PDA

View Full Version : Which prospects do the Reds like?



Kc61
08-02-2009, 11:33 AM
When a prospect is traded, how do we know what the Reds really thought of the guy?

For example, Zach Stewart was traded last week. It sounds like a big loss based on press reports, some good repors from people in the know around here, and statistics.

But what did the Reds really think of him?

I've always been a big Roenicke supporter Yet I always got the impression that the Reds didn't love Josh as a prospect. For example, there were always reports that Roenicke was being shined uip for a trade.

There's probably no way to know for sure, these internal reports are undoubtedly quite secret, but aren't they the key to understanding the rationale for trades? In other words, it's hard to evaluate a trade of prospects without knowing the team's real view of the prospects.

indy_dave00
08-02-2009, 12:21 PM
From fact Drew Sutton , Jonnie Gomes and Laynce Nix have started the entire Rockies series in the outfield , you have to wonder if Chris Heisey and Drew Stubbs are truely not ready ? Or the Reds are afraid if they expose them to the majors it will hurt their trade value.

Baker has always been reluctant to play youngsters and Jocketty while in St. Louis seemed to trade his top prospects , it makes me worry just what the future holds for the Reds " highly touted " minor leaguers. Will Reds fans even see some of them in a Reds uni ?

RedsManRick
08-02-2009, 12:34 PM
This is a great point, KC. Though it also makes me wonder if sometimes teams lose the forest for the trees. At the end of the day, production is king. I wonder sometimes if personality/ attitude ends up taking a bigger part of the calculus than it should.

HokieRed
08-02-2009, 12:35 PM
I think you can look at the numbers for Heisey and Stubbs at Louisville and see there's reason to believe they need more time at AAA. Good teams actually do what the Reds are now doing: not rushing prospects. As to Stewart, I suggest the Reds really liked him; remember Jocketty drafted him. Toronto also liked him; probably both sides were right. That's why we got a hall of fame 3bman for him. We didn't get Rolen for a guy who has no position and a pretty heavy contract in his own right. I think this trade was Rolen for Stewart all the way.

GIDP
08-02-2009, 03:31 PM
I really dont know. I really think they were trying to put Yonder in the deal for Rolen. They have left Frazier in AA all year, and they are almost refusing to call up stubbs or heisey. I think they liked Valiaka but they seem to have moved off him being a SS. Out of the high minor guys I think the only one they really like is maybe Cozart. Everyone else seems to be completely expendable to them it seems.

redsmetz
08-02-2009, 03:33 PM
I really dont know. I really think they were trying to put Yonder in the deal for Rolen. They have left Frazier in AA all year, and they are almost refusing to call up stubbs or heisey. I think they liked Valiaka but they seem to have moved off him being a SS. Out of the high minor guys I think the only one they really like is maybe Cozart. Everyone else seems to be completely expendable to them it seems.

I don't understand your belief they tried to make Alonso part of the deal. I know it's merely conjecture on your part, but given how Jocketty talked finally giving in on Zach Stewart, I'm not sure I can say that. I know we gave up a bit, but giving Alonso there would have been just crazy and there's no evidence that his name was ever seriously part of the discussion.

GIDP
08-02-2009, 03:37 PM
I don't understand your belief they tried to make Alonso part of the deal. I know it's merely conjecture on your part, but given how Jocketty talked finally giving in on Zach Stewart, I'm not sure I can say that. I know we gave up a bit, but giving Alonso there would have been just crazy and there's no evidence that his name was ever seriously part of the discussion.

The rumors of Yonder being in the deal were floated so that makes me believe that he was really considered at some point and considering Walt said something along the lines of "we gave in" when talking about adding Stewart in the deal I think its completely possible it was Edwin, Yonder and someone else in the deal. I'm trying to read between the lines a little but I see some dots being connected.

HokieRed
08-02-2009, 04:29 PM
First of all, I take the "giving in" remark with a grain of salt; it's the kind of thing a shrewd trader of anything says in order to make the other side feel good about what it's got--and that's important if you want to do future deals. Second, I'm not sure the "giving in" remark was applied to Stewart--maybe it was and I'm just misremembering. As I see the trade, we got something we wanted--Rolen--and so did they--Stewart. We got rid of something we wanted to get rid of--EE--and so did they--some of Rolen's money. So if that's about even, if there was anything given in on in might have been Roenicke--or the identity of Roenicke (as against some other prospect), and then Walt's remark may have been just as I suggested--i.e. a disguise for his protecting somebody else we think more highly of. Frankly, I was surprised that neither of the central field prospects was included in this trade.

GIDP
08-02-2009, 04:36 PM
"The young pitching was the stumbling block," Jocketty said. "We finally gave in."

mac624
08-02-2009, 05:21 PM
Well, reading/hearing some scout talk makes me think they weren't that high on Roenicke and his "attitude issues" (whatever that means). Personally, I'd leave Heisey and Stubbs right where they are at, so not to be absolutely ruined by Dusto and Jacoby.

Dusto prefers vets anyway, and I think so does Jockety too, so that's why Gomes, Nix, and an older Sutton sees the time, and not the prospects.

It really doesn't matter in my opinion, because Dusty has lost this team. I'll be shocked it they win 10 more games the rest of the season. I suspect they'll ride the season out and hopefully they'll fire dusto and hire someone that has a clue. Until that happens, I don't care if they bring in here to play, Dusto will find a way to lose.

mac624
08-02-2009, 05:25 PM
but they didn't like him as much as Alonso. I believe Walt thinks Alonso is the next Pujols and he's trying his darnest to fashion us into what he did in St. Louis. I'm ok with it, if it works, but it's a big gamble.....we'll see.

HokieRed
08-02-2009, 05:42 PM
I think it's a mistake to say that players traded are ones we don't like. Usually we like them; the other side likes them. It's not that unclear that they're going to be good. I think we liked Stewart a lot.

GIDP
08-02-2009, 05:53 PM
I think it's a mistake to say that players traded are ones we don't like. Usually we like them; the other side likes them. It's not that unclear that they're going to be good. I think we liked Stewart a lot.

Well what I'm saying is that they dont like anyone enough to keep them. I feel that every player is touchable and from my POV trading any of them would not surprise me after the Rolen deal. I can see them trading anyone for just about anyone else right now. Players who I thought they would only deal for long term fixes were just traded for short term fixes. I dont think they dislike guys but I certainly feel they dont have any untouchables, or players they really really value.

Caveat Emperor
08-02-2009, 05:58 PM
It might be counter-intuitive, but the most pressing need for the Reds right now is pitching stability, not more kids getting on-the-job training.

I liked Stewart, but really, the only way he was going to contribute before 2011 was if the Reds punted 2010, IMO.

GIDP
08-02-2009, 06:02 PM
Unless they add like 20 million in payroll they are pretty much going to be forced to punt though.

malcontent
08-02-2009, 06:32 PM
First of all, I take the "giving in" remark with a grain of salt; it's the kind of thing a shrewd trader of anything says in order to make the other side feel good about what it's got--and that's important if you want to do future deals.

After witnessing this gem of a deal go down, I think it's far more likely that Old Walt has simply lost the editing function to cover his tracks as he wanders from house to house looking for recognizable faces from his St. Louis past.

I will give him this: he'll admit to a reeker when it's in his drawers.

Screwball
08-02-2009, 06:41 PM
I think you can look at the numbers for Heisey and Stubbs at Louisville and see there's reason to believe they need more time at AAA. Good teams actually do what the Reds are now doing: not rushing prospects. As to Stewart, I suggest the Reds really liked him; remember Jocketty drafted him. Toronto also liked him; probably both sides were right. That's why we got a hall of fame 3bman for him. We didn't get Rolen for a guy who has no position and a pretty heavy contract in his own right. I think this trade was Rolen for Stewart all the way.

Chris Buckley is in charge of the Reds' drafts. If I sent you out to do my grocery shopping, I might tell you to get a steak, but may or may not like the kind that you got me.

GIDP
08-02-2009, 06:44 PM
Chris Buckley is in charge of the Reds' drafts. If I sent you out to do my grocery shopping, I might tell you to get a steak, but may or may not like the kind that you got me.

I think of it more like this, Buckley bought a 5 dollar steak it turned out to be a 25 dollar steak. Walt just looked on the receipt and sold it for the original sale price.

Mario-Rijo
08-02-2009, 08:25 PM
Well what I'm saying is that they dont like anyone enough to keep them. I feel that every player is touchable and from my POV trading any of them would not surprise me after the Rolen deal. I can see them trading anyone for just about anyone else right now. Players who I thought they would only deal for long term fixes were just traded for short term fixes. I dont think they dislike guys but I certainly feel they dont have any untouchables, or players they really really value.

Here, here! I can't help but feel the same way, in fact it's now days later and I can't seem to get over it and the minor league forum just became far less important too me. No sense in investing time watching them grow just to see them ultimately shine for some other organization. In time that may change afterall Walt makes about 1 deal every calender year so I probably won't have to worry about losing another until this time next year. My biggest issue in dealing Zach Stewart besides the obvious (too much quality too give up for Rolen) is that I cannot trust Walt and company not to make future similiar mistakes. I mean if Walt can't see Stewart was too valuable to trade for Rolen what's from stopping him from trading Alonso for a subpar return, Frazier, Cozart etc.

It would be one thing if I trusted his/their talent evaluation skills as then I could take some comfort that maybe there is something there we don't know about Stewart. And perhaps there is but I don't trust his skills or anyone around him for that matter. We'll see but I think we ultimately regret trading away a potential well above average starting pitcher for anything short of something similiarly valuable. If Stewart ends up a reliever of any kind and Rolen gives this team a professional standard that they actually use to make them winners for a longtime the deal will be more than worth it but something tells me that isn't gonna happen quite the way they are planning.

Oh and for those who say you gotta give up something to get something tell that to Walt who got more for Jr than he did for Dunn and gave up more for Rolen than either.

Mario-Rijo
08-02-2009, 08:33 PM
Sorry to get off track but had to get that off my chest and put it to rest.

Now prospects they like? Tough to say they haven't shown any particular favoritism or shown any one particular way of advancing guys that makes any sense.

But from how they talk you would have to believe that they value a professional attitude over most other qualities so I'd have to believe that Frazier, Heisey and Alonso are high on their list they seem to be just as professional as they are good after that who knows.

paulrichjr
08-03-2009, 09:45 PM
One thing that kills me is that they appear to have sold Stewart for $4 million dollars and now will have to spend close to that to find a bullpen guy this winter (who will be a "Vet")...when he obviously could have at least done that job next year for a lot less.