PDA

View Full Version : Post Rolen trade reactions



nate
08-04-2009, 12:30 PM
Interesting (http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/08/olney-on-parity-waivers-rolen-encarnacion.html) stuff from MLBTR:


ESPN.com's Buster Olney (http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?name=olney_buster) shows that the economic downturn has widened the gap between rich teams and poor ones after a decade of relative parity. As he shows, seven of the eight teams with the biggest payrolls would make the playoffs if they began today. The Mets have the game's second-biggest payroll, but wouldn't make it. Here are a few others notes from Olney's blog:


We could start hearing about waiver claims today, since teams have stared putting players on waivers.
The Reds' acquisition of Scott Rolen (http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/07/reds-acquire-scott-rolen.html) is "without question the most widely panned pre-deadline trade within the industry."
The Reds gave up Josh Roenicke and Zach Stewart, a pair of highly-regarded young arms.
One talent evaluator believes the Jays will release Edwin Encarnacion after the season. Even if the third baseman's $4.75MM salary is too much for the Jays, they'd presumably try to trade him first.

bucksfan2
08-04-2009, 12:32 PM
One talent evaluator believes the Jays will release Edwin Encarnacion after the season. Even if the third baseman's $4.75MM salary is too much for the Jays, they'd presumably try to trade him first.

Scary when you consider that many thought Edwin would be THE RH bat in the Reds lineup this season.

BRM
08-04-2009, 12:36 PM
Sounds like Edwin was essentially a throw-in to the deal if they really plan on releasing him.

princeton
08-04-2009, 12:37 PM
EdE won't be released, IMO.

Patrick Bateman
08-04-2009, 12:37 PM
Sounds like Edwin was essentially a throw-in to the deal if they really plan on releasing him.

He was included because the Reds wanted too... the Jays didn't want him. He offsets the salary to Rolen, his inclusion meant nothing else since the Reds had nowhere to play him.

BRM
08-04-2009, 12:40 PM
EdE won't be released, IMO.

I can't see it either. They'll trade him this winter.

dunner13
08-04-2009, 12:42 PM
trade him? who would want him? He cant play third, hes never played the outfield and hes hitting .209 the best part of the trade with the jays was getting rid of EE.

Chip R
08-04-2009, 12:58 PM
trade him? who would want him? He cant play third, hes never played the outfield and hes hitting .209 the best part of the trade with the jays was getting rid of EE.


Perhaps the Jays aren't as reluctant as the Reds are to ask someone to switch positions. Plus they have been a very Dominican friendly franchise so perhaps they value EE a little more than the Reds.

Boss-Hog
08-04-2009, 01:08 PM
Perhaps the Jays aren't as reluctant as the Reds are to ask someone to switch positions. Plus they have been a very Dominican friendly franchise so perhaps they value EE a little more than the Reds.
The Reds have numerous Dominicans on their current roster (even after trading EE); I always thought the Reds had become somewhat Dominican friendly themselves.

HokieRed
08-04-2009, 01:09 PM
He was included because the Reds wanted too... the Jays didn't want him. He offsets the salary to Rolen, his inclusion meant nothing else since the Reds had nowhere to play him.

I've said alll along the trade was Stewart for Rolen.

Benihana
08-04-2009, 01:10 PM
I've said alll along the trade was Stewart for Rolen.

Which is still not a very good trade, especially once you factor in the Prospect Bubble.

Chip R
08-04-2009, 01:13 PM
The Reds have numerous Dominicans on their current roster (even after trading EE); I always thought the Reds had become somewhat Dominican friendly themselves.


I'm talking historically. They were the first team to really go with a lot of Dominicans in their organization and to have a presence there. No knock on the Reds but it could be that the Jays will be a better fit for EE.

HokieRed
08-04-2009, 01:13 PM
Which is still not a very good trade, especially once you factor in the Prospect Bubble.

Maybe not, but I think it's important to see that we got two things we wanted: to get Rolen and be rid of EE.

Tom Servo
08-04-2009, 01:23 PM
Maybe I'm biased but I don't see what warrants panning for the deal. Well okay, we probably did give up too much for a team going nowhere, but my point is that Rolen is having a good season and is someone widely recognized as a good talent. It's not exactly like when the going nowhere Pirates went out and traded for below average and overpriced Matt Morris two years ago.

RedEye
08-04-2009, 01:48 PM
Maybe I'm biased but I don't see what warrants panning for the deal. Well okay, we probably did give up too much for a team going nowhere, but my point is that Rolen is having a good season and is someone widely recognized as a good talent. It's not exactly like when the going nowhere Pirates went out and traded for below average and overpriced Matt Morris two years ago.

Actually, that might be the trade I would compare it most to. Sure, Morris and Rolen are different players, but their ages and injury histories are comparable. IMO, the Reds--at 45-60--have no place trading for a 35 year-old 3B who is on the downside of his career and then committing the lion's share of their budget wriggle room to said player. At least, they have no business doing that if they actually want to contend any time soon.

TheNext44
08-04-2009, 02:10 PM
The Reds' acquisition of Scott Rolen is "without question the most widely panned pre-deadline trade within the industry."

That's because all the critics analyzed it before learning about the money involved.

No one said that the Reds got hosed on the talent level, just that Rolen makes too much money and this trade makes it harder for the Reds to do something else since it limits the teams payroll flex. That is what BP, Fangraphs, everyone at ESPN, everyone at MLBTV, and everyone else I read said.

Now if you add in the fact that the Reds will receive around $7M in the deal, it makes much more sense. The Reds add no payroll this year, and only add around $2M next year. Throw in the money saved by trading Hairston, and it's only around $1M.

So the Reds still have basically the same payroll flex they had before the trade, but have upgraded from a guy everyone knows is not a starting 3B, to one of the best in the majors, both defensively and offensively. Rolen is easily the best defensive 3B in the NL, and would be the 6th best offensive 3B in the NL (top ten in the majors).

For that the Reds gave up that previously mentioned utility player who will make close to $5M next year, a 27 year old rookie relief pitcher, and solid B+ prospect.

And they kept their payroll about the same. Had they increased their payroll by around $7M the trade makes no sense, so the money is very important, and something that every commentator on the trade missed.

REDREAD
08-04-2009, 02:20 PM
Sounds like Edwin was essentially a throw-in to the deal if they really plan on releasing him.

My guess is that the Jays wanted nothing to do with EdE. They had to accept him in order to make the finances work. If we were willing to keep EdE, we could've probably sent lesser prospects.

I'm still cautiously optimistic about Walt, but I wonder why his critics don't bring up extending EdE on his list of "goofs" this offseason. EdE got more money than Tavares did. I guess it's because EdE was more or less a homegrown player (acquired as a prospect), so he gets more love?

nate
08-04-2009, 02:24 PM
That's because all the critics analyzed it before learning about the money involved.

No one said that the Reds got hosed on the talent level, just that Rolen makes too much money and this trade makes it harder for the Reds to do something else since it limits the teams payroll flex. That is what BP, Fangraphs, everyone at ESPN, everyone at MLBTV, and everyone else I read said.

Now if you add in the fact that the Reds will receive around $7M in the deal, it makes much more sense. The Reds add no payroll this year, and only add around $2M next year. Throw in the money saved by trading Hairston, and it's only around $1M.

So the Reds still have basically the same payroll flex they had before the trade, but have upgraded from a guy everyone knows is not a starting 3B, to one of the best in the majors, both defensively and offensively. Rolen is easily the best defensive 3B in the NL, and would be the 6th best offensive 3B in the NL (top ten in the majors).

For that the Reds gave up that previously mentioned utility player who will make close to $5M next year, a 27 year old rookie relief pitcher, and solid B+ prospect.

And they kept their payroll about the same. Had they increased their payroll by around $7M the trade makes no sense, so the money is very important, and something that every commentator on the trade missed.

This is exactly how I'm starting to see the deal.

puca
08-04-2009, 02:30 PM
That's because all the critics analyzed it before learning about the money involved.

No one said that the Reds got hosed on the talent level, just that Rolen makes too much money and this trade makes it harder for the Reds to do something else since it limits the teams payroll flex. That is what BP, Fangraphs, everyone at ESPN, everyone at MLBTV, and everyone else I read said.

Now if you add in the fact that the Reds will receive around $7M in the deal, it makes much more sense. The Reds add no payroll this year, and only add around $2M next year. Throw in the money saved by trading Hairston, and it's only around $1M.

So the Reds still have basically the same payroll flex they had before the trade, but have upgraded from a guy everyone knows is not a starting 3B, to one of the best in the majors, both defensively and offensively. Rolen is easily the best defensive 3B in the NL, and would be the 6th best offensive 3B in the NL (top ten in the majors).

For that the Reds gave up that previously mentioned utility player who will make close to $5M next year, a 27 year old rookie relief pitcher, and solid B+ prospect.

And they kept their payroll about the same. Had they increased their payroll by around $7M the trade makes no sense, so the money is very important, and something that every commentator on the trade missed.

Perhaps, but Rolen comes with an expiration date of the end of the 2010 season.

With Edison's injury and with the Reds lacking money or high-level prospects to make up for the resulting hole in the rotation, they basically traded away two prospects in order to try and finish ahead of the Pirates next year.

edabbs44
08-04-2009, 02:34 PM
Perhaps, but Rolen comes with an expiration date of the end of the 2010 season.

With Edison's injury and with the Reds lacking money or high-level prospects to make up for the resulting hole in the rotation, they basically traded away two prospects in order to try and finish ahead of the Pirates next year.

I see Rolen being here for a year or two after that.

wolfboy
08-04-2009, 02:37 PM
I see Rolen being here for a year or two after that.

That's not unlikely, but how productive is he going to be at age 36 and 37?

REDREAD
08-04-2009, 02:42 PM
Perhaps, but Rolen comes with an expiration date of the end of the 2010 season.

With Edison's injury and with the Reds lacking money or high-level prospects to make up for the resulting hole in the rotation, they basically traded away two prospects in order to try and finish ahead of the Pirates next year.

On the day of the trade, either Dusty or Walt said they were looking to keep Rolen beyond 2010. I think it was Dusty. He said that they wouldn't trade prospects that good for a rental.

Kind of fits Walt's MO in StL of picking up good players near the end of their contracts and finding a way to keep them.

Now, I admit, Rolen isn't a potential MVP and not exactly the dream target, but there's a method to the madness here.

I also say that if you are stuck with Harang, Arroyo, and Cordero, you might as well try to win with them. It seems right now that the most likely scenerio is that they will walk in 2 years and we are going to be starting over again.

princeton
08-04-2009, 02:45 PM
That's not unlikely, but how productive is he going to be at age 36 and 37?

he'll be awesome. there's no such thing as aging

personally, I am hoping that they offer him role of player-manager ;)

HokieRed
08-04-2009, 03:08 PM
he'll be awesome. there's no such thing as aging

personally, I am hoping that they offer him role of player-manager ;)


It's occurred to me; it would be a way to get another 3.5 million toward his salary.

Chip R
08-04-2009, 03:16 PM
It occurred to me that one of the reasons the Reds got Rolen was for his leadership. I wonder what that says for the self-proclaimed leader of the team, Brandon Phillips?

BRM
08-04-2009, 03:18 PM
It occurred to me that one of the reasons the Reds got Rolen was for his leadership. I wonder what that says for the self-proclaimed leader of the team, Brandon Phillips?

I'm guessing the only person who thinks Brandon Phillips is the leader of the team is Brandon Phillips.

Ltlabner
08-04-2009, 03:19 PM
It occurred to me that one of the reasons the Reds got Rolen was for his leadership. I wonder what that says for the self-proclaimed leader of the team, Brandon Phillips?

I offered up the same thought a few days back.

I predict friction and pouting.

puca
08-04-2009, 03:23 PM
I see Rolen being here for a year or two after that.

If he is productive enough for the Reds to want to keep him then he will be too expensive for it to be a good idea.

Chip R
08-04-2009, 03:24 PM
I'm guessing the only person who thinks Brandon Phillips is the leader of the team is Brandon Phillips.


That's why I said "self-proclaimed".

puca
08-04-2009, 03:28 PM
On the day of the trade, either Dusty or Walt said they were looking to keep Rolen beyond 2010. I think it was Dusty. He said that they wouldn't trade prospects that good for a rental.

Kind of fits Walt's MO in StL of picking up good players near the end of their contracts and finding a way to keep them.

Now, I admit, Rolen isn't a potential MVP and not exactly the dream target, but there's a method to the madness here.

I also say that if you are stuck with Harang, Arroyo, and Cordero, you might as well try to win with them. It seems right now that the most likely scenerio is that they will walk in 2 years and we are going to be starting over again.


He is an asset next year because the Cardinals and Jays are paying a large part of his contract. If he is here past 2010 it will be entirely on the Reds bill.

Cedric
08-04-2009, 03:42 PM
I like the move. Giving up basically two relievers for someone the caliber of Scott Rolen is good business. I have been pretty harsh on Jocketty in the past, can't say anything bad about this move.

I also like the way Rolen looks in a Reds uniform. Call me weird but I like when someone carries himself like a professional.

nate
08-04-2009, 03:44 PM
I offered up the same thought a few days back.

I predict friction and pouting.

Here or in the Reds locker room?

redsfan4445
08-04-2009, 03:49 PM
I wonder if Rolen was brought in to give his own opinion as a player on who to keep and get rid of for 2010.. like behind the scene. When ESPN was showing him on camera, he wasnt joking around with others, he was intensely watching.. very focused..

just ba take on maybe whats hopefully going to get this team beter ready for 2010

TRF
08-04-2009, 03:51 PM
That's because all the critics analyzed it before learning about the money involved.

No one said that the Reds got hosed on the talent level, just that Rolen makes too much money and this trade makes it harder for the Reds to do something else since it limits the teams payroll flex. That is what BP, Fangraphs, everyone at ESPN, everyone at MLBTV, and everyone else I read said.

IMO the Reds were completely hosed on the talent level. They have now traded to relievers, likely their best SP prospect and a 26 year old 3B whose offensive game is on the rise, while Rolen's skills are declining. To Rolen's credit he's been fairly healthy and productive this year, but he costs a mint, and my guess is he won't sign for less than 3 years.

The STL model WJ wants to adopt won't work for a team that struggles to draw 2 mil.

Horrible trade. I have no doubt Rolen will be productive for the remainder of 2009 and the first half of 2010 before he is dealt for prospects.

Same as it ever was.

Rojo
08-04-2009, 03:53 PM
I wonder why his critics don't bring up extending EdE on his list of "goofs" this offseason. EdE got more money than Tavares did. I guess it's because EdE was more or less a homegrown player (acquired as a prospect), so he gets more love?

I was critical. I wanted EdE traded when he was still a young, cheap player with 26 HR's. The extension plus the changing market moved him into the albatross column.


What I want to know is what did Walt know and when did he know it about Volquez. The seriousness of the injury makes the trade less appealling.

BuckeyeRedleg
08-04-2009, 04:02 PM
For all the people that look at dumping EE as addition by subtraction, what was your reaction when he signed the two-year deal in the off-season?

By the way he's talked about (post-trade) you'd think there would have been some RedsZone meltdown they day he signed. I never saw that.

And for those that say they supported the EE signing because they thought he was better than he actually was (he's been a disappointment in '09), don't you think his injury has played a factor in his performance this year?

People are saying....we basically traded relievers for Rolen. I can bet last off-season, it wouldn't have been looked at as just relievers for Rolen. Face it, we just sold EE when his stock was low (due to the injury) and had to pay the price with two good pitching prospects.

You can't give Walt credit for making this trade and not fault him for extending EE.

Four days later and I still don't like this deal.

BRM
08-04-2009, 04:03 PM
Here's Daugherty's take.


A scout I spoke to yesterday re the Rolen deal said, "They'd (Reds) have had to fire me before I made that deal.''

TML will be accused of flip-flopping again. Not at all. About a month ago, when the Reds were a game under and 3 1/2 out, I suggested they be bold and make a big move. They did, on Friday, when they were something like 10-under and out of contention. The cavalry came after the Indians had done their work. It was a strange deal. Those who favored it talk of Rolen's clubhouse influence. Good, but worth $7 million next year, which apparently is what the Reds portion of his deal will be? Rolen is injury prone, has lost some HR pop. And really, why should a club have to trade for "presence?'' Didnt we hear all spring about how a new attitude was emerging now that Dunn and Junior were gone? Who didnt step up?

bucksfan2
08-04-2009, 04:08 PM
I was critical. I wanted EdE traded when he was still a young, cheap player with 26 HR's. The extension plus the changing market moved him into the albatross column.


What I want to know is what did Walt know and when did he know it about Volquez. The seriousness of the injury makes the trade less appealling.

To me it says that Walt didn't see Stewart as a starter.

Chip R
08-04-2009, 04:09 PM
The STL model WJ wants to adopt won't work for a team that struggles to draw 2 mil.


Exactly. But does this mean we're East St. Louis rather than St. Louis East?

TheNext44
08-04-2009, 04:10 PM
Here's Daugherty's take.

Okay, now it's official. PDoc and Keith Law don't like it, so it must have been a good move. :D

Chip R
08-04-2009, 04:12 PM
And really, why should a club have to trade for "presence?'' Didnt we hear all spring about how a new attitude was emerging now that Dunn and Junior were gone? Who didnt step up?

Like my grandpa used to say, "Even a blind sow finds an acorn every once in a while."

TheNext44
08-04-2009, 04:13 PM
Exactly. But does this mean we're East St. Louis rather than St. Louis East?

:laugh::laugh::laugh:

If you've ever been to East St. Louis, it's even funnier (and sadder).

wolfboy
08-04-2009, 04:19 PM
Exactly. But does this mean we're East St. Louis rather than St. Louis East?

East St. Louis for sure. Right now, the Cards are the designer watch you buy on 5th Ave, while the Reds are the knockoff watch you buy on Canal St.

Rojo
08-04-2009, 04:19 PM
To me it says that Walt didn't see Stewart as a starter.

So. I was ok (and only ok) with the trade to take advantage of a 2010. The window fell nearly shut with the Volquez news.

Now, if he's got a plan to add a pitcher and a SS, fine. Otherwise, the trade doesn't make sense.

Chip R
08-04-2009, 04:24 PM
:laugh::laugh::laugh:

If you've ever been to East St. Louis, it's even funnier (and sadder).


I have been - by accident. I took the wrong exit from the airport and wound up there. Turned around to get back on the freeway ASAP.

dougdirt
08-04-2009, 04:33 PM
Here's Daugherty's take.
A scout I spoke to yesterday re the Rolen deal said, "They'd (Reds) have had to fire me before I made that deal.''

Sounds like a few of the other scouts I talked to as well.

As to the idea that Jocketty didn't see Stewart as a starter, I have to ask then what kind of guy DOES he see as a starter? Stewart had the plus fastball that he carried with him into the 7th inning. Stewart had the plus offspeed pitch. Stewart had the control. The only thing he didn't have yet was the innings. Unless he was concerned his arm was about to fall off, which I doubt since he was still pitching, then I just don't get how you don't see him as a starter.

Chip R
08-04-2009, 04:35 PM
Sounds like a few of the other scouts I talked to as well.

As to the idea that Jocketty didn't see Stewart as a starter, I have to ask then what kind of guy DOES he see as a starter? Stewart had the plus fastball that he carried with him into the 7th inning. Stewart had the plus offspeed pitch. Stewart had the control. The only thing he didn't have yet was the innings. Unless he was concerned his arm was about to fall off, which I doubt since he was still pitching, then I just don't get how you don't see him as a starter.


If you are going to be a starter, you need a 3rd pitch.

BRM
08-04-2009, 04:36 PM
Sounds like a few of the other scouts I talked to as well.


I bet none of the scouts who commented had insight into the financials at the time either.

dougdirt
08-04-2009, 04:37 PM
If you are going to be a starter, you need a 3rd pitch.

He has a change up, that is average.

Patrick Bateman
08-04-2009, 04:38 PM
If you are going to be a starter, you need a 3rd pitch.

Well he's supposed to have a great sinker and developing slider.... I guess that makes 3 quality pitches.

dougdirt
08-04-2009, 04:38 PM
I bet none of the scouts who commented had insight into the financials at the time either.

I bet they all knew what the Reds had on their team both now, in 2010 and down on the farm and thats all that really matters. Unless the Blue Jays sent us 25 million bucks, its a bad deal because we aren't going to be competing without career years from multiple players and no fall off from several other guys.

dougdirt
08-04-2009, 04:39 PM
Well he's supposed to have a great sinker and developing slider.... I guess that makes 3 quality pitches.

Developing slider? Stewart has a plus slider right now.

Homer Bailey
08-04-2009, 04:40 PM
Well he's supposed to have a great sinker and developing slider.... I guess that makes 3 quality pitches.

His slider is considered a plus pitch.

BRM
08-04-2009, 04:41 PM
I bet they all knew what the Reds had on their team both now, in 2010 and down on the farm and thats all that really matters. Unless the Blue Jays sent us 25 million bucks, its a bad deal because we aren't going to be competing without career years from multiple players and no fall off from several other guys.

They know what the Reds will have on the team in 2010? Who does their crystal ball say Walt is going to acquire?

It now looks like the Reds are on the hook for about $2M more than they would have been with EE. The dollars aren't a big deal. Stewart was definitely a high price to pay to get that upgrade at 3B though. I will definitely agree with that.

Kc61
08-04-2009, 04:44 PM
He has a change up, that is average.

I'm not a particular fan of this trade, I have a "wait and see" view of it. I see the Reds' purpose but am concerned they may have given up a bit too much.

I would point out, though, that at AA Stewart was highly successful as a starter but largely because of ground ball tendencies. His K/BB per nine innings was 7.54/2.43. From a strikeout point of view, those aren't dominant numbers.

It doesn't mean he couldn't be a good starter. It does mean that pitching longer stints he didn't have a particularly great strikeout record.

Stewart then went to AAA and relieved. Then his K rate increased to 11.68 but his walk rate ballooned up to 5.84. Probably threw harder in shorter outings, and that may have affected his control.

I'm interested to see how Stewart works out. I don't think his stats indicate a sure fire star. Some obviously disagree and may be right.

pedro
08-04-2009, 04:44 PM
If you are going to be a starter, you need a 3rd pitch.

Didn't you hear? He's going to win a Cy Young!

Patrick Bateman
08-04-2009, 04:46 PM
Developing slider? Stewart has a plus slider right now.

Sorry I must have gotten it confused. I thought I heard it was supposed to develop into a plus pitch, but was just average right now.

Chip R
08-04-2009, 04:52 PM
Well he's supposed to have a great sinker and developing slider.... I guess that makes 3 quality pitches.


What's his offspeed pitch, the slider, the sinker or the change?

BRM
08-04-2009, 04:54 PM
What's his offspeed pitch, the slider, the sinker or the change?

Apparently he has four pitches now.

bucksfan2
08-04-2009, 04:55 PM
Apparently he has four pitches now.

And he will win the CY Young Award next year.

dougdirt
08-04-2009, 04:56 PM
They know what the Reds will have on the team in 2010? Who does their crystal ball say Walt is going to acquire?

It now looks like the Reds are on the hook for about $2M more than they would have been with EE. The dollars aren't a big deal. Stewart was definitely a high price to pay to get that upgrade at 3B though. I will definitely agree with that.
Is Bob going to up the payroll by 10+ million bucks? Otherwise they don't have the money to acquire anyone.


2010 Cincinnati Reds payroll committments
POS Player 2010
DL Ed Volquez $0.45
SP Johnny Cueto $0.45
SP Aaron Harang $12.50
SP Bronson Arroyo $11.00
SP Homer Bailey $0.45
RP Franc. Cordero $12.00
RP Unknown
RP Arthur Rhodes $2.00
RP Nick Masset $0.45
RP Danny Herrera $0.45
SP Micah Owings $0.50
RP Carlos Fisher $0.45
RP Mike Lincoln $2.50
C Ryan Hanigan $0.45
C Back Up
1B Joey Votto $0.45
2B Br Phillips $6.75
SS Unknown
3B Scott Rolen $11.00
LF C Dickerson $0.45
CF Willy Taveras $4.00
RF Jay Bruce $0.45
BN Wlad Balentien $0.45
BN Back Up
BN Back Up
BN Back Up
Total $67.20


That doesn't count $1.7M in buyouts to Weathers, Hernandez and Gonzalez. So we have to acquire a starting SS, a backup catcher, a reliever and 3 other bench options. Even at the league minimum (assuming we pull ALL from our system) thats $2.4 Million bucks, placing payroll at $70M.

Brutus
08-04-2009, 04:58 PM
Is Bob going to up the payroll by 10+ million bucks? Otherwise they don't have the money to acquire anyone.


2010 Cincinnati Reds payroll committments
POS Player 2010
DL Ed Volquez $0.45
SP Johnny Cueto $0.45
SP Aaron Harang $12.50
SP Bronson Arroyo $11.00
SP Homer Bailey $0.45
RP Franc. Cordero $12.00
RP Unknown
RP Arthur Rhodes $2.00
RP Nick Masset $0.45
RP Danny Herrera $0.45
SP Micah Owings $0.50
RP Carlos Fisher $0.45
RP Mike Lincoln $2.50
C Ryan Hanigan $0.45
C Back Up
1B Joey Votto $0.45
2B Br Phillips $6.75
SS Unknown
3B Scott Rolen $11.00
LF C Dickerson $0.45
CF Willy Taveras $4.00
RF Jay Bruce $0.45
BN Wlad Balentien $0.45
BN Back Up
BN Back Up
BN Back Up
Total $67.20


That doesn't count $1.7M in buyouts to Weathers, Hernandez and Gonzalez. So we have to acquire a starting SS, a backup catcher, a reliever and 3 other bench options. Even at the league minimum (assuming we pull ALL from our system) thats $2.4 Million bucks, placing payroll at $70M.

I imagine there will be a marginal increase in payroll. I still believe one or more of those high-priced pitchers will be moved as well.

BRM
08-04-2009, 04:58 PM
They aren't on the hook for all of Rolen's salary in 2010. And I have no idea if Bob is going to up payroll. None of us do.

dougdirt
08-04-2009, 04:59 PM
They aren't on the hook for all of Rolen's salary in 2010. And I have no idea if Bob is going to up payroll. None of us do.

He certainly has made comments in the past that he can't if we don't show up and we certainly aren't showing up. And even if they aren't on the hook for all of Rolen in 2010, we at most have what, 8 million combined between the Rolen savings and whats left to fill out a starting shortstop, a bullpen spot and 4 bench spots (while taking into account the raises guys will get in 2011 so you have to be careful signing a multi year deal on that shortstop, meaning you can't sign a difference maker).

TRF
08-04-2009, 05:01 PM
They aren't on the hook for all of Rolen's salary in 2010. And I have no idea if Bob is going to up payroll. None of us do.

7 million of it. That's a chunk for a team that really has no shot of contending as currently constructed.

And for those that might say let's see if WJ makes some deals this offseason I say to you "how'd that work last offseason?"

BRM
08-04-2009, 05:02 PM
7 million of it. That's a chunk for a team that really has no shot of contending as currently constructed.

And for those that might say let's see if WJ makes some deals this offseason I say to you "how'd that work last offseason?"

Isn't it only $2M more than they would have owed EE? Not a gigantic leap in payroll.

No argument for how his deals went last offseason. We need much, much better this time around.

dougdirt
08-04-2009, 05:02 PM
I imagine there will be a marginal increase in payroll. I still believe one or more of those high-priced pitchers will be moved as well.

I hope you are right, but why would the Reds trade either of them when 'we are close' and the other options are a slew of guys with no proven record at all in AAA who project to be #5 starters next year at best?

puca
08-04-2009, 05:05 PM
So we have to acquire a starting SS, a backup catcher, a reliever and 3 other bench options. Even at the league minimum (assuming we pull ALL from our system) thats $2.4 Million bucks, placing payroll at $70M.

Not to mention replace arguably their best starting pitcher.

dougdirt
08-04-2009, 05:07 PM
Not to mention replace arguably their best starting pitcher.

We will just go Cueto, Harang, Arroyo, Owings and Bailey.

puca
08-04-2009, 05:09 PM
Isn't it only $2M more than they would have owed EE? Not a gigantic leap in payroll.

No argument for how his deals last offseason. We need much, much better this time around.

But what does he have to deal with? He can't take on much salary and doesn't have the type of minor league talent needed to acquire good, young cheap players.

He already dealt arguably the top trading chip to acquire Rolen.

TheNext44
08-04-2009, 05:09 PM
Is Bob going to up the payroll by 10+ million bucks? Otherwise they don't have the money to acquire anyone.


2010 Cincinnati Reds payroll committments
POS Player 2010
DL Ed Volquez $0.45
SP Johnny Cueto $0.45
SP Aaron Harang $12.50
SP Bronson Arroyo $11.00
SP Homer Bailey $0.45
RP Franc. Cordero $12.00
RP Unknown
RP Arthur Rhodes $2.00
RP Nick Masset $0.45
RP Danny Herrera $0.45
SP Micah Owings $0.50
RP Carlos Fisher $0.45
RP Mike Lincoln $2.50
C Ryan Hanigan $0.45
C Back Up
1B Joey Votto $0.45
2B Br Phillips $6.75
SS Unknown
3B Scott Rolen $11.00
LF C Dickerson $0.45
CF Willy Taveras $4.00
RF Jay Bruce $0.45
BN Wlad Balentien $0.45
BN Back Up
BN Back Up
BN Back Up
Total $67.20


That doesn't count $1.7M in buyouts to Weathers, Hernandez and Gonzalez. So we have to acquire a starting SS, a backup catcher, a reliever and 3 other bench options. Even at the league minimum (assuming we pull ALL from our system) thats $2.4 Million bucks, placing payroll at $70M.

According to a bunch of reports, the Reds are on the hook for around $7M of Rolen's salary next year, lets say $8M to be safe.

That drops the payroll down to around $67M for next year, baring any trades.

That leaves around $8M if they keep payroll the same. That can get one solid upgrade at SS, LF or a SP.

If the Reds can trade Harang, Arroyo or Cordero this season, that would free up around $15M, if you consider the savings this year and next. That would mean that the Reds would have around $23M next year to upgrade the team, and that could easily fill in all three holes.

Brutus
08-04-2009, 05:11 PM
I hope you are right, but why would the Reds trade either of them when 'we are close' and the other options are a slew of guys with no proven record at all in AAA who project to be #5 starters next year at best?

I like Cordero, but at $12 mil, you could give Masset the closer's job and probably get similar production for $11 mil cheaper knowing all you have to do is put him as the closer and then get a replacement in the bullpen for Masset's role.

Then I'd trade Arroyo. The Reds just need to be able to find a league average pitcher to replace his production.

That's $23 mil saved, theoretically, and replaceable in talent & ability considering their positions.

I'd actually hold on to Harang still, unless I get a good offer including a ML-ready young pitcher and a good prospect in return.

BRM
08-04-2009, 05:14 PM
But what does he have to deal with? He can't take on much salary and doesn't have the type of minor league talent needed to acquire good, young cheap players.

He already dealt arguably the top trading chip to acquire Rolen.

I never said he had an easy job ahead of him. Shedding Arroyo's contract will free up salary but then he has yet another starter to replace. Tough task indeed.

Alonso is the biggest chip he's got now. Then probably Frazier and Stubbs.

TRF
08-04-2009, 05:15 PM
I like Cordero, but at $12 mil, you could give Masset the closer's job and probably get similar production for $11 mil cheaper knowing all you have to do is put him as the closer and then get a replacement in the bullpen for Masset's role.

Then I'd trade Arroyo. The Reds just need to be able to find a league average pitcher to replace his production.

That's $23 mil saved, theoretically, and replaceable in talent & ability considering their positions.

I'd actually hold on to Harang still, unless I get a good offer including a ML-ready young pitcher and a good prospect in return.

Yeah, and he had the option of doing this last off season. At best he can move them at the ASB next year.

UKFlounder
08-04-2009, 05:16 PM
But wouldn't such a trade create a 4th hole, or would we go in-house for another starter or a closer? Do we have desirable candidates for those roles?



If the Reds can trade Harang, Arroyo or Cordero this season, that would free up around $15M, if you consider the savings this year and next. That would mean that the Reds would have around $23M next year to upgrade the team, and that could easily fill in all three holes.

edabbs44
08-04-2009, 05:18 PM
Yeah, and he had the option of doing this last off season. At best he can move them at the ASB next year.

He actually didn't, because Cordero had 3 years left on his contract rather than 2 and Arroyo had 2 instead of 1.

But, the question is why would someone take on Arroyo's contract when they can theoretically find a league average equivalent for cheaper?

PuffyPig
08-04-2009, 05:19 PM
Sounds like Edwin was essentially a throw-in to the deal if they really plan on releasing him.


It was from the Reds perspective a moving of salary.

UKFlounder
08-04-2009, 05:19 PM
I don't think Cordero's production is so easy to replace. Maybe I'm wrong, but Cordero has been the best closer the Reds have had for quite a while. Trading him saves money, but does it make the team better? Is Masset really a good candidate for closer? It takes skills besides a cheap contract to close games, but maybe I'm making it seem harder than it is.

Rock - Walt - Hard Place

membengal
08-04-2009, 05:19 PM
7 million of it. That's a chunk for a team that really has no shot of contending as currently constructed.

And for those that might say let's see if WJ makes some deals this offseason I say to you "how'd that work last offseason?"

Bad.

HokieRed
08-04-2009, 05:25 PM
I doubt you can move any of Harang, Arroyo, or Cordero without eating so much of the contracts that it becomes self-defeating--e.g. if we're left with about half their money we can't buy replacements. Leads us back to the possibility of trading Phillips. An artful deal would get us a very cheap young 2b prospect, leaving us almost enough to buy an SS in the market. Or vice versa. I don't particularly like it but I don't see a lot of alternatives. It will not be made easier by the way Phillips' contract really balloons up after next year, IIRC. He's rapidly becoming as unmovable as the pitchers.

puca
08-04-2009, 05:25 PM
That leaves around $8M if they keep payroll the same. That can get one solid upgrade at SS, LF or a SP.

If the Reds can trade Harang, Arroyo or Cordero this season, that would free up around $15M, if you consider the savings this year and next. That would mean that the Reds would have around $23M next year to upgrade the team, and that could easily fill in all three holes.

There is no market for Harang, Arroyo or Cordero with their current contracts. That means the Reds will either have to swallow a big chunk of their salary or get nothing in return (or possibly both). Any of those guys they trade they then must replace and it's not like they have the talent in the system to replace any of these guys. In fact the best chances of replacing Cordero or one of the starters went to Toronto in the Rolen deal.

The Reds prospects for 2010 are bleak. This should have been obvious prior to the Rolen trade. That is the main reason the trade is being panned.

puca
08-04-2009, 05:26 PM
We will just go Cueto, Harang, Arroyo, Owings and Bailey.

That is not a good rotation. You know that right?

BRM
08-04-2009, 05:27 PM
That is not a good rotation. You know that right?

I'm pretty sure doug isn't advocating for that rotation. Just speculating that's what we will see next year.

Benihana
08-04-2009, 05:28 PM
This reminds me of The Trade in so many ways, except that it's worse in so many ways.

It is similar to The Trade in the following ways:

1. We traded a player who was long considered "the future" in Cincinnati after he never really broke out and exhibited somewhat of an attitude problem. We traded him while he was still young and under team control, albeit at an escalating salary.
2. The reaction of Redszoners and critics alike were that it wasn't necessarily a bad deal because of who we traded, but because of the return and perceived market value of the players we dealt at the time.

Yet it was worse than The Trade for the following reasons:

1. We took on salary at a time when the payroll was already at full capacity
2. The player we acquired is on the downside of his career, as opposed to Bray and Thompson who supposedly had bright futures
3. This trade did not fit in with any sort of team direction. The Volquez news only magnified that. The Trade made sense because we had a debilitating bullpen at the time and Kearns and Lopez were both considered replaceable. I'm not sure that Zach Stewart is replaceable anytime soon. Travis Wood has a #4 ceiling and Mike Leake has yet to throw a professional pitch. Meanwhile, Josh Roenicke could provide Weathers and Rhodes-like production at 10% of the price, and 10 years less in age.

It was a bad trade, there are no two ways about it. I just hope that it doesn't turn out to be horrible- I hope that the fallout is only as bad as The Trade, in that none of the three players we dealt away become terribly substantial. If Stewart ends up in the Jays rotation, or if either Stewart or Roenicke end up as the Jays closer in the next couple years, it was a horrible, horrible deal.

Scott Rolen would have to win an MVP in the next 2-3 years to justify that kind of return, especially when you look at what Cliff Lee, Jake Peavy, and Victor Martinez fetched on the same day.

edabbs44
08-04-2009, 05:31 PM
That is not a good rotation. You know that right?

BIG ifs coming:

If Bailey takes a leap to consistent useable major league pitcher

and

If the offense is materially upgraded

I could see that rotation being good enough to get into contention and make things interesting around next year's deadline, when Walt offers up the farm for Halladay.

TheNext44
08-04-2009, 05:31 PM
But wouldn't such a trade create a 4th hole, or would we go in-house for another starter or a closer? Do we have desirable candidates for those roles?

Closer is an easy hole to fix. Heck, I think even Herrera might be a good closer. It's an overrated position.

I think the Reds could get back from whoever they trade Arroyo or Harang to a back of the rotation starter for depth. Then use what ever money is saved to get a solid #1 or 2 starter as a free agent.

A team would want Arroyo or Harang instead of signing a TOR starter via free agency since they are only on the hook for one year.

REDREAD
08-04-2009, 05:33 PM
He is an asset next year because the Cardinals and Jays are paying a large part of his contract. If he is here past 2010 it will be entirely on the Reds bill.

Ok, but past 2010, he probably won't be making as much.

A lot depends on Rolen. He wanted to come here. I don't know what he'll be willing to play for in 2011.. He could declare FA and resign for less. Is that likely? I don't know. I'm pretty sure he would not get over 10 million on the open market right now.

Benihana
08-04-2009, 05:33 PM
BIG ifs coming:

If Bailey takes a leap to consistent useable major league pitcher

and

If the offense is materially upgraded

I could see that rotation being good enough to get into contention and make things interesting around next year's deadline, when Walt offers up the farm for Halladay.

At this rate, I don't know that we'll have a farm to offer up at that point.

Benihana
08-04-2009, 05:34 PM
Ok, but past 2010, he probably won't be making as much.

A lot depends on Rolen. He wanted to come here. I don't know what he'll be willing to play for in 2011.. He could declare FA and resign for less. Is that likely? I don't know. I'm pretty sure he would not get over 10 million on the open market right now.

Exactly. Remember what JimBo was able to do to the M's once Jr. demanded a trade (and wanted to come to Cincy?) It was VERY different than this fiasco.

REDREAD
08-04-2009, 05:36 PM
I was critical. I wanted EdE traded when he was still a young, cheap player with 26 HR's. The extension plus the changing market moved him into the albatross column.


What I want to know is what did Walt know and when did he know it about Volquez. The seriousness of the injury makes the trade less appealling.


Ok, you were one of the few to call the EdE extension. I'm just saying it is not villified nearly as much as Willy's contract was, for whatever reason.

As far as Volquez's injury goes, I guess if Walt and Bob want to improve the W-L record, they should go ahead and add ML talent when they get the opportunity too, regardless of everyone's projected health. That seems to be the plan, improve the W-L for next year.

Ltlabner
08-04-2009, 05:37 PM
Ok, you were one of the few to call the EdE extension. I'm just saying it is not villified nearly as much as Willy's contract was, for whatever reason.

Maybe because there was a reasonable expectation that Edwin would produce while there was only the slimmest of chances that Willy would provide anything of value to the team?

TRF
08-04-2009, 05:49 PM
My biggest current gripe is complaining about Player X's salary. Please understand I don't give one crap about what a player or any person makes, so long as they produce. Guys like Harang that earned a bigger contract through performance sometimes struggle. Cordero was offered a similar amount by the Brewers. Plus he's performed.

What I don't want is dreck signed as starters and for them to peddle said dreck as "the answer" at whatever position. 99% of this board, a freaking messageboard, KNEW Willy Taveras would start 95% or more of the games in CF and be a complete disaster. Yet WJ and Dusty thought he'd be the spark to lead this offense. We KNEW AGon was going to be a black hole at SS and that JHJ would get the majority of starts when he wasn't in the lineup.

Might as well have the Shamwow guy promoting this team, as he seems to be able to sell anything.

Same as it ever was.

Ltlabner
08-04-2009, 05:51 PM
Might as well have the Shamwow guy promoting this team, as he seems to be able to sell anything.

http://www.ksuradio.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/shamwow1.jpg

nate
08-04-2009, 06:04 PM
Might as well have the Shamwow guy promoting this team, as he seems to be able to sell anything.

Heresy!

dougdirt
08-04-2009, 06:49 PM
I like Cordero, but at $12 mil, you could give Masset the closer's job and probably get similar production for $11 mil cheaper knowing all you have to do is put him as the closer and then get a replacement in the bullpen for Masset's role.

Then I'd trade Arroyo. The Reds just need to be able to find a league average pitcher to replace his production.

That's $23 mil saved, theoretically, and replaceable in talent & ability considering their positions.

I'd actually hold on to Harang still, unless I get a good offer including a ML-ready young pitcher and a good prospect in return.

I am with you on your idea's, but sadly the Reds seem to think a $12M closer is needed.

As for trading Arroyo... again, I hope you are right but I just can't see a team taking him on without Bob paying a lot of the contract and I don't think Bob will do that. I really hope I am wrong, but I have very little faith that they get rid of any of the three pitchers.

Brutus
08-04-2009, 06:54 PM
I am with you on your idea's, but sadly the Reds seem to think a $12M closer is needed.

As for trading Arroyo... again, I hope you are right but I just can't see a team taking him on without Bob paying a lot of the contract and I don't think Bob will do that. I really hope I am wrong, but I have very little faith that they get rid of any of the three pitchers.

You might be right. I would hope Castellini would think of it as money he would have to pay anyhow. So if it gives them a chance to be flexible, acquire some talent at other positions, and still save a few pennies, then get 'er done.

jojo
08-04-2009, 07:00 PM
I am with you on your idea's, but sadly the Reds seem to think a $12M closer is needed.

I was honked off at the time he was signed (http://www.redszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1501830&postcount=277) and still get frustrated when thinking about the money the Reds have dumped on their pen.

Kc61
08-04-2009, 07:00 PM
You might be right. I would hope Castellini would think of it as money he would have to pay anyhow. So if it gives them a chance to be flexible, acquire some talent at other positions, and still save a few pennies, then get 'er done.


I hope and am confident that the Reds will keep Cordero. Closers are a special breed. Coming into this year some posters rejected the idea that Massett would even make the team. During spring training he was generally considered highly expendable.

Massett's reward for this good season should be Weathers' spot in the eighth inning. Not closer. No way.

As for Arroyo, I think he's a goner. There was no reason to trade him before July 31. I expect the Reds to take the best financial deal they can by 8/31. Bronson is on one of his pretty good streaks, somebody will take him, with the Reds paying a relatively small part of the salary.

Too bad Bronson can't pitch against the Mets in August. In fact, that's probably the way to sell him. See which contender plays the most games against the Mets -- they should want the Mets killer Arroyo.

And BTW, I expect Weathers to be sold off in August too. Arroyo and Weathers are the two I think will most definitely go.

Will M
08-04-2009, 11:27 PM
I hope and am confident that the Reds will keep Cordero. Closers are a special breed. Coming into this year some posters rejected the idea that Massett would even make the team. During spring training he was generally considered highly expendable.

Massett's reward for this good season should be Weathers' spot in the eighth inning. Not closer. No way.

As for Arroyo, I think he's a goner. There was no reason to trade him before July 31. I expect the Reds to take the best financial deal they can by 8/31. Bronson is on one of his pretty good streaks, somebody will take him, with the Reds paying a relatively small part of the salary.

Too bad Bronson can't pitch against the Mets in August. In fact, that's probably the way to sell him. See which contender plays the most games against the Mets -- they should want the Mets killer Arroyo.

And BTW, I expect Weathers to be sold off in August too. Arroyo and Weathers are the two I think will most definitely go.

IMO Arroyo and Weathers should be the ones to go. Ideally shed (part of) Arroyo's big salary to make a play at a better free agent starter.
Weathers is a decent middle reliever but not worth the $3.9M 2010 option.

Keeping Cordero & Rhodes makes sense if we want to win some games in 2010. IMO Harang is a better pitcher then Arroyo so I would prefer to keep him.

2010 starters...
#1 free agent (Lackey, Bedard, Harden,etc)
#2 Cueto
#3 Harang
#4 Bailey
#5 Owings, Maloney, Wood

2010 pen...
Cordero, Rhodes, Masset, Herrera, Fisher, Burton, Viola. Plus likely a cheap free agent veteran.

HokieRed
08-04-2009, 11:30 PM
I'd love to move Cordero, not because closers aren't a special breed, which they are, but just because I don't see any way, other than trading Phillips, which I'd also explore, for this FO to get some salary flexibility. I'm not as confident as you, Kc, that anybody's going to want Arroyo or Weathers.

Heath
08-04-2009, 11:54 PM
I don't know what happened, but early in the year, I thought if anyone wanted the closer's role, it would have been Jared Burton.

Dude leveled off fast.

You wonder if Danny Ray Boy and his off speed scroogie could be a closer. Heck, it worked for Doug Jones.

BuckeyeRedleg
08-05-2009, 12:48 AM
You know, I just thought of something and maybe this has already been brought up.

If the Reds would have just drafted Gordan Beckham when they had the chance (like many of us wanted), they would not have needed to go out and get Scott Rolen.

Beckham just hit his 6th HR tonight. He now is hitting .316, with 6 HR, and 38 RBI (.890 OPS).

I hope Mr. Alonso is the real deal (if they can find a position for him).

Kc61
08-05-2009, 12:55 AM
I'd love to move Cordero, not because closers aren't a special breed, which they are, but just because I don't see any way, other than trading Phillips, which I'd also explore, for this FO to get some salary flexibility. I'm not as confident as you, Kc, that anybody's going to want Arroyo or Weathers.

I remember the pre-Cordero days of eighth inning meltdowns. I just don't think the Reds want to go there again.

We'll see about Arroyo and Weathers. I think it's just a matter of price, meaning how much salary the Reds will pay.

Blitz Dorsey
08-05-2009, 03:19 AM
You know, I just thought of something and maybe this has already been brought up.

If the Reds would have just drafted Gordan Beckham when they had the chance (like many of us wanted), they would not have needed to go out and get Scott Rolen.

Beckham just hit his 6th HR tonight. He now is hitting .316, with 6 HR, and 38 RBI (.890 OPS).

I hope Mr. Alonso is the real deal (if they can find a position for him).

Uh oh, you just went there. I think every Reds fan is thinking the exact same thing every time we see highlights of Beckham tearing it up for the Pale Hose. If Beckham was a SS it would hurt even more. That's why the Reds didn't take him: they weren't convinced he would be a SS.

Course, if he rips it up at 3B, he would have looked real good as a Redleg. Oh well, let's just hope Alonso turns into a stud.

redsfandan
08-05-2009, 04:30 AM
You know, I just thought of something and maybe this has already been brought up.

If the Reds would have just drafted Gordan Beckham when they had the chance (like many of us wanted), they would not have needed to go out and get Scott Rolen.
Did you really have to mention that? :angry: Just kidding. I've had that thought in the back of my mind for the last few days too. It's been kinda hard to NOT think about that when Beckham could be the AL rookie of the year while playing 3rd for the ChiSox this year. :bang:

I remember the pre-Cordero days of eighth inning meltdowns. I just don't think the Reds want to go there again.
I will never understand how some people, like you, value closers so highly. We didn't need to commit almost $50m to solve the problem with the bullpen in the 8th inning. Thanks to that contract, the extension to Arroyo, and now the acquisition of Rolen we'll have almost 2/3 of the payroll devoted to only 4 players next year. Brilliant.

Ron Madden
08-05-2009, 05:12 AM
Seems to be an endless cycle no matter who the GM has been the past few years.

No moves or bad moves during the off season followed by "just wait until the July 31 trading deadline", followed by "just wait until the off season".

I'm growing tired of waiting and I'm just about to lose all faith that this organization can do anything right.

:(

puca
08-05-2009, 07:04 AM
As for Arroyo, I think he's a goner. There was no reason to trade him before July 31. I expect the Reds to take the best financial deal they can by 8/31. Bronson is on one of his pretty good streaks, somebody will take him, with the Reds paying a relatively small part of the salary.


I hope you are right, but the only way I see someone taking Arroyo without the Reds picking up a huge portion is if the Reds also throw in a premium prospect. Unfortunately I could see that happening all to easily.

mth123
08-05-2009, 07:28 AM
I hope you are right, but the only way I see someone taking Arroyo without the Reds picking up a huge portion is if the Reds also throw in a premium prospect. Unfortunately I could see that happening all to easily.

I think if I were a contender with deep pockets, I'd feel pretty good about Arroyo's chances of pitching well down the stretch. He's had his horrendus streak for 2009 and he'll probably be pretty solid from here on out. His dollars next year and living with the probable 2010 rough stretch would be a concern, but a team with the money to deal with that and an immediate need could be interested. The return would of course be limited and I'm not really sure that the fringe prospect and the payflex would go very far since the team would need to replace Arroyo's innings from outside the organization, but if the Reds are willing to gamble on a cheap starter in his place and use the money to shore up the position player side of things, it could help this team out. It would work better if there was an internal option that could be ready at some point in 2010 but the team just traded its best alternative to Toronto.

The Yankees could still be interested. Joba is near his innings limit and may be headed to the pen for the stretch. Wang is out. Sergio Mitre is getting hit. Arroyo might be a good fit there. He may even be useful in 2010 for them. Pettitte may retire. He's been threatening to do so for several years now and Arroyo could fill that spot. For 2009, CC, AJ, Pettitte and Arroyo down the stretch may be a logical rotation. Mitre, Joba and maybe Phil Hughes could split the 5th spot it would ease Mitre back, limit Joba's innings and give Hughes another crack at it. I think it makes a lot of sense for a team with the cash to pull it off.

redsmetz
08-05-2009, 09:00 AM
The Yankees could still be interested. Joba is near his innings limit and may be headed to the pen for the stretch. Wang is out. Sergio Mitre is getting hit. Arroyo might be a good fit there. He may even be useful in 2010 for them. Pettitte may retire. He's been threatening to do so for several years now and Arroyo could fill that spot. For 2009, CC, AJ, Pettitte and Arroyo down the stretch may be a logical rotation. Mitre, Joba and maybe Phil Hughes could split the 5th spot it would ease Mitre back, limit Joba's innings and give Hughes another crack at it. I think it makes a lot of sense for a team with the cash to pull it off.

Likewise, in the AL East, the Yankees come before Boston and Tampa Bay in the order of waiver claims, so they can't grab him to prevent the Yankees getting him. I think either Harang or Arroyo can help a club in contention and it's possible a well heeled club can afford the salaries without us putting something in.

[I would find something untoward about the Reds putting up money to cover a salary for the Yankees or any other big money club]

puca
08-05-2009, 09:15 AM
I thought it was reported around the trade deadline that the Yankees wanted the Reds to pick up some of Arroyo's salary and that was a sticking point to making a deal.

Maybe I dreamed it, maybe the report was wrong, or maybe even the Yankees know a bad contract when they see it.

redsmetz
08-05-2009, 09:39 AM
I thought it was reported around the trade deadline that the Yankees wanted the Reds to pick up some of Arroyo's salary and that was a sticking point to making a deal.

Maybe I dreamed it, maybe the report was wrong, or maybe even the Yankees know a bad contract when they see it.

You may well be right, but I still find it offensive. And, IMO, the Arroyo and Harang contracts have proven to be an albatross for the Reds given our current circumstances. I remember at the time that I and others felt it was an adroit move to lock up two pitchers in this manner. Yes, I understand that a number of folks objected to one or another, but then, that's par for the course around RZ - we have folks ardently on both sides of a question.

That said, again, I would find it offensive to pay money to a big club for a trade. That's just me and it's only my issue.

bucksfan2
08-05-2009, 09:41 AM
I will never understand how some people, like you, value closers so highly. We didn't need to commit almost $50m to solve the problem with the bullpen in the 8th inning. Thanks to that contract, the extension to Arroyo, and now the acquisition of Rolen we'll have almost 2/3 of the payroll devoted to only 4 players next year. Brilliant.

Remember the 8th innings meltdowns a few seasons ago? Remember how the Reds were actually playing good baseball they just couldn't hold a lead when they got to the pen? Remember earlier this season when the Reds were actually playing good baseball and once they got into the 7th inning you knew the Reds were going to win?

There has been a push in baseball, it may have been started by Bill James, to put you closer in the highest leverage position regardless of inning. It has been clearly evident on RZ where people discount closers to a very large degree. The problem with this theory is it completely ignores the psychological aspect of the game. It ignores the fact that good closers have a short memory, and that bad closers let a bad performance carry over for days. It ignores the fact that some people fail miserably when thrust into the 9th inning gig.

Sure having Cordero is a luxury for the Reds. The only time it becomes a problem is when he isn't performing. As long as he is performing he is making his keep, can't really say that about Harang or Arroyo.

edabbs44
08-05-2009, 10:16 AM
So now it is reported that Toronto is giving Cincy $3MM towards Rolen's 2010 salary. Does that make the trade any better for those who are/were on the ledge?

BuckeyeRedleg
08-05-2009, 10:33 AM
So now it is reported that Toronto is giving Cincy $3MM towards Rolen's 2010 salary. Does that make the trade any better for those who are/were on the ledge?

Nope, because I didn't want Rolen in the first place. I wanted him in 2002, but not for a non-competing team in 2009 and 2010.

Then, of course, the whole Zach Stewart part of it.

puca
08-05-2009, 11:37 AM
You may well be right, but I still find it offensive. And, IMO, the Arroyo and Harang contracts have proven to be an albatross for the Reds given our current circumstances. I remember at the time that I and others felt it was an adroit move to lock up two pitchers in this manner. Yes, I understand that a number of folks objected to one or another, but then, that's par for the course around RZ - we have folks ardently on both sides of a question.

That said, again, I would find it offensive to pay money to a big club for a trade. That's just me and it's only my issue.

Although it might be tough for a fan base to swallow, an organization with a smallish buget has to cash out on players like Harang and Arroyo instead of extending them. Even if you cash out a year or two early, as long as you get good return, you should be able to keep the young talent pipeline full. If instead you pay dearly for what is likely going to be a declining talent you get burned more ways than one.

This was obvious at the time Harang and Arroyo were signed and it is even more obvious now.

bucksfan2
08-05-2009, 11:40 AM
Although it might be tough for a fan base to swallow, an organization with a smallish buget has to cash out on players like Harang and Arroyo instead of extending them. Even if you cash out a year or two early, as long as you get good return, you should be able to keep the young talent pipeline full. If instead you pay dearly for what is likely going to be a declining talent you get burned more ways than one.

This was obvious at the time Harang and Arroyo were signed and it is even more obvious now.

It was pretty obvious at the time that the Reds needed to extend Harang. Arroyo was a different scenario, but IIRC everybody was in favor of the Harang extension.

puca
08-05-2009, 11:47 AM
So now it is reported that Toronto is giving Cincy $3MM towards Rolen's 2010 salary. Does that make the trade any better for those who are/were on the ledge?

It doesn't change anything for me. I would question the move even if Rolen played for free next year. I don't see any way short of a miracle that the Reds will contend in 2010. I also don't see anyway that Rolen will help the Reds past 2010 (even if they signed him and he remained healthy he wouldn't be a cheap option). To get him they traded two of their best young arms. Arms that could have possibly helped the Reds in 2010 and beyond.

The way I see it the Reds traded two cows for a carton milk. They wanted the milk for their morning cereal. Unfortunately they are out of cereal and by the time they get some more the milk will be sour.

puca
08-05-2009, 11:48 AM
It was pretty obvious at the time that the Reds needed to extend Harang. Arroyo was a different scenario, but IIRC everybody was in favor of the Harang extension.

I'm never in favor of the Reds extending 30ish pitchers coming off great years.

Highlifeman21
08-05-2009, 11:57 AM
Apparently he has four pitches now.

Rumor has it, also working on the gyroball and the eephus.

That'll give him one Hell of a 6 pitch arsenal!

Highlifeman21
08-05-2009, 12:00 PM
7 million of it. That's a chunk for a team that really has no shot of contending as currently constructed.

And for those that might say let's see if WJ makes some deals this offseason I say to you "how'd that work last offseason?"

The Reds caught a cold in CF and the leadoff spot, re-upped Career Year Hairston, burned a pile o' cash on Mike Lincoln, and I'm sure we had other legendary offseason moves as well, but they were so legendary I can't think of them off the top of my head.

Highlifeman21
08-05-2009, 12:07 PM
We will just go Cueto, Harang, Arroyo, Owings and Bailey.

Awesome, more of the same....

:thisyear:

OnBaseMachine
08-05-2009, 12:09 PM
So now it is reported that Toronto is giving Cincy $3MM towards Rolen's 2010 salary. Does that make the trade any better for those who are/were on the ledge?

Nope.

That doesn't bring Zach Stewart back. Still a bad deal in my eyes.

OnBaseMachine
08-05-2009, 01:03 PM
FWIW, John Manuel of Baseball America rated Zach Stewart as the second best prospect traded at the deadline. Number one was Brett Wallace. So according to Manuel, the Reds gave up a better prospect to get Rolen than the Red Sox did to acquire Victor Martinez, the White Sox did to get Jake Peavy, and the Phillies did to get Cliff Lee.

edabbs44
08-05-2009, 01:33 PM
FWIW, John Manuel of Baseball America rated Zach Stewart as the second best prospect traded at the deadline. Number one was Brett Wallace. So according to Manuel, the Reds gave up a better prospect to get Rolen than the Red Sox did to acquire Victor Martinez, the White Sox did to get Jake Peavy, and the Phillies did to get Cliff Lee.

To give the whole story, the Phillies gave up #5, 8, 9 and 10 which is probably worth more than #2. And Masterson isn't eligible for this list but is still a young arm and is worth more than Stewart. And Peavy has a sizeable amount of money owed to him and is injured.

Peavy's agent even said :


"Frankly I am flabbergasted that the White Sox would want to make this deal with him in his physical condition"

Gotta look at the big picture.

Eric_the_Red
08-05-2009, 05:11 PM
Plus, VMart has no place on this team, as he is not a full-time catcher and 1B is covered. Cliff Lee would've been nice though.

mth123
08-05-2009, 09:04 PM
I thought it was reported around the trade deadline that the Yankees wanted the Reds to pick up some of Arroyo's salary and that was a sticking point to making a deal.

Maybe I dreamed it, maybe the report was wrong, or maybe even the Yankees know a bad contract when they see it.

Your right, but that was when it was a trade with the Reds getting something back. I think now it would be the Yankees making a claim and the Reds letting him go.

edabbs44
08-05-2009, 10:47 PM
One thing about Rolen, you just get the feeling that he knows what he is doing out there. Both with the bat and the glove. Can't say that about many others on this team.

Emin3mShady07
08-06-2009, 12:31 AM
I haven't been on in a while, but wow, jockety has outdone himself. What a terrible trade. 1 year of scott rolen for a cheap and good edwin encarnacion and josh roenicke and a top of the line pitching prospect. Glad to see jockety has financially crippled the reds for next year and made them a worse team for an old veteran that may break down with injuries any day now...oh wait...

Reds/Flyers Fan
08-06-2009, 12:47 AM
EE went 1 for 4 tonight (with 2 strikeouts) to raise his Toronto average to .188; Josh Roenicke pitched 1 inning, allowing 2 walks, 2 hits and 3 runs.

And the Blue Jays lost to fall 5 games under .500.

As much as it may hurt to give up on Stewart, I'm still doing cartwheels over never having to watch Edwin Encarnacion again play for a team I root for.

pedro
08-06-2009, 12:48 AM
I haven't been on in a while, but wow, jockety has outdone himself. What a terrible trade. 1 year of scott rolen for a cheap and good edwin encarnacion and josh roenicke and a top of the line pitching prospect. Glad to see jockety has financially crippled the reds for next year and made them a worse team for an old veteran that may break down with injuries any day now...oh wait...

Really? This is what the ORG has become?

Freaking kill me.

cincrazy
08-06-2009, 12:49 AM
EE went 1 for 4 tonight (with 2 strikeouts) to raise his Toronto average to .188; Josh Roenicke pitched 1 inning, allowing 2 walks, 2 hits and 3 runs.

And the Blue Jays lost to fall 5 games under .500.

As much as it may hurt to give up on Stewart, I'm still doing cartwheels over never having to watch Edwin Encarnacion again play for a team I root for.

HIGH FIVE!

HokieRed
08-06-2009, 12:57 AM
EE went 1 for 4 tonight (with 2 strikeouts) to raise his Toronto average to .188; Josh Roenicke pitched 1 inning, allowing 2 walks, 2 hits and 3 runs.

And the Blue Jays lost to fall 5 games under .500.

As much as it may hurt to give up on Stewart, I'm still doing cartwheels over never having to watch Edwin Encarnacion again play for a team I root for.

Imagine how good the pitchers feel looking over at 3b and seeing Rolen instead of EE.

KoryMac5
08-06-2009, 12:59 AM
Not sure if anyone posted this article from The Hardball Times defending the rationale behind the trade: http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/blog_article/defending-cincinnatis-rolen-trade/

Basically covers what many have already talked about, which is cost.

redsfandan
08-06-2009, 07:47 AM
Remember the 8th innings meltdowns a few seasons ago? Remember how the Reds were actually playing good baseball they just couldn't hold a lead when they got to the pen? Remember earlier this season when the Reds were actually playing good baseball and once they got into the 7th inning you knew the Reds were going to win?

There has been a push in baseball, it may have been started by Bill James, to put you closer in the highest leverage position regardless of inning. It has been clearly evident on RZ where people discount closers to a very large degree. The problem with this theory is it completely ignores the psychological aspect of the game. It ignores the fact that good closers have a short memory, and that bad closers let a bad performance carry over for days. It ignores the fact that some people fail miserably when thrust into the 9th inning gig.

Sure having Cordero is a luxury for the Reds. The only time it becomes a problem is when he isn't performing. As long as he is performing he is making his keep, can't really say that about Harang or Arroyo.

In '07 Weathers had 33 saves and 6 blown saves and was paid $2.25m. Cordero saved 34 games in '08 with 6 blown saves and was paid $8.5m. Weathers was paid $2.7m in '08. Now Cordero looked better doing the job but was it really worth paying that much more?

Cordero has been better this year with 23 saves so far and only 1 blown save but he's making $12m this year. The Brewers signed Trevor Hoffman in the offseason for $6m and he's been just as good as Cordero. We could've just added someone to strengthen the middle relief after '07 and then signed Hoffman after '08 but instead we had to overpay for Cordero.

I'll agree that Cordero is a good closer and has been one of the few "bright spots" this year but that doesn't mean it makes sense that he makes so much when the Reds can't afford to have so much money devoted to so few players. The job of a closer is to save games. That's it. Making a pitcher that totals less than 80 innings/yr the highest paid player on the team isn't smart. That's why it's a problem.

edabbs44
08-06-2009, 08:23 AM
I haven't been on in a while, but wow, jockety has outdone himself. What a terrible trade. 1 year of scott rolen for a cheap and good edwin encarnacion and josh roenicke and a top of the line pitching prospect. Glad to see jockety has financially crippled the reds for next year and made them a worse team for an old veteran that may break down with injuries any day now...oh wait...

EdE is not really "cheap" or "good".

bucksfan2
08-06-2009, 09:16 AM
In '07 Weathers had 33 saves and 6 blown saves and was paid $2.25m. Cordero saved 34 games in '08 with 6 blown saves and was paid $8.5m. Weathers was paid $2.7m in '08. Now Cordero looked better doing the job but was it really worth paying that much more?

In 07 it wasn't Weathers in the save situation, rather it was the 8th inning and the rest of the pen. An amazing thing happened when the Reds signed Cordero, the rest of the pen got considerably better. The 8th inning got better, the middle relief got better. Having a shut down closer to come in the game in the 9th inning give a huge psychological boost to the rest of the pen.

jojo
08-06-2009, 09:29 AM
In 07 it wasn't Weathers in the save situation, rather it was the 8th inning and the rest of the pen. An amazing thing happened when the Reds signed Cordero, the rest of the pen got considerably better. The 8th inning got better, the middle relief got better. Having a shut down closer to come in the game in the 9th inning give a huge psychological boost to the rest of the pen.

It didn't hurt that Bray, Burton and Affeldt had career years in '08.

I think it had less to do with psychology and more to do with having better options before the 9th and happy volatility....

nate
08-06-2009, 10:09 AM
Another take (http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/blog_article/defending-cincinnatis-rolen-trade/) from The Hardball Times, one quote:


What the Reds did was take a commodity that wasn't helping them and turn it into someone who can actually contribute and push the Reds to contend. Losing Edison Volquez to Tommy John surgery was a major blow, but to compete next year, Roenicke and Stewart weren't going to help.

puca
08-06-2009, 11:27 AM
Another take (http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/blog_article/defending-cincinnatis-rolen-trade/) from The Hardball Times, one quote:

That 'take' is based on the premise that Reds can compete next year.

Remember that the statement "If FALSE then my take" is logically correct no matter what 'my take' is.

I just don't buy into the fact that the Reds can and will do all of the things required for them to compete next year. I'm not sure they can even identify what they need to do.

Kc61
08-06-2009, 11:30 AM
I just don't buy into the fact that the Reds can and will do all of the things required for them to compete next year. I'm not sure they can even identify what they need to do.

If the Reds keep EE, Roenicke and Stewart, what year do they compete in?

Benihana
08-06-2009, 11:34 AM
If the Reds keep EE, Roenicke and Stewart, what year do they compete in?

The same year they compete with the current roster: Two thousand and never.

Kc61
08-06-2009, 12:13 PM
The same year they compete with the current roster: Two thousand and never.

Right. So I've come around to believe that the best thing is to get as many good players as possible on the team as soon as possible.

Guys who still have it, not has beens, but Rolen still has it.

Maybe in the next year or two they can compile some more good players and it will add up to a winning season. How they then build on that is tomorrow's problem.

All these fancy schemes for becoming a perennial contender at some point in the future never work for the Reds. Maybe they aren't bad enough, they don't get the true super star draft choices.

Right now, I'd like to see them sign Dye in the offseason, get another starting middle infielder with a good OBP, and add a quality pitcher who would, hopefully, upgrade the Arroyo spot.
Maybe they would then be a competitive ballclub. Right now, that's all I'm asking for.

Emin3mShady07
08-06-2009, 12:17 PM
EdE is not really "cheap" or "good".

Compared to Rolen he is certainly cheap.

Edwin has been plagued by injury this year and should be a better player next year. A 2 win player seems about right. If a win is worth about 4.5 Million on the market, then EE is worth 9 million but getting paid 4.75 Million.

Encarnacion is also entering his prime next year, he will only be 27, Scott Rolen will be a 3 win player at best next year IMHO and that's if he stays healthy all year and at age 35, I wouldn't bank on that. And the reds are going to be paying him 8 million I believe, so the reds pay a little less than market value for a win when they got rolen.

However, that's just the swap heads up. Josh Roenicke has a 98 mph fastball and has averaged more than a strikeout per inning in his career in the minors as well as in this small sample in the bigs this year. He has a lot of promise and is under team control for six more years with a great potential.

Zack Stewart is also a very good pitching prospect and I don't see why the Walt Jockety felt he had to give up so much to get a 34 year old scott rolen due a ton of money next year.

edabbs44
08-06-2009, 12:40 PM
Edwin has been plagued by injury this year and should be a better player next year. A 2 win player seems about right. If a win is worth about 4.5 Million on the market, then EE is worth 9 million but getting paid 4.75 Million.

Encarnacion is nowhere close to $9MM.

Patrick Bateman
08-06-2009, 12:43 PM
Encarnacion is nowhere close to $9MM.

Ya, he was overpaid at his current contract.

kpresidente
08-06-2009, 12:51 PM
Encarnacion is nowhere close to $9MM.

Ya, he was overpaid at his current contract.


Fangraphs says statistically his production in '08 was worth $9.5 million.

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=2151&position=3B...bottom of the page.


Much better value than Rolen (who they pegged at $13 million this year), especially given you're unlikely to see a repeat at the plate from the 34 year old.

puca
08-06-2009, 12:54 PM
If the Reds keep EE, Roenicke and Stewart, what year do they compete in?

With the current management maybe never.

2010 is a lost cause. Beyond 2010 Rolen will be gone or if he is still here he will be no bargin.

I'm not opposed to this type of trade, but giving away prospects without a realistic chance of competing is shear lunacy in my opinion. With this trade the Reds have reduced their chances (even if only slightly) of producing a TOR starter and/or shutdown reliever in the near future - something that this team desperately needs.

TRF
08-06-2009, 01:05 PM
Again, this is the model Jocketty used in STL, and it worked. However, the Cardinals drew anywhere from 2.8 to 3.5 million fans from 1998 through his last year as GM.

Someone wake me when the Reds do that.

BRM
08-06-2009, 01:07 PM
Again, this is the model Jocketty used in STL, and it worked. However, the Cardinals drew anywhere from 2.8 to 3.5 million fans from 1998 through his last year as GM.

Someone wake me when the Reds do that.

I bet the Reds have drawn 3.5 million fans since 1998.

TRF
08-06-2009, 01:12 PM
I bet the Reds have drawn 3.5 million fans since 1998.

remember 2003?

It'd be close. They drew what? 75,000 that year? ok that's an exaggeration.

Over the past 10 years, the best the Reds have drawn is 2.5 mil in 2000, KGJ's first year as a red and coming off their best season since 2005. That's 400,000 fewer fans than the Cards worst season, 2.9 mil.

bucksfan2
08-06-2009, 02:27 PM
Fangraphs says statistically his production in '08 was worth $9.5 million.

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=2151&position=3B...bottom of the page.


Much better value than Rolen (who they pegged at $13 million this year), especially given you're unlikely to see a repeat at the plate from the 34 year old.

What was his production worth this year? Can you be worth negative money?

TheNext44
08-06-2009, 02:45 PM
Fangraphs says statistically his production in '08 was worth $9.5 million.

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=2151&position=3B...bottom of the page.


Much better value than Rolen (who they pegged at $13 million this year), especially given you're unlikely to see a repeat at the plate from the 34 year old.

This is where stats don't tell the whole story.

I have argued that because of his defense EE really is just a backup player. His offense is not strong enough to justify his horrible defense. He's a around a -15 UZR/150 and the fielding bible has him the same or worse.

A team just can't have an infielder that bad playing everyday. It hurts the pitching staff, deflates moral, and makes the team look like the bad news bears.

You can't move him to LF or 1B, because he doesn't hit well enough to justify that move, even if he could field well there. It's not like he's Ryan Braun.

So basically, EE is a very solid RH bat off the bench, at most a half a win player. Like I said before, and what has been echoed on MLBTR's, EE most likely will be non-tendered after the 2010 season, and the Reds can pick him up for around league minimum if they want to.

So basically

Kc61
08-06-2009, 03:08 PM
This is where stats don't tell the whole story.

I have argued that because of his defense EE really is just a backup player. His offense is not strong enough to justify his horrible defense. He's a around a -15 UZR/150 and the fielding bible has him the same or worse.

A team just can't have an infielder that bad playing everyday. It hurts the pitching staff, deflates moral, and makes the team look like the bad news bears.

You can't move him to LF or 1B, because he doesn't hit well enough to justify that move, even if he could field well there. It's not like he's Ryan Braun.

So basically, EE is a very solid RH bat off the bench, at most a half a win player. Like I said before, and what has been echoed on MLBTR's, EE most likely will be non-tendered after the 2010 season, and the Reds can pick him up for around league minimum if they want to.

So basically


Agree. I think Rolen is a huge upgrade in terms of the confidence a team has in its infield. Offensively, I would also argue that EE was so inconsistent that his overall numbers didn't adequately tell the story. And yes, I have repeatedly given specifics on this, it is true, he was extremely inconsistent and prone to long slumps.

In terms of overall defense, a team with Phillips and Rolen in the infield with a good or better shortstop (to be determined), with the excellent Jay Bruce defending RF, and the combo of Taveras, Dickerson, Stubbs in center, and with Hanigan's arm behind the plate, is a pretty fair defensive club. Rolen is a huge part of that. It never made sense to me that the Reds were relying on EE in a pitching/defense regime.

I'm not very knowledgeable about the "run share" analysis, and I didn't like giving up Stewart, but Rolen brings a great deal to this ballclub. Hopefully he can stay healthy for a couple of years and the Reds build on this.

Benihana
08-07-2009, 02:51 PM
Jon Paul Morosi of FOX Sports hears that Reds will pay Scott Rolen $11MM next year without help from the Blue Jays.

Wow, what a deal if true!

I could envision a situation where the Reds act like the Jays are picking up most of Rolen's salary so that they can tell other teams they don't have to move Harang/Arroyo, when in reality it's just a bargaining position. Why else would no one be at liberty to divulge how much of the tab the Jays are actually picking up?

IslandRed
08-07-2009, 04:37 PM
I think people (on both sides) are making assumptions about when the Reds are going to use the cash the Jays are sending. I don't know, but since they supposedly had room to make a move if they were in contention, it's possible they're going to just eat the difference this year and apply the cash towards next year's payroll. Who knows.

RANDY IN INDY
08-07-2009, 04:50 PM
Who is Jon Paul Morosi and who is he hearing from?

Benihana
08-07-2009, 04:51 PM
Who is Jon Paul Morosi?

Ken Rosenthal's colleague/partner at FOXSports. Together, they are two of the best scoop reporters in all of baseball.

RANDY IN INDY
08-07-2009, 05:07 PM
I guess it has to be true then. Just love those "scoopers."

Benihana
08-07-2009, 05:09 PM
I guess it has to be true then. Just love those "scoopers."

No one said it is gospel.

I said
"what a deal if true!"

There is a lot of inaccurate information circulating out there, especially this time of year. I was just noting one report that came from a respected source. And I was also noting that it is at least plausible considering the circumstances.

RANDY IN INDY
08-07-2009, 05:09 PM
Doesn't hurt to wish.

Benihana
08-07-2009, 05:10 PM
Doesn't hurt to wish.

Huh?

Marc D
08-08-2009, 11:24 AM
Again, this is the model Jocketty used in STL, and it worked. However, the Cardinals drew anywhere from 2.8 to 3.5 million fans from 1998 through his last year as GM.

Someone wake me when the Reds do that.

Then wake me up when they hit the lottery in the last rounds of the draft and find a Pujols. The Jocketty era in St Louis looks a whole lot different without that minor miracle.

As for this trade I still don't like it. They took on some amount of money and gave up prospects for the privilege. Taking on more risk for less reward is never good business.

lollipopcurve
09-23-2010, 03:32 PM
Great article on the Rolen trade...

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/Cincinnati-Reds-Scott-Rolen-play-has-critics-red-in-the-face-092310

Cedric
09-23-2010, 04:01 PM
Great article on the Rolen trade...

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/Cincinnati-Reds-Scott-Rolen-play-has-critics-red-in-the-face-092310

I like this thread because I was right for once.

I also like it because it shows how bad people overvalue their "own" prospects.

westofyou
09-23-2010, 04:16 PM
I also like it because it shows how bad people overvalue their "own" prospects.

I like it because it also shows how much people undervalue baseball acumen.

Puffy
09-23-2010, 04:20 PM
This thread is great. Absolutely great!

RedsManRick
09-23-2010, 04:26 PM
I like the line about homework. I wish they went in to this in greater detail. What did Jocketty and company know, other than that Scott would sign an extension, that wasn't publicly available?

Cedric
09-23-2010, 04:29 PM
I like the line about homework. I wish they went in to this in greater detail. What did Jocketty and company know, other than that Scot would sign an extension, that wasn't publicly available?

I assume they knew that his shoulder was finally rounding into form. They probably knew his performance suffered playing in Toronto for other reasons.

Brutus
09-23-2010, 04:36 PM
I like the line about homework. I wish they went in to this in greater detail. What did Jocketty and company know, other than that Scot would sign an extension, that wasn't publicly available?

They probably asked him. If I recall, Toronto gave them permission to speak with him before the trade.

edabbs44
09-23-2010, 04:59 PM
I like it because it also shows how much people undervalue baseball acumen.

I love it because it is a case study on why you shouldn't get so worked up over a move that is made.

Tom Servo
09-23-2010, 05:10 PM
I'd make a tongue-in-cheek Cy Young joke here but last time I did some people went up in arms.

RedsManRick
09-23-2010, 05:16 PM
I love it because it is a case study on why you shouldn't get so worked up over a move that is made.

Depends on the move. No amount of homework can justify acquiring a guy named Willy/ie.

camisadelgolf
09-23-2010, 05:27 PM
Depends on the move. No amount of homework can justify acquiring a guy named Willy/ie.

http://sportsthenandnow.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/willie-mays.jpg

johngalt
09-23-2010, 05:31 PM
I like looking back and seeing someone in early August 2009 saying that "2010 is a lost cause".

Reds fan pessimism at its finest.

bucksfan2
09-23-2010, 05:34 PM
One of my favorite threads.

Going back through it there was a lot of anger directed at Walt and Bob. Hindsight is always 20/20 and I think this thread proves it.

Oh and by the way Scotty 'Freakin' Rolen is pretty good.

edabbs44
09-23-2010, 05:36 PM
Depends on the move. No amount of homework can justify acquiring a guy named Willy/ie.

For every Willy, there are similar reactions given to guys named Jonny, Orlando, Laynce, Ramon, Miguel and others who sometimes work out better than expected.

OnBaseMachine
09-23-2010, 07:36 PM
Someone should bump one of threads about the Arroyo extension.

Anyway, I liked acquiring Scott Rolen. Hated trading away Zach Stewart.

jojo
09-23-2010, 07:49 PM
Been re-reading the Stewart/Rolen threads...this guy is particularly brilliant:

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1996900&postcount=423


:cool:

cincrazy
09-23-2010, 07:59 PM
I like looking back and seeing someone in early August 2009 saying that "2010 is a lost cause".

Reds fan pessimism at its finest.

I don't think you can really blame anyone for feeling that way. After 10 years of everything going wrong, it's hard to be optimistic.

johngalt
09-23-2010, 08:21 PM
I don't think you can really blame anyone for feeling that way. After 10 years of everything going wrong, it's hard to be optimistic.

Understood, but when there's two months left in the 2009 season and you're already saying the NEXT season is a lost cause, that's a bit over the top. Even at that point last year, you could still see a pretty healthy amount of young talent on the horizon even without adding Chapman and the idea that Leake would be in the 2010 plans.

It's the same overreaction we've seen this season a million times. One bad loss and all of a sudden everyone is running for cover and talking about how the rotation isn't deep enough or the bullpen is falling apart or the offense won't score enough runs to "outlast" the Cardinals.

To me, it just gets REALLY old.

Eric_the_Red
09-23-2010, 08:22 PM
Been re-reading the Stewart/Rolen threads...this guy is particularly brilliant:

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1996900&postcount=423


:cool:

Very well played, sir. BTW, what are the winning lotto numbers going to be?

edabbs44
09-23-2010, 09:02 PM
Someone should bump one of threads about the Arroyo extension.

Anyway, I liked acquiring Scott Rolen. Hated trading away Zach Stewart.

Didn't you call for his firing after the Rolen trade? :)

TheNext44
09-23-2010, 11:32 PM
I don't think you can really blame anyone for feeling that way. After 10 years of everything going wrong, it's hard to be optimistic.

Can't blame Reds fans, but you surely can blame the reporters and analysts that get paid to be objective for missing this one so badly. They are always shocked when a bad team turns it around and becomes good, even when it happens year, after year, after year.

cincrazy
09-24-2010, 12:42 AM
Understood, but when there's two months left in the 2009 season and you're already saying the NEXT season is a lost cause, that's a bit over the top. Even at that point last year, you could still see a pretty healthy amount of young talent on the horizon even without adding Chapman and the idea that Leake would be in the 2010 plans.

It's the same overreaction we've seen this season a million times. One bad loss and all of a sudden everyone is running for cover and talking about how the rotation isn't deep enough or the bullpen is falling apart or the offense won't score enough runs to "outlast" the Cardinals.

To me, it just gets REALLY old.

Oh, I agree with what you're saying, certainly. I thought we had a pretty good chance to be competitive this year. Did I think we would be sitting 8 games up with a week left in the season? Definitely not. But I thought we'd be better.

Wasn't expecting playoffs, however. But I guess I'll take it :).

Puffy
09-24-2010, 01:03 PM
Didn't you call for his firing after the Rolen trade? :)

Didn't he have "Fire Walt Jocketty" as his signature, too?? ;)

37red
09-24-2010, 01:29 PM
I haven't seen the ink pen in Rolen's hand. But in this thread I do see a door closing behind him as he walks out. Everyone seems to say he's going, no if's and's and buts. I'll have to read every post and some articles. It would disapoint me if that happens.

jojo
09-24-2010, 01:52 PM
I haven't seen the ink pen in Rolen's hand. But in this thread I do see a door closing behind him as he walks out. Everyone seems to say he's going, no if's and's and buts. I'll have to read every post and some articles. It would disapoint me if that happens.

I'm confused.

camisadelgolf
09-24-2010, 02:00 PM
I'm confused.
+1

Cedric
09-24-2010, 02:01 PM
I'm confused.

I think he's talking about an autograph session.. Ink pen and all that.

It could be discouraging in a playoff run that Scott is pulling a Pete.

westofyou
09-24-2010, 02:07 PM
Eh??

Clarification can be the key to effective communication

TRF
09-24-2010, 02:10 PM
I was against the Rolen trade. I thought it was a bad idea to trade for a 35 year old 3B with a history of chronic back issues. I was against signing Eric Milton. Not because I thought he was a bad fit for GABP, but because he had a degenerative condition in his knee. It wasn't going to get better.

I'm not against older players per se. I'm not for acquiring them if they have certain injury histories. Specifically, Labrum, back or knee issues.

I also wasn't a fan of giving up Stewart, who kind of came into his own in the TOR org. He suffered some failure and got his act together at the end of the season. Had this been 2003, and a young Stewart was offered for Rolen, I'd have been all over that trade, jumping for joy.

IMO Walt got a little lucky here. Even if doctors give a guy a clean bill of health, the back is a chronic issue. It's going to flare up on occasion. And it did. The luck part is that he didn't miss SIGNIFICANT time. Walt bet on intangibles and won big. Props to him for that. But don't anyone think for a minute this was a move without risk. I'm thrilled it paid off.

But let me ask this. If Votto went down at the beginning of the season, would you want Walt to trade for Jim Thome? The intangibles, from all accounts are there, but is the risk of him breaking down worth 5 Mil or more? I don't know.

edabbs44
09-24-2010, 02:34 PM
Without us having access to doctors and Rolen's medical records, it is kind of unfair to try and estimate exactly how much risk was involved there.

OnBaseMachine
09-24-2010, 04:41 PM
Didn't he have "Fire Walt Jocketty" as his signature, too?? ;)

Tell us your thoughts on Joe Randa. ;)

Brutus
09-24-2010, 05:02 PM
I haven't seen the ink pen in Rolen's hand. But in this thread I do see a door closing behind him as he walks out. Everyone seems to say he's going, no if's and's and buts. I'll have to read every post and some articles. It would disapoint me if that happens.

My head is spinning!

tommycash
09-24-2010, 05:10 PM
I haven't seen the ink pen in Rolen's hand. But in this thread I do see a door closing behind him as he walks out. Everyone seems to say he's going, no if's and's and buts. I'll have to read every post and some articles. It would disapoint me if that happens.

What just happened?!?!?!?!?!?

Raisor
09-24-2010, 05:52 PM
I haven't seen the ink pen in Rolen's hand. But in this thread I do see a door closing behind him as he walks out. Everyone seems to say he's going, no if's and's and buts. I'll have to read every post and some articles. It would disapoint me if that happens.

http://punditkitchen.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/political-pictures-confused-guy.jpg

reds44
09-24-2010, 05:56 PM
I haven't seen the ink pen in Rolen's hand. But in this thread I do see a door closing behind him as he walks out. Everyone seems to say he's going, no if's and's and buts. I'll have to read every post and some articles. It would disapoint me if that happens.
My heard hurts.

kaldaniels
09-24-2010, 06:06 PM
I haven't seen the ink pen in Rolen's hand. But in this thread I do see a door closing behind him as he walks out. Everyone seems to say he's going, no if's and's and buts. I'll have to read every post and some articles. It would disapoint me if that happens.

I'm trying to come up with a equally as long 5-sentence length rebuttal to this that would humorously be every bit as confusing as the above, but it is simply impossible.

Brutus
09-24-2010, 06:10 PM
I'm trying to come up with a equally as long 5-sentence length rebuttal to this that would humorously be every bit as confusing as the above, but it is simply impossible.

I'm sure it was a reply to a post. What I can't say with any certainty is whether the post was in this thread or in his head.

Tom Servo
09-24-2010, 06:30 PM
I haven't seen the ink pen in Rolen's hand. But in this thread I do see a door closing behind him as he walks out. Everyone seems to say he's going, no if's and's and buts. I'll have to read every post and some articles. It would disapoint me if that happens.
Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

mdccclxix
09-24-2010, 06:41 PM
I haven't seen the ink pen in Rolen's hand. But in this thread I do see a door closing behind him as he walks out. Everyone seems to say he's going, no if's and's and buts. I'll have to read every post and some articles. It would disapoint me if that happens.

This must be a premonition about 2012.

TRF
09-24-2010, 07:01 PM
Without us having access to doctors and Rolen's medical records, it is kind of unfair to try and estimate exactly how much risk was involved there.

Horse hockey. Antonio Bryant and the Bengals say hi. They had full access and got it wrong.

But sometimes you just kinda know. In this case, Walt knew Rolen as a person. He was banking on the person to facilitate a change in the clubhouse and it worked. I've never heard a person say a bad thing about Eric Milton. He obviously pitched in a lot of pain, so he's a gamer. And I still wanted no part of him. Rolen is 35, and his best years are behind him. NO WAY did Walt think he was getting what he got from Rolen this year. No. Way.

I'm beyond thrilled it worked. And I know I wouldn't have pulled the trigger on the trade that brought him here. I do agree that giving up Stewart was too much, but I likely would have suffered through this year with Frazier at 3B.

jojo
09-24-2010, 07:01 PM
Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

Of course so.

Puffy
09-24-2010, 07:46 PM
Tell us your thoughts on Joe Randa. ;)

Ummmmm, I was right about Joe Randa, so not sure what your point is. He put up stats exactly within his career line and the Reds were not one bit better record wise while he played here. My point was then as it is now that he did not make the Reds better and they had in house solutions that would have made the Reds still bad but with money to spend elsewhere.

Now, Wily Mo Pena I was wrong about. And Rich Aurilla. And Scott Hatteburg too.

Joseph
09-24-2010, 08:15 PM
Ummmmm, I was right about Joe Randa, so not sure what your point is. He put up stats exactly within his career line and the Reds were not one bit better record wise while he played here. My point was then as it is now that he did not make the Reds better and they had in house solutions that would have made the Reds still bad but with money to spend elsewhere.

Now, Wily Mo Pena I was wrong about. And Rich Aurilla. And Scott Hatteburg too.

Apparently you are a big man Puffy.

edabbs44
09-24-2010, 09:38 PM
Horse hockey. Antonio Bryant and the Bengals say hi. They had full access and got it wrong.

But sometimes you just kinda know. In this case, Walt knew Rolen as a person. He was banking on the person to facilitate a change in the clubhouse and it worked. I've never heard a person say a bad thing about Eric Milton. He obviously pitched in a lot of pain, so he's a gamer. And I still wanted no part of him. Rolen is 35, and his best years are behind him. NO WAY did Walt think he was getting what he got from Rolen this year. No. Way.

I'm beyond thrilled it worked. And I know I wouldn't have pulled the trigger on the trade that brought him here. I do agree that giving up Stewart was too much, but I likely would have suffered through this year with Frazier at 3B.

You are right, Walt knew the impact Rolen could have on the clubhouse and the other players. But we were also talking about him getting lucky with his health. I could have seen the doctors telling Walt "Look, you are going to get Rolen for 125 or so games and those 35 or so games he will miss will either be on your terms or in the form of 2 or more stints on the DL".

The Reds have done well with him this season and we can't say that it has definitely been all about luck. They picked their spots when to rest him and to this point it has worked well.