PDA

View Full Version : MLB Trade Deadline Buyers and Sellers



savafan
07-14-2010, 07:08 PM
http://mlb.fanhouse.com/2010/07/14/mlb-trade-deadline-buyers-and-sellers/

I don't really see any top end starters on that list, but for the bullpen, would the Brewers be a match with Riske or Coffey?

RedsMan3203
07-14-2010, 07:19 PM
I like Dotel

Also wouldn't mind DeJesus and Farnsworth.. 30K's in 37 innings giving up just over a hit an inning.... and has allowed 10 Runs this year..

_Sir_Charles_
07-14-2010, 07:30 PM
I know I'm in the minority here, but I just don't see a starting pitcher as being a priority for us. I know we don't have that proverbial ace, but our staff overall matches up very well with other clubs. Add in our offense, and I just don't see the need. IMO our top 2 needs are a well rounded SS (or at least a move to Janish more), and some upgraded bullpen arms.

Mario-Rijo
07-14-2010, 08:09 PM
Let's match the buyers up with their logical seller counterparts.

Buyer: Angels - Bullpen and 1st base
Seller: Blue Jays - Scott Downs & Lyle Overbay

Braves - RH Bat
Brewers - Corey Hart

Cardinals - Mid Level Starter
Indians - Jake Westbrook

Dodgers - Starter & Reliever
Brewers - Carlos Villanueva & *Randy Wolf (*Not on sellers list)

Giants - Bat
Marlins - Jorge Cantu

Mets - Bullpen & Top End Starter
Cubs - Carlos Marmol & Ted Lilly

Padres - Bat
Royals - Jose Guillen

Phillies - Mid Level Starter, Bullpen & IF
Oakland - Ben Sheets
KC - Alberto Callaspo & Kyle Farnsworth

Rangers - Top end Starter (still, really?)
NO TRADE AVAILABLE that they can afford

Rays - RF
NA

Red Sox - OF Depth & Bullpen
Royals - David DeJesus

Rockies - IF
No good match

Tigers - Bullpen
Brewers - David Riske

Twins - Top end starter & 3rd Base
O's - Ty Wigginton (no pitching available in their price range)

White Sox - LH bat
Brewers - Prince Fielder

Yankees - Bench & Bullpen
Who knows

Reds - TOR Starter and Bullpen
D-Backs - Chad Qualls

Spitball
07-14-2010, 08:13 PM
I have never been a Farnsworth fan, but he might be the best bet to improve the pen.

Dotel's ERA and WHIP numbers are a concern. Riske hasn't pitched very much so I wonder about his health. I'm not sure the Reds want to try any more Coffey. If the price is reasonable, Farnsworth might be worth a try.

I also like Callaspo. He was a shortstop in the Angels system, but they were deep at the position. He was right there developmentally with Aybar, and Brandon Wood was a level below and emerging (at the time) as their top prospect. With their depth at shortstop, the Angels moved Callaspo to second base. When the Angels decided Howie Kendrick was a future batting champ, Callaspo became expendable.

I don't know if the Reds and Royals match up though. It seems they have similar strengths in their systems. Seemingly, they wouldn't want Alonso with Hosmer around, and they have minor league pitching depth.

Cedric
07-14-2010, 08:16 PM
I have never been a Farnsworth fan, but he might be the best bet to improve the pen.

Dotel's ERA and WHIP numbers are a concern. Riske hasn't pitched very much so I wonder about his health. I'm not sure the Reds want to try any more Coffey. If the price is reasonable, Farnsworth might be worth a try.

I also like Callaspo. He was a shortstop in the Angels system, but they were deep at the position. He was right there developmentally with Aybar, and Brandon Wood was a level below and emerging (at the time) as their top prospect. With their depth at shortstop, the Angels moved Callaspo to second base. When the Angels decided Howie Kendrick was a future batting champ, Callaspo became expendable.

I don't know if the Reds and Royals match up though. It seems they have similar strengths in their systems. Seemingly, they wouldn't want Alonso with Hosmer around, and they have minor league pitching depth.

Callaspo is a butcher. Brutal defender. I do think we match up well with KC though.

Mario-Rijo
07-14-2010, 08:19 PM
Callaspo is a butcher. Brutal defender. I do think we match up well with KC though.

Really, I didn't know that, he's looked solid (and versatile) every time I have seen him. Good bat off the bench at least.

edabbs44
07-14-2010, 08:22 PM
I know I'm in the minority here, but I just don't see a starting pitcher as being a priority for us. I know we don't have that proverbial ace, but our staff overall matches up very well with other clubs. Add in our offense, and I just don't see the need. IMO our top 2 needs are a well rounded SS (or at least a move to Janish more), and some upgraded bullpen arms.

Agreed, and that is probably why Lee isn't here right now. Walt isn't going to overpay when he might not need to get that guy. If a TOR guy is there for the taking and the price is in the budget, 100% he'd make the deal. But I think they are happy with this team and with the future of the team. They aren't going to burn it down just because they are within striking distance in 2010. That would be a rookie move, to be quite honest.

jojo
07-14-2010, 08:47 PM
Let's match the buyers up with their logical seller counterparts.

Buyer: Angels - Bullpen and 1st base
Seller: Blue Jays - Scott Downs & Lyle Overbay

Braves - RH Bat
Brewers - Corey Hart

Cardinals - Mid Level Starter
Indians - Jake Westbrook

Dodgers - Starter & Reliever
Brewers - Carlos Villanueva & *Randy Wolf (*Not on sellers list)

Giants - Bat
Marlins - Jorge Cantu

Mets - Bullpen & Top End Starter
Cubs - Carlos Marmol & Ted Lilly

Padres - Bat
Royals - Jose Guillen

Phillies - Mid Level Starter, Bullpen & IF
Oakland - Ben Sheets
KC - Alberto Callaspo & Kyle Farnsworth

Rangers - Top end Starter (still, really?)
NO TRADE AVAILABLE that they can afford

Rays - RF
NA

Red Sox - OF Depth & Bullpen
Royals - David DeJesus

Rockies - IF
No good match

Tigers - Bullpen
Brewers - David Riske

Twins - Top end starter & 3rd Base
O's - Ty Wigginton (no pitching available in their price range)

White Sox - LH bat
Brewers - Prince Fielder

Yankees - Bench & Bullpen
Who knows

Reds - TOR Starter and Bullpen
D-Backs - Chad Qualls

In your view why wouldn't the Rockies and Marlins (Uggla) be a good match?

Spitball
07-14-2010, 08:57 PM
Callaspo is a butcher. Brutal defender. I do think we match up well with KC though.

When Callaspo was in the Angels' system, he was skinny little guy with a good middle infielder's glove. He has bulked up, added some power to his bat, but lost some range. He still has pretty good hands, can provide some offense, and wouldn't be a bad bench addition.

How do the Reds "match up well with KC"?

Captain Hook
07-15-2010, 01:31 AM
http://mlb.fanhouse.com/2010/07/14/mlb-trade-deadline-buyers-and-sellers/

I don't really see any top end starters on that list, but for the bullpen, would the Brewers be a match with Riske or Coffey?

Hopefully the Brewers have forgave the Reds for tricking them into taking Weathers last year for their playoff run.Besides, doesn't Coffey hate the Reds?

11larkin11
07-15-2010, 02:30 AM
Yeah, Coffey isn't too fond of the Reds.

jojo
07-15-2010, 08:41 AM
Hopefully the Brewers have forgave the Reds for tricking them into taking Weathers last year for their playoff run.Besides, doesn't Coffey hate the Reds?

No, He hates Redszone.... :cool:

OesterPoster
07-15-2010, 08:47 AM
Seattle is still a good match for the Reds, if they're interested in Aardsma. Not sure I see too much different between he and Qualls though. Dotel and Lindstrom are two more interesting options. Mariners fans are pretty much anointing Brandon League as their next closer, and quite a few want Aardsma gone. I don't know much about him, other than the few times I saw him in the Cinci interleague series. His k and bb rates are better than Cordero (if that says anything). Aardsma and League are both under control for 2 more years, I think...so Seattle might not have a lot of motivation to move.

Sea Ray
07-15-2010, 09:03 AM
Seattle is still a good match for the Reds, if they're interested in Aardsma. Not sure I see too much different between he and Qualls though. Dotel and Lindstrom are two more interesting options. Mariners fans are pretty much anointing Brandon League as their next closer, and quite a few want Aardsma gone. I don't know much about him, other than the few times I saw him in the Cinci interleague series. His k and bb rates are better than Cordero (if that says anything). Aardsma and League are both under control for 2 more years, I think...so Seattle might not have a lot of motivation to move.

Aardsma's numbers are very similar to Cordero's. Do we really need another Coco?

Sea Ray
07-15-2010, 09:06 AM
Let's match the buyers up with their logical seller counterparts.

Buyer: Angels - Bullpen and 1st base
Seller: Blue Jays - Scott Downs & Lyle Overbay

Braves - RH Bat
Brewers - Corey Hart

Cardinals - Mid Level Starter
Indians - Jake Westbrook

Dodgers - Starter & Reliever
Brewers - Carlos Villanueva & *Randy Wolf (*Not on sellers list)

Giants - Bat
Marlins - Jorge Cantu

Mets - Bullpen & Top End Starter
Cubs - Carlos Marmol & Ted Lilly

Padres - Bat
Royals - Jose Guillen

Phillies - Mid Level Starter, Bullpen & IF
Oakland - Ben Sheets
KC - Alberto Callaspo & Kyle Farnsworth

Rangers - Top end Starter (still, really?)
NO TRADE AVAILABLE that they can afford

Rays - RF
NA

Red Sox - OF Depth & Bullpen
Royals - David DeJesus

Rockies - IF
No good match

Tigers - Bullpen
Brewers - David Riske

Twins - Top end starter & 3rd Base
O's - Ty Wigginton (no pitching available in their price range)

White Sox - LH bat
Brewers - Prince Fielder

Yankees - Bench & Bullpen
Who knows

Reds - TOR Starter and Bullpen
D-Backs - Chad Qualls


I'll add one:

Angels-1B
Nationals-Adam Dunn

Mario-Rijo
07-15-2010, 09:52 AM
In your view why wouldn't the Rockies and Marlins (Uggla) be a good match?

Guess I didn't even notice Uggla's name on the list. Sounds reasonable.

LincolnparkRed
07-15-2010, 10:56 AM
I think Lilly is done but if the Mets got Marmol, I would be worried. I think they overtake the Braves and nudge out Philly, and I like their chances even more with Marmol. This trade helps us as well. No Marmol means the end of games that the cubs lead would be even easier for us for the last 6 games we have with CHI.

nemesis
07-15-2010, 01:05 PM
Marlon Byrd would be a good fit to SD. SD could unload Banks and pitching to Chicago and get that done. It would free up Lee to the Giants for parts as well...

Mario-Rijo
07-16-2010, 06:21 PM
I think Lilly is done but if the Mets got Marmol, I would be worried. I think they overtake the Braves and nudge out Philly, and I like their chances even more with Marmol. This trade helps us as well. No Marmol means the end of games that the cubs lead would be even easier for us for the last 6 games we have with CHI.

I'll toss another one to the Mets, Brett Myers. I read something on ESPN insider about it that had alot of logic involved, makes alot of sense for them. Myers actually is a shrewd pick up for anyone right now IMO.

*BaseClogger*
07-17-2010, 01:38 PM
I'll add one:

Angels-1B
Nationals-Adam Dunn

Or:

White Sox - LH DH
Nationals - Adam Dunn

fearofpopvol1
07-21-2010, 03:18 AM
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=5396916

This is interesting. Oswalt would prefer a team in the south or the Midwest. Maybe the Reds could get him?

Ghosts of 1990
07-21-2010, 03:46 AM
I think Oswalt will be a Phillie.

There are so many relievers out there who could help us. If we sign Isringhausen; I really might vomit in my mouth a little bit

nemesis
07-21-2010, 06:05 AM
I think Oswalt will be a Phillie.

There are so many relievers out there who could help us. If we sign Isringhausen; I really might vomit in my mouth a little bit

Why? He has been successful pretty much everywhere he has been.

buckeyenut
07-21-2010, 08:25 AM
With the signing of Springer and Izzy and improvement of the guys in the pen, I am OK with our bullpen right now. With Volquez back, I am OK with the rotation, leaving really Oswalt or Haren as the only two guys I would consider bringing in.

I think the primary position we need to upgrade is SS. I think we could do that if we just gave Janish more time. I think he would be very solid at plate and outstanding in field. Unfortunately, I don't think there is one on the market that makes sense.

The other thing we are missing is a legit leadoff hitter. As much as I think this team needs Gomes attitude, I think DeJesus and his OBP atop the lineup in front of Phillips and Votto ignites this offense. I then let Gomes spell Bruce and DeJesus a couple days a week, particularly Bruce against LHP. I'd try to go for Gordon and DeJesus and see what it cost.

edabbs44
07-21-2010, 08:38 AM
With the signing of Springer and Izzy and improvement of the guys in the pen, I am OK with our bullpen right now. With Volquez back, I am OK with the rotation, leaving really Oswalt or Haren as the only two guys I would consider bringing in.

I think the primary position we need to upgrade is SS. I think we could do that if we just gave Janish more time. I think he would be very solid at plate and outstanding in field. Unfortunately, I don't think there is one on the market that makes sense.

The other thing we are missing is a legit leadoff hitter. As much as I think this team needs Gomes attitude, I think DeJesus and his OBP atop the lineup in front of Phillips and Votto ignites this offense. I then let Gomes spell Bruce and DeJesus a couple days a week, particularly Bruce against LHP. I'd try to go for Gordon and DeJesus and see what it cost.

You can't take Gomes out of the starting lineup right now.

bucksfan2
07-21-2010, 09:25 AM
You can't take Gomes out of the starting lineup right now.

I think its funny how often Gomes gets mentioned as needing a platoon partner but often the elephant in the room is ignored. How about getting DeJesus and platooning Gomes and Bruce?

BRM
07-21-2010, 09:29 AM
I think its funny how often Gomes gets mentioned as needing a platoon partner but often the elephant in the room is ignored. How about getting DeJesus and platooning Gomes and Bruce?

I've seen people mention platooning Bruce. Normally it's a Heisey/Bruce platoon though. If I remember right, Gomes is an even worse defender when he's in RF.

bucksfan2
07-21-2010, 09:41 AM
I've seen people mention platooning Bruce. Normally it's a Heisey/Bruce platoon though. If I remember right, Gomes is an even worse defender when he's in RF.

I was more thinking of getting another outfielder like DeJesus. Then you can play Gomes in LF and DeJesus in RF and DeJesus in LF and Bruce in RF.

Im not giving up on Bruce but the Reds are going to need production out of that RF position. He may be developing right on schedule but in a pennant race that can become unacceptable.

edabbs44
07-21-2010, 09:42 AM
I've seen people mention platooning Bruce. Normally it's a Heisey/Bruce platoon though. If I remember right, Gomes is an even worse defender when he's in RF.

The view of Gomes as being as bad of a defender as the stats say is bunk. It just doesn't add up. We all know that he isn't a gold glover, but to say that he is as bad as they say doesn't make sense.

But the reality is that he isn't going to be replaced at this point of the season for multiple reasons.

BRM
07-21-2010, 09:46 AM
I was more thinking of getting another outfielder like DeJesus. Then you can play Gomes in LF and DeJesus in RF and DeJesus in LF and Bruce in RF.

Im not giving up on Bruce but the Reds are going to need production out of that RF position. He may be developing right on schedule but in a pennant race that can become unacceptable.

Gotcha. That makes sense.

I agree with edabbs. Gomes isn't getting replaced right now.

bucksfan2
07-21-2010, 10:50 AM
Would you?

Jay Bruce + for Nick Markakis

I doubt the O's go for it seeing as they have locked up Markakis until 2014. But Baltimore is in one of the worst situations in all of baseball. They aren't even close to the Yankees, Red Sox, or Rays.

Markakis gives the Reds a + bat under control for a number of years. They should be able to afford the contract with the likes of Harang and maybe Arroyo coming off the books. Maybe I am dreaming but its the kind of young/prospect player/s for good MLB player that Jocketty has made his living off of.

edabbs44
07-21-2010, 11:01 AM
Would you?

Jay Bruce + for Nick Markakis

I doubt the O's go for it seeing as they have locked up Markakis until 2014. But Baltimore is in one of the worst situations in all of baseball. They aren't even close to the Yankees, Red Sox, or Rays.

Markakis gives the Reds a + bat under control for a number of years. They should be able to afford the contract with the likes of Harang and maybe Arroyo coming off the books. Maybe I am dreaming but its the kind of young/prospect player/s for good MLB player that Jocketty has made his living off of.

Can't see that being worth it...Markakis isn't living up to his potential just yet and gets very expensive very quickly. Bruce probably outperforms him over the life of his contract.

bucksfan2
07-21-2010, 11:33 AM
Can't see that being worth it...Markakis isn't living up to his potential just yet and gets very expensive very quickly. Bruce probably outperforms him over the life of his contract.

How would .300/.383/.443 OPS .826 OPS+123 look in the lineup this season? He is a career 119 OPS+ guy who you would have in the prime of his career.

Bruce very well may outperform him over the life of the contract, or he may not. Also with his super 2 status the Reds only control him for 3 years instead of 4 with him probably getting a nice little bump this season.

Here is the thing, the Reds are built right now to contend this season as well as into the next 3-4 years and hopefully more into the future. The Reds have some serious questions going forward this year. Some them being lack of a TOR starter, Rolen's health, Jay Bruce, the bullpen. Adding Markakis to this club not only alleviates the Jay Bruce question but it puts a bonified bat that could soften a Rolen DL stint.

There are very few players I would advocated trading Jay for, Markakis may just be one of them.

lollipopcurve
07-21-2010, 12:12 PM
Would you?

Jay Bruce + for Nick Markakis

I doubt the O's go for it seeing as they have locked up Markakis until 2014. But Baltimore is in one of the worst situations in all of baseball. They aren't even close to the Yankees, Red Sox, or Rays.

Markakis gives the Reds a + bat under control for a number of years. They should be able to afford the contract with the likes of Harang and maybe Arroyo coming off the books. Maybe I am dreaming but its the kind of young/prospect player/s for good MLB player that Jocketty has made his living off of.

Funny you mention it -- I've been mulling this one over myself.

I think I would do it. Markakis is locked in through 2014, and I feel he is the kind of player you can consider a core guy. He hits lefties OK and he plays good defense. He's an everyday guy. The contract may look big now, but it won't look bad vs. what players like him are getting paid in 2013-2014. He's dying to play on a good team, and he's still young. His best is likely still ahead of him.

I just don't feel certain Bruce is going to become the monster many have predicted he will become. And his salary is going to start escalating quickly, too.

You can't wait forever. The window appears to have opened. And right now, I don't think there's any doubt that Markakis gives the Reds a better chance to win this year and next, plus he provides middle-of-the-order stability, and cost certainty from "the core" for pretty much the entire window this young pitching staff can be in place.

I know it's anathema to talk about trading Bruce, but I think getting Markakis locks in this team's competitive window for several years to come with more certainty than we can count on from the current squad.

edabbs44
07-21-2010, 12:18 PM
How would .300/.383/.443 OPS .826 OPS+123 look in the lineup this season? He is a career 119 OPS+ guy who you would have in the prime of his career.

Bruce very well may outperform him over the life of the contract, or he may not. Also with his super 2 status the Reds only control him for 3 years instead of 4 with him probably getting a nice little bump this season.

Here is the thing, the Reds are built right now to contend this season as well as into the next 3-4 years and hopefully more into the future. The Reds have some serious questions going forward this year. Some them being lack of a TOR starter, Rolen's health, Jay Bruce, the bullpen. Adding Markakis to this club not only alleviates the Jay Bruce question but it puts a bonified bat that could soften a Rolen DL stint.

There are very few players I would advocated trading Jay for, Markakis may just be one of them.

Markakis makes $54.25MM over the next 4 seasons. He's a nice player but unless he ramps up his production significantly, I wouldn't want that contact anywhere near Cincinnati.

REDREAD
07-21-2010, 12:23 PM
Would you?

Jay Bruce + for Nick Markakis



Yes, I do that in a heartbeat.

I like Bruce. I hope someday he becomes as good as Markakis, but it's not a sure thing. Getting Markakis sets the Reds up really nice for making a 3-4 year run.

Trade a maybe star (Bruce) for a sure thing? No brainer. Chances are that when Bruce puts it together, arbitration is going to send his salary through the roof anyhow.

Big Klu
07-21-2010, 01:56 PM
As long as Peter Angelos is owner of the Orioles, fellow Greek Nick Markakis isn't going anywhere. In fact, maybe the Reds can trade Milt Pappas back to the O's for Frank Robinson.

(We can even throw in John Tsitouris and Alex Grammas if they want to send Adam Jones our way! ;) )

TheNext44
07-21-2010, 02:42 PM
Would you?

Jay Bruce + for Nick Markakis

I doubt the O's go for it seeing as they have locked up Markakis until 2014. But Baltimore is in one of the worst situations in all of baseball. They aren't even close to the Yankees, Red Sox, or Rays.

Markakis gives the Reds a + bat under control for a number of years. They should be able to afford the contract with the likes of Harang and maybe Arroyo coming off the books. Maybe I am dreaming but its the kind of young/prospect player/s for good MLB player that Jocketty has made his living off of.

Bruce is twice the fielder that Markakis is, and has more power than Markakis. The power is not showing up this year, but it will.

Add in that Markakis already has a huge contract, and I would have to pass. I know Bruce is a super two, but the good news about him not having strong counting stats yet is that he probably won't get much in arbitration. Bruce should be relatively affordable until he has a breakout season.

bucksfan2
07-21-2010, 03:16 PM
Bruce is twice the fielder that Markakis is, and has more power than Markakis. The power is not showing up this year, but it will.

When will the power show up? When will Jay become the player most think he will? Will Jay become the player most think he will?

Its not a knock on Jay but the Reds need production from that spot. They need production from Jay. Down the the stretch it isn't going to be good enough if Jay is developing, the Reds are going to need production.


Add in that Markakis already has a huge contract, and I would have to pass. I know Bruce is a super two, but the good news about him not having strong counting stats yet is that he probably won't get much in arbitration. Bruce should be relatively affordable until he has a breakout season.

I am not all that scared with Markakis contract. He will be making money but that money will be coming during his peak years. It isn't like the will be paying a 37 year old KGJ all that money.

I would not advocate trading Jay for a quick fix. What I would look for is a similar type player that is a year or two further along in their development. I am would be willing to sacrifice a little upside production for a player like Markakis.

TheNext44
07-21-2010, 03:31 PM
When will the power show up? When will Jay become the player most think he will? Will Jay become the player most think he will?

Its not a knock on Jay but the Reds need production from that spot. They need production from Jay. Down the the stretch it isn't going to be good enough if Jay is developing, the Reds are going to need production.



I am not all that scared with Markakis contract. He will be making money but that money will be coming during his peak years. It isn't like the will be paying a 37 year old KGJ all that money.

I would not advocate trading Jay for a quick fix. What I would look for is a similar type player that is a year or two further along in their development. I am would be willing to sacrifice a little upside production for a player like Markakis.

It's a good trade proposal, and if the Reds did it, I wouldn't be upset. But at the end of the day, dollars for doughnuts, I just think that over the next four years, the Reds will get more value from Bruce than Markakis. But it probably would be close.

nemesis
07-21-2010, 03:42 PM
I like Bruce. I hope someday he becomes as good as Markakis.

Markakis (26) - 358 AB's / 40 Runs / 107 H / 31 2B's / 1 3B / 6 HR / 31 RBI / 50 BB / 55 K's / 3 SB

At $13 Million per year.

BABIP - .326 / LD% 18.0%

UZR - (-1.7) UZR 150 - (-6.3)

Slash of - .382/.441/.823 on the Season

VS RHP - .377/.402/.779

Since All Star Break - .304/.174/.478


Bruce (23) - 339 AB's (-19) / 51 (+11) Runs / 87 (-20) H / 21 (-10) 2B's /4 (+3) 3B's / 10 (+4) HR / 37 (+6) RBI's / 37 (-13) BB / 89 (+34) K's / 5 (+2) SB

At $13 Million for the next 4 years.

BABIP .289 / LD% 20.1%

UZR - (3.5) UZR 150 (6.5) a (12.8 UZR Swing) That's alot of runs. (In 2009 it was 19.7 UZR 150 advantage by Bruce)

Slash of - .329/.431/.760 on the season

VS RHP - .342/.461/.803

Since All Star Break - .118/.125/.243

So at three and a half years older than Bruce (Markakis will be 27 this year) and at about $41 Million more expensive over the next 4 years, you get a negative defender, with less power, a lower LD rate, a higher BABIP which has to be luck, based on a 2.1% lower LD rate. Bruce hits RHP better (+.024) and with way more power (+.059). Has a higher ISO as well. (.203 to .174)(+.029). Other than plate Discipline, exactly how is a guy 3 and a half years older than Bruce, better than Bruce? Specifically $13 Million more a year better? It takes one Bruce hot streak to go over an .800 OPS.


Do some research before you go Armchair GMing for a name player. Once again the undervaluing of what we have here right in front of us based on a couple bat AB's is overwhelming to me. In 3 years Bruce will be significantly better than the number Nick is putting up now, as Nick is starting his decline at 31... At a fraction of the price... Exactly why do you trade that?

bucksfan2
07-21-2010, 03:56 PM
Markakis (26) - 358 AB's / 40 Runs / 107 H / 31 2B's / 1 3B / 6 HR / 31 RBI / 50 BB / 55 K's / 3 SB

At $13 Million per year.

BABIP - .326 / LD% 18.0%

UZR - (-1.7) UZR 150 - (-6.3)

Slash of - .382/.441/.823 on the Season

VS RHP - .377/.402/.779

Since All Star Break - .304/.174/.478


Bruce (23) - 339 AB's (-19) / 51 (+11) Runs / 87 (-20) H / 21 (-10) 2B's /4 (+3) 3B's / 10 (+4) HR / 37 (+6) RBI's / 37 (-13) BB / 89 (+34) K's / 5 (+2) SB

At $13 Million for the next 4 years.

BABIP .289 / LD% 20.1%

UZR - (3.5) UZR 150 (6.5) a (12.8 UZR Swing) That's alot of runs. (In 2009 it was 19.7 UZR 150 advantage by Bruce)

Slash of - .329/.431/.760 on the season

VS RHP - .342/.461/.803

Since All Star Break - .118/.125/.243

So at three and a half years older than Bruce (Markakis will be 27 this year) and at about $41 Million more expensive over the next 4 years, you get a negative defender, with less power, a lower LD rate, a higher BABIP which has to be luck, based on a 2.1% lower LD rate. Bruce hits RHP better (+.024) and with way more power (+.059). Has a higher ISO as well. (.203 to .174)(+.029). Other than plate Discipline, exactly how is a guy 3 and a half years older than Bruce, better than Bruce? Specifically $13 Million more a year better? It takes one Bruce hot streak to go over an .800 OPS.


Do some research before you go Armchair GMing for a name player. Once again the undervaluing of what we have here right in front of us based on a couple bat AB's is overwhelming to me. In 3 years Bruce will be significantly better than the number Nick is putting up now, as Nick is starting his decline at 31... At a fraction of the price... Exactly why do you trade that?

First of all we are all armchair GM's.

Second of all back in 2008 Markakis was a 12.0 UZR RF. Did all of a sudden he fall off a cliff defensive wise? Did he forget how to play defense? Or are UZR metrics inherently flawed and you need more than one seasons worth of data to make an educated suggestion.

I would be happy if Bruce because a similar offensive player to Markakis. The suggested trade is more fantasy than anything else but to me is interesting. You are basically trading away more young potential but getting back in return current high level production. Who knows what Jay Bruce will inevitably become. He could go on and become Larry Walker or he could go on and become Austin Kearns. There will always be risk with the development of a young player.

nemesis
07-21-2010, 04:06 PM
First of all we are all armchair GM's.

Second of all back in 2008 Markakis was a 12.0 UZR RF. Did all of a sudden he fall off a cliff defensive wise? Did he forget how to play defense? Or are UZR metrics inherently flawed and you need more than one seasons worth of data to make an educated suggestion.

I would be happy if Bruce because a similar offensive player to Markakis. The suggested trade is more fantasy than anything else but to me is interesting. You are basically trading away more young potential but getting back in return current high level production. Who knows what Jay Bruce will inevitably become. He could go on and become Larry Walker or he could go on and become Austin Kearns. There will always be risk with the development of a young player.

He hasn't forgot how to field a ball but in the last 2 years his UZR has dropped due most in part to a drop in his range rating. It could be lack of hustle, a lack of interest or him battling an injury. Who knows. But the idea that Markakis is a better player than Bruce and somehow would put this team over the top is laughable.

bucksfan2
07-21-2010, 04:08 PM
He hasn't forgot how to field a ball but in the last 2 years his UZR has dropped due most in part to a drop in his range rating. It could be lack of hustle, a lack of interest or him battling an injury. Who knows. But the idea that Markakis is a better player than Bruce and somehow would put this team over the top is laughable.

Right now I would argue that Markakis is better than Jay Bruce. He may not project to be a better player during the long haul, but right now yes he is better.

Mario-Rijo
07-21-2010, 04:09 PM
Would you?

Jay Bruce + for Nick Markakis

I doubt the O's go for it seeing as they have locked up Markakis until 2014. But Baltimore is in one of the worst situations in all of baseball. They aren't even close to the Yankees, Red Sox, or Rays.

Markakis gives the Reds a + bat under control for a number of years. They should be able to afford the contract with the likes of Harang and maybe Arroyo coming off the books. Maybe I am dreaming but its the kind of young/prospect player/s for good MLB player that Jocketty has made his living off of.

No thanks.

nemesis
07-21-2010, 04:15 PM
Right now I would argue that Markakis is better than Jay Bruce. He may not project to be a better player during the long haul, but right now yes he is better.

Can I ask in what regard he is better?

bucksfan2
07-21-2010, 04:23 PM
Can I ask in what regard he is better?

He is better in ever offensive category.

traderumor
07-21-2010, 04:28 PM
Bruce for Markakis is very close to O'Neill for Roberto Kelly. No thanks.

nemesis
07-21-2010, 04:40 PM
He is better in every offensive category.

He has Less HR's, 3B's, Runs, RBI's, and most importantly OPSing .024 less against RHP. Has a lower LD% Rate by 2.1%. Lower Power ISO rate by .029. Has hit into 67% more DP's. Define every category. Not to mention he is worth about 15 to 20 less runs in RF than Bruce.

All this at 3 and a half years older and 12.5 million more this year.

So your willing to pay $12.5 million more this year and $41 million over the next 4 years for a guy WHO WALKS?

bucksfan2
07-21-2010, 04:56 PM
He has Less HR's, 3B's, Runs, RBI's, and most importantly OPSing .024 less against RHP. Has a lower LD% Rate by 2.1%. Lower Power ISO rate by .029. Has hit into 67% more DP's. Define every category. Not to mention he is worth about 15 to 20 less runs in RF than Bruce.

All this at 3 and a half years older and 12.5 million more this year.

So your willing to pay $12.5 million more this year and $41 million over the next 4 years for a guy WHO WALKS?

Markakis
OPS .826
OPS + 123
OBP .383
BB 50
K 55
2010 Salary $6.75

Bruce
OPS .760
OPS + 101
OBP .329
BB 37
K 89


I will give you the HR part. I guess I missed it that Markakis hasn't hit many HR's this season but I would imagine that would increase playing in GABP. Don't really care about 3b's, they are more a result of luck than anything else. IMO a 3b is a glorified 2B and right now if you combine the two Nick has Jay beat 32/25. I don't really care about an OPS difference in facing RHP because if you are going to be an everyday player that doesn't matter to me. Heck you could make the argument that Nick faces tougher pitching in the AL east than Bruce does in the NL Central.

The issue is right now the Reds are built for not only this season but the next couple of seasons. Jay needs to be an important piece in that and right now he is a question mark. IMO the Reds would be better off this season as well as next seasons with Nick. And then after that its a big question mark. Markakis would be more expensive but also more of a known commodity. Over the next 3 years Jay would be cheaper but a much bigger question mark. And its not like Markakis is going to fall off a cliff due to age, he is only 27 right now so you would have him during his peak years.

I would make the trade. I would much rather have the known commodity (see the Scott Rolen trade) over a big potential question mark. As BigKlu mentioned earlier the likeliness of this happening is very slim because of Angelos and Markakis' Greek connection.

Big Klu
07-21-2010, 05:32 PM
Bruce for Markakis is very close to O'Neill for Roberto Kelly. No thanks.

Roberto Kelly was a solid player, even with the Reds. Sure, he doesn't compare to what Paul O'Neill became after he went to the Bronx, but I'm not sure Paulie ever becomes that player if he had stayed in Cincinnati. Kelly's numbers in 1993 were quite good, although his season was shortened by injury. (Remember, he was an All-Star in '93.) At the time the Reds made the trade with the Yankees, there were still some doubts as to whether O'Neill would ever consistently hit LHP, and there was also considerable doubt as to whether Reggie Sanders could handle CF. Reds management felt that Sanders projected more as a corner OF, so there was a perceived need for a CF.

Kelly's problem was that he couldn't stay healthy, and that fact, coupled with the fact that the Reds were RH-heavy in their lineup, led to him being traded to the Braves in the middle of the 1994 season for Deion Sanders. But really his biggest sin was that O'Neill became an even bigger star than anyone in Cincinnati could have envisioned.

lollipopcurve
07-21-2010, 05:59 PM
But the idea that Markakis is a better player than Bruce and somehow would put this team over the top is laughable.

No, it's laughable to deny that he's a better player.

Markakis is a very consistent mid .800 OPS player in the AL East. He plays a lot of games against the Yankee, Red Sox and Ray pitching staffs. He gets little to hit in that Baltimore lineup. Bruce has never OPsed .800, has not made significant progress as a major league hitter, and he's in the NL Central.

You know what you're getting with Markakis, and it's likely to be even better than what he's done, given the switch to the NL Central and the adrenaline of being on a good team in a good lineup.

Meanwhile, with Bruce, we wait. He has shown no sign that the breakout is nearing. Yet, the postseason is now a distinct possibility, and the pitching staff is primed.

With Markakis, the team pushes the accelerator as the competitive window opens, and you have him for many years to come. With Bruce, it idles. I have no idea if Baltimore would deal Markakis, but apparently McPhail has said no young player is untouchable. If I were Jocketty I'd be seeing if he and McPhail can work together on another deal, this one involving their RFs.

Mario-Rijo
07-21-2010, 06:03 PM
Meanwhile, with Bruce, we wait. He has shown no sign that the breakout is nearing. Yet, the postseason is now a distinct possibility, and the pitching staff is primed.


He hit what .212 last season? Yeah he has shown improvement in his approach which is showing up in the stats.

edabbs44
07-21-2010, 06:04 PM
Markakis is a decent bet to outproduce Bruce for the rest of this season, but I'll take Bruce and millions in flexibility over Markakis for the next 4 years any day.

Kc61
07-21-2010, 06:12 PM
Markakis is a decent bet to outproduce Bruce for the rest of this season, but I'll take Bruce and millions in flexibility over Markakis for the next 4 years any day.


If Bruce is on the table, here is my deal.

Hanley Ramirez for Bruce, Alonso, Cozart, Maloney and Cabrera. If pushed, I would give up the young reliever Joseph or Homer B instead of Maloney.

lollipopcurve
07-21-2010, 06:16 PM
Markakis is a decent bet to outproduce Bruce for the rest of this season, but I'll take Bruce and millions in flexibility over Markakis for the next 4 years any day.

I understand the allure -- Bruce will flower, the team will go out and find another impact player with the money saved.

It's all a maybe. But the team is not a maybe any more -- it's close, and it needs more offense.

Bruce is the golden boy. Something of a sacred cow. Yes, he's shown flashes of being a dominant hitter, but so far he's always fallen back. His OPS is treading water -- no improvement since he came up. If you wait on him, and he doesn't have that breakthrough, his value plummets. It would take guts to deal him, and maybe he goes on to be a Triple Crown winner like Robby did, but I think in this case you'd be getting a player you can count on to be a middle of the order hitter on a contending club.

Would it be better to go get Markakis with other prospects? Sure, but I doubt the deal would happen without Bruce.

nate
07-21-2010, 06:22 PM
Requiring more than a single season's worth of data in no way makes a statistic "flawed."

lollipopcurve
07-21-2010, 06:25 PM
If Bruce is on the table, here is my deal.

Hanley Ramirez for Bruce, Alonso, Cozart, Maloney and Cabrera. If pushed, I would give up the young reliever Joseph or Homer B instead of Maloney.

Yes. Same idea. Selling high on Bruce to get an impact bat who's locked up for several years. Markakis would be less expensive and less risky as a clubhouse influence, while Ramirez would bring the MVP-caliber bat.

What it comes down to is the team needs another offensive anchor. We've all been hoping Bruce would become that. He hasn't. So, do you keep waiting, or do you use him to go get what he isn't? I really think the time is ripe for the team to solidy its offensive core. Maybe I'm being impatient, I don't know, but generally speaking I've preached waiting on the young guys for years. Now I think the team is truly ready to make the next step, and needs to take it, and I don't see it happening without another legit, established bat to pair with Votto.

nate
07-21-2010, 06:40 PM
I like Markakis but not for Bruce and not without some salary offset; the Reds will have other FA needs in the offseason.

mdccclxix
07-21-2010, 06:45 PM
Next week, after Bruce has hit a couple HR's and raised his average back to .270, no one will want to think about losing him.

I hope. :)

edabbs44
07-21-2010, 08:28 PM
I understand the allure -- Bruce will flower, the team will go out and find another impact player with the money saved.

It's all a maybe. But the team is not a maybe any more -- it's close, and it needs more offense.

Bruce is the golden boy. Something of a sacred cow. Yes, he's shown flashes of being a dominant hitter, but so far he's always fallen back. His OPS is treading water -- no improvement since he came up. If you wait on him, and he doesn't have that breakthrough, his value plummets. It would take guts to deal him, and maybe he goes on to be a Triple Crown winner like Robby did, but I think in this case you'd be getting a player you can count on to be a middle of the order hitter on a contending club.

Would it be better to go get Markakis with other prospects? Sure, but I doubt the deal would happen without Bruce.

I think it's more of smart business than anything else. I'm not sure that Markakis' upside is worthy of Bruce's potential and payroll flexibility. I'm not sure of Markakis' defensive prowess, but UZR isn't a huge fan. His bat hasn't taken off as some predicted. And he has a hefty price tag.

To be honest, I don't even think that Bruce would need to be in the discussion to get Markakis. His market value is probably materially higher than Markakis', I would imagine. Taking on a guy signed at $14MM per for 4 years who doesn't provide plus anything? No thanks, unless it makes a whole lot of sense for my club.

buckeyenut
07-21-2010, 09:26 PM
I would love to get markasis for LF and keep bring in RF somehow. Would heisey, Alonso and Frazier for markasis get it done?

edabbs44
07-21-2010, 09:31 PM
I would love to get markasis for LF and keep bring in RF somehow. Would heisey, Alonso and Frazier for markasis get it done?

Baltimore might pass out if they got that offer.

RedsManRick
07-21-2010, 10:06 PM
Markakis is a better player than Jay Bruce today. But I'll take 2012 and beyond Bruce over 2012 and beyond Markakis -- and would save a boatload of cash in the process.

buckeyenut
07-22-2010, 05:49 AM
Baltimore might pass out if they got that offer.

Too much or not enough?

edabbs44
07-22-2010, 05:55 AM
Too much or not enough?

Way too much.

bucksfan2
07-22-2010, 08:56 AM
Markakis is a better player than Jay Bruce today. But I'll take 2012 and beyond Bruce over 2012 and beyond Markakis -- and would save a boatload of cash in the process.

That is pretty much the prevailing argument in this debate. In my mind there really isn't an issue that Markakis is a better player than Jay in both 2010 and 2011. The Reds are in a pennant race this season and they need production out of the RF spot and not potential. That is my biggest issue with Jay right now, not that he is a bad player, just most of his value is wrapped up in defense and potential. It isn't a bad thing to have and its not like he is a negative ball player but potential isn't going to help this 2010 team hitting in the 5-6 hole down the stretch.

The bigger issue is what does Jay Bruce look like in 2012? Does he look like the current version of Jay Bruce? Does he look like Austin Kearns? Does he look like an MVP caliber RF? No one knows. Then add to the issue that with Bruce being a super 2 the Reds would control him in 2011,12,13 and if he starts to put up Markakis overall production I don't know how much money you will save because he will get very expensive.

If you are able to trade Jay Bruce for a player like Markakis who is young, productive, and under contract for several years you substantially limit your downside. And if Bruce does become a good baseball player its not like you are left hanging with chop liver. In order to be successful in baseball you need to take risks. The issue I am seeing more and more is Jay Bruce is no sure think in 2012, he has quite a bit of potential but so did the likes of Kearns, Willie Green, Encarnacion, etc.

lollipopcurve
07-22-2010, 09:09 AM
If you are able to trade Jay Bruce for a player like Markakis who is young, productive, and under contract for several years you substantially limit your downside. And if Bruce does become a good baseball player its not like you are left hanging with chop liver. In order to be successful in baseball you need to take risks. The issue I am seeing more and more is Jay Bruce is no sure think in 2012, he has quite a bit of potential but so did the likes of Kearns, Willie Green, Encarnacion, etc.

I think Bruce is a better player than those guys, but yes -- this is precisely the argument in re: 2012 and beyond. Add that to the notion that Markakis makes the team better in the near-term, and it's enough for me.

I'm torn on this one, but I have the sense that because the mindset needs to shift from waiting for to capitalizing on unrealized young talent -- no one would argue that the time is not ripe for the Reds to deal prospects for talent that helps the big-league club for several seasons -- that if the best deal of that nature has to involve Jay Bruce, you do it. Could be wrong, but, as bucksfan says, you're not left with chopped liver, either.

Very tough call.

Falls City Beer
07-22-2010, 09:11 AM
Affordability is not production. And neither is payflex.

TheNext44
07-22-2010, 09:26 AM
Affordability is not production. And neither is payflex.

When dealing with a fixed budget, Affordability and Payflex do equal production.

Case in point. If the Reds did not have to pay Cordero $12M this year and next, they could have gotten another veteran starting pitcher, or SS, or left fielder for this season and the future. They would have similar production from Masset or Rhodes in the closer role to Cordero's current production, and then more production from that starting pitcher/SS/LF than they currently are getting from whoever is in those spots currently. Payflex and affordability leads to more production, when it is used correctly.

Falls City Beer
07-22-2010, 09:35 AM
When dealing with a fixed budget, Affordability and Payflex do equal production.

Case in point. If the Reds did not have to pay Cordero $12M this year and next, they could have gotten another veteran starting pitcher, or SS, or left fielder for this season and the future. They would have similar production from Masset or Rhodes in the closer role to Cordero's current production, and then more production from that starting pitcher/SS/LF than they currently are getting from whoever is in those spots currently. Payflex and affordability leads to more production, when it is used correctly.

Paying market price for a blue chip stock like Markakis is not the same thing as betting your life savings on a roulette spin, like Cordero.

RedsManRick
07-22-2010, 09:36 AM
If I'm trading away Jay's future, I want a bigger present value upgrade than Markakis. WAR has Markakis at 2.0 to Bruce's 1.3 this year.

I'm all for going after Markakis, but trading Bruce is just marginally better than running in place in 2010. If you want to get a ~1 win upgrade, go after a LF or SS. Trading away a very high ceiling player who is a positive contributor as is strikes me as a silly way to pick up a win given all of the other options. Offer them Alonso, Hesiey, and Maloney, keep Bruce and stick Markakis in LF.

bucksfan2
07-22-2010, 09:49 AM
If I'm trading away Jay's future, I want a bigger present value upgrade than Markakis. WAR has Markakis at 2.0 to Bruce's 1.3 this year.

I'm all for going after Markakis, but trading Bruce is just marginally better than running in place in 2010. If you want to get a ~1 win upgrade, go after a LF or SS. Trading away a very high ceiling player who is a positive contributor as is strikes me as a silly way to pick up a win given all of the other options. Offer them Alonso, Hesiey, and Maloney, keep Bruce and stick Markakis in LF.

Markakis WAR this season may be significantly skewed by a poor UZR rating. I don't think its close this season in regards to who is the better overall player.

Falls City Beer
07-22-2010, 09:51 AM
While getting a guy like Markakis is a very Jocketty-like thing to do, it's not very likely to happen. Payroll won't be added.

lollipopcurve
07-22-2010, 10:12 AM
If I'm trading away Jay's future, I want a bigger present value upgrade than Markakis. WAR has Markakis at 2.0 to Bruce's 1.3 this year.

I'm all for going after Markakis, but trading Bruce is just marginally better than running in place in 2010. If you want to get a ~1 win upgrade, go after a LF or SS. Trading away a very high ceiling player who is a positive contributor as is strikes me as a silly way to pick up a win given all of the other options. Offer them Alonso, Hesiey, and Maloney, keep Bruce and stick Markakis in LF.

Can't argue with this, and I have said it's far preferable to get Markakis without dealing Bruce.

That kind of deal would likely have to wait till the offseason. I don't see them shelving Gomes this year.