PDA

View Full Version : Reds Inquire On Greinke



Pages : [1] 2

RedLegSuperStar
12-04-2010, 08:25 PM
This per Bob Elliott of the Toronto Sun.

redsfandan
12-04-2010, 08:27 PM
This would make sense after the Arroyo extension.

Jpup
12-04-2010, 08:28 PM
This per Bob Elliott of the Toronto Sun.


The Twins, Rangers, Braves, Reds, Mariners, and Nationals have all inquired about Greinke according to Elliott.

CarolinaRedleg
12-04-2010, 08:28 PM
Here's the link

http://www.torontosun.com/sports/baseball/2010/12/04/16431131.html

RedLegSuperStar
12-04-2010, 08:29 PM
Yonder, Wood, and Mesaraco tempt the pallet?

redsfandan
12-04-2010, 08:34 PM
Yonder, Wood, and Mesaraco tempt the pallet?
I doubt they'd have much interest in Yonder since they have Butler, Hosmer, and the Kia monster. And I hope Mes isn't dealt.

I think two of our young starting pitchers would probably be part of any potential deal for Greinke.

jojo
12-04-2010, 08:44 PM
Moore loves Ms castoffs. Who knows what strange things he might do?

Eric_the_Red
12-04-2010, 08:58 PM
Can we merge this and the "What do you want for Christmas?" thread?

kaldaniels
12-04-2010, 09:13 PM
Yonder, Wood, and Mesaraco tempt the pallet?

No one is untouchable in reality, but as of today Travis Wood is on my top-5 list of "Guys I Will Not Trade".

cinreds21
12-04-2010, 09:16 PM
They would probably be interested in Billy Hamilton.

TheNext44
12-04-2010, 09:20 PM
Sorry, but considering his salary and emotional issues, I just don't see Greinke as the guy you empty the farm for. He's desirable, but he shouldn't cost more than what A. Gonzalez brought, probably less.

HokieRed
12-04-2010, 09:31 PM
Sorry, but considering his salary and emotional issues, I just don't see Greinke as the guy you empty the farm for. He's desirable, but he shouldn't cost more than what A. Gonzalez brought, probably less.

Agreed. I think a Wood, Mesoraco, Alonso deal is way way too much to pay for Greinke.

jojo
12-04-2010, 09:37 PM
What if Grienke meant playoffs in 2011 and 2012?

HotCorner
12-04-2010, 09:39 PM
Can Christmas come early?

TheNext44
12-04-2010, 09:41 PM
What if Grienke meant playoffs in 2011 and 2012?

Guarantee that in writing, and sure, I'd trade Mes and Wood for him. ;)

But I think that there are other ways that both make that more likely and are cheaper.

Spitball
12-04-2010, 09:48 PM
Yonder, Wood, and Mesaraco tempt the pallet?

As Redsfandan said, they are way too deep at first base/DH to consider Alonso. They would be interested in Wood but have serious depth in left handed pitching prospects. With catching prospect Will Myers maybe their best offensive prospect, they may not have a desperate need for Mesoraco.

I really think their biggest need is the major league ready, top shortstop prospect the Reds don't happen to have.

Mario-Rijo
12-04-2010, 09:57 PM
I hope they do inquire on him and since Arroyo has been signed maybe they knew in advance it would take 2 arms +. The only 2 I would feel comfortable with dealing would be Bailey and Volquez. Leake and Wood both are gonna be league minimum guys for at least 2 more years and both are good arms/good bats/good athletes. Ya don't particularly need Volquez and Bailey if you have Greike and Cueto w/ Arroyo and Chapman in the mix but you do need cheap guys behind them and those 2 are gonna cost more going forward of the arms that are "available" if you will.

As far as what it will take I'm sure KC would prefer more athletic types and up the middle guys but value is value and who knows who will turn out with who they already have, the more the merrier. Alonso at DH with Hosmer at 1st someday won't look too bad. Myers in a COF spot with Mes at catcher, so on, so forth. Though I'd prefer to keep Mes of all the minor leaguers. I'd rather trade the young but high upside guys like Yorman and Hamilton. Though I don't really see it taking that to make it happen.

Greinke to the Reds
Alonso, Bailey & Volquez is quite a haul for KC. Maybe toss in Sappelt.

membengal
12-04-2010, 10:23 PM
Goodness knows I've been fantasizing about Grienke as a target for awhile.

Volquez/Leake/Frazier/Alonso would be more than ample to get it done, I suspect. Or, if no need for Alonso there, a Sappelt.

Reds rotation of Grienke/Arroyo/Cueto/Wood/Bailey? Yes please.

RedLegSuperStar
12-04-2010, 10:31 PM
Goodness knows I've been fantasizing about Grienke as a target for awhile.

Volquez/Leake/Frazier/Alonso would be more than ample to get it done, I suspect. Or, if no need for Alonso there, a Sappelt.

Reds rotation of Grienke/Arroyo/Cueto/Wood/Bailey? Yes please.

Switch Bailey with Chapman.. I don't deal Volquez though.

membengal
12-04-2010, 10:35 PM
I send Volquez if need be to get Grienke. Basically, two of these three Volquez/Leake/Bailey. Royals choice.

As for Chapman...different thread, but I think Reds have him ticketed for the pen in 2011. I won't agree with it, but I think that's how it's going down.

And, I am one of the ones who have not given up on Bailey.

Regardless, if there is a way to get this done somewhat reasonably, I hope the Reds do that.

toledodan
12-05-2010, 01:05 AM
I really think their biggest need is the major league ready, top shortstop prospect the Reds don't happen to have.

can't think of the kids name but they drafted that player last year. they expect him to be up in a couple of seasons. i'm all for a ZG trade but only if he signs a LTC.

nemesis
12-05-2010, 10:08 AM
Volquez is going to get expensive with one more good year. Probably wouldn't stay in KC after that either. Leake and Bailey would both be controllable for 4 and 5 more years respectively. Add in a Heisey or Sappelt, and one of the SS/2B types in the Minors not named Hamilton and that should be a very heavy package to turn down. (Leake, Bailey, Heisey/Sappelt, Cozart/Gregorious)

Greinke
Arroyo
Cueto
Volquez
Wood/Chapman

1-5 that's pretty close to the Cards.

I(heart)Freel
12-05-2010, 10:49 AM
Would you do Leake and Stubbs as the foundation of a deal?

I like them both, a lot. But this team needs a hammer.

The Reds can contend for a few years with the talent currently on this team and the generally weakened division. But it won't make hay in the playoffs until it gets an ace. Maybe Chapman is that thing. But Greinke definitely is that thing.

Because I think this team can contend in the great 162 without a rotation upgrade, I would prefer to wait til July to get the ace it needs for the post season. Next year's Cliff Lee, in other words.

But because I don't know who that would be or if they would be significantly better than what the Reds have in system, and because I would hate for someone else to come in a scoop up Greinke and take him off the market, I am inclined to offer Leake and Stubbs and see where talks go.

The window is now.

lollipopcurve
12-05-2010, 10:50 AM
www.kansascity.com/sports/royals/

Speculation in KC, or perhaps it's more substantive than that, is that it might take the Reds giving up both Leake and Wood. Other specific packages (for Ryan Braun, even up) are mentioned.

Sure seems like Greinke will be dealt and the Reds are part of the top tier of contenders, at least from the seller's point of view.

Personally, I think 10 years of Leake and Wood, including 4 pre-arbitration years, is too much for two years of Greinke at 27 million. Reds are better off dealing 1 good young arm for a solid offensive upgrade, or prospects for a hitter.

Now, if the Royals would accept 1 starter plus prospects, that's a different story. If you can extend Greinke, that's another story too. But not 2 starters for 2 years of Greinke, IMO.

_Sir_Charles_
12-05-2010, 10:52 AM
Greinke's a good target. Not gonna happen though. There are LOTS of teams out there that the Reds matchup well with for trades. The Royals are NOT on the list. We simply don't have what each other needs.

membengal
12-05-2010, 11:00 AM
Would you do Leake and Stubbs as the foundation of a deal?I like them both, a lot. But this team needs a hammer.

The Reds can contend for a few years with the talent currently on this team and the generally weakened division. But it won't make hay in the playoffs until it gets an ace. Maybe Chapman is that thing. But Greinke definitely is that thing.

Because I think this team can contend in the great 162 without a rotation upgrade, I would prefer to wait til July to get the ace it needs for the post season. Next year's Cliff Lee, in other words.

But because I don't know who that would be or if they would be significantly better than what the Reds have in system, and because I would hate for someone else to come in a scoop up Greinke and take him off the market, I am inclined to offer Leake and Stubbs and see where talks go.

The window is now.

I sure wouldn't deal Stubbs, no.

membengal
12-05-2010, 11:01 AM
Greinke's a good target. Not gonna happen though. There are LOTS of teams out there that the Reds matchup well with for trades. The Royals are NOT on the list. We simply don't have what each other needs.

Oh.

And, really? The Royals are not a good trade fit? Because their rotation is SO stacked they couldn't use two of Volquez/Leake/Bailey? With Frazier and/or Francisco and a lower level prospect thrown in as a sweetener? Really? I must have missed them in the World Series last year...

mth123
12-05-2010, 11:05 AM
I can't see the Reds adding that much Payroll to simply deal prospects.The Money just doesn't work and since the most tradeable piece, Alonso, seems to be a non-priority, I don't see anything like this happening.

Maybe the Reds keep Leake, Wood and Bailey and send volquez and Cueto the other way. That would move $6+ Million the other way and might make this doable. If the Royals would take say Burton and Bray's arb cases too it might make the money work.

Volquez, Cueto, Burton and Bray for Gerinke? The Reds take on about $5 Million in a deal like that. KC deepens their pitching while building the offense from within. Personally, I think that would be a bad deal for the Reds.

_Sir_Charles_
12-05-2010, 11:18 AM
Oh.

And, really? The Royals are not a good trade fit? Because their rotation is SO stacked they couldn't use two of Volquez/Leake/Bailey? With Frazier and/or Francisco and a lower level prospect thrown in as a sweetener? Really? I must have missed them in the World Series last year...

My point is that in order to deal for Greinke, we're talking about having to deal off TWO of our young pitchers most likely. One of our top trading chips (Alonso) doesn't fit in their system at all really. We've both got identical needs at SS. Sure, we could rig it to work...but other teams will have more coveted pieces that fill holes with them IMO.

Lastly...I don't want to deal off 2 of the young guns for only 2 years of a seemingly declining Greinke. Yeah, I know...his peripherals were still good...but still down considerably nonetheless. For that much coin & cost in prospects...I want more of a sure thing.

NJReds
12-05-2010, 11:22 AM
The Red Sox will probably trade two AA players and a rookie league prospect to land Greinke. :rolleyes:

lollipopcurve
12-05-2010, 11:24 AM
Maybe the Reds keep Leake, Wood and Bailey and send volquez and Cueto the other way. That would move $6+ Million the other way and might make this doable. If the Royals would take say Burton and Bray's arb cases too it might make the money work.

Volquez, Cueto, Burton and Bray for Gerinke? The Reds take on about $5 Million in a deal like that. KC deepens their pitching while building the offense from within. Personally, I think that would be a bad deal for the Reds.

I agree. The money is a factor too. Complicating this scenario is that both Volquez and Cueto have higher ceilings than Leake and Wood, making them outliers -- but still possibilities -- for putting up seasons close to what Greinke can be expected to deliver. Interesting puzzle, but I don't see the Reds dealing frontline 2 arms for Greinke unless -- as you point out -- the $$$ work. AND, I would add, the team can find an arm somewhere else.

_Sir_Charles_
12-05-2010, 11:30 AM
Just to put things into perspective.....



SEASON TEAM G GS CG SHO IP H R ER HR BB SO W L SV HLD BLSV WHIP ERA
2004 KC 24 24 0 0 145.0 143 64 64 26 26 100 8 11 0 0 -- 1.17 3.97
2005 KC 33 33 2 0 183.0 233 125 118 23 53 114 5 17 0 0 -- 1.56 5.80
2006 KC 3 0 0 0 6.1 7 3 3 1 3 5 1 0 0 0 -- 1.58 4.26
2007 KC 52 14 0 0 122.0 122 52 50 12 36 106 7 7 1 12 0 1.30 3.69
2008 KC 32 32 1 0 202.1 202 87 78 21 56 183 13 10 0 0 -- 1.28 3.47
2009 KC 33 33 6 3 229.1 195 64 55 11 51 242 16 8 0 0 -- 1.07 2.16
2010 KC 33 33 3 0 220.0 219 114 102 18 55 181 10 14 0 0 -- 1.25 4.17
Total -- 210 169 12 3 1108.0 1121 509 470 112 280 931 60 67 1 12 -- 1.26 3.82

People are super high on Zack mainly due to his phenomenal 2009 which had career highs in NUMEROUS catagories. 2010 was a return to his career norms for the most part. To expect Cy Young caliber performance out of him is a bit of a reach IMO. I'm not saying he's not a good or even a great pitcher...I'm only saying to keep things in perspective.

4.17 era last season, losing record, fewer strikeouts, more walks, more homeruns allowed, fewer innings pitched, more hits allowed, BAA up .30 points.

With those trends, I'd be looking to get him cheaper than the ideas being tossed around here. Especially considering what we just saw A.Gon go for. 2 of our top young starters is too much.

mth123
12-05-2010, 11:38 AM
I agree. The money is a factor too. Complicating this scenario is that both Volquez and Cueto have higher ceilings than Leake and Wood, making them outliers -- but still possibilities -- for putting up seasons close to what Greinke can be expected to deliver. Interesting puzzle, but I don't see the Reds dealing frontline 2 arms for Greinke unless -- as you point out -- the $$$ work. AND, I would add, the team can find an arm somewhere else.

I don't see it either, but the rotation would be Greinke, Arroyo, Bailey, Wood and Leake with Maloney, Lecure and maybe Dontrelle Willis and Aroldis Chapman as alternatives. The Reds probably wouldn't need to add another arm, but if the team has to deal Cueto, I see this as only an incremental improvement.

GoReds
12-05-2010, 11:45 AM
To make the $$$ work, the Reds would have to get the Royals to take on Cordero's contract. That would make the deal nearly neutral. Cordero only has a year remaining, so it's not like the Royals are breaking the bank long term.

Wood, Leake, Cordero, Frazier and a prospect of their choosing from AA or lower for Grienke. That's a good haul for KC and makes sense for the Reds.

Would really like to try to pry Alex Gordon as well.

Cedric
12-05-2010, 11:50 AM
Just to put things into perspective.....



SEASON TEAM G GS CG SHO IP H R ER HR BB SO W L SV HLD BLSV WHIP ERA
2004 KC 24 24 0 0 145.0 143 64 64 26 26 100 8 11 0 0 -- 1.17 3.97
2005 KC 33 33 2 0 183.0 233 125 118 23 53 114 5 17 0 0 -- 1.56 5.80
2006 KC 3 0 0 0 6.1 7 3 3 1 3 5 1 0 0 0 -- 1.58 4.26
2007 KC 52 14 0 0 122.0 122 52 50 12 36 106 7 7 1 12 0 1.30 3.69
2008 KC 32 32 1 0 202.1 202 87 78 21 56 183 13 10 0 0 -- 1.28 3.47
2009 KC 33 33 6 3 229.1 195 64 55 11 51 242 16 8 0 0 -- 1.07 2.16
2010 KC 33 33 3 0 220.0 219 114 102 18 55 181 10 14 0 0 -- 1.25 4.17
Total -- 210 169 12 3 1108.0 1121 509 470 112 280 931 60 67 1 12 -- 1.26 3.82

People are super high on Zack mainly due to his phenomenal 2009 which had career highs in NUMEROUS catagories. 2010 was a return to his career norms for the most part. To expect Cy Young caliber performance out of him is a bit of a reach IMO. I'm not saying he's not a good or even a great pitcher...I'm only saying to keep things in perspective.

4.17 era last season, losing record, fewer strikeouts, more walks, more homeruns allowed, fewer innings pitched, more hits allowed, BAA up .30 points.

With those trends, I'd be looking to get him cheaper than the ideas being tossed around here. Especially considering what we just saw A.Gon go for. 2 of our top young starters is too much.

Greinke is everything you should want. A high K/9 guy with great control. Put him in the National League and he will dominate.

lollipopcurve
12-05-2010, 11:50 AM
I don't see it either, but the rotation would be Greinke, Arroyo, Bailey, Wood and Leake with Maloney, Lecure and maybe Dontrelle Willis and Aroldis Chapman as alternatives. The Reds probably wouldn't need to add another arm, but if the team has to deal Cueto, I see this as only an incremental improvement.

Right -- incremental improvement at best, probably. If Cueto and Volquez pitch well they're likely to be better than everyone in that rotation save Greinke.

Much of the argument for getting Greinke is the "need an ace in the postseason" thing. I think that's an overreaction to how the Reds' season ended. The team already has the quality and depth in the rotation to make it back to the postseason, and the upside is there to make noise in the postseason. Factor in Chapman, probably starting in 2012, and this remains the case for years to come. If you dismantle the depth in the rotation, it's a classic case of robbing Peter to pay Paul. You get quality -- at a steep price -- but lose your insurance against injury/poor performance. And that's a dicey game to play with your rotation.

Oh, and I don't consider Willis a viable starter any more. He's a LOOGY at best, unless something close to miraculous happens with him.

OnBaseMachine
12-05-2010, 01:08 PM
Would you do Leake and Stubbs as the foundation of a deal?


Nope. Stubbs is too valuable to give up. Center fielders who can OPS north of .750 and play excellent defense are tough to find, especially cheap ones.

I would hang on to Travis Wood too. I think he's a bit underrated around here. I think he's got a very good major league future ahead of him.

OnBaseMachine
12-05-2010, 01:10 PM
Ken Rosenthal lists the Reds as one of five surprise teams who could be in on Cliff Lee. This is just speculation on his part.


REDS: OK, they probably can’t afford Lee, and are more likely to attempt a trade for Zack Greinke. The Royals’ ace did not include the Reds on his no-trade list; they are one of 15 clubs that can acquire him without his approval.

Then again, we know that the Reds tried to acquire Lee from the Mariners last July, with GM Walt Jocketty saying, “We felt me made a pretty substantial offer.”



http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/Cliff-Lee-free-agent-could-have-surprise-teams-after-him-this-offseason-120410

MattyHo4Life
12-05-2010, 01:20 PM
To make the $$$ work, the Reds would have to get the Royals to take on Cordero's contract. That would make the deal nearly neutral. Cordero only has a year remaining, so it's not like the Royals are breaking the bank long term.

Another team would make an offer for Greinke and not force the Royals to take on a bad contract.

edabbs44
12-05-2010, 01:53 PM
Nope. Stubbs is too valuable to give up. Center fielders who can OPS north of .750 and play excellent defense are tough to find, especially cheap ones.

I would hang on to Travis Wood too. I think he's a bit underrated around here. I think he's got a very good major league future ahead of him.

So, in other words, you aren't willing to give up much? I'd try and hang on to Stubbs but Wood would be gone in a second in this deal, for me.

NJReds
12-05-2010, 02:13 PM
People are super high on Zack mainly due to his phenomenal 2009 which had career highs in NUMEROUS catagories. 2010 was a return to his career norms for the most part. To expect Cy Young caliber performance out of him is a bit of a reach IMO. I'm not saying he's not a good or even a great pitcher...I'm only saying to keep things in perspective.

4.17 era last season, losing record, fewer strikeouts, more walks, more homeruns allowed, fewer innings pitched, more hits allowed, BAA up .30 points.

With those trends, I'd be looking to get him cheaper than the ideas being tossed around here. Especially considering what we just saw A.Gon go for. 2 of our top young starters is too much.

Agreed. I don't think that Walt is giving up young pitchers who have done well in the majors like Wood. Look at a package including AA, AAA level prospects. That's it.

Caveat Emperor
12-05-2010, 02:21 PM
I doubt they'd have much interest in Yonder since they have Butler, Hosmer, and the Kia monster.

Hmmm...smells like the perfect situation for a three-team swap.

membengal
12-05-2010, 02:29 PM
Various people can run down Grienke all they want, but he's a #1 in a rotation, and a potential anchor for this staff. And would be an AL pitcher coming to the NL, never a bad thing. He is the hammer that this team needs, readymade.

Make it happen, Walt.

GoReds
12-05-2010, 02:29 PM
Another team would make an offer for Greinke and not force the Royals to take on a bad contract.

If the package the Reds are offering appeals to the Royals, I doubt the Cordero inclusion would have much of an impact on their decision making. They have to be thinking long term here and taking a payroll neutral contract to improve dramatically for the future is part of that thinking.

TheNext44
12-05-2010, 02:38 PM
Various people can run down Grienke all they want, but he's a #1 in a rotation, and a potential anchor for this staff. And would be an AL pitcher coming to the NL, never a bad thing. He is the hammer that this team needs, readymade.

Make it happen, Walt.

I don't question his talent. I agree he would be an ace. Here are the reasons for my hesitation.

1) He makes a ton of money over the next two years.
2) He's only under team control for two years.
3) He's had similar issues that Votto had. He's never been in a pennent race. That could be a factor. At the very least, it's a big unkown.
4) I think that one of the Reds current starters has just as good of a chance of being an Ace in 2011 and 2012 as Grienke does Not sure who, but I lke the odds that one of them will.

GO get him, just be prudent. ;)

membengal
12-05-2010, 02:41 PM
Grienke: already stepped up to acelevel
Reds: Hoping one of their current pitchers will

Go get the ace Walt. It's what this team is missing.

MWM
12-05-2010, 02:41 PM
Maybe I'm a little higher on Wood than I should be, but I wouldn't trade him. I think he's going to be REAL good for a long time.

membengal
12-05-2010, 02:42 PM
Maybe I'm a little higher on Wood than I should be, but I wouldn't trade him. I think he's going to be REAL good for a long time.

I'm in that boat, MWN. He wouldn't be on my hypothetical pick-two-of-three list to KC. In my world, they get two of EV/Leake/Bailey, their pick.

OnBaseMachine
12-05-2010, 02:47 PM
Maybe I'm a little higher on Wood than I should be, but I wouldn't trade him. I think he's going to be REAL good for a long time.

Agreed.

Add Volquez to the list of guys I don't want to trade either. I think a package could be built around Homer Bailey, Juan Francisco + prospects. Juan Francisco seems like a Dayton Moore type of player. I would hate to trade any of our young pitchers, Bailey included because I think he's on the cusp of becoming a very good pitcher, but he's the one guy I would be willing to part with in a deal for Greinke.

membengal
12-05-2010, 02:48 PM
OBM, I send EV potentially in a nod to cost issues. Volquez is on the doorstep of money, and since they would be taking it on with Grienke, I let him go. I don't do that lightly, but I do so for a Grienke.

MikeS21
12-05-2010, 03:07 PM
Volquez, Maloney, Sappelt, and Fransisco for Grienke. I hang on to Bailey and Wood if possible.

reds44
12-05-2010, 03:10 PM
Volquez, Maloney, Sappelt, and Fransisco for Grienke. I hang on to Bailey and Wood if possible.
I don't think there's anyway the Royals would do that deal.

Brutus
12-05-2010, 03:18 PM
Everyone fretting the Reds would have to give up too much to get Greinke, I ask you this:

When was the last time a team got a big time player and everyone thought they overpaid?

If you look at the trades around baseball lately, including the reported Gonzalez trade and all the other blockbusters lately, I can't say there's been one time where a team got a real good player and had to give up a ransom to do it. In other words, if the Reds get Greinke, I don't think it will cost as much as this board is discussing.

WMR
12-05-2010, 03:21 PM
If the Reds were to land Greinke I would be very bullish on our chances of going further next season than we went this year.

MWM
12-05-2010, 03:44 PM
OBM, I send EV potentially in a nod to cost issues. Volquez is on the doorstep of money, and since they would be taking it on with Grienke, I let him go. I don't do that lightly, but I do so for a Grienke.

I agree. I love EV's potential and stuff, but I have a hunch he's going to be an up and down pitcher his entire career due to his command disappearing on a regular basis.

MattyHo4Life
12-05-2010, 03:45 PM
Maybe I'm a little higher on Wood than I should be, but I wouldn't trade him. I think he's going to be REAL good for a long time.

I'm all for a deal for Greinke that includes Wood. Otherwise, forget it.

I(heart)Freel
12-05-2010, 03:59 PM
I think KC would demand one of the young, cheap arms and one of Stubbs/Heisey.

I read somewhere that KC is 2 years away from having their farm ready to produce at the major league level. Hence, why they're willing to deal Greinke. He'll be gone by the time they're ready.

So any deals for Greinke should be focused on players who still will be cheap and good in two years. That's why any Coco or even EV talk is far-fetched IMHO. Another team - especially one that loses the Cliff Lee sweepstakes - will easily pay the prospects I describe.

Superdude
12-05-2010, 04:15 PM
I'd try to move one of Leake, Wood, or Bailey before I'd trade Volquez. He had some inconsistency, but that stretch he had in September was probably as good as we've ever seen the guy. I like his chances for a big comeback next year.

Razor Shines
12-05-2010, 04:21 PM
I'd try to move one of Leake, Wood, or Bailey before I'd trade Volquez. He had some inconsistency, but that stretch he had in September was probably as good as we've ever seen the guy. I like his chances for a big comeback next year.

I'm kind of the opposite. I'd absolutely keep Wood and Leake before EV and for me it's a toss up between Bailey and EV probably lean toward keeping Bailey because of money.

thatcoolguy_22
12-05-2010, 04:28 PM
If the Royals are loooking for control of players a couple of years down the road then how about a Leake, Billy Hamilton, David Sappelt, and Ismael Guillon package?

1 Major league ready arm, prospects 5, 10, and 11 in the sytem. Hamilton and Sappelt both have high upside and this deal follows the current trend of uber player trades. KC adds 3 legit prospects and Leake.

I would do this deal (or one similar) every day of the week.

Sidenote everyone gives Arroyo a lot of credit because he eats 200+ innings a year, but look at Greinke. Better periphials and 200+ a year for 3 straight, similar contract figures.

kaldaniels
12-05-2010, 05:10 PM
Various people can run down Grienke all they want, but he's a #1 in a rotation, and a potential anchor for this staff. And would be an AL pitcher coming to the NL, never a bad thing. He is the hammer that this team needs, readymade.

Make it happen, Walt.

Yep, no matter what side of the debate you fall on, you must acknowledge if Greinke ends up on the Reds, he is a lead pipe lock for our #1 starter.

Degenerate39
12-05-2010, 05:47 PM
1. Greinke
2. Arroyo
3. Volquez
4. Wood
5. Cueto

Still have Chapman, Bailey, Leake. I'd assume Leake or Bailey would be traded though

thatcoolguy_22
12-05-2010, 05:59 PM
1. Greinke
2. Arroyo
3. Volquez
4. Wood
5. Cueto

Still have Chapman, Bailey, Leake. I'd assume Leake or Bailey would be traded though

Cueto vs a bunch of #5 type pitchers? I care nothing for the "Win" stat, but his total would be in the 20's easy.

PuffyPig
12-05-2010, 06:00 PM
Cueto vs a bunch of #5 type pitchers? I care nothing for the "Win" stat, but his total would be in the 20's easy.

That would be assuming he pitched against the other team's #5 starter.

But we all know he wouldn't.

Big Klu
12-05-2010, 06:42 PM
1. Greinke
2. Arroyo
3. Volquez
4. Wood
5. Cueto

Still have Chapman, Bailey, Leake. I'd assume Leake or Bailey would be traded though

I would trade Volquez before any of those three.

edabbs44
12-05-2010, 08:09 PM
Not wanting to trade Wood in a deal for Greinke is slightly off the wall.

I na perfect world I'd want to trade Cordero for him, but in reality you are going to have to give up some value for this guy. Wood shouldn't stop anyone.

Ghosts of 1990
12-05-2010, 08:11 PM
I'm thinking it could have been a package of Todd Frazier/Heisey, Leake, Homer type of guys.

Jpup
12-05-2010, 09:12 PM
I think it's really overreaching for anyone to assume the Reds can't afford the guy. If they couldn't afford him, they would not be trying to trade for him.

Dan
12-05-2010, 09:52 PM
If I'm giving up 2 starters + Alonso, I would rather have Garza and Joyce back.

redsfandan
12-05-2010, 10:26 PM
For the heck of it, I'll throw out a couple ideas. Hopefully the resident prospect experts can chime in on the return.

1) Bailey/Leake/Francisco/Gregorius

for

Greinke/Cheslor Cuthbert/+ 1 of either Crawford Simmons, Cole White, or Patrick Keating



2) Bailey/Leake/Francisco/Gregorius/Heisey or Sappelt

for

Greinke/Cheslor Cuthbert/John Lamb or Tim Melville


Moustakas is the Royals 3rd baseman of the future and Cuthbert plays 3rd as well so they may be open to moving him and the Reds could use some more decent corner infield prospects. Simmons is a lefty back of the rotation type. White and Keating are relievers. Keating is the only one of the four that has played above A ball and Cuthbert just turned 18 a month ago. Lamb and Melville are more highly regarded starting pitchers but, considering what the Royals would get in return, they might part with one of them.

If they're really lucky, the Royals might be able to contend in that division starting in 2012. Bailey, Leake, Francisco, and Heisey could help make that happen. Lamb is likely the only one that might even see the big leagues by then much less be able to really help. While Gregorius or Sappelt are the only ones that they'd get that probably wouldn't be able to help by then. Most of these guys (Cuthbert, Simmons, White, Keating) might be expendable to them for one reason or another. An expanded trade like this would also give the Reds some additional prospects a few years from the bigs and a hedge against Greinke leaving after two years (meaning the trade could still pay off for the Reds).

Two of the Reds young starting pitchers would have alot more appeal than just one. Expanding the deal would make moving two possible.

Mario-Rijo
12-06-2010, 08:36 AM
For the heck of it, I'll throw out a couple ideas. Hopefully the resident prospect experts can chime in on the return.

1) Bailey/Leake/Francisco/Gregorius

for

Greinke/Cheslor Cuthbert/+ 1 of either Crawford Simmons, Cole White, or Patrick Keating



2) Bailey/Leake/Francisco/Gregorius/Heisey or Sappelt

for

Greinke/Cheslor Cuthbert/John Lamb or Tim Melville


Moustakas is the Royals 3rd baseman of the future and Cuthbert plays 3rd as well so they may be open to moving him and the Reds could use some more decent corner infield prospects. Simmons is a lefty back of the rotation type. White and Keating are relievers. Keating is the only one of the four that has played above A ball and Cuthbert just turned 18 a month ago. Lamb and Melville are more highly regarded starting pitchers but, considering what the Royals would get in return, they might part with one of them.

If they're really lucky, the Royals might be able to contend in that division starting in 2012. Bailey, Leake, Francisco, and Heisey could help make that happen. Lamb is likely the only one that might even see the big leagues by then much less be able to really help. While Gregorius or Sappelt are the only ones that they'd get that probably wouldn't be able to help by then. Most of these guys (Cuthbert, Simmons, White, Keating) might be expendable to them for one reason or another. An expanded trade like this would also give the Reds some additional prospects a few years from the bigs and a hedge against Greinke leaving after two years (meaning the trade could still pay off for the Reds).

Two of the Reds young starting pitchers would have alot more appeal than just one. Expanding the deal would make moving two possible.

To be honest I wouldn't wanna muddy the picture too much adding on players on their side. I would just make the deal 3-4 for Greinke and then go from there. That said I'm not enough of a prospect expert to tell you on this deal. I tend to stick to the Reds 'spects for the most part. I like the 1st offer for Greinke, but I'd try to deal Volquez or Boxberger instead of Leake. If they just asked for Leake and minor leaguers for Greinke i'd go ahead and part with him but not Leake/Cueto/Wood plus any other good starting arm.

lollipopcurve
12-06-2010, 08:51 AM
Everyone fretting the Reds would have to give up too much to get Greinke, I ask you this:

When was the last time a team got a big time player and everyone thought they overpaid?

Very true, and I had not really considered this. Factor in that 2 years of Shaun Marcum (a very solid pitcher, if not as good as Greinke) just cost the Brewers 1 -- that's 1 -- Double A prospect. Cliff Lee, the last 2 times he was traded, brought back prospects only. This leads me to believe that the Royals will have a hard time coaxing legit major leaguers out of bidders. Especially pre-arb major leaguers who do nothing to offset Greinke's high cost.

Mario-Rijo
12-06-2010, 09:02 AM
From the Sun Deck:

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=86874&page=2


One unnamed Royals official told Bob Dutton in Sunday's Kansas City Star: "We'd want two young players who can make a major impact, and maybe two guys who can help us out in some way. If we don't get that, we don't make the trade. It's that simple."


Bob Elliott of the Toronto Sun reports Saturday that the Blue Jays remain very interested in Greinke's services. The Jays could offer right-hander Kyle Drabek and (Brett) Lawrie as part of a package, and have right fielder Travis Snider and catcher Travis d'Arnaud to dangle in front of Dayton Moore.

GoReds
12-06-2010, 10:35 AM
Drabek is a solid prospect, but not someone who can make an immediate "major impact". From what I'm hearing, Lawrie may be overrated as a prospect.

If that is what Toronto has to offer, a package of Leake or Wood, Heisey and two lower prospects is easily better.

lollipopcurve
12-06-2010, 10:41 AM
Drabek is a solid prospect, but not someone who can make an immediate "major impact". From what I'm hearing, Lawrie may be overrated as a prospect.

If that is what Toronto has to offer, a package of Leake or Wood, Heisey and two lower prospects is easily better.

The Toronto GM is manic. At this point, it's kind of hard to see the method in his madness. Hard for me to see what they would gain by selling off Marcum and Drabek -- that's 8 years of control and two spots in the starting rotation -- for two years of Greinke and a backfill starter. (With Toronto on Greinke's no-trade list, it's highly unlikely he'd re-up there.) Not to mention Travis Snider and/or whatever other prospects might go. Seems like out of control wheeling and dealing to me.

HokieRed
12-06-2010, 11:07 AM
Discussion now starting to get more interesting as there's recognition most of the proposals here have been for extreme overpayment by Reds. I would not be interested in any deal involving 2 of our top 7 starters: Arroyo, Cueto, Bailey, Volquez, Leake, Chapman, Wood. If you give up 2 of them for Greinke, you are one injury away from losing this team's major strength: depth of competent starting pitching. Offer Volquez for Greinke with some non-starting pitching and see what the response is; that's move number 1.

Mario-Rijo
12-06-2010, 11:12 AM
Discussion now starting to get more interesting as there's recognition most of the proposals here have been for extreme overpayment by Reds. I would not be interested in any deal involving 2 of our top 7 starters: Arroyo, Cueto, Bailey, Volquez, Leake, Chapman, Wood. If you give up 2 of them for Greinke, you are one injury away from losing this team's major strength: depth of competent starting pitching. Offer Volquez for Greinke with some non-starting pitching and see what the response is; that's move number 1.

6 with Greinke or 7 without? I know which way I'd go if I had to.

WVRed
12-06-2010, 11:14 AM
As Redsfandan said, they are way too deep at first base/DH to consider Alonso. They would be interested in Wood but have serious depth in left handed pitching prospects. With catching prospect Will Myers maybe their best offensive prospect, they may not have a desperate need for Mesoraco.

I really think their biggest need is the major league ready, top shortstop prospect the Reds don't happen to have.

This is why I think a three way would work. Oakland (Grant Green) and Baltimore (Manny Machado) could both be possibilities if we wanted to go that direction. Oakland could be interested in Mesoraco while Baltimore possibly could be attracted to Alonso.

Edd Roush
12-06-2010, 11:40 AM
6 with Greinke or 7 without? I know which way I'd go if I had to.

I agree and those 6 wouldn't even include Maloney and Lecure who could keep the Reds in games if needed to fill in during an injury.

OldXOhio
12-06-2010, 12:27 PM
Offer Volquez for Greinke with some non-starting pitching and see what the response is; that's move number 1.

You clearly are not interested in the Reds getting Zach Grienke then.

HokieRed
12-06-2010, 12:43 PM
You clearly are not interested in the Reds getting Zach Grienke then.

I'm not interested in getting Greinke if it requires two of the following: Cueto, Bailey, Volquez, Leake, Wood. I assume they have no interest in Arroyo and Chapman is untouchable.

aubashbrother
12-06-2010, 01:28 PM
Dont know if this was posted yet or not but I was watching ESPN this morning i believe it was First Take and they had Keith Law live from the winter meetings interviewing him and Greinkes name came up and they asked him who is the one team that would be the best fit for him and he said if he could play God and put him on one team it would be the Reds. talked for a few about how we have the players and the need and said how we not only have good prospects but duplicate prospects or something talking bout Alonso with Votto already on first . Mez with Grandal waiting after him.

BCubb2003
12-06-2010, 01:34 PM
our top 7 starters

How many teams can say that?

I(heart)Freel
12-06-2010, 01:47 PM
I agree and those 6 wouldn't even include Maloney and Lecure who could keep the Reds in games if needed to fill in during an injury.

This is spot-on. Lecure and Maloney would make fine fifth starters if the need arose.

There is plenty of depth to do this deal and still have a contingency plan better than the 2011 version of Jimmy Haynes.

Sea Ray
12-06-2010, 01:54 PM
Interesting that they were discussing Greinke on ESPN First Take this morning and the guest they had on said that he thought the best fit was our Cincinnati Reds, due to our young talent stacked at certain positions like 1B and our need

HokieRed
12-06-2010, 01:54 PM
This is spot-on. Lecure and Maloney would make fine fifth starters if the need arose.

There is plenty of depth to do this deal and still have a contingency plan better than the 2011 version of Jimmy Haynes.

Disagree here. There's, IMHO, a big break point on the depth chart between #7, probably at this point Leake, and #8 and #9, Maloney and LeCure. Neither of the last 2 is somebody I want in a rotation on a contending team.

edabbs44
12-06-2010, 01:58 PM
Disagree here. There's, IMHO, a big break point on the depth chart between #7, probably at this point Leake, and #8 and #9, Maloney and LeCure. Neither of the last 2 is somebody I want in a rotation on a contending team.

They wouldn't be in the rotation unless an injury happened. There is a difference.

Plus, if you deal 2 starters and get one back, you still have 6 SPs.

Caveat Emperor
12-06-2010, 02:00 PM
You clearly are not interested in the Reds getting Zach Grienke then.

I'm interested -- I just always find these discussions amusing. They usually end with everyone making the statement "Wow, that's all it took? The Reds could've easily beaten that offer."

Fact is, someone else can have Grienke if the asking price includes Travis Wood. I'll take my chances with 6 years of a LHP with Wood's stuff over 2 years of Grienke.

Volquez and Cueto? I'm listening. Wood, Chapman or Bailey? I hear Toronto is lovely this time of year.

I(heart)Freel
12-06-2010, 02:05 PM
Disagree here. There's, IMHO, a big break point on the depth chart between #7, probably at this point Leake, and #8 and #9, Maloney and LeCure. Neither of the last 2 is somebody I want in a rotation on a contending team.

Maloney and Lecure combined for 8 starts on the 2010 Reds. That worked out pretty well.

Brutus
12-06-2010, 03:20 PM
I'm interested -- I just always find these discussions amusing. They usually end with everyone making the statement "Wow, that's all it took? The Reds could've easily beaten that offer."

Fact is, someone else can have Grienke if the asking price includes Travis Wood. I'll take my chances with 6 years of a LHP with Wood's stuff over 2 years of Grienke.

Volquez and Cueto? I'm listening. Wood, Chapman or Bailey? I hear Toronto is lovely this time of year.

I made that point earlier in this thread. It's so true. These trades almost NEVER wind up having the players exchanged for the superstar that everyone expects. It's always, always less.

Red Leader
12-06-2010, 03:25 PM
I'm interested -- I just always find these discussions amusing. They usually end with everyone making the statement "Wow, that's all it took? The Reds could've easily beaten that offer."

Fact is, someone else can have Grienke if the asking price includes Travis Wood. I'll take my chances with 6 years of a LHP with Wood's stuff over 2 years of Grienke.

Volquez and Cueto? I'm listening. Wood, Chapman or Bailey? I hear Toronto is lovely this time of year.

As usual, I'm in total agreement with Caveat here.

Edd Roush
12-06-2010, 03:32 PM
As usual, I'm in total agreement with Caveat here.

I'm usually with Caveat as well. However, I make Bailey available, too. Frankly the only two starting pitchers I wouldn't give up are Chapman and Wood. I honestly think I would give up two of Leake/Arroyo/Bailey/Cueto and Volquez as long as I don't have to give up Hamilton/Mesoraco/YRod as well. I am all for competing in this window. I think we have to deal Coco away and not take too much salary back to get it done though.

Benihana
12-06-2010, 03:41 PM
I'd deal Bailey, Leake or Wood easily before I'd deal Cueto.

_Sir_Charles_
12-06-2010, 03:46 PM
I'm not interested in getting Greinke if it requires two of the following: Cueto, Bailey, Volquez, Leake, Wood. I assume they have no interest in Arroyo and Chapman is untouchable.

This is where I am as well. Look, I want to get Greinke as much as the next guy, but so many of the proposals on here are severely overpaying on the part of the Reds. Just look at some of the recent deals made over the past few years. If Walt has to give up 2 of those main 5 names tossed around (Cueto, Bailey, Leake, Wood, Volquez) then he got rogered...hard. And that's not me saying that Greinke isn't worth 2 of them. It's me saying that nobody else has been paying that much for a pitcher like Greinke.

Cedric
12-06-2010, 03:46 PM
I'd deal Bailey, Leake or Wood easily before I'd deal Cueto.

I'd keep Bailey and Wood over Cueto easily. Deal Leake/Cueto/Volquez if they want.

Benihana
12-06-2010, 03:52 PM
I'd keep Bailey and Wood over Cueto easily. Deal Leake/Cueto/Volquez if they want.

Ugh, I've been hearing the Bailey over Cueto talk for YEARS on this board. In fact, this might be the only thing I have disagreed with mth123 about in the last 12 months.

Please tell me, what in the WORLD makes Bailey more valuable than Cueto?

At least Wood throws with his left hand, can hit, and has a decent track record at a very young age. Bailey is the same age as Cueto with a significantly worse track record despite one more year of experience, and by most accounts, a significantly worse head on his shoulders. Not to mention, Johnny has shown the durability (and consistency) to throw 70% more innings each season than Homer has (yet it's not like he's being overworked).

_Sir_Charles_
12-06-2010, 03:54 PM
I think many here have forgotten just how great Leake was before he hit the "wall". Everyone's drooling over Wood, but ready to ditch Mike. Me...I keep 'em BOTH.

Of all the young'uns, Homer is the most likely to go unfortunately. And it's not due to his stuff or anything else, it's his lack of options. Volquez won't be the one to go due to his injury history...I don't see another team taking him on until he's got a full season (post surgery) under his belt. Cueto's a guy you build around IMO. So for me, Homer + parts should get it done. If they insist on another starting pitching prospect...we do have LeCure & Maloney down on the farm. If those guys are good enough for us as fall-back starters...why not for KC?

westofyou
12-06-2010, 04:00 PM
I'd deal Bailey, Leake or Wood easily before I'd deal Cueto.

Short RH, getting expensive, K rate likely to drop.

Cueto is primed to be moved.

edabbs44
12-06-2010, 04:01 PM
I think Wood is starting to become very, very overrated by many on this board.

I like the guy and am happy that he is in the organization, but he should not be held onto at the expense of acquiring a guy like Greinke.

RedsManRick
12-06-2010, 04:03 PM
I'd keep Bailey and Wood over Cueto easily. Deal Leake/Cueto/Volquez if they want.

I'm not sure I understand the widespread downplaying of Cueto I've seen around here. Of all the young starters, he's the only one who has stayed healthy (30+ starts each year) and demonstrated consistent improvement. He's the same age as Homer and has clearly out-pitched him.

As far as I'm concerned, Cueto is the one young guy it makes the least sense to trade.

Caveat Emperor
12-06-2010, 04:03 PM
Please tell me, what in the WORLD makes Bailey more valuable than Cueto?

Johnny's 1st year arb-eligible, Bailey is still pre-arb.

There's also that little matter of roughly half a foot in height, but YMMV as to how much stock to put in that issue. History isn't quite as kind to pitchers like Mr. Cueto as they mature.

Cedric
12-06-2010, 04:03 PM
Ugh, I've been hearing the Bailey over Cueto talk for YEARS on this board. In fact, this might be the only thing I have disagreed with mth123 about in the last 12 months.

Please tell me, what in the WORLD makes Bailey more valuable than Cueto?

At least Wood throws with his left hand, can hit, and has a decent track record at a very young age. Bailey is the same age as Cueto with a significantly worse track record despite one more year of experience, and by most accounts, a significantly worse head on his shoulders. Not to mention, Johnny has shown the durability (and consistency) to throw 70% more innings each season than Homer has (yet it's not like he's being overworked).

He is short and has a declining k/9 rate. His actual ERA was way better than he truly pitched. It's the perfect time to move him.

Ron Madden
12-06-2010, 04:04 PM
Walt Jocketty told John Fay "The Reds have not talked to KC about Greinke".

Cedric
12-06-2010, 04:04 PM
I'm not sure I understand the widespread downplaying of Cueto I've seen around here. Of all the young starters, he's the only one who has stayed healthy (30+ starts each year) and demonstrated consistent improvement. He's the same age as Homer and has clearly out-pitched him.

As far as I'm concerned, Cueto is the one young guy it makes the least sense to trade.

Clearly? Other than actual innings I disagree. They have very similar XFIPs the last few years. One guy is short with a declining k/9 rate and the other has a very solid k/9.

I'm selling the guy with higher perceived value that is short and declining already.

Caveat Emperor
12-06-2010, 04:08 PM
He is short and has a declining k/9 rate. His actual ERA was way better than he truly pitched. It's the perfect time to move him.

Cueto: 6.7 K/9 in 2010
Bailey: 8.3 K/9 in 2010

Cueto owns Bailey on health / reliability, though. Bailey has never thrown a full season of baseball in the majors, while Cueto has 3 consecutive 30+ start seasons.

The real issue here, though, is value. You'd be selling high on Cueto to (presumably) bring value back to the ballclub. Bailey will never bring the return that Cueto can at this moment.

westofyou
12-06-2010, 04:11 PM
I think Wood is starting to become very, very overrated by many on this board.

I like the guy and am happy that he is in the organization, but he should not be held onto at the expense of acquiring a guy like Greinke.

What?

Trade Pat Zachary?

He won rookie of the year!!!

camisadelgolf
12-06-2010, 04:16 PM
Clearly? Other than actual innings I disagree. They have very similar XFIPs the last few years. One guy is short with a declining k/9 rate and the other has a very solid k/9.

I'm selling the guy with higher perceived value that is short and declining already.
Cueto had some bad luck his first couple of years, but he regressed to the mean and got a little lucky this year. It was nothing extreme, though. He also developed a new pitch, which helps explain why his strikeouts were down. It was a way of getting more groundballs and giving up less homeruns. The start to his career reminds me a lot of Ben Sheets' except Cueto has had more success and missed more bats so far.

Caveat Emperor
12-06-2010, 04:18 PM
I think Wood is starting to become very, very overrated by many on this board.

And I think Greinke's a touch overrated here too. Somebody posted his stats a few pages back -- dude had a straight outlier-filled 2009, and that's all anyone wants to remember.

He's a good pitcher (probably a solid bet to be a 3.30-3.50 in the NL), but if you sign him expecting to get the unhittable ace who struck out 242 guys and had an ERA+ of 200, I think you're going to be very, very disappointed.

Edd Roush
12-06-2010, 04:19 PM
Walt Jocketty told John Fay "The Reds have not talked to KC about Greinke".

This doesn't sound like something Jocketty would have any reason to lie about. Since there aren't any names out there or any rumors about the package being discussed between the Reds and Royals, it certainly wouldn't hurt to say something like "We have discussed a lot of potential deals with many potential teams including Zack Greinke and the Royals," if he truly was talking to them. This makes me really think that nothing is going to happen at the Winter Meetings except a Cairo contract, a Rhodes contract or maybe a Cordero deal.

OnBaseMachine
12-06-2010, 04:22 PM
I'm not sure I understand the widespread downplaying of Cueto I've seen around here. Of all the young starters, he's the only one who has stayed healthy (30+ starts each year) and demonstrated consistent improvement. He's the same age as Homer and has clearly out-pitched him.

As far as I'm concerned, Cueto is the one young guy it makes the least sense to trade.

Agreed.

People continue to try to downplay Johnny Cueto's stuff yet his swing and miss rates are right in line with some of the better pitchers in the game: Ubaldo Jimenez, Johan Santana, Justin Verlander, Ricky Romero, John Danks, and his SwStr% was better than that of Chris Carpenter, Zack Greinke, Tommy Hanson, Yovani Gallardo, and Matt Cain.

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=all&qual=y&type=5&season=2010&month=0

RedsManRick
12-06-2010, 04:28 PM
Clearly? Other than actual innings I disagree. They have very similar XFIPs the last few years. One guy is short with a declining k/9 rate and the other has a very solid k/9.

I'm selling the guy with higher perceived value that is short and declining already.

Bailey took a real nice step forward last year -- and pitched half a season. The innings can't just be dismissed as if they're a given. You also can't ignore command.

As for perceived value, I think Bailey has greater trade value for Cueto for precisely the reasons you've cited.

Don't get me wrong, I like both guys. Volquez is the one I'd be shopping.

westofyou
12-06-2010, 04:29 PM
And I think Greinke's a touch overrated here too. Somebody posted his stats a few pages back -- dude had a straight outlier-filled 2009, and that's all anyone wants to remember.

He's a good pitcher (probably a solid bet to be a 3.30-3.50 in the NL), but if you sign him expecting to get the unhittable ace who struck out 242 guys and had an ERA+ of 200, I think you're going to be very, very disappointed.





Batters Faced 919
Reached Base 327
Retired 592

Reached Base by:
Single 154
Double 40
Triple 7
Home Run 18
Walk 55
Hit Batsman 7
Error 13
Fielder's Choice (FC)
FC All Safe 5
FC with Out 28

Retired by:
Strikeout 181
Ground Out 208
Line Out 9
Fly Out 151
Pop Out 43
Other 0

edabbs44
12-06-2010, 04:32 PM
And I think Greinke's a touch overrated here too. Somebody posted his stats a few pages back -- dude had a straight outlier-filled 2009, and that's all anyone wants to remember.

He's a good pitcher (probably a solid bet to be a 3.30-3.50 in the NL), but if you sign him expecting to get the unhittable ace who struck out 242 guys and had an ERA+ of 200, I think you're going to be very, very disappointed.

Before 2010, his 3 seasons prior were in that range you provided or better. Translate to the NL with Cincy's defense and I think he is more of a high 2s guy, easily.

I trade Wood for that any day.

westofyou
12-06-2010, 04:34 PM
Before 2010, his 3 seasons prior were in that range you provided or better. Translate to the NL with Cincy's defense and I think he is more of a high 2s guy, easily.

I trade Wood for that any day.

Wood, Travis
2010


Batters Faced 419
Reached Base 129
Retired 290

Reached Base by:
Single 59
Double 16
Triple 1
Home Run 9
Walk 26
Hit Batsman 4
Error 4
Fielder's Choice (FC)
FC All Safe 0
FC with Out 10

Retired by:
Strikeout 86
Ground Out 66
Line Out 6
Fly Out 104
Pop Out 28
Other 0

Caveat Emperor
12-06-2010, 04:53 PM
You'll get zero argument from me that Greinke isn't a very good pitcher (he's not '09 Greinke good, but he's pretty damn good all the same).

I just don't think 2 years of what you'd get from him is worth 5 years of what I think Travis Wood is capable of producing.

edabbs44
12-06-2010, 04:56 PM
You'll get zero argument from me that Greinke isn't a very good pitcher (he's not '09 Greinke good, but he's pretty damn good all the same).

I just don't think 2 years of what you'd get from him is worth 5 years of what I think Travis Wood is capable of producing.

I think this is a huge difference. Obviously there is risk with anyone but the risk with Greinke is so much less.

And who knows if it is only 2 years, maybe Cincy rolls this year to the WS and he loves Cincy, the fans start coming in droves and Cincy is the new Philly. And Greinke re-ups for 5 years, $75MM.

I'm down for that.

redsfandan
12-06-2010, 04:59 PM
To be honest I wouldn't wanna muddy the picture too much adding on players on their side. I would just make the deal 3-4 for Greinke and then go from there. That said I'm not enough of a prospect expert to tell you on this deal. I tend to stick to the Reds 'spects for the most part. I like the 1st offer for Greinke, but I'd try to deal Volquez or Boxberger instead of Leake. If they just asked for Leake and minor leaguers for Greinke i'd go ahead and part with him but not Leake/Cueto/Wood plus any other good starting arm.

Making it 1 of our young starting pitchers plus 2-3 other players might not get it done. But most don't want to include 2 starting pitchers. Adding a couple prospects on the Royals side could help make the deal more even.

kaldaniels
12-06-2010, 05:11 PM
Before 2010, his 3 seasons prior were in that range you provided or better. Translate to the NL with Cincy's defense and I think he is more of a high 2s guy, easily.

I trade Wood for that any day.

If the issue was forced, yeah I would have to take a look at doing that. But I'd try to shove everyone (pitcher-wise) but Chapman their way before letting Wood get involved.

medford
12-06-2010, 05:38 PM
This doesn't sound like something Jocketty would have any reason to lie about. Since there aren't any names out there or any rumors about the package being discussed between the Reds and Royals, it certainly wouldn't hurt to say something like "We have discussed a lot of potential deals with many potential teams including Zack Greinke and the Royals," if he truly was talking to them. This makes me really think that nothing is going to happen at the Winter Meetings except a Cairo contract, a Rhodes contract or maybe a Cordero deal.

But what would Walt have to gain by mentioning it or admitting to it? Seems like Walt's MO is to lurke in the shadows, rather than get out in front of a story like Jim Bowden would have. If the Royals are serious about trading Grienke, then the Walt knows that they won't move him until at least during the winter meetings, if not later, and he should also have a good idea what they're looking for. Walt may not have talked to KC directly yet, but it can't be much of a secret in his business what kind of offers they're expecting. Grienke's agent could pass along the word, or another GM that is paying Walt off a favor by mentioning what he's heard from KC in discussion knowing he doesn't have the prospects to get the deal done, but is willing to spread the news to Walt knowing he's going to eventually enter the conversation.

Frankly, the Reds have 6 legitimate young, cheap starting pitchers, a top prospect blocked at 1b, 2 legit catching prospects, not to mention a solid young catcher in the majors, lots of potential in the low minors, and thanks to a playoff run, perhaps a little bit of salary flex to take on all or part of a contract in the right deal. Oppossing GMs should be begging to get a piece of Walt's ear right now. Seriously, how many other teams have a recent top pitching draft pick, skip the minors all together, and put up a couple of very solid months to start out their career, and consider them "touchable".

Walt is in a very strong position should he want to make a move. He's got chips that many others don't, and no glaring needs, nor the big market pressure to make a huge splash. There's no need for him to blink first and show his hand.

Ron Madden
12-06-2010, 05:56 PM
If Walt says he hasn't talked to KC about Greinke, I believe him.

MattyHo4Life
12-06-2010, 06:10 PM
I think many here have forgotten just how great Leake was before he hit the "wall". Everyone's drooling over Wood, but ready to ditch Mike. Me...I keep 'em BOTH.

This is what I don't understand. Everybody seems to have a different opinion on which pitchers should be traded and which ones should be kept. The one pitcher that most posters here don't seem to mind trading is Leake. Can someone please explain this to me. As a Cardinals fan, I'd love to see the Reds trade both Wood and Leake for Greinke. lol

MikeS21
12-06-2010, 06:41 PM
This is what I don't understand. Everybody seems to have a different opinion on which pitchers should be traded and which ones should be kept. The one pitcher that most posters here don't seem to mind trading is Leake. Can someone please explain this to me. As a Cardinals fan, I'd love to see the Reds trade both Wood and Leake for Greinke. lol
I think the issue with Leake is that he was lights out first time around the league. But hitters made adjustments and Leake didn't. You could chalk that up to youth and inexperience, but I'm not sure Leake has a lot of wiggle room to make adjustments. I just don't think his ceiling is all that high. I hope I'm wrong, but I feel Leake has been a bit overvalued because of some of the perceived parallels between he and Strasburg, which is like comparing apples to oranges. Give me Strasburg (and his TJ surgery elbow) any day of the week and twice on Sunday. Leake's value is that he is cheap, but so are most #5 starters. I simply don't see him any more than that.

Wood, on the other hand, is a lefty, and has paid his dues in the minors and has learned how to pitch. The only knock I have on Wood is that he seems to be a six inning pitcher. But if the Reds have a strong bullpen, a six-inning pitcher is not a liability.

kaldaniels
12-06-2010, 06:53 PM
Just a quick question here while we are on the subject of the Reds young pitching vis a vis their expendability...

Of all the young arms the most productive has been Johnny Cueto. What would you say to throwing 35 million his way and seeing if he will bite on a 5 yr deal?

IslandRed
12-06-2010, 07:17 PM
This is what I don't understand. Everybody seems to have a different opinion on which pitchers should be traded and which ones should be kept. The one pitcher that most posters here don't seem to mind trading is Leake. Can someone please explain this to me. As a Cardinals fan, I'd love to see the Reds trade both Wood and Leake for Greinke. lol


I think the issue with Leake is that he was lights out first time around the league. But hitters made adjustments and Leake didn't. You could chalk that up to youth and inexperience, but I'm not sure Leake has a lot of wiggle room to make adjustments. I just don't think his ceiling is all that high.

While granting that MikeS21 and others who have expressed the same sentiments could be correct in the long run... I'm with Matty, I don't get it either. I don't care how much polish a guy has in college, I don't think it's possible to be (1) drafted #8, (2) skip the minor leagues entirely and (3) put up an ERA in the threes for half a season without having some serious natural ability.

He did fade in the second half, but probability-wise, I'd put my money on "wearing out due to taking the ball every five days for the first time in his life" versus "can't make adjustments." The command and movement on his pitches just wasn't the same in his last several starts, and the tired shoulder that led to his shutdown seems like the Occam's Razor in the discussion.

I certainly think he did more than enough to earn the chance to go through the league a few more times before he's written off as some sort of low-ceiling fringe guy.

MattyHo4Life
12-06-2010, 08:21 PM
The only knock I have on Wood is that he seems to be a six inning pitcher.

That sounds exactly like Danny Haren. The knock on Haren in his rookie season is that he was a 6 inning pitcher, and that's all he would ever be. That was supposedly why Walt and company (I believe LaRussa and Duncan were all on board) gave up on him and traded him to Oakland. Personally, I wouldn't give up on Leake or Wood. They are both young, and will have growing pains. I would especially cut Leake some slack since he didn't even spend time in the minors. He is nothing like Strasburg, but I think both Wood and Leake could be Ace caliber pitchers if handled correctly. Like I said though....I wouldn't mind if the Reds trade them both to KC for a few years of Greinke. :cool:

MikeS21
12-06-2010, 08:31 PM
Perhaps Leake would benefit from some time at AAA just to work on learning how to pitch and building that arm strength to go out every 5th day?

mth123
12-06-2010, 08:35 PM
IMO Leake was pretty good for two months when he was laying the ball over the plate on the first pitch and everybody in the league was taking to try to get a read on him. After he was ahead 0-1 on everybody, like most pitchers, he was pretty effective. In early June the worm turned. The league stopped letting him get away with it. If he tried the same plan, he got ripped. If he tried something else, he fell behind in the count and was pounded. From then on, he gave up more fly balls than ground balls and lots and lots of homers. IMO, he had such an extreme advantage (basically starting out 0-1 on a lot of hitters before they really started to try to hit him) skewing his results for the first 2 months, I don't believe they provide any kind of indication of what to expect from him going forward.

Leake made his debut in the majors so soon after being drafted because he was basically considered a finished product. If the first two months are invalid, and there is little left as far as development goes, there is a good chance that the Home Run machine we saw in June, July and August is who he is. I still have hope that with a year in AAA, he could be a back of the rotation innings eater along the lines of Jeff Suppan or (at best) Bronson Arroyo, but that is if everything goes right IMO. Compared to Wood's mastery, Bailey TOR stuff, Cueto's success or Volquez former All Star form Leake is the guy I'd be most willing to see the team move.

Add that he only threw 130 or so innings and realistically needs a year in AAA just to build his inning count before going back into a rotation of a contending team and he's the most expendable. Ideally, the Reds would be able to keep him around as heir apparant to the inning eater role, but with Arroyo's extension, that's covered now. The Reds need other stuff. Deal him if its what it takes to get a big fish, otherwise I'd say he should spend the year in AAA as insurance for the others and building his inning count.

Mario-Rijo
12-06-2010, 08:45 PM
Lots of stuff here to think about and discuss. Just my 2 cents on some of it.

#1 - I prefer to deal Bailey or Volquez and in that order though it's quite close. But they seem like the 2 most likely to just not ever put it all together and in addition are far closer to making money than Leake and Wood. Leake and Wood both know how to pitch, both can handle the wood and the leather exceptionally well. I also don't believe these 2 are any worse than solid #3 starters in their careers, though I don't see ACE stuff it's pretty doggone good.

I certainly understand some of the rational for including Cueto and I would add that he is a kid who though I like alot is the most likely of the bunch to go all Bartolo Colon on us with his weight. I think it would be a shrewd gamble to deal him and I wouldn't but hey I doubt he is around when he starts making the big bucks anyhow so whatever just get a good return if so. But if he goes before Bailey and Volquez I will be disappointed.

Personally none are deal breakers for Greinke in my mind but there is definitely a pecking order and the higher the Royals were to ask in that order the less they get on the back end.

#2 - As far as Greinke goes I read a pretty interesting piece snippet on him recently from Keith Law I believe it was. His reasoning for Greinke's struggles last season were because his curve wasn't quite as sharp as in '09 and his overall command wasn't quite as good. Still his fastball and slider were filthy and his command though not on par with '09 was still quite good. This tells me that it's very likely it's not that he was lucky in '09 but just wasn't "right" in '10. Now due to a possible injury perhaps, or simply just tired from pitching so long & strong the season before. Whatever the reason, aside from a lingering potential for injury I don't think his stuff should be mistaken he is very much the ACE he appeared to be in '09. So proceed with some degree of caution on him but if his arm and body seem to be healthy then you gotta go all in on him.

#3 - The big elephant in the room isn't the prospects/players to deal it's the money. How can Walt pull of this deal without adding much in the way of dollars? The only thing I can think of is to include Brandon Phillips in the deal. But would KC take him? I don't think there is any doubt they would want him money aside, he's a great defender who wants to lead, now has a better idea of how to do that and has the requisite power (and speed) to be an asset to a team that lacks it and craves it. He is in the last year of his deal (with an option) so that could make a difference. And could bring a draft pick or 2 when he leaves if they let him make it to FA. Or they could flip him to another team for whatever they like. Short of that Walt is gonna have to get creative because I can't see Cordero getting moved at all.

Reds get: Greinke & Alex Gordon
Royals get: BP, Bailey, LaMarre & Brad Boxberger

Rays get: Alonso, Burton & Francisco
Reds get: Bartlett & Joyce

Reds re-sign Arthur Rhodes

Reds opening day 25 man 2011

Greinke
Cueto
Arroyo
Wood
Leake/Volquez/Chapman (Chapman most likely to AAA start the season and if need be Leake as well).

Cordero CL
Masset
Rhodes
Arredondo
Bray
Ondrusek
LeCure

Bartlett SS
Stubbs CF
Votto 1B
Bruce RF
Rolen 3B
Heisey/Joyce LF
Hernandez C
Cozart 2B

Hanigan C
Heisey OF
Sappelt OF
Cairo UT
Janish IF

jojo
12-06-2010, 08:57 PM
I'm not sure why Greinke's 2010 is being considered a strike against him. He had to face designated hitters instead of pitchers and he still would have been the best starter on the Reds staff based upon his peripherals and almost twice as valuable as the Reds most valuable starter based upon WAR . Greinke didn't have the benefit of pitching in front of a great defense either. In fact the Royals defense was one of the worst in the majors. Not bad for a down year?

GADawg
12-06-2010, 09:19 PM
probably already been mentioned somewhere in this long arse thread but I was reading on CBS sportsline that Jocketty said he hasn't had any discussions with the Royals about Greinke.....look out!!

IslandRed
12-06-2010, 10:14 PM
IMO Leake was pretty good for two months when he was laying the ball over the plate on the first pitch and everybody in the league was taking to try to get a read on him. After he was ahead 0-1 on everybody, like most pitchers, he was pretty effective. In early June the worm turned. The league stopped letting him get away with it. If he tried the same plan, he got ripped. If he tried something else, he fell behind in the count and was pounded. From then on, he gave up more fly balls than ground balls and lots and lots of homers. IMO, he had such an extreme advantage (basically starting out 0-1 on a lot of hitters before they really started to try to hit him) skewing his results for the first 2 months, I don't believe they provide any kind of indication of what to expect from him going forward.

In this age of pitch/fX and high definition video everywhere, it takes about half of one game -- not two months -- to figure out a guy's throwing first-pitch meatballs. Leake was throwing a ton of first strikes, but they were quality strikes, the type of strikes a hitter will let go figuring surely something better will come along. I don't know how one could watch most of his early starts, and see the corners being painted and everything being down and the sharp downward movement on most of his pitches, and conclude anything other than he was pitching extremely well.

Later in the season when he started to wear down, the quality of the strikes went south. They were catching more of the plate and the downward break started to disappear. And they got hit. Hard.

When and if I see the league hitting Leake's good stuff, then I'll grant that maybe they've gotten over on him. Until then, I'll give Leake the benefit of the doubt... presuming, of course, that his good stuff comes back.

mth123
12-06-2010, 10:58 PM
In this age of pitch/fX and high definition video everywhere, it takes about half of one game -- not two months -- to figure out a guy's throwing first-pitch meatballs. Leake was throwing a ton of first strikes, but they were quality strikes, the type of strikes a hitter will let go figuring surely something better will come along. I don't know how one could watch most of his early starts, and see the corners being painted and everything being down and the sharp downward movement on most of his pitches, and conclude anything other than he was pitching extremely well.

Later in the season when he started to wear down, the quality of the strikes went south. They were catching more of the plate and the downward break started to disappear. And they got hit. Hard.

When and if I see the league hitting Leake's good stuff, then I'll grant that maybe they've gotten over on him. Until then, I'll give Leake the benefit of the doubt... presuming, of course, that his good stuff comes back.

I'm not sure I buy the worn down theory. The kid was at the 75 inning mark when the worm turned. He threw 142 innings in College in 2009. If he was worn down at 75 innings, then he has a couple of years of inning building in the minors before he should be considered for the rotation.

I don't think he was getting any more of the plate in June than he was in April. As far as the Pitch F/X stuff goes, I think hitters base their book on a pitcher on facing him themselves. There may have been some information out there, but I doubt that all that many hitters went up there hacking based on it. I'd guess that you and I pay more attention to Pitch F/X than most major league hitters do. Nobody in the majors had ever even seen Leake. Other Rookies have at least faced some percentage of hitters in the minor leagues. In Leake's case he was a total unknown. He wasn't laying meatballs in there, but he was getting the ball over the plate and he really doesn't have the stuff to get away with it when hitters aren't holding back. Leake himself said he was getting the ball over the plate too much. I just think the same stuff that seemed to be working in April was getting pounded in June. I don't believe those results we saw in the first two months are a reflection of Leake's ability and were largely influenced by hitters holding back and letting the most hittable pitch of each at bat go by,

RedsManRick
12-07-2010, 01:22 AM
I'm not sure why Greinke's 2010 is being considered a strike against him. He had to face designated hitters instead of pitchers and he still would have been the best starter on the Reds staff based upon his peripherals and almost twice as valuable as the Reds most valuable starter based upon WAR . Greinke didn't have the benefit of pitching in front of a great defense either. In fact the Royals defense was one of the worst in the majors. Not bad for a down year?

Some people around here only want to pay a guy $12M if a 4.00 ERA is his upside...

TheNext44
12-07-2010, 01:44 AM
Some people around here only want to pay a guy $12M if a 4.00 ERA is his upside...

If the Reds could get Grienke by just agreeing to pay his salary, I think everyone would jump on it.

Caveat Emperor
12-07-2010, 08:28 AM
Some people around here only want to pay a guy $12M if a 4.00 ERA is his upside...

Total strawman. If the Reds were talking about trading Wood or Leake for a guy like Arroyo, I think you'd hear nothing but howling from the membership. Arroyo just cost the team money. With Greinke, you're talking about giving up high upside major league pitchers who are young, cheap, and under team control for the next 5 years.

RedsManRick
12-07-2010, 08:52 AM
I guess my facetiousness was not quite clear enough.

Cooper
12-07-2010, 08:58 AM
With regard to Leake: his BaBIP rate evened out over those last 2 months.

I'm guessing he's not as good as he was in the 1st 2 months he pitched and not as bad as the last 2 months. I think he could give you a 150 IP at 110 ERA+. The only caveat being his luck is average.

The guy was living right the 1st 2 months of the year -things had to even out- he looked like Greg Maddux, but he didn't have the periphrals to support it.

He needs to start -he's got 4 average pitches and 1 pitch that is slightly above average. That sounds like a #4 or 5 starter to me. If you get a league average ERA+ from your number 5 guy -i'd take that every day of the week. If it's 110+ i'd cry tears of joy.

Is 110+ ERA way out of bounds??

I don't know how you guys can look at that pitchfx stuff and get anything from it -there's TOO much data there and it's broken down into such small grains that i can't take too much from it. That's not to say i'm completely missing the boat. Interpreting data is not my strength.

Unassisted
12-07-2010, 11:07 AM
FWIW, Fay was asked on Twitter (http://twitter.com/johnfayman/status/11889824256495617) about the likelihood of the Reds picking up Greinke.

He said "Reds are about at payroll, Greinke makes $13.5 million. Won't happen."

IslandRed
12-07-2010, 11:34 AM
I'm not sure I buy the worn down theory. The kid was at the 75 inning mark when the worm turned. He threw 142 innings in College in 2009.

I don't believe college innings are direct equivalents to pro innings. Just about anyone can bounce back on six days' rest. The pro grind gradually wears down guys that aren't used to it yet, and I'm sure it's only worse when a guy is simultaneously breaking into the majors and never feels like he can coast.

I would not be averse to him logging some AAA time if necessary to build innings and be ready to go a full season in 2012, but I expect it'll basically come down to performance. If he's pitching well or if we need him, he'll be in Cincinnati.


Nobody in the majors had ever even seen Leake. Other Rookies have at least faced some percentage of hitters in the minor leagues. In Leake's case he was a total unknown.

You could use the same logic to suggest any decent college pitcher could skip the minors and get big-league hitters out for a couple of months. In practice, I don't think it would be quite that easy.

Now, let me clarify -- I'm not suggesting I wouldn't trade Leake for Greinke. But if Leake was maybe a little overrated early last season, I think the prevailing opinion underrates him now. There aren't that many pitchers who could skip the minors and put up a solid run of success in the show under any circumstances, so I think he's worth just a little more than the "deal him for whatever" sentiment I'm seeing at times. (Not saying you said that.)

REDREAD
12-07-2010, 11:51 AM
As far as I'm concerned, Cueto is the one young guy it makes the least sense to trade.

I agree completely. In 2010, Ceuto became the pitcher that we hope all the other youngsters will grow into being. Bird in the hand. It doesn't bother me that he's short. Oswalt is short.

I wouldn't mind trading one young starting pitcher and change for Grienke (especially if that starter is Homer), but I really think LF and SS are more pressing needs than upgrading the rotation. Especially if you look beyond 2011.. If the team wants to remain competitive over the next few years, we have some position players that are aging or have contract issues. It would be great to find a 4 year solution at LF and/or SS to help mitigate risks at other positions.

RedLegSuperStar
12-07-2010, 12:17 PM
FWIW, Fay was asked on Twitter (http://twitter.com/johnfayman/status/11889824256495617) about the likelihood of the Reds picking up Greinke.

He said "Reds are about at payroll, Greinke makes $13.5 million. Won't happen."

He also said that the Arroyo deal for this season is deferred. $$ wasn't discussed but gives the Reds wiggle room.

RedsManRick
12-07-2010, 12:44 PM
I agree completely. In 2010, Ceuto became the pitcher that we hope all the other youngsters will grow into being. Bird in the hand. It doesn't bother me that he's short. Oswalt is short.

Exactly. And while Cueto is "short" (5'10"), he's not slight. He's a thick 5'10", listed at 210 lbs. Compare that to Tim Lincecum at 170. He's got a more robust build than Pedro Martinez or Greg Maddux.

Cueto's velocity hasn't dipped -- he still averages 93 mph on his fastball. The biggest change stuff wise has been an improved change-up that he's throwing more often. He may not be a 3.60 ERA guy, but I think the Arroyo thread has clearly established that a 4.00 ERA and 30+ starts is a very valuable thing. Of the young guys, Cueto is the one guy who has established himself in that way.

kaldaniels
12-07-2010, 12:56 PM
Exactly. And while Cueto is "short" (5'10"), he's not slight. He's a thick 5'10", listed at 210 lbs. Compare that to Tim Lincecum at 170. He's got a more robust build than Pedro Martinez or Greg Maddux.

Cueto's velocity hasn't dipped -- he still averages 93 mph on his fastball. The biggest change stuff wise has been an improved change-up that he's throwing more often. He may not be a 3.60 ERA guy, but I think the Arroyo thread has clearly established that a 4.00 ERA and 30+ starts is a very valuable thing. Of the young guys, Cueto is the one guy who has established himself in that way.

So any thought to extend him a year or two post-arb? I'd look into it.

Jpup
12-07-2010, 01:20 PM
By reading this thread, I don't believe we want the Reds to trade any of their young starters. I am so looking forward to watching them grow that I don't really want to trade any of them either. I believe the Reds need offense worse than they need Zack Greinke. I think Stubbs and Bruce will continue to improve and Votto is the MVP, but where is the rest of the offense going to come from? Wonder what the Reds could fetch for Phillips? One starter for a bat would be tolerable, but I would hate to let 2 of them go.

redsfandan
12-07-2010, 01:30 PM
By reading this thread, I don't believe we want the Reds to trade any of their young starters. I am so looking forward to watching them grow that I don't really want to trade any of them either. I believe the Reds need offense worse than they need Zack Greinke. I think Stubbs and Bruce will continue to improve and Votto is the MVP, but where is the rest of the offense going to come from? Wonder what the Reds could fetch for Phillips? One starter for a bat would be tolerable, but I would hate to let 2 of them go.

I'll never understand why some seem to be looking forward to moving Phillips. Yeah, he's not as good as you'd like him to be. I got that. But, if you deal him you're most likely looking at a drop in production at 2nd.

edabbs44
12-07-2010, 01:30 PM
FWIW, Fay was asked on Twitter (http://twitter.com/johnfayman/status/11889824256495617) about the likelihood of the Reds picking up Greinke.

He said "Reds are about at payroll, Greinke makes $13.5 million. Won't happen."

I wonder what Fay thought the chances were last year if Cincy would get Chapman.

Jpup
12-07-2010, 01:33 PM
I'll never understand why some seem to be looking forward to moving Phillips. Yeah, he's not as good as you'd like him to be. I got that. But, if you deal him you're most likely looking at a drop in production at 2nd.

Sure, but with Gomes in left, you aren't getting a whole lot of production where you could get a whole lot of production. I also think Phillips value is as high as it will ever be and he's not cheap.

camisadelgolf
12-07-2010, 01:39 PM
In case it's relevant, Sam LeCure, Matt Maloney, and Daryl Thompson will all likely use up their last option year this upcoming season, which means they need to be on the Major League roster in 2012 or go to another organization. What I'm getting at is that the Reds don't have much time to decide whether they're part of the club's future or not. If not, I'd hope they try packaging them for help in other parts of the organization.

dfs
12-07-2010, 01:40 PM
I think Stubbs and Bruce will continue to improve and Votto is the MVP, but where is the rest of the offense going to come from? Wonder what the Reds could fetch for Phillips?

Given his salary, I don't think Phillips would bring anything in return.

That said, I think Phillips has some value at the plate and while I don't think his defense is as good as the reds broadcasting team seems to think, he isn't terrible in the field also.

Rolen has some value at the plate. As many said at the time of the trade, Rolen's value will be determined by how healthy he can stay. As we learned this year...he needs a caddy and days off. He was a different player in October than he was in June.

It would be dishonest to suggest improvement at the catcher position, but Paul Janish was the good offensive half of shortstop this last season. While we all thought Janish would crash, whenever he's been presented with a baseball challenge he has overcome it. If he really does put up an OPS of 96 over the course of a season....that's improvement.

That pretty much covers everywhere but left and the reds have enough in house options that left field should not crater. It still stands out as a place they could improve and they do have a surplus.....

redsfandan
12-07-2010, 01:43 PM
Sure, but with Gomes in left, you aren't getting a whole lot of production where you could get a whole lot of production. I also think Phillips value is as high as it will ever be and he's not cheap.

So, you're going to upgrade leftfield at the cost of downgrading 2nd? Doesn't make sense to me.

As much as you may want to see what kind of return he'll bring I really doubt Walt will deal Phillips.

REDREAD
12-07-2010, 01:54 PM
Sure, but with Gomes in left, you aren't getting a whole lot of production where you could get a whole lot of production. I also think Phillips value is as high as it will ever be and he's not cheap.

IMO, contending teams need multi-faceted players like Phillips in key positions. With Phillips, the Reds have a pretty good edge on many teams. There's just not that many special 2b around. Phillips is expensive, but worth it.

I'd rather trade one of the young starting pitchers for a longterm solution/upgrade in LF or SS. Walt needs to sort through all the starting pitchers and figure out which one to deal. I want to keep Arroyo, Cueto, and Chapman. It's hard to say on the other guys. I'd prefer to keep Wood, but if trading him got us a young/reasonably priced impact bat at LF or SS who could also play defense, it would be hard to say no.

I am really hoping there's enough budget room for us to add some salary.

Caveat Emperor
12-07-2010, 02:03 PM
Of the young guys, Cueto is the one guy who has established himself in that way.

He's also arb eligible, and would bring the most value in return if he were to be traded.

RedsManRick
12-07-2010, 02:10 PM
So any thought to extend him a year or two post-arb? I'd look into it.

Not really. As I've argued in the Arroyo thread, I don't think even the most durable pitcher is a smart bet to stay both healthy and effective over the course of a long term deal. You're more likely to get value for your investment with position players, if only because they're much less likely to suffer a catastrophic injury which costs them a full season and which possibly permanently alters their talent level.

In my opinion, long-term contracts for pitchers are simply too risky for teams that don't have the capacity to eat big contracts. With hitters, you still may not get full value over a long-term contract, but you're much less likely to get drastically less. (just think of the 10 worst contracts of the last decade -- there are more Barry Zitos than Mo Vaughns and the Vaughns tend to be much more obviously bad ideas at the time -- think Carlos Lee)

I think of it this way -- how much of a bargain would the Reds get on Cueto by giving him say a 5 year deal at $40M? For the sake of discussion, let's call it $10M in savings over just going year-to-year in arb and then paying him at market cost for the 2 FA years (an estimated $50M in total). So barring a ridiculous performance improvement and perfect health, you've basically capped your upside at adding $10M of value.

Now what are the odds he gives you $10M less in production than what you're paying him for, $30M worth over the 5 years? That's the equivalent of basically missing a full season or slightly underperforming? What are the odds of even worse? The long term contract gives you a moderate cost savings and cost certainty, but it comes at the expense of significant down-side risk. I just don't think it's wise for a team like the Reds to expose itself to that given a relatively small benefit.

Unless the cost savings via the long term contract are massive, I'd rather pay him a few million bucks more a year for the opportunity to keep my risk low. I'm all for being optimistic and taking advantage of opportunities for cost savings, but I think some teams are much too eager to give away the value of the flexibility and opt-out opportunity arbitration provides them. They're too willing to pay attention to the upside possibility (if he stays healthy and productive, we're golden) while paying too little to the downside possibilities (how many players stay healthy and productive?). If 2 years from now, Cueto is still chugging along and we want to give him a 3 year deal which extends in to FA, I'd be down for it. Otherwise I'd be prepared to pay him his full value in FA, trade him or keep him and take the comp picks if he leaves.

If I'm running a team like the Reds, the last thing I want to do is make a decision which has the possibility of significantly handicapping my team for years to come. And with pitchers, that risk is more present than we like to think.

dfs
12-07-2010, 02:24 PM
Not really. As I've argued in the Arroyo thread, I don't think even the most durable pitcher is a smart bet to stay both healthy and effective over the course of a long term deal. You're more likely to get value for your investment with position players, if only because they're much less likely to suffer a catastrophic injury which costs them a full season and which possibly permanently alters their talent level.

Edinson Vloquez.....c'mon down as exhibit A.

That's why the reds felt Bronson was worth the money. Consistency and health.

Aaron Harang....c'mon down as exhibit B.

GoReds
12-07-2010, 02:29 PM
Not really. As I've argued in the Arroyo thread, I don't think even the most durable pitcher is a smart bet to stay both healthy and effective over the course of a long term deal. You're more likely to get value for your investment with position players, if only because they're much less likely to suffer a catastrophic injury which costs them a full season and which possibly permanently alters their talent level.

In my opinion, long-term contracts for pitchers are simply too risky for teams that don't have the capacity to eat big contracts. With hitters, you still may not get full value over a long-term contract, but you're much less likely to get drastically less. (just think of the 10 worst contracts of the last decade -- there are more Barry Zitos than Mo Vaughns and the Vaughns tend to be much more obviously bad ideas at the time -- think Carlos Lee)

I think of it this way -- how much of a bargain would the Reds get on Cueto by giving him say a 5 year deal at $40M? For the sake of discussion, let's call it $10M in savings over just going year-to-year in arb and then paying him at market cost for the 2 FA years (an estimated $50M in total). So barring a ridiculous performance improvement and perfect health, you've basically capped your upside at adding $10M of value.

Now what are the odds he gives you $10M less in production than what you're paying him for, $30M worth over the 50 years? That's the equivalent of basically missing a full season or slightly underperforming? What are the odds of even worse? The long term contract gives you a moderate cost savings and cost certainty, but it comes at the expense of significant down-side risk. I just don't think it's wise for a team like the Reds to expose itself to that given a relatively small benefit.

Unless the cost savings via the long term contract are massive, I'd rather pay him a few million bucks more a year for the opportunity to keep my risk low. I'm all for being optimistic and taking advantage of opportunities for cost savings, but I think some teams are much too eager to give away the value of the flexibility and opt-out opportunity arbitration provides them. They're too willing to pay attention to the upside possibility (if he stays healthy and productive, we're golden) while paying too little to the downside possibilities (how many players stay healthy and productive?). If 2 years from now, Cueto is still chugging along and we want to give him a 3 year deal which extends in to FA, I'd be down for it. Otherwise I'd be prepared to pay him his full value in FA, trade him or keep him and take the comp picks if he leaves.

If I'm running a team like the Reds, the last thing I want to do is make a decision which has the possibility of significantly handicapping my team for years to come. And with pitchers, that risk is more present than we like to think.

During this entire discussion, I'm reminded of the Eric Bedard discussions that occurred a couple of years ago. We were discussing the possibility of Votto AND Bailey as PART of a package for Bedard. A couple years later, we wouldn't send a package of used balls for him now.

I really like Greinke and would like to see him in a Reds uni, but the cost has to make sense.

Caveat Emperor
12-07-2010, 02:38 PM
In my opinion, long-term contracts for pitchers are simply too risky for teams that don't have the capacity to eat big contracts.

All the more reason the team should be in absolutely no hurry to move guys like Wood and Leake, who are both effective major league pitchers with 5 years of team control remaining before they require a long-term contract to pitch.

MikeS21
12-07-2010, 02:48 PM
Volquez is the guy I question. All Star or not, his control is too inconsistent, and I don't see it improving any time soon. I package him with Sappelt, Fransisco, and Maloney/Lecure. Replace Sappelt with Heisey if it tips the scales and gets the deal done. I don't think this a deal where the Reds are overpaying.

I almost think if the Reds keep EV, they should consider grooming him as Coco's replacement.

RedsManRick
12-07-2010, 02:49 PM
Edinson Vloquez.....c'mon down as exhibit A.

That's why the reds felt Bronson was worth the money. Consistency and health.

Aaron Harang....c'mon down as exhibit B.

Harang is a great example. After 2007 he was coming off a stretch of 3 seasons with 210+ IP and a sub 4.00 ERA. The guy was the model of health and consistency heading in to his age 30 season. He proceeds to struggle through injury and lose effectiveness. It wasn't the end of the world, but wouldn't it have been nice to have the option to go year to year with him?

I'd love Greinke, but not at the price the Royals are asking for and not if it's built around one of the least risky options we've got.

dfs
12-07-2010, 03:06 PM
Harang is a great example. After 2007 he was coming off a stretch of 3 seasons with 210+ IP and a sub 4.00 ERA. The guy was the model of health and consistency heading in to his age 30 season. He proceeds to struggle through injury and lose effectiveness. It wasn't the end of the world, but wouldn't it have been nice to have the option to go year to year with him?
Bronson Arroyo has also been the model of health and consistency....oh. oopps. Never mind.


I'd love Greinke, but not at the price the Royals are asking for and not if it's built around one of the least risky options we've got.

In fairness to the Royals, we know public posturing through the media. We don't know what they'll really take or what's really been offered.

OnBaseMachine
12-07-2010, 03:14 PM
From Ed Price:

Sounds like teams are upping offers for Zack Greinke. #Royals

http://twitter.com/ed_price

Caveat Emperor
12-07-2010, 03:23 PM
I'd love Greinke, but not at the price the Royals are asking for and not if it's built around one of the least risky options we've got.

You wouldn't trade Cueto + 2 B/C Level prospects for Greinke? I'd drive Johnny to KC myself if it helped to make the deal happen.

OnBaseMachine
12-07-2010, 03:37 PM
From John Fay:

Jocketty clarified on Greinke: "We haven't had any discussions. If anyone did, it doesn't matter. Only Bob Castelllini & I matter on that."

http://twitter.com/johnfayman

Brutus
12-07-2010, 04:19 PM
From John Fay:

Jocketty clarified on Greinke: "We haven't had any discussions. If anyone did, it doesn't matter. Only Bob Castelllini & I matter on that."

http://twitter.com/johnfayman

Hm. That seems a bit like backtracking.

We didn't do it, but if we did it, it didn't mean anything.

RedsManRick
12-07-2010, 04:26 PM
You wouldn't trade Cueto + 2 B/C Level prospects for Greinke? I'd drive Johnny to KC myself if it helped to make the deal happen.

If it was just that, possibly. But all indications out of KC are that it's going to take more than 1 good major leaguer and 2 mediocre prospects. They're looking for 2 major leaguers and 2 good prospects.

Sea Ray
12-07-2010, 04:27 PM
The way I see it our chances of getting Greinke are right up there with players discussed here in the past, Halladay, Holliday, Sabathia, Lee...

RedsManRick
12-07-2010, 04:28 PM
Hm. That seems a bit like backtracking.

We didn't do it, but if we did it, it didn't mean anything.

I think he's drawing the distinction between Baseball Operations staff doing due diligence and having contact with the Royals to get an understanding on the price and a formal discussion between decision makers about actual offers.

Brutus
12-07-2010, 04:44 PM
I think he's drawing the distinction between Baseball Operations staff doing due diligence and having contact with the Royals to get an understanding on the price and a formal discussion between decision makers about actual offers.

Perhaps, but it's still backtracking from the original comment, which was having "NO" conversations with the Royals about Greinke.

kaldaniels
12-07-2010, 04:50 PM
Fays tweets on the matter have had quite the scolding tone.

Unassisted
12-07-2010, 05:00 PM
Fays tweets on the matter have had quite the scolding tone.He gets his perspective on the matter straight from Jocketty. None of us do and I would venture to say that you can count on one hand the number of his Twitter followers who do. I appreciate that Fay is discouraging people from trying to stoke the fire of the hot stove when the Reds' GM has the matches locked away in his desk drawer and didn't bring any firewood to the winter meetings.

OnBaseMachine
12-08-2010, 01:57 AM
From Jon Morosi:

#Reds have prospects to be player for Greinke but like rotation as is: Arroyo, Cueto, Volquez, Wood, Bailey, Chapman, Leake.

http://twitter.com/jonmorosi

TheNext44
12-08-2010, 03:15 AM
From Jon Morosi:

#Reds have prospects to be player for Greinke but like rotation as is: Arroyo, Cueto, Volquez, Wood, Bailey, Chapman, Leake.

http://twitter.com/jonmorosi

Good to hear. Thanks :)

I hope this is true. I would love to Greinke for the right price, but would not be upset if the Reds went into the season with current rotation.

I(heart)Freel
12-08-2010, 03:37 PM
More insight into the asking price...

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/Kansas-City-Royals-holding-firm-on-price-for-Zack-Greinke-120710

Bottom-line: Pitching to replace Greinke and middle-field position players.

Seems to me the Reds could do Leake, Heisey and Grandal and not miss a beat in the next few years.

ADDED FOR INTRIGUE: This little tidbit could REALLY fuel the fire on a deal like this.
http://mlb.fanhouse.com/2010/06/04/sources-royals-yasmani-grandal-have-pre-draft-agreement/

edabbs44
12-08-2010, 03:41 PM
More insight into the asking price...

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/Kansas-City-Royals-holding-firm-on-price-for-Zack-Greinke-120710

Bottom-line: Pitching to replace Greinke and middle-field position players.

Seems to me the Reds could do Leake, Heisey and Grandal and not miss a beat in the next few years.

ADDED FOR INTRIGUE: This little tidbit could REALLY fuel the fire on a deal like this.
http://mlb.fanhouse.com/2010/06/04/sources-royals-yasmani-grandal-have-pre-draft-agreement/

He'd have to be a PTBNL until June, correct?

Brutus
12-08-2010, 03:42 PM
He'd have to be a PTBNL until June, correct?

Until August, since it's based on when he signed.

Which means he could be a PTBNL in a deal, at the earliest, in February (because there's a max of 6 months before being named)

Benihana
12-08-2010, 03:43 PM
From Jon Morosi:

#Reds have prospects to be player for Greinke but like rotation as is: Arroyo, Cueto, Volquez, Wood, Bailey, Chapman, Leake.

http://twitter.com/jonmorosi

So we're going with a six-man rotation?

TheNext44
12-08-2010, 03:48 PM
Until August, since it's based on when he signed.

Which means he could be a PTBNL in a deal, at the earliest, in February (because there's a max of 6 months before being named)

And I would want to wait to trade him until then, since no one really knows him yet.

Benihana
12-08-2010, 03:55 PM
From Jon Morosi:

#Reds have prospects to be player for Greinke but like rotation as is: Arroyo, Cueto, Volquez, Wood, Bailey, Chapman, Leake.

http://twitter.com/jonmorosi

Makes a lot of sense given Rosenthal's latest that they are asking for pitching and young players up the middle.

Leake, Sappelt, Heisey, LaMarre, Mesoraco, Grandal, Lohman, Rojas, Rodriguez, and Gregorious are all names that should interest them.

I'd offer one from each of the following groups:

GROUP 1
Leake
Bailey
Wood

GROUP 2
Grandal (might consider Mesoraco here if Reds could pull back two or more players from the other groups)

GROUP 3
Heisey
Sappelt
LaMarre

GROUP 4
Valaika
Negron
Rojas
Gregorious
Lohman

Basically offering up our top 3 picks from the 2010 draft, as well as a former top pick currently in the Reds rotation for two years of a hammer.

The way I see it 2011-2012 is the Reds true window of contention. After 2012, the three All-Star infielders may be gone, and players like Bruce, Stubbs, and the rest of the pitchers will start getting very expensive. If we could get a true hammer for this window while not giving up anyone irreplaceable, you have to strongly consider it.

Brutus
12-08-2010, 03:56 PM
And I would want to wait to trade him until then, since no one really knows him yet.

I would suggest, without regard to his potential or whether he'll be better or worse than Mesoraco, that this is the exact reason to trade him if he's an asset to the Royals.

I(heart)Freel
12-08-2010, 04:01 PM
And I would want to wait to trade him until then, since no one really knows him yet.

Per that second link, it sounds like the KC organization knows him very well.

TheNext44
12-08-2010, 04:21 PM
I would suggest, without regard to his potential or whether he'll be better or worse than Mesoraco, that this is the exact reason to trade him if he's an asset to the Royals.

It's not a matter of where he is on the depth chart, but how well he plays. Why risk trading someone with such a high ceiling before he ever plays a professional inning?

edabbs44
12-08-2010, 04:25 PM
It's not a matter of where he is on the depth chart, but how well he plays. Why risk trading someone with such a high ceiling before he ever plays a professional inning?

Because you'd be getting Greinke.

TheNext44
12-08-2010, 04:30 PM
Per that second link, it sounds like the KC organization knows him very well.

Exactly. He was almost signed by the Indians as well, which means he was consideded a top 5 talent in the draft, probably #3 if not for contract demands.

Brutus
12-08-2010, 04:33 PM
It's not a matter of where he is on the depth chart, but how well he plays. Why risk trading someone with such a high ceiling before he ever plays a professional inning?

Why risk losing out on a Cy Young caliber pitcher over someone you have absolutely no clue will turn out?

A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. I'd say that since we know what Greinke is, he's far more valuable than the 1,000 different outcomes we could see Grandal turn out to be.

TheNext44
12-08-2010, 04:37 PM
Because you'd be getting Greinke.

Greinke is a TOR starter with emotional issues and a two year $27M contract. He's worth a lot, but Grandal could easily out produce him by himself before he becomes a free agent.

edabbs44
12-08-2010, 04:47 PM
Greinke is a TOR starter with emotional issues and a two year $27M contract. He's worth a lot, but Grandal could easily out produce him by himself before he becomes a free agent.

Or he could easily be Munsoned.


Eric Walter Munson (born October 3, 1977 in San Diego, California) is a Major League Baseball catcher who currently plays for the Newark Bears. He was the third overall pick in the 1999 Major League Baseball Draft by the Detroit Tigers, behind Josh Hamilton and Josh Beckett. He is of no relation to former major league catcher Thurman Munson



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

camisadelgolf
12-08-2010, 04:54 PM
Or he could easily be Munsoned.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Munson
http://obamiconme.pastemagazine.com/entries/images/49/40/424235/original_image.gif

I(heart)Freel
12-08-2010, 04:55 PM
In regard to prospects who have high ceilings but who may or may not pan out, I am reminded of the phrase...

"Better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."

If Grandal is well regarded and untested, then maybe his value is as high as it could be. Why wait for him to prove it if the value is already high? The only thing he could do is disprove it.

Plus there's that whole Mesoraco thing. He's closer and has proved his worth in the minors a bit. And amazingly he's only a year older than Grandal.

For a difference-maker like Greinke and because of Mez, Grandal is expendable.

TheNext44
12-08-2010, 05:38 PM
Or he could easily be Munsoned.



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

Or he could become Buster Posey.

Leake has beome far more valuable now than he was a year ago. Alonso less valuable than he was when drafted.

Trading Grandal now is like playing Let's Make Deal with Monty Hall. You don't know if the envelope he gave you is worth more or less than Vespa behind curtain #2. It's a gamble. Why play that game when you can trade what you know?

Benihana
12-08-2010, 05:40 PM
Or he could become Buster Posey.

Leake has beome far more valuable now than he was a year ago. Alonso less valuable than he was when drafted.

Trading Grandal now is like playing Let's Make Deal with Monty Hall. You don't know if the envelope he gave you is worth more or less than Vespa behind curtain #2. It's a gamble. Why play that game when you can trade what you know?

So I guess the moral of the story is you should never trade prospects?

I'd trade Grandal 8 days a week for Greinke.

TheNext44
12-08-2010, 05:42 PM
In regard to prospects who have high ceilings but who may or may not pan out, I am reminded of the phrase...

"Better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."

If Grandal is well regarded and untested, then maybe his value is as high as it could be. Why wait for him to prove it if the value is already high? The only thing he could do is disprove it.

Plus there's that whole Mesoraco thing. He's closer and has proved his worth in the minors a bit. And amazingly he's only a year older than Grandal.

For a difference-maker like Greinke and because of Mez, Grandal is expendable.

I am not sure Greinke is a difference maker for this team. I think that there is a better chance that Grandal becomes a solid everyday starting catcher than Greinke outperforms every Reds starting pitcher over the next two seasons. Mostly because I think that at least one of them will be a TOR pitcher, who will be cheaper than Greinke.

TheNext44
12-08-2010, 05:44 PM
So I guess the moral of the story is you should never trade prospects?

I'd trade Grandal 8 days a week for Greinke.

I might make that trade, but the deal sujggested was for one of the Reds starting pitchers, plus Grandal, plus another prospect. I don't want to include a complete unknown top prospect as a throw in.

Benihana
12-08-2010, 05:49 PM
I might make that trade, but the deal sujggested was for one of the Reds starting pitchers, plus Grandal, plus another prospect. I don't want to include a complete unknown top prospect as a throw in.

I would make that deal too.

FWIW, I don't think he's looked at as a throw-in, I think he's viewed as a top prospect and essential piece of the proposed deal.

Benihana
12-08-2010, 05:51 PM
I am not sure Greinke is a difference maker for this team. I think that there is a better chance that Grandal becomes a solid everyday starting catcher than Greinke outperforms every Reds starting pitcher over the next two seasons. Mostly because I think that at least one of them will be a TOR pitcher, who will be cheaper than Greinke.

And teams with two TOR pitchers compete for championships. Just look at the Giants and Phillies.

I think there is probably a better chance at this point that both Hanigan and Mesoraco are solid everyday starting catchers before Grandal.

jojo
12-08-2010, 06:06 PM
Greinke would be a definite upgrade for the Reds rotation.

RedLegSuperStar
12-08-2010, 06:11 PM
Marlins, Rangers, and Royals working on a 3-Team trade that would send Greinke to the Marlins

Brutus
12-08-2010, 06:13 PM
Marlins, Rangers, and Royals working on a 3-Team trade that would send Greinke to the Marlins

Um. Wow.

RedLegSuperStar
12-08-2010, 06:18 PM
Um. Wow.

Ken Rosenthal is reporting this via twitter

HokieRed
12-08-2010, 06:33 PM
Greinke would be a definite upgrade for the Reds rotation.

Granted. But the same defense could be/was offered for the Hamilton for Volquez trade. It's all about the cost.

Benihana
12-08-2010, 06:34 PM
I don't see why the Rangers would be involved in a Greinke deal before they knew the fate of Cliff Lee. If they fail to sign Lee, I would think they'd want Greinke for themselves.

TheNext44
12-08-2010, 06:49 PM
Greinke would be a definite upgrade for the Reds rotation.

Clearly, but how much of one and at what cost, both in players and money?

Benihana
12-08-2010, 06:52 PM
Rosenthal clarifies- #Marlins definitely tried for Greinke. Marlins also talking to Rangers. Rangers deny 3-team deal discussed. Talks fluid. #MLB

If the Marlins can afford Greinke, we should be able to.

kaldaniels
12-08-2010, 06:55 PM
Rosenthal clarifies- #Marlins definitely tried for Greinke. Marlins also talking to Rangers. Rangers deny 3-team deal discussed. Talks fluid. #MLB

If the Marlins can afford Greinke, we should be able to.

The Marlins and Reds finances are apples and oranges. That just needs to be realized with such a statement. We have Vottos and Bruces to consider as well as throwing 27 million at a guy for 2 years. I want him too, but he comes at a hefty price for the Reds.

TheNext44
12-09-2010, 04:53 PM
Here's my breakdown on a potential Greinke deal:

Greinke projects to be around a 5 WAR pitcher for the next two seasons. He might find the magic of 2009 again, but I wouldn't bet on it.

So he would likely give the Reds 10 WAR over the next two seasons, and would cost $27M.

In order to get him, it would cost the Reds at least one starting pitcher. No matter who is chosen from the top seven, I would say that at least, that pitcher would provide 4 WAR total over the next two seasons.

So Greinke would be providing at most 6 additional WAR over the next two years, at the cost of $27M. 6 wins is almost worth exactly $27M according to present day contracts.

This means that trading one of the Reds worst starting pitchers for Greinke is really just a sideways move, and that doesn't include the additional value that the traded pitcher might have since he would be under team control longer, nor the value of the additional players that the Royals would demand.

Now one could argue that the Reds need a TOR arm to go deeper into the playoffs. Without discussing the merits of that argument, I would just ask if you would want to overpay for a pitcher to be that TOR arm, who has emotional issues strong enough to prevent him from playing for a big city team?

Cedric
12-09-2010, 04:54 PM
Here's my breakdown on a potential Greinke deal:

Greinke projects to be around a 5 WAR pitcher for the next two seasons. He might find the magic of 2009 again, but I wouldn't bet on it.

So he would likely give the Reds 10 WAR over the next two seasons, and would cost $27M.

In order to get him, it would cost the Reds at least one starting pitcher. No matter who is chosen from the top seven, I would say that at least, that pitcher would provide 4 WAR total over the next two seasons.

So Greinke would be providing at most 6 additional WAR over the next two years, at the cost of $27M. 6 wins is almost worth exactly $27M according to present day contracts.

This means that trading one of the Reds worst starting pitchers for Greinke is really just a sideways move, and that doesn't include the additional value that the traded pitcher might have since he would be under team control longer, nor the value of the additional players that the Royals would demand.

Now one could argue that the Reds need a TOR arm to go deeper into the playoffs. Without discussing the merits of that argument, I would just ask if you would want to overpay for a pitcher to be that TOR arm, who has emotional issues strong enough to prevent him from playing for a big city team?

With a better defense and better luck that "magic" will be right back.

I(heart)Freel
12-09-2010, 05:10 PM
Here's my breakdown on a potential Greinke deal:

Greinke projects to be around a 5 WAR pitcher for the next two seasons. He might find the magic of 2009 again, but I wouldn't bet on it.

So he would likely give the Reds 10 WAR over the next two seasons, and would cost $27M.

In order to get him, it would cost the Reds at least one starting pitcher. No matter who is chosen from the top seven, I would say that at least, that pitcher would provide 4 WAR total over the next two seasons.

So Greinke would be providing at most 6 additional WAR over the next two years, at the cost of $27M. 6 wins is almost worth exactly $27M according to present day contracts.

This means that trading one of the Reds worst starting pitchers for Greinke is really just a sideways move, and that doesn't include the additional value that the traded pitcher might have since he would be under team control longer, nor the value of the additional players that the Royals would demand.

Now one could argue that the Reds need a TOR arm to go deeper into the playoffs. Without discussing the merits of that argument, I would just ask if you would want to overpay for a pitcher to be that TOR arm, who has emotional issues strong enough to prevent him from playing for a big city team?

Difficult to provide that much WAR from Louisville.

TheNext44
12-09-2010, 05:16 PM
With a better defense and better luck that "magic" will be right back.

WAR is supposed to be defense and luck neutral. Plus he's pretty much had the same defense behind him his whole career as a Royal.

TheNext44
12-09-2010, 05:21 PM
Difficult to provide that much WAR from Louisville.

Teams use on average 8 starting pitchers a year.

Wood started 2010 as the Reds 6th best starting pitcher, and he provided over 2 WAR. Bailey missed most of the season and provided very close to 2 WAR.

2 WAR from a starting pitcher is pretty low. I based that number on the assumption that that pitcher would not spend the entire season on the major league team.

RedsManRick
12-09-2010, 05:26 PM
Here's my breakdown on a potential Greinke deal:

Greinke projects to be around a 5 WAR pitcher for the next two seasons. He might find the magic of 2009 again, but I wouldn't bet on it.

So he would likely give the Reds 10 WAR over the next two seasons, and would cost $27M.

In order to get him, it would cost the Reds at least one starting pitcher. No matter who is chosen from the top seven, I would say that at least, that pitcher would provide 4 WAR total over the next two seasons.

So Greinke would be providing at most 6 additional WAR over the next two years, at the cost of $27M. 6 wins is almost worth exactly $27M according to present day contracts.

This means that trading one of the Reds worst starting pitchers for Greinke is really just a sideways move, and that doesn't include the additional value that the traded pitcher might have since he would be under team control longer, nor the value of the additional players that the Royals would demand.

Now one could argue that the Reds need a TOR arm to go deeper into the playoffs. Without discussing the merits of that argument, I would just ask if you would want to overpay for a pitcher to be that TOR arm, who has emotional issues strong enough to prevent him from playing for a big city team?

Fair analysis. But as has been pointed out to me numerous times, at the end of the day you actually need to turn that theoretical value in to real players. If we assume the budget is there, where else are the Reds going to upgrade by 3 wins at just 1 position? What FA would we sign? What other trade would we make? Are we going to find a 4 win SS? A 5 win LF?

I'm all about recognizing opportunity cost. But there's so much good talent on this team, we're just about past the point of adding wins by replacing crappy players with decent ones. This is what makes winning 90+ games so hard. There are dozens upon dozens of guys you can acquire in a variety of ways to upgrade a replacement level guy to average. But once you have an average (or better) guy everywhere, the pool from which you can find major upgrades gets awfully small. If you have the budget, but can't find an available player worth spending it on, who cares? If the money stays in the bank, you don't get the wins. At some point, the premium may be worth it.

As for his emotional issues, I bet you there are lots of guys whose psychological makeup affects their performance in certain conditions. We're just not privy to them. That's not to say it shouldn't be a consideration, but let's apply the standard equally. And besides, just because Grienke would prefer not to play in a big city and has the opportunity to make that decision doesn't mean he's incapable of pitching well. Suggesting that it's a sign of fragility and that he's prone to mental breakdown (and thus extra risky) seems a bit specious to me considering he's been back 3 years and passed through a significant maturation phase in anyone's life (early 20's).

RedsManRick
12-09-2010, 05:31 PM
Teams use on average 8 starting pitchers a year.

Wood started 2010 as the Reds 6th best starting pitcher, and he provided over 2 WAR. Bailey missed most of the season and provided very close to 2 WAR.

2 WAR from a starting pitcher is pretty low. I based that number on the assumption that that pitcher would not spend the entire season on the major league team.

Regarding 8 pitchers, how often is that because of necessity due to injury vs. a simple inability to find a pitcher(s) who merit 30+ starts? Obviously it's a bit of both, but I think the Reds have less to worry about when it comes to the latter. That suggests that your 2 WAR estimate may be overly generous...

TheNext44
12-09-2010, 05:39 PM
Fair analysis. But as has been pointed out to me numerous times, at the end of the day you actually need to turn that theoretical value in to real players. If we assume the budget is there, where else are the Reds going to upgrade by 3 wins at just 1 position? What FA would we sign? What other trade would we make? Are we going to find a 4 win SS? A 5 win LF?

I'm all about recognizing opportunity cost. But there's so much good talent on this team, we're just about past the point of adding wins by replacing crappy players with decent ones. This is what makes winning 90+ games so hard. There are dozens dozens upon dozens of guys you can acquire in a variety of ways to upgrade a replacement level guy to average. But once you have an average (or better) guy everywhere, the pool from you can improve gets awfully small. If you have the budget, but can't find an available player worth spending it on, who cares? If the money stays in the bank, you don't get the wins. At some point, the premium may be worth it.

As for his emotional issues, I bet you there are lots of guys whose psychological makeup affects their performance in certain conditions. We're just not privy to them. That's not to say it shouldn't be a consideration, but let's apply the standard equally. And besides, just because Grienke would prefer not to play in a big city and has the opportunity to make that decision doesn't mean he's incapable of pitching well. Suggesting that it's a sign of fragility and that he's prone to mental breakdown (and thus extra risky) seems a bit specious to me considering he's been back 3 years and passed through a significant maturation phase in anyone's life (early 20's).

I agree with everything you said.

I'm not against trading from the surplus to get an elite player I just think that it makes more sense to improve LF, where I think we are very close to replacement level, as opposed to starting pitching, where I think 1-5 the Reds are very close to league average. I am also for saving some resources for the trading deadline, when the real opportunity to get elite players overs and when the team will have a better idea of what it needs.

As for Greinke's emotional issues:

The whole point of getting a TOR arm is for the playoffs, the exact type of situation that Greinke admits to having problems with. Huge crowds, huge media influence, and intense pressure on your performance. Maybe he'll be able to handle it. But do you really want to overpay and take that chance?

Mario-Rijo
12-09-2010, 06:00 PM
As for Greinke's emotional issues:

The whole point of getting a TOR arm is for the playoffs, the exact type of situation that Greinke admits to having problems with. Huge crowds, huge media influence, and intense pressure on your performance. Maybe he'll be able to handle it. But do you really want to overpay and take that chance?

Can we win it without that type of arm and can we find a comparable arm elsewhere so reasonably priced? I'd say no and not likely so again yes I would take the chance.

RedsManRick
12-09-2010, 08:03 PM
I agree with everything you said.

I'm not against trading from the surplus to get an elite player I just think that it makes more sense to improve LF, where I think we are very close to replacement level, as opposed to starting pitching, where I think 1-5 the Reds are very close to league average. I am also for saving some resources for the trading deadline, when the real opportunity to get elite players overs and when the team will have a better idea of what it needs.

I think our LF is better than above replacement. Gomes won't play everyday. Leveraged properly, he's an asset. I'd put my expected LF production around 1.5 WAR, about where I'd put SS. I just don't know that there is a LF or SS out there who represents the same 2-3 win upgrade. Who is out there? You Matt Kemp (0.4 WAR in 2010)? Josh Willingham (2.7 WAR)? Magglio Ordonez (2.5 WAR)? Johnny Damon (1.9 WAR)?

As for waiting for the deadline, I'm not a huge fan of getting only 50% (or less) of a guy's seasonal production. I don't think you pay 50% less in June than you'd pay in January - but you get 50% less production. The identifying needs piece makes some sense, but why not address needs we already know we have instead of saving them for other needs which may or may not come up while taking our lumps elsewhere?

I also tend to think that if the team is in position where a mid-season upgrade is needed, the money will be there to make it happen. Playoff races have a history of loosening purse strings.



As for Greinke's emotional issues:

The whole point of getting a TOR arm is for the playoffs, the exact type of situation that Greinke admits to having problems with. Huge crowds, huge media influence, and intense pressure on your performance. Maybe he'll be able to handle it. But do you really want to overpay and take that chance?

I guess it seems to me that you are asserting that Greinke is orders of magnitude more risky in that regard than the average player. I'm not so sure that's the case.

I think you take that risk with every single player; you're just not always so conscious of it. Obviously that doesn't mean you ignore what you are aware of, but I think it needs to be taken with a very big grain of salt. If there were another Greinke out there who didn't have the issues, I'd prefer him. But I'll take Greinke and his issues over a less talented player who's emotional life is less public.

What's interesting with Greinke is how his issues have been positioned. It's made to be purely a social anxiety thing. I've heard some discussion that it is also a focus thing. He got bored and disinterested in giving it 100% playing for a 60 win team and little excitement. When the Royals were having success, he was having success (chicken or the egg, I know). That's certainly no positive, but there's reason to believe Cincinnati would be a much better place for him in that regard.

Blitz Dorsey
12-09-2010, 08:13 PM
Maybe the guy just needed some Xanex and now he's got it. You guys act like he was suicidal or something. He just had some anxiety and needed some prescription meds (from my understanding).

MattyHo4Life
12-09-2010, 08:28 PM
Greinke probably won't be traded until July anyways.

Mario-Rijo
12-10-2010, 10:32 AM
12/9/10

Insider Link (http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/features/rumors/_/date/20101210#7261)


Dutton says KC wants "two high-impact prospects, preferably a starting pitcher and either a middle infielder or center fielder, and two players capable of supporting roles."


The Reds have been mentioned as a possible suitor, but John Fay of the Cincinnati Enquirer writes Friday that it would be "foolish" for Cincinnati to trade away its future for Greinke.

buckeyenut
12-10-2010, 10:58 AM
12/9/10

Insider Link (http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/features/rumors/_/date/20101210#7261)
It would be foolish to trade away our future. But the thing is #1) we can trade away 3-4 top notch guys and see very little impact because of our depth and 2) the future is NOW. The next two to three years are prime for this team. You don't give up a shot at World Series in the next two years because you want to save for 5 years from now.

Mario-Rijo
12-10-2010, 11:03 AM
It would be foolish to trade away our future. But the thing is #1) we can trade away 3-4 top notch guys and see very little impact because of our depth and 2) the future is NOW. The next two to three years are prime for this team. You don't give up a shot at World Series in the next two years because you want to save for 5 years from now.

You won't get any argument from me, my thinking all the way.

jojo
12-10-2010, 11:30 AM
12/9/10

Insider Link (http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/features/rumors/_/date/20101210#7261)

The Royal's asking price according to that link is kind of shockingly unrealistic at first glance but when one remembers that Moore considers Yuniesky Betancourt a high impact middle infielder, suddenly Grienke seems very obtainable!

Mario-Rijo
12-10-2010, 11:42 AM
The Royal's asking price according to that link is kind of shockingly unrealistic at first glance but when one remembers that Moore considers Yuniesky Betancourt a high impact middle infielder, suddenly Grienke seems very obtainable!

Does that make Heisey a high impact CF type?

Slyder
12-10-2010, 12:02 PM
Another Rumor out there...

http://www.sbnation.com/mlb/2010/12/9/1865614/matt-garza-trade-rumors-cubs-rays-rangers

Anyone know the sCrubs farm system to know what they could possibly offer in terms of two "high impact" spects?

If the Royals like Heisey that much I would take the risk of (a pitcher), Heisey, and a third piece from lower on the farm for Greinke.

TheNext44
12-10-2010, 12:48 PM
Can we win it without that type of arm and can we find a comparable arm elsewhere so reasonably priced? I'd say no and not likely so again yes I would take the chance.

I would answer your first question with an " absolutely.". The Reds already won the division without one, plus the odds are good that one of the starters they already have will be one in 2011.

That's my main issue with Greinke. I don't see the need for him as much as others. I would rather overpay for an above average LF.

Mario-Rijo
12-10-2010, 01:04 PM
I would answer your first question with an " absolutely.". The Reds already won the division without one, plus the odds are good that one of the starters they already have will be one in 2011.

That's my main issue with Greinke. I don't see the need for him as much as others. I would rather overpay for an above average LF.

We'll just have to agree to disagree. I don't believe our offense is good enough to make up for the lack of an ace in the playoffs. It could be but there is no way to project the kind of leap I believe this offense needs to make in order to do so. Heisey could be a huge key as could the further development of Bruce and Stubbs. As far as ACES go I think Reds fans are a bit out of touch with what an ACE is if they believe the odds are good that one of the current starters are ACE like soon. Yes Chapman has ACE stuff, Volquez as well but neither are good bets at this juncture in my mind, at least for '11. I don't know what the odds are but IMO they aren't "good". I don't see ACE stuff with the rest, maybe #2 with Cueto and #3's with the rest.

And the window appears to be '11 & '12, with one big injury away from destroying either of those 2 season it's time to go get a guy who throws 5 pitches anywhere from above average to elite with outstanding command and control who makes about the same amount we have been paying Harang the last couple of seasons.

TheNext44
12-10-2010, 05:25 PM
We'll just have to agree to disagree. I don't believe our offense is good enough to make up for the lack of an ace in the playoffs. It could be but there is no way to project the kind of leap I believe this offense needs to make in order to do so. Heisey could be a huge key as could the further development of Bruce and Stubbs. As far as ACES go I think Reds fans are a bit out of touch with what an ACE is if they believe the odds are good that one of the current starters are ACE like soon. Yes Chapman has ACE stuff, Volquez as well but neither are good bets at this juncture in my mind, at least for '11. I don't know what the odds are but IMO they aren't "good". I don't see ACE stuff with the rest, maybe #2 with Cueto and #3's with the rest.

And the window appears to be '11 & '12, with one big injury away from destroying either of those 2 season it's time to go get a guy who throws 5 pitches anywhere from above average to elite with outstanding command and control who makes about the same amount we have been paying Harang the last couple of seasons.

1) I don't believe in windows. An organization should put a competitive team in the field every season and should never go "all in" on one or two seasons. That is what Jocketty did in St. Louis. They didn't make the playoffs every year, bu they were in the hunt every year. That's what I want the Reds to be.

2) Regardless of how one defines "Ace", the Reds need Greinke so that he can match up with other teams #1 starters in the playoffs. I think every Reds starter besides Bronson has that ability. The majority of "Aces" don't throw close to 100 MPH. They are "Aces" becuase they are smart pitchers who know how to pitch. All of the Reds starters, besides Arroyo, are young and inexperienced enough to get better and develop into an "Ace." Some like Cueto and Volquex, are very close.
Even if each one only has a 10% chance, together, they have over a 50% chance of one of them developing into an "Ace."

So I hope JoJo is right, because I would love to trade Leake, Heisey and Frazier for Greinke. I just don't want to pay much more than that.

TRF
12-10-2010, 05:39 PM
I've been on the fence. And in my opinion, the potential for Greinke to come to the Reds and be an ace (past success, changing leagues, better defense, better offense) isn't something that can be 100% counted on. Then again a very average pitcher like Carlos Silva had 21 pretty good starts for the Cubs 10-6 4.22 ERA 1.27 WHIP.

That ain't bad for a sub par pitcher like Silva. Now, I think he regresses to his career norms in 2011, maybe a tad better.

So, Greinke likely would have an ERA around 3.00 or less a WHIP around 1.10 and could win upwards of 18 games.

That'd be huge. The 220 IP is also huge.

He's not a lock to be an ace because he hasn't always been one. What he has been is well above average the last three seasons.

The royals W's leader last season was Bruce Chen. Let that sink in for a minute. If Leake, Maloney and Heisey can get you Zack Greinke, well, you do it. I'd throw in Donnie Joseph too.

He's not a 100% lock to be an ace. But if he can put up better number than Bronson Arroyo did last year, I'd take it.

Will M
12-10-2010, 06:52 PM
If Leake, Maloney and Heisey can get you Zack Greinke, well, you do it. I'd throw in Donnie Joseph too.



The way I look at these deals...
Reds costs: the players they send to KC & $27M in salary for 2011 & 2012.
Reds benefits: Greinke pitching for us in 2011 & 2012 plus in all likelihood 2 draft picks in the 2013 draft (assumes we don't extend him and he is a type A free agent after 2012).

IMO Leake & Heisey & assorted change is a real deal for the Reds even considering the money owed to Greinke.

kaldaniels
12-11-2010, 12:14 AM
Heyman reports the Brewers are one of 5 teams going after Greinke. Depending on who they gave up, that could present a serious problem for the Reds.

mdccclxix
12-11-2010, 12:25 AM
Greinke would quickly make the Brewers the favorite in the Central for many. NO.

LoganBuck
12-11-2010, 06:42 AM
Greinke, Gallardo, and Marcum, would make them the favorite to win the division.

Then how would the stand pat crew feel, at the December 2012 meetings, faced with the probability of losing Joey Votto after the 2013 season, the Reds trade him to the Yankees or White Sox for three "top" prospects? Don't think it could happen? Where is San Diego getting their offense next year?

This team is lousy without Joey Votto.

Win while the window is open.

thatcoolguy_22
12-11-2010, 07:15 AM
Greinke, Gallardo, and Marcum, would make them the favorite to win the division.

Then how would the stand pat crew feel, at the December 2012 meetings, faced with the probability of losing Joey Votto after the 2013 season, the Reds trade him to the Yankees or White Sox for three "top" prospects? Don't think it could happen? Where is San Diego getting their offense next year?

This team is lousy without Joey Votto.

Win while the window is open.

Count me in the boat that wanted to trade Votto and others for 2 years of Bedard; I can't be wrong twice, right? :D

I'm not really into the play for it all when the window is open because defining the window is often tough to decide. 1 or 2 injuries or an off year dramaticaly change the amount of sunlight through the curtains. However barring an injury to Votto, the next 3 years is as obvious of a window as could possibly be perceived.

Count me as one that wants to make a serious offer for Grienke. Nothing more than one of the starters and a few prospects though.

The Operator
12-11-2010, 07:48 AM
Greinke, Gallardo, and Marcum, would make them the favorite to win the division.

Then how would the stand pat crew feel, at the December 2012 meetings, faced with the probability of losing Joey Votto after the 2013 season, the Reds trade him to the Yankees or White Sox for three "top" prospects? Don't think it could happen? Where is San Diego getting their offense next year?

This team is lousy without Joey Votto.

Win while the window is open.This. :clap:

lollipopcurve
12-11-2010, 08:41 AM
The Brewers will be hard pressed to come up with a winning package for Greinke that does not have a significant impact on their major league roster. They've dealt Lawrie, and they don't have pitching depth.

The Reds have the players to deal. The question is, do they have the will to make a run at being a big-time postseason threat, not just a contender?

mth123
12-11-2010, 10:13 AM
The Brewers will be hard pressed to come up with a winning package for Greinke that does not have a significant impact on their major league roster. They've dealt Lawrie, and they don't have pitching depth.

The Reds have the players to deal. The question is, do they have the will to make a run at being a big-time postseason threat, not just a contender?

The Brewers had a lot of high picks in 2008 and 2009. Jake Odorizzi, Seth Lintz, Cutter Dykstra, Kyle Heckathorn, Evan Frederickson, Kentrail Davis, Brent Brewer, Eric Arnett. Many have disappointed so far, but on the mound and up the middle are represeted. If three or so could be packaged with say a Lorenzo Cain, Matt Gamel and Jeremy Jeffress it might be something that coupled with the salary relief may interest KC since they seem to be pointing toward 2013 or so as a time to be taken seriously. I kind of agree though that at least one of Escobar, Weeks or Gallardo will probably be required most likely Escobar. I'm guessing maybe Cain, Jeffress, Escobar and Heckathorn could be a deal that KC might like.

If I'm the Reds, I'd center a deal around Volquez and Leake with maybe Heisey and somebody like Boxberger. I think Money will be the stumbling block in any deal for Greinke.

TheNext44
12-11-2010, 12:48 PM
For the Brewers to get Greinke, they are going to have to give up either Gallardo or Marcum. Royals are demanding a MLB ready starter to replace Greinke, and Parra or Narveson won't get it done. Other teams can do much better than that.

I'm not too worried about the Brewers even if they get Greinke somehow without giving up one of those two. They still have a terrible bullpen, bottom of the rotation, and defense.

edabbs44
12-11-2010, 02:40 PM
For the Brewers to get Greinke, they are going to have to give up either Gallardo or Marcum. Royals are demanding a MLB ready starter to replace Greinke, and Parra or Narveson won't get it done. Other teams can do much better than that.

I'm not too worried about the Brewers even if they get Greinke somehow without giving up one of those two. They still have a terrible bullpen, bottom of the rotation, and defense.

Good fronts of the rotation help you more in the playoffs than they do to get you there. Ask St. Louis.

jojo
12-11-2010, 03:07 PM
For the Brewers to get Greinke, they are going to have to give up either Gallardo or Marcum. Royals are demanding a MLB ready starter to replace Greinke, and Parra or Narveson won't get it done. Other teams can do much better than that.

I'm not too worried about the Brewers even if they get Greinke somehow without giving up one of those two. They still have a terrible bullpen, bottom of the rotation, and defense.

What the Royals are demanding and what they get are likely to be two different things which is why the Reds hopefully are kicking the tires too.

TheNext44
12-11-2010, 04:35 PM
What the Royals are demanding and what they get are likely to be two different things which is why the Reds hopefully are kicking the tires too.

Exactly. WHich is why the Brewers don't worry me. The Reds should be able to beat any offer they make. The only thing that scares me is Moore not understanding that Volquez, Heisey, Fraizer and Francisco is a better offer than Narveson, Gamel, and two Brewers prospects.

mth123
12-11-2010, 04:38 PM
Exactly. WHich is why the Brewers don't worry me. The Reds should be able to beat any offer they make. The only thing that scares me is Moore not understanding that Volquez, Heisey, Fraizer and Francisco is a better offer than Narveson, Gamel, and two Brewers prospects.

The edge the Brewers have is that they are willing to take on the salary. The Reds aren't in the hunt for Greinke IMO so they won't be beating any offers.

TheNext44
12-11-2010, 05:09 PM
The edge the Brewers have is that they are willing to take on the salary. The Reds aren't in the hunt for Greinke IMO so they won't be beating any offers.

With the details of Arroyo's extension, it now seems like the Reds have at least $10M to work with. The details of Bruce's and maybe Cueto's and Votto's extension should give them even more.

I think if it came down to getting him or letting him become a Brewer, the Reds would come up with the money.

jojo
12-11-2010, 07:01 PM
With the details of Arroyo's extension, it now seems like the Reds have at least $10M to work with. The details of Bruce's and maybe Cueto's and Votto's extension should give them even more.

I think if it came down to getting him or letting him become a Brewer, the Reds would come up with the money.

I dunno. Do you work on Votto or try to get Grienke? Can the Reds do both?

Mario-Rijo
12-11-2010, 09:55 PM
Good fronts of the rotation help you more in the playoffs than they do to get you there. Ask St. Louis.

Randy Wolf and Dave Bush are pretty solid #4 & #5 starters. Better than what the Cards were dealing with last season.

edabbs44
12-11-2010, 09:59 PM
Randy Wolf and Dave Bush are pretty solid #4 & #5 starters. Better than what the Cards were dealing with last season.

Wolf maybe, not Bush though. But it is a fair point.

Oxilon
12-11-2010, 10:48 PM
Why would the Royals want Volquez? He's the same age as Grienke. I'd figure if the Royals are going to part ways with Grienke, they'd want a top pitching prospect who'd be considerably younger.

Spitball
12-11-2010, 11:56 PM
Why would the Royals want Volquez? He's the same age as Grienke. I'd figure if the Royals are going to part ways with Grienke, they'd want a top pitching prospect who'd be considerably younger.

I agree, although I'm not sure they have to have a top pitching prospect. They have some pretty awesome pitching prospects at their double A level in Northwest Arkansas. Really, the Royals are building a bridge to a bright future and have a chance to be the next Tampa Bay Rays in 2013. All they need is a top young shortstop and possibly an outfield prospect.

Greinke won't be a pure salary dump but a calculated effort to add the missing pieces in their future lineup. After Lee signs, there will be a bidding war of prospects for Greinke that will likely be best for the Reds to avoid.

Mario-Rijo
12-12-2010, 08:55 AM
I agree, although I'm not sure they have to have a top pitching prospect. They have some pretty awesome pitching prospects at their double A level in Northwest Arkansas. Really, the Royals are building a bridge to a bright future and have a chance to be the next Tampa Bay Rays in 2013. All they need is a top young shortstop and possibly an outfield prospect.

Greinke won't be a pure salary dump but a calculated effort to add the missing pieces in their future lineup. After Lee signs, there will be a bidding war of prospects for Greinke that will likely be best for the Reds to avoid.

Wasn't their recent 1st round pick a SS, his name escapes me at the moment but he was a SS in name anyway. But I agree they need an OF.

1990REDS
12-12-2010, 09:00 AM
Wasn't their recent 1st round pick a SS, his name escapes me at the moment but he was a SS in name anyway. But I agree they need an OF.

You are correct. Christian Colon out of Cal State Fullerton. However due to lack of arm strength, many project him to be a MLB 2nd baseman.

Mario-Rijo
12-12-2010, 09:15 AM
You are correct. Christian Colon out of Cal State Fullerton

Ah yes Colon, thanks.

mth123
12-12-2010, 09:59 AM
Seems like the Royals future by 2013 would include:

Mike Moustakas 3B/RF
Wil Myers C
Billy Butler DH/1B/LF
Eric Hosmer 1B/DH
Alex Gordon RF/3B
Clint Robinson LF/1B (won the Texas League -AA- Triple crown in 2010)
Christian Colon 2B/SS
Johnny Giavoltella 2B
Jeff Bianchi SS
Derrick Robinson CF
David Lough CF

Mike Montgomery LHSP
Danny Duffy LHSP
Chris Dwyer LHSP
Tim Melville RHSP
Aaron Crow RHSP
John Lamb LHSP
Vin Mazzaro RHSP
Tim Collins LHRP
Blaine Hardy LHRP
Patrick Keating RHRP
Louis Coleman RHRP

These are just the better ones. They have others who may develop, but it seems like CF is the weakest link but may still be ok. They could probably use another MI who is legit at SS and always more pitching. I'd guess a package headlined by Leake and maybe Sappelt would perk up their ears. Heisey might interest them. I'd guess a reliever like Joseph would as well. Heck, with all that, they should just re-sign Greinke and deal off other pieces for whatever is missing.

Scrap Irony
12-12-2010, 10:21 AM
I'd guess Sappelt and Wood would headline the deal, along with Cozart or Janish and Logan Ondrusek.

I don't think they'd agree to Leake instead of Wood simply because Wood's a soutpaw and GMs consider lefties (especially lefties with good stuff) more valuable. Sappelt would be iffy, as I think they might insist on Stubbs, but, for the sake of argument, let's say they agree to the lesser Sappelt. Then, they'd need a stop-gap SS (that's also cheap) for a couple years or perhaps a starting SS for a decade, depending on development. (Janish, in that lineup, could play for six years and provide good value, as the rest of the lineup looks solid offensively, but defensive-challenged. (Moustakas, Hosmer, Butler, and Robinson are pretty much all 1B/DH who may be able to play other positions at a Dunnian/ Gomesian level.)

That's a pretty steep price, but doable. Depends on what you think you'd get out of Grienke and what you think Wood and company will be.

mth123
12-12-2010, 10:35 AM
I'd guess Sappelt and Wood would headline the deal, along with Cozart or Janish and Logan Ondrusek.

I don't think they'd agree to Leake instead of Wood simply because Wood's a soutpaw and GMs consider lefties (especially lefties with good stuff) more valuable. Sappelt would be iffy, as I think they might insist on Stubbs, but, for the sake of argument, let's say they agree to the lesser Sappelt. Then, they'd need a stop-gap SS (that's also cheap) for a couple years or perhaps a starting SS for a decade, depending on development. (Janish, in that lineup, could play for six years and provide good value, as the rest of the lineup looks solid offensively, but defensive-challenged. (Moustakas, Hosmer, Butler, and Robinson are pretty much all 1B/DH who may be able to play other positions at a Dunnian/ Gomesian level.)

That's a pretty steep price, but doable. Depends on what you think you'd get out of Grienke and what you think Wood and company will be.

The Royals have good lefty starters and relievers coming out their ears. Not sure how much getting a lefty will matter to them.

lollipopcurve
12-12-2010, 11:04 AM
I'd guess Sappelt and Wood would headline the deal, along with Cozart or Janish and Logan Ondrusek.

I don't think they'd agree to Leake instead of Wood simply because Wood's a soutpaw and GMs consider lefties (especially lefties with good stuff) more valuable. Sappelt would be iffy, as I think they might insist on Stubbs, but, for the sake of argument, let's say they agree to the lesser Sappelt. Then, they'd need a stop-gap SS (that's also cheap) for a couple years or perhaps a starting SS for a decade, depending on development. (Janish, in that lineup, could play for six years and provide good value, as the rest of the lineup looks solid offensively, but defensive-challenged. (Moustakas, Hosmer, Butler, and Robinson are pretty much all 1B/DH who may be able to play other positions at a Dunnian/ Gomesian level.)

That's a pretty steep price, but doable. Depends on what you think you'd get out of Grienke and what you think Wood and company will be.

Solid analysis. I think the Reds would prefer to offer RHPs, whether it be Leake, Bailey, Cueto or Volquez, and I think the Royals would like one of those guys enough. The good news is that the asking price is not 2 pitchers. The key, I think, is going to be the quality of the 2nd player. I don't know that Sappelt, Cozart or Ondrusek would entice them enough. In the end, I think the Reds would have to be willing to give up a 2nd piece that would hurt -- a Mesoraco, Yorman or Hamilton.

The linchpin, for me, is whether the Reds feel they could get Greinke to sign an extension. Pros -- competitive team, laid-back media market, great group of starters, NL, good place to hit (I guess Greinke is interested in being in the NL so he can hit). Cons -- $$$ may not be as good in Cincy.

One of the things I like about the idea of bringing in Greinke is that it takes pressure of the inevitable conversion of Chapman to starter. If Greinke takes on the mantle of #1 starter, which he would, Chapman can grow into being a front of the rotation guy. Without Greinke, the expectations for Chapman will be too high out of the chute, IMO, and who knows how that plays out. So, think of a long-term investment in Greinke as a paying a dividend in the form of a better-developed Chapman.