as examples that the system has not turned the corner. No mater how good a system is, you're always going to have guys who don't develop. That's not a surprise.

But when's the last time you could honestly say the Reds had a system on the brink of being used for 25-man depth and in many cases, options for future starters? I've been following the Reds pretty closely since the 1990's, and I don't remember this much talent up and down through the organization. Not saying all these players will turn into stars and that some won't flame out, but the system is on the verge of helping the big league club in a big way.

It's for that reason I don't think a 2010 plan will require too much heavy lifting. Some maintenance, a few signings and unloading a bad contract or two and I think the Reds are in a position to make a good run.

M2
07-29-2009, 10:46 PM
M2, I wouldn't trade with the Cards. It's a no-win.

It is if they give you something you really want.

Trade with anybody. Trade with everybody. Just trade FOR something.

Caveat Emperor
07-29-2009, 10:50 PM
It is if they give you something you really want.

Trade with anybody. Trade with everybody. Just trade FOR something.

http://mlb.mlb.com/images/2007/03/26/nEg4woje.jpg

;)

M2
07-29-2009, 10:55 PM
http://mlb.mlb.com/images/2007/03/26/nEg4woje.jpg

;)

Hey, I think I'm on record about THAT one. I believe I may have started the engine on the Majewski Sucks bandwagon the day the trade went down.

Highlifeman21
07-29-2009, 10:57 PM
I noted that Volquez and Masset were traded for in my list. But the bottom line is they're part of the organization.

I meant to add on the 25-man roster or ready to make an appearance soon (hence when I said about to start filtering in over the next 12-18 months).

You're using Bailey and Mesoraco as examples that the system has not turned the corner. No mater how good a system is, you're always going to have guys who don't develop. That's not a surprise.

But when's the last time you could honestly say the Reds had a system on the brink of being used for 25-man depth and in many cases, options for future starters? I've been following the Reds pretty closely since the 1990's, and I don't remember this much talent up and down through the organization. Not saying all these players will turn into stars and that some won't flame out, but the system is on the verge of helping the big league club in a big way.

It's for that reason I don't think a 2010 plan will require too much heavy lifting. Some maintenance, a few signings and unloading a bad contract or two and I think the Reds are in a position to make a good run.

I just can't buy into this kinda blind optimism.

Our farm isn't as good as advertised. The guys (for the most part) that are on, or on the brink of being on the 25 man roster would be very low on many teams 25 man rosters, if at all.

That's my point.

Sure, we have guys that might make an appearance on the 25 man roster, but they aren't going to turn heads in a good way. You're looking at a separation of talent where we have guys that would start on any MLB team, and a collection of guys that only start on crappy MLB teams, and should probably be career AAA guys. That's the difference between the Reds and good teams.

Good teams don't hope the stars align and their kids on the farm are the answer, all at the same time, mind you.

Bad teams do. The Reds are hoping all those kids on your laundry list pan out at the same time, b/c they've committed bad money to Arroyo and Cordero, which means they tell us they can't afford to pay for actual talent, and while Harang's contract was great at the time, now his performace doesn't match the amount he's paid.

I respectfully disagree that the Reds have talent up and down the organization. The farm is far from being on the verge to help the big club in a big way. If it is, then our big club was/is in worse shape than we ever imagined.

BuckeyeRedleg
07-29-2009, 10:57 PM
http://mlb.mlb.com/images/2007/03/26/nEg4woje.jpg

;)

Thanks, I must now clean the beer and dip spit off the monitor.

edabbs44
07-29-2009, 11:00 PM
So everyone buys into the idea that these two pitching contracts, which expire in a year, are strangling this team.

I don't. Even with Harang, Arroyo and Cordero the Reds have a modest payroll. If they wanted to acquire another couple of good veterans it's hard to imagine they couldn't.

So you think Cincy has the revenue streams to support a $90-100MM payroll? They are around $70MM now.


Personally, I doubt that the Reds have top stars looming in the minor leagues, i don't think they will win until they spend the seed money to have more good major league players. Maybe I'm wrong, I hope so.

But ask yourself, if Jay Bruce, a great prospect, is hitting .207 this year how long will it take lesser prospects to blossom at the major league level? It could be a very long time before the current philosophy results in a winner.

Bruce, while a top prospect, was also a very young one. There are lesser prospects who can make more of a short-term impact because of their age.

redsfan4445
07-29-2009, 11:06 PM
if the Reds are like the Cardinals where the fans KNOW the ownerships main goal before game #1 is making the playoffs and World Series, (Like St' Louis EVERY YEAR) the fans will come out. See how the attendance has dropped the last 3 games? the fans are not stupid. They know the season is over and no reason to get excited watching a team play like a last place team.

And the front office wont bring up any young kids to see what they can do and evaluate before going after certain targeted positions in the off season. I want to see Frazier and Heisey up here now! and get rid of some of the other players that dont help this team AKA Edwin.. Let Frazier play 3B and Hiesey play RF.(Gomes isnt a RFer)

dsmith421
07-29-2009, 11:25 PM
I think it's unreasonable for the fans to expect the owner to lose money doing it.

I think an owner who is concerned about losing money on his sports investment is a complete idiot. Sports is literally the most surefire investment in the entire world, even a degenerate cretin like Mike Brown can make a billion dollars by bunging up his hindquarters with his own thumb for twenty years.

Castellini's biggest problem right now is that he swaggered into this gig and wrote checks with his gigantic mouth that he clearly has no intention of cashing. There are 21-year-old kids in Cincinnati that have only the vaguest recollection of the Reds being good. Literally a lost generation of baseball fans. Ownership has to be innovative and willing to take major risks to win back support. Or else we're going to be submerged in the Pirates spin cycle and baseball in this town will slowly but surely die.

Brutus
07-30-2009, 12:16 AM
I just can't buy into this kinda blind optimism.

Our farm isn't as good as advertised. The guys (for the most part) that are on, or on the brink of being on the 25 man roster would be very low on many teams 25 man rosters, if at all.

That's my point.

Sure, we have guys that might make an appearance on the 25 man roster, but they aren't going to turn heads in a good way. You're looking at a separation of talent where we have guys that would start on any MLB team, and a collection of guys that only start on crappy MLB teams, and should probably be career AAA guys. That's the difference between the Reds and good teams.

Good teams don't hope the stars align and their kids on the farm are the answer, all at the same time, mind you.

Bad teams do. The Reds are hoping all those kids on your laundry list pan out at the same time, b/c they've committed bad money to Arroyo and Cordero, which means they tell us they can't afford to pay for actual talent, and while Harang's contract was great at the time, now his performace doesn't match the amount he's paid.

I respectfully disagree that the Reds have talent up and down the organization. The farm is far from being on the verge to help the big club in a big way. If it is, then our big club was/is in worse shape than we ever imagined.

It's not really blind optimism. It's the prevailing opinions of scouts and organizations like Baseball America that watch this for a living. Alonso, Frazier, Heisey and Stubbs project as legit, everyday starters with Alonso, Stubbs and possibly Frazier have been thought to have possible high ceilings. Then you've got someone like Zach Cozart who keeps getting better and Juan Francisco is extremely raw, but has all-star ceiling.

Pitching-wise, Wood, Stewart and Leake all profile as middle to top of the rotation type of talents. The Reds already have three pitchers on the roster with that ceiling, so that's pretty significant.

The Reds already have proven players at 1B, 2B and a rising star in RF. The odds say one of either Stubbs or Heisey should settle in at CF. Ryan Hanigan continues to get on base at a .420 clip and is dominating the league at throwing out base runners. With three TOR talents on the staff and several good young arms in the bullpen and in AAA, I see a team that needs to find a consistent bopper in left and someone to man the fort at shortstop. If they can find that, they're in good shape. A Scott Rolen for Encarnacion swap would also help significantly.

I'm not saying the Reds are a player away from all of the sudden a World Series appearance, but I am definitely saying this franchise is a heck of a lot closer now to competing than it's been since 2000.

Caveat Emperor
07-30-2009, 12:39 AM
I think an owner who is concerned about losing money on his sports investment is a complete idiot. Sports is literally the most surefire investment in the entire world, even a degenerate cretin like Mike Brown can make a billion dollars by bunging up his hindquarters with his own thumb for twenty years.

I don't think there's much danger of Cast losing money on his investment. The Reds will naturally appreciate in value (and have already since he bought the controlling interest) and he'll likely realize substantial profit when and if he chooses to sell the team.

The issue of yearly operating costs is another matter. I think it's unreasonable for the fans to expect Cast to run the team with a net-operating loss (i.e. paying more money in expenditures than the team takes in for revenue) year-to-year just for the sake of being competitive.

That's all I was saying.


Castellini's biggest problem right now is that he swaggered into this gig and wrote checks with his gigantic mouth that he clearly has no intention of cashing. There are 21-year-old kids in Cincinnati that have only the vaguest recollection of the Reds being good. Literally a lost generation of baseball fans. Ownership has to be innovative and willing to take major risks to win back support. Or else we're going to be submerged in the Pirates spin cycle and baseball in this town will slowly but surely die.

Cincinnati supports a winner and a front-runner. Put a winning team on the field and the "lost generation" will be back about as quickly as you can print the tickets.

TheNext44
07-30-2009, 03:26 AM
The reason why the Cardinals get good players every year in which they compete at the trading deadline is because they can. They have the depth to trade a Brett Wallace, and know that even if he becomes a stud, he won't be missed.

The Reds just don't have that same depth yet, and they absolutely did not have any depth at all until a few years ago. During most of this decade, if the Reds had any prospects to trade, they were the only ones they had.

Right now, the only real prospect that has any real trade value is Alonso, and if they trade him, it will be a few years before they can get another to trade. Soto is the closest talent wise, and he's only 20 and in single A. And any player they take in the next draft will be a few years before they can trade him, if they get anyone that good.

I do think that next year, when Soto and Leake hopefully have a solid year at AA, and guys like Frazier, Wood, Valaika, Stubbs, and Heisey get sorted out as to who has the goods, the Reds will be in nice position at the trading deadline to pick up who they need, if they are in contention. Not as nice as the Cardinals have been in for the past 10 years, but much better than this year.

PuffyPig
07-30-2009, 07:53 AM
The reason why the Cardinals get good players every year in which they compete at the trading deadline is because they can. They have the depth to trade a Brett Wallace, and know that even if he becomes a stud, he won't be missed.

The Reds just don't have that same depth yet, and they absolutely did not have any depth at all until a few years ago. During most of this decade, if the Reds had any prospects to trade, they were the only ones they had.

Right now, the only real prospect that has any real trade value is Alonso, and if they trade him, it will be a few years before they can get another to trade. Soto is the closest talent wise, and he's only 20 and in single A. And any player they take in the next draft will be a few years before they can trade him, if they get anyone that good.

I do think that next year, when Soto and Leake hopefully have a solid year at AA, and guys like Frazier, Wood, Valaika, Stubbs, and Heisey get sorted out as to who has the goods, the Reds will be in nice position at the trading deadline to pick up who they need, if they are in contention. Not as nice as the Cardinals have been in for the past 10 years, but much better than this year.

The Cards had little depth in their propsect list, and have traded most of it away now. The reason they can make trades like this is becuase they are contending. We could also trade prospects for FA's to be, it just makes no sense.

To suggest that Alonso is the only real propsect we have with any trade value is just wrong. We have the goods to pull off a trade like the Cards did for Holliday or the Phillies did for Lee, just not the situation where it makes sense.

To suggest the Cards have the depth to not miss a Wallace indicates you know little of their farm system. Considering how their farm system has been ravaged this year through promotions, trades and poor performances, it you mixed up their and our propsects, probably 8 of the top 10 would be Reds.

Highlifeman21
07-30-2009, 10:09 AM
It's not really blind optimism. It's the prevailing opinions of scouts and organizations like Baseball America that watch this for a living. Alonso, Frazier, Heisey and Stubbs project as legit, everyday starters with Alonso, Stubbs and possibly Frazier have been thought to have possible high ceilings. Then you've got someone like Zach Cozart who keeps getting better and Juan Francisco is extremely raw, but has all-star ceiling.

Pitching-wise, Wood, Stewart and Leake all profile as middle to top of the rotation type of talents. The Reds already have three pitchers on the roster with that ceiling, so that's pretty significant.

The Reds already have proven players at 1B, 2B and a rising star in RF. The odds say one of either Stubbs or Heisey should settle in at CF. Ryan Hanigan continues to get on base at a .420 clip and is dominating the league at throwing out base runners. With three TOR talents on the staff and several good young arms in the bullpen and in AAA, I see a team that needs to find a consistent bopper in left and someone to man the fort at shortstop. If they can find that, they're in good shape. A Scott Rolen for Encarnacion swap would also help significantly.

I'm not saying the Reds are a player away from all of the sudden a World Series appearance, but I am definitely saying this franchise is a heck of a lot closer now to competing than it's been since 2000.

You must work for a PR firm with that kinda spin on the Reds farm.

Alonso's probably the only guy on that list that'll do anything of significance for the big club, and currently he's without a position due to Votto playing 1B.

Last time I checked, I'm not an eskimo, so I don't need the fridge or freezer you're tryin' to sell me.

TheNext44
07-30-2009, 10:23 AM
The Cards had little depth in their propsect list, and have traded most of it away now. The reason they can make trades like this is becuase they are contending. We could also trade prospects for FA's to be, it just makes no sense.

To suggest that Alonso is the only real propsect we have with any trade value is just wrong. We have the goods to pull off a trade like the Cards did for Holliday or the Phillies did for Lee, just not the situation where it makes sense.

To suggest the Cards have the depth to not miss a Wallace indicates you know little of their farm system. Considering how their farm system has been ravaged this year through promotions, trades and poor performances, it you mixed up their and our propsects, probably 8 of the top 10 would be Reds.


I think we actually agree, kinda.

The Cards will not miss Wallace, because they have depth at the major league level, which is due to having depth throughout the organization for over a decade.

They currently have in their everyday lineup Molina, Pujols, Shoemaker, Ryan, Rasmus and Ankiel (although one of the last two will sit because of Holliday), all home grown, all young, all league average or better, and all save Pujols, very cheap. That gives them the opportunity to spend money on free agents, and mid season acquisitions, and allows them to trade a young player like Wallace, and not miss him. They are depleted at the minor league level, because they had so many make it to the bigs and contribute.
And the Cardinals do have some nice prospects at the lower levels and should be refueled in a year or two.

The Reds have more and better prospects at higher levels right now, but they have such a dirth of talent at the major league level, that they can't afford to trade them to fill all the holes. The Reds need a SS, 3B, LF and CF. They have the prospects to fill maybe two of those holes. And if they do that, then will need to wait a few years to rebuild the farm again.

The Reds do have the talent to make a trade like the Phils did for Lee, but they wouldn't have prospects like D. Brown, Drabek, M. Taylor and Happ still around. That's the depth the Reds need.

Brutus
07-30-2009, 10:39 AM
You must work for a PR firm with that kinda spin on the Reds farm.

Alonso's probably the only guy on that list that'll do anything of significance for the big club, and currently he's without a position due to Votto playing 1B.

Last time I checked, I'm not an eskimo, so I don't need the fridge or freezer you're tryin' to sell me.

Blind optimism. PR work. The polarization is not necessary, is it? Can a person not have an opinion without being labeled as one extreme or another? Those that know me know I'm actually pretty cynical and grounded in expectations. I actually think highly of where the system is at now compared to the absolute train wreck it's been for many years. Call that whatever you want, though I'd prefer you simply defer to it as a difference of opinion without the attempts at hyperbole.

Not really necessary to throw in the condescension. If you don't agree, that's fine. I'm a big boy, I can handle that. But you made the point the first time you aren't on the same page.

M2
07-30-2009, 10:59 AM
Blind optimism. PR work. The polarization is not necessary, is it? Can a person not have an opinion without being labeled as one extreme or another? Those that know me know I'm actually pretty cynical and grounded in expectations. I actually think highly of where the system is at now compared to the absolute train wreck it's been for many years. Call that whatever you want, though I'd prefer you simply defer to it as a difference of opinion without the attempts at hyperbole.

Not really necessary to throw in the condescension. If you don't agree, that's fine. I'm a big boy, I can handle that. But you made the point the first time you aren't on the same page.

My guess is people are responding to your simultaneous assertions that the farm is groovy and the 2010 is and always has been Jocketty's plan.

Those two stances don't reconcile with each other, at least not well. The Reds can't reasonably expect much more help from the farm for 2010. Already 1/3 of the roster has come up from the farm during the past two seasons - Votto, Bruce, Dickerson, Hanigan, Cueto, Fisher, Roenicke and Herrera (you can count Janish too, though I don't see where he helps all that much). That's a lot of help if only the other 2/3 of the roster were in good shape.

Frazier and Heisey aren't likely to take MLB by storm next season. Bailey may or may not be ready to pitch as well overall as Micah Owings (and if he isn't then his career with the Reds likely is kaput). Maloney probably would require a transition period even if he ultimately pans out. Wood and Stewart are still a bit down the road. Stubbs doesn't look like anything more than a backup option at the moment. Alonso isn't coming all that fast. Leake has yet to throw his first professional pitch.

That doesn't mean the farm isn't doing better, but even if you expect it to be fruitful in the coming five years, 2010 profiles as a breather before the next wave arrives.

So when you laud the farm system and insist 2010 is go time it sounds like you expect the former to deliver the latter, which looks terribly unlikely.

Brutus
07-30-2009, 02:23 PM
My guess is people are responding to your simultaneous assertions that the farm is groovy and the 2010 is and always has been Jocketty's plan.

Those two stances don't reconcile with each other, at least not well. The Reds can't reasonably expect much more help from the farm for 2010. Already 1/3 of the roster has come up from the farm during the past two seasons - Votto, Bruce, Dickerson, Hanigan, Cueto, Fisher, Roenicke and Herrera (you can count Janish too, though I don't see where he helps all that much). That's a lot of help if only the other 2/3 of the roster were in good shape.

Frazier and Heisey aren't likely to take MLB by storm next season. Bailey may or may not be ready to pitch as well overall as Micah Owings (and if he isn't then his career with the Reds likely is kaput). Maloney probably would require a transition period even if he ultimately pans out. Wood and Stewart are still a bit down the road. Stubbs doesn't look like anything more than a backup option at the moment. Alonso isn't coming all that fast. Leake has yet to throw his first professional pitch.

That doesn't mean the farm isn't doing better, but even if you expect it to be fruitful in the coming five years, 2010 profiles as a breather before the next wave arrives.

So when you laud the farm system and insist 2010 is go time it sounds like you expect the former to deliver the latter, which looks terribly unlikely.

I have no problem with anyone that has that stance. It's my opinion, but I don't suggest it's an infallible one. I do assert that both the Reds are aiming at 2010 and the farm system is in much better shape than it's been in a while. Anyone is correct in saying these are two stances I've taken.

I have no issues with the dissenting opinions that do not coincide with mine. I was simply responding to the tone.

I don't believe that whole group will be ready to contribute in 2010, but I do think the young relievers that are now up, one of the centerfielders and possibly Todd Frazier will be ready by next season. Leake has not thrown a pitch, true, but I'm very high on him. I've read in many places that he might be one of the more advanced pitchers the last few years, and accordingly is a lot more likely to contribute sooner than later.

My hope for 2010 is not being fueled just on the farm system. But it does support my belief that there will be enough guys knocking on the door that the Reds might have some flexibility. Having that talent won't hurt if it comes down to making a trade next summer, either.