PDA

View Full Version : Weathers traded to Brewers



Pages : [1] 2

nate
08-09-2009, 03:22 PM
Tweeted from Fay. It's a PTBNL.

klw
08-09-2009, 03:23 PM
For player to be named
http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=blog07&plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3ae57bcc87-152a-4f72-96fb-cc08b1f396efPost%3a6c3f5142-19e7-41cc-bffe-fdfa477658c2&sid=sitelife.cincinnati.com

Brutus
08-09-2009, 03:23 PM
$3.9 mil down
$20 mil more to go

marcshoe
08-09-2009, 03:24 PM
Didn't this happen a decade or so ago?

nate
08-09-2009, 03:27 PM
Yeah, this is like turning on the TV and seeing "I Love Lucy."

*BaseClogger*
08-09-2009, 03:28 PM
This makes too much sense to be true...

fearofpopvol1
08-09-2009, 03:29 PM
Good luck to Weathers. Even though you always worried when he came in late in the games to hold leads, he succeeded more than he failed. He doesn't have great stuff, but he was battler and always gave it his all. I respect him greatly for that.

Hopefully he can help the Brewers.

Tom Servo
08-09-2009, 03:31 PM
Best of luck, Stormy. You served us well.

MrCinatit
08-09-2009, 03:32 PM
He'll be back. He always comes back.

LoganBuck
08-09-2009, 03:33 PM
Given the value of Scott Rolen, I can assume that the Reds are receiving Alcides Escobar.

MikeS21
08-09-2009, 03:33 PM
Amy speculation who the PTBNL is?

UKFlounder
08-09-2009, 03:36 PM
Wow.

So we add veteran Rolen, then sell veteran Weathers?

Hopefully it all works out in the long-run once we see other moves being made.

Good luck to David. He lasted much longer than I expected him to here in Cincy

JaxRed
08-09-2009, 03:39 PM
Amy speculation who the PTBNL is?

Has to be a minor leaguer who hasn't played in NL this year

Joseph
08-09-2009, 03:42 PM
When we brought him back a few years ago I was disgusted.

Now I'm a bit sad to see him go. Not that its not the right thing at this point, but still he was a good ol' boy who brought some glue to the bullpen and never much complained no matter what we asked of him.

Good luck Stormy.

RedEye
08-09-2009, 03:44 PM
Weathers was quite often a part of the solution and almost never an overly big part of the problem. He will be missed.

RedEye
08-09-2009, 03:44 PM
And this seems to confirm that the Rolen trade was most definitely NOT meant to make the Reds competitive in 2009.

RANDY IN INDY
08-09-2009, 03:47 PM
And this seems to confirm that the Rolen trade was most definitely NOT meant to make the Reds competitive in 2009.

How you figure?

TheNext44
08-09-2009, 03:49 PM
Saves the team around $1.5M this year and next including his buyout. Clearly that money can be better spent next year than on whatever Weathers brings in the last two months.

I've always liked Weathers, since he always accepted whatever the roll the Reds offered him without complaint. He also was always better than I expected every year. I just wish the Reds were better at using him in his best role.

I will now be rooting for the Brewers to win the NL Central Division, since they have both Coffey and Weathers. (And aren't the Cubs).

LoganBuck
08-09-2009, 03:51 PM
Weathers was quite often a part of the solution and almost never an overly big part of the problem. He will be missed.

Very well put. Pseudo rep too you.

HeatherC1212
08-09-2009, 03:51 PM
Best of luck to Stormy and thanks for all the great (and more often than not heart stopping :p: ) moments with the Reds. :)

Tony Cloninger
08-09-2009, 03:52 PM
I liked him for that as well. Most relievers....they need to be told what their role is. He did whatever you asked and could go more than 1 inning. Throwback reliever....who you wish they would develop more of in the minors .. guys who can throw 2 and do whatever is asked.

RedLegSuperStar
08-09-2009, 03:56 PM
Rickie Weeks?

I can wish..

Haningan - C
Votto - 1B
Weeks - 2B
Phillips - SS
Rolen - 3B
Bruce - RF
Dickerson/Stubbs/Heisey - CF
Frazier - LF

BTW.. I know Weeks is on the 60 Day DL

Stormy
08-09-2009, 03:56 PM
And this seems to confirm that the Rolen trade was most definitely NOT meant to make the Reds competitive in 2009.

On the bright side, this move may slightly assist in our endeavor to catch the Nationals, whose tremendous win streak is alive and kicking.

Stormy
08-09-2009, 03:58 PM
Best of luck to Stormy and thanks for all the great (and more often than not heart stopping :p: ) moments with the Reds. :)

My pleasure, oh wait... :)

HeatherC1212
08-09-2009, 04:00 PM
My pleasure, oh wait... :)

Wrong Stormy, LOL :laugh: (BTW-I have a friend on another board who also uses the name Stormy there. She's a Red Sox fan though....eh, no one's perfect. :p: )

lollipopcurve
08-09-2009, 04:01 PM
Guy has had a very, very nice bullpen career. I must say, I learned some things about pitching watching Weathers work. Good luck to him.

marcshoe
08-09-2009, 04:07 PM
I will now be rooting for the Brewers to win the NL Central Division, since they have both Coffey and Weathers. (And aren't the Cubs).

I've already been doing that because I had the pleasure of watching Ryan Braun playing locally his first season in the minors. Coffey and Weathers definitely help the cause.

TheNext44
08-09-2009, 04:12 PM
More from Fay:

http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=blog07&plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3ae57bcc87-152a-4f72-96fb-cc08b1f396efPost%3a41165348-6312-4aef-8a82-f1d5cda765f7&plckCommentSortOrder=TimeStampAscending&sid=sitelife.cincinnati.com


The Reds traded David Weathers to the Milwaukee Brewers for a player-to-be-named.


The Reds have a pool of players to pick from. They are young players. The club has until Oct. 15 to decide. If they choose not to take any of the players, they’ll get cash instead.


This means that the right-handed setup job is open.


“We’ve got (Jared) Burton coming back,” Walt Jocketty said. “We going to start using younger guys and giving them an opportunity.”


Burton, who is on minor league rehab, will join the Reds tomorrow in St. Louis.


Weathers was told before the game.


“Initially, you’re excited to go to a team that has a good shot at the playoffs,” Weathers said, “to get back into the atmosphere. I’ve already played for Milwaukee. I really enjoyed Milwaukee. I’m excited to go there. I’ll be reunited with Billy Castro, one of my best friends in baseball, and Todd Coffey.


“But our family had adopted the Reds organization. I really thought it was where I’d end my career. But, in this game, things don’t go like you plan them.


“We’re going to miss Cincinnati, my family and I. They’ve been very good to us. The city’s been very good to us. I love my teammates.


“It’s a good day. But to be honest, it’s tough day emotionally because you form a lot of bonds with guys you’ve been with five, six years. You don’t find that every day, especially in this game.


“As excited as I am to get that race, at the same time, I’m sad that I leaving. My kids are very upset about not being able to be with the people they know.”


Some really nice quotes from Weathers. My favorite:

"I’ve already played for Milwaukee."

I think he could say about any city he was traded to. :D

UKFlounder
08-09-2009, 04:14 PM
"We're going to start using younger guys" - I guess that means just in the bullpen, though maybe upcoming moves will prove that wrong.

redsmetz
08-09-2009, 04:17 PM
On mlbtraderumors.com, some Reds fan wrote a "good riddance" type post and said that Weathers had caused him "frustration year after year." A Brewers fan wrote:


Why would this cause you "frustration year after year"?

2007 CIN 77.2 3.59 1.21 .233
2008 CIN 72 3.25 1.53 .276
2009 CIN 38.0 3.32 1.16 .199

Looks like pretty good numbers to me. Nice pickup, Brewers.

HokieRed
08-09-2009, 04:19 PM
"We're going to start using younger guys" - I guess that means just in the bullpen, though maybe upcoming moves will prove that wrong.


Kip Wells.

RedsBaron
08-09-2009, 04:28 PM
Weathers is a class act. I wish him well.

JaxRed
08-09-2009, 04:33 PM
A couple time at practices, I saw Weathers the fence at the practice fields signing autographs till everyone that wanted one got one. And talking to the kids.

Trading Weathers was the right move for the Reds, but he was a class guy.

KoryMac5
08-09-2009, 04:35 PM
Weathers was a class act and a guy who made the most out of not having over powering stuff. He caused a few gray hairs for those of us who had to watch him over the last few seasons. But when he was hitting the corners it was a thing of beauty. Good luck in Brew Town.

reds44
08-09-2009, 04:40 PM
Weathers is class all the way.

CarolinaRedleg
08-09-2009, 04:41 PM
Hate to see Stormy go. At Zebulon, he was one of the first Reds to the fence where the autograph seekers were waiting, took time to sign and chatted a bit too. Great representative of the team.

chicoruiz
08-09-2009, 04:50 PM
The fact that everyone who gets rid of him eventually wants him back speaks volumes about the kind of guy he is. Good luck, Stormy...

Scrap Irony
08-09-2009, 04:51 PM
As to the prospects, there aren't many young players on the 40-man roster of Milwaukee. Because it's a PTBNL, I assumed the young player(s) would there.

I think not, after viewing what's there. Only top prospects Escobar and Salome (along with Gamel) are young enough to apply and none, I would think, are available for the likes of Weathers.

11larkin11
08-09-2009, 04:55 PM
Grande speculating if it may be Hardy

Tom Servo
08-09-2009, 04:56 PM
Grande speculating if it may be Hardy
George says a lot of things.

HokieRed
08-09-2009, 04:57 PM
As to the prospects, there aren't many young players on the 40-man roster of Milwaukee. Because it's a PTBNL, I assumed the young player(s) would there.

I think not, after viewing what's there. Only top prospects Escobar and Salome (along with Gamel) are young enough to apply and none, I would think, are available for the likes of Weathers.


I, too, hate to see Weathers go. I think he's been very valuable to this club, and I only wish he could have pitched here with a better team. But I do think getting rid of the contract and getting something for him is the right move here. Problem is, as Scrap notes, just what that might be. I hardly see anything on their 40 man that I think Weathers would bring or (among those he might bring) that would do us any good.

nate
08-09-2009, 04:58 PM
Err...nm.

Falls City Beer
08-09-2009, 04:58 PM
It was time to move on, but he was certainly a source of stability in a sea of chaos.

JaxRed
08-09-2009, 05:07 PM
I would actually suspect it's a player NOT on their 40 man roster, (and it CAN'T be Hardy)

RedEye
08-09-2009, 05:09 PM
How you figure?

Well... doesn't having good bullpen pitchers play a role in fielding a competitive roster? If the team were in "win now" mode, I wouldn't expect them to start shedding the salaries of integral parts...

RedEye
08-09-2009, 05:10 PM
Grande speculating if it may be Hardy

If it is Hardy, then I take back my earlier comments about this not possibly being about winning this year.

It can't be Hardy. Can it?

redsfandan
08-09-2009, 05:12 PM
On Weathers, I'm happy for the guy. He was good for us and underrated by some but it just made sense to move him. At least now he can finish the season with a team that still has a shot at the playoffs. I just hope the Reds don't receive cash or another Weems in exchange.

mth123
08-09-2009, 05:17 PM
Weathers converted me. He did a good job here and was a classy guy. It was a move that needed to be made. Maybe now more innings for Josh Roen..oh wait.;)

As for the PTBNL, hopefully its some one who does not need to be protected on the 40 man at this point, but I suspect Pile O' Cash may be involved. If its a player, the Brewers have decent catching depth. Jonathon Lucroy wouldn't be a bad pick-up. The Brewers already have Angel Solome and Brett Lawrie. If the team coud get a top ten prospect from the Astros for Keppinger, a decent prospect for Weathers shouldn't be out of the question.

Weathers is reunited with Todd Coffey. If I remember right, Coffey kind of looked up to Weathers as a mentor. Maybe Coffeybro could chime in.

Brutus
08-09-2009, 05:25 PM
If it is Hardy, then I take back my earlier comments about this not possibly being about winning this year.

It can't be Hardy. Can it?

I think technically it could, but probably is not. It does actually make sense for the Brewers, as they are planning on Escobar being their guy next season.

RedEye
08-09-2009, 05:27 PM
I think technically it could, but probably is not. It does actually make sense for the Brewers, as they are planning on Escobar being their guy next season.

Well, J.J. Hardy would be one whale of a return for David Weathers. He's a bit feast-or-famine as a hitter, but IIRC he's a decent fielder and still quite young.

JaxRed
08-09-2009, 05:27 PM
I think technically it could, but probably is not. It does actually make sense for the Brewers, as they are planning on Escobar being their guy next season.

It can't. A PTBNL can't have played in same league during that season.

RedEye
08-09-2009, 05:27 PM
An infield of Rolen-Hardy-Phillips-Votto would actually start resembling something I'd like to see on the field, too. Hmmm...

Brutus
08-09-2009, 05:30 PM
It can't. A PTBNL can't have played in same league during that season.

Micah Owings was a PTBNL last season for Arizona and he had pitched in that league in the same season. So while I am aware that was have said to be the rule, there's clearly some loopholes to it.

nate
08-09-2009, 05:31 PM
Micah Owings was a PTBNL last season for Arizona and he had pitched in that league in the same season. So while I am aware that was have said to be the rule, there's clearly some loopholes to it.

But didn't he come over after the season was over?

Emin3mShady07
08-09-2009, 05:31 PM
Grande speculating if it may be Hardy

If the Reds can get JJ Hardy for an old average reliever, then more power to them.

Hardy is an excellent fielder and is on pace to be a 2 win player this year, whilst only hitting a paltry .226/.300/.364, he'd be a FANTASTIC addition if he could just be an average hitter and is indeed a player on the list the reds get to choose from.

That being said, there is no way I trade JJ Hardy for David Weathers. Even with Escobar waiting in the wings.

JaxRed
08-09-2009, 05:32 PM
Micah Owings was a PTBNL last season for Arizona and he had pitched in that league in the same season. So while I am aware that was have said to be the rule, there's clearly some loopholes to it.

Hmmmm Good point......

11larkin11
08-09-2009, 05:33 PM
To clarify, I think George was talking about "expanding the deal" to include Hardy, but he is a FA after this year, so if that were to happen (which it won't), I would want a 72 hours negotiating window.

And yes, a player must switch leagues, so I'm not sure what happened with Owings. He may have currently been in AAA.

Brutus
08-09-2009, 05:34 PM
To clarify, I think George was talking about "expanding the deal" to include Hardy, but he is a FA after this year, so if that were to happen (which it won't), I would want a 72 hours negotiating window.

And yes, a player must switch leagues, so I'm not sure what happened with Owings. He may have currently been in AAA.


Owings was on the DL at the time of the Dunn trade. I don't recall if he had been on the minor league DL or the Major League DL, but I'm pretty sure it was the Major League DL.

EDIT: I forgot that Hardy was a free agent. That kind of makes this more of a moot point, IMHO.

Kc61
08-09-2009, 05:35 PM
Weathers was always one of my favorite Reds, he didn't pitch scared, came after the hitters and knew how to locate his pitches well. He'll be missed.

Still, he was a free agent last year, the Reds offered arbitration, and a pretty big contract resulted. Reds had little choice but to move him now and save the rest of the contract money.

I expect they will get a decent minor league prospect but not a major return. The main issue was avoiding the salary commitment and the buy out of Weathers' option and I assume they got that relief from the Brewers.

Burton needs to come back strong so the Reds will have Burton, Massett, Rhodes and Coco for the late innings next year. If not, they will be short a late innings reliever.

Brutus
08-09-2009, 05:36 PM
But didn't he come over after the season was over?

Yes, he did.

That's my point though. That trade makes some sense (somewhat) for the Brewers because if they were to send Hardy over after the season, then they can use him in the playoff race but cut ties in favor of Escobar after the season.

Make no mistake, I do not think they would do that trade, nor do I think Grande has any insight to this. I'm simply saying I think it actually could make sense.

11larkin11
08-09-2009, 05:37 PM
Yes, he did.

That's my point though. That trade makes some sense (somewhat) for the Brewers because if they were to send Hardy over after the season, then they can use him in the playoff race but cut ties in favor of Escobar after the season.

Make no mistake, I do not think they would do that trade, nor do I think Grande has any insight to this. I'm simply saying I think it actually could make sense.

No, he didn't. He came over in September for PH duties.

RANDY IN INDY
08-09-2009, 05:39 PM
Well... doesn't having good bullpen pitchers play a role in fielding a competitive roster? If the team were in "win now" mode, I wouldn't expect them to start shedding the salaries of integral parts...

2009 has pretty much been over for a while.

Brutus
08-09-2009, 05:39 PM
No, he didn't. He came over in September for PH duties.

Right. That goes more to the point though that it's possible.

11larkin11
08-09-2009, 05:41 PM
Ok. To clarify, a player must change leagues. Owings played for Tucson until September 8th, and was DLed, so he went from the PCL to the NL (Reds), so he did technically switch leagues. Therefore, unless Hardy is sent down, it can't be him. And they cannot wait until after the season, as Hardy is currently on a one year contract and is a FA after this year. He's had a down year, so I would love to sign low with him. He and Gonzo have similair contracts, I'd definitely replace Gonzo with Hardy for the same amount of money.

Brutus
08-09-2009, 05:44 PM
Ok. To clarify, a player must change leagues. Owings played for Tucson until September 8th, and was DLed, so he went from the PCL to the NL (Reds), so he did technically switch leagues. Therefore, unless Hardy is sent down, it can't be him. And they cannot wait until after the season, as Hardy is currently on a one year contract and is a FA after this year. He's had a down year, so I would love to sign low with him. He and Gonzo have similair contracts, I'd definitely replace Gonzo with Hardy for the same amount of money.

That makes sense. I knew he had been hurt for a while, but I could not remember if he was ever sent down by the D-backs or if he was simply a PTBNL until he returned from the DL.

So the rule is actually needing to change leagues. Thanks for the clarification.

It does make sense to sign Hardy in the offseason. He's a woefully inconsistent hitter, but good fielder who hits well at GABP.

ochre
08-09-2009, 05:46 PM
"We're going to start using younger guys" - I guess that means just in the bullpen, though maybe upcoming moves will prove that wrong.
I think it just means they don't have many options older than Weathers :)

11larkin11
08-09-2009, 05:46 PM
That makes sense. I knew he had been hurt for a while, but I could not remember if he was ever sent down by the D-backs or if he was simply a PTBNL until he returned from the DL.

So the rule is actually needing to change leagues. Thanks for the clarification.

It does make sense to sign Hardy in the offseason. He's a woefully inconsistent hitter, but good fielder who hits well at GABP.

Exactly. He's my second option behind Figgins (to play 2B with a Phillips SS switch). He's probably cheaper than Figgins though and no position changing would be necessary.

Ron Madden
08-09-2009, 05:46 PM
This move had to be made.

I wish David Weathers all the best, he's a class act.

mth123
08-09-2009, 05:47 PM
Here is the PTBNL snippet from Cots




A transaction including a player to be named later must be completed within six months. The player may not be an active Major League player during the interval between the trade and the date the player is named. As a result, most players to be named later are minor leaguers.

At the time of a trade, clubs sometimes agree on a list of players from which the player to be named will be selected. They also may agree on an amount of money to be exchanged in lieu of a player.

Clubs may include a player to be named later in a trade if a player is not eligible to be traded. For example, once a draft pick signs a professional contract, he may not be traded until an entire year has elapsed (the Pete Incaviglia Rule). Additionally, a player on a minor-league reserve list may not be traded between November 20 and the Rule 5 draft in December, so trades during that window may include a PTBNL.



A PTBNL can have played in the league this year, he just can't play in the league after the dealt player was acquired (Weathers in this case). So the example of a guy playing for the brewers during the rest of the year and then being named is not possible. It appears that it can be a guy on the major league DL so long as he is never activated after the initial trade.

reds44
08-09-2009, 05:48 PM
Rickie Weeks.

11larkin11
08-09-2009, 05:50 PM
It very well could be Weeks. Weather does have a decent trade value, and Weeks hasn't really been the star he was meant out to be, but still has upside.

Spring~Fields
08-09-2009, 05:50 PM
On the bright side, this move may slightly assist in our endeavor to catch the Nationals, whose tremendous win streak is alive and kicking.

:all_cohol

JaxRed
08-09-2009, 05:51 PM
Then give me Matt Gamel. Huge RH bat

Hoosier Red
08-09-2009, 05:51 PM
But didn't he come over after the season was over?

No, he(owings) didn't pitch last year but he came in and had a couple of pinch hits.

TheNext44
08-09-2009, 05:53 PM
I can guarantee that the player will be some low level prospect no one besides DougDirt has ever heard of. Probably in the #20-40 range of all Brewer prospects, maybe in the top 20 if the Reds are lucky.

No way 7 weeks of Weathers and a $3.5M contract is worth more than that.

Brutus
08-09-2009, 05:54 PM
Though it was probably said more in jest, I definitely would not think the Brewers would move Weeks. He looked like he was finally putting it together this year before he got hurt. If he comes back healthy, Weeks might be a monster next season. FeLo is a free agent at the end of the season, so I don't think the Brewers have him in any long-range plans.

Gamel... I'm with you on that Jax. He can hit. He could be the big-bopping LF the Reds need.

11larkin11
08-09-2009, 05:56 PM
Ha, if you thought getting Weeks or Hardy was farfetched, Gamel is an absolute monster. He is the least likely of that bunch that we would get.

Brutus
08-09-2009, 05:58 PM
Ha, if you thought getting Weeks or Hardy was farfetched, Gamel is an absolute monster. He is the least likely of that bunch that we would get.

Personally, about 2-3 times a week, I like to think outside the box even if it doesn't deal with reality:D

TheNext44
08-09-2009, 05:58 PM
How about Ryan Braun? I heard he's good. :D

Spring~Fields
08-09-2009, 06:09 PM
How about Ryan Braun? I heard he's good. :D

He is not a good fit for this organization. His on base percentage is too high, he is young, plus he can actually hit the ball :)

Ryan Braun .391 .566 .957

redsfandan
08-09-2009, 06:15 PM
I can guarantee that the player will be some low level prospect no one besides DougDirt has ever heard of. Probably in the #20-40 range of all Brewer prospects, maybe in the top 20 if the Reds are lucky.

No way 7 weeks of Weathers and a $3.5M contract is worth more than that.
Agreed. If we receive a player that's more than just filer then I'll be happy.

NJReds
08-09-2009, 06:30 PM
Good luck to David. He was a true professional with the Reds, filling in where needed and he performed well.

GAC
08-09-2009, 06:40 PM
Just reading all the great responses on this thread is a testimony in itself of just how much of class act Stormy is.

He had a sound career in a Cincy uniform.

The best of luck David...... just not against us! ;)

tommycash
08-09-2009, 06:55 PM
Thanks Stormy. I will miss you.

bucksfan2
08-09-2009, 06:58 PM
It makes sense to deal Weathers. I guess the trade market wasn't all that active for Weathers during the July trade deadline. I just find it odd that the Reds would trade Weathers now rather than a week or so ago.

Will M
08-09-2009, 07:18 PM
IF the reds want weathers back for 2010 it is actually cheaper for them to trade him now. they save money on the rest of 2009 and save on the buyout.
Rhodes got 2 yrs/$2M per year last winter and I suspect on the open market Weathers could get a 1 year $2M deal. he certainly will get less than the $3.9M option the Reds had on him

kaldaniels
08-09-2009, 07:22 PM
David Weathers...Reds Hall of Fame?

RedsManRick
08-09-2009, 07:32 PM
Always fun to see the speculation -- I'd be shocked if it was anything other than a mediocre prospect -- or cash.

bucksfan2
08-09-2009, 07:34 PM
David Weathers...Reds Hall of Fame?

Should be, but he never got much love amongst Reds fans.

WebScorpion
08-09-2009, 07:35 PM
Good luck to Stormy, I'm sure he'll do well for the Brewers. As stated here numerous times, he was a class act and did a ton more for this team than even his numbers suggest.
The Brewers have some pretty deep talent in their system, I hope the Reds can find a decent return on that list somewhere. Names I wouldn't mind seeing are Jeremy Jeffress or Caleb Gindl...maybe even one of their young latin pitchers Wily Peralta or Efrain Nieves...

Ron Madden
08-09-2009, 07:41 PM
Always fun to see the speculation -- I'd be shocked if it was anything other than a mediocre prospect -- or cash.

Exactly the way I see it. I'd bet on cash in return.

GAC
08-09-2009, 07:51 PM
I'd take door #3. The superstar starting SS is always behind door #3

http://picklepumpers.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/lets-make-a-deal-doors.jpg

jojo
08-09-2009, 08:11 PM
I think technically it could, but probably is not. It does actually make sense for the Brewers, as they are planning on Escobar being their guy next season.

Hardy has much more trade value than 6 weeks of an aging relief pitcher.

Raisor
08-09-2009, 08:13 PM
David Weathers...Reds Hall of Fame?

only if Scott Sullivan makes it.

In other words, no.

traderumor
08-09-2009, 08:14 PM
My 7 year old take on the trade: "now the Brewers will stink" :)

IslandRed
08-09-2009, 08:20 PM
From Fay's article:


The Reds have a pool of players to pick from. They are young players. The club has until Oct. 15 to decide. If they choose not to take any of the players, they’ll get cash instead.

Seems pretty clear the PTBNL loopholes aren't going to be a factor here; this just gives the Reds extra time to scout a group of players while the Brewers get Weathers right away. Works for both sides.

Super_Barry11
08-09-2009, 10:06 PM
Just wanted to add my funny little story of the day. I was at the game today with my friend, who was really hoping to get Weathers to sign a picture of her with him from a previous season. We watched him warm-up and then take his usual run in the outfield before the game. My friend then called over to him and asked him to sign the photo. He's usually pretty friendly and good about signing, so I was surprised when he declined. He then explained that he heard he was supposed to see Baker his office and that he had to go. He said he might be back out later. Well, obviously, he never came back out. :( He seems to be a really nice guy, so I wish him the best in Milwaukee. Hopefully the Reds will get a good return!!

cincrazy
08-09-2009, 11:13 PM
I'd hate to bust anyone's bubble, but the Reds aren't getting more than a bucket of balls in return for David Weathers. He's a good pitcher and a useful part, and he'll help the Brewers a ton. But relief pitchers in their late 30's with next to no stuff making over $3 million a year aren't going to get you much.

penantboundreds
08-09-2009, 11:52 PM
Hate to bust your bubble there Cincrazy, but if you can get people out you are valuable, and clearly Weathers is valuable, so the return might not be peanuts as you suggest.

harangatang
08-10-2009, 12:21 AM
I remember back in 2005 being equally horrified having Weathers as the closer as the newly departed Graves, let alone a member of the pitching staff. He did well in whatever role the Reds threw him in whether it was a setup man for Coffey or Cordero or as a closer. He was one of the few bright spots during his tenure as a Red and I will actually miss having him on the ballclub.

jojo
08-10-2009, 12:27 AM
Hate to bust your bubble there Cincrazy, but if you can get people out you are valuable, and clearly Weathers is valuable, so the return might not be peanuts as you suggest.

Weathers has very little trade value.

It's most likely that the big get for the Reds is salary relief and a roster spot.

*BaseClogger*
08-10-2009, 01:19 AM
David Weathers was like the anti-Matt Belisle. The numbers said one thing, and the player performed the opposite way. That's why you can't just rely on the numbers... :thumbup:

Mario-Rijo
08-10-2009, 02:38 AM
Weathers has very little trade value.

It's most likely that the big get for the Reds is salary relief and a roster spot.

Yeah a little extra cash for the rookie signings for the next week, oddly the same thing happened last season to sign players. Just speculating but it makes sense. I wouldn't be all that shocked to see one more (Rhodes, Arroyo, Harang) go, if so the Reds might take the lowlevel prospect if not I suspect they take the cash.

RedlegJake
08-10-2009, 06:39 AM
I think Weathers has more value than some of you think - you are telling me you wouldn't give up just about ANY A level player to get a quality reliever if your team was still in the thick of things? They probably pull back 1 or 2 guys but sounds like they got a list, probably all prospects in Rookie to A ball.

That said I'm very glad for Stormy - love to see him get a ring, and I actually don't mind the Brewers if the Reds aren't in it.

cumberlandreds
08-10-2009, 07:51 AM
Best of luck to Weathers!. When he first came to the Reds for the 2nd time I was more than skeptical about him. But as time went on he became one of my favorite current Reds. He was as tough as competitor as you would want. He was one the few Reds pitcher's who wasn't afraid to brush back someone when they needed it. I liked that. I knew it was inevitable he would go someday so this doesn't surprise. I hope does well in Milwaukee and wherever else he plays.

redsmetz
08-10-2009, 07:59 AM
I think Weathers has more value than some of you think - you are telling me you wouldn't give up just about ANY A level player to get a quality reliever if your team was still in the thick of things? They probably pull back 1 or 2 guys but sounds like they got a list, probably all prospects in Rookie to A ball.

That said I'm very glad for Stormy - love to see him get a ring, and I actually don't mind the Brewers if the Reds aren't in it.

It's been heartening to read folks acknowledging what Weathers has done for this team over his past several years here.

It didn't surprise me that the Reds moved Weathers now. For the Reds to have exercised their option at season's end, they would have made him a 10 & 5 player (ten years or more ML experience, five with the same club). This is year five. He has more value to someone else who he can help in the stretch run and that club can take the option and still be able to trade him next season without his approval (or before season's end, if they wanted).

That said, I don't expect a top prospect, but I do think it can be a reasonably good one. Probably a Single A player or another, although if cash helps sign the top two picks this season, put the check in the mail.

bucksfan2
08-10-2009, 08:38 AM
Weathers has very little trade value.

It's most likely that the big get for the Reds is salary relief and a roster spot.

This is kind of the view most Reds fans had of Weathers. Every time he was brought into the game people moaned and groaned that the Reds are bringing in "stormy Weathers". Time and time again Weathers took the ball and got out of a jam. I saw him pound that outside corner with his sinker over and over again until he finally struck out a batter.

Weathers had quite a bit of value if you ask me. Even though he is older he has shown he is a reliable 8th inning man. As the season goes along and you get into the crunch time that 8th inning spot becomes more and more important. For the past 2 years Weathers has made his money pitching as the setup man and been quite successful. If he had blazing stuff he would have been thought of as a great 8th inning pitcher.

IMO the Reds get a decent prospect back. Not the top tier prospect, but probably a good A baller.

nate
08-10-2009, 09:11 AM
This is kind of the view most Reds fans had of Weathers. Every time he was brought into the game people moaned and groaned that the Reds are bringing in "stormy Weathers". Time and time again Weathers took the ball and got out of a jam. I saw him pound that outside corner with his sinker over and over again until he finally struck out a batter.

Weathers had quite a bit of value if you ask me. Even though he is older he has shown he is a reliable 8th inning man. As the season goes along and you get into the crunch time that 8th inning spot becomes more and more important. For the past 2 years Weathers has made his money pitching as the setup man and been quite successful. If he had blazing stuff he would have been thought of as a great 8th inning pitcher.

IMO the Reds get a decent prospect back. Not the top tier prospect, but probably a good A baller.

Trade value isn't the same thing as talent and/or performance.

Ltlabner
08-10-2009, 09:34 AM
Redszone: Miss a day, miss a lot.

I usually take Reds sabbaticals on the West Coast Trips. So I had no idea this had gone down until I was scrolling down the list of threads a few minutes ago.

Count me in the list of people who groaned every time he came to the mound, or we re-signed him. Also count me in the list of people he won over as a non-flashy but effective pitcher. Good luck Stormy.

buckeyenut
08-10-2009, 10:02 AM
I would not mind bringing Weathers back next season under this scenario. We wouldn't pay him 3.9M, but this lets MIL pay him rest of year and buyout and we can bring him back for a 1 yr 1-2M deal for next season if that works out. In this market, that is going to be the MR sweet spot, IMO. And if he can get more, good for him. But if we sign him for less than 2M, we pay for next year by dealing him now and we get a low level spect for our trouble.

Bumstead
08-10-2009, 10:53 AM
FYI. Hardy's last year of Arbitration is 2010; so, he's not a free agent until after the 2010 season.

Bum

OnBaseMachine
08-10-2009, 11:45 AM
Weathering the storm
Posted by JohnFay at 8/10/2009 7:45 AM EDT on Cincinnati.com

David Weathers was in the seat in front of me on the red eye from San Francisco to Cincinnati.

"Walt Jocketty isn't the most popular guy with my son right now," he said.

You tend to forget the human element when a trade happens. Sunday's trade took Weathers completely by surprise. His family is home in Tennessee -- two of his three kids have started school. He going to get his car and drive to Milwaukee this afternoon. The Brewers are off today.

I remember when Jerry Hairston Jr. got traded to the Yankees. I'm thinking this guy should ecstatic, but you could tell he was upset. You spend everyday with a group of people than they call you one day and say: You've been traded. You've got a half hour to say so long and then move on. It's odd. It doesn't happen in other jobs.

It's particularly rough on guys with families.

But there are a few perks to the job as well. Well, maybe more than a few.

http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=blog07&plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3ae57bcc87-152a-4f72-96fb-cc08b1f396efPost%3a4b4a2d13-3f6f-45d8-b5ba-9af4584597e3&sid=sitelife.cincinnati.com

Good luck to Weathers. He wasn't my favorite player but he seemed like a classy guy.

M2
08-10-2009, 12:31 PM
Then give me Matt Gamel. Huge RH bat

His bat is huge, though it's LH.

AA catcher Jonathan Lucroy would we a nice snag.

A-ball OF Caleb Gindl and P's Eric Anundsen and Amaury Rivas might be good pickups as well.

Benihana
08-10-2009, 12:45 PM
His bat is huge, though it's LH.

AA catcher Jonathan Lucroy would we a nice snag.

A-ball OF Caleb Gindl and P's Eric Anundsen and Amaury Rivas might be good pickups as well.

Lucroy would be a good return for Weathers.

Angel Salome would be a decent consolation, although I'm not sure this org likes offensive-minded, Max Ramirez-like catchers.

M2
08-10-2009, 12:48 PM
Lucroy would be a good return for Weathers.

Angel Salome would be a decent consolation, although I'm not sure this org likes offensive-minded, Max Ramirez-like catchers.

Forgot about Salome, he would be a nice pickup.

Plus, I hear he does this dance with seven veils ...

jojo
08-10-2009, 12:52 PM
One of the brewers minor league three-pack of catchers would be a fleecing for Weathers.

traderumor
08-10-2009, 01:21 PM
My expectations are very low on a PTBNL for Weathers. I am picturing some longshot A baller or a AAAAer.

princeton
08-10-2009, 01:25 PM
My expectations are very low on a PTBNL for Weathers. I am picturing some longshot A baller or a AAAAer.


Walt does a good job in August, as long as he opts for healthy players.

Benihana
08-10-2009, 01:27 PM
If they only get cash back, they should make a strong play to sign one or both of the Miami shortstops. However I doubt that they will. Would be nice to see them take a page from the new Pittsburgh model (wait, did I just say that?)

They had already budgeted for the Leake/Boxberger signings.

traderumor
08-10-2009, 01:32 PM
If they only get cash back, they should make a strong play to sign one or both of the Miami shortstops. However I doubt that they will. Would be nice to see them take a page from the new Pittsburgh model (wait, did I just say that?)

They had already budgeted for the Leake/Boxberger signings.What is the "new Pittsburgh model"?

flyer85
08-10-2009, 01:44 PM
What is the "new Pittsburgh model"?
trade away veterans for a boatload of middling prospects all while losing a bunch of games?

Benihana
08-10-2009, 01:44 PM
What is the "new Pittsburgh model"?

1. When you're not contending, trade in your older, higher priced assets for younger, high upside players on the cusp of being major league ready.

Examples: Out with Jack Wilson and Freddy Sanchez,
Welcome Tim Alderson, Lastings Milledge and Jeff Clement.

2. Build a brand new, state of the art facility in the DR that attracts all of the top talent. Sign said talent.

Example: Miguel Angel Sano (hasn't signed yet, but appears likely to do so)

3. Draft high-talent guys who fall in draft due to signability concerns. Sign said talent, even if way over slot (at least until MLB changes the slotting system, which should happen with the new CBA). The Reds did this with JC Sulbaran last year, and he is one of the best pitching prospects in the system this year. Would have liked to see them do it again this year, but alas...

Examples: Colton Cain, Zach von Rosenberg, Zack Dodson

Benihana
08-10-2009, 01:46 PM
trade away veterans for a boatload of middling prospects all while losing a bunch of games?

Beats signing middling veterans and trading top prospects for middling veterans all while losing a bunch of games, doesn't it?

Not to mention spending big $$ for top amateur talent.

flyer85
08-10-2009, 01:47 PM
1. When you're not contending, trade in your older, higher priced assets for younger, high upside players on the cusp of being major league ready.
Pittsburgh has been doing this for a number of years with nothing to show for it.

They would struggle until they have the ability to sign and develop their own players.

flyer85
08-10-2009, 01:49 PM
Beats signing middling veterans and trading top prospects for middling veterans all while losing a bunch of games, doesn't it?

Not to mention spending big $$ for top amateur talent.both still produce losing ... and it will produce losing until the fundamental problem of developing your core of talent from within is fixed.

marcshoe
08-10-2009, 01:50 PM
Salome can flat-out hit, and came back from his PED suspension with no ill effects. One of my favorite players I've seen locally in the past few years. I'm not sure the Brewers would give him up for Weathers, though.

LeCroy's not bad either.

flyer85
08-10-2009, 01:52 PM
Salome can flat-out hit, and came back from his PED suspension with no ill effects. One of my favorite players I've seen locally in the past few years. I'm not sure the Brewers would give him up for Weathers, though.

LeCroy's not bad either.maybe the Reds should send Bavasi along with Weathers.

Benihana
08-10-2009, 01:53 PM
Pittsburgh has been doing this for a number of years with nothing to show for it.

They would struggle until they have the ability to sign and develop their own players.

Within the last year, they've signed Pedro Alvarez, Tony Sanchez, Victor Black, Colton Cain, Zach von Rosenberg to >$1 million contracts. They've also spent over $5MM building the finest facility in the Dominican Republic, and they are the leading candidates to sign Miguel Angel Sano (the top talent in the entire international FA class.)

Additionally, former first round picks Andrew McCutchen and Paul Maholm have had breakout seasons at the major league level.

I'd say they are signing (and developing) some of their own players.

traderumor
08-10-2009, 01:54 PM
1. When you're not contending, trade in your older, higher priced assets for younger, high upside players on the cusp of being major league ready.

Examples: Out with Jack Wilson and Freddy Sanchez,
Welcome Tim Alderson, Lastings Milledge and Jeff Clement.

2. Build a brand new, state of the art facility in the DR that attracts all of the top talent. Sign said talent.

Example: Miguel Angel Sano (hasn't signed yet, but appears likely to do so)

3. Draft high-talent guys who fall in draft due to signability concerns. Sign said talent, even if way over slot (at least until MLB changes the slotting system, which should happen with the new CBA). The Reds did this with JC Sulbaran last year, and he is one of the best pitching prospects in the system this year. Would have liked to see them do it again this year, but alas...

Examples: Colton Cain, Zach von Rosenberg, Zack Dodson

I echo flyer85. As to point #3, it seems like the Reds did exactly that this year with the HS catcher from Indiana (Barnhart). Also, the Reds have been throwing money around in Latin America, so that fits your model. Point #1, I would say Wilson and Sanchez had rotted on the vine and been overpriced for a couple of years, at least, so I'm not sure that is a model to emulate.

flyer85
08-10-2009, 01:58 PM
Within the last year, they've signed Pedro Alvarez, Tony Sanchez, Victor Black, Colton Cain, Zach von Rosenberg, and are the leading candidates to sign Miguel Angel Sano (the top talent in the entire international FA class.)

Additionally, former first round picks Andrew McCutchen and Paul Maholm have had breakout seasons at the major league level.

I'd say they are signing (and developing) some of their own players.maholm was decent last season, this season not so much. With all those high picks over the last 15 years McCutchen is the only one who is likely to make a huge impact. Alvarez has some talent but he is a guy who may not stick at third which greatly lessens his value.

Have their upgraded their talent stock? Yep ... but at some point it has to translate into W's on the field.

lollipopcurve
08-10-2009, 01:58 PM
2. Build a brand new, state of the art facility in the DR that attracts all of the top talent. Sign said talent.

Reds did build a new facility in the DR recently.

Last year they signed Juan Duran (DR) for 1.5 million and Yorman Rodriguez (VZ) for 2.5 million. They spent several million in Latin America this year, too, including a high profile signing in shortstop Humberto Valor.

Benihana
08-10-2009, 02:02 PM
I echo flyer85. As to point #3, it seems like the Reds did exactly that this year with the HS catcher from Indiana. Also, the Reds have been throwing money around in Latin America, so that fits your model. Point #1, I would say Wilson and Sanchez had rotted on the vine and been overpriced for a couple of years, at least, so I'm not sure that is a model to emulate.

Sorry, but I disagree. I'm not trying to be a Reds-hater, but let's examine the facts and compare apples to apples: if you were to examine their progress as of today:

Pedro Alvarez > Yonder Alonso (Alvarez has been raking, Alonso is sitting)
Tony Sanchez > Mike Leake (Sanchez is signed and playing)
Colton Cain, Zach von Rosenberg, et al >>>>>> Tucker Barnhardt (not even close according to any and all scouting reports, let alone their contracts)
Miguel Angel Sano > Humberto Valor (ditto)
Pirates Dominican Academy > Reds' Baseball Academy
Andrew McCutchen > Jay Bruce (while Bruce probably still has more upside, McCutchen has certainly had a better debut at the ML level)
Paul Maholm > Homer Bailey (again, not even close)

flyer85
08-10-2009, 02:07 PM
I will give the Pirates a pat on the back for seemingly having a plan and sticking to it.

The Reds really seem to have no long term plan. There is really no way to project the 2010 Reds as a winner even if Rolen stays healthy and has a good season. the loss of Volquez is a HUGE blow to trying to put together the starting staff needed to win next year.

Benihana
08-10-2009, 02:08 PM
maholm was decent last season, this season not so much.
He would be one of, if not the best pitcher on the Reds' staff this year. He has a better ERA and WHIP than any Reds pitcher over the last two years. I'd gladly take him over Homer Bailey, especially at this point.


With all those high picks over the last 15 years McCutchen is the only one who is likely to make a huge impact. Alvarez has some talent but he is a guy who may not stick at third which greatly lessens his value.

I'd take Alvarez over Alonso every day of the week, and it's not that close.


Have their upgraded their talent stock? Yep ... but at some point it has to translate into W's on the field.

Of course. Same thing could be said about the Reds. And right now, with their current organizational structures, I like Pittsburgh's chances over the next five years more than the Reds. And that's sad, very sad.

Benihana
08-10-2009, 02:10 PM
Reds did build a new facility in the DR recently.

Last year they signed Juan Duran (DR) for 1.5 million and Yorman Rodriguez (VZ) for 2.5 million. They spent several million in Latin America this year, too, including a high profile signing in shortstop Humberto Valor.

They spent several million in Latin America this year? That's news to me.


Valor signed for <$1 MM. I don't believe anyone else even got a quarter of a million.

Further, the Pirates are very well positioned to sign a lot of top-level Dominican players in the upcoming years due to their state of the art facility, according to many baseball insiders.

flyer85
08-10-2009, 02:12 PM
He would be one of, if not the best pitcher on the Reds' staff this year. He has a better ERA and WHIP than any Reds pitcher over the last two years.
pitching in the nice environment at PNC. I doubt he would fare as well with half his starts in the cozy confines of GABP ... and with his 4.76 ERA this year it looks more like 2008 was a career season(3.71). 2009 looks like 2006 and 2007.

chicoruiz
08-10-2009, 02:13 PM
Tony Sanchez > Mike Leake (Sanchez is signed and playing

If that's the only advantage Sanchez has over Leake (and I think it is...)

Benihana
08-10-2009, 02:16 PM
pitching in the nice environment at PNC. I doubt he would fare as well with half his starts in the cozy confines of GABP ... and with his 4.76 ERA this year it looks more like 2008 was a career season(3.71). 2009 looks like 2006 and 2007.

Well, he does have a 1.66 ERA in 27 IP against the Reds, including a 1.92 ERA in GAB over the last two years. Small sample size and all, but still...

Benihana
08-10-2009, 02:19 PM
If that's the only advantage Sanchez has over Leake (and I think it is...)

My only point in this whole Pirates-Reds discussion is that I think the Reds FO could learn a thing or two from what the Pirates have done in the last 12 months. Since Huntington has taken over, they've clearly done a few things right. Can we say the same about Jocketty? That remains to be seen...

lollipopcurve
08-10-2009, 02:20 PM
Pedro Alvarez > Yonder Alonso (Alvarez has been raking, Alonso is sitting)

Are you blaming the Reds for Alonso's injury? Remember, too, that the Prates had the 2nd overall pick in getting Alvarez. Alonso came 5 slots later.


Tony Sanchez > Mike Leake (Sanchez is signed and playing)

The only reason Sanchez is signed and playing is that he was a signability pick at #4. Is that a strategy you recommend?


Colton Cain, Zach von Rosenberg, et al >>>>>> Tucker Barnhardt (not even close according to any and all scouting reports, let alone their contracts)

The Reds signed Harold/Jacob Johnson for well above slot at #11, and he's been tremendous in the GCL so far. How closely are you looking at the signings the Reds have made?



Miguel Angel Sano > Humberto Valor (ditto)

The Pirates have not signed Sano. Even if they had, it's WAY too soon to be judging these players.


Pirates Dominican Academy > Reds' Baseball Academy

Because?


Andrew McCutchen > Jay Bruce (while Bruce probably still has more upside, McCutchen has certainly had a better debut at the ML level)

Let's let this one play out, too.


Paul Maholm > Homer Bailey (again, not even close)

And Drew Stubbs is a helluva lot better prospect than Daniel Moskos.

Looking a little more closely, the Pirates appear to have come up with little for Bay, Nady and McLouth, though I suppose the jury's out on Jose Tabata still, and they've misfired on a couple of top 5 draft picks (Moskos instead of Wieters, Lincoln instead of Lincecum) -- and gone signability at #4 this year. Not impressive.

This is really an absurd argument. I'll take the Reds because I like a Votto-Phillips-Bruce-Alonso-Cueto young core better than a McCutchen-Alvarez-Milledge and whatever core Pittsburgh is putting together, especially given the fact the Reds are willing to sprinkle in some decent experience around the youth.

Benihana
08-10-2009, 02:28 PM
Are you blaming the Reds for Alonso's injury? Remember, too, that the Prates had the 2nd overall pick in getting Alvarez. Alonso came 5 slots later.


The only reason Sanchez is signed and playing is that he was a signability pick at #4. Is that a strategy you recommend?



The Reds signed Harold/Jacob Johnson for well above slot at #11, and he's been tremendous in the GCL so far. How closely are you looking at the signings the Reds have made?




The Pirates have not signed Sano. Even if they had, it's WAY too soon to be judging these players.



Because?



Let's let this one play out, too.



And Drew Stubbs is a helluva lot better prospect than Daniel Moskos.

Looking a little more closely, the Pirates appear to have come up with little for Bay, Nady and McLouth, though I suppose the jury's out on Jose Tabata still, and they've misfired on a couple of top 5 draft picks (Moskos instead of Wieters, Lincoln instead of Lincecum) -- and gone signability at #4 this year. Not impressive.

This is really an absurd argument. I'll take the Reds because I like a Votto-Phillips-Bruce-Alonso-Cueto young core better than a McCutchen-Alvarez-Milledge and whatever core Pittsburgh is putting together, especially given the fact the Reds are willing to sprinkle in some decent experience around the youth.


The point is that the Pirates have been a historically awful organization, especially prior to Huntington's arrival. They have an even cheaper owner than the Reds, yet I believe they are making much better allocations of their assets. And FWIW, Huntington's regime didn't draft Moskos or Lincoln. Pittsburgh's ownership is cheap to epic proportions, and Bonifay and Littlefield's regimes were historically bad.

Out of the players you mentioned for the Reds core, Walt is responsible only for Yonder Alonso.

In only six more months on the job, Huntington has brought in Alvarez, Andy LaRoche, Sanchez, von Rosenberg, Clement, Hernandez, Milledge, and many, many more. True he has traded more veterans as well, but I think most of us would have liked to see more of that kind of activity (ie some sort of defined plan) out of Walt instead of the deer in headlights, last minute out-of-control swerve (aka the Rolen trade) that we've seen so far during his tenure.

Do I like and prefer guys like Votto, Phillips, Cueto et al? Of course. But that's not really Walt's doing, now is it? As for a comparison of their facilities in the Dominican, ask anyone inside the game. They would probably laugh at you.

TheNext44
08-10-2009, 02:29 PM
Sorry, but I disagree. I'm not trying to be a Reds-hater, but let's examine the facts and compare apples to apples: if you were to examine their progress as of today:

Pedro Alvarez > Yonder Alonso (Alvarez has been raking, Alonso is sitting)
Tony Sanchez > Mike Leake (Sanchez is signed and playing)
Colton Cain, Zach von Rosenberg, et al >>>>>> Tucker Barnhardt (not even close according to any and all scouting reports, let alone their contracts)
Miguel Angel Sano > Humberto Valor (ditto)
Pirates Dominican Academy > Reds' Baseball Academy
Andrew McCutchen > Jay Bruce (while Bruce probably still has more upside, McCutchen has certainly had a better debut at the ML level)
Paul Maholm > Homer Bailey (again, not even close)

I like what the Pirates are doing too, but just a few particulars on this list that I don't completely agree with:

Bruce's first 50 games: .267 .329 .433 .762
McCutchen 's first 50 games: .281 .339 .438 .777
If I compare just their first months, it's Bruce by a landslide.
Lets see McCutchen's numbers at the end of the season before judging his MLB debut. And he was taken one pick before Bruce.

Sanchez was drafted because he was an easy sign, and taken four picks earlier.

Alvarez was taken 2nd overall, six spots higher than Alonso. He better be better.

None of these players show any superiority of the Pirates over the Reds, other than their ability to play worse than the Reds and get better draft slots.

lollipopcurve
08-10-2009, 02:34 PM
In only six more months on the job, Huntington has brought in Alvarez, Andy LaRoche, Sanchez, von Rosenberg, Clement, Hernandez, Milledge, and many, many more. True he has traded more veterans as well, but I think most of us would have liked to see more of that kind of activity (ie some sort of defined plan) out of Walt instead of the deer in headlights, last minute out-of-control swerve (aka the Rolen trade) that we've seen so far during his tenure.

Do I like and prefer guys like Votto, Phillips, Cueto et al? Of course. But that's not really Walt's doing, now is it?

The Pirates are in pure sell-off mode. What that means is that they are putting all their eggs in the youth movement basket. That's high risk, because, as we've seen with players like Bailey and Bruce, prospect pedigree does not translate easily to big league performance.

Is the Reds' young core at least partly Jocketty's doing? To the extent he has kept it intact, yes. What you're seeing with the Reds is patience. This does not sit well with the moment to moment surveillance that this board visits upon the Reds. But it has a better chance of working than a fire sale, I think.

Benihana
08-10-2009, 02:37 PM
Sometimes going signability in the first round if it means you can take a lot more upside (and expensive) chances later can be a decent strategy. That's what many on this board hoped the Reds did after they drafted Leake (over Crow, Matzek, etc.), yet they didn't take any top talents later on (I laugh at those that point to J.Johnson/Barnhardt) and they still haven't even signed Leake!

Not a shot at Johnson or Barnhardt, but those guys are hardly in the same class in terms of pedigree or cost as some of the other guys we're talking about.

Benihana
08-10-2009, 02:39 PM
The Pirates are in pure sell-off mode. What that means is that they are putting all their eggs in the youth movement basket. That's high risk, because, as we've seen with players like Bailey and Bruce, prospect pedigree does not translate easily to big league performance.

Is the Reds' young core at least partly Jocketty's doing? To the extent he has kept it intact, yes. What you're seeing with the Reds is patience. This does not sit well with the moment to moment surveillance that this board visits upon the Reds. But it has a better chance of working than a fire sale, I think.

Of course it's a risk. But I'd argue a last place team trading their top starting pitching and relief pitching prospects on the cusp of the majors for a 34 year old 3B with a big contract and a history of back problems is equally if not more risky.

Sure we've seen patience- in all the wrong places. We've seen "patience" with guys like Corey Patterson and Willy Taveras regardless of their struggles. Yet I don't know how you can characterize a move like the Rolen trade (described above) as a "patient" move?! :confused:

flyer85
08-10-2009, 02:40 PM
But it has a better chance of working than a fire sale, I think.Does it?

IMO the Reds way will produce more wins from year to year with little chance of actually making the playoffs. I think the firesale while scouting and develop player has a batter shot at producing post results than does attempting to maximize wins on a yearly basis.

Small market teams need the confluence of prospects coming along as major contributors at the same time.

Benihana
08-10-2009, 02:41 PM
Does it?

IMO the Reds way will produce more wins from year to year with little chance of actually making the playoffs. I think the firesale while scouting and develop player has a batter shot at producing post results than does attempting to maximize wins on a yearly basis.

Small market teams need the confluence of prospects coming along as major contributors at the same time.

Nice to see you've come over to the dark side flyer!

flyer85
08-10-2009, 02:45 PM
Nice to see you've come over to the dark side flyer!
it is how the Twins and A's have won with small budgets, having a number of impact players come along at around the same time.

Benihana
08-10-2009, 02:46 PM
it is how the Twins and A's have won with small budgets, having a number of impact players come along at around the same time.

You'll get no argument from me. Don't forget about the Marlins or the Rays either.

REDREAD
08-10-2009, 02:47 PM
Do I like and prefer guys like Votto, Phillips, Cueto et al? Of course. But that's not really Walt's doing, now is it? As for a comparison of their facilities in the Dominican, ask anyone inside the game. They would probably laugh at you.

But we can look at it this way. There's a decent chance the Reds will keep Votto for 5-6+ years if he plays well. What does Pittsburg do? It seems they dump players after about 3 years to save money. McClouth (was that the OF they traded to Atl) had an affordable contract, but he was dumped. They traded a pretty good reliever for LaRoche, but then dumped LaRoche a couple years later.. How is that progress?

Walt is turning over the roster more slowly. Part of that is because he inherited veterans that are much more difficult to trade and less desirable.
It's much easier to trade McClouth than it is to trade Arroyo or Cordero.

I think Pittsburg is much more hopeless than the Reds. It's going to be impossible for them to build a talent base if every decent ML player gets traded after about 3 years. No matter how well they do in the draft and international signings, if they don't make a commitment to keep good players, they are never going to be good.

Benihana
08-10-2009, 02:49 PM
I think Pittsburg is much more hopeless than the Reds. It's going to be impossible for them to build a talent base if every decent ML player gets traded after about 3 years. No matter how well they do in the draft and international signings, if they don't make a commitment to keep good players, they are never going to be good.

No argument here that Pittsburgh is hopeless if they can't keep a guy more than three years.

But the Reds are just as hopeless if they focus on trying to get to .500 on a year-to-year basis as opposed to formulating and sticking to a long term plan. I present to you the last decade as evidence.

lollipopcurve
08-10-2009, 02:51 PM
Small market teams need the confluence of prospects coming along as major contributors at the same time.

The Reds may have that in the offing. I don't see how you can look at the Pirates and see this kind of event coming any more easily than you can in the Reds' case. Still, I know of no example of a team going to the World Series with nothing but pre-FA palyers. You have to mix in proven players to guide the way.


I think the firesale while scouting and develop player has a batter shot at producing post results than does attempting to maximize wins on a yearly basis.

The Reds have not stopped "signing and developing," have they? Meanwhile, Votto, Bruce and Cueto have arrived, with Phillips and Volquez (if he can regain his form) still under control for a few years. A young core has taken recognizable shape, and there are some more possible pieces close on the horizon (a CF, Alonso, Frazier). The Pirates have yet to achieve that.

Benihana
08-10-2009, 02:52 PM
The Reds may have that in the offing. I don't see how you can look at the Pirates and see this kind of event coming any more easily than you can in the Reds' case. Still, I know of no example of a team going to the World Series with nothing but pre-FA roster. You have to mix in proven players to guide the way.



The Reds have not stopped "signing and developing," have they? Meanwhile, Votto, Bruce and Cueto have arrived, with Phillips and Volquez (if he can regain his form) still under control for a few years. A young core has taken recognizable shape, and there are some more possible pieces close on the horizon (a CF, Alonso, Frazier). The Pirates have yet to achieve that.

Are you forgetting that they just traded Zach Stewart and Josh Roenicke, arguably the two best quasi-major league ready pitching prospects in the system, for a guy that is a FA after next season?

flyer85
08-10-2009, 02:55 PM
The Reds may have that in the offing. I don't see how you can look at the Pirates and see this kind of event coming any more easily than you can in the Reds' case.
trading away decent prospects for aging oft-injured veteran doesn't fit the plan unless you are acquiring the final piece(or pieces) and Rolen was far from that.

IMO the Reds have the same plan that they did the Bowden years, put together a roster to maximize wins yearly with little thought given to what the team will look like 3-5 years down the line.

Benihana
08-10-2009, 03:03 PM
trading away decent prospects for aging oft-injured veteran doesn't fit the plan unless you are acquiring the final piece(or pieces) and Rolen was far from that.

IMO the Reds have the same plan that they did the Bowden years, put together a roster to maximize wins yearly with little thought given to what the team will look like 3-5 years down the line.

Exactly.

lollipopcurve
08-10-2009, 03:04 PM
trading away decent prospects for aging oft-injured veteran doesn't fit the plan unless you are acquiring the final piece(or pieces) and Rolen was far from that.

I don't think a team can ever be sure that only 1 more piece is needed.

I'm as big a prospect supporter as just about any on this board. But the fact is that we are often fooled by minor league performance and draft and prospect rankings. Roenicke and Stewart are tough to lose. But keep in mind that these two guys may be nothing more than strong-armed set-up guys. Rolen, if he can stay healthy, gives the Reds something they desperately need -- a guy who can hit 4th-6th and give good defense on the infield. And, given that they were able to unload the commitment to EdE in the deal, he is not an expensive proposition, and he's signed for only 1 more year. Factor in that if he is productive they WILL be able to re-sign him (it is his choice to play in Cincinnati), and I think you have manageable risk combined with some real nice upside (that being, Rolen maintains solid offensive and defensive skills for 2-3 years).

I said at the time of the trade that it was a steep price, but I do believe they got something real good in Rolen, and the risk that he will not be healthy is somewhat balanced by the fact that both Roenicke and Stewart may end up as nothing more than set-up guys, and you can find those guys much more easily than you can find what Rolen brings when healthy.

flyer85
08-10-2009, 03:05 PM
I don't think a team can ever be sure that only 1 more piece is needed.
especially when you need 6 or 8.

lollipopcurve
08-10-2009, 03:08 PM
especially when you need 6 or 8.

Some needs are greater than others, and a middle-of-the-order hitter who plays very good infield defense is worth two set up guys, any day.

Benihana
08-10-2009, 03:11 PM
Some needs are greater than others, and a middle-of-the-order hitter who plays very good infield defense is worth two set up guys, any day.

For a team that is planning to contend, a guy that averages 10 HR a year over the last 5 years shouldn't be counted on as a middle of the order hitter, especially when he's 34 years old and presumably in decline.

I have no problems with trading prospects, be it Stewart/Roenicke or anyone else, but in this instance they paid $100,000 for a used Porsche with 80,000 miles on it. Sure it can rev up to 80 MPH and occasionally turn heads every now and then, but it can't really be counted on for years to come.

flyer85
08-10-2009, 03:15 PM
For a team that is planning to contend, a guy that averages 10 HR a year over the last 3 years shouldn't be counted on as a middle of the order hitter, especially when he's 34 years old and presumably in decline.
hmmmmmmm ... I'm not listening ... hmmmmmmm

Please pass the koolaid :all_cohol

Eric_the_Red
08-10-2009, 03:15 PM
trading away decent prospects for aging oft-injured veteran doesn't fit the plan unless you are acquiring the final piece(or pieces) and Rolen was far from that.

IMO the Reds have the same plan that they did the Bowden years, put together a roster to maximize wins yearly with little thought given to what the team will look like 3-5 years down the line.

THIS is what maximizing wins looks like to the FO? :eek:

We are screwed.

lollipopcurve
08-10-2009, 03:17 PM
For a team that is planning to contend, a guy that averages 10 HR a year over the last 3 years shouldn't be counted on as a middle of the order hitter, especially when he's 34 years old and presumably in decline.

Rolen's been hurt prior to this year. He's been healthy in 2009, and look at his numbers. It's absurd to lump this year with the previous two, statistically, and claim decline.

I just don't buy the "go for it or blow it up" dichotomy, especially now that the Reds have put together a decent young core, with a solid minor league system in place. Seems to me all folks want is trades for the sake of trades.

Benihana
08-10-2009, 03:19 PM
Rolen's been hurt prior to this year. He's been healthy in 2009, and look at his numbers. It's absurd to lump this year with the previous two, statistically, and claim decline.

I'm actually lumping this year in with the last four.

Ken Griffey Jr. put up some nice (healthy) halves of seasons in his later years, too. Would you have wanted to trade for him then?



I just don't buy the "go for it or blow it up" dichotomy, especially now that the Reds have put together a decent young core, with a solid minor league system in place. Seems to me all folks want is trades for the sake of trades.

No, trades for the sake of improving the team while sticking to a long term plan would be nice. Good front offices seem to be pretty adept at doing it.

lollipopcurve
08-10-2009, 03:23 PM
Good front offices seem to be pretty adept at doing it.

For example?

lollipopcurve
08-10-2009, 03:25 PM
No, trades for the sake of improving the team while sticking to a long term plan would be nice

You seem to think that "going young" at every position is a viable strategy for success. Is that what you think?

Benihana
08-10-2009, 03:57 PM
You seem to think that "going young" at every position is a viable strategy for success. Is that what you think?

Um, no.

I definitely wouldn't "go young" in the rotation, particularly the top portion of it. And now that we have Rolen, I wouldn't go young at 3B. Or whatever position Brandon Phillips plays next year. Joey Votto obviously stays put at 1B as well.

However, I would "go young" in CF- as I think that either of the Chrises (Dickerson or Heisey) could outperform Wily Taveras for much cheaper and with much more upside.

Jay Bruce is staying in RF. I've advocated taking a cheap flyer on an older faded star in LF, be it a Vlad Guerrero or a Magglio Ordonez. If not, I'd try Balentien if he continues to rake the rest of the way. And especially if Frazier's not going to get significant reps in Louisville this year, I'd advocate not going young at whichever MI position BP doesn't play next year. Preferably, I'd sign Orlando Hudson and move Phillips to SS, provided Hudson doesn't break the bank.

lollipopcurve
08-10-2009, 04:00 PM
And now that we have Rolen, I wouldn't go young at 3B.

Um, um, um.... I thought this was all about you despising the Rolen acquisition.

Benihana
08-10-2009, 04:04 PM
Um, um, um.... I thought this was all about you despising the Rolen acquisition.

I'm not crying over spilled milk.

This was all over my suggestion that the Reds should dedicate the cash that they will save in the Weathers deal to sign some of their more heralded later round picks, and maybe even bid for Sano if it's not already too late.

TheNext44
08-10-2009, 04:11 PM
trading away decent prospects for aging oft-injured veteran doesn't fit the plan unless you are acquiring the final piece(or pieces) and Rolen was far from that.

IMO the Reds have the same plan that they did the Bowden years, put together a roster to maximize wins yearly with little thought given to what the team will look like 3-5 years down the line.

There is a huge difference between this team and any team that Bowden had.

This team has a strong core of young talent. Cueto, Votto, Bruce, Volquez, and Phillips is a core that you can build around. Bringing in veterans to compliment them is the smart move.

Bowden never had a strong core, be it young or veteran. He simply was spending all his resources on getting whatever talent he could for that year. The vets that Bowden brought in each year, were the team, not compliments to a solid core.

cincrazy
08-10-2009, 04:17 PM
If I trade for David Weathers, and I have to pick up a significant portion of his salary, I don't give up my dog that's not house trained for him.

I like David Weathers, and he can help the Brewers. But the chances of him landing us anyone that is going to be a significant contributor on the major league roster aren't high.

bucksfan2
08-10-2009, 04:24 PM
However, I would "go young" in CF- as I think that either of the Chrises (Dickerson or Heisey) could outperform Wily Taveras for much cheaper and with much more upside.

Jay Bruce is staying in RF. I've advocated taking a cheap flyer on an older faded star in LF, be it a Vlad Guerrero or a Magglio Ordonez. If not, I'd try Balentien if he continues to rake the rest of the way. And especially if Frazier's not going to get significant reps in Louisville this year, I'd advocate not going young at whichever MI position BP doesn't play next year. Preferably, I'd sign Orlando Hudson and move Phillips to SS, provided Hudson doesn't break the bank.

As usual you fail to realize that the future center fielder of the Reds first name is Andrew. I know you really dislike him but I think he will be manning CF every day as a Red by June 2010.

I too would keep Bruce in RF everyday for at least another full season. I think he makes a big leap from now, or whenever he comes back, until the beginning of next year. He needs to get some confidence back and maybe playing a rehab assignment in AAA ball will help him do that. I also wouldn't hesitate to send him to the AFL if he doesn't come back soon.

I wouldn't Vlad or Magglio unless it was to a very low base, high incentive salary. I don't think either of those two players would go for that. I also wouldn't sign Orlando Hudson to play 2b if Phillips is move to SS. IMO that would be too much money to pay a 2b. Unless you have a game changing bat like Utley, I don't think investing in a 2b is all that smart of an idea. IMO Frazier would do just fine with me at 2b, even if his defense is slightly below average.

REDREAD
08-10-2009, 04:33 PM
No argument here that Pittsburgh is hopeless if they can't keep a guy more than three years.

But the Reds are just as hopeless if they focus on trying to get to .500 on a year-to-year basis as opposed to formulating and sticking to a long term plan. I present to you the last decade as evidence.

I think the plan is to attempt to incrementally improve each year. Has it worked? No. However, it is just as viable plan as holding a fire sale every 3 years.

The game is stacked against the Reds and Pirates. Really, no matter what GM they have, it's tough odds to play.

Heck, the A's have been trumpeted as a model to emulate, but they never won it all either. Now in hindsight, it seems that a lot of their success was steroid aided. In spite of that, they still never made noise in the playoffs.

Given that the Reds have a very bleak shot of ever winning the WS, I'd rather them continue to try to improve every year as opposed to mass dumping of all the veterans every 2-3 years.

A .500 team is a heck of a lot more enjoyable to watch than the crap we've been subjected to the last several years. 2006 was mildly interesting, or at least the first half of the season was. The fun only lasted a month this year.
Last year pretty much sucked right out of the gate.

REDREAD
08-10-2009, 04:39 PM
especially when you need 6 or 8.

When you need 6-8 more pieces, you generally can only add one or two per transaction.

Look at 1999. At the end of the 1998 season, we were several pieces away.

Vaughn, Neagle, Guzman, Cameron, Reyes, Williamson, Villone, Tucker, Paris..

That's 9 pieces added.

The Reds could've just tossed their hands up in the air and decided it was not worth giving up Konerko (arguably their #1 prospect and projected to be better than Casey) for an athletic CF that was coming off a bad year (Cameron), since they were several pieces away. It was definitely a risky trade that many of the people on the board did not like when it happened.

Benihana
08-10-2009, 04:42 PM
I think the plan is to attempt to incrementally improve each year. Has it worked? No. However, it is just as viable plan as holding a fire sale every 3 years.

The game is stacked against the Reds and Pirates. Really, no matter what GM they have, it's tough odds to play.

Heck, the A's have been trumpeted as a model to emulate, but they never won it all either. Now in hindsight, it seems that a lot of their success was steroid aided. In spite of that, they still never made noise in the playoffs.

Given that the Reds have a very bleak shot of ever winning the WS, I'd rather them continue to try to improve every year as opposed to mass dumping of all the veterans every 2-3 years.

A .500 team is a heck of a lot more enjoyable to watch than the crap we've been subjected to the last several years. 2006 was mildly interesting, or at least the first half of the season was. The fun only lasted a month this year.
Last year pretty much sucked right out of the gate.

Wow, what a depressing outlook. I consider myself as much of a realist as anyone, but whatever happened to "Dare to be great"?

I don't think anyone around here expects a WS ring. But I also don't think expecting more than 1 playoff appearance per 20 years is too much to ask, no matter how much the game is stacked against the small markets.

To be honest with you, I don't really give a crap if the team is .500 or if it loses 100 games. If they don't make the playoffs, it doesn't really matter. All it means is they don't have a chance at the premium talents in the draft, be it a Strasburg, a Harper, a Weiters, etc.

I'd rather see the Reds make a few moves and give it their all. Or keep their prospects, sell off their veterans for more (good) prospects, and try to put together a dynasty. It's the BS in between that really disgusts me. If they trade prospects for Rolen and don't follow it up with several other attempts to acquire premium (or at least decent veteran) talent, then the BS in between is exactly what we're witnessing.

redsmetz
08-10-2009, 04:43 PM
I think the plan is to attempt to incrementally improve each year. Has it worked? No. However, it is just as viable plan as holding a fire sale every 3 years.

The game is stacked against the Reds and Pirates. Really, no matter what GM they have, it's tough odds to play.

Heck, the A's have been trumpeted as a model to emulate, but they never won it all either. Now in hindsight, it seems that a lot of their success was steroid aided. In spite of that, they still never made noise in the playoffs.

Given that the Reds have a very bleak shot of ever winning the WS, I'd rather them continue to try to improve every year as opposed to mass dumping of all the veterans every 2-3 years.

A .500 team is a heck of a lot more enjoyable to watch than the crap we've been subjected to the last several years. 2006 was mildly interesting, or at least the first half of the season was. The fun only lasted a month this year.
Last year pretty much sucked right out of the gate.

We talk about a "lost decade," but I find it hard to lay the bulk of that period on Castellini's shoulders. He took over ownership in early 2006, after MLB dillydallyed over the transfer of the club through the bulk of the offseason of 2005. So Cast is only in his 4th season. I think he made some mistakes during that time, including firing Krivsky which set us back another year, IMO. While our record has not improved, I disagree with those who constantly state we're making no progress. I know it's mocked around here, but we are closer than people believe. I would be very surprised if the Pirates improve before we do.

I can't minimize the frustration we all feel for that decade of poor play, but the Castellini ownership is dramatically better than Lindner and Schott.

Benihana
08-10-2009, 04:46 PM
When you need 6-8 more pieces, you generally can only add one or two per transaction.

Look at 1999. At the end of the 1998 season, we were several pieces away.

Vaughn, Neagle, Guzman, Cameron, Reyes, Williamson, Villone, Tucker, Paris..

That's 9 pieces added.

If you are waiting for/expecting another Villone/Parris combo to put up those kinds of seasons in the same year, you are going to be waiting for a long, long time. The problem is, I think that's exactly what the Reds have been waiting for/expecting for the last 10 years, and is one of the foremost reasons why they've gotten the results that they have during that time.


The Reds could've just tossed their hands up in the air and decided it was not worth giving up Konerko (arguably their #1 prospect and projected to be better than Casey) for an athletic CF that was coming off a bad year (Cameron), since they were several pieces away. It was definitely a risky trade that many of the people on the board did not like when it happened.
And IMO it was a bad one. Casey had at least as much (if not more) trade value at the time, and I think it's pretty obvious that Konerko would have been a more valuable piece than Casey for the last decade.



That said, I agree with your initial premise- that you have to start somewhere. If the Reds make several moves this offseason to shape themselves into contention for next year, I will look differently at the Rolen trade. However, if they don't, it's more of the same...

Benihana
08-10-2009, 04:49 PM
I can't minimize the frustration we all feel for that decade of poor play, but the Castellini ownership is dramatically better than Lindner and Schott.

To paraphrase M2, loosely formed fecal matter is dramatically better than diarrhea. I'd rather get the crap out of the house.

In all seriousness, I don't think Castellini's budget is the primary problem. As I said earlier this thread, it's the way those assets are being allocated that leaves a lot to be desired. Taveras, Lincoln, not trading at least one of Cordero/Harang/Arroyo, etc. (although the last one remains to be seen.)

Benihana
08-10-2009, 05:06 PM
FWIW, the Pirates spent the 4th most of any major league team on the draft in 2008 and the most in 2009. They are also the favorites to sign the best international free agent out there.

Add to that their brand new $5MM facility in the DR, and they are significantly outspending the Reds in player development.

Now on to your regularly scheduled program...

Brutus
08-10-2009, 05:16 PM
FWIW, the Pirates spent the 4th most of any major league team on the draft in 2008 and the most in 2009. They are also the favorites to sign the best international free agent out there.

Add to that their brand new $5MM facility in the DR, and they are significantly outspending the Reds in player development.

Now on to your regularly scheduled program...

There's still seven days and a lot of unsigned players for 2009, so the Pirates spending the most is only because so far, they've been one of the few teams to actually sign their top picks. When it's all said and done, we'll see them drop down the list a little bit, as their top picks this year were widely regarded as "signability" picks.

FYI, criticizing the Reds now of all times in recent memory for scouting & player development is untimely. They're actually spending money now in both departments - something that has not happened under previous regimes.

For two years in a row they've been active in international free agency. They've pumped a lot of money into scouting. And the system is a heck of a lot deeper than it was.

This is not to say the Pirates are not doing an adequate job.... just that it's shortchanging areas the Reds have actually made significant strides in.

M2
08-10-2009, 05:22 PM
FWIW, the Pirates spent the 4th most of any major league team on the draft in 2008 and the most in 2009. They are also the favorites to sign the best international free agent out there.

Add to that their brand new $5MM facility in the DR, and they are significantly outspending the Reds in player development.

Now on to your regularly scheduled program...

They are driving their money into the future - a nebulous and distant future, but the investment is noteworthy. Yet the GM also hasn't demonstrated, to me at least, he knows what to do with a major league roster.

Benihana
08-10-2009, 05:22 PM
There's still seven days and a lot of unsigned players for 2009, so the Pirates spending the most is only because so far, they've been one of the few teams to actually sign their top picks. When it's all said and done, we'll see them drop down the list a little bit, as their top picks this year were widely regarded as "signability" picks.

FYI, criticizing the Reds now of all times in recent memory for scouting & player development is untimely. They're actually spending money now in both departments - something that has not happened under previous regimes.

For two years in a row they've been active in international free agency. They've pumped a lot of money into scouting. And the system is a heck of a lot deeper than it was.

This is not to say the Pirates are not doing an adequate job.... just that it's shortchanging areas the Reds have actually made significant strides in.

I don't disagree- the Reds have certainly improved in this regard.

My frustration lies from not having a true, consistent plan.

REDREAD
08-10-2009, 05:25 PM
To be honest with you, I don't really give a crap if the team is .500 or if it loses 100 games. If they don't make the playoffs, it doesn't really matter. .

I can understand that outlook, but given the current realities, you are in for a lot of disappointment if you feel the playoffs are the only measure of success.
The Cubs are starting to spend tons of money. The Cards (and probably the Astros) will always outspend us.

I try to enjoy this team one game at a time now. So for me, a .500 team is much more enjoyable than a 100 loss team. Just a different prospective, I guess. For example, if Harang and Arroyo got claimed on waivers and the Reds just let them go for nothing, I would not be happy watching the crap which backfills the rotation. Sure, maybe we get a higher draft pick out of it, but that is a hollow victory for me.

Again, not saying your outlook is wrong. I understand it. I'm just trying to be realistic with my fandom now.

Brutus
08-10-2009, 05:35 PM
I don't disagree- the Reds have certainly improved in this regard.

My frustration lies from not having a true, consistent plan.

That's definitely frustrating. But...

You can never have a true, consistent plan when you have three ownership changes, four GM changes, two CFO changes and six managerial changes in one single decade. You have to have stability to have consistency. If you've a rotating door among ownership, general management and management, there's no way consistency is possible.

The man currently on the job in direction of the Reds has been on this job a little over a year. He's been in the system only less than 18 months. Any plan he may have would not necessarily show in full form just yet. I have been saying for a while that I think 2010 is his plan. The Rolen trade does actually somewhat corroborate that might be the plan, so I would give him August and the offseason, and then judge the team heading into next year as to whether or not that's correct.

REDREAD
08-10-2009, 05:35 PM
If you are waiting for/expecting another Villone/Parris combo to put up those kinds of seasons in the same year, you are going to be waiting for a long, long time. The problem is, I think that's exactly what the Reds have been waiting for/expecting for the last 10 years, and is one of the foremost reasons why they've gotten the results that they have during that time.

Don't necessarily agree. They got the anchors of the rotation in Harnish and Neagle. Later got Guzman. That is fine SP for the playoffs. Parris and Villione were used to backfill the 4 and 5 slots. Bere and Avery were also in the mix.
Not too unrealistic to expect a 3.50 ERA (134 ERA+) out of your #4 guy (Paris) and a 4.23 (ERA+ 111) out of your #5 guy. I think going into this season, most would say Arroyo was our #4 guy and he could duplicate that.
The #5 numbers are just slightly above average.

The larger point is that the other moves got the Reds to the point where they only needed a #4 and #5 starter. If they didn't get all those other players, getting the good year out of Parris/Villone is wasted.




And IMO it was a bad one. Casey had at least as much (if not more) trade value at the time, and I think it's pretty obvious that Konerko would have been a more valuable piece than Casey for the last decade.


And I'm pretty sure that's why the White Sox insisted on Konerko instead of Casey. Casey had more service time and Konerko was projected to be better.
Bowden had the guts to realize that Cameron was one of the missing pieces and grabbed him, despite being about 4 more pieces short at the time of the trade.



That said, I agree with your initial premise- that you have to start somewhere. If the Reds make several moves this offseason to shape themselves into contention for next year, I will look differently at the Rolen trade. However, if they don't, it's more of the same...

Fair enough. I guess I never saw all the mental anguish over trading two bullpen arms though. If Zach ends up being as good as some thing he will be, then I will admit I am wrong, but I think I trust Walt on this one.

Benihana
08-10-2009, 05:37 PM
I can understand that outlook, but given the current realities, you are in for a lot of disappointment if you feel the playoffs are the only measure of success.
The Cubs are starting to spend tons of money. The Cards (and probably the Astros) will always outspend us.

I try to enjoy this team one game at a time now. So for me, a .500 team is much more enjoyable than a 100 loss team. Just a different prospective, I guess. For example, if Harang and Arroyo got claimed on waivers and the Reds just let them go for nothing, I would not be happy watching the crap which backfills the rotation. Sure, maybe we get a higher draft pick out of it, but that is a hollow victory for me.

Again, not saying your outlook is wrong. I understand it. I'm just trying to be realistic with my fandom now.

I hear what you're saying, but I think there is still room to improve and contend. Maybe I'm hopelessly optimistic, but I don't think the Reds are in a particularly unique situation with regards to their division.

The Yankees and the Red Sox will always outspend the Rays and the Blue Jays.
The Angels and the Rangers (and probably the Mariners) will always outspend the A's.
The Mets and the Phillies (and probably the Braves and the Nationals going forward) will always outspend the Marlins.

I don't believe any of those four teams (TB, TOR, OAK and FLA) have or will stop trying to compete for the playoffs. All of them have had much more success- in individual seasons if nothing else- than the Reds in the last nineteen years: Tampa played for the WS last year, and the other three have had multiple playoff (if not World Series) appearances.

Anyways, I personally would like to see the Reds really go for a playoff run, not try to maintain "respectability." I understand where you are coming from, but maybe I'm too young or too (hopelessly) optimistic to see it that way.

Benihana
08-10-2009, 05:53 PM
Don't necessarily agree. They got the anchors of the rotation in Harnish and Neagle. Later got Guzman. That is fine SP for the playoffs. Parris and Villione were used to backfill the 4 and 5 slots. Bere and Avery were also in the mix.
Not too unrealistic to expect a 3.50 ERA (134 ERA+) out of your #4 guy (Paris) and a 4.23 (ERA+ 111) out of your #5 guy. I think going into this season, most would say Arroyo was our #4 guy and he could duplicate that.
The #5 numbers are just slightly above average.

Disagree. My point is that you can't go out and acquire complete chaff (Villone and Parris pre-1999) and expect them to put up those kind of numbers.


The larger point is that the other moves got the Reds to the point where they only needed a #4 and #5 starter. If they didn't get all those other players, getting the good year out of Parris/Villone is wasted.

Agree, but I think you are looking at this the wrong way. If Villone and Parris don't have the career years that they did, all the other moves would have been irrelevant. My point is that you can't hope for simultaneous career years from multiple retreads playing key roles. If you do, you'll be waiting for a very long time.





And I'm pretty sure that's why the White Sox insisted on Konerko instead of Casey. Casey had more service time and Konerko was projected to be better.
Bowden had the guts to realize that Cameron was one of the missing pieces and grabbed him, despite being about 4 more pieces short at the time of the trade.

Disagree. Konerko at the time was looking more like Brandon Phillips circa 2005 or Andy Marte circa 2007- a highly touted prospect that was floundering at the big league level. Konerko had OPSed < .600 in most of two seasons, and didn't appear to have a big league position.

Casey OTOH had just OPSed .782 in his debut season and was establishing himself as the 1B of the future, particularly after being acquired at the steep price of the Reds' Opening Day starter- on the eve of Opening Day that same season.

The way I remember it, the Reds chose to keep Casey (and A.Boone) over Konerko, not entirely overlooking Casey's personal/community charm and Boone's family connections to the organization.




Fair enough. I guess I never saw all the mental anguish over trading two bullpen arms though. If Zach ends up being as good as some thing he will be, then I will admit I am wrong, but I think I trust Walt on this one.

I don't lament the loss of the two pitchers as much as some on this board, but given the market at the time I think Walt steeply overpaid for what may turn out to be an irrelevant asset. Like you said, if Walt follows it up with several other consistent moves this offseason then I'll stand corrected. If he doesn't, then :barf:

Falls City Beer
08-10-2009, 10:23 PM
At least the Reds have Burton.

CTA513
08-10-2009, 10:31 PM
At least the Reds have Burton.

:cool:

REDREAD
08-10-2009, 11:53 PM
Disagree. My point is that you can't go out and acquire complete chaff (Villone and Parris pre-1999) and expect them to put up those kind of numbers.


The Reds signed 4 veteran (maybe more) starters.. Villone, Paris, Bere, Avery.. They hoped two of them would be #4/#5 starters. They also concievably had Reyes and Williamson as backups. Williamson was a starter in AAA.. Is it an airtight plan? No, but it had a fair shot of success. I think most of the board thought that Owings and Homer would do a fair job of covering the end of the rotation this year.. Not much of a difference in the leap of faith required. Did Paris far exceed expectations? Yes, but part of that (and all the pitching success that year) was the insanely good defense on the field.





Agree, but I think you are looking at this the wrong way. If Villone and Parris don't have the career years that they did, all the other moves would have been irrelevant. My point is that you can't hope for simultaneous career years from multiple retreads playing key roles. If you do, you'll be waiting for a very long time.


Sure, when you need 9 moves to compete, you need probably at least 7 of them to work out. Bere and Avery didn't work out. If one of them did, we probably don't have that one game playoff with the Mets.










Disagree. Konerko at the time was looking more like Brandon Phillips circa 2005 or Andy Marte circa 2007- a highly touted prospect that was floundering at the big league level. Konerko had OPSed < .600 in most of two seasons, and didn't appear to have a big league position.

Casey OTOH had just OPSed .782 in his debut season and was establishing himself as the 1B of the future, particularly after being acquired at the steep price of the Reds' Opening Day starter- on the eve of Opening Day that same season.

The way I remember it, the Reds chose to keep Casey (and A.Boone) over Konerko, not entirely overlooking Casey's personal/community charm and Boone's family connections to the organization.


Not how I remember it. Konerko was one of the top prospects in baseball. He could not play 3b well. He was crushing the ball in the minors (I saw him play at AAA that year). His power potential made everyone drool. Just about the entire board perfered to keep him over Casey.

If the White Sox were willing to take Boone and Casey instead of Konerko, then the Reds made the right move. They probably would not have contended with Konerko playing 3b.

Think about it, if you are rebuilding, wouldn't you insist on Konerko instead of Casey, for the higher upside?










I don't lament the loss of the two pitchers as much as some on this board, but given the market at the time I think Walt steeply overpaid for what may turn out to be an irrelevant asset. Like you said, if Walt follows it up with several other consistent moves this offseason then I'll stand corrected. If he doesn't, then :barf:

Time will tell. It's possible Roenocke and Stewart may not be impact relievers or not even stick.. Walt has traded away a lot of prospects for veterans and most of the time has won the talent exchange. I trust his judgement. In fact, Stewart may have been aggressively promoted and then placed in the AAA bullpen for the sole purpose of generating trade interest. Perhaps the Reds felt he'd be exposed in the AAA rotation.

Ron Madden
08-11-2009, 03:21 AM
I believe Dan O'Brian drafted some pretty talented players, as did Wayne Krivisky.

I have a couple of honest questions.

How many scouts do we have left from Dan O'Brians term as GM? How many from WK's term as GM? (and) Why does Walt get any of the credit for our current farm system while receiving none of the blame for the 40 man roster?

:confused:

Topcat
08-11-2009, 07:15 AM
Back on subject, no matter the return I wish Stormy well as he served the the Reds well and best wishes going forward to him and his family.

redsfandan
08-11-2009, 08:51 AM
Why does Walt get any of the credit for our current farm system while receiving none of the blame for the 40 man roster?

Walt only gets credit for the '08/'09 draft classes and the Latin America prospects. But I think he receives alot of the blame for the current 40 man roster.

Benihana
08-11-2009, 09:30 AM
The Reds signed 4 veteran (maybe more) starters.. Villone, Paris, Bere, Avery.. They hoped two of them would be #4/#5 starters. They also concievably had Reyes and Williamson as backups. Williamson was a starter in AAA.. Is it an airtight plan? No, but it had a fair shot of success. I think most of the board thought that Owings and Homer would do a fair job of covering the end of the rotation this year.. Not much of a difference in the leap of faith required. Did Paris far exceed expectations? Yes, but part of that (and all the pitching success that year) was the insanely good defense on the field.

This doesn't sound too different than their plan every year in the JimBo era. Sign as many retread pitchers as you can and hope that some of them stick- Remember Jimmy Anderson, Joey Hamilton, the Fernandez brothers, etc? It worked once out of JimBo's 10 years with the team. That sounds about right.



Sure, when you need 9 moves to compete, you need probably at least 7 of them to work out. Bere and Avery didn't work out. If one of them did, we probably don't have that one game playoff with the Mets.

If one of them did, JimBo should have played the lottery that year.



Not how I remember it. Konerko was one of the top prospects in baseball. He could not play 3b well. He was crushing the ball in the minors (I saw him play at AAA that year). His power potential made everyone drool. Just about the entire board perfered to keep him over Casey.

If the White Sox were willing to take Boone and Casey instead of Konerko, then the Reds made the right move. They probably would not have contended with Konerko playing 3b.

Think about it, if you are rebuilding, wouldn't you insist on Konerko instead of Casey, for the higher upside?

I think this is 20/20 hindsight. First off, this board didn't exist then. Secondly, the Enquirer board was all over the place- for those that think it is impossible to build a consensus on RedsZone, the Enquirer board was a more inconsistent version of mlbtraderumors or ESPN's messageboards. In other words, it was a mess (hence the creation of RedsZone.)

Sean Casey was supposed to be Tony Gwynn, and he was looking great after his 23 year old rookie season. Konerko was a former top prospect, but at the time he couldn't put it together at the major league level. Again, think Brandon Phillips minus the defense. Both Casey and Konerko were ranked as Top 20 prospects coming into the year by BA, and judging their performances at the major league level during the season, Casey's value had certainly surpassed Konerko's by the end of the year. To use another example, Cameron Maybin and Gordon Beckham were both ranked as Top 20 prospects coming into 2009, with Maybin ranked 11 spots ahead of Beckham (who was ironically ranked #20- same as Casey coming into 1998.) However because Beckham has performed well in the big leagues during the season and Maybin has not, Beckham certainly has more value at this point, regardless of Maybin's "upside." Furthermore, before anyone gets too caught up in prospect rankings (be it BA's or anyone else's) it's pretty clear that the individual numbers matter a lot less than the range- in other words, it is almost irrelevant if someone is ranked #8 or #20- they both have the tools and the upside to be ranked in the upper tier of prospects in all of baseball, and therefore their relative values will depend a lot more on their performance, especially once they hit the big leagues. 2009 Beckham and Maybin are pretty good comps for 1998 Casey and Konerko respectively, at least in terms of perceived value.

The Sox didn't ask for Casey and Boone, they would have taken Casey straight up instead of Konerko. The Reds chose to hang onto Casey. It was similar to the Stillwell/Larkin situation, only this time the Reds chose the wrong one.




Time will tell. It's possible Roenocke and Stewart may not be impact relievers or not even stick.. Walt has traded away a lot of prospects for veterans and most of the time has won the talent exchange. I trust his judgement. In fact, Stewart may have been aggressively promoted and then placed in the AAA bullpen for the sole purpose of generating trade interest. Perhaps the Reds felt he'd be exposed in the AAA rotation.

Again, I'm not sick over the thought of trading prospects- especially if they are destined to be relievers. No matter what Stewart and Roenicke end up doing over the course of their respective careers, I think this was an ill-advised trade. Most people on this board weren't sick over trading Kearns/Lopez in The Trade. It is just that the return didn't match the price, especially in the context of the current market. That more than anything else is the problem I have with both trades.

REDREAD
08-11-2009, 10:23 AM
IWhy does Walt get any of the credit for our current farm system while receiving none of the blame for the 40 man roster?

:confused:

I don't give Walt credit for any players he did not draft.

That's not how a lot of people think though. For example, Wayne got credit for "not screwing up" Votto and the other youngsters that came up during his watch. Your point is valid. I think it's too early to grade Walt on his drafting/international signing strategy. The early results are promising, but as fans we tend to be overoptimistic. Rob Bell and Brian Reith once got us really excited.

flyer85
08-11-2009, 10:23 AM
No matter what Stewart and Roenicke end up doing over the course of their respective careers, I think this was an ill-advised trade. Most people on this board weren't sick over trading Kearns/Lopez in The Trade. It is just that the return didn't match the price, especially in the context of the current market. That more than anything else is the problem I have with both trades."the trade" wasn't going to do anything to address the problem. Rolen(with his age and injury history) was at best a small incremental improvement of the major league club and only helps for 2010.

Benihana
08-11-2009, 10:28 AM
"the trade" wasn't going to do anything to address the problem. Rolen(with his age and injury history) was at best a small incremental improvement of the major league club and only helps for 2010.

I don't disagree.

REDREAD
08-11-2009, 10:49 AM
This doesn't sound too different than their plan every year in the JimBo era. Sign as many retread pitchers as you can and hope that some of them stick- Remember Jimmy Anderson, Joey Hamilton, the Fernandez brothers, etc? It worked once out of JimBo's 10 years with the team. That sounds about right.


Not saying it is the greatest strategy, but a team like the Reds is not going to have a good enough farm or enough $$ to get proven players at every position. They are always going to be bottom feeding somewhere. Maybe it's the OF, maybe it's the rotation. That's just the reality of it. All small market teams have to have some skills in dumpster diving.. The Marlins snagged Cody Ross from us. He was not a superstar, but he plugged a hole cheaply for awhle. There's really not enough good starting pitchers to go around, unless you are one of the top 6 big spenders and can throw money at FA every year.









I think this is 20/20 hindsight. First off, this board didn't exist then. Secondly, the Enquirer board was all over the place


Sorry, I meant Fastball.com. That's the board I was on back then.
I don't know what happened on the Enquirer board.
Generally though, a lot of fans were more enamored with Konerko's potential vs Casey. It's logical, isn't it? Look at all the love Zach Stewart gets. Look how excited people were about Homer when he was rated as a top prospect. Ditto with Kearns when he came up. Fans always tend to think that a prospect is going to be the next MVP.







Sean Casey was supposed to be Tony Gwynn, and he was looking great after his 23 year old rookie season. Konerko was a former top prospect, but at the time he couldn't put it together at the major league level.


That's not how I remembered it. The Reds realized that Konerko was not a ML 3b. He just could not play 3b. They already had Casey there, so they sent Konerko to the minors where he tore it up. As I said, I saw him in AAA that year. He was a monster. It was obvious he was a ML hitter.

I don't know.. Maybe it's just my own view, but it was totally different from Phillips. In 1998, Konerko was 22. He only got 73 AB with the Reds. Never got a shot to really play every day. He got some time in LA, but I really didn't follow him then.
Phillips was also brought up too soon (at 20-21), but he had 4 seasons with Cleveland. Granted, his only real extended playing time was in 2003, when he got 370 AB. Phillips had an attitude problem, and was out of options.
I didn't realize Phillips was only 24 when we picked him up (summer birthday).
So I guess it's a closer comparison than I thought.

I guess my main point in Konerko vs Phillips is that there was never a doubt that Konerko would be a good player. Phillips' career was hanging on by a thread. The Reds gave up nothing to get him. The Reds had to give up a closer on a sweet contract in order to get Konerko. Konerko was flipped for Cameron.. again, indicating that the market thought Konkero was very valuable.





Again, think Brandon Phillips minus the defense. Both Casey and Konerko were ranked as Top 20 prospects coming into the year by BA, and judging their performances at the major league level during the season, Casey's value had certainly surpassed Konerko's by the end of the year.


IIRC, Konerko was minor player of the year in 1997. He was one of the top 2-3 prospects in the game, if not #1. I don't think Casey was that highly rated. There was always a question of whether Casey's power would develop. I don't think anyone other than Bowden thought Casey would win a batting title.








The Sox didn't ask for Casey and Boone, they would have taken Casey straight up instead of Konerko. The Reds chose to hang onto Casey. It was similar to the Stillwell/Larkin situation, only this time the Reds chose the wrong one.


Ok, I misunderstood what you said about Casey/Boone.
Still, I doubt they would've taken Casey, for the same arguement you are making of why the Reds should've dealt Casey. Konerko was simply the better player. It was obvious at the time.







Again, I'm not sick over the thought of trading prospects- especially if they are destined to be relievers. No matter what Stewart and Roenicke end up doing over the course of their respective careers, I think this was an ill-advised trade. Most people on this board weren't sick over trading Kearns/Lopez in The Trade. It is just that the return didn't match the price, especially in the context of the current market. That more than anything else is the problem I have with both trades.

I can understand that. I think Walt's strength though is dealing marginal prospects for useful veterans. That's how he built StL. Is that skill set a good fit in Cincinnati? I am not sure. I hope so. I guess my point is that Walt is not the GM that is going to wait for the farm to bear fruit. He is going to add veteran players, and trade a lot of prospects. That's what his strength is. Historically, he will trade what appears to be $10 worth of prospects for $13 worth of veterans. Then in a few years, it turns out the prospects he gave up were really only worth $5 or less. That's how he adds talent to the club. I have a feeling he's going to make more moves that give the board heartburn, because this is a different way of running the club than we are used to.

Benihana
08-11-2009, 11:17 AM
Not saying it is the greatest strategy, but a team like the Reds is not going to have a good enough farm or enough $$ to get proven players at every position. They are always going to be bottom feeding somewhere. Maybe it's the OF, maybe it's the rotation. That's just the reality of it. All small market teams have to have some skills in dumpster diving.. The Marlins snagged Cody Ross from us. He was not a superstar, but he plugged a hole cheaply for awhle. There's really not enough good starting pitchers to go around, unless you are one of the top 6 big spenders and can throw money at FA every year.

Of course you have to dumpster dive at some point somewhere. Bowden's Reds teams just did it almost every year for 40-60% of the rotation- that is not a winning strategy.



Sorry, I meant Fastball.com. That's the board I was on back then.
I don't know what happened on the Enquirer board.
Generally though, a lot of fans were more enamored with Konerko's potential vs Casey. It's logical, isn't it? Look at all the love Zach Stewart gets. Look how excited people were about Homer when he was rated as a top prospect. Ditto with Kearns when he came up. Fans always tend to think that a prospect is going to be the next MVP.

That's not how I remembered it. The Reds realized that Konerko was not a ML 3b. He just could not play 3b. They already had Casey there, so they sent Konerko to the minors where he tore it up. As I said, I saw him in AAA that year. He was a monster. It was obvious he was a ML hitter.

Brandon Larson, Lastings Milledge and Andy Marte (who I think is a better comp for Konerko and I still believe he can be a player) say hello. Marte was traded twice during his prospect years, and despite tearing up the minors and being ranked a Top 10 prospect by BA I don't think his value was particularly sky-high (he was DFA'd last year for crying out loud.) The same could be said for Milledge.


I guess my main point in Konerko vs Phillips is that there was never a doubt that Konerko would be a good player. The Reds had to give up a closer on a sweet contract in order to get Konerko. Konerko was flipped for Cameron.. again, indicating that the market thought Konkero was very valuable.

IIRC, Konerko was minor player of the year in 1997. He was one of the top 2-3 prospects in the game, if not #1. I don't think Casey was that highly rated. There was always a question of whether Casey's power would develop. I don't think anyone other than Bowden thought Casey would win a batting title.

Ok, I misunderstood what you said about Casey/Boone.
Still, I doubt they would've taken Casey, for the same arguement you are making of why the Reds should've dealt Casey. Konerko was simply the better player. It was obvious at the time.


OK sorry- According to BA, Konerko was ranked #2, and Casey was ranked #20 coming into 1998. If Konerko tore up the minors, Casey nuked it- Casey had a higher career minor league OPS than Konerko. He also looked much better in his time in the big leagues, at least at the time of the trade. Konerko had an OPS <.600, Casey's was .782 in roughly the same amount of ABs.

In other words, Casey had both a minor league and a major league OPS higher than Konerko's at the time of the trade, and unlike Konerko, Casey had a major league position. Both were top tier prospects, but Casey had outperformed Konerko- at almost every level.

As far as the trade value argument- usually when a prospect is traded twice in the same year, many people (on this board especially) say "Buyer beware! Two teams have given up on him!" Not "Wow his value is still high!"

The fact that Konerko was traded for an All-Star closer on a sweet deal, and then moved four months later for an underperforming CF shows that if anything he had a decline in value- not that it was sky-high. Plus, the Reds might have had to trade a closer on a sweet deal for Konerko (and we got Reyes who had significant value at the time), but the Reds had to trade their Opening Day starter on a sweet deal (the night before Opening Day!) straight-up for Casey.





I can understand that. I think Walt's strength though is dealing marginal prospects for useful veterans. That's how he built StL. Is that skill set a good fit in Cincinnati? I am not sure. I hope so. I guess my point is that Walt is not the GM that is going to wait for the farm to bear fruit. He is going to add veteran players, and trade a lot of prospects. That's what his strength is. Historically, he will trade what appears to be $10 worth of prospects for $13 worth of veterans. Then in a few years, it turns out the prospects he gave up were really only worth $5 or less. That's how he adds talent to the club. I have a feeling he's going to make more moves that give the board heartburn, because this is a different way of running the club than we are used to.

Now here we can agree regarding what type of GM Walt is. The problem is that he is not GMing in the current context of the game. Back in 1997 when Walt traded prospects for McGwire, other teams did not value prospects nearly as much as they do now. The same could be said when he acquired Rolen in 2002. These days, he should have known better, and should have been able to get a lot more value for the prospects than he did. You have to GM in the current context in the market, not do things the same way you did 10 years ago just because. I have no problem with trading prospects for vets (in fact I've advocated it), but please get proper value within the context of the current market.

Furthermore, he was able to sign Big Mac and Rolen to huge extensions that I'm not sure current Reds ownership is able to afford. I can accept that Walt's FO is going to take a different direction than what we are used to, but I just hope he gains and appreciates a better understanding of the current market. This move is like someone coming out of 1985 and trading 100 shares of Microsoft for a good meal at The Maisonette. It may have been a good deal back then, but these days in the current market, 100 shares of Microsoft stock is worth a lot more than a good dinner. I'd still be fine with trading the stock (like prospects, its value can always crash), but do so in exchange for proper value.

And this of course doesn't mention his last major prospect-for-player trade, the Mulder/Haren debacle.

Benihana
08-11-2009, 11:42 AM
Getting back to the whole draft top talent later and overpay slot for them argument, here's another one I was pining for back on draft day:


Susan Slusser of the San Francisco Chronicle hears that the A's have budgeted first round money for fourth rounder Max Stassi.

Instead we got...Mark Fleury :thumbup: :rolleyes:

REDREAD
08-11-2009, 05:42 PM
OK sorry- According to BA, Konerko was ranked #2, and Casey was ranked #20 coming into 1998. If Konerko tore up the minors, Casey nuked it- Casey had a higher career minor league OPS than Konerko. He also looked much better in his time in the big leagues, at least at the time of the trade. Konerko had an OPS <.600, Casey's was .782 in roughly the same amount of ABs.

In other words, Casey had both a minor league and a major league OPS higher than Konerko's at the time of the trade, and unlike Konerko, Casey had a major league position. Both were top tier prospects, but Casey had outperformed Konerko- at almost every level.



Ok.. In light of all this information, why are you taking the Reds to task for trading Konerko instead of Casey?
Wasn't that what started this discussion? That the Reds should've been smart enough to trade Casey instead of Konerko?
My gut feeling at the time was that Konerko was going to be the better player, and Casey was not going to develop as much power as Konerko.
Granted, I made that estimate without looking at any stats, just by watching them.

But given all this info you are putting out to try to prove Casey was the better prospect.. doesn't this strengthen the case that the Reds should have kept Casey?

Personally, I thought Konerko was the better player, but I wouldn't have cared if we traded Casey or Konkero for Cameron. We needed a legit CF much more than we needed two 1b. After seeing Konerko play 3b in the minors, I agreed with Jack McKeon that he was not a ML 3b.

Benihana
08-11-2009, 05:48 PM
Ok.. In light of all this information, why are you taking the Reds to task for trading Konerko instead of Casey?
Wasn't that what started this discussion? That the Reds should've been smart enough to trade Casey instead of Konerko?
My gut feeling at the time was that Konerko was going to be the better player, and Casey was not going to develop as much power as Konerko.
Granted, I made that estimate without looking at any stats, just by watching them.

But given all this info you are putting out to try to prove Casey was the better prospect.. doesn't this strengthen the case that the Reds should have kept Casey?

Personally, I thought Konerko was the better player, but I wouldn't have cared if we traded Casey or Konkero for Cameron. We needed a legit CF much more than we needed two 1b. After seeing Konerko play 3b in the minors, I agreed with Jack McKeon that he was not a ML 3b.

You're right, I'm not even sure why we're discussing Konerko/Casey in such depth. I think the point that I was trying to make is that 1999 was a fluke. The Reds made a series of moves in the offseason that happened by chance to work out.

The Reds need to have a much better, more well defined plan heading into this offseason than they did back then. They can't pick up a couple of retread starters and just hope they all have career years at the same time. They can't make ill-advised trades of their best young assets (which is what both Konerko and Casey were then and Stewart & co. are now) without getting a LOT of value in return- whether its a veteran or a younger player(s) that they're acquiring.

In short, THERE HAS TO BE A COHERENT PLAN!!

REDREAD
08-11-2009, 05:49 PM
Now here we can agree regarding what type of GM Walt is. The problem is that he is not GMing in the current context of the game. Back in 1997 when Walt traded prospects for McGwire, other teams did not value prospects nearly as much as they do now. The same could be said when he acquired Rolen in 2002. These days, he should have known better, and should have been able to get a lot more value for the prospects than he did. You have to GM in the current context in the market, not do things the same way you did 10 years ago just because. I have no problem with trading prospects for vets (in fact I've advocated it), but please get proper value within the context of the current market.



Only time will tell. I remember on the fasball board, people were having an aneurism when Buddy Carlyle was traded, due to his guady minor league numbers.
We will have to see how this plays out. If Zach Stewart wins a Cy Young, as one poster pointed out, then obviously this is a loss for the Reds.

Is Walt wrong in this market? I don't know. I like the fact that the Reds are willing to trade prospects when no one else is. Maybe Rolen was the wrong target, but the thinking is sound. If he can get a solid SS and another OF this winter by trading prospects, the team becomes interesting next year.




Furthermore, he was able to sign Big Mac and Rolen to huge extensions that I'm not sure current Reds ownership is able to afford.


I don't know. I think the jury is still out on Cast. He gave Wayne a lot of money to spend. It just was not spent wisely. I would've never thought the Reds would've taken on a contract like Cordero in FA. Dunn, Harang, Phillips, and Arroyo also got unprecendented contracts. At least there's a glimmer of hope that if the Reds do have the opportunity to get a super star, Cast might pay. Heck, they took on some salary in the Rolen deal, despite being dead in the water.

REDREAD
08-11-2009, 05:58 PM
You're right, I'm not even sure why we're discussing Konerko/Casey in such depth. I think the point that I was trying to make is that 1999 was a fluke. The Reds made a series of moves in the offseason that happened by chance to work out.

Disagree here. Bowden made his own luck.
Harnish was a good gamble. Bowden was able to recruit him to Cincy in 97 or 98 (I forget which year).
Neagle was a stroke of genius. Selling the Braves that Brett Boone was more valuable and getting Tucker as a throw in was great.
Getting Vaughn for Sanders because the Padres just wanted to dump Vaughn.. another great move.
Trading an extra 1b for Cameron.. great.

Paris had a miracle season in 1999, but that was partly due to the outstanding defense Bowden created. Villone was just slightly above average... not exactly a miracle.

So yes, the Reds caught a big break on Paris.. However, just about every contender gets a miracle year out of someone.

My point is that 1999 was not just dumb luck. If Paris flopped, Bowden would've dealt for another starter (if $$ was available). Allen tried his best to kill the Guzman deal, but Bowden still got it done, despite not being able to add any payroll. Sure, it would've cost us a few more prospects if Paris did not work out, but that's worth it when the team has a chance to make the playoffs.





The Reds need to have a much better, more well defined plan heading into this offseason than they did back then. They can't pick up a couple of retread starters and just hope they all have career years at the same time.


The Reds had a plan in 1999.. See list above. They addressed every need they had. They had a pool of starters for the back end of the rotation.




They can't make ill-advised trades of their best young assets (which is what both Konerko and Casey were then and Stewart & co. are now) without getting a LOT of value in return- whether its a veteran or a yo
unger player(s) that they're acquiring.


Cameron was a lot of value in return. That was one of Bowden's best trades ever, IMO. Holding on to Konerko would've been the same mistake DanO made of holding on to Wily Mo too long.

If Walt has confidence that he can build a bullpen in 2010 and 2011 without Stewart and Roenoke, then it is smart to deal them to fill a need. Now maybe Rolen wasn't the best target, but it is sound thinking. You have to give up value to get value.

ochre
08-11-2009, 06:39 PM
Scott Sullivan made the Steve Parris and Ron Villone career years possible in '99. Those two could pitch five, or six innings, have Scott Sullivan come in and pitch 2-3 innings to bridge to Williamson, Graves, or Reyes, who all had decent/outstanding years. Sullivan (113.2) (and Graves (111) for that matter) pitched nearly as many innings as Parris (128.2) or Villone (132.2).

Bowden could put together occasional good teams, but it required him finding 300ish bullpen innings at <1.25 WHIP and <3.00 ERA, or a random Cy Youngish season from the Pete Shoureks of the world.

Ron Madden
08-12-2009, 03:42 AM
Scott Sullivan made the Steve Parris and Ron Villone career years possible in '99. Those two could pitch five, or six innings, have Scott Sullivan come in and pitch 2-3 innings to bridge to Williamson, Graves, or Reyes, who all had decent/outstanding years. Sullivan (113.2) (and Graves (111) for that matter) pitched nearly as many innings as Parris (128.2) or Villone (132.2).

Bowden could put together occasional good teams, but it required him finding 300ish bullpen innings at <1.25 WHIP and <3.00 ERA, or a random Cy Youngish season from the Pete Shoureks of the world.

Sullivan was probably the most under-rated yet most productive middle reliever the Reds have run out there years. :beerme:

cincrazy
08-12-2009, 07:30 AM
Sullivan was probably the most under-rated yet most productive middle reliever the Reds have run out there years. :beerme:

Agreed. Some people scoff at the notion of Sullivan as a Reds Hall of Famer, but I think the guy deserves mention just as much as anyone. IMO, he may have been the MVP on that 1999 team. As someone else has already mentioned, he almost pitched as many innings as Parris and Villone did. He was the anchor of that bullpen, and the bullpen was the anchor of that team.

bucksfan2
08-12-2009, 08:28 AM
Scott Sullivan made the Steve Parris and Ron Villone career years possible in '99. Those two could pitch five, or six innings, have Scott Sullivan come in and pitch 2-3 innings to bridge to Williamson, Graves, or Reyes, who all had decent/outstanding years. Sullivan (113.2) (and Graves (111) for that matter) pitched nearly as many innings as Parris (128.2) or Villone (132.2).

Bowden could put together occasional good teams, but it required him finding 300ish bullpen innings at <1.25 WHIP and <3.00 ERA, or a random Cy Youngish season from the Pete Shoureks of the world.

For all the hate that Bowen gets, rightfully so, the guy knew how to build a bullpen.

HokieRed
08-12-2009, 08:36 AM
Glad to see Sullivan getting these kudos. He was tremendously valuable. Seems to me like a team ought to look for somebody to do this with today rather than simply following along on this one-inning routine. Not only is a guy like Sullivan helping out the 5-6 inning starters but he should be able to take innings off the arms of the late inning guys.

REDREAD
08-12-2009, 12:09 PM
Scott Sullivan made the Steve Parris and Ron Villone career years possible in '99. Those two could pitch five, or six innings, have Scott Sullivan come in and pitch 2-3 innings to bridge to Williamson, Graves, or Reyes, who all had decent/outstanding years. Sullivan (113.2) (and Graves (111) for that matter) pitched nearly as many innings as Parris (128.2) or Villone (132.2).

That's an excellent point. Bowden leveraged his ability to build strong bullpens. In a way, he was ahead of the curve. Now teams are willing to trade everyday position players for bullpen arms. That wasn't the case 10 years ago. Bullpen arms were undervalued then.

Benihana
08-12-2009, 12:11 PM
In a way, he was ahead of the curve. Now teams are willing to trade everyday position players for bullpen arms.

Where does that leave Wayne Krivsky/The Trade with respect to the curve?

mth123
10-08-2009, 03:39 AM
Bumping this thread because I'm really bored and wanting to throw out a reminder that Oct 15th is the deadline for he Reds to decide on the PTBNL (per Fay I believe at the time of the deal) in the Weathers trade. (It doesn't mean it will be announced at that time though.)

I'm still hoping for Jonathon Lucroy, but starting to think Pile O' Cash will be the route they go. If it is a player, it may start some of the inevitable purging of guys from the 40 man roster.

Krusty
10-08-2009, 04:23 AM
Bumping this thread because I'm really bored and wanting to throw out a reminder that Oct 15th is the deadline for he Reds to decide on the PTBNL (per Fay I believe at the time of the deal) in the Weathers trade. (It doesn't mean it will be announced at that time though.)

I'm still hoping for Jonathon Lucroy, but starting to think Pile O' Cash will be the route they go. If it is a player, it may start some of the inevitable purging of guys from the 40 man roster.


As I mentioned in another thread, how crazy would it be that J.J. Hardy was the player we got in return?

mth123
10-08-2009, 06:47 AM
As I mentioned in another thread, how crazy would it be that J.J. Hardy was the player we got in return?

Not possible per the rules.

lollipopcurve
10-08-2009, 07:00 AM
I'm thinking it's cash. But I'm hoping for one of their decent arms out of A ball (can't see a player like Lucroy in this one).

redsfandan
10-08-2009, 07:17 AM
Maybe Jeffres? Good arm(?) & stupid mistakes = high risk/high yield (could be out of baseball if he keeps screwing up)

lollipopcurve
10-08-2009, 07:33 AM
Maybe Jeffres? Good arm(?) & stupid mistakes = high risk/high yield (could be out of baseball if he keeps screwing up)

Hadn't thought of him, but he's a great idea. Was thinking more along the lines of Mark Rogers (ex no.1 pick, two slots ahead of Homer), who's coming back from arm surgery, Cody Scarpetta, Wily Peralta.

LoganBuck
10-08-2009, 07:40 AM
I still think we see Angel Salome.

Accused of being a Catcher, some potential in his bat, on the Brewers 40 man. Not called up in September when they only carried 2 catchers on the roster, after having a solid but not spectacular year with the bat. Redundant to Lucroy.

I feel that they drug there feet on completing the deal because they had 3 40 man spots tied up at the time with catchers, and when they were forced to add Miller it became impossible.

lollipopcurve
10-08-2009, 08:59 AM
I still think we see Angel Salome.

Accused of being a Catcher, some potential in his bat, on the Brewers 40 man. Not called up in September when they only carried 2 catchers on the roster, after having a solid but not spectacular year with the bat. Redundant to Lucroy.

I feel that they drug there feet on completing the deal because they had 3 40 man spots tied up at the time with catchers, and when they were forced to add Miller it became impossible.

I think you're right that Salome is a strong candidate to be traded. I just don't think Weathers carried enough value to get him. Remember, too, that Salome was one of the main antagonists in the brawls the Reds' Chattanooga team had with the Brewers' Huntsville team back in 2008.

HokieRed
10-08-2009, 09:08 AM
I've really liked the numbers on their FSL (High A) starter, Evan Anundsen, 21 year old righthander. 130.1/ 2.69/ 101 H / 2 HR [yes, that's 2] /41 W / 118 K/ 1.09 WHIP. I don't think he made the top 20 FSL prospects list, though, but I don't know how much any of that means. Seems like somebody who might be on the list.

marcshoe
10-08-2009, 09:42 AM
I'm a huge fan of Salome's bat, but I don't think you'll get him without giving up someone under 40.

Chip R
10-08-2009, 09:55 AM
Remember, too, that Salome was one of the main antagonists in the brawls the Reds' Chattanooga team had with the Brewers' Huntsville team back in 2008.


Nobody cares about some fight that happened back in 2008.

lollipopcurve
10-08-2009, 09:58 AM
Nobody cares about some fight that happened back in 2008.

I don't know how you can be so sure. You may be right that it's a non-issue, but there could have been some nastiness there that the Reds organization would just as soon avoid having to iron over. We know they're working with a list of several players, and, all things being equal -- as such a list suggests they are -- why take on a guy some of your players may really dislike?

westofyou
10-08-2009, 10:03 AM
I why take on a guy some of your players may really dislike?

Because it's a business and not a traveling squad for Midland?

lollipopcurve
10-08-2009, 10:09 AM
Because it's a business and not a traveling squad for Midland?

Again, they're working with a list of players -- do you really think a history of on-field brawling -- especially against some of your own players -- would not enter into the evaluation of a player who you're weighing against others more or less his equal?

I'm not saying it's an issue -- I'm saying it could be. The player may be an extreme hothead who has cheapshotted Drew Stubbs, for all we know.

The snark is gratuitous, unless of course you know all about what it's like to be in locker rooms from Cincinnati to Midland.

Chip R
10-08-2009, 10:10 AM
I don't know how you can be so sure. You may be right that it's a non-issue, but there could have been some nastiness there that the Reds organization would just as soon avoid having to iron over. We know they're working with a list of several players, and, all things being equal -- as such a list suggests they are -- why take on a guy some of your players may really dislike?


For one thing, there aren't going to be that many guys from that 2008 Chattanooga team on the 2010 Reds. And those who are, probably don't remember it. And even if they did, they are teammates now so they will have to come to some sort of an understanding. This isn't high school. Nobody's going to hold a grudge for some brawl back in the bushes two years ago.

lollipopcurve
10-08-2009, 10:12 AM
For one thing, there aren't going to be that many guys from that 2008 Chattanooga team on the 2010 Reds. And those who are, probably don't remember it. And even if they did, they are teammates now so they will have to come to some sort of an understanding. This isn't high school. Nobody's going to hold a grudge for some brawl back in the bushes two years ago.

You may be right. But it is not a certainty. The problems between Chattanooga and Huntsville were pretty intense there, for awhile. And Salome was a main player, as I recall.

westofyou
10-08-2009, 10:17 AM
Again, they're working with a list of players -- do you really think a history of on-field brawling -- especially against some of your own players -- would not enter into the evaluation of a player who you're weighing against others more or less his equal?

I'm not saying it's an issue -- I'm saying it could be. The player may be an extreme hothead who has cheapshotted Drew Stubbs, for all we know.

The snark is gratuitous, unless of course you know all about what it's like to be in locker rooms from Cincinnati to Midland.

Snark?

Methinks not, I just think that grown men have punched each other and played on the same team the next year throughout the history of the game. And I also think any team that wrings their hands over that sort of stuff will end up being on the short end of the stick if they worry about it over talent.

lollipopcurve
10-08-2009, 10:20 AM
I just think that grown men have punched each other and played on the same team the next year throughout the history of the game. And I also think any team that wrings their hands over that sort of stuff will end up being on the short end of the stick if they worry about it over talent.

Agreed. But in a situation where they can choose from among several players, all of whose talent is seen as similar -- as is the case in PTBNL trades like this -- an incident such as a brawl against one's own team may be a factor.

If you think it's information that's below your consideration, you can ignore it.

traderumor
10-08-2009, 10:22 AM
I can't recall the player, but there was a season where the Reds got someone in a trade that had been part of a brawl or near brawl earlier in the season as an opponent. Anyone recall that? It was within the last 2-3 seasons.

westofyou
10-08-2009, 10:24 AM
I can't recall the player, but there was a season where the Reds got someone in a trade that had been part of a brawl or near brawl earlier in the season as an opponent. Anyone recall that? It was within the last 2-3 seasons.

Brian Hunter and Sully.

traderumor
10-08-2009, 10:27 AM
Brian Hunter and Sully.Wow, that was longer ago than I thought, but that is the one I was talking about.

LoganBuck
10-14-2009, 09:58 PM
Tomorrow is the 15th. If they take cash, I suspect that this is going to be a very long cold winter.

jojo
10-14-2009, 10:46 PM
The Reds should count themselves lucky if the Brewers don't demand cash should be coming their way on this one.... :cool:

lollipopcurve
10-15-2009, 07:26 AM
With all the talk lately about trimming budgets, I'd be shocked if they don't take the dough.

mth123
10-15-2009, 07:47 AM
With all the talk lately about trimming budgets, I'd be shocked if they don't take the dough.

Probably right, but if they could get a young catcher who makes the minimum to pair with Hanigan, that may put more money in their pocket by avoiding having to pay $2 to $3 Million on the market for a guy.

Of course, my dream of the player being Lucroy or Solome is just a dream and if its a player its likely some one in the Chase Weems, Chris Negron non-prospect category.

Sea Ray
10-15-2009, 10:26 AM
I'm puzzled why this has gone down to the wire

lollipopcurve
10-15-2009, 11:00 AM
I'm puzzled why this has gone down to the wire

My guess is that it's because taking a modest amount of cash is not what people want to hear so the team prefers to bury that news -- if they say anything at all about it -- among other announcements (such as the front office changes coming soon).

Chip R
10-15-2009, 11:43 AM
I'm puzzled why this has gone down to the wire


They don't want this announcement overshadowing the beginning of the ALCS? ;)

Benihana
10-15-2009, 02:05 PM
Take the cash and use it to hire Jamarillo and Duncan ;)

HokieRed
10-15-2009, 02:10 PM
Take the cash and use it to hire Jamarillo and Duncan ;)

I doubt it will be quite that much cash. I'm still hoping for Anundsen.

paulrichjr
10-15-2009, 02:29 PM
They don't want this announcement overshadowing the beginning of the ALCS? ;)

That made me laugh out loud... Oh I forgot...LOL

Gallen5862
10-15-2009, 10:02 PM
Did the Reds take cash instead of a player? If so how much cash was received?

Chip R
10-15-2009, 10:16 PM
Did the Reds take cash instead of a player? If so how much cash was received?

It's not on the ESPN crawl?

LoganBuck
10-16-2009, 07:41 AM
Boo

redsmetz
10-16-2009, 07:54 AM
Nothing's showing on the Reds transactions. It wouldn't surprise me if it ultimately is cash, given the present circumstances. At this point, I'm fine with that.

traderumor
10-16-2009, 09:25 AM
That made me laugh out loud... Oh I forgot...LOLYou're supposed to say it made you spray coffee on the computer screen. Where have you been, in a cave? ;)

RedLegSuperStar
10-16-2009, 04:32 PM
Reds did receive cash for Stormy. How much.. I have no clue. This was discussed on MLBTradeRumors.com

Raisor
10-16-2009, 04:41 PM
Reds did receive cash for Stormy. How much.. I have no clue. This was discussed on MLBTradeRumors.com

$15.97 and a coupon to Ryan's Steakhouse and Buffet.

Tom Servo
10-16-2009, 08:06 PM
Good old Pile O'Cash.

_Sir_Charles_
10-16-2009, 10:28 PM
$15.97 and a coupon to Ryan's Steakhouse and Buffet.

SCORE! Jocketty for GM of the year! :D