PDA

View Full Version : Trade Ideas



camisadelgolf
10-28-2010, 11:06 AM
I just thought this could be a fun idea. Make a trade proposal that you think would make sense for both the Reds and another MLB team. Please explain why it makes sense. I'll give it some thought and come up with something soon.

camisadelgolf
10-28-2010, 11:41 AM
Reds get:
Josh Willingham

Nationals get:
Bronson Arroyo & Carlos Fisher

Why it makes sense:
In the short term, the Reds have starting pitching to spare, which is a major need for Washington. Salary-wise, Josh Willingham is due a big raise as he heads into his final year of arbitration. As for Arroyo, he is on a one-year contract that will pay him a bit more than Willingham will earn. It's possible the Reds may need to chip in some cash to make the deal happen.

In the long term, Bryce Harper should be up with the Nationals within a few years, and Mike Morse proved he can be a solid option as a corner outfielder. They also have first-round draft pick Michael Burgess, who they're pretty excited about. In other words, Willingham is on his way out, and the only question is whether he leaves or as a free agent or if he's traded away. Seeing as how they're probably looking to the future, they also have to convince the fans they're serious about competing now, which would justify the acquisition of Arroyo. However, if they aren't competing at the trade deadline, Arroyo would be very easy to flip for some quality prospects.

nemesis
10-28-2010, 04:39 PM
Reds get - Adrian Gonzalez, Chase Headley

San Diego Gets - Alonso, Heisey, Sappelt, Francisco, Maloney, Negron, Fleury

There has been all this talk of Votto moving to LF for Alonso's bat. Why not ask Votto to move if you can get a bat like AGon, who is still just 28, in the middle of his prime and wanting a big year in his contract year. No doubt he would OPS near 1.000 playing in GABP vs Petco. Headley is a good hitting 3B with an excellent glove, something the Reds value and would be ready to step in for Rolen when not if his back starts acting up.

San Diego needs a overhaul in bats. Denorfia is there best OF, Jerry Hariston is still their SS as of now and depth at all positions less C is needed. Heisey could move right into RF platoon with Hairston, Sappelt could be a legit leadoff guy in CF with Denorfia/Ludwick in LF. Alonso would be the centerpiece of the deal. Francisco replaces Headley and adds power to the lineup, Maloney would be much better suited to succeed in the NL West. Negron provides them IF depth, Fleury, will be blocked by better prospects in the system at C and give them a legit prospect in their system.

If a deal can't be worked out for AGon in the offseason, he is a Type A and you get two picks for him. you still have a MVP 1B in Votto and Frazier should be ready for LF. Keep important depth, while bolstering you ML roster. Still leaves enough $ and prospects to go get Greinke if you wanted.

bucksfan2
10-28-2010, 04:45 PM
nemsis I don't understand that trade at all. Right now I have to think Votto has more value that Gonzo. He is just entering arbitration where as Gonzo is almost done with arb. Votto just had a monster year and I don't see any signs of slowing. Basically I think a Votto for Gonzo swap would be a bad idea but almost equal. So then you are trading a lot of value for Headly. I don't see how this trade benefits the Reds at all.

camisadelgolf
10-28-2010, 04:53 PM
Reds get - Adrian Gonzalez, Chase Headley

San Diego Gets - Alonso, Heisey, Sappelt, Francisco, Maloney, Negron, Fleury

There has been all this talk of Votto moving to LF for Alonso's bat. Why not ask Votto to move if you can get a bat like AGon, who is still just 28, in the middle of his prime and wanting a big year in his contract year. No doubt he would OPS near 1.000 playing in GABP vs Petco. Headley is a good hitting 3B with an excellent glove, something the Reds value and would be ready to step in for Rolen when not if his back starts acting up.

San Diego needs a overhaul in bats. Denorfia is there best OF, Jerry Hariston is still their SS as of now and depth at all positions less C is needed. Heisey could move right into RF platoon with Hairston, Sappelt could be a legit leadoff guy in CF with Denorfia/Ludwick in LF. Alonso would be the centerpiece of the deal. Francisco replaces Headley and adds power to the lineup, Maloney would be much better suited to succeed in the NL West. Negron provides them IF depth, Fleury, will be blocked by better prospects in the system at C and give them a legit prospect in their system.

If a deal can't be worked out for AGon in the offseason, he is a Type A and you get two picks for him. you still have a MVP 1B in Votto and Frazier should be ready for LF. Keep important depth, while bolstering you ML roster. Still leaves enough $ and prospects to go get Greinke if you wanted.
I don't see Votto moving to left field ever, but I'll ignore that for now. I could see San Diego being open to moving AGon, but I don't see them moving him (along with Headley) for players who aren't established Major Leaguers. They were nearly in the playoffs this year, so I'd imagine they're totally in buy-now mode, and moving both Headley and AGon looks like a sell-now move. You also have to figure that they'd need to drop at least two or three players from their 40-man roster to make that deal happen, and teams just don't do that.

Overall, I don't think it's very realistic, but I like the creativity.

TheNext44
10-28-2010, 07:01 PM
Reds get:
Josh Willingham

Nationals get:
Bronson Arroyo & Carlos Fisher

Why it makes sense:
In the short term, the Reds have starting pitching to spare, which is a major need for Washington. Salary-wise, Josh Willingham is due a big raise as he heads into his final year of arbitration. As for Arroyo, he is on a one-year contract that will pay him a bit more than Willingham will earn. It's possible the Reds may need to chip in some cash to make the deal happen.

In the long term, Bryce Harper should be up with the Nationals within a few years, and Mike Morse proved he can be a solid option as a corner outfielder. They also have first-round draft pick Michael Burgess, who they're pretty excited about. In other words, Willingham is on his way out, and the only question is whether he leaves or as a free agent or if he's traded away. Seeing as how they're probably looking to the future, they also have to convince the fans they're serious about competing now, which would justify the acquisition of Arroyo. However, if they aren't competing at the trade deadline, Arroyo would be very easy to flip for some quality prospects.

Not a bad idea, but I like Swisher a lot better than Willingham. He plays better defense in both the outfield and 1B, has more power, and has played more regularly. If the Reds have to give up Arroyo, I would rather it be for Swisher than Willingham.

mth123
10-28-2010, 08:17 PM
Reds get:
Josh Willingham

Nationals get:
Bronson Arroyo & Carlos Fisher

Why it makes sense:
In the short term, the Reds have starting pitching to spare, which is a major need for Washington. Salary-wise, Josh Willingham is due a big raise as he heads into his final year of arbitration. As for Arroyo, he is on a one-year contract that will pay him a bit more than Willingham will earn. It's possible the Reds may need to chip in some cash to make the deal happen.

In the long term, Bryce Harper should be up with the Nationals within a few years, and Mike Morse proved he can be a solid option as a corner outfielder. They also have first-round draft pick Michael Burgess, who they're pretty excited about. In other words, Willingham is on his way out, and the only question is whether he leaves or as a free agent or if he's traded away. Seeing as how they're probably looking to the future, they also have to convince the fans they're serious about competing now, which would justify the acquisition of Arroyo. However, if they aren't competing at the trade deadline, Arroyo would be very easy to flip for some quality prospects.

I love the idea of Willingham and like Swisher, he's a guy dealt for a song that the Reds should have been after before 2009 began. For reasons enumerated in the Arroyo thread, I wouldn't deal Arroyo for him. Some combo of kids for him would be great by me with the idea that the Reds let Cabrera and Hernandez go free to pay for him. I'd offer Maloney and Gomes. The Nats trade down a bit, save some money and get a back-end arm to boot. They could have any of a number of bubble relievers like Smith, Fisher, Burton etc. if they want and a lower level kid could be added - maybe somebody like Sulbaran.

Rojo
10-28-2010, 08:28 PM
I'd try to put something together for Stephen Drew and Miggy Montero. Maybe Alonso and low-level pitching gets it done?

mth123
10-28-2010, 08:29 PM
My Idea is a bigger deal with Tampa Bay:

Reds deal Edinson Volquez, Yonder Alonso, Chris Heisey, Chris Valaika, Bill Bray and Jared Burton for Matt Garza, Matt Joyce, Reid Brignac and Angel Torres.

The Rays motivation would be to trade down from Garza to Volquez to save some cash while acquiring a cheap replacement for Carlos Pena, a couple of cheap relievers to backfill for pricey guys like Soriano, Qualls, Wheeler, Cormier and/or Howell. Valaika is to replace whatever IF depth they lose with Brignac gone and Heisey gives them a cheap guy with spme speed to try and address the loss of Crawford. Rays are looking to cut $20 Million plus. I think they would take a lot of cheap players who could help now.

The Reds convert one of the rotation question marks to a more certain guy, add a LH Power bat who could platoon with Gomes and provide a pair with ample power in the 5 hole (and Joyce is a good OF) and Brignac's LH bat would be able to play 4 days a week or so filling in for Rolen, getting some starts at SS and giving Phillips a rest a couple times a month. It would make Rolen and Phillips more effective players for the long haul and provide an alternative if both Janish and Cozart struggle. Cozart has had some splits that show he may struggle against RHP as he's reached the high minors (AA and AAA). Cozart would still be the primary starter at SS under this plan. Torres provides another rotation option should teh Reds need it as 2010 moves forward.

RedsManRick
10-28-2010, 08:36 PM
Reds Get:
Zack Greinke, David DeJesus

Royals Get:
Edinson Volquez, Juan Fransisco, David Sappelt, Matt Maloney

Royals want to capitalize on Greinke and Volquez gives them a high ceiling replacement and Maloney can be plugged in to the back of the rotation. Sappelt steps in for DeJesus and you can't have too many guys with 40 HR power (and the Royals aren't known value walks....). They also save a whole bunch of cash -- the Reds do not extend Arroyo.

Reds get a top of the rotation starter and a plus guy in LF who's just a year investment.

Of course, it's probably too much money coming our way and too little talent go back theirs...

Brutus
10-28-2010, 08:38 PM
I'm all for throwing out trade ideas. It seems, though, when it becomes necessary to throw 5 or 6 names into the Reds' side of the deal to get two players, then the deal is too fantasy baseball (ish) to ever happen.

As fans, we clearly tend to overvalue our own favorite team's prospects. So adding more names to any hypothetical trades rarely ever advances the likelihood such a trade would occur. It just throws in a bunch more excess that probably doesn't appeal the other team if such talks were to ever occur.

Teams just don't deal two established, quality players in the same deal. They're better off separating such players and dealing them to different teams, which is why we hardly ever see such a trade. The last time I can really think of a team including teams in the same package was the Beckett/Lowell for Hanley trade, which included Anibal Sanchez (and as an aside, Reds' farmhand Jesus Delgado).

But even that deal was a rare occurrence where the change of ownership from Florida to Boston played heavily into how/why the deal was constructed. As a rule of thumb, those trades just don't usually happen outside of fantasy universe.

In keeping with the spirit of the thread, I guess my trade would be as I mentioned the other day: Cueto for Swisher. It's not that I want to give up Cueto, but being realistic, it's the type of deal the Reds need to make to acquire a true upgrade in left. And I think, if we're being honest, that's likely what the Yankees would want in return.

RedsManRick
10-28-2010, 08:40 PM
Brutus, I think you are way undervaluing Cueto. If the Reds put him on the market, teams would be flocking. I'm sure they Yankees would love to get him in return, but there's no way they get that much value for Swish.

Brutus
10-28-2010, 08:43 PM
Brutus, I think you are way undervaluing Cueto. If the Reds put him on the market, teams would be flocking. I'm sure they Yankees would love to get him in return, but there's no way they get that much value for Swish.

Why would the Yankees give up Swisher for anything else the Reds have (short of Chapman)? If they want a starting pitcher, they could just put Joba in the rotation.

I don't think they trade Swisher unless they get an upgrade to their current rotation. I'm not undervaluing Cueto... I'm actually valuing what I think the Reds would need to give up to get someone like Swisher.

I'm not saying a player of Swisher's caliber can't be had for prospects elsewhere, but I haven't seen any other names mentioned that are likely available. Swisher won't be had for prospects. The Yankees don't need those. They need a quality starting pitcher, presumably.

TheNext44
10-28-2010, 08:49 PM
Reds Get:
Zack Greinke, David DeJesus

Royals Get:
Edinson Volquez, Juan Fransisco, David Sappelt, Matt Maloney

Royals want to capitalize on Greinke and Volquez gives them a high ceiling replacement and Maloney can be plugged in to the back of the rotation. Sappelt steps in for DeJesus and you can't have too many guys with 40 HR power (and the Royals aren't known value walks....). They also save a whole bunch of cash -- the Reds do not extend Arroyo.

Reds get a top of the rotation starter and a plus guy in LF who's just a year investment.

Of course, it's probably too much money coming our way and too little talent go back theirs...

Sign me up. Except for the whole not extending Arroyo part ;)

I think if the Reds can improve themselves this much, Cast will find a way to pay for it.

buckeyenut
10-28-2010, 08:52 PM
Here's what I do. I go to NYM and ask for David Wright and I offer up any 4 guys from my farm system that they want. I then move Rolen out to LF, where I plan on spotting him with Nix/Heisey to give him time to rest. I think that will be much easier on his body than 3B and hopefully I can get a few more years out of him.

I then go out to the FA market and ask Reyes to come to CIN and play with his buddy for 10M per for 4 years and I take the rest of the winter off.

Griffey012
10-28-2010, 09:05 PM
Here's what I do. I go to NYM and ask for David Wright and I offer up any 4 guys from my farm system that they want. I then move Rolen out to LF, where I plan on spotting him with Nix/Heisey to give him time to rest. I think that will be much easier on his body than 3B and hopefully I can get a few more years out of him.

I then go out to the FA market and ask Reyes to come to CIN and play with his buddy for 10M per for 4 years and I take the rest of the winter off.

David Wright goes in LF way before Rolen does. You could have Wright play 3rd some to spell Rolen and plug a guy into LF. The idea of moving Rolen to 3rd base is really, really far fetched...it would only happen on a video game.

nemesis
10-28-2010, 09:25 PM
nemsis I don't understand that trade at all. Right now I have to think Votto has more value that Gonzo. He is just entering arbitration where as Gonzo is almost done with arb. Votto just had a monster year and I don't see any signs of slowing. Basically I think a Votto for Gonzo swap would be a bad idea but almost equal. So then you are trading a lot of value for Headly. I don't see how this trade benefits the Reds at all.



Cause your not dealing Votto. Your making a positional switch with him. Something many many players have done to help thier teams. Albert did it, Frank Robinson has done it, Perez, Rose several times, Michael Young did it, A Rod did it, Lots of Hall of Famers have done it. You get to keep Votto and get a better bat in AGon than is available in the OF at a cheaper price. Creative roster moves is the way I played this game.

Everyone is so focused on acquiring a RH bat they fail to see the reasoning behind it. The Reds need someone who destroys LHP.

AGon - .424/.513/.937 VS LHP - .377/.510/.887 VS RHP

Keep in mind the park difference between GABP and Petco. His SLG% should go up about .30/.50 points. (6 HR's in his last 7 games in GABP) Should Joey have a less than MVP like season next year there would be a proven motivated secondary bat that could carry the team. With keeping Gomes or acquiring a Crawford you do not get that type of player. That's what Walt should be looking for this off season.

Oh with RISP his line was .570/.712/1.282 with a .407 BA. Had he ben in the Cincy lineup with those #'s he would have drove in 120+ runs.

mth123
10-28-2010, 10:23 PM
I'm all for throwing out trade ideas. It seems, though, when it becomes necessary to throw 5 or 6 names into the Reds' side of the deal to get two players, then the deal is too fantasy baseball (ish) to ever happen.

As fans, we clearly tend to overvalue our own favorite team's prospects. So adding more names to any hypothetical trades rarely ever advances the likelihood such a trade would occur. It just throws in a bunch more excess that probably doesn't appeal the other team if such talks were to ever occur.

Teams just don't deal two established, quality players in the same deal. They're better off separating such players and dealing them to different teams, which is why we hardly ever see such a trade. The last time I can really think of a team including teams in the same package was the Beckett/Lowell for Hanley trade, which included Anibal Sanchez (and as an aside, Reds' farmhand Jesus Delgado).

But even that deal was a rare occurrence where the change of ownership from Florida to Boston played heavily into how/why the deal was constructed. As a rule of thumb, those trades just don't usually happen outside of fantasy universe.

In keeping with the spirit of the thread, I guess my trade would be as I mentioned the other day: Cueto for Swisher. It's not that I want to give up Cueto, but being realistic, it's the type of deal the Reds need to make to acquire a true upgrade in left. And I think, if we're being honest, that's likely what the Yankees would want in return.

I don't really want to deal Cueto for the same reasons that I think the Reds need to bring Arroyo back, the other guys have too may question marks. Volquez for Swisher is a deal I could get behind. Maybe that "former All-Star" description would get the Yanks interest.

If they insist on Cueto, then I'd want more rotation options in case things go south. Cueto for Swisher, Ivan Nova and Sergio Mitre might be doable.

corkedbat
10-28-2010, 11:56 PM
Probably not a good idea to pick up Bronson's option and then turn around and deal him if you plan on signing anyone in the future.

1. I love the Swisher idea and would craft a deal around Volquez or Bailey and maybe sell them on Francisco as a young DH.
2. Ditto Texas for Nelson Cruz
3. I'd talk to Cleveland about a package of youngsters for Grady Sizemore or Choo
4. Same with San Diego for Ryan Ludwyck
5. I'd target Stephen Drew (and possibly Kelly Johnson) in Arizona and Leake, Cozart and Alonso would be my starting point

Those would be my top five targets (with other pieces on both sides as needed). The first four would be mutually exclusive. I might try to pull off number 5 with one of the others.

TheNext44
10-29-2010, 12:26 AM
Probably not a good idea to pick up Bronson's option and then turn around and deal him if you plan on signing anyone in the future.

1. I love the Swisher idea and would craft a deal around Volquez or Bailey and maybe sell them on Francisco as a young DH.
2. Ditto TexasTexas for Nelson Cruz
3. I'd talk to Cleveland about a package of youngsters for Grady Sizemore or Choo
4. Same with San Diego for Ruan Ludwyck
5. I'd target Stephen Drew (and possibly Kelly Johnson) in Arizone and Leake, Cozart and Alonso would be my starting point

Those would be my top five targets (with other pieces on both sides as needed). The first four would be mutually exclusively. I might try to pull off number 5 with one of the others.

I like the trade ideas. But guys are traded after their options are picked up all the time. In fact, Bronson was traded to the Reds after he signed a long term deal with the Red Sox in which he gave a hometown discount. He was mad, but Boston really didn't have much trouble signing players after that.

Will M
10-29-2010, 03:29 AM
Probably not a good idea to pick up Bronson's option and then turn around and deal him if you plan on signing anyone in the future.

1. I love the Swisher idea and would craft a deal around Volquez or Bailey and maybe sell them on Francisco as a young DH.
2. Ditto Texas for Nelson Cruz
3. I'd talk to Cleveland about a package of youngsters for Grady Sizemore or Choo
4. Same with San Diego for Ryan Ludwyck
5. I'd target Stephen Drew (and possibly Kelly Johnson) in Arizona and Leake, Cozart and Alonso would be my starting point

Those would be my top five targets (with other pieces on both sides as needed). The first four would be mutually exclusive. I might try to pull off number 5 with one of the others.

Good ideas.

As much as it pains me to say it I think the Reds should trade Volquez for a power bat to play left. Swisher seems like a good target. Now, I would not deal Volquez straight up for him. I'd make the Yankees take Cordero. I don't see the Reds paying a left fielder $10M or more with the budget constraints they have.

The Reds have a bit of room in the payroll this year. My back of the envelope estimate put the payroll at $69M counting bringing back Bronson but needing a 2nd catcher, two backup infielders (one of these could be an upgrade over Janish and push him to the bench) , a left fielder & a lefty reliever to replace Rhodes. I'd look at teams that are hurting in the payroll department & try to pawn off some of our B & C prospects in order to find a solution for LF. If the Diamondbacks need to slash payroll I'd offer Valaika & Maloney for Kelly Johnson. That kind of deal is workable both in terms of the payroll we have & also we wouldn't have to deal away an 'A' level prospect.

I actually REALLY like Kelly Johnson as an offseason target. Even if we were to get a power bat for left Johnson (or a guy like him) could fill in at 1B/2B/3B/LF. If the starters at 1B/2B/LF play 150 games & Rolen plays 110 thats 96 games a super utility type player could start.

Will M
10-29-2010, 03:37 AM
My Idea is a bigger deal with Tampa Bay:

Reds deal Edinson Volquez, Yonder Alonso, Chris Heisey, Chris Valaika, Bill Bray and Jared Burton for Matt Garza, Matt Joyce, Reid Brignac and Angel Torres.

The Rays motivation would be to trade down from Garza to Volquez to save some cash while acquiring a cheap replacement for Carlos Pena, a couple of cheap relievers to backfill for pricey guys like Soriano, Qualls, Wheeler, Cormier and/or Howell. Valaika is to replace whatever IF depth they lose with Brignac gone and Heisey gives them a cheap guy with spme speed to try and address the loss of Crawford. Rays are looking to cut $20 Million plus. I think they would take a lot of cheap players who could help now.

The Reds convert one of the rotation question marks to a more certain guy, add a LH Power bat who could platoon with Gomes and provide a pair with ample power in the 5 hole (and Joyce is a good OF) and Brignac's LH bat would be able to play 4 days a week or so filling in for Rolen, getting some starts at SS and giving Phillips a rest a couple times a month. It would make Rolen and Phillips more effective players for the long haul and provide an alternative if both Janish and Cozart struggle. Cozart has had some splits that show he may struggle against RHP as he's reached the high minors (AA and AAA). Cozart would still be the primary starter at SS under this plan. Torres provides another rotation option should teh Reds need it as 2010 moves forward.

I think the Reds & the Rays match up as trading partners. Some of their spare parts (Brignac & Joyce) could match up with needs that the Reds have.
Even if a mega deal wouldn't go down a smaller deal could work out for both teams.

I will note that the Rays are one of the few teams that could use Alonso. Since I don't think Votto or Alonso will be playing left field I expect Walt to try to move Alonso this offseason.

mth123
10-29-2010, 07:35 AM
Not sure this would be accepted, but the Reds have a ton of depth and could afford to overpay for a building block. A team in need of talent might go for it.

Alonso, Heisey and Maloney for Andrew McCutcheon. 800+ OPS 2 years in a row, speed to burn, defense in the OF would be phenominal. Heck, I'd throw in Valaika and Smith. The Pirates could plug Heisey in CF, add Alonso at 1B, Maloney in the rotation and Smith in the pen. Valaika would compete for 2B. The Pirates would add an entire nucleus in this deal and the Reds would add an affordable stud. It seems like a lot to give-up, but both teams would be vastly inproved.

GoReds
10-29-2010, 08:52 AM
I like McCutcheon as a target, but have a couple of questions about him.

1. When has the last traded Pirate outfielder produced at a high level once traded?

2. Would Pittsburgh even consider trading him?

He would be pretty awesome to have in left and spelling Drew in center, when needed.

hebroncougar
10-29-2010, 09:42 AM
I like McCutcheon as a target, but have a couple of questions about him.

1. When has the last traded Pirate outfielder produced at a high level once traded?

2. Would Pittsburgh even consider trading him?

He would be pretty awesome to have in left and spelling Drew in center, when needed.

To answer question 1, Jason Bay has done pretty well, and Jose Bautista, who was a spare part in Pittsburgh. I don't like the idea of trading so many players interdivision though.

Dan
10-29-2010, 10:06 AM
I like McCutcheon as a target, but have a couple of questions about him.

1. When has the last traded Pirate outfielder produced at a high level once traded?

Jason Bay (until he got hurt)

PuffyPig
10-29-2010, 10:07 AM
I then go out to the FA market and ask Reyes to come to CIN and play with his buddy for 10M per for 4 years and I take the rest of the winter off.

You make those deals, you can't take the winter off.

You need to go work to pay for your expensive acqusitions.

Dan
10-29-2010, 10:08 AM
I'm all for throwing out trade ideas. It seems, though, when it becomes necessary to throw 5 or 6 names into the Reds' side of the deal to get two players, then the deal is too fantasy baseball (ish) to ever happen.

As fans, we clearly tend to overvalue our own favorite team's prospects. So adding more names to any hypothetical trades rarely ever advances the likelihood such a trade would occur. It just throws in a bunch more excess that probably doesn't appeal the other team if such talks were to ever occur.

Teams just don't deal two established, quality players in the same deal. They're better off separating such players and dealing them to different teams, which is why we hardly ever see such a trade. The last time I can really think of a team including teams in the same package was the Beckett/Lowell for Hanley trade, which included Anibal Sanchez (and as an aside, Reds' farmhand Jesus Delgado).

But even that deal was a rare occurrence where the change of ownership from Florida to Boston played heavily into how/why the deal was constructed. As a rule of thumb, those trades just don't usually happen outside of fantasy universe.

In keeping with the spirit of the thread, I guess my trade would be as I mentioned the other day: Cueto for Swisher. It's not that I want to give up Cueto, but being realistic, it's the type of deal the Reds need to make to acquire a true upgrade in left. And I think, if we're being honest, that's likely what the Yankees would want in return.

Thank you for saying this.

osuceltic
10-29-2010, 10:46 AM
Reds get:
Josh Willingham

Nationals get:
Bronson Arroyo & Carlos Fisher

Why it makes sense:
In the short term, the Reds have starting pitching to spare, which is a major need for Washington. Salary-wise, Josh Willingham is due a big raise as he heads into his final year of arbitration. As for Arroyo, he is on a one-year contract that will pay him a bit more than Willingham will earn. It's possible the Reds may need to chip in some cash to make the deal happen.

In the long term, Bryce Harper should be up with the Nationals within a few years, and Mike Morse proved he can be a solid option as a corner outfielder. They also have first-round draft pick Michael Burgess, who they're pretty excited about. In other words, Willingham is on his way out, and the only question is whether he leaves or as a free agent or if he's traded away. Seeing as how they're probably looking to the future, they also have to convince the fans they're serious about competing now, which would justify the acquisition of Arroyo. However, if they aren't competing at the trade deadline, Arroyo would be very easy to flip for some quality prospects.

Way, way, way overpaying. You don't give up 200 IP starting pitchers for guys like Willingham. He's a slight uptick over Jonny Gomes. He's the kind of guy you sign for cheap and if you catch lightning in a bottle, you savor it. But ultimately you know what he really is.

If you deal Arroyo, you need to get a legitimate talent back in return. And, by the way, picking up his option and then dealing him is pretty unrealistic.

lollipopcurve
10-29-2010, 11:04 AM
Way, way, way overpaying. You don't give up 200 IP starting pitchers for guys like Willingham. He's a slight uptick over Jonny Gomes. He's the kind of guy you sign for cheap and if you catch lightning in a bottle, you savor it. But ultimately you know what he really is.

Agree 100%. Plus, Willingham had a bad knee at the end of 2010. When they he walks a lot, they're right....

marcshoe
10-29-2010, 11:10 AM
Not sure this would be accepted, but the Reds have a ton of depth and could afford to overpay for a building block. A team in need of talent might go for it.

Alonso, Heisey and Maloney for Andrew McCutcheon. 800+ OPS 2 years in a row, speed to burn, defense in the OF would be phenominal. Heck, I'd throw in Valaika and Smith. The Pirates could plug Heisey in CF, add Alonso at 1B, Maloney in the rotation and Smith in the pen. Valaika would compete for 2B. The Pirates would add an entire nucleus in this deal and the Reds would add an affordable stud. It seems like a lot to give-up, but both teams would be vastly inproved.



I like McCutcheon a lot and would probably do this. It would likely take this much to get him. McCutcheon seems to be at the center of Pittsburgh's marketing right now, and it would take a lot to get them to give him up. I hate trading Alonso but realize the Reds don't really have a place for him. The team needs to get a stud in return.

Brutus
10-29-2010, 11:10 AM
Way, way, way overpaying. You don't give up 200 IP starting pitchers for guys like Willingham. He's a slight uptick over Jonny Gomes. He's the kind of guy you sign for cheap and if you catch lightning in a bottle, you savor it. But ultimately you know what he really is.

If you deal Arroyo, you need to get a legitimate talent back in return. And, by the way, picking up his option and then dealing him is pretty unrealistic.

Jonny Gomes has totaled somewhere in the neighborhood of 2.5 wins above replacement for his entire career.

Josh Willingham has had at least 2 wins above replacement each of the past 5 seasons.

Gomes: career OPS .790, poor defender
Willingham: career OPS .840, slightly below average defender

That's more than a "slight uptick."

marcshoe
10-29-2010, 11:12 AM
Probably not a good idea to pick up Bronson's option and then turn around and deal him if you plan on signing anyone in the future.

1. I love the Swisher idea and would craft a deal around Volquez or Bailey and maybe sell them on Francisco as a young DH.
2. Ditto Texas for Nelson Cruz
3. I'd talk to Cleveland about a package of youngsters for Grady Sizemore or Choo
4. Same with San Diego for Ryan Ludwyck
5. I'd target Stephen Drew (and possibly Kelly Johnson) in Arizona and Leake, Cozart and Alonso would be my starting point

Those would be my top five targets (with other pieces on both sides as needed). The first four would be mutually exclusive. I might try to pull off number 5 with one of the others.
I particularly like 2,3, and 5 here. I wouldn't mind Swisher either, but I'm not sure it would take that much to get him. Not that he's not worth it, but I think you could get by with trading lesser players, particularly if the Yankees find themselves needing to thin out a bit.

osuceltic
10-29-2010, 12:18 PM
Jonny Gomes has totaled somewhere in the neighborhood of 2.5 wins above replacement for his entire career.

Josh Willingham has had at least 2 wins above replacement each of the past 5 seasons.

Gomes: career OPS .790, poor defender
Willingham: career OPS .840, slightly below average defender

That's more than a "slight uptick."

No, it's pretty much my definition of "slight uptick" and if you think that improvement is worth handing over a 200 IP workhorse, I'll just say I wish you were a MLB general manager -- anywhere but Cincinnati.

thatcoolguy_22
10-29-2010, 12:19 PM
1) Matusz for Alonso and Maloney. (If they went for it I would be estactic, if not upgrade Maloney)
2) S. Drew would be a target (trade ideas are all over the place for him)
3) C. Iannetta and S. Smith for Frazier and Maloney (Iannetta has completely fallen out and I like his pop to go with Hanigan until Meso is ready)
4) Matt Latos for Brandon Phillips/Travis Wood (or Leake)
5) Release Arroyo and use money saved to sign Carl Crawford. (Not a trade and very much impossible without blowing out the Reds budget on an aging LF whose skill set will soon begin a rapid descent into average, but I like him for the next 2-3 years.)

camisadelgolf
10-29-2010, 12:31 PM
Way, way, way overpaying. You don't give up 200 IP starting pitchers for guys like Willingham. He's a slight uptick over Jonny Gomes. He's the kind of guy you sign for cheap and if you catch lightning in a bottle, you savor it. But ultimately you know what he really is.

If you deal Arroyo, you need to get a legitimate talent back in return. And, by the way, picking up his option and then dealing him is pretty unrealistic.
Three questions:
1.) What do you think it would take to get Willingham?
2.) What do you think you could get for Arroyo?
3.) Would trading Arroyo for Willingham improve the team?

bucksfan2
10-29-2010, 12:32 PM
Couple of things here.

Swisher - Has a bulky knee. I like the idea but you don't have a DH to hide him when his knee flares up.

Wright - Don't see NY trading him. He is to the Mets what Jeter is to the Yankees. Well without the winning I guess. I don't see Wright ever leaving the Mets.

McClutchen - Maybe a year or two too early. The Pirates aren't going to trade him now because he is till cheap.

Choo - Would be my ideal target. The military issue does scare me a little but that guy is a special player.

Dan
10-29-2010, 12:32 PM
Let's disabuse a notion here.

Matt Maloney will be 27 before the season starts next year. He's had exactly 14 appearances in the majors. If Maloney had the type of arm/stuff to succeed at the top level, he already would have. And most GMs realize this.

corkedbat
10-29-2010, 12:38 PM
Let's disabuse a notion here.

Matt Maloney will be 27 before the season starts next year. He's had exactly 14 appearances in the majors. If Maloney had the type of arm/stuff to succeed at the top level, he already would have. And most GMs realize this.

Maloney's ceiling is as a 5th starter possibly even 4th max in a weaker rotation. He's not going to land you much on his own, but there is value there and he could sweeten the right deal, IMO.

Brutus
10-29-2010, 12:46 PM
No, it's pretty much my definition of "slight uptick" and if you think that improvement is worth handing over a 200 IP workhorse, I'll just say I wish you were a MLB general manager -- anywhere but Cincinnati.

Last year, the difference between Gomes & Willingham was the same difference as Joey Votto to Daric Barton, Scott Rolen to Casey Blake and Jay Bruce to J.D. Drew.

Would you consider those slight downticks?

Just for context, if WAR has any validity, and the Reds had those 'slight downticks' at those 3 positions, they win just 84/85 games and miss the playoffs.

An additional 25 runs over the course of the year is a pretty big deal. I'm glad you're not the Reds' GM.

osuceltic
10-29-2010, 02:28 PM
Three questions:
1.) What do you think it would take to get Willingham?
2.) What do you think you could get for Arroyo?
3.) Would trading Arroyo for Willingham improve the team?

1.) Less than Arroyo
2.) More than Willingham
3.) No

RedsManRick
10-29-2010, 02:57 PM
No, it's pretty much my definition of "slight uptick" and if you think that improvement is worth handing over a 200 IP workhorse, I'll just say I wish you were a MLB general manager -- anywhere but Cincinnati.

Depends how you define slight. Over a full season, that's on the order of 2-3 wins different once you consider the scope of the defensive difference and that Willingham has a significant OBP advantage (which on a point-by-point basis is worth about 70% more than SLG).

buckeyenut
10-29-2010, 03:49 PM
Couple of things here.

Swisher - Has a bulky knee. I like the idea but you don't have a DH to hide him when his knee flares up.

Wright - Don't see NY trading him. He is to the Mets what Jeter is to the Yankees. Well without the winning I guess. I don't see Wright ever leaving the Mets.

McClutchen - Maybe a year or two too early. The Pirates aren't going to trade him now because he is till cheap.

Choo - Would be my ideal target. The military issue does scare me a little but that guy is a special player.

On wright, only reason I would even consider asking about him is because a) new GM and b) team in absolute disarray. In that case, everyone should be fair game for discussion at least, so no reason to not ask.

Brutus
10-29-2010, 03:55 PM
1.) Less than Arroyo
2.) More than Willingham
3.) No

I think you're terribly overrating Arroyo's trade value. The Reds reportedly shopped Arroyo the last two years and got almost no interest.

In fact, one report said the Yankees had "no interest" in Arroyo and another, I recall, said the Reds were getting "no bites" on him.

lollipopcurve
10-29-2010, 03:56 PM
Willingham had knee (meniscus) surgery at the end of the year. That's not major surgery, but it's enough that you'd want to see how he looks on the field well into the spring before you deal any starting pitching for him. That's simple common sense.

I'd look for a player with better health, better defense, and more years of control if I'm dealing a starting pitcher.

Griffey012
10-29-2010, 04:22 PM
I think you're terribly overrating Arroyo's trade value. The Reds reportedly shopped Arroyo the last two years and got almost no interest.

In fact, one report said the Yankees had "no interest" in Arroyo and another, I recall, said the Reds were getting "no bites" on him.

A lot of the probably had to do with the contract. Now he is a 1 and done player with his current contract situation. Overpaying Arroyo for 1 year is much better than having to overpay him for 2 or 3. It also makes it much easier for the Reds to toss in some cash to make it work.

It's probably a combination of Reds fans overrating Arroyo and the rest of the MLB underrating him. He isn't flashy but he is incredibly consistent at an above average level.

Griffey012
10-29-2010, 04:26 PM
No, it's pretty much my definition of "slight uptick" and if you think that improvement is worth handing over a 200 IP workhorse, I'll just say I wish you were a MLB general manager -- anywhere but Cincinnati.

I am not a proponent of dealing Arroyo for Willingham, but one of the main facets of working out deals in baseball is trading from surplus to get a need. The Reds have a surplus of starting pitchers right now so Arroyo's value declines a bit since they have solid replacements. They have a gaping hole in left field so someone that can fill the hole is more valuable than their actual performance may dictate.

It's like the theory of marginal utility in economics. Where the more you have of something, the less value it brings to you, until eventually you have so much of something adding another one brings hardly any added value at all.

Griffey012
10-29-2010, 04:39 PM
Reds get: Nick Markakis, cash

Orioles get: Yonder Alonso, Cozart/Valaika, and a mid level prospect.

Why it works. Markakis can move to LF and is an OBP stud. Has seen a dip in power the past 2 seasons which may have something to do with being on a terrible team surrounded by poor hitters. Pencil him into the 2 hole in front of Votto and you have a .370 OBP guy in front of Votto seeing a lot of good pitches. The O's have nobody in their minors at 1B and nobody on their team for 1B. Alonso fills that. They also don't have a ton of infield depth in the upper minors so Valaika/Cozart, probably Cozart becomes their SS. Markakis is due for a raise to 10 million this season so the O's would probably be willing to part with him to save some money. His contract then escalates to 12 mil and 15 mil which is why the O's throw in 4-6 million to help the Reds keep Markakis at about 10 mil a season.

Markakis has the ability to be a 3.5-5 win player in a good offense.

RedsManRick
10-29-2010, 04:43 PM
I am not a proponent of dealing Arroyo for Willingham, but one of the main facets of working out deals in baseball is trading from surplus to get a need. The Reds have a surplus of starting pitchers right now so Arroyo's value declines a bit since they have solid replacements. They have a gaping hole in left field so someone that can fill the hole is more valuable than their actual performance may dictate.

It's like the theory of marginal utility in economics. Where the more you have of something, the less value it brings to you, until eventually you have so much of something adding another one brings hardly any added value at all.

Conceptually, you're right. But I think many people disagree with your assumptions:

"The Reds have a surplus of starting pitchers right now"
Some people recognize that teams usually use more than 5 SP in a season, that our non-Arroyo pitchers are generally unreliable, and that our current set of options is merely sufficient and that trading Arroyo exposes the Reds to the possibility of using sub-replacement level starters.

"They have a gaping hole in left field"
Some people believe that Gomes' defensive shortcomings are over-stated and that he will likely rebound offensively. Others believe that our other in-house options aren't all that bad. In either case, they think LF will be better in 2011 than it was in 2010.

Given these positions, the calculus changes. If you hold the above beliefs, Arroyo's marginal utility exceeds that of a good, but not great LF.

Brutus
10-29-2010, 04:47 PM
A lot of the probably had to do with the contract. Now he is a 1 and done player with his current contract situation. Overpaying Arroyo for 1 year is much better than having to overpay him for 2 or 3. It also makes it much easier for the Reds to toss in some cash to make it work.

It's probably a combination of Reds fans overrating Arroyo and the rest of the MLB underrating him. He isn't flashy but he is incredibly consistent at an above average level.

I have no doubt the contract played a part, but isn't that also part of determining the value of a trade? The fact is, if the Reds want to make a deal to improve the club, they have to do so within the constraints of the budget and within the parameters of other clubs' budgets. I actually think Arroyo for Willingham is a very, very fair offer, and if anything, might be lucky for the Reds to get that much for Arroyo.

Because quite frankly, despite the rosy views of Arroyo here, his contract, even if the option is picked up for one more season, is going to be hard to move until July (which hopefully the Reds have no reason to move it in July).

He's a good, solid pitcher. But good, solid pitchers making $12 million a year don't fetch much more than good, solid position players. Josh Willingham would be a tremendous upgrade in left over what the Reds have had the past two seasons. That would actually be a tremendous deal for the Reds.

lollipopcurve
10-29-2010, 04:57 PM
He's a good, solid pitcher. But good, solid pitchers making $12 million a year don't fetch much more than good, solid position players. Josh Willingham would be a tremendous upgrade in left over what the Reds have had the past two seasons. That would actually be a tremendous deal for the Reds.

He can't defend, he can't run and he's coming off knee surgery. He made 4.6 million last year, and he's eligible for a third turn through arbitration. I just don't see the appeal, given they could probably get a guy like David DeJesus for prospects.

Brutus
10-29-2010, 05:05 PM
He can't defend, he can't run and he's coming off knee surgery. He made 4.6 million last year, and he's eligible for a third turn through arbitration. I just don't see the appeal, given they could probably get a guy like David DeJesus for prospects.

The Reds, as is, have a player that can't defend (even less) and can't run (even less). They have an opportunity to make a pretty significant upgrade at that position.

Like I have shown... the current LF has won about 2.5 games for his career over what might be expected of any freely available player. Josh Willingham has done that each of the past five seasons.

Secondly... David DeJesus is making $6 million and just came off surgery. Isn't that a double standard?

I love DeJesus. But interestingly... in 5 seasons, he's amassed about 14 WAR. Willingham has added just over 13 WAR. In other words... the two, as a whole picture, are pretty comparable.

Considering DeJesus currently makes over $1.5 mil more than Willingham, and is the same age, I think you're short-changing Willingham a bit.

Griffey012
10-29-2010, 05:14 PM
Conceptually, you're right. But I think many people disagree with your assumptions:

"The Reds have a surplus of starting pitchers right now"
Some people recognize that teams usually use more than 5 SP in a season, that our non-Arroyo pitchers are generally unreliable, and that our current set of options is merely sufficient and that trading Arroyo exposes the Reds to the possibility of using sub-replacement level starters.

"They have a gaping hole in left field"
Some people believe that Gomes' defensive shortcomings are over-stated and that he will likely rebound offensively. Others believe that our other in-house options aren't all that bad. In either case, they think LF will be better in 2011 than it was in 2010.

Given these positions, the calculus changes. If you hold the above beliefs, Arroyo's marginal utility exceeds that of a good, but not great LF.

The first assumption is quite plausible and I am happy having Arroyo around, I was just using the Arroyo/Willingham as an example of trading wealth for a shortcoming. And I have my faith in the organization to determine if we have a wealth of SP or not. However, if the Reds are going to trade Arroyo for a guy like Willingham, then this scenario must hold true. If we didn't have a surplus of SP, the deal would be treading water by filling 1 hole and creating another.

I do however believe you will find very few on here who agree with your 2nd assumption.

Griffey012
10-29-2010, 05:23 PM
The Reds, as is, have a player that can't defend (even less) and can't run (even less). They have an opportunity to make a pretty significant upgrade at that position.

Like I have shown... the current LF has won about 2.5 games for his career over what might be expected of any freely available player. Josh Willingham has done that each of the past five seasons.

Secondly... David DeJesus is making $6 million and just came off surgery. Isn't that a double standard?

I love DeJesus. But interestingly... in 5 seasons, he's amassed about 14 WAR. Willingham has added just over 13 WAR. In other words... the two, as a whole picture, are pretty comparable.

Considering DeJesus currently makes over $1.5 mil more than Willingham, and is the same age, I think you're short-changing Willingham a bit.

I would be very open to acquiring either one of the two to play LF. I would prefer DeJesus because has been an good defensive LF throughout his career while being around average at the other 2 positions. If we make him the full-time LF'er he would bring good defense along with an OBP close to Willingham's with a little less power. On our team as a full time LF'er Dejesus likely becomes a 3+ WAR player while Willingham is probably around his usual 2.5. Not a huge difference, but I see DeJesus having more potential to go higher above 3, where as Willingham probably remains constant.

Willingham could probably be had for cheaper than DeJesus which is why I would be pretty indifferent on which one to trade for. Overall they both would be a nice upgrade as Willingham isn't nearly as bad in LF as people are making him out to be.

lollipopcurve
10-29-2010, 05:40 PM
The Reds, as is, have a player that can't defend (even less) and can't run (even less).

Gomes runs much better than Willingham. And now Willingham has had knee surgery. There was a study on baserunning recently -- sorry, don't have a link -- that determined Willingham was the worst baserunner in baseball. (I believe this was for the 2009 season.)


Secondly... David DeJesus is making $6 million and just came off surgery. Isn't that a double standard?

Perhaps. But DeJesus' hand injury will not affect his defense or his speed. If Willingham's knee surgery doesn't take, it could affect every aspect of his game, and it will likely slow him down even if the surgery is "successful." Due diligence would have to be taken with the medical reports of both players.


Considering DeJesus currently makes over $1.5 mil more than Willingham, and is the same age, I think you're short-changing Willingham a bit.

Willingham will get a bump in salary. Dejesus is locked in at 6 million. Probably no difference there.

Strongly prefer DeJesus, though I wouldn't deal a starter for him either.

corkedbat
10-29-2010, 05:41 PM
I think you're terribly overrating Arroyo's trade value. The Reds reportedly shopped Arroyo the last two years and got almost no interest.

In fact, one report said the Yankees had "no interest" in Arroyo and another, I recall, said the Reds were getting "no bites" on him.

I've seen reports that the Mets really wanted Arroyo last Winter, but were rebuffed because Bronson was one of BCast's favorite. Guess it depends on who you talk to. I'd say though that a pitcher who will give you 200 innings per season, is crafty and seldom misses a start would be that hard to deal (even at $11 or 13M per. Maybe not at what the Reds want for him though.

NJReds
10-29-2010, 05:53 PM
I've seen reports that the Mets really wanted Arroyo last Winter, but were rebuffed because Bronson was one of BCast's favorite. Guess it depends on who you talk to. I'd say though that a pitcher who will give you 200 innings per season, is crafty and seldom misses a start would be that hard to deal (even at $11 or 13M per. Maybe not at what the Reds want for him though.

Heard that from multiple sources on NY sports radio over the past couple seasons. Not sure where the Yankee "no interest" came from. The Reds were probably asking for prospects that they didn't want to part with.

HeatherC1212
10-29-2010, 06:02 PM
Reds get: Nick Markakis, cash

Orioles get: Yonder Alonso, Cozart/Valaika, and a mid level prospect.

Why it works. Markakis can move to LF and is an OBP stud. Has seen a dip in power the past 2 seasons which may have something to do with being on a terrible team surrounded by poor hitters. Pencil him into the 2 hole in front of Votto and you have a .370 OBP guy in front of Votto seeing a lot of good pitches. The O's have nobody in their minors at 1B and nobody on their team for 1B. Alonso fills that. They also don't have a ton of infield depth in the upper minors so Valaika/Cozart, probably Cozart becomes their SS. Markakis is due for a raise to 10 million this season so the O's would probably be willing to part with him to save some money. His contract then escalates to 12 mil and 15 mil which is why the O's throw in 4-6 million to help the Reds keep Markakis at about 10 mil a season.

Markakis has the ability to be a 3.5-5 win player in a good offense.

Sign me up for this plan! Nick Markakis is one of my favorite players and I'd love to see him in Cincy. :thumbup:

RedsManRick
10-29-2010, 06:28 PM
Love the Markakis idea!

nemesis
10-29-2010, 06:39 PM
Love the Markakis idea!

As do I but Peter Angelos probably won't come off him with a new manager, Greek ties and being their most marketable player. He would take a hit in PR by moving hime. You'd have to trade a Bruce, Cueto, Volquez type player to get him. Which would be overpaying.

TheNext44
10-29-2010, 06:55 PM
I love the idea of acquiring Markakis, but I would want to keep Cozart. He has a chance to be a league average SS, which would be very valuable for the Reds over the next few years.

If he was a deal breaker, I would include him, but I wouldn't start the negations with him.

Brutus
10-29-2010, 07:11 PM
Gomes runs much better than Willingham. And now Willingham has had knee surgery. There was a study on baserunning recently -- sorry, don't have a link -- that determined Willingham was the worst baserunner in baseball. (I believe this was for the 2009 season.)



Perhaps. But DeJesus' hand injury will not affect his defense or his speed. If Willingham's knee surgery doesn't take, it could affect every aspect of his game, and it will likely slow him down even if the surgery is "successful." Due diligence would have to be taken with the medical reports of both players.



Willingham will get a bump in salary. Dejesus is locked in at 6 million. Probably no difference there.

Strongly prefer DeJesus, though I wouldn't deal a starter for him either.

I can't speak for the one report, but generally Willingham's baserunning puts him at or around average.

He was 8/8 in stolen base attempts this season. He took an extra base this year 42% of the time he had a chance to do so (i.e. going first to third, etc.)... which is above average. FWIW, Gomes was 5/8 in stolen bases and took an extra base 39% of the time. For his career, Willingham is about 38% at XBT, which is a tick below average.

RE: the knee surgery... I think you're putting way too much emphasis on that. Surgeries these days often make the player better. Players recovering from a torn ACL actually come back better (granted, it takes a year for that to happen, but nonetheless). I interviewed a team doctor once in a story I was doing and a lot of these surgeries can improve a player's running ability.

As far as Willingham/DeJesus... fwiw, I also prefer DeJesus. He's been one of my preferential targets for the Reds' LF position for over a year. But Willingham, looking at the whole picture, is a very, very similar option. What he gives up defensively and in speed to DeJesus, he mostly gets back with his bat. Willingham has a career 121 OPS+ while Dejesus is 108.

Brutus
10-29-2010, 07:15 PM
Heard that from multiple sources on NY sports radio over the past couple seasons. Not sure where the Yankee "no interest" came from. The Reds were probably asking for prospects that they didn't want to part with.

It came from here...

NY Times Blog: July 27, 2009 (http://bats.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/27/where-the-yankees-could-use-some-help/)


The wild card in this is Alfredo Aceves, who still has time to transition back to the rotation. But to remove Aceves from the bullpen, the Yankees probably need to trade for a reliever. That’s why I think there’s no chance they’ll stand pat before Friday’s 4 p.m. nonwaiver deadline.

Maybe they’ll make it easy by trading for a starter like the Mariners’ Jarrod Washburn, though they did that dance with Seattle last summer and got nowhere. They have zero interest in Bronson Arroyo of Cincinnati. They are said to have scouted Ian Snell’s minor league starts, but Snell, of the Pirates, would seem to be a long way from being a reliable postseason starter.

Griffey012
10-29-2010, 07:15 PM
I love the idea of acquiring Markakis, but I would want to keep Cozart. He has a chance to be a league average SS, which would be very valuable for the Reds over the next few years.

If he was a deal breaker, I would include him, but I wouldn't start the negations with him.

If we have Markakis in LF, Janish can start 162 games at SS and OPS .650 and we would still have a very good offense and an excellent defense at nearly every position. Looking at Baltimore's infield depth, I think Cozart would be a must in the deal for Baltimore, which is why I included him.

RedsManRick
10-29-2010, 07:19 PM
FWIW, BP had Willingham at 0.1 runs above average on the bases in 2010. Dejesus came in at -0.7.

I think base-running is really hard to measure qualitatively. I think stolen bases tend to have a disproportionate influence on our perceptions since the other opportunities to take a base aren't nearly as memorable (nor covered by the cameras).

We also fall in to the trap of confusing ability for performance.

Stolen bases are sort of like batting average. They can be indicators of somebody who is very productive. But they can also put a shiny veneer on somebody who's actually not producing all that much when you consider the rest of the picture.

Griffey012
10-29-2010, 07:22 PM
FWIW, BP had Willingham at 0.1 runs above average on the bases in 2010. Dejesus came in at -0.7.

I think base-running is really hard to measure qualitatively. I think stolen bases tend to have a disproportionate influence on our perceptions since the other opportunities to take a base aren't nearly as memorable (nor covered by the cameras).

We also fall in to the trap of confusing ability for performance.

Willingham would also likely be batting 4th or 5th...which is a much less relevant spot to consider how good of a baserunner he is. If he a guy is 1st or 2nd with the big guns behind him, base-running becomes more important. Where if he is batting 4th or 5th he is going to have a lot less opportunities to nab extra bags with guys like Stubbs, Janish, catchers, and the pitcher behind him.

savafan
10-29-2010, 07:31 PM
Dodgers get: Devin Mesoraco, Travis Wood and Matt Malone

Reds get: Russell Martin

Why it works for the Dodgers: They need to cut salary and rebuild. Mesoraco could be their catcher of the future, and they need young arms for their rotation. Wood goes into the rotation with Maloney getting a shot at being a fifth starter or long relief man out of the pen. I hate to give up Mesoraco or Wood, but you've got to give up something to get something.

Why it works for the Reds: They get one of the best offensive/defensive combination catchers in the game in Martin. Certainly an upgrade over Hernandez, and Hanigan has proven to be a more than capable backup.

I believe catcher is one of the positions that the Reds need to upgrade, and getting Martin gives them their best receiver since Bench... or at least since Benny Santiago.

Brutus
10-29-2010, 07:36 PM
Dodgers get: Devin Mesoraco, Travis Wood and Matt Malone

Reds get: Russell Martin

Why it works for the Dodgers: They need to cut salary and rebuild. Mesoraco could be their catcher of the future, and they need young arms for their rotation. Wood goes into the rotation with Maloney getting a shot at being a fifth starter or long relief man out of the pen. I hate to give up Mesoraco or Wood, but you've got to give up something to get something.

Why it works for the Reds: They get one of the best offensive/defensive combination catchers in the game in Martin. Certainly an upgrade over Hernandez, and Hanigan has proven to be a more than capable backup.

I believe catcher is one of the positions that the Reds need to upgrade, and getting Martin gives them their best receiver since Bench... or at least since Benny Santiago.

Given the way Martin has played the last two years, the Reds have a better option at catcher in Ryan Hanigan in-house. Martin's OPS has been .680 and .679 the past two seasons (Hanigan .690 and .830).

I want no part of Martin, at least not at the price of Mesoraco or Wood, let alone both.

Griffey012
10-29-2010, 07:44 PM
Dodgers get: Devin Mesoraco, Travis Wood and Matt Malone

Reds get: Russell Martin

Why it works for the Dodgers: They need to cut salary and rebuild. Mesoraco could be their catcher of the future, and they need young arms for their rotation. Wood goes into the rotation with Maloney getting a shot at being a fifth starter or long relief man out of the pen. I hate to give up Mesoraco or Wood, but you've got to give up something to get something.

Why it works for the Reds: They get one of the best offensive/defensive combination catchers in the game in Martin. Certainly an upgrade over Hernandez, and Hanigan has proven to be a more than capable backup.

I believe catcher is one of the positions that the Reds need to upgrade, and getting Martin gives them their best receiver since Bench... or at least since Benny Santiago.

I would trade Matt Maloney for Russell Martin. I would not trade Mesoraco or Wood for Martin individually. In '07 or '08 I would do this deal, but absolutely no way now. Martin is Ryan Hanigan this day and age. Not to mention our catching platoon last season put out top 10 production and possibly top 5 production from a catching standpoint across the league. I disagree it is an area we need to upgrade. Mesoraco may be that upgrade in 2012, for now Hanigan and whoever else is just fine.

lollipopcurve
10-29-2010, 08:00 PM
Martin's got a bad hip. He's expensive. Stay away.

savafan
10-29-2010, 08:03 PM
There's rumblings that the Mariners may be willing to move Felix Hernandez in exchange for a team's top 4-5 prospects. I know the Reds rotation looks good, but how much better would it look with Hernandez as the ace? Would you be willing to give the M's the top 4-5 prospects for Hernandez?

mth123
10-29-2010, 08:04 PM
Dodgers get: Devin Mesoraco, Travis Wood and Matt Malone

Reds get: Russell Martin

Why it works for the Dodgers: They need to cut salary and rebuild. Mesoraco could be their catcher of the future, and they need young arms for their rotation. Wood goes into the rotation with Maloney getting a shot at being a fifth starter or long relief man out of the pen. I hate to give up Mesoraco or Wood, but you've got to give up something to get something.

Why it works for the Reds: They get one of the best offensive/defensive combination catchers in the game in Martin. Certainly an upgrade over Hernandez, and Hanigan has proven to be a more than capable backup.

I believe catcher is one of the positions that the Reds need to upgrade, and getting Martin gives them their best receiver since Bench... or at least since Benny Santiago.

I'd rather have Mesoraco. Catcher is possibly a need for half a season, but it was pretty good in 2010 and Hanigan can hold down the fort even if Ramon is let go (as he should be IMO) or comes back and tanks. Mesoraco is on the way Grandal won't be far behind and several lesser guys could be second bananas if need be. I wouldn't waste any chips on catcher, especiallynot Wood ro Mesoraco. Maybe if the Dodgers add Kershaw.;)

lollipopcurve
10-29-2010, 08:04 PM
I can't speak for the one report, but generally Willingham's baserunning puts him at or around average.

He was 8/8 in stolen base attempts this season. He took an extra base this year 42% of the time he had a chance to do so (i.e. going first to third, etc.)... which is above average. FWIW, Gomes was 5/8 in stolen bases and took an extra base 39% of the time. For his career, Willingham is about 38% at XBT, which is a tick below average.

RE: the knee surgery... I think you're putting way too much emphasis on that. Surgeries these days often make the player better. Players recovering from a torn ACL actually come back better (granted, it takes a year for that to happen, but nonetheless). I interviewed a team doctor once in a story I was doing and a lot of these surgeries can improve a player's running ability.

As far as Willingham/DeJesus... fwiw, I also prefer DeJesus. He's been one of my preferential targets for the Reds' LF position for over a year. But Willingham, looking at the whole picture, is a very, very similar option. What he gives up defensively and in speed to DeJesus, he mostly gets back with his bat. Willingham has a career 121 OPS+ while Dejesus is 108.

Appreciate the counterpoints.

One thing that unites the 2 players for me -- they're not worth Arroyo, Bailey, Cueto, Volquez or Leake.

savafan
10-29-2010, 08:05 PM
I wouldn't waste any chips on catcher, especiallynot Wood ro Mesoraco. Maybe if the Dodgers add Kershaw.;)

Would you settle for Ethier?

Griffey012
10-29-2010, 08:06 PM
There's rumblings that the Mariners may be willing to move Felix Hernandez in exchange for a team's top 4-5 prospects. I know the Reds rotation looks good, but how much better would it look with Hernandez as the ace? Would you be willing to give the M's the top 4-5 prospects for Hernandez?

For 5 years of Hernandez I would give them about anything they wanted from the minor leagues. I would include Mesoraco, Alonso, Leake, and 1 or 2 other pieces they wanted. Hernandez is crazy, crazy good. I would drool at the site of him in a Reds Uni!

mth123
10-29-2010, 08:21 PM
Would you settle for Ethier?

Not if Wood and Mesoraco are involved. For Alonso, Maloney, Heisey and Gomes I'd do it. I'd throw in some lesser lights. Otherwise, Volquez and Gomes for Ethier might make sense.

Wood and Mes are two of the top 8 properties in the Reds organization along with Votto, Bruce, Cueto, Stubbs, Bailey and Chapman. There is a pretty significant drop-off after those guys.

savafan
10-29-2010, 08:24 PM
Wood and Mes are two of the top 8 properties in the Reds organization along with Votto, Bruce, Cueto, Stubbs, Bailey and Chapman. There is a pretty significant drop-off after those guys.

I agree, but if you want to fill holes, you can't do it by trading your holes for the fillers.

mth123
10-29-2010, 08:36 PM
I agree, but if you want to fill holes, you can't do it by trading your holes for the fillers.

Why make holes in spots that are harder to fill? Ethier is pricey and a couple season rental. Don't get me wrong, a guy like Either would be a pretty darn good fit, but the Reds have guys they can afford to deal to get him and the Dodgers would be wise to think about it. Volquez as a centerpiece is a pretty good starting point. They'd probabty want more than Gomes though. Maybe Volquez/Alonso. The Dodgers would have money avaiable to get another OF, and Loney is a weakness on that team that they could address with Alonso. I'd add bodies from guys not in that group of 8 if need be, but I wouldn't deal Wood or Mes for an OF unless its a similarly young building block type (somebody like Mike Stanton, Jayson Heyward, etc.)

NJReds
10-29-2010, 08:43 PM
It came from here...

NY Times Blog: July 27, 2009 (http://bats.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/27/where-the-yankees-could-use-some-help/)

That's odd. At the same time there were reports that a deal between the Yanks and Reds for Arroyo was hung up on the $$$. The Reds wanted the Yanks to pay the full contract.

The Yankees are never interested in trading for players when the deal doesn't happen. That's pretty standard, except this year when they thought they had a deal for Lee, but Seattle backed out at the last minute and traded him to Texas.

buckeyenut
10-29-2010, 09:22 PM
For 5 years of Hernandez I would give them about anything they wanted from the minor leagues. I would include Mesoraco, Alonso, Leake, and 1 or 2 other pieces they wanted. Hernandez is crazy, crazy good. I would drool at the site of him in a Reds Uni!
Absolutely agree. In fact, I would give them their pick of an arm from the rotation if they wanted one as well, excluding Chapman.

I don't know who would be the top 4-5 prospects, but if Hernandez is on the market, we have the farm to be in the discussion and he would cover up a lot of flaws.

PuffyPig
10-29-2010, 10:31 PM
Absolutely agree. In fact, I would give them their pick of an arm from the rotation if they wanted one as well, excluding Chapman.

I don't know who would be the top 4-5 prospects, but if Hernandez is on the market, we have the farm to be in the discussion and he would cover up a lot of flaws.

So, you would give them Cueto (or Wood or Bailey or Volquez), Leake, Mesoraco, Alonso and 2 other prospects for Hernandez, who makes $17M over the next 4 years?

In like Hernandez, but at his salary, he's simply not worth gutting to team.

Brutus
10-29-2010, 10:44 PM
That's odd. At the same time there were reports that a deal between the Yanks and Reds for Arroyo was hung up on the $$$. The Reds wanted the Yanks to pay the full contract.

The Yankees are never interested in trading for players when the deal doesn't happen. That's pretty standard, except this year when they thought they had a deal for Lee, but Seattle backed out at the last minute and traded him to Texas.

We'll never know for sure, but it's also possible they simply were never really interested in Arroyo. It's not impossible, as Arroyo isn't a dominant starter so not everyone is interested in him.

I guess my point is: I don't believe he has the kind of value outwardly that he's perceived to have here on this board. That's not to say no one wants him, but don't believe he's worth the money. And since money usually isn't a hold up for the Yankees, it seems to me they probably didn't want him enough to pay that money.

TheNext44
10-29-2010, 11:23 PM
It came from here...

NY Times Blog: July 27, 2009 (http://bats.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/27/where-the-yankees-could-use-some-help/)

As Paul Harvey would say, here's the rest of the story...

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/07/yankees-and-reds-talking-arroyo-trade.html


5:00pm: The Yankees and Reds are seriously discussing a Bronson Arroyo trade, according to Jeff Fletcher of AOL FanHouse. One of Fletcher's sources says the possible deal "will get done," though the two clubs haven't determined how much of the $4MM remaining on Arroyo's contract the Reds will pay. Arroyo will make $11MM next season and the same amount in 2011 if his team doesn't buy him out for $2MM.


@SI_JonHeyman
Jon Heyman
#yankees on arroyo: "not realistic at this point.'' in other words, if reds pay a lot of $17 mil left, well then, maybe.

The Yankees did want Arroyo, but not at full price. Which means the two teams couldn't work out the money/prospect side of the trade, which no one except those involved, know the details of.

Anyway, that was over a year ago, before Arroyo went on a 22-13 3.30 ERA run over 45 games. And considering that this is the last year of the contract, which seemed to be the biggest hangup for most teams, I would think that Arroyo has excellent trade value right now.

Brutus
10-29-2010, 11:27 PM
As Paul Harvey would say, here's the rest of the story...

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/07/yankees-and-reds-talking-arroyo-trade.html





The Yankees did want Arroyo, but not at full price. Which means the two teams couldn't work out the money/prospect side of the trade, which no one except those involved, know the details of.

Anyway, that was over a year ago, before Arroyo went on a 22-13 3.30 ERA run over 45 games. And considering that this is the last year of the contract, which seemed to be the biggest hangup for most teams, I would think that Arroyo has excellent trade value right now.

To me... that's kind of the point. They didn't want him at that price tag, i.e. "zero interest" which was my point of contention all along--that teams don't view him as being worth that money.

Griffey012
10-30-2010, 01:17 AM
So, you would give them Cueto (or Wood or Bailey or Volquez), Leake, Mesoraco, Alonso and 2 other prospects for Hernandez, who makes $17M over the next 4 years?

In like Hernandez, but at his salary, he's simply not worth gutting to team.

I would give them Leake, Mesoraco, Alonso without a doubt. The issue would be the remaining pieces in the deal. If it included Bailey with those 3 I would do it in a heart beat. I would be reluctant to give up Cueto along with those guys. Even if Bailey meets his peak, he will never be nearly as good as King Felix, he is one of those guys who are once in a generation pitchers. Just like Halladay, Lincecum, and Sabathia currently are. We don't have a spot for Alonso, and Leake, Bailey, and Mesoraco are still unknowns with lots of potential.

You can't sit around forever hanging onto prospects, you have to have the studs in the big leagues to make a move. A potential rotation of Felix, Cueto, Volquez, Chapman, and Wood is crazy, crazy good. And simply swap out Arroyo in for Chapman next year and it is still crazy good.

All we do is swap out some prospects and continue to draft well and replace the revolving door of "prospects."

buckeyenut
10-30-2010, 10:31 AM
So, you would give them Cueto (or Wood or Bailey or Volquez), Leake, Mesoraco, Alonso and 2 other prospects for Hernandez, who makes $17M over the next 4 years?

In like Hernandez, but at his salary, he's simply not worth gutting to team.In that instance, I would argue Leake is not a prospect, but a member of ML squad.

I would give them their choice of Cueto, Wood, Bailey, Volquez, Leake plus Mesoraco, Alonso and 2 other prospects. In a heartbeat. We've been talking about Grienke, who I would love to pick up, but Hernandez is better and cheaper than Grienke.

If they wanted two of my young starters (ie Leake and Cueto), I would probably negotiate down on the prospects a little. But I might even suck it up and do that.

Will M
10-30-2010, 10:42 AM
1) the Reds are not a high payroll team
2) guys like Votto, Bruce & Cueto will make some cash soon so the money coming off the books (Harang, Cordero after 2011) is going to be paying these guys's salaries
3) therefore trades where we deal cheap young talent in bunches for high priced players don't make a lot of sense to me unless we plan to go "all in". personally i disagree with this strategy, i would rather built a team that can compete year after year.

Griffey012
10-30-2010, 11:33 AM
1) the Reds are not a high payroll team
2) guys like Votto, Bruce & Cueto will make some cash soon so the money coming off the books (Harang, Cordero after 2011) is going to be paying these guys's salaries
3) therefore trades where we deal cheap young talent in bunches for high priced players don't make a lot of sense to me unless we plan to go "all in". personally i disagree with this strategy, i would rather built a team that can compete year after year.

Right now we have around 21 mil coming off the books for this season (assuming we hang onto Arroyo). And another 21.3 coming off the books after the 2011 season (assuming we keep Phillips). Take Phillips out of the equation and we have 31.3 million.

A guy like Markakis would use 10 of that 20 million next season, leaving 7 mil for Joey's raise, and we would have to increase payroll 2 or 3 million for the other arb raises I am guessing. Outside of next season he would fit in just fine to the payroll structure...being a small market team you never keep all of your homegrown talent when they get expensive...you have to part with some and replace it with cheap talent.

Felix makes 10 million next season also so its the same situation. However he gets pretty pricey the following 3 seasons. I am not expecting to Reds management to instantly increase payroll by 15 million to acquire a guy, but we do have some decent payroll flexibility coming up, I expect payroll to increase a little bit. It really all depends on the guys arbitration results.

Trading a group of prospects for a true #1 like Felix is not going all in. Going all in is trading away all of your prospects for a post season push for a year or 2. Filling a big gap in your lineup or rotation is simply trying to get the team to the playoffs and WS.

redsfandan
10-30-2010, 11:53 AM
In that instance, I would argue Leake is not a prospect, but a member of ML squad.

I would give them their choice of Cueto, Wood, Bailey, Volquez, Leake plus Mesoraco, Alonso and 2 other prospects. In a heartbeat. We've been talking about Grienke, who I would love to pick up, but Hernandez is better and cheaper than Grienke.

If they wanted two of my young starters (ie Leake and Cueto), I would probably negotiate down on the prospects a little. But I might even suck it up and do that.
Felix will be cheaper in 2011 but only by a few million and over the following three seasons he'll likely cost more than Greinke. We can dream all we want but I really doubt we'll see a pitcher make $20m/yr for the Reds anytime soon.


1) the Reds are not a high payroll team
2) guys like Votto, Bruce & Cueto will make some cash soon so the money coming off the books (Harang, Cordero after 2011) is going to be paying these guys's salaries
3) therefore trades where we deal cheap young talent in bunches for high priced players don't make a lot of sense to me unless we plan to go "all in". personally i disagree with this strategy, i would rather built a team that can compete year after year.

+1

TheNext44
10-30-2010, 01:17 PM
1) the Reds are not a high payroll team
2) guys like Votto, Bruce & Cueto will make some cash soon so the money coming off the books (Harang, Cordero after 2011) is going to be paying these guys's salaries
3) therefore trades where we deal cheap young talent in bunches for high priced players don't make a lot of sense to me unless we plan to go "all in". personally i disagree with this strategy, i would rather built a team that can compete year after year.

If the Reds can continue to contend, their payroll should be around $90M. Not a big market team, but not one that is handcuffed by their payroll.

This team won the division, with a $76M payroll that paid close to $25M to Harang and Cordero. Imagine how good they would be if they had that money to pay players that actually earned their salary?

The problem that teams like the Reds face is not that they can't afford big contracts, it's that they can't afford bad contracts.

Will M
10-30-2010, 02:13 PM
Right now we have around 21 mil coming off the books for this season (assuming we hang onto Arroyo). And another 21.3 coming off the books after the 2011 season (assuming we keep Phillips). Take Phillips out of the equation and we have 31.3 million.

A guy like Markakis would use 10 of that 20 million next season, leaving 7 mil for Joey's raise, and we would have to increase payroll 2 or 3 million for the other arb raises I am guessing. Outside of next season he would fit in just fine to the payroll structure...being a small market team you never keep all of your homegrown talent when they get expensive...you have to part with some and replace it with cheap talent.

Felix makes 10 million next season also so its the same situation. However he gets pretty pricey the following 3 seasons. I am not expecting to Reds management to instantly increase payroll by 15 million to acquire a guy, but we do have some decent payroll flexibility coming up, I expect payroll to increase a little bit. It really all depends on the guys arbitration results.

Trading a group of prospects for a true #1 like Felix is not going all in. Going all in is trading away all of your prospects for a post season push for a year or 2. Filling a big gap in your lineup or rotation is simply trying to get the team to the playoffs and WS.

Fast forward to 2013. Votto & Cueto could make $25M between them. IMO its very important that guys like Wood, Leake, Stubbs, Mesaraco, etc can contribute yet not be into their big money years. Its also important that the team have a steady stream of talent coming up through the system

If the team can fit high priced talent into the budget without trading away 'A' prospects then I am all for it. However, i disagree with people who might include Wood & Mes in a deal for some star.


If the Reds can continue to contend, their payroll should be around $90M. Not a big market team, but not one that is handcuffed by their payroll.

This team won the division, with a $76M payroll that paid close to $25M to Harang and Cordero. Imagine how good they would be if they had that money to pay players that actually earned their salary?

The problem that teams like the Reds face is not that they can't afford big contracts, it's that they can't afford bad contracts.

Agree here. Its bad contracts, especially long ones, that can kill a team like the Reds. For example: despite Holliday's strong 2010 I think this is the type of deal that could hurt the Cards. Guys can get real old real fast. Imagine the angst if Cordero had 4 more years on his deal instead of one.

If the Reds can get a $90M payroll they can be a real contending team year after year. They would still need to be well run but they wouldn't be a lost cause like say the Pirates.

mth123
10-30-2010, 02:32 PM
Right now we have around 21 mil coming off the books for this season (assuming we hang onto Arroyo). And another 21.3 coming off the books after the 2011 season (assuming we keep Phillips). Take Phillips out of the equation and we have 31.3 million.

A guy like Markakis would use 10 of that 20 million next season, leaving 7 mil for Joey's raise, and we would have to increase payroll 2 or 3 million for the other arb raises I am guessing. Outside of next season he would fit in just fine to the payroll structure...being a small market team you never keep all of your homegrown talent when they get expensive...you have to part with some and replace it with cheap talent.

Felix makes 10 million next season also so its the same situation. However he gets pretty pricey the following 3 seasons. I am not expecting to Reds management to instantly increase payroll by 15 million to acquire a guy, but we do have some decent payroll flexibility coming up, I expect payroll to increase a little bit. It really all depends on the guys arbitration results.

Trading a group of prospects for a true #1 like Felix is not going all in. Going all in is trading away all of your prospects for a post season push for a year or 2. Filling a big gap in your lineup or rotation is simply trying to get the team to the playoffs and WS.

I don't see the wiggle room. The $21 Million I assume is Harang (12.5), Lincoln (2.5), Miles (2.7), Cabrera (3.0) and Rhodes (2.0). That is actually a $22.7 savings. That is more than eaten up from within. Contractual raises for Phillips (4.5), Arroyo (2.0), Gomes and Masset (1.5 Combined) and Buy-outs for Harang (2.0) and Cabrera (1.0) account for about half. Arb increases for Votto, Cueto, Bruce and Volquez will combine to be in the $15 Million range.

TheNext44
10-30-2010, 02:58 PM
I don't see the wiggle room. The $21 Million I assume is Harang (12.5), Lincoln (2.5), Miles (2.7), Cabrera (3.0) and Rhodes (2.0). That is actually a $22.7 savings. That is more than eaten up from within. Contractual raises for Phillips (4.5), Arroyo (2.0), Gomes and Masset (1.5 Combined) and Buy-outs for Harang (2.0) and Cabrera (1.0) account for about half. Arb increases for Votto, Cueto, Bruce and Volquez will combine to be in the $15 Million range.

That's about right, but that is assuming payroll stays the same. I don't see the Reds adding a big ticket player either, but that's mostly because there really isn't one out there that seems worth it. I think Jocketty's plan is to play it safe, and if the Reds are in contention at the trading deadline, then make a big move.

Griffey012
10-30-2010, 03:19 PM
Fast forward to 2013. Votto & Cueto could make $25M between them. IMO its very important that guys like Wood, Leake, Stubbs, Mesaraco, etc can contribute yet not be into their big money years. Its also important that the team have a steady stream of talent coming up through the system

That's why I stated it all really depends on how the guys do in Arbitration. And if in 2013 Joey and Cueto are combining for $25 million it's time to look at flipping Cueto for a nice haul of good prospects. Like I stated, you can't afford to hold onto all of your homegrown talent when they start to get expensive, you have to pick and choose. Adding a guy like Felix would give us a much, much better shot than we currently have of getting that WS title. Just ask the Twins how much fun it is to make the playoffs every season and bounce in the first round, that's why you have to take some big shots in bringing in guys to put you over the top.

Griffey012
10-30-2010, 03:29 PM
I don't see the wiggle room. The $21 Million I assume is Harang (12.5), Lincoln (2.5), Miles (2.7), Cabrera (3.0) and Rhodes (2.0). That is actually a $22.7 savings. That is more than eaten up from within. Contractual raises for Phillips (4.5), Arroyo (2.0), Gomes and Masset (1.5 Combined) and Buy-outs for Harang (2.0) and Cabrera (1.0) account for about half. Arb increases for Votto, Cueto, Bruce and Volquez will combine to be in the $15 Million range.

I did forget to include the raises for Phillips and Arroyo when I was glancing at the numbers, but believe I included the buyouts. Obviously if we brought in a big ticket guy it would involve some decisions on Arroyo and Phillips. However the potential flexibility is more geared at 2011 and 2012. I am guessing a lot of guys will get hefty arb raises this season, than in 2011 and 2012 they will increase a little less. Such as with Votto something along the lines of 7 mil/9.5mil/12 mil. This offseason we can't afford a lot unless we have a bit of an increase in payroll which I believe I mentioned.

There are still a lot of unknowns in determining who and what we can afford to acquire,I doubt we could afford a guy like Felix, but there is too little known to also say that we can't. I get the feeling we have a little more flexibility than a lot of people on here are leading me to believe.

kpresidente
10-31-2010, 10:29 AM
Reds get: Stephen Drew

Diamondbacks get: Homer Bailey

-------------------------------

Arizona approached Detroit earlier this year with a Drew > Porcello proposal that the Tigers balked at (http://bit.ly/9TU4qI). I see Bailey as a similar player to Porcello so it could work.

HokieRed
10-31-2010, 11:42 AM
Reds get: Stephen Drew

Diamondbacks get: Homer Bailey

-------------------------------

Arizona approached Detroit earlier this year with a Drew > Porcello proposal that the Tigers balked at (http://bit.ly/9TU4qI). I see Bailey as a similar player to Porcello so it could work.

Prediction: we'll come to regret any trade of Bailey.

mth123
10-31-2010, 11:44 AM
Prediction: we'll come to regret any trade of Bailey.

Agreed. Give 'em Volquez

kpresidente
10-31-2010, 11:46 AM
I was going to say Bailey or Volquez, but Bailey was a better straight comparison to Porcello. Volquez has injury concerns so they might not want him, but yeah, I think I'd rather trade Volquez. It's close, though.

lollipopcurve
10-31-2010, 12:46 PM
You're only getting 1 year of Drew.

TheNext44
10-31-2010, 01:10 PM
You're only getting 1 year of Drew.

Not a big fan of the Drew family. Stephen had a great year last year, but who knows if that's the real him.

HokieRed
10-31-2010, 02:46 PM
I'm not interested in sending either Volquez or Bailey for the difference between Drew and Cozart.

Brutus
10-31-2010, 03:18 PM
I'm not interested in sending either Volquez or Bailey for the difference between Drew and Cozart.

Out of curiosity, why not?

Drew is a proven shortstop. One that was solid in 2008 and 2009 and borderline spectacular in 2010.

Cozart, meanwhile, has never had a single plate appearance at the Major League level and projects as a a possible average shortstop at the Major League level.

Why wouldn't that be worth depth at a position the Reds currently have?

I really don't understand the mindset on this board (not to aim this at you). People agree that LF and SS need upgrading, but it seems very few want to actually do what it takes to upgrade those positions. We don't know the difference between Cozart and Drew because Cozart is a complete non-entity thus far at this level. We do have an idea of what Drew is (though we don't know if the 2008/09 version or 2010 version is his real ability) and he would provide an upgrade to this team.

lollipopcurve
10-31-2010, 05:08 PM
I really don't understand the mindset on this board (not to aim this at you). People agree that LF and SS need upgrading, but it seems very few want to actually do what it takes to upgrade those positions. We don't know the difference between Cozart and Drew because Cozart is a complete non-entity thus far at this level. We do have an idea of what Drew is (though we don't know if the 2008/09 version or 2010 version is his real ability) and he would provide an upgrade to this team.

The only way you deal a starter for 1 year of Drew is if you know you can sign him long-term. With Boras as his agent, there's no realistic chance the Reds could get it done.

TheNext44
10-31-2010, 05:20 PM
Out of curiosity, why not?

Drew is a proven shortstop. One that was solid in 2008 and 2009 and borderline spectacular in 2010.

Cozart, meanwhile, has never had a single plate appearance at the Major League level and projects as a a possible average shortstop at the Major League level.

Why wouldn't that be worth depth at a position the Reds currently have?

I really don't understand the mindset on this board (not to aim this at you). People agree that LF and SS need upgrading, but it seems very few want to actually do what it takes to upgrade those positions. We don't know the difference between Cozart and Drew because Cozart is a complete non-entity thus far at this level. We do have an idea of what Drew is (though we don't know if the 2008/09 version or 2010 version is his real ability) and he would provide an upgrade to this team.

Drew really has only been an average or better SS once in his career... 2010. Before that, he was always below league average overall, and averaged just 1.3 WAR a season.

Until 2010, he was a low on base guy with some pop and a below average glove. In 2010, he really put it all together, both offensively and defensively.

The question is, was 2010 Drew coming into his own, or a one year fluke? He does have a lot of talent, and 27 is about the age when players either put it together or never do. But it also was just one year, and we have all seen this time and time again, players having one great year in an otherwise mediocre career.

I'm not completely against the Reds getting Drew, but I think Bailey is too high a price for one uncertain year.

HokieRed
10-31-2010, 05:42 PM
Out of curiosity, why not?

Drew is a proven shortstop. One that was solid in 2008 and 2009 and borderline spectacular in 2010.

Cozart, meanwhile, has never had a single plate appearance at the Major League level and projects as a a possible average shortstop at the Major League level.

Why wouldn't that be worth depth at a position the Reds currently have?

I really don't understand the mindset on this board (not to aim this at you). People agree that LF and SS need upgrading, but it seems very few want to actually do what it takes to upgrade those positions. We don't know the difference between Cozart and Drew because Cozart is a complete non-entity thus far at this level. We do have an idea of what Drew is (though we don't know if the 2008/09 version or 2010 version is his real ability) and he would provide an upgrade to this team.

Part of my reluctance to trade either Volquez or Bailey for Drew is based on the point Lollipopcurve made about Drew's contract, and I'm also, like TheNext44, wary of projecting Drew from his 2010 year. But I'm also not convinced we have the "depth" of starting pitching yet that others seem to see. We have a young lefthander who's pitched one half season in the major leagues, another one who's made about 20 relief appearances, a third guy who's a year out of Arizona State, and two right-handers with great stuff who've never put a whole season together. And then we have Arroyo, with his 5 K's per 9 last year, and Cueto. I don't see enough depth there to trade a starter, especially one of the ones whose development would be the most important single thing that could possibly move this team to WS status--i.e. Chapman, Bailey, Volquez, Wood. If we've got to do something here in order to make upgrades elsewhere--and I'm not at all sure we do--I'd take the chance on going without Arroyo and spend his money on the upgrades.

camisadelgolf
10-31-2010, 08:58 PM
Bailey-for-Drew is interesting. People might knock Drew and say he isn't much better than average, but that's more than can be said for Bailey's track record. There's a good chance Bailey will be the better player moving forward, but Stephen Drew fills a much bigger need than Homer Bailey would.

Will M
10-31-2010, 09:35 PM
You're only getting 1 year of Drew.

Cot's baseball site lists him as having 3.079 years of service time prior to this year. That would indicate that he is not a free agent until after 2012.

lollipopcurve
10-31-2010, 10:23 PM
Cot's baseball site lists him as having 3.079 years of service time prior to this year. That would indicate that he is not a free agent until after 2012.

Ah, my bad. That changes things. He may be worth a starter.

jojo
10-31-2010, 10:28 PM
Cots hasn't updated service time accrued during this seasons yet.... Drew's got a little over 4 years in actuality which means a team trading for him would be getting two seasons worth of control (the 2011 season would only put him over 5 meaning he'd still have to wait another year before hitting the market).

corkedbat
10-31-2010, 10:48 PM
Part of my reluctance to trade either Volquez or Bailey for Drew is based on the point Lollipopcurve made about Drew's contract, and I'm also, like TheNext44, wary of projecting Drew from his 2010 year. But I'm also not convinced we have the "depth" of starting pitching yet that others seem to see. We have a young lefthander who's pitched one half season in the major leagues, another one who's made about 20 relief appearances, a third guy who's a year out of Arizona State, and two right-handers with great stuff who've never put a whole season together. And then we have Arroyo, with his 5 K's per 9 last year, and Cueto. I don't see enough depth there to trade a starter, especially one of the ones whose development would be the most important single thing that could possibly move this team to WS status--i.e. Chapman, Bailey, Volquez, Wood. If we've got to do something here in order to make upgrades elsewhere--and I'm not at all sure we do--I'd take the chance on going without Arroyo and spend his money on the upgrades.

I'd rather deal Leake that Volquez or Bailey. Mike pitched college ball in Arizona and that might being some interest from the DBacks. They might also be one of the clubs that has interest in Alonso if they don't land Konerko and I might add Cozartif they want a SS in return.

If I send all three though I'd want a propect back or see the Reds add a prospect and get Johnson also. Not sure if the 1yr rule still holds for Leake since he's been in the majors. If they have to wait until June, that probabgly squashes that idea.

Will M
11-01-2010, 12:36 AM
I'd rather deal Leake that Volquez or Bailey. Mike pitched college ball in Arizona and that might being some interest from the DBacks. They might also be one of the clubs that has interest in Alonso if they don't land Konerko and I might add Cozartif they want a SS in return.

If I send all three though I'd want a propect back or see the Reds add a prospect and get Johnson also. Not sure if the 1yr rule still holds for Leake since he's been in the majors. If they have to wait until June, that probabgly squashes that idea.

Leake can be dealt as he was drafted in 2009 not this year.

I thought that the Diamondbacks were rebuilding but then I read that they want Kornerko. If they really are rebuilding then trying to pry a couple of guys who make some money off of them seems like a good idea. Leake, Alonso & Cozart for Stephen Drew & Kelly Johnson is a great deal for the Reds. It instantly fixes LF & SS.

Alonso seems like a guy who almost has to be traded this winter or by the trading deadline next year. The Reds have made no sign that they will try Votto in left.

TheNext44
11-01-2010, 01:07 AM
Leake can be dealt as he was drafted in 2009 not this year.

I thought that the Diamondbacks were rebuilding but then I read that they want Kornerko. If they really are rebuilding then trying to pry a couple of guys who make some money off of them seems like a good idea. Leake, Alonso & Cozart for Stephen Drew & Kelly Johnson is a great deal for the Reds. It instantly fixes LF & SS.

Alonso seems like a guy who almost has to be traded this winter or by the trading deadline next year. The Reds have made no sign that they will try Votto in left.

Kelly Johnson doesn't solve the SS problem, even if he played SS. He's an even bigger risk than Drew. Mediocre career, released by the Braves, and has one exceptional year at age 28 on a club the was never in contention. All the markings of a one hit wonder.

corkedbat
11-01-2010, 02:07 AM
Kelly Johnson doesn't solve the SS problem, even if he played SS. He's an even bigger risk than Drew. Mediocre career, released by the Braves, and has one exceptional year at age 28 on a club the was never in contention. All the markings of a one hit wonder.

I think Drew would be at SS. If we were to land Johnson, I'd put him in LF in a platoon with Gomes or Heisey.

corkedbat
11-01-2010, 02:08 AM
Kelly Johnson doesn't solve the SS problem, even if he played SS. He's an even bigger risk than Drew. Mediocre career, released by the Braves, and has one exceptional year at age 28 on a club the was never in contention. All the markings of a one hit wonder.

I think Drew would be at SS. If we were to land Johnson, I'd put him in LF in a platoon with Gomes or Heisey. I'd also have him as a reserve in the IF (2B & 3B) as well.

Will M
11-01-2010, 02:19 AM
Kelly Johnson doesn't solve the SS problem, even if he played SS. He's an even bigger risk than Drew. Mediocre career, released by the Braves, and has one exceptional year at age 28 on a club the was never in contention. All the markings of a one hit wonder.

Kelly Johnson has amassed 12.6 WAR in the last 4 seasons. He would play LF & can also fill in at 2B (and I believe 3B). He would not play SS.
He was released by the Braves not because he was a bad player but because he was arbitration eligible & the Braves didn't want to pay him what they thought he might get.

Drew is better than Janish or Cozart.

What would we give up?
1) the guy many feel is our 7th best starter
2) a first baseman we have no position for. in a year where there are a fair number of free agent first baseman
3) a shortstop who is a rookie who is in no way a 'can't miss prospect'

TheNext44
11-01-2010, 10:27 AM
Kelly Johnson has amassed 12.6 WAR in the last 4 seasons. He would play LF & can also fill in at 2B (and I believe 3B). He would not play SS.
He was released by the Braves not because he was a bad player but because he was arbitration eligible & the Braves didn't want to pay him what they thought he might get.

Drew is better than Janish or Cozart.

What would we give up?
1) the guy many feel is our 7th best starter
2) a first baseman we have no position for. in a year where there are a fair number of free agent first baseman
3) a shortstop who is a rookie who is in no way a 'can't miss prospect'

I wouldn't bet Bailey or Alonso that Drew will be significantly better than what the Reds currently have at SS.

Johnson accrued half of that WAR last year alone. He was below average almost the entire rest of his career. He was released because of bad play, and contract issues. He had lost his starting job, and OPS'd below .700.

kpresidente
11-01-2010, 10:38 AM
On a side note, how does a guy like Stephen Drew end up averaging 12 triples/season over the past 3 years?

redsfandan
11-01-2010, 11:04 AM
I really don't understand the mindset on this board (not to aim this at you). People agree that LF and SS need upgrading, but it seems very few want to actually do what it takes to upgrade those positions. We don't know the difference between Cozart and Drew because Cozart is a complete non-entity thus far at this level. We do have an idea of what Drew is (though we don't know if the 2008/09 version or 2010 version is his real ability) and he would provide an upgrade to this team.
I have no problem with making a move to upgrade leftfield. But, as far as ss goes, I'd prefer to see how Cozart and Janish look in Feb/March before a move is made there. If we can get good production between those two for peanuts it would be worth a lot.

By the way, I like how you contradicted yourself there. Yes, Drew is an experienced major league ss but to just find out which Drew we'd get we'd have to pay up some good prospects plus at least $3M to pay him. And who knows if the price for Drew would even be worth the difference in production relative to Cozart/Janish. Why give up more for Drew when he may not be much better if he's even better at all?

No, what few trading chips we do have (I don't think we have that much) I'd prefer that they were used to upgrade leftfield. If that doesn't work then I'd want a deal including prospect(s) that could help us in a couple years like maybe players at 2nd and/or 3rd.


Bailey-for-Drew is interesting. People might knock Drew and say he isn't much better than average, but that's more than can be said for Bailey's track record. There's a good chance Bailey will be the better player moving forward, but Stephen Drew fills a much bigger need than Homer Bailey would.

How much can we really afford to part with starting pitching right now? We might be fine without Bailey just like we might be fine without Arroyo. But I wouldn't take the chance until mid-season and only if the others do well.

camisadelgolf
11-01-2010, 12:26 PM
How much can we really afford to part with starting pitching right now? We might be fine without Bailey just like we might be fine without Arroyo. But I wouldn't take the chance until mid-season and only if the others do well.
We've seen what Janish can do in limited playing time, and it's not all that good if you ask me. And I think it makes sense to have doubts about his production improving with more playing time.

As for Cozart, Paul Janish had a .582 OPS over his first two seasons, so it's far from a sure thing that Cozart would be able to eclipse that as a rookie. In fact, Cozart and Janish have nearly the same minor league OPS (although Janish's was more OBP-based), so for all the people predicting Cozart to be an upgrade, I think they're expectations are possibly too high.

So here's my point: You ask a fair question about being able to part with pitching, but can't you also ask, "How much can we really afford to go without a bona fide shortstop?"

HokieRed
11-01-2010, 12:56 PM
In answer to Cam's last point, the Giants have Edgar Renteria as their SS and four young stud pitchers. My conclusion: preserve anybody who might turn out to have high upside as a starting pitcher.

camisadelgolf
11-01-2010, 01:04 PM
In answer to Cam's last point, the Giants have Edgar Renteria as their SS and four young stud pitchers. My conclusion: preserve anybody who might turn out to have high upside as a starting pitcher.
They also have Juan Uribe, who spent much more time as the Giants' shortstop than Renteria. If anything, you're emphasizing the importance of having shortstop depth.

redsfandan
11-01-2010, 02:44 PM
We've seen what Janish can do in limited playing time, and it's not all that good if you ask me. And I think it makes sense to have doubts about his production improving with more playing time.

As for Cozart, Paul Janish had a .582 OPS over his first two seasons, so it's far from a sure thing that Cozart would be able to eclipse that as a rookie. In fact, Cozart and Janish have nearly the same minor league OPS (although Janish's was more OBP-based), so for all the people predicting Cozart to be an upgrade, I think they're expectations are possibly too high.

So here's my point: You ask a fair question about being able to part with pitching, but can't you also ask, "How much can we really afford to go without a bona fide shortstop?"
Depends on what you demand from your shortstop. Shouldn't defense be the most important thing when it comes to the shortstop? Don't Janish and Cozart both provide above average defense? I actually wasn't suggesting that Janish would improve his offensive production or that he should be more than a platoon player. But if he can come anywhere close to what he did last year I'd be happy. And did you really base what you expect from Cozart on what Janish did his first two seasons? I've never even thought they were the same type of shortstop offensively.

You seem to be convinced that the Reds can't compete with Janish/Cozart at short. Maybe you're right. But, I'm willing to take the chance and at least see how they look in spring training. It seems like you're willing to give up whatever for a player that may not be as good as you think. I doubt Drew is even available. And who knows what Arizona would really want even if they were to consider moving him. But there will be other shortstops available, like Uribe, that likely won't cost nearly as much as Drew.

TheNext44
11-01-2010, 02:54 PM
We've seen what Janish can do in limited playing time, and it's not all that good if you ask me. And I think it makes sense to have doubts about his production improving with more playing time.

As for Cozart, Paul Janish had a .582 OPS over his first two seasons, so it's far from a sure thing that Cozart would be able to eclipse that as a rookie. In fact, Cozart and Janish have nearly the same minor league OPS (although Janish's was more OBP-based), so for all the people predicting Cozart to be an upgrade, I think they're expectations are possibly too high.

So here's my point: You ask a fair question about being able to part with pitching, but can't you also ask, "How much can we really afford to go without a bona fide shortstop?"

1). I was happy with what I saw from Janish this season. If he can do the same over a full season, I see no reason to spend resources to upgrade SS.

2). You are right to be skeptical of what Cozart can do in his first season, which is why the Reds will have Janish to start, and Cozart to backup. Cozart will only be getting playing time by outplaying Janish. He is not being handed the starting job, for the very reasons you state. If he does, then problem solved.

3). A minor league OPS with A higher SLG projects to better MLB numbers than the same one with higher OBP. The higher slugging means that pitchers will be more fearful of you, and are not as likely to challenge you as often, so your OBP will not suffer as much as the player with the low SLG. While Cozart doesn't project to be that great of a hitter, he does project to be a better one than Janish.

camisadelgolf
11-01-2010, 03:02 PM
Depends on what you demand from your shortstop. Shouldn't defense be the most important thing when it comes to the shortstop? Don't Janish and Cozart both provide above average defense? I actually wasn't suggesting that Janish would improve his offensive production or that he should be more than a platoon player. But if he can come anywhere close to what he did last year I'd be happy. And did you really base what you expect from Cozart on what Janish did his first two seasons? I've never even thought they were the same type of shortstop offensively.

You seem to be convinced that the Reds can't compete with Janish/Cozart at short. Maybe you're right. But, I'm willing to take the chance and at least see how they look in spring training. It seems like you're willing to give up whatever for a player that may not be as good as you think. I doubt Drew is even available. And who knows what Arizona would really want even if they were to consider moving him. But there will be other shortstops available, like Uribe, that likely won't cost nearly as much as Drew.
I'm not saying I'm convinced that the Reds can't compete with Janish/Cozart. It's amazing to me that you would make that assumption. They managed to win the division with The OC on the team, so I think it would be stupid to suggest the Reds couldn't be competitive with Janish & Cozart at short. I wouldn't even rule out the possibility of them being competitive with Juan Castro at shortstop. However, I think depth is very important, and the Reds have more starting pitching depth than they do shortstop depth. I'm not necessarily condoning a Bailey-for-Drew trade, but I am condoning a trade of pitching for a quality, everyday shortstop.

redsfandan
11-01-2010, 03:12 PM
I'm not saying I'm convinced that the Reds can't compete with Janish/Cozart. It's amazing to me that you would make that assumption. They managed to win the division with The OC on the team, so I think it would be stupid to suggest the Reds couldn't be competitive with Janish & Cozart at short. I wouldn't even rule out the possibility of them being competitive with Juan Castro at shortstop.
My apologies. I had the impression that arrangement wouldn't be sufficient to you. My mistake.

However, I think depth is very important, and the Reds have more starting pitching depth than they do shortstop depth.
Yes, they have depth but it's alot of inexperienced depth. Yes, you can say the same about both positions. But, I'm not saying I wouldn't consider getting a veteran shortstop. I'd just prefer not to overpay for someone that could be just a stopgap.


I'm not necessarily condoning a Bailey-for-Drew trade, but I am condoning a trade of pitching for a quality, everyday shortstop.
So package Maloney with Alonso. Not the guys that have the higher ceiling unless we'd get a player back that is at a similar point in his career. Young, talented, and cheap. Or an established sure thing. I don't think Drew counts as either.

Griffey012
11-01-2010, 05:07 PM
As long as we have a very productive catching platoon, we can afford to have Janish playing great D at SS and having a pretty low OPS. That is assuming his OPS drops by about .100 points from this season. To me SS isn't much of an issue, not nearly as much as LF, unless we have the opportunity to get an All-Star caliber SS. It seems to me that whatever we would have to give up to get a guy like Drew would be far, far more than the marginal value of Drew over Janish.

HokieRed
11-01-2010, 06:14 PM
They also have Juan Uribe, who spent much more time as the Giants' shortstop than Renteria. If anything, you're emphasizing the importance of having shortstop depth.

Uribe had a .749 and Renteria a .707 OPS. What I'm emphasizing is that the Giants are going to win the WS because of the 4 starters they have (plus good bullpen depth and an iron closer). Who's playing SS for them matters little. The only way for the Reds to get to that level is for a couple of our starters with the highest upside to realize their potential, which is why I'm against trading any of Chapman, Bailey, Wood, Cueto, or Volquez (though I could be tempted on Volquez). Of course I'd like to have Drew but not at the cost of any of those five.

*BaseClogger*
11-01-2010, 06:31 PM
the Reds will have Janish to start, and Cozart to backup.

Are you worried that this could possibly stunt his development?

TheNext44
11-01-2010, 06:47 PM
Are you worried that this could possibly stunt his development?

It didn't stunt Concepcion, nor Larkin. Both had similar plans their first full season, and both won the job by the end of the year.

*BaseClogger*
11-01-2010, 09:06 PM
It didn't stunt Concepcion, nor Larkin. Both had similar plans their first full season, and both won the job by the end of the year.

It's an argument that I've heard, not that I disagree with you. As a 25 year-old former college prospect, I think it's about time the Reds challenged Cozart...

mth123
11-01-2010, 09:19 PM
It's an argument that I've heard, not that I disagree with you. As a 25 year-old former college prospect, I think it's about time the Reds challenged Cozart...

Huh?? They have challenged him. He jumped straight to Dayton instead of enhancing his reputation by beating up on a lesser group of players in a hitters paradise like Billings. Next, Cozart skipped high A completely and jumped to AA. Cozart has been challenged a lot and his numbers have improved. He could have taken the slower route and the numbers would probably be better. People need to look a little more at the context IMO.

*BaseClogger*
11-01-2010, 09:37 PM
Huh?? They have challenged him. He jumped straight to Dayton instead of enhancing his reputation by beating up on a lesser group of players in a hitters paradise like Billings. Next, Cozart skipped high A completely and jumped to AA. Cozart has been challenged a lot and his numbers have improved. He could have taken the slower route and the numbers would probably be better. People need to look a little more at the context IMO.

...then he repeated Dayton for another year. Then he spent an entire season at AA. Then an entire year at AAA. Is that really challenging a 2nd round pick out of a top collegiate program?

mth123
11-01-2010, 10:02 PM
...then he repeated Dayton for another year. Then he spent an entire season at AA. Then an entire year at AAA. Is that really challenging a 2nd round pick out of a top collegiate program?

They could have let him have a .900+ OPS at Billings followed by a stop at each level. Skipping the rookie leagues and high A is challenging him pretty much IMO. Others fatten the stat sheet by playing in leagues beneath them, but since Cozart didn't he suffers a bit when the comparisons get started. Cozart didn't turn 25 until August. This was his age 24 season in AAA same as many others.

*BaseClogger*
11-01-2010, 10:07 PM
Cozart didn't turn 25 until August. This was his age 24 season in AAA same as many others.

I agree with the statement "same as many others", but that conflicts with the idea that the Reds are challenging him.

I agree that having him skip Billings was an example of challenging him, but since then they have played it safe with Cozart. And skipping high A does not necessarily hurt his stats considering what a pitcher's park the Reds had back in Sarasota/in the FSL...

Will M
11-08-2010, 04:37 PM
Here is an idea I have been thinking about:

Reds obtain Kosuke Fukudome in exchange for Francisco Cordero.
The salaries are almost a wash ($13.5M vs $12M & a $1M buyout).

Fukudome could platoon in LF with Gomes.
He has been an above average defender in RF for the Cubs.
He can play CF in a pinch.
He has not been worth his contract (understatement).
He did post an OPS of .809 in 2010.
He does get on base so he could hit leadoff when he plays.

The Cubs have been trying to move him. Of course he is pretty much a rock unless the Cubs want to eat a ton of his salary or take a bad contract in return. They did move Bradley for Silva last offseason so maybe they would want to try again. I have read that the Cubs are looking at moving Fukudome so they can add a big bat. Why would they want Coco? Well, I can't really come up with a good reason. However, they do have the itch to move Fukudome & maybe the Reds can help them scratch it.

If the Reds made this deal their LF problem would be fixed for 2011. They could re-sign Rhodes. Maybe Chapman does go to the pen. Maybe they use the cash that was going to LF to try & find another late inning RH arm to pair with Masset.

Question for Redszone: If the Cubs would do this trade would you?

camisadelgolf
11-08-2010, 04:50 PM
Here is an idea I have been thinking about:

Reds obtain Kosuke Fukudome in exchange for Francisco Cordero.
The salaries are almost a wash ($13.5M vs $12M & a $1M buyout).

Fukudome could platoon in LF with Gomes.
He has been an above average defender in RF for the Cubs.
He can play CF in a pinch.
He has not been worth his contract (understatement).
He did post an OPS of .809 in 2010.
He does get on base so he could hit leadoff when he plays.

The Cubs have been trying to move him. Of course he is pretty much a rock unless the Cubs want to eat a ton of his salary or take a bad contract in return. They did move Bradley for Silva last offseason so maybe they would want to try again. I have read that the Cubs are looking at moving Fukudome so they can add a big bat. Why would they want Coco? Well, I can't really come up with a good reason. However, they do have the itch to move Fukudome & maybe the Reds can help them scratch it.

If the Reds made this deal their LF problem would be fixed for 2011. They could re-sign Rhodes. Maybe Chapman does go to the pen. Maybe they use the cash that was going to LF to try & find another late inning RH arm to pair with Masset.

Question for Redszone: If the Cubs would do this trade would you?
If the Cubs would do it, I'd be willing, but I don't think they would.
1.) They have Marmol, and I doubt they'd want to put up with the clubhouse problems that could arise from Cordero/Marmol not being the primary closer.
2.) It's a deal that should help the Reds more than the Cubs, so I doubt the Cubs would be interested.
3.) Fukudome has a no-trade clause, and I'd be surprised if he were willing to give up what he has in Chicago to come to Cincinnati.

But it's a good thought. I just don't think it's very realistic.

mth123
11-08-2010, 09:26 PM
I like power in LF, but since lead-off is the goal:

Matt Maloney, Kris Negron, Chris Heisey, and Jared Burton for David Dejesus and Brayan Pena.

The Royals shed some salary and open a spot for younger guys on the verge. Negron gives them a guy who will probably play in the majors and can handle SS, (though maybe not as a starter), Maloney can eat innings on the cheap at he back of the rotation while the more prized kids develop, Burton provides a solid arm for the middle of the pen and Heisey can play somewhere in the KC OF. The Reds get their every day LF and lead-off guy in Dejesus and Pena is an option to compete with Corky as the back-up to Hanigan while waiting for Mesoraco. Letting Ramon walk and dealing Burton makes this a almost $ neutral deal for the Reds and a separate deal of Gomes somewhere for a kid could pretty much even up the books.

Will M
11-09-2010, 12:38 AM
I like power in LF, but since lead-off is the goal:

Matt Maloney, Kris Negron, Chris Heisey, and Jared Burton for David Dejesus and Brayan Pena.

The Royals shed some salary and open a spot for younger guys on the verge. Negron gives them a guy who will probably play in the majors and can handle SS, (though maybe not as a starter), Maloney can eat innings on the cheap at he back of the rotation while the more prized kids develop, Burton provides a solid arm for the middle of the pen and Heisey can play somewhere in the KC OF. The Reds get their every day LF and lead-off guy in Dejesus and Pena is an option to compete with Corky as the back-up to Hanigan while waiting for Mesoraco. Letting Ramon walk and dealing Burton makes this a almost $ neutral deal for the Reds and a separate deal of Gomes somewhere for a kid could pretty much even up the books.

I like Dejesus a lot. A LH bat who can play LF but can also play RF (and CF in a pinch). The only thing that gives me pause is: has he recovered from his surgery?

I do think it wouldn't cost a ton in prospects to get him. I think a guy like Dejesus (or my other favorite target Kelly Johnson) cab be had for some of our host of lower grade prospects. Plus his salary fits into the budget.

nemesis
11-09-2010, 03:15 AM
Seems like TB is looking for BP arms. What about a combo of 2 of Ondrusek/Smith/Herrera/Maloney/Bray/Burton/Valiquette and Cordero plus a few Mil for Joyce and Shoppach?

Gives the Reds a .800+ OPS bat in LF and a catcher with pop that could see a increase in production at GABP and out of the AL East, therefore increasing his value and getting something at the deadline for him in the event Mesoraco is ready?

mth123
11-09-2010, 04:18 AM
Seems like TB is looking for BP arms. What about a combo of 2 of Ondrusek/Smith/Herrera/Maloney/Bray/Burton/Valiquette and Cordero plus a few Mil for Joyce and Shoppach?

Gives the Reds a .800+ OPS bat in LF and a catcher with pop that could see a increase in production at GABP and out of the AL East, therefore increasing his value and getting something at the deadline for him in the event Mesoraco is ready?

TB, frst and foremost, is looking to cut costs. They would never take Cordero unless the Reds paid the bills. They need to replace Pena. A deal involving Alonso and Joyce makes some sense. I'd happily add a reliver or two and one of the lesser MI IF guys (Valaika, Negron, Rojas) if the team could get Reid Brignac as well. I'd also be interested in Shoppach and Alex Torres.

Alonso, Burton, Valiquette, Valaika and Sulbaran for Joyce, Shoppach, Brignac and Torres would be great and might suit both teams. The Rays move Shoppach's salary, add a 1B of the future, get some arms for the pen. The Reds get their LF, a caddy for Rolen and Phillips who can be a fall back at SS, upgrade the minor league starter and get the back-up catcher while taking on a little money.

That's a little complicated though. Honestly, I'd do Alonso for Joyce straight-up, but I imagine many would scream at dealing a top 100 prospect for a platoon OF and I see their point which is why making it a bigger deal makes sense. Maybe Alonso and Burton for Joyce and Torres makes some sense.

jojo
11-09-2010, 07:32 AM
If we think Cordero is no longer a closer, why would TB think he's their answer?

kpresidente
11-09-2010, 10:50 AM
What about Ellsbury? There was some talk of him being moved (http://bit.ly/9cHgaY) this offseason, and it looks like the Sox might go after Crawford.

Volquez/Bailey and Alonso for Ellsbury?

Alonso as a long-term DH, given that Ortiz is probably in his last year. Pretty sure Volquez/Bailey upgrades a spot in their rotation.

blumj
11-09-2010, 10:55 AM
I think Tampa might be the very rare team with enough surplus talent to only trade players who are making more than the minumum and still get just about everything they could want in return, without taking much salary back or seriously damaging their chance to contend next season.

blumj
11-09-2010, 11:17 AM
What about Ellsbury? There was some talk of him being moved (http://bit.ly/9cHgaY) this offseason, and it looks like the Sox might go after Crawford.

Volquez/Bailey and Alonso for Ellsbury?

Alonso as a long-term DH, given that Ortiz is probably in his last year. Pretty sure Volquez/Bailey upgrades a spot in their rotation.
Anyone Volquez or Bailey might be an upgrade over in their rotation is just about untradeable. Dice-K: 2 years/$20M, full NTC, and Boras, Beckett: 4 years/$68M, and Lackey: 4 years/$61M. Thanks for reminding me, though.

TheNext44
11-09-2010, 01:39 PM
What about Ellsbury? There was some talk of him being moved (http://bit.ly/9cHgaY) this offseason, and it looks like the Sox might go after Crawford.

Volquez/Bailey and Alonso for Ellsbury?

Alonso as a long-term DH, given that Ortiz is probably in his last year. Pretty sure Volquez/Bailey upgrades a spot in their rotation.

I would love for the Reds to get Elsbury.

Elsbury is coming off missing almost an entire season to injury, and is about to be making some bigbucks, so I doubt it would take much more than Alonso to get him, especially when the Sox really don't need Elsbury anymore, and could really use Alonso.

hebroncougar
11-09-2010, 01:45 PM
If the Cubs would do it, I'd be willing, but I don't think they would.
1.) They have Marmol, and I doubt they'd want to put up with the clubhouse problems that could arise from Cordero/Marmol not being the primary closer.
2.) It's a deal that should help the Reds more than the Cubs, so I doubt the Cubs would be interested.
3.) Fukudome has a no-trade clause, and I'd be surprised if he were willing to give up what he has in Chicago to come to Cincinnati.

But it's a good thought. I just don't think it's very realistic.

I had that exact same thought........trading Cordero for Fukodome as their salaries are a wash. After looking at Marmol's stats, I thought no way the Cubs would do that . However, I do think Fukodome would do the deal, his hitting stats would jump from the GABP effect, but I don't think the Cubs would.

nemesis
11-09-2010, 04:07 PM
If we think Cordero is no longer a closer, why would TB think he's their answer?

Because as bad as we all know Cordero truly was this year, TB needs a closer who'll last the season. Cordero fits that role...

I'd happily send along the $$$ difference between Shoppach and Cordero because I believe Shoppach will have more trade value come midseason than Cordero. Add in the fact the Reds wouldn't trade their closer come midseason unless they are completely out of it.


I'd go Alonso, Cordero, Money and Burton for Shoppach, Joyce and Torres.

Be an upgrade for both teams.

jojo
11-09-2010, 04:48 PM
Because as bad as we all know Cordero truly was this year, TB needs a closer who'll last the season. Cordero fits that role...

Certainly they'd have better trade targets than Cordero if they felt their pen was a major priority.

Benihana
11-09-2010, 06:48 PM
What about Ellsbury? There was some talk of him being moved (http://bit.ly/9cHgaY) this offseason, and it looks like the Sox might go after Crawford.

Volquez/Bailey and Alonso for Ellsbury?

Alonso as a long-term DH, given that Ortiz is probably in his last year. Pretty sure Volquez/Bailey upgrades a spot in their rotation.

This is by far my favorite idea of the thread thus far.

When is Ellsbury arb-eligible?

I'd still prefer a legit power hitter in LF, or at least a Matt Kemp-like 25 HR guy. But Ellsbury is just about the next best thing, as he solves the leadoff problem and is SIGNIFICANTLY preferable to Jonny Gomes or Scotty Pods.

LF Ellsbury
2B Phillips
1B Votto
RF Bruce
3B Rolen
CF Stubbs
C Hanigan
SS Janish/Cozart

SP Arroyo
SP Cueto
SP Volquez/Bailey
SP Wood
SP Leake/Chapman

Works for me!

Benihana
11-09-2010, 06:50 PM
Anyone Volquez or Bailey might be an upgrade over in their rotation is just about untradeable. Dice-K: 2 years/$20M, full NTC, and Boras, Beckett: 4 years/$68M, and Lackey: 4 years/$61M. Thanks for reminding me, though.

I think they could/would stomach Dice-K as an overpriced middle reliever/spot starter for the next two years if it significantly upgraded their rotation and offered up Ortiz's replacement, no?

He would become the Red Sox equivalent of Kei Igawa.

buckeyenut
11-09-2010, 07:21 PM
Are we talking about the guy who hit below .200 for the year in Ellsbury? 1st year arb eligible BTW

mth123
11-09-2010, 07:48 PM
Not sure I love the Ellsbury idea as much as others, but if we want him, how about a 3 way?

Alonso, Maloney and Heisey to SD
Gonzalez to Bos
Ellsbury and Lowrie to CIN

blumj
11-09-2010, 07:51 PM
Are we talking about the guy who hit below .200 for the year in Ellsbury? 1st year arb eligible BTW
To be fair, he only played in 18 games, 12 of them with rib fractures that either never healed or that he re-injured.

Scrap Irony
11-09-2010, 08:29 PM
Not sure I love the Ellsbury idea as much as others, but if we want him, how about a 3 way?

Alonso, Maloney and Heisey to SD
Gonzalez to Bos
Ellsbury and Lowrie to CIN

Yeah, that'd work for the Reds, for sure. It would really solidify the Cincinnati lineup across the board (fairly cheaply, too).

The Red Sox should like it as well, as it allows Youk to go back to third and improves their offense.

But the Pads would probably need at least one more prospect, perhaps two for this to work. I'd guess it'd take a Sox Kelly or maybe a Red Joseph.

mth123
11-09-2010, 08:33 PM
Yeah, that'd work for the Reds, for sure. It would really solidify the Cincinnati lineup across the board (fairly cheaply, too).

The Red Sox should like it as well, as it allows Youk to go back to third and improves their offense.

But the Pads would probably need at least one more prospect, perhaps two for this to work. I'd guess it'd take a Sox Kelly or maybe a Red Joseph.

Wouldn't be a problem for me to add Joseph in a deal like that. I guess I'd try quantity first and add Valiquette and Negron or Valaika.

Rojo
11-09-2010, 09:00 PM
Not sure I love the Ellsbury idea as much as others, but if we want him, how about a 3 way?

Alonso, Maloney and Heisey to SD
Gonzalez to Bos
Ellsbury and Lowrie to CIN

Not bad. SD would need more. If we're getting Lowrie, might as well toss Cozart to SD.

RedsManRick
11-10-2010, 01:13 AM
Not sure I love the Ellsbury idea as much as others, but if we want him, how about a 3 way?

Alonso, Maloney and Heisey to SD
Gonzalez to Bos
Ellsbury and Lowrie to CIN

Agreed with the others that SD would need more in return. Gonzalez is basically Joey Votto with a longer track record playing in a much tougher home environment. considering how Lowrie looked last year, it's probably coming from us, not them. Imagine what we'd want in return for JoeVo.

I'd say you'd probably need to give up another guy that SD could hang their hat on, like Bailey instead of Maloney.

Krusty
11-10-2010, 10:08 AM
Yeah, that'd work for the Reds, for sure. It would really solidify the Cincinnati lineup across the board (fairly cheaply, too).

The Red Sox should like it as well, as it allows Youk to go back to third and improves their offense.

But the Pads would probably need at least one more prospect, perhaps two for this to work. I'd guess it'd take a Sox Kelly or maybe a Red Joseph.

I really like that deal.

lollipopcurve
11-10-2010, 10:50 AM
Alonso, Maloney and Heisey to SD
Gonzalez to Bos
Ellsbury and Lowrie to CIN

It makes much more sense for SD to deal directly with Boston. SD has said they want a CF who can lead off and middle infield help. Gonzalez for Ellsbury and Lowrie is a perfect match. To get more from Boston, SD can always dangle Heath Bell. I don't see the Reds being able to insinuate themselves into conversations between those two clubs, unfortunately.

I see far more potential with the Dodgers, maybe even the Mets.

blumj
11-10-2010, 01:55 PM
Agreed with the others that SD would need more in return. Gonzalez is basically Joey Votto with a longer track record playing in a much tougher home environment. considering how Lowrie looked last year, it's probably coming from us, not them. Imagine what we'd want in return for JoeVo.

I'd say you'd probably need to give up another guy that SD could hang their hat on, like Bailey instead of Maloney.
Just thought I'd mention that the idea of the Red Sox trading Jed Lowrie makes me feel really queasy. I know I'm supposed to believe he can't really play anywhere close to an average defensive SS or hit like he did last year, and that he'll probably just get hurt again. My brain really does know all that, and the thought still makes me feel sick.

mth123
11-10-2010, 09:25 PM
It makes much more sense for SD to deal directly with Boston. SD has said they want a CF who can lead off and middle infield help. Gonzalez for Ellsbury and Lowrie is a perfect match. To get more from Boston, SD can always dangle Heath Bell. I don't see the Reds being able to insinuate themselves into conversations between those two clubs, unfortunately.

I see far more potential with the Dodgers, maybe even the Mets.

I think you're probably right. I'm actually surprised it hasn't already happened.

REDREAD
11-11-2010, 11:55 AM
Not sure this would be accepted, but the Reds have a ton of depth and could afford to overpay for a building block. A team in need of talent might go for it.

Alonso, Heisey and Maloney for Andrew McCutcheon. 800+ OPS 2 years in a row, speed to burn, defense in the OF would be phenominal. Heck, I'd throw in Valaika and Smith. The Pirates could plug Heisey in CF, add Alonso at 1B, Maloney in the rotation and Smith in the pen. Valaika would compete for 2B. The Pirates would add an entire nucleus in this deal and the Reds would add an affordable stud. It seems like a lot to give-up, but both teams would be vastly inproved.

This is the best suggestion I have seen in the thread so far.
We need to target an OF on a team that has a talent deficit who would welcome 3 prospects. Swisher is a nice player, but the Yanks aren't going to want our prospects. A team like the Pirates or Royals is a better match.

Heck, I'd be willing to toss in a little more in that deal to get McCutcheon.
If it takes adding someone like Fisher, Cozart, or Fransciso to get the deal done.. do it.

REDREAD
11-11-2010, 11:59 AM
Let's disabuse a notion here.

Matt Maloney will be 27 before the season starts next year. He's had exactly 14 appearances in the majors. If Maloney had the type of arm/stuff to succeed at the top level, he already would have. And most GMs realize this.

I agree. Malony is probably worthless on the trade market.
I'm guessing he's going to be out of options next year too, so that kind of kills his value as emergency insurance in AAA.

REDREAD
11-11-2010, 12:08 PM
It came from here...

NY Times Blog: July 27, 2009 (http://bats.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/27/where-the-yankees-could-use-some-help/)

That's true. I can believe that. However, just because the Yanks had zero interest in Bronson doesn't mean that he would be hard to trade.
The Yanks might not have wanted to take on Bronson because they planned on signing CC in the offseason. Just like they may have not traded for Oswalt because maybe they plan on signing Cliff Lee this winter. The Yanks are a whole different situation than the rest of baseball.

I would not trade Arroyo for Willingham. Arroyo is too valuable for this team.
Plus, why would Washington want Arroyo? They'd tell the Reds to deal Arroyo for prospects themselves and then get back to them.

I wouldn't mind Willingham, assuming he is healthy. Just send some prospects to Wash instead of Arroyo.

bucksfan2
11-11-2010, 01:09 PM
I agree. Malony is probably worthless on the trade market.
I'm guessing he's going to be out of options next year too, so that kind of kills his value as emergency insurance in AAA.

Its always an issue of value. Does Maloney have more value to the Reds or more value on the trade market? IMO his value to the Reds, 6th starter type, is much higher than what his trade value is.

RedsManRick
11-11-2010, 03:50 PM
I'm pretty sure this isn't a new idea (I may have suggested it myself...) but Cordero for Carlos Beltran and the difference between their salaries seems like it would make sense for both teams. Beltran has said he'd consider waiving his no-trade.

The Mets shore up their very shallow pen with a guy who could be counted on to close and allow them to shift K-Rod in to a setup role where he won't trigger the guarantee on his 2012 option. The Reds get a better option for LF who could play either of the other positions as well -- and they have the depth to give him plenty of time off.

Either Masset steps in to the closing role or Chapman does.

15fan
11-11-2010, 04:25 PM
I'm pretty sure this isn't a new idea (I may have suggested it myself...) but Cordero for Carlos Beltran and the difference between their salaries seems like it would make sense for both teams. Beltran has said he'd consider waiving his no-trade.

The Mets shore up their very shallow pen with a guy who could be counted on to close and allow them to shift K-Rod in to a setup role where he won't trigger the guarantee on his 2012 option. The Reds get a better option for LF who could play either of the other positions as well -- and they have the depth to give him plenty of time off.

Either Masset steps in to the closing role or Chapman does.

http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/mlb/news/story?id=5792180

Rojo
11-11-2010, 06:01 PM
I'm pretty sure this isn't a new idea (I may have suggested it myself...) but Cordero for Carlos Beltran and the difference between their salaries seems like it would make sense for both teams. Beltran has said he'd consider waiving his no-trade.

The Mets shore up their very shallow pen with a guy who could be counted on to close and allow them to shift K-Rod in to a setup role where he won't trigger the guarantee on his 2012 option. The Reds get a better option for LF who could play either of the other positions as well -- and they have the depth to give him plenty of time off.

Either Masset steps in to the closing role or Chapman does.

Like it. And it's a very WJ-like move.

An aside: I know Beltran's basepath exploits are likely behind him but his career SB% is 89%. Wow.

Benihana
11-11-2010, 06:13 PM
I'm pretty sure this isn't a new idea (I may have suggested it myself...) but Cordero for Carlos Beltran and the difference between their salaries seems like it would make sense for both teams. Beltran has said he'd consider waiving his no-trade.

The Mets shore up their very shallow pen with a guy who could be counted on to close and allow them to shift K-Rod in to a setup role where he won't trigger the guarantee on his 2012 option. The Reds get a better option for LF who could play either of the other positions as well -- and they have the depth to give him plenty of time off.

Either Masset steps in to the closing role or Chapman does.

LOVE this idea, but my guess is we'd have to sweeten the deal. We know WJ has a long history with Alderson. I'd do Cordero and Heisey for Beltran.

My guess is the Mets' would subsidize Beltran's contract if we were willing to part with Leake or Bailey. Not sure I like that deal nearly as much, but might be what Sandy would ask for.

mdccclxix
11-11-2010, 09:44 PM
Another few injury prone players of interest - all FA after 2011

Grady Sizemore for Juan Francisco and Felix Perez - Juan finds a home in the AL and CLE gets two MLB ready players to add power and fill holes. Sizemore moves to LF.

Jose Reyes for Mesoraco and Cozart - Best. infield. ever.

Jose Bautista for Francisco, Perez and Valaika - These parts don't fit into the Reds plans, but having a 4 hitter in 2011 sure does.

marcshoe
11-11-2010, 10:55 PM
XM said tonight that word was Reyes is on the block. Maybe that was common knowledge, but I haven't been paying attention. Seems as if he'd be as good a fit with the Reds as with anyone.

edabbs44
11-11-2010, 11:05 PM
No thanks on Beltran or Reyes.

Slyder
11-11-2010, 11:08 PM
There's rumblings that the Mariners may be willing to move Felix Hernandez in exchange for a team's top 4-5 prospects. I know the Reds rotation looks good, but how much better would it look with Hernandez as the ace? Would you be willing to give the M's the top 4-5 prospects for Hernandez?

Bumping a rather old post just saw it I know.

Top 4-5 Prospects?

Alonso
Wood/Leake
Frazier
Francisco?

I would have to take a really long look at that. Hernandez is already at a level we hope to get out of our young starters and would absolutely be an upgrade at the top of the rotation.

edabbs44
11-11-2010, 11:15 PM
Bumping a rather old post just saw it I know.

Top 4-5 Prospects?

Alonso
Wood/Leake
Frazier
Francisco?

I would have to take a really long look at that. Hernandez is already at a level we hope to get out of our young starters and would absolutely be an upgrade at the top of the rotation.

Mesoraco

Slyder
11-11-2010, 11:23 PM
Mesoraco

Still I would take it. Just because of the level of production Hernandez has already acheived.

Scrap Irony
11-11-2010, 11:32 PM
No thanks on Beltran or Reyes.

I'd take them both right now, assuming the cost were low enough. I'd go Leake, Cozart, Heisey, Sappelt, and Cordero for the duo and not think twice, as I'd consider Reyes my SS and leadoff hitter and Beltran my cleanup guy. Add in solid defense (solid-ish, as Reyes graded out below average as a SS, with poor range, and I'm assuming Beltran bounces into an outstanding LF)from both of them and the six starters in my rotation (not to mention Maloney and/or LeCure I still have to dangle), and it'd be awfully hard not to get excited about the Reds next season.

marcshoe
11-12-2010, 12:07 AM
I wouldn't be surprised if the Reds went after either or both, and would say the better odds were on Reyes. With the stated needs being a leadoff or cleanup hitter, there aren't many available shortstops who fall into either category. Reyes could, of course, be slipped into the leadoff role easily. Walt has to know this is one of the few opportunities he'll have to make an impact at short.

Spitball
11-12-2010, 12:17 AM
Bumping a rather old post just saw it I know.

Top 4-5 Prospects?

Alonso
Wood/Leake
Frazier
Francisco?

I would have to take a really long look at that. Hernandez is already at a level we hope to get out of our young starters and would absolutely be an upgrade at the top of the rotation.

I think if the Reds are hoping for Felix Hernandez, they are going to have to start with a package of Jay Bruce. Unless Smoak is flipped this winter for a Prince Fielder or other established power hitter, I would doubt they would have any interested in Alonso. Smoak was already the centerpiece in their trade for one ace and their first baseman of the future.

Felix Hernandez is a very, very special talent, and the Mariners know it. Any package to pry him away will hurt...in a Bruce type way.

Slyder
11-12-2010, 12:26 AM
I think if the Reds are hoping for Felix Hernandez, they are going to have to start with a package of Jay Bruce. Unless Smoak is flipped this winter for a Prince Fielder or other established power hitter, I would doubt they would have any interested in Alonso. Smoak was already the centerpiece in their trade for one ace and their first baseman of the future.

Felix Hernandez is a very, very special talent, and the Mariners know it. Any package to pry him away will hurt...in a Bruce type way.

They could still DH with Alonso or split time at 1b with Smoak and Alonso to keep them fresh. I still would do a deal with Bruce if it meant we got Hernandez.

redsfandan
11-12-2010, 09:55 AM
Some weird stuff in this thread.

There's noway I'd deal our top 4-5 prospects OR Bruce for Felix. Either would be bad moves and pretty short-sighted moves imo.

I wouldn't be a fan of including Mes in a deal for Reyes either.

lollipopcurve
11-12-2010, 10:17 AM
Here's a player I really like who I see as high-upside for the leadoff spot -- coming off a pretty serious knee injury, but still young. He's got versatility, so if he returns to Rookie of the Year form, you get nice roster flexibility AND talent. He'd be in left in 2011, but could slide to 2B after that, if the team wants to move Phillips.

Chris Coghlan. Florida is bouncing him around like a pinball, saying now he'll play 3B. With Matt Dominguez getting pretty close to the majors, I think they'd sacrifice Coghlan if the offer was good.

marcshoe
11-12-2010, 11:46 AM
About Coghlan, It wouldn't hurt to ask, but with their relationship with Uggla going south fast, they may want to hold on to him, particularly since he's young and cheap.

To dan: I'd prefer not to trade Mes period. I think the team has enough chips that they won't need to, but they'd need to be plain about that up front.

lollipopcurve
11-12-2010, 11:53 AM
About Coghlan, It wouldn't hurt to ask, but with their relationship with Uggla going south fast, they may want to hold on to him, particularly since he's young and cheap.


I think they'll sign Uggla.

www.mlbtraderumors.com/2010/11/uggla-believes-a-deal-can-be-reached.html

If Florida likes Dominguez, it looks like Coghlan is going to get squeezed. The OF corners are spoken for with Morrison and Stanton. The Reds will need to make an enticing offer, but prospects only may do it, given Coghlan's injury and very mediocre 2010.

jojo
11-12-2010, 12:18 PM
There's rumblings that the Mariners may be willing to move Felix Hernandez in exchange for a team's top 4-5 prospects. I know the Reds rotation looks good, but how much better would it look with Hernandez as the ace? Would you be willing to give the M's the top 4-5 prospects for Hernandez?

Rumblings from what sources? The Ms aren't very likely to trade Felix.

marcshoe
11-12-2010, 12:39 PM
I think they'll sign Uggla.

www.mlbtraderumors.com/2010/11/uggla-believes-a-deal-can-be-reached.html

If Florida likes Dominguez, it looks like Coghlan is going to get squeezed. The OF corners are spoken for with Morrison and Stanton. The Reds will need to make an enticing offer, but prospects only may do it, given Coghlan's injury and very mediocre 2010.

You may be right; I may be funneling this 'I want to stay here' stuff through Lebron. The money's not that far apart; they just don't seem to be negotiating in good faith.

I'd love to have Coghlin at the right price. I just don't see the Marlins trading young, cheap players right now. You never know, though.

lollipopcurve
11-12-2010, 12:47 PM
I'd love to have Coghlin at the right price. I just don't see the Marlins trading young, cheap players right now. You never know, though.

You've got to make a fair offer, and as long as you're offering them legitimate talent, it's got a chance..

They've got Bonifacio to play 3rd, a guy they have always seemed to like (for some reason), so I don't think they're necessarily relying on Coghlan to hold down a starting spot at this point.

mdccclxix
11-12-2010, 12:56 PM
Some weird stuff in this thread.

There's noway I'd deal our top 4-5 prospects OR Bruce for Felix. Either would be bad moves and pretty short-sighted moves imo.

I wouldn't be a fan of including Mes in a deal for Reyes either.

Felix is signed long term and is a top 5 pitcher. The point is, he'd require a lot.

As for Reyes for Mez, I don't like it either, but it's hard to find a fit for the Mets on this one. They need an outfielder with pop, and we don't have one for them. They need a 2nd baseman, but why would they swap Reyes for Phillips, or any lesser one we have? It was tough coming up with something for them that made sense.

marcshoe
11-12-2010, 01:26 PM
The Mets also need pitching, both in the rotation and in the bullpen. I'd start with Leake and CoCo (don't know if they want him specifically, since they really need middle relief), and see where it goes from there. Most likely, you'd need to include a prospect.

camisadelgolf
11-12-2010, 02:00 PM
You've got to make a fair offer, and as long as you're offering them legitimate talent, it's got a chance..

They've got Bonifacio to play 3rd, a guy they have always seemed to like (for some reason), so I don't think they're necessarily relying on Coghlan to hold down a starting spot at this point.
I've heard that they soured Bonifacio in the past year.

Griffey012
11-12-2010, 05:23 PM
Here is one I hadn't put any thought into...

According to MLBTradeRumors.com the Rays are open to trading B.J. Upton and wouldn't have to be overwhelmed to make a deal.

Upton has his issues with an apparent lack of effort sometimes, I think being around someone like Phillips could do him a lot of good, a change of scenery also might have an effect.

The guy has never posted a WAR below 2.2, and had a WAR of 3.4 last season. He would definitely be an upgrade in LF and could potentially be a huge upgrade for a fairly cheap price. He will be hitting his 2nd ARB year and will probably come in somewhere around 5 million, so he wouldnt be breaking the bank money wise or prospect wise from the sounds of it.

redsfandan
11-12-2010, 05:27 PM
Felix is signed long term and is a top 5 pitcher. The point is, he'd require a lot.

He might IF he's really available. But our top 4-5 prospects would include Chapman and Mesoraco. Chapman could also be a TOR starter and Mes could be our best catcher in years. If the Reds dealt Bruce instead they'd be giving up a guy that's already one of the best rightfielders in the game. So, it's a little surprising that people are so willing to deal these guys especially since starting pitching isn't a problem. I can understand that people would like to have a true Ace in the rotation. So would I. But not at those prices. I think the Reds would regret dealing all of the best 4-5 prospects for only one player even if it's Felix. Deal Bruce and you'd create a hole in the lineup by trading for a player that doesn't fill a hole in the rotation. And anyone you'd get to replace Bruce would likely be a downgrade.

Chapman, Mes, and Bruce are good cheap players. Those are the kind of players that the Reds need if they want to compete. Felix is one of the best but he's also about to be paid like he's one of the best too. From 2012-2014 his average salary will be close to $20M/yr. The Reds aren't the yankees. Just because they might have some payroll room doesn't mean that they can pay a guy whatever it takes to have him. And I really doubt the Reds will have a pitcher make that much anytime soon.

Griffey012
11-12-2010, 05:59 PM
He might IF he's really available. But our top 4-5 prospects would include Chapman and Mesoraco. Chapman could also be a TOR starter and Mes could be our best catcher in years. If the Reds dealt Bruce instead they'd be giving up a guy that's already one of the best rightfielders in the game. So, it's a little surprising that people are so willing to deal these guys especially since starting pitching isn't a problem. I can understand that people would like to have a true Ace in the rotation. So would I. But not at those prices. I think the Reds would regret dealing all of the best 4-5 prospects for only one player even if it's Felix. Deal Bruce and you'd create a hole in the lineup by trading for a player that doesn't fill a hole in the rotation. And anyone you'd get to replace Bruce would likely be a downgrade.

Chapman, Mes, and Bruce are good cheap players. Those are the kind of players that the Reds need if they want to compete. Felix is one of the best but he's also about to be paid like he's one of the best too. From 2012-2014 his average salary will be close to $20M/yr. The Reds aren't the yankees. Just because they might have some payroll room doesn't mean that they can pay a guy whatever it takes to have him. And I really doubt the Reds will have a pitcher make that much anytime soon.

I definitely would not deal Bruce for anyone, unless maybe the Braves wanted to send us Heyward, Hanson, and another good young player, and I would still have to think about it. Point is Bruce should not and will not be going anywhere and he will likely be signed long term.

As far as the other deals mentioned on this thread, most involved prospects, but I don't recall seeing Chapman and Mes in a deal, but I am probably wrong. I would be willing to part with a group of 4-5 prospects, but the most I could do at the top is Mes/Alonso, Bailey/Wood, and a group of 2 or 3 lower level prospects . Chapman would be a nearly untouchable guy.

We have to be careful to not overvalue our own prospects and cannot be afraid to deal them, but as with any deal we must be getting a good and useful return.

buckeyenut
11-13-2010, 10:34 AM
On the Felix idea, I'm OK dealing Mes as part of a deal of our top 5 prospects. Bruce is not a prospect and given Chapman was in the majors for most of the year including the playoffs, I would argue he is not a prospect either. So those guys should be off the table.

As far as Upton goes, I can see why TB may be looking to trade him cheap. His numbers the last two years probably have them considering nontendering him. That said, he can take a walk, has speed and pop and had put it up in the past. I think he would be a PERFECT target for LF, with Gomes and Heisey on the bench. He is the type of guy that the leadership on this team could work with and really show a success with.

mth123
11-13-2010, 03:30 PM
How about a deal of contracts to fit needs? Francisco Cordero, Johnny Gomes and Danny Dorn to Atlanta for Nate McClouth, Kenshin Kawakami, Jordan Schafer and Brandon Hicks.

The money would be about even. With Wagner retiring, Cordero provides a vet fallback while Venters and Kimbrel break in. Atlanta is looking for RH power and get it in the person of Gomes. Dorn is a guy who could platoon with Gomes if need be or could play a little 1B or PH possibly or end-up as minor league filler. McClouth would be the starter in LF and his lefty bat would balance the line-up a little and GABP would help with the rebound. Schafer would pair with Heisey to give the Reds two reserve OF who could play any spot with one hitting RH and the other LH (and may switch spots with McClouth if he comes along and McClouth struggles). Kawakami could end-up as salary relief if he returns to Japan or as insurance for the rotation if the kids fail or a deal calling for one turns-up. Hicks is an extra body who can play SS to stash at AAA which is always handy and even up the deal a bit if Kawakami goes back to Japan. They could structure the deal where the Reds pay Atlanta $2 to $3 Million if Kawakami returns to Japan so both teams get about the same salary relief.

mth123
11-14-2010, 12:46 PM
Not Reds related, but yesterday's deal of Maybin might set-up a deal involving Dan Uggla and Jacoby Ellsbury. If the Marlins could get Lowrie added it would make a ton of sense. The Sox could afford Uggla and add his bat either at 1B or 3B with Youkilis in the other spot. Lowrie would play 2B and Ellsbury CF in Fla. Seems like a deal that would work for both teams.

Will M
11-14-2010, 02:21 PM
The Marlins now plan to trade Dan Uggla according to MLBTR: http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2010/11/marlins-intend-to-trade-uggla.html

Looking at his UZR numbers he is below average defensively at 2B. Some teams that are interested in him want to play him at 3B.

Now...
1) He has 154 home runs in 5 seasons. His strong RH bat would look awfully good in the 4 hole between Mr MVP & Jay Bruce.
2) can he play LF? thats where he would fit in on the Reds. I suspect he could as LF generally is the easiest spot on the field to play.
3) plus he could still play some 2B & can also apparently play 3B. The Reds could plug him in at 3B when Rolen needs a day off & then get a backup outfielder's bat in the lineup (in LF) as opposed to getting a weaker backup infielder's bat in the lineup.
4) He was born in Louisville & grew up in Tennessee.
Maybe he would like the Cincinnati area.

Mario-Rijo
11-14-2010, 02:46 PM
I don't know there is a good fit power wise out there for us. I kinda like the Beltran idea I have suggested something along those lines myself. Also have considered strongly the Upton idea both he and Beltran (if healthy) can run and field in addition to give us enough pop to improve. I like Beltran a little more if healthy and it won't take an extension for him to waive his no trade clause and I don't think it will as I thought I read somewhere he was willing to waive his clause. Upton is a guy who I think would benefit at the plate and overall from having Dusty Baker here, one of Dusty's strengths dealing with these young hitters.

Short of those not sure there is a good fit power wise for us in LF so we also need a leadoff type and Brett Gardner is a somewhat realistic target. He fits the mold of what Dusty would want and he isn't making much (not sure if he is arb. eligible.) Not sure what kind of deal it would have to be but I think we could match up with NY. Perhaps a Burton & Sappelt deal? It's also possible (and I hate myself for saying this) they would have some interest in Hanigan. I'd try to avoid that but he wouldn't be a deal breaker perse'.

I'd also pursue Jason Bartlett IMO he's being undervalued a great deal. Drew and Hanley are 2 guys I'd consider as well especially if we could get Gardner.

Gardner LF
Bartlett SS
Votto 1B
Bruce RF
Rolen 3B
BP 2B
Stubbs CF
Hanny/Mes C

I doubt you could find a better defensive team in all of baseball and maybe in recent years.

Or....

BP 2B
Bartlett SS
Votto 1B
Beltran LF
Rolen 3B
Bruce RF
Stubbs CF
Hanny/Mes C

mth123
11-14-2010, 03:29 PM
I don't know there is a good fit power wise out there for us. I kinda like the Beltran idea I have suggested something along those lines myself. Also have considered strongly the Upton idea both he and Beltran (if healthy) can run and field in addition to give us enough pop to improve. I like Beltran a little more if healthy and it won't take an extension for him to waive his no trade clause and I don't think it will as I thought I read somewhere he was willing to waive his clause. Upton is a guy who I think would benefit at the plate and overall from having Dusty Baker here, one of Dusty's strengths dealing with these young hitters.

Short of those not sure there is a good fit power wise for us in LF so we also need a leadoff type and Brett Gardner is a somewhat realistic target. He fits the mold of what Dusty would want and he isn't making much (not sure if he is arb. eligible.) Not sure what kind of deal it would have to be but I think we could match up with NY. Perhaps a Burton & Sappelt deal? It's also possible (and I hate myself for saying this) they would have some interest in Hanigan. I'd try to avoid that but he wouldn't be a deal breaker perse'.

I'd also pursue Jason Bartlett IMO he's being undervalued a great deal. Drew and Hanley are 2 guys I'd consider as well especially if we could get Gardner.

Gardner LF
Bartlett SS
Votto 1B
Bruce RF
Rolen 3B
BP 2B
Stubbs CF
Hanny/Mes C

I doubt you could find a better defensive team in all of baseball and maybe in recent years.

Or....

BP 2B
Bartlett SS
Votto 1B
Beltran LF
Rolen 3B
Bruce RF
Stubbs CF
Hanny/Mes C

I'd be ok with the idea of Bartlett or Gardner, and I imagine if the Reds would offer Alonso for Bartlett, that could get done. Bartlett, however, had a career year in 2009 and has basically been a sub-.700 OPS guy most of his career. He'd probably get a bit of a bump with a move to the NL and GABP, but he doesn't really seem like that much of an upgrade from Janish or Cozart who both profile as slick defenders with questionable offense. Add that he's basically a one year rental who would be going to arb with a base of $4 Million, and he just seems like a guy for whom the Reds shouldn't give-up much. If they could get him for say Burton or Fisher and adding his salary wouldn't preclude the team from getting something better or making a move at the deadline, I'd be for it, but he'd have to come cheap and the dollars would have to work.

In Gardner's case, I can't see anything the Reds would or should realistically deal that would interest the Yankees. The Yankees can afford to pay for guys like Downs or Wood and probably wouldn't have a lot of interest in cheap relievers and prospects probably wouldn't appeal to them. I'm sure the Reds could interest them in somebody like Masset, but the Reds shouldn't do that. I'm guessing that the Yankees either keep Gardner and deal off Swisher or Granderson or deal Gardner in a package for a bigger name than the Reds could afford to offer.

RedsManRick
11-14-2010, 05:12 PM
It doesn't make sense from a payroll or team philosophy perspective, but Dan Uggla's bat would look pretty nice in LF and I bet he could be decent out there. Looks like they will trade him at this point and the Blue Jays are the current favorites:

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2010/11/jays-the-favorite-for-uggla-rox-priced-out.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Benihana
11-15-2010, 06:19 PM
From MLBTR:


ESPN's Buster Olney tweets that some clubs "perceive the Marlins are absolutely intent on moving Uggla ASAP, and they are not asking for a high rate of return -- a couple of decent guys, no A-plus prospects necessary."


Uggla isn't moving to LF. If he goes anywhere, it will be to 3B. But how about another move here- a move that's been talked about for years but never actually executed: How about BP to SS? I know it will never happen, but with no clear SS heir and an All-Star 2B available on the cheap, now might be the best possible time to try.

Worst case scenario, it doesn't work. Uggla walks after the season, BP moves back to 2B, and the Reds get a couple of draft picks for Uggla. Plus, at that time we'd probably have more clarity on whether Zack Cozart is the solution.

lollipopcurve
11-15-2010, 07:22 PM
I think Uggla could be the power RH bat the Reds have been unable to find for a while now. He's a flyball hitter who would be a monster in GAB and the NL Central. Hard-nosed guy who the Cincy fans would love -- and since his roots are KY/Tenn, I think there's a good chance he'd sign to stay. Votto-Uggla-Bruce? Yeah, that works.

mdccclxix
11-15-2010, 07:26 PM
From MLBTR:


Uggla isn't moving to LF. If he goes anywhere, it will be to 3B. But how about another move here- a move that's been talked about for years but never actually executed: How about BP to SS? I know it will never happen, but with no clear SS heir and an All-Star 2B available on the cheap, now might be the best possible time to try.

Worst case scenario, it doesn't work. Uggla walks after the season, BP moves back to 2B, and the Reds get a couple of draft picks for Uggla. Plus, at that time we'd probably have more clarity on whether Zack Cozart is the solution.

Brandon to LF! :beerme:

lollipopcurve
11-15-2010, 07:31 PM
Word now is that the Marlins want a pitcher and a catcher. Right up the Reds' alley.

mdccclxix
11-15-2010, 07:42 PM
From MLBTR:


Uggla isn't moving to LF. If he goes anywhere, it will be to 3B. But how about another move here- a move that's been talked about for years but never actually executed: How about BP to SS? I know it will never happen, but with no clear SS heir and an All-Star 2B available on the cheap, now might be the best possible time to try.

Worst case scenario, it doesn't work. Uggla walks after the season, BP moves back to 2B, and the Reds get a couple of draft picks for Uggla. Plus, at that time we'd probably have more clarity on whether Zack Cozart is the solution.

That's how I'd work my fantasy line up, for sure.

Scratching my head trying to fit Uggla on this team and I can't see how. Damn. There's even a "buy low" flavor to the air right now.

blumj
11-15-2010, 08:32 PM
I think that I wouldn't trade for Uggla unless I either had an opening and was willing to play him at 2nd base, knew he was okay with changing positions in his walk year(and it seems like a big reach to me that he would be), or was willing to meet his terms for a contract extension before he learns his new position.

redsfandan
11-16-2010, 07:48 AM
With the Reds emphasis on defense I'd be surprised if they made a play for Uggla.

aubashbrother
11-16-2010, 01:26 PM
Talk is Arizona might look at moving Upton. Id throw Leake in a deal to get Upton in LF

lollipopcurve
11-16-2010, 02:24 PM
On Uggla:


1) He has 154 home runs in 5 seasons. His strong RH bat would look awfully good in the 4 hole between Mr MVP & Jay Bruce.
2) can he play LF? thats where he would fit in on the Reds. I suspect he could as LF generally is the easiest spot on the field to play.
3) plus he could still play some 2B & can also apparently play 3B. The Reds could plug him in at 3B when Rolen needs a day off & then get a backup outfielder's bat in the lineup (in LF) as opposed to getting a weaker backup infielder's bat in the lineup.
4) He was born in Louisville & grew up in Tennessee.
Maybe he would like the Cincinnati area.

And he's got the same agent as Arroyo....

Benihana
11-16-2010, 02:45 PM
Talk is Arizona might look at moving Upton. Id throw Leake in a deal to get Upton in LF

I think I'd give Arizona their choice of Volquez, Bailey, Leake or Wood for Upton.

I'd also throw in Heisey or any other OF in the entire minor leagues, with the exception of Y-Rod.

nemesis
11-16-2010, 05:34 PM
I don't think the problem with Uggla is finding a spot to play him for the Reds it's the cost of him. He'd become so expensive in his next deal he would out value himself quickly. Upton would be right target. Still just 23, he has tons of undervalued money in that contract. His best years are still ahead of him. Arizona needs retooled in alot of areas but already has a few promising rotation arms in Hudson, Kennedy and Enright. They need bullpen arms and now.

I'd open the door with Mike Leake. First off he is a Arizona State product who has a home not to far away who probably would be thrilled to go back to pitch in front of family and friends 15-17 times a year. Arizona needs a First-baseman and we happen to have a Top 100 prospect lying around. Gomes would be another local Arizona product who could step in and give them offensive production right away at a value since with Upton in the line up everyday there will be very limited gameday opportunities for him.

So to open the door Arizona gets, Leake (controllable for 5 more years), Alonso (controllable for 6) and Gomes who is a affordable LF stopgap for this upcoming season.

Now you give them Sappelt or Heisey to groom for next year, Burton, Smith, Valiquette and Horst for their bullpen and Cordero to balance out the salaries for Upton and include Negron as a SS incase Drew leaves.


Reds get Upton for 5 years and $2 million savings against Cordero

Arizona gets - Leake, Alonso, Gomes, (Sappelt or Heisey), Burton (ready now reliver), Valiquette (high upside arm), Horst (Swingman/ Loogy), Smith (groundball machine/Possible future closer), Cordero (Current closer and off the books in a year) and Negron

Seems like alot, alot to pay but what would you want for Bruce or Votto? That's what Arizona would want back.

The Reds OF would be locked for at least 4 more years together. Gives Duran, Yorman, Waldrop, LaMarre all time to develop without a rushing time table. Keeps Francisco who we might get a big dose of this year at 3B and going forward. Keeps Frazier who'll probably be a super sub come 2012 or sooner. Keeps all the Lower minor arms who are going to be very important to the franchise in 3 years. I am will to go 11 for 1 as long as Cordero is apart of it for salary reasons and other falling off the cliff reasons. Arizona would be able to get 7 useful pieces that really have equal or better options behind them here going forward.

*BaseClogger*
11-16-2010, 05:49 PM
If we send the Diamondbacks Volquez and don't re-sign Arroyo long-term then I don't see the need to include Cordero to even out the contracts. The money won't really be that different in 2011...

mdccclxix
11-16-2010, 06:46 PM
So long Uggla, you were almost a Red. A Redszone Red, perhaps:

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2010/11/braves-to-acquire-dan-uggla.html

wally post
11-16-2010, 06:54 PM
OMG - that is awful! I thought he would bring a lot more than that!

mdccclxix
11-16-2010, 07:01 PM
OMG - that is awful! I thought he would bring a lot more than that!

No kidding. Just shows that perception is definitely not reality. They even traded within their division. It'd be like Phillips going to the Cubs for DeRosa (when they had him) and a throw in reliever.

This market is ripe for vets, I think Walt could excel this winter.

Check this out:


The Cardinals, Blue Jays, Nationals, and Tigers were other reported suitors for Uggla.

I'm surprised they didn't push harder, they need infield help badly.

RedsManRick
11-16-2010, 07:34 PM
No kidding. Just shows that perception is definitely not reality. They even traded within their division. It'd be like Phillips going to the Cubs for DeRosa (when they had him) and a throw in reliever.

This market is ripe for vets, I think Walt could excel this winter.

Check this out:



I'm surprised they didn't push harder, they need infield help badly.

I'm not sure the Cards have much major league caliber talent available and the Marlins wanted guys they could plug in to the active roster.

nemesis
11-16-2010, 08:24 PM
Seems like the value is down for expensive vets. You would have thought the Red Sox and Tigers could have easily topped that deal.

mth123
11-16-2010, 09:14 PM
How about a deal of contracts to fit needs? Francisco Cordero, Johnny Gomes and Danny Dorn to Atlanta for Nate McClouth, Kenshin Kawakami, Jordan Schafer and Brandon Hicks.

The money would be about even. With Wagner retiring, Cordero provides a vet fallback while Venters and Kimbrel break in. Atlanta is looking for RH power and get it in the person of Gomes. Dorn is a guy who could platoon with Gomes if need be or could play a little 1B or PH possibly or end-up as minor league filler. McClouth would be the starter in LF and his lefty bat would balance the line-up a little and GABP would help with the rebound. Schafer would pair with Heisey to give the Reds two reserve OF who could play any spot with one hitting RH and the other LH (and may switch spots with McClouth if he comes along and McClouth struggles). Kawakami could end-up as salary relief if he returns to Japan or as insurance for the rotation if the kids fail or a deal calling for one turns-up. Hicks is an extra body who can play SS to stash at AAA which is always handy and even up the deal a bit if Kawakami goes back to Japan. They could structure the deal where the Reds pay Atlanta $2 to $3 Million if Kawakami returns to Japan so both teams get about the same salary relief.

After today's events a form of this deal involving simply Cordero and McClouth and a little money makes more sense. The Braves will play Prado in LF with Uggla's acquisition and the Reds are rumored to be shopping Cordero and willing to pitch in some bucks. The Braves lose Wagner to retirement, Saito and Farnsworth to free agency and may be interested in a mentor for Venters and Kimbrel. The Reds need a LH hitting OF who can split time with Gomes and maybe spell Stubbs once in a while. Nate McClouth makes $6.5 Million in 2011 with a $1.25 Million option buy-out. If the Reds ship Cordero and say $2.5 Million to the Braves, the Braves fill the mentor role for about $2.25 Million while the Reds add an OF who could make a big comeback at GABP, open the closer role for Chapman/Masset and save $2.25 Million on a nearly maxed out budget (enough to bring back Arthur Rhodes as the bullpen vet).

Cedric
11-16-2010, 09:18 PM
After today's events a form of this deal involving simply Cordero and McClouth and a little money makes more sense. The Braves will play Prado in LF with Uggla's acquisition and the Reds are rumored to be shopping Cordero and willing to pitch in some bucks. The Braves lose Wagner to retirement, Saito and Farnsworth to free agency and may be interested in a mentor for Venters and Kimbrel. The Reds need a LH hitting OF who can split time with Gomes and maybe spell Stubbs once in a while. Nate McClouth makes $6.5 Million in 2011 with a $1.25 Million option buy-out. If the Reds ship Cordero and say $2.5 Million to the Braves, the Braves fill the mentor role for about $2.25 Million while the Reds add an OF who could make a big comeback at GABP, open the closer role for Chapman/Masset and save $2.25 Million on a nearly maxed out budget (enough to bring back Arthur Rhodes as the bullpen vet).

I expect Prado to play 1b if Freeman isn't ready.

mth123
11-16-2010, 09:23 PM
I expect Prado to play 1b if Freeman isn't ready.

Heard the GM on XM tonight and he says Prado is playing LF in Winter Ball and the plan is for him in LF, Uggla at 2B, Chipper back at 3B and Freeman with the job at 1B. He made it sound like Freeman already had the job. He also said that Wagner was valuable as a mentor to his young relief corp, but didn't sound hopeful he'd be back.

Spitball
11-16-2010, 09:31 PM
I am sure this has been mentioned, but I am not seeing it. Uggla has been traded to the Braves for (I believe) Omar Infante and reliever Mike Dunn. Not a great take for the Marlins.

blumj
11-16-2010, 09:34 PM
Yeah, that.

Spitball
11-16-2010, 10:26 PM
So long Uggla, you were almost a Red. A Redszone Red, perhaps:

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2010/1...dan-uggla.html


The Braves will play Prado in LF with Uggla's acquisition...

Oops. I guess I missed these mentions.

camisadelgolf
11-17-2010, 11:30 AM
Here's an idea . . .

Red Sox get:
Homer Bailey
Todd Frazier
Henry Rodriguez
Jordan Smith

Reds get:
Jacoby Ellsbury
Marco Scutaro
Brock Huntzinger

Why the Red Sox would do it: Jacoby Ellsbury is disgruntled and may want out of town. The Sox want to play Lowrie at SS, making Marco Scutaro expendable in a walk year. Homer Bailey would fill an immediate need in the rotation. Todd Frazier could be insurance for if Beltre doesn't return. Even if Beltre sticks around, Frazier could fill a need as a corner outfielder. Henry Rodriguez is a decent prospect that could give good bench depth, which would be especially helpful when it's later in Pedroia's career. Jordan Smith would help solidify the bullpen.

Why the Reds would do it: Marco Scutaro fills a need at shortstop, and Jacoby Ellsbury fills a need in the outfield. They would also be very serviceable at the top of the order. The Reds have starting pitching to spare, and it's doubtful that he'd be much of an upgrade over Volquez, Cueto, Chapman, Wood, and maybe even Leake or Arroyo. The Reds could also lose Smith without taking much of a hit. Henry Rodriguez is almost a redundant prospect with the presence of Billy Hamilton and others. Todd Frazier might be the biggest loss down the line, but if you have Ellsbury, it should be worth it.

Thoughts? I like this potential lineup:
LF Ellsbury
SS Scutaro
1B Votto
3B Rolen
RF Bruce
2B Phillips
CF Stubbs
C Hanigan

OnBaseMachine
11-17-2010, 01:09 PM
I don't want Marco Scutaro. I think Janish is probably a better option than Scutaro at this point, especially defensively.

Benihana
11-17-2010, 01:12 PM
Here's an idea . . .

Red Sox get:
Homer Bailey
Todd Frazier
Henry Rodriguez
Jordan Smith

Reds get:
Jacoby Ellsbury
Marco Scutaro
Brock Huntzinger

Why the Red Sox would do it: Jacoby Ellsbury is disgruntled and may want out of town. The Sox want to play Lowrie at SS, making Marco Scutaro expendable in a walk year. Homer Bailey would fill an immediate need in the rotation. Todd Frazier could be insurance for if Beltre doesn't return. Even if Beltre sticks around, Frazier could fill a need as a corner outfielder. Henry Rodriguez is a decent prospect that could give good bench depth, which would be especially helpful when it's later in Pedroia's career. Jordan Smith would help solidify the bullpen.

Why the Reds would do it: Marco Scutaro fills a need at shortstop, and Jacoby Ellsbury fills a need in the outfield. They would also be very serviceable at the top of the order. The Reds have starting pitching to spare, and it's doubtful that he'd be much of an upgrade over Volquez, Cueto, Chapman, Wood, and maybe even Leake or Arroyo. The Reds could also lose Smith without taking much of a hit. Henry Rodriguez is almost a redundant prospect with the presence of Billy Hamilton and others. Todd Frazier might be the biggest loss down the line, but if you have Ellsbury, it should be worth it.

Thoughts? I like this potential lineup:
LF Ellsbury
SS Scutaro
1B Votto
3B Rolen
RF Bruce
2B Phillips
CF Stubbs
C Hanigan

I would do it, although I'm not sure if Scutaro and his contract fit into the Reds plans. Is the difference in his production vs. Janish/Cozart worth the extra money? In this case, I'm not sure.

I'm also not sure if the Red Sox would trade two of their starters for essentially a bunch of potential guys. Doesn't strike me as a Red Sox (or Yankees) type of deal. I also think Bill Bray makes sense as a trade candidate, given the hopeful emergence of Jose Arredondo.

mth123
11-17-2010, 09:10 PM
Here's an idea . . .

Red Sox get:
Homer Bailey
Todd Frazier
Henry Rodriguez
Jordan Smith

Reds get:
Jacoby Ellsbury
Marco Scutaro
Brock Huntzinger

Why the Red Sox would do it: Jacoby Ellsbury is disgruntled and may want out of town. The Sox want to play Lowrie at SS, making Marco Scutaro expendable in a walk year. Homer Bailey would fill an immediate need in the rotation. Todd Frazier could be insurance for if Beltre doesn't return. Even if Beltre sticks around, Frazier could fill a need as a corner outfielder. Henry Rodriguez is a decent prospect that could give good bench depth, which would be especially helpful when it's later in Pedroia's career. Jordan Smith would help solidify the bullpen.

Why the Reds would do it: Marco Scutaro fills a need at shortstop, and Jacoby Ellsbury fills a need in the outfield. They would also be very serviceable at the top of the order. The Reds have starting pitching to spare, and it's doubtful that he'd be much of an upgrade over Volquez, Cueto, Chapman, Wood, and maybe even Leake or Arroyo. The Reds could also lose Smith without taking much of a hit. Henry Rodriguez is almost a redundant prospect with the presence of Billy Hamilton and others. Todd Frazier might be the biggest loss down the line, but if you have Ellsbury, it should be worth it.

Thoughts? I like this potential lineup:
LF Ellsbury
SS Scutaro
1B Votto
3B Rolen
RF Bruce
2B Phillips
CF Stubbs
C Hanigan

Put Leake in for Bailey and I'd be ok with it. Put Volquez in, and I'd love it. I wouldn't deal Bailey for those guys. Ellsbury is not my favorite type of player, but he could help the Reds. I still wouldn't deal Bailey for him. Scutaro would be useful, but his salary makes him add little in terms of value coming the Reds way. Need more info on Huntziger.

blumj
11-17-2010, 10:08 PM
How the heck did you come up with Brock Huntzinger? I don't even know anything about him, except that soxprospects.com doesn't even have him ranked in their top 60 but they project him for the Portland(AA) rotation next year.

http://www.soxprospects.com/players/huntzinger-brock.htm

camisadelgolf
11-18-2010, 12:13 AM
How the heck did you come up with Brock Huntzinger? I don't even know anything about him, except that soxprospects.com doesn't even have him ranked in their top 60 but they project him for the Portland(AA) rotation next year.

http://www.soxprospects.com/players/huntzinger-brock.htm
He's basically a younger version of Jordan Smith in my eyes. He's a pitch-to-contact guy whose value is strongly tied to the defense behind him. He wouldn't yet take up a spot on the 40-man roster and could really increase his value in 2011. Even if he isn't slated for the bullpen, the Reds badly need a good starter in A+, and if he shows he's ready for AA, the depth would be helpful there, too.

Cedric
11-18-2010, 12:14 AM
How the heck did you come up with Brock Huntzinger? I don't even know anything about him, except that soxprospects.com doesn't even have him ranked in their top 60 but they project him for the Portland(AA) rotation next year.

http://www.soxprospects.com/players/huntzinger-brock.htm

I wonder if Brock realizes he has been mock traded? Someone that far down the totem pole would probably be thrilled.

And no offense to anyone, I surely hope Jordan Smith never pitches for the Reds again.

camisadelgolf
11-18-2010, 12:24 AM
I wonder if Brock realizes he has been mock traded? Someone that far down the totem pole would probably be thrilled.

And no offense to anyone, I surely hope Jordan Smith never pitches for the Reds again.
I knew it would come off as kind of odd when I suggested it, but I definitely didn't expect to be called out on it. :lol:

One thing I just noticed is that he's from Indiana, so maybe he'd like the chance to play closer to home anyway.

schroomytunes
11-18-2010, 01:44 AM
I like the idea of trading with Boston, just not sure if we get the matchup we would like, but I like this scenerio:

Reds Trade:
1)Yonder Alonso
2)Danny Dorn
3)Juan Francisco

Boston trades:
1)Jacoby Ellsbury
2)Marco Scutero

we get our LF and leadoff hitter, and Scutero can play SS wnd Janish can spell Rolen at 3rd.

Boston gets younger on the infield corners with 2 guys who may be suited for 1b/dh, while getting a 4th OF type guy also, and they rid themselves of Scutero's contract!

Krusty
11-18-2010, 02:06 AM
Would rather trade Bailey and Heisey to Arizona for Justin Upton.

camisadelgolf
11-18-2010, 09:03 AM
I like the idea of trading with Boston, just not sure if we get the matchup we would like, but I like this scenerio:

Reds Trade:
1)Yonder Alonso
2)Danny Dorn
3)Juan Francisco

Boston trades:
1)Jacoby Ellsbury
2)Marco Scutero

we get our LF and leadoff hitter, and Scutero can play SS wnd Janish can spell Rolen at 3rd.

Boston gets younger on the infield corners with 2 guys who may be suited for 1b/dh, while getting a 4th OF type guy also, and they rid themselves of Scutero's contract!
First of all, they're likely not trading for a first base prospect (they have some quality first base prospects in their system, including one who is ranked higher than Yonder Alonso at this point). Second of all, Juan Francisco has very little trade value. Third of all, Danny Dorn has practically no trade value. It's just not a good enough offer.

redsfandan
11-18-2010, 10:38 AM
How the heck did you come up with Brock Huntzinger? I don't even know anything about him, except that soxprospects.com doesn't even have him ranked in their top 60 but they project him for the Portland(AA) rotation next year.

http://www.soxprospects.com/players/huntzinger-brock.htm
cam wanted to impress us with his knowledge of Red Sox prospects. Maybe he's about to switch sides.

Would rather trade Bailey and Heisey to Arizona for Justin Upton.
You, me, and most on here. But he'd require more.

First of all, they're likely not trading for a first base prospect (they have some quality first base prospects in their system, including one who is ranked higher than Yonder Alonso at this point). Second of all, Juan Francisco has very little trade value. Third of all, Danny Dorn has practically no trade value. It's just not a good enough offer.
I thought Anderson was behind Alonso in the 1st base prospect rankings. Even if he isn't, adding Alonso to their mix would increase the chances of them having an actual good, young 1st baseman in a couple years. And I wouldn't say Francisco or Dorn has NO or little trade value. He may not have as much as we want but it only takes one team to take a shine to him and I think the people that would say he has absolutely NO shot to amount to anything are in the minority.

camisadelgolf
11-18-2010, 11:41 AM
cam wanted to impress us with his knowledge of Red Sox prospects. Maybe he's about to switch sides.
It worked, though, didn't it? Try not to hurt your back as you bow to me.


I thought Anderson was behind Alonso in the 1st base prospect rankings. Even if he isn't, adding Alonso to their mix would increase the chances of them having an actual good, young 1st baseman in a couple years. And I wouldn't say Francisco or Dorn has NO or little trade value. He may not have as much as we want but it only takes one team to take a shine to him and I think the people that would say he has absolutely NO shot to amount to anything are in the minority.
Obviously, it depends on you ask, but you're right--Alonso is more highly touted, as he should be. My bad. Anyway, the Red Sox have both Lars Anderson and Anthony Rizzo, so I'm sure they're confident that they have first base taken care of for awhile. There's also a decent chance that Ryan Lavarnway won't stick at catcher.

Every GM is aware of Juan Francisco's issues with getting on base. I'm not saying he has no trade value, but no GM is going to trade much of value for him until they see a noticeable improvement in that area.

As for Danny Dorn, no one was willing to take him in the rule five draft. In other words, they felt he wasn't worth the risk of $25k, which is chump change in this industry.

Yonder Alonso = 1B
Juan Francisco = DH (or 3B in a pinch)
Danny Dorn = 1B/DH (or OF in a pinch)

And that's in addition to Anderson, Rizzo, David Ortiz, and Kevin Youkilis. They would be creating an unnecessary logjam when they have much bigger holes to fill elsewhere (starting rotation, bullpen, catcher, and third base if they can't re-sign Beltre).

Red Leader
11-18-2010, 01:29 PM
I love all of the ideas about trading for superstars...

I do have a question about somebody that isn't a superstar, but may be a useful piece.

The Yankees are interested in Carl Crawford (as everyone should be). They said that they'll get heavily involved in the talks for him if they lose out on Cliff Lee. Let's just assume that Cliff Lee returns to Texas (for the sake of my post). The Yankees then pursue and land Carl Crawford. That means the Yankees have an extra outfielder on their roster and would still need a starting pitcher. I'm going to assume the Yankees would be least resistant to give up Curtis Granderson. So they would definitely have Carl Crawford in LF, Granderson in CF and likely want to retain Nick Swisher in RF. That leaves LF Brett Gardner on the outside looking in. Would you be interested in Gardner? He did swipe close to 50 bases last year and had a decent OBP. His contract falls more in line with what the Reds could afford and not have to dump salary or throw in a large contract to make him fit. He could be our answer at the top of this lineup. Defensively, I haven't looked at his numbers and have no idea how much of an upgrade he would be. What SP would you give up to obtain Gardner, or would you?

Rojo
11-18-2010, 02:16 PM
Not sure why everyone's so eager to move Bailey. His peripherals took a big step forward last season and he's 24.

Keep the young guns this winter, re-visit in July.

Griffey012
11-18-2010, 02:53 PM
How the heck did you come up with Brock Huntzinger? I don't even know anything about him, except that soxprospects.com doesn't even have him ranked in their top 60 but they project him for the Portland(AA) rotation next year.

http://www.soxprospects.com/players/huntzinger-brock.htm

I thought it was quite strange also. I played against the guy in high school, but hadn't heard anything about him since. Knew he played at a D-1 school and hadn't followed up. It was a bit of a shock to see his name in a potential trade.

Dan
11-18-2010, 03:34 PM
And I wouldn't say Francisco or Dorn has NO or little trade value.

I would say that. Both are replaceable parts at best, and Dorn likely never sees the majors. There's a reason he's not up here already, despite his minor league production. It's probably due to the scouts figuring he won't ever hit major league pitching.

Don't over value our prospects.

The trades I'd like to see:

Leake/Alonso/Gomes/2 prospects to the D-backs for Upton
Bailey to the Red Sox for Lowrie

Might also do a 3-way trade if Lee goes away from Texas:
Bailey to the Rangers, Mitch Moreland to the Red Sox, Lowrie to the Reds

blumj
11-18-2010, 03:48 PM
I thought it was quite strange also. I played against the guy in high school, but hadn't heard anything about him since. Knew he played at a D-1 school and hadn't followed up. It was a bit of a shock to see his name in a potential trade.
Are you sure it's the same Brock Huntzinger? :D

Has to be one of the best 70's cop show character type names a real person ever had.

Dan
11-18-2010, 04:04 PM
OK, Let me toss another idea out there:

Bailey to the Rangers for Mitch Moreland
Moreland/Alonso/Janish/Volquez or Cueto to the Red Sox for Ellsbury and Lowrie.

mth123
11-18-2010, 09:45 PM
I love all of the ideas about trading for superstars...

I do have a question about somebody that isn't a superstar, but may be a useful piece.

The Yankees are interested in Carl Crawford (as everyone should be). They said that they'll get heavily involved in the talks for him if they lose out on Cliff Lee. Let's just assume that Cliff Lee returns to Texas (for the sake of my post). The Yankees then pursue and land Carl Crawford. That means the Yankees have an extra outfielder on their roster and would still need a starting pitcher. I'm going to assume the Yankees would be least resistant to give up Curtis Granderson. So they would definitely have Carl Crawford in LF, Granderson in CF and likely want to retain Nick Swisher in RF. That leaves LF Brett Gardner on the outside looking in. Would you be interested in Gardner? He did swipe close to 50 bases last year and had a decent OBP. His contract falls more in line with what the Reds could afford and not have to dump salary or throw in a large contract to make him fit. He could be our answer at the top of this lineup. Defensively, I haven't looked at his numbers and have no idea how much of an upgrade he would be. What SP would you give up to obtain Gardner, or would you?

I like Gardner ok as far as players of his ilk go. The Yankees need help in the pen. If they would take Coco and say $6 Million it would be great and allow the Reds to make other moves. Unfortunately, I'm guessing they'd want Masset and the Reds just couldn't do that.

Given the dollars involved, Cordero for Granderson or Swisher makes more sense. The Yankees are a hard match for the Reds. They probably could care less about prospects and the Reds can't afford a talent hit by trading key players.

klw
11-18-2010, 09:50 PM
If I am the Reds the only place I send Bailey is out to the mound. He still is the sort of guy teams should make packages to get and not to be part of a package to get someone.

redsfandan
11-18-2010, 10:36 PM
I would say that. Both are replaceable parts at best, and Dorn likely never sees the majors. There's a reason he's not up here already, despite his minor league production. It's probably due to the scouts figuring he won't ever hit major league pitching.

Don't over value our prospects.

Who did the Reds trade Hairston for again? Someone Weems? The yankees gave up a nobody player that was considered organizational filler and got a decent utility guy in return for the stretch drive. I'm not over valuing our prospects. I'm just saying that it just takes one gm to think that a player can have some value in a trade even as a throw in or as a player to be named.



The trades I'd like to see:

Leake/Alonso/Gomes/2 prospects to the D-backs for Upton
Bailey to the Red Sox for Lowrie

Might also do a 3-way trade if Lee goes away from Texas:
Bailey to the Rangers, Mitch Moreland to the Red Sox, Lowrie to the Reds


OK, Let me toss another idea out there:

Bailey to the Rangers for Mitch Moreland
Moreland/Alonso/Janish/Volquez or Cueto to the Red Sox for Ellsbury and Lowrie.
I don't think the Reds will deal two of the young starting pitchers unless they get one better starting pitcher back.

Rojo
11-21-2010, 08:15 PM
If I am the Reds the only place I send Bailey is out to the mound. He still is the sort of guy teams should make packages to get and not to be part of a package to get someone.

I think we're losing here klw.