PDA

View Full Version : You can only have 1, which one would it be?



brm7675
10-07-2010, 03:11 PM
Lets say our owner tells Walt he will pay whatever the cost is for 1 major addition in the offseason. Which player should Walt get?

Girevik
10-07-2010, 03:35 PM
Cawford, and I don't even have to think about it. Although, I'd take either (and we'll get neither).

New York Red
10-07-2010, 03:44 PM
I love Crawford and would love to see him in a Reds uniform, but we saw once again yesterday the importance of having an ace on your pitching staff. If we already had a stud pitcher, I'd take Crawford over Lee. But we don't, so I voted for Cliff Lee.

Wiggidy
10-07-2010, 03:49 PM
I voted for Lee but considering that Crawford is only 9 years old I think I'm going to have to change my mind.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Crawford

New York Red
10-07-2010, 03:50 PM
I voted for Lee but considering that Crawford is only 9 years old I think I'm going to have to change my mind.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Crawford
LOL ... he's got quite a future! :beerme:

redsrolen
10-07-2010, 04:03 PM
I voted for Lee but considering that Crawford is only 9 years old I think I'm going to have to change my mind.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Crawford

LOL!! I had to look that up to see what you were talking about!!

Seriously though, I voted for Lee and any ace brothers and cousins he might have laying around!! People can talk all they want about how great the Phillies are, give the Reds the same pitchers and we RAKE!!!!!!

mivers176
10-07-2010, 04:07 PM
I vote Lee. I really like Crawford and it would be tough if it was an option but we need a dominant #1 hands down no questions asked ace.

brm7675
10-07-2010, 04:11 PM
I love Crawford and would love to see him in a Reds uniform, but we saw once again yesterday the importance of having an ace on your pitching staff. If we already had a stud pitcher, I'd take Crawford over Lee. But we don't, so I voted for Cliff Lee.

Exactly how well did the mighty Philly offense do against our pitching? What like 4 runs off of 5 hits? Had our SS not been old and poor in the field it's a difference game. If we have Crawford and not Gomes in LF it's a different game. We have pitching, what we don't have is a leadoff hitter who can play incredible defense in the field.

Vottomatic
10-07-2010, 04:17 PM
Exactly how well did the mighty Philly offense do against our pitching? What like 4 runs off of 5 hits? Had our SS not been old and poor in the field it's a difference game. If we have Crawford and not Gomes in LF it's a different game. We have pitching, what we don't have is a leadoff hitter who can play incredible defense in the field.

Agreed. Philly pretty much scored 1 legit run off of us. Our SS and LFer did alot of helping out.

But doesn't matter what the final score in a loss is. A loss is a loss. But if you're looking for positives, the Philly offense really didn't light it up that much.

1990REDS
10-07-2010, 04:26 PM
I vote Crawford. I would love to have Lee but hes 32 and you know hes gonna want a long, expensive 5 or 6 year deal. Not a big fan of giving pitchers in thier 30's long term deals. I would have a feeling the final 2 years of that deal he would not be worth what he was making.

757690
10-07-2010, 04:49 PM
Team needs an all around solid LF much more than an ace pitcher. Throw in their ages and it's not even a fair question, imo.

redsfan_12
10-07-2010, 06:27 PM
Good pitching > good hitting. I think Heisey in left is good enough to fill the hole. I voted Lee

New York Red
10-07-2010, 06:35 PM
LOL!! I had to look that up to see what you were talking about!!

Seriously though, I voted for Lee and any ace brothers and cousins he might have laying around!! People can talk all they want about how great the Phillies are, give the Reds the same pitchers and we RAKE!!!!!!
Just give us Halladay and it's a different looking series. Heck, we'd have won 100 games and have home field advantage throughout the playoffs if we had Halladay taking the hill every fifth day.

1990REDS
10-07-2010, 06:41 PM
Lee would make us better right now but he wants a long term deal that could really hurt us the final couple years.

CaliBuck
10-07-2010, 07:32 PM
At this point in the careers, give me Crawford and go out and trade for a pitcher with some potential to be that ace. We have the prospects to part with. Lee's age right now kinda deters me. If you give me a similar question asking me whether I want King Felix or Crawford, I'll take Felix. All depends on the age for me.

'69 & Vine
10-07-2010, 07:56 PM
I vote Crawford. I would love to have Lee but hes 32 and you know hes gonna want a long, expensive 5 or 6 year deal. Not a big fan of giving pitchers in thier 30's long term deals. I would have a feeling the final 2 years of that deal he would not be worth what he was making.

It seems like a lot of aces don't turn into aces until around age 30 for some reason. And that the lights out guys are well into their 30's. I didn't look up Pedro Martinez' age but wasn't he well into his thirties when he dominated?

Regardless, I voted for Lee...a lot of successful teams have meh left fielders and some very crappy teams have stellar left fielders. I vote Ace if not for the psychological factor. And very tireed of getting dogged for our staff.

1990REDS
10-07-2010, 08:25 PM
It seems like a lot of aces don't turn into aces until around age 30 for some reason. And that the lights out guys are well into their 30's. I didn't look up Pedro Martinez' age but wasn't he well into his thirties when he dominated?

Regardless, I voted for Lee...a lot of successful teams have meh left fielders and some very crappy teams have stellar left fielders. I vote Ace if not for the psychological factor. And very tireed of getting dogged for our staff.

Yes but Pedro did it for teams that could afford to roll the dice and possibly overpay if it didnt work out. The Reds are not one of those teams. If Lee would hit a wall at the age of 35, 36, and still made 16 or so million per, that would cripple the Reds.

benchpress
10-08-2010, 03:05 AM
Cliff Lee