PDA

View Full Version : Your challenge: improve the team for $6M



Will M
01-01-2011, 09:08 AM
Its rumored that the team offered Rhodes a 1 year deal for ~$4M and also offered Renteria a deal (i am guessing for ~$2M). It possible that the team wouldn't have done both of those deals but it seems there is at least $4M & maybe $6M in the budget. I wonder if its really ~$8M as I can't believe Walt doesn't also have ~$2M set aside for a left hitting outfielder. We have heard all winter that the Reds are 'at payroll'. Yet when we all added up the salary committments we got nowhere near $80M. I suspect the Reds being 'at payroll' included Walt setting aside $6-8M for LF, SS & Rhodes.

Now the challenge! Find the best way to improve the team if the Reds have either $4M, $6M or $8m to spend.

A) My $4M scenario. Pretty simple. Chapman to the pen to take Rhodes spot. Renteria at ~$2M for backup shortstop. Lewis or Edmonds at ~$2M for left field. Not great but it does add some value to the 25 man roster.

B) My $6M scenario. Chapman to the pen to take Rhodes spot. Renteria at ~$2M for backup shortstop. Trade Gomes to an AL team that could use help at DH. The Red Sox might as Ortiz can't hit lefties. The Yankees might as Posada may do a little catching. Rangers seem another possibility. The prospect we get back doesn't matter much. The trade is to free up $1.8M. The Reds use that $1.8M & the $4M left & trade for Kelly Johnson who will make ~$6M in arbitration. Based on what Willingham & DeJesus went for, I suspect a B & a C prospect would get it done. Maybe Valaika & one of our many relief pitchers stacking up in AAA. Johnson leads off & plays left field. He also adds another much needed (IMO) left handed bat to our lineup.

C) My $8M scenario is the same as the $6M scenario except we keep Gomes. Johnson can play 2B ( and maybe 3B?) so Gomes would still get some starts in left versus a right handed pitcher. If Heisey looks great in the spring the team could still deal Gomes prior to opening day (if it looked like he wouldn't get much playing time).

An alternative $8M is to use the 'B' scenario and use the $2M to try to sign a cheap lefty reliever to replace Rhodes in the pen. That frees up Chapman to be in the rotation.

What do folks think? Do you believe the team has $4-8M to spend? If so how best could Walt spend it?

mth123
01-01-2011, 10:13 AM
Lots of scenarios, but I'll go with:

For $4 Million:

Yonder Alonso and a spare arm (say Carlos Fisher) to Texas for David Murphy and Andres Blanco and a minor league arm (a #10 to #15 range prospect in Texas who would be a clear top 10 in most other organizations). Murphy would be the LH half the LF platoon and Blanco is a Switch Hitter who can play 2B, SS, 3B and has worked this winter at C and the OF. Rolen hits in the 2 hole in front of Votto and Bruce. The Murphy/Gomes platoon bats 5th. Stubbs and Phillips move between 1st and 6th depending on who is hot. They hit 1 & 2 when Rolen sits and Francisco plays. Against LHP, Phillips moves up to clean-up and Bruce drops to 6th. Murphy is 1st year arb eligible and probably makes around $2 to 2.5 Million. Blanco will make around $500K. Alonso will make $600K whether or not he's on the 25 man roster, so this adds $2 to 2.5 Million and leaves about $1.5 to $2 Million for the deadline. In this scenario the Reds may need to drop to 11 pitchers or send Heisey to AAA.

For $6 Million:

Sign Johnny Damon to lead-off and play LF. Pass on getting a SS, keep Francisco to caddy Rolen and be the LH bench bat and take your chances with Cairo, knowing that Cozart can be recalled if need be.

For $8 Million:

Same as $6 Million and keep more money for the deadline.

Scrap Irony
01-01-2011, 12:42 PM
$4 million move(s):
Trade Francisco Cordero and Yonder Alonso for Carlos Beltran. The $4 million balances out the salaries. Beltran hits cleanup, Rolen hits second, Phillips leads off. Stubbs hits behind Bruce.

$6 million move(s):
Sign Manny Ramirez to play LF for one-year, $5 million. Plug him in at cleanup. Move Rolen to the #2 hole, with Phillips leading off and Stubbs hitting sixth. Play Janish at SS, with Valaika (or possibly Frazier) backing him up. Keep the million bucks for the deadline.

$8 million move(s):
Trade Francisco Cordero, Yonder Alonso, Chris Valaika, Zach Cozart, Chris Heisey, Mike Leake, and Matt Maloney to the New York Mets for Carlos Beltran and Jose Reyes. The extra cash is used to balance salaries so that the Reds only boost salary $8 million total. Reyes leads off, with Rolen behind. Beltran hits cleanup. Phillips and Stubbs follow Bruce at six and seven. Janish becomes the middle infield backup.

HokieRed
01-01-2011, 01:03 PM
Talk Jim Edmonds into coming back for the LF platoon and then take the rest of the money and promise half of it to Bailey and half to Wood to use for hunting trips if they win 18 and 15 respectively. And do not trade Yonder Alonso.

PuffyPig
01-01-2011, 02:00 PM
$$8 million move(s):
Trade Francisco Cordero, Yonder Alonso, Chris Valaika, Zach Cozart, Chris Heisey, Mike Leake, and Matt Maloney to the New York Mets for Carlos Beltran and Jose Reyes. The extra cash is used to balance salaries so that the Reds only boost salary $8 million total. Reyes leads off, with Rolen behind. Beltran hits cleanup. Phillips and Stubbs follow Bruce at six and seven. Janish becomes the middle infield backup.

That's trading a ton of cheap, cost controlled talent to pick of two really expensive players who are UFA's after this season, and each has had injury/production issues.

We are also weakening our pitching substantially for 2011, trading two pitchers who figure prominently in our plans, and another who is likely our #6 starter stashed at AAA.

At $18M, Beltran likely has negative value.

I'm not sure your numbers are correct. We pick up $29.5M in salaries and give up Cordero's $12M. THat's about a $18M difference, not $8M

Scrap Irony
01-01-2011, 05:09 PM
The Mets would pay the extra cash. (That's part of the reason why Cincinnati sends all that cost-controlled talent.)

PuffyPig
01-01-2011, 05:59 PM
The Mets would pay the extra cash. (That's part of the reason why Cincinnati sends all that cost-controlled talent.)


They would have to send over $10M.

I don't like selling that much talent, unless I was getting sure things for more than one year.

A trade like that is just not going to happen. And may not even make us any better. It severely weakens our pitching.

kpresidente
01-01-2011, 07:16 PM
1. Chapman, Mesoraco, Sappelt and $$ to Florida for Mike Stanton. :D

2. Phillips to Seattle for Figgins :)

3. Volquez to Arizona for Stephen Drew. :cool:


Leadoff hitter? Check
Power-hitting RH left fielder? Check
Shortstop with positive offensive value? Check

PuffyPig
01-01-2011, 07:26 PM
1. Chapman, Mesoraco, Sappelt and $$ to Florida for Mike Stanton. :D

2. Phillips to Seattle for Figgins :)

3. Volquez to Arizona for Stephen Drew. :cool:


Leadoff hitter? Check
Power-hitting RH left fielder? Check
Shortstop with positive offensive value? Check


Have we ever sent money to someone? Especially when we aren't dumping salary?

Figgens is owed a huge amount of money and isn't all that great. Don't want to touch that contract.

TheNext44
01-01-2011, 07:34 PM
1. Chapman, Mesoraco, Sappelt and $$ to Florida for Mike Stanton. :D

2. Phillips to Seattle for Figgins :)

3. Volquez to Arizona for Stephen Drew. :cool:


Leadoff hitter? Check
Power-hitting RH left fielder? Check
Shortstop with positive offensive value? Check

Significantly worse rotation? Check
Significantly worse defense up the middle? Check
Organizational depth decimated? Check
Exploding payroll in 2012-3? Check
Guarantee that the Reds will not be competitive for years to come? Check
:D

schroomytunes
01-01-2011, 07:38 PM
Ok with your 6 million in mind, that's not much but here goes:

I truly think we are going to have Alonso platoon with Gomes to raise his trade value and have stubbs/phillips be our leadoff guy. So the additions i make are:

1) Edgar Renteria-1yr at 1.75 million with incentives to reach 2.5million, he gives us a solid backup/starter at SS.

2) save the remaining 3.5- 4million for a june/july acquisition based on our team's current standings.

Now guys I like that are still to be had are:
1) Joe Beimel-lhrp
2) Chad Durbin-rhrp
3) Fred Lewis-LH LF-if we dont go with Alonso
4) Johnny Damon-LF same as above

--we will see a lot of non roster invites for bullpen/5th OF's!!!

kpresidente
01-01-2011, 08:12 PM
Have we ever sent money to someone? Especially when we aren't dumping salary? Figgens is owed a huge amount of money and isn't all that great. Don't want to touch that contract.


Significantly worse rotation? Check
Significantly worse defense up the middle? Check
Organizational depth decimated? Check
Exploding payroll in 2012-3? Check
Guarantee that the Reds will not be competitive for years to come? Check

I realize those weren't realistic trades, but you guys are way off on the criticisms. Figgins has a similar value on the dollar as Phillips, and while the rotation suffers, it's mostly depth, you still have 5 dependable starters and you trade from a strength to a weakness anyway. Stephen Drew was a 5 win player last year, Volquez wasn't that good even in '08, which he's unlikely to top. Mesoraco is expendable because of Grandal. The defense is worse, but offense is more important than defense and the offense would be the best in the baseball, with Votto/Stanton/Bruce being an unparalleled heart of the order, and no gimmie outs anywhere. The payroll wouldn't explode, either, I don't know where you get that.

Mario-Rijo
01-01-2011, 08:37 PM
After much internal deliberation I've come to the conclusion that we aren't likely to improve at this juncture very much. Most of the upgrades are off the market. No matter what is done at the top of the lineup now we still don't have adequate protection behind Votto and he is the reason for adding a guy at the top. Short of making a serious run at a guy who might scare someone at the plate from LF or SS we are who we are gonna be.

Jose Bautista
Nelson Cruz
Shin Soo Choo

3 guys off the top of my head that can possibly protect Votto a little at a cheap price in terms of dollars. Gonna cost a substantial package to deal for no doubt but it's a must. None are likely "available" but that is why ya gotta get creative. To top it off 2 of the 3 also have an intriguing SS playing on the same team with them (Yunel Escobar & Asdrubal Cabrera). Toronto and Cleveland have to listen to any reasonable offer as they are still collecting prospects and rebuilding. Texas isn't likely to deal Cruz but they have a couple of potential black holes in CF and the rotation and a big contract they are trying to purge (Michael Young).

Just some thoughts...

RedLegSuperStar
01-01-2011, 09:58 PM
Reds trade Homer Bailey, Naftali Soto, Jordan Smith, and Carlos Fisher to Cleveland
Reds get Grady Sizemore ($7.5 Mil) and Rafael Perez ($1 Mil) to Reds

- 7 Million

Reds deal Brandon Phillips ($11 Mil) and Chris Heisey to Arizona
Reds get Stephen Drew ($5 Mil)

+6 Million

Reds send Francisco Cordero ($12 Mil), Yonder Alonso ($1 Mil), Todd Frazier to Texas
Reds recieve Michael Young ($16 Mil) and Cash ($9 Mil / $3 Mil per year)

+/- 0 Million

Reds dish out around $1-2 Million in the process

Reds net a leadoff man/lefty bat to go with Gomes
Reds swap Phillips for Young
Reds get a francise type SS with Drew
Reds get a young setup man in Perez
Reds insert Chapman into the Starting Rotation






Does that improve the team?

PuffyPig
01-01-2011, 11:58 PM
Reds send Francisco Cordero ($12 Mil), Yonder Alonso ($1 Mil), Todd Frazier to Texas
Reds recieve Michael Young ($16 Mil) and Cash ($9 Mil / $3 Mil per year)








So we are then on the hook for $13M for Young for an additional two years. For a guy who's OPS'ed above .800 once in the last 4 years.

BTW, he's considered a horrible midde infielder.

Cordero for Young and money would be a horrible deal.

And we give up Alonso and Frazier also?

TheNext44
01-02-2011, 12:47 AM
I realize those weren't realistic trades, but you guys are way off on the criticisms. Figgins has a similar value on the dollar as Phillips, and while the rotation suffers, it's mostly depth, you still have 5 dependable starters and you trade from a strength to a weakness anyway. Stephen Drew was a 5 win player last year, Volquez wasn't that good even in '08, which he's unlikely to top. Mesoraco is expendable because of Grandal. The defense is worse, but offense is more important than defense and the offense would be the best in the baseball, with Votto/Stanton/Bruce being an unparalleled heart of the order, and no gimmie outs anywhere. The payroll wouldn't explode, either, I don't know where you get that.

I used the big grin to show that I was using hyperbole and trying to be cute.

But those deals would severely weaken the team in the long term without really improving it in the short term.

1) Figgins may or may not bounce back from a terrible 2010, but even if he does, I'd rather have Phillips. Phillips is due $2M more in 2011, but Figgins is due $9M a year through 2014. That's what blows up the payroll those years, and makes the defense weaker at 2n base, with maybe a slight increase in OBP, if Figgins bounces back.

2) I love Stanton, but you're suggesting trading a 100MPH young lefty with Cy Young stuff, and one of the top catching prospects in all of baseball, and top CF prospect for him. Maybe he is worth Chapman or Mes straight up... maybe. Power hitting LF, no matter how good, are easy to find. Arms like Chapman, and catchers with power are not. Trading those guys gets rid of the premium prospects that the Reds have and guts their organization.

3) Volquez for Drew is not a bad idea, but it does weaken the rotation. It means more innings for LeCure and Maloney. Teams need around 8 starting pitchers to get through a season. Getting rid of the most talented starter in your rotation will always weaken it. Maybe it's worth it for Drew, but it does mean a weakened rotation. Drew also is about to get really expensive.

Those were creative ideas and you should be commended for wanting to think outside the box and take risks. I just don't see the payoff being all that great.

Caveat Emperor
01-02-2011, 10:53 AM
1.) Put the $6m in the bank.

2.) Go to Arizona and see if you can work to shake someone of note loose from another organization as spring training proceeds -- possibly waiting until someone develops an unexpected hole in their rotation due to injury or ineffectiveness.

3.) If all else fails, wait for the right opportunity to improve the club at the deadline.

PuffyPig
01-02-2011, 11:34 AM
Stephen Drew was a 5 win player last year, Volquez wasn't that good even in '08, which he's unlikely to top.

Wasn't that good in 2008? He had a 4.8 WAR. Drew was at 3.3 in 2010. At least accoring to Baseball Reference.

kaldaniels
01-02-2011, 12:19 PM
1.) Put the $6m in the bank.

2.) Go to Arizona and see if you can work to shake someone of note loose from another organization as spring training proceeds -- possibly waiting until someone develops an unexpected hole in their rotation due to injury or ineffectiveness.

3.) If all else fails, wait for the right opportunity to improve the club at the deadline.

That thought crossed my mind. Do clubs ever take a few million they have left over and place in in a risky investment, and if it makes $$$ adjust payroll accordingly? (Obviously on a hush-hush basis to the public) Heck to me, given the marginal improvement 6 million would bring to this club, putting that 6 Million on red on a roulette wheel hoping to turn it into 12 Million would be an option. Not saying I'd do it, but I would put thought it into and weigh that vs what 6 Million would bring in. Easy for me to say that though...not my money.

I(heart)Freel
01-02-2011, 12:32 PM
Take every bit of the available money and make a reasonable offer to Damon.

I'm ready to see a full year of Janish. Also want to keep middle positions focused on defense. Edgar R doesn't float my boat much.

Ron Madden
01-02-2011, 12:49 PM
If it comes down to signing Posednik and Renteria I pass.

Standing pat may not improve the 2011 chances but I believe it would be less damaging than signing Posednik and Renteria.

JMHO

Mario-Rijo
01-02-2011, 01:29 PM
If it comes down to signing Posednik and Renteria I pass.

Standing pat may not improve the 2011 chances but I believe it would be less damaging than signing Posednik and Renteria.

JMHO

Only if it means they would have to ante up 2 year contracts would I agree. Although not big at all on Renteria at this stage of his career. Podsednik I'd take a shot on a 1 year deal, it's risky no doubt but the reward is worth the risk. Find that backup SS via trade Renteria is one in name only.

If only they would realize some of these youngsters have no value to us except as trade bait they wouldn't have to keep signing over the hill guys to 2 year pacts. Got to deal them while their value is at it's highest and not sure they are able to recognize when that is. For some that time has come and gone or is close to being gone, yet they continue to wither on the vine.

alexad
01-02-2011, 03:24 PM
If we get to February and still have holes to fill call me. Until then we need to relax. We have the right higher ups to get what we need. I still think we get Drew from
Zona but Bailey will be gone to get him.

PuffyPig
01-02-2011, 05:44 PM
If only they would realize some of these youngsters have no value to us except as trade bait they wouldn't have to keep signing over the hill guys to 2 year pacts. Got to deal them while their value is at it's highest and not sure they are able to recognize when that is. For some that time has come and gone or is close to being gone, yet they continue to wither on the vine.

Glad we didn't use this approach on guys like Votto and Stubbs. And Bailey. And Wood. They were traded so often around here I forget sometimes they are still on the team.

Mario-Rijo
01-02-2011, 06:28 PM
Glad we didn't use this approach on guys like Votto and Stubbs. And Bailey. And Wood. They were traded so often around here I forget sometimes they are still on the team.

You can't tell me this applies to every prospect we have, not all of them are gonna pan out. Not to mention we had many holes to fill then, now they are filled with some of those guys time to do the next smart thing and capitalize on those who aren't gonna pan out for the few holes we now have.

Brutus
01-02-2011, 06:35 PM
$6 million: sign Wily Taveras.

Oh wait, that's already been done once.

dougdirt
01-02-2011, 07:48 PM
You can't tell me this applies to every prospect we have, not all of them are gonna pan out. Not to mention we had many holes to fill then, now they are filled with some of those guys time to do the next smart thing and capitalize on those who aren't gonna pan out for the few holes we now have.

Except if we know who isn't going to pan out, the odds are that the other guys know it too and we then can't use them to acquire guys to fill holes.

PuffyPig
01-02-2011, 07:54 PM
You can't tell me this applies to every prospect we have, not all of them are gonna pan out. Not to mention we had many holes to fill then, now they are filled with some of those guys time to do the next smart thing and capitalize on those who aren't gonna pan out for the few holes we now have.

So, tell me which ones will never pan out.

And I assume you have a 100% success rate in doing so?

edabbs44
01-02-2011, 08:43 PM
1.) Put the $6m in the bank.

2.) Go to Arizona and see if you can work to shake someone of note loose from another organization as spring training proceeds -- possibly waiting until someone develops an unexpected hole in their rotation due to injury or ineffectiveness.

3.) If all else fails, wait for the right opportunity to improve the club at the deadline.

I like this. $6MM gets you a lot at the deadline. The Reds have a rotation made for April to September. As we all know, at this point they don't have that October guy. The deadline could change that.

Mario-Rijo
01-02-2011, 09:02 PM
So, tell me which ones will never pan out.

And I assume you have a 100% success rate in doing so?

That is for the F.O. to decide isn't it....

kaldaniels
01-02-2011, 09:05 PM
That is for the F.O. to decide isn't it....

Considering this thread is "Your Challlenge", and you brought up the fact that many prospects are not worth holding onto, what prospects do you view as being worthwhile and which ones are tradebait?

Mario-Rijo
01-02-2011, 09:10 PM
Except if we know who isn't going to pan out, the odds are that the other guys know it too and we then can't use them to acquire guys to fill holes.

Is that right Doug? The history of the game suggests different doesn't it? If Walt and company are as good as everyone makes them out to be they should have the upper hand. Besides when I say pan out I don't mean guys who obviously will never play major league ball, I would think that was kind of a given.

RBA
01-02-2011, 09:12 PM
$6M: Consulting fee paid to RBA.

Mario-Rijo
01-02-2011, 09:17 PM
Considering this thread is "Your Challlenge", and you brought up the fact that many prospects are not worth holding onto, what prospects do you view as being worthwhile and which ones are tradebait?

I've stated on numerous occasions my preferences on who to deal and to keep. It's a matter of the return as to who I would deal for the most part. But the short list is anyone who isn't gonna be helping us either as a starter or depth in the next 2-3 years. We can't go 50 deep so there are guys who can and should be dealt.

PuffyPig
01-02-2011, 09:50 PM
. But the short list is anyone who isn't gonna be helping us either as a starter or depth in the next 2-3 years.

I don't know who those players are.

Who are those players who have no chance of helping us?

kaldaniels
01-02-2011, 10:42 PM
I don't know who those players are.

Who are those players who have no chance of helping us?

Hopefully you get a better answer than I did.

TheNext44
01-02-2011, 11:50 PM
That is for the F.O. to decide isn't it....

Considering the fact that Jocketty did an exceptional job of this during his career, trading away dozens of Cardinal top prospects with only a handful ever becoming regular major leaguers, and considering the fact that he has been reluctant to trade many of the Reds prospects so far, doesn't that suggest that Jocketty has done what you have asked? Doesn't this suggest that a large number of the Reds prospects, including ones that people want to trade, are genuine prospects, and not just names to fill out a list? It's not as if Jocketty has ever been shy about trading prospects for veterans.

Mario-Rijo
01-03-2011, 08:47 AM
I don't know who those players are.

Who are those players who have no chance of helping us?

:rolleyes: Why don't you just go ahead and say what you really mean instead of this silly back and forth trying to lead me into something. I am on record on every prospect as to how I feel about them. If want you want me to say is I have been wrong on some of them, sure I have. Of the ones I have watched personally in the minors on more than one occasion I have been pretty accurate on. Of the ones I haven't seen or haven't seen much of them I have still done pretty well on when I have a good scouting report. But yeah I have still missed. But it doesn't really change a thing in this thread, the F.O. can't hold on to all of them and shouldn't when we have holes on the major league team.

Mario-Rijo
01-03-2011, 08:48 AM
Hopefully you get a better answer than I did.

You got a perfectly good answer but you are just trying to be a smartellic so you get what you give.

Mario-Rijo
01-03-2011, 08:50 AM
Considering the fact that Jocketty did an exceptional job of this during his career, trading away dozens of Cardinal top prospects with only a handful ever becoming regular major leaguers, and considering the fact that he has been reluctant to trade many of the Reds prospects so far, doesn't that suggest that Jocketty has done what you have asked? Doesn't this suggest that a large number of the Reds prospects, including ones that people want to trade, are genuine prospects, and not just names to fill out a list? It's not as if Jocketty has ever been shy about trading prospects for veterans.

So all of them are legit major league players? You don't really believe that do you? And even if you do then we still have no room for all of them. At some point we have to fish or cut bait on a number of them.

kaldaniels
01-03-2011, 09:00 AM
You got a perfectly good answer but you are just trying to be a smartellic so you get what you give.

No you dodged the question, which was quite a simple one.

Mario-Rijo
01-03-2011, 09:04 AM
No you dodged the question, which was quite a simple one.

I did no such thing! You want a detailed list of what I think it's out there for the perusing. I'm not gonna give you a breakdown of every prospect for no good reason, it doesn't change the point.

PuffyPig
01-03-2011, 09:08 AM
I did no such thing! You want a detailed list of what I think it's out there for the perusing. I'm not gonna give you a breakdown of every prospect for no good reason, it doesn't change the point.

You stated that the FO should trade those propsects on the team that have no chance of panning out to fill holes on the team.

Who do you think are those prospects who have no chance of panning out?

Becuase I'm not prepared to suggest that any of our "tradeable" prospects have no chance of panning out. You obviously feel differently.

kaldaniels
01-03-2011, 09:08 AM
I'm not interested what players you would get in return. I asked what prospects should the Reds keep/cut bait since you brought up the point that certain guys just need to be traded. Which ones?

Mario-Rijo
01-03-2011, 09:20 AM
You stated that the FO should trade those propsects on the team that have no chance of panning out to fill holes on the team.

Who do you think are those prospects who have no chance of panning out?

Becuase I'm not prepared to suggest that any of our "tradeable" prospects have no chance of panning out. You obviously feel differently.

Again that is for the F.O. to decide. Though I do have an opinion it doesn't make a difference. The point is they cannot keep them all, nor should they with obvious deficiencies at the major league level. All prospects are tradeable with exception to guys with less than a year of pro ball under their belts.

Mario-Rijo
01-03-2011, 09:28 AM
I'm not interested what players you would get in return. I asked what prospects should the Reds keep/cut bait since you brought up the point that certain guys just need to be traded. Which ones?

Give me a good reason and I'll give you my list of players I think need to be dealt. As of right now my opinion of the players only muddies the real debate that is/should be going on in this thread. And that is that Walt and company should know who they feel is trade bait and they should trade them to improve the team before they lose value. As soon as I give my list this becomes a whole new debate as you start trying to pick apart my list asking me why I feel/think that way.

How about you and Puffy give us your opinions on whether they should indeed deal these prospects or not and then we move on to the who.

kaldaniels
01-03-2011, 09:30 AM
And that is not a dodge of a simple question how? You deny dodging the question and proceed to do it again. Is this the bizzaro world?

Hoosier Red
01-03-2011, 09:32 AM
I'm not interested what players you would get in return. I asked what prospects should the Reds keep/cut bait since you brought up the point that certain guys just need to be traded. Which ones?

I think to be fair even that depends on the return to an extent.
If we could get CC Sabathia plus have the Yankees pick up the salary difference, just about anyone and everyone in the system is available.

Really, I think the best way to think of it is in terms of the points system that NFL teams assign to trading away draft picks. This doesn't seem to be as in vogue now as it was 10 years ago, but IIRC Jimmy Johnson sort of made it famous. But in any event, if we determine that we need a cost controlled LF that can fit in a $5 million budget, then we assign a certain amount of points to that. And we assign points to each of our prospects based on how far along they are, their projected ceilings, etc...

Than it's just a matter of picking a target and finding the right combination of points to go get him.

My only disclaimer is that I would not be in favor of trading more than say 3 prospects for any one player. One player isn't going to make all the difference in the world, and it's better to not waste all your bullets on the first target.

But to Mario-Rijo's point. A good number of prospects, even if they turn out to be solid major league players, will have the most value to the Reds as trading chips. So we shouldn't get emotionally attached to any of them.

kaldaniels
01-03-2011, 09:45 AM
If only they would realize some of these youngsters have no value to us except as trade bait they wouldn't have to keep signing over the hill guys...

It sounds like you don't believe the FO knows who those guys are.

All you are giving us is that the front office should trade some prospects. You won't tell us who. It appears you don't think the FO knows who. What is the point?

REDREAD
01-03-2011, 09:52 AM
Well, it's probably a year or two too early for this, but I'd love to get Andrew McCutchen from Pittsburg. I think he's due for arbitration after 2011.

Since this is fantasy GMing, how about offering:
Leake, Mesoraco , Fisher, and a lower level prospect..
Not saying that Pitt would take it though :)

Seriously, if McCutchen was on the table, I'd probably make Travis Wood avaiable..

Well, that's my fantasy GM dreaming..

Mario-Rijo
01-03-2011, 09:54 AM
It sounds like you don't believe the FO knows who those guys are.

All you are giving us is that the front office should trade some prospects. You won't tell us who. It appears you don't think the FO knows who. What is the point?

Does it matter who? The point is some guys are only valuable to an organization as trade bait. The front office needs to figure who that is to them and fill these holes on the team.

I'll tell ya what I'll give you an example of the type of guy I am talking about.

Phillipe Valiquette - Many guys of his ilk have been dealt this offseason for established major league players (usually 2 of his ilk at a time) and yet we continue to hang on tight to everybody. I'm not saying trade Phillipe perse', I'm saying Walt needs to figure out who his Phillipes are and trade them. I personally do think Phillipe fits the very definition of what I am proposing to deal.

edabbs44
01-03-2011, 11:01 AM
Does it matter who? The point is some guys are only valuable to an organization as trade bait. The front office needs to figure who that is to them and fill these holes on the team.

I'll tell ya what I'll give you an example of the type of guy I am talking about.

Phillipe Valiquette - Many guys of his ilk have been dealt this offseason for established major league players (usually 2 of his ilk at a time) and yet we continue to hang on tight to everybody. I'm not saying trade Phillipe perse', I'm saying Walt needs to figure out who his Phillipes are and trade them. I personally do think Phillipe fits the very definition of what I am proposing to deal.

Who would you say is of Valiquette's ilk?

bucksfan2
01-03-2011, 11:08 AM
For $6M you think I could build a time machine? Go back to 1995 and get Barry Larkin or head back to 2000 and pick up Jr?

I like the Renteria target and hope he has come off of his "disrespect" contract offer from the Giants.

Beltran is an intriguing target. I doubt the Reds would pick up any salary in trading for him. Too much of an injury risk to assume much of anything salary wise for him

To be honest I really don't know who to really go after. Too much speculation and most trades come out of the blue this time in the off season. (Can we trade Volquez for Hamilton???) LF and SS need to be improved and thats why I like Renteria. As for LF I don't know if its better to make a run now or wait until Juneish.

PuffyPig
01-03-2011, 01:10 PM
Give me a good reason and I'll give you my list of players I think need to be dealt. ndeed deal these prospects or not and then we move on to the who.

You said the FO needs to trade those propsects that will never pan out.

That's a good reason to reveal who you think those prospects are.

Most of us are of the view that the jury is still out on most prospects as to whether or not they will pan out, and those that obviously will never pan out have zero trade value.

You seem to be of the opinion that somewhere there is a secret list the FO has that lists certain prospects that will never, ever pan out. And those are the prospects we need to trade.

dougdirt
01-03-2011, 01:17 PM
Phillipe Valiquette - Many guys of his ilk have been dealt this offseason for established major league players (usually 2 of his ilk at a time) and yet we continue to hang on tight to everybody. I'm not saying trade Phillipe perse', I'm saying Walt needs to figure out who his Phillipes are and trade them. I personally do think Phillipe fits the very definition of what I am proposing to deal.

I haven't been following the trade front much this offseason, so who has been of the Valiquette ilk that has been traded and who did they get back? My guess is that if the Reds traded Valiquette at this point they might get a veteran bench player making peanuts. Maybe I am wrong, but that is how I see it. He has one plus pitch (fastball) and no average second pitch and his control is shaky. I imagine other teams all know this as well. While he is a solid prospect because he is a lefty who has hit 100 MPH, I don't think he has much trade value because he is a reliever who isn't ready to step into the Majors.

TheNext44
01-03-2011, 01:46 PM
So all of them are legit major league players? You don't really believe that do you? And even if you do then we still have no room for all of them. At some point we have to fish or cut bait on a number of them.

Of course not every player in the Reds mi or league system is legit. Just the ones that other teams are willing to offer what the Reds need in return for them.

My point was that I fully believe that Jocketty has offered many prospects in trades, but felt he was never able to get enough in return for them to justify a trade.

REDREAD
01-03-2011, 02:34 PM
You seem to be of the opinion that somewhere there is a secret list the FO has that lists certain prospects that will never, ever pan out. And those are the prospects we need to trade.

Well, if you define "pan out" as being starting position players, or pitchers that will go at least 60 innings a year, then most of these prospects will not pan out.

Here's a prime example.. Rob Bell had a lot of percieved value when the Reds picked him up from Atlanta. He had some value (although a lot less) when the Reds traded him to Texas.. Then his value pretty much plummeted to zero.

There was a time when Homer Bailey was one of the top pitching prospects in the game. If the Reds wanted to trade him, they could've gotten a king's ransom for him. Now, Homer is out of options, and only shown flashes of his potential. That's not to say that he's worthless, but he's worth a lot less than he was a few years ago.

Smart GMs can trade prospects who have a percieved value greater than what they will actually produce.

PuffyPig
01-03-2011, 02:39 PM
Smart GMs can trade prospects who have a percieved value greater than what they will actually produce.

If smart GM's could predict which prospects would pan out and which ones wouldn't, thjey could assemble an all star team every draft year.

The fact of the matter is, predicting the likliehood of prospects panning out is an inexact science at best.

Mario-Rijo
01-03-2011, 03:17 PM
I haven't been following the trade front much this offseason, so who has been of the Valiquette ilk that has been traded and who did they get back? My guess is that if the Reds traded Valiquette at this point they might get a veteran bench player making peanuts. Maybe I am wrong, but that is how I see it. He has one plus pitch (fastball) and no average second pitch and his control is shaky. I imagine other teams all know this as well. While he is a solid prospect because he is a lefty who has hit 100 MPH, I don't think he has much trade value because he is a reliever who isn't ready to step into the Majors.

The Bartlett, DeJesus & Willingham deals. Relief arms with some talent but not necessarily anyone who is a given to be a sure thing and right now.

Mario-Rijo
01-03-2011, 03:19 PM
If smart GM's could predict which prospects would pan out and which ones wouldn't, thjey could assemble an all star team every draft year.

The fact of the matter is, predicting the likliehood of prospects panning out is an inexact science at best.

And yet prospects get dealt all the time. You can bet the farm Walt has an idea of his own who will pan out and who won't, rather or not he is right is another story.

Big Klu
01-03-2011, 03:32 PM
Improve the team for $6 million? Easy.

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRE9qjVT9fa4j6-I4BQZoEDp1_LKISmJo8j6GsSfUtcBTT48e4ttg

klw
01-03-2011, 03:56 PM
Improve the team for $6 million? Easy.

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRE9qjVT9fa4j6-I4BQZoEDp1_LKISmJo8j6GsSfUtcBTT48e4ttg

We have a winner.


My choice was to sign Damon for $4 million and give me $2 million and I would feel alot better about the team. :) To improve the team I would take Damon for $4mil or Lewis for $1 mil and pocket the rest for midseason moves.