PDA

View Full Version : Alonso predicament



wlf WV
08-21-2011, 08:16 PM
Who's to blame-player development ;or front office not being able to move him for viable return before now?Someone had to see this coming,they get paid to.It's a little late in the game now to be teaching defensive fundamentals(what position?)Maybe I'm imagining things,but there seems a disconnect somewhere.The only thing I can think of is that we're not seeing the same outfielder that played in AAA.It's baffling to me.

dougdirt
08-21-2011, 08:33 PM
Who's to blame-player development ;or front office not being able to move him for viable return before now?Someone had to see this coming,they get paid to.It's a little late in the game now to be teaching defensive fundamentals(what position?)Maybe I'm imagining things,but there seems a disconnect somewhere.The only thing I can think of is that we're not seeing the same outfielder that played in AAA.It's baffling to me.

I still think its Dusty. I know, I know.... I don't like Dusty. But lets be real here. The last two seasons, the minor league guys have spent time getting Alonso time in left. This season, he played more in left than he played anywhere else. Walt traded Jonny Gomes and came out and said it was to get a spot for Alonso. So, the minor league guys clearly thought he was able to not kill a team defensively in left field. Walt Jocketty clearly thought the same thing. Dusty calls the entire thing quits after 3 games. It seems to me that its a Dusty thing rather than anyone else.

Don't get me wrong.... the guy isn't much of a left fielder. In fact, he is a bad one. But I don't think he is worse than Dunn ever was and he might be slightly worse than Gomes is. Yes, he has looked bad a few times out there. I can't preach small sample size enough though. There is a reason Rick Sweet played him 70+ times down there in Louisville and it wasn't because he was looking that bad all the time.

osuceltic
08-21-2011, 08:37 PM
I still think its Dusty. I know, I know.... I don't like Dusty. But lets be real here. The last two seasons, the minor league guys have spent time getting Alonso time in left. This season, he played more in left than he played anywhere else. Walt traded Jonny Gomes and came out and said it was to get a spot for Alonso. So, the minor league guys clearly thought he was able to not kill a team defensively in left field. Walt Jocketty clearly thought the same thing. Dusty calls the entire thing quits after 3 games. It seems to me that its a Dusty thing rather than anyone else.

Don't get me wrong.... the guy isn't much of a left fielder. In fact, he is a bad one. But I don't think he is worse than Dunn ever was and he might be slightly worse than Gomes is. Yes, he has looked bad a few times out there. I can't preach small sample size enough though. There is a reason Rick Sweet played him 70+ times down there in Louisville and it wasn't because he was looking that bad all the time.

Completely disagree. Dusty gets paid to win games. Every time he puts Alonso out there, he botches a play that costs the team a run or more. The minor league guys can experiment. Dusty can't.

This isn't rocket science. One of two things are going to happen. Alonso is going to be traded (as he should have been already) or Votto is going to be traded and Alonso will play the only position he is capable of playing -- first base. This isn't some kind of advanced math or anything at all unusual in the history of the game.

dougdirt
08-21-2011, 08:43 PM
Completely disagree. Dusty gets paid to win games. Every time he puts Alonso out there, he botches a play that costs the team a run or more. The minor league guys can experiment. Dusty can't.

This isn't rocket science. One of two things are going to happen. Alonso is going to be traded (as he should have been already) or Votto is going to be traded and Alonso will play the only position he is capable of playing -- first base. This isn't some kind of advanced math or anything at all unusual in the history of the game.

If Alonso went out there and did what people think he is (rather than what he has done) in the Majors in left field, there is ZERO chance that he would have spent as much time in left field as he did in the minors. Yes, you can experiment out there. But it doesn't last as long as it does. Your GM doesn't trade a left fielder then say it was to make room for Alonso.

PuffyPig
08-21-2011, 08:54 PM
What pridicament?

We have a solid prospect at first base, who we will hold on to in case we trade Votto.

Or perhaps we trade Alonso in the right deal.

There is no gun to our head at the moment.

BTW, you may want to consier either a space (or even two) between your sentences or indenting each sentence. It certainly makes for a easier read.

wlf WV
08-21-2011, 08:57 PM
I don't imagine the front office was fooled about his abilities.It is a perplexing situation.

oneupper
08-21-2011, 09:02 PM
Alonso should be down in L'ville playing. Bring up Hermida if you need a lefty bat off the bench.

Scrap Irony
08-21-2011, 09:19 PM
None of us know what's really happened, but, IMO:

1. Jocketty really likes Alonso's bat and has since the draft. He sees a 900 OPS slugger with few holes in his swing and very good plate coverage.
2. Votto's emergence as a true elite player meant keeping him for now, but concern about being able to afford him continues.
3. Jocketty isn't willing to deal Alonso for less than the true difference-maker he sees in front of him.
4. Other teams see a GM with two good 1B possibiliites and are low-balling, hoping to make out well in the deal. Or, those teams have reservations about the ability of Alonso.
5. To keep both Votto and Alonso in the lineup, one had to play out of position. Because of his breakout season last year, Votto isn't going to be asked to move. Alonso, OTOH, is a prospect that could play another position. Playing him at another spot in the minors hurts no one, aside from the minor league won/loss record, which few GMs care at all about. (Or at least care little about it.) The risk/ reward of the move in the minors is negligible. Once he came to the majors, Alonso's OF defense cost the team a couple wins and the starting pitchers a few earned runs. This isn't acceptable at the major league level.

There is no conspiracy, IMO. No power play between GM and manager. No holding back some HoF prospect.

Votto is a better player than Alonso.
Alonso cannot play LF adequately at the mlb level.
Therefore, Votto plays in front of Alonso.

Now, perhaps Alonso can learn to play another position, such as 3B. (The quickness, the footwork, the speed and angle off the bat are all similar to 1B. The hands are a question, as is the arm.) He'll likely still be really, really bad defensively, but, again, if he hits like Tony Perez in 1970, I'll take his Tony Perez-like 1970 defense.

wlf WV
08-21-2011, 09:34 PM
What pridicament?

We have a solid prospect at first base, who we will hold on to in case we trade Votto.

Or perhaps we trade Alonso in the right deal.

There is no gun to our head at the moment.

BTW, you may want to consier either a space (or even two) between your sentences or indenting each sentence. It certainly makes for a easier read.
Thanks for the input,I'll try.Don't expect too much,I can't even type.:) If he's still with us in 2012, what do you do with him?

RedsManRick
08-21-2011, 09:36 PM
If there's anything Dusty's career has shown it's that he does what he think will win the games today. He rarely wants to do something today for the sake of tomorrow, especially if he might get embarrassed in the process. Playing Alonso would make Dusty feel like he has to tell the other 24 games that this year is no longer important and he doesn't want to do that. That's my read at least.

westofyou
08-21-2011, 09:42 PM
If there's anything Dusty's career has shown it's that he does what he think will win the games today. He rarely wants to do something today for the sake of tomorrow, especially if he might get embarrassed in the process. Playing Alonso would make Dusty feel like he has to tell the other 24 games that this year is no longer important and he doesn't want to do that. That's my read at least.
Who are the managers who have managed 5 plus years who haven't committed that crime?

Alonso is a statue.

He isn't going to play 100 games in MLB as an OF.

No crime in that, Dusty just happens to have the guts to say it out loud.

RedsManRick
08-21-2011, 09:53 PM
Who are the managers who have managed 5 plus years who haven't committed that crime?

Alonso is a statue.

He isn't going to play 100 games in MLB as an OF.

No crime in that, Dusty just happens to have the guts to say it out loud.

I'm not suggesting he belongs out there. But clearly somebody in the Reds organization wanted to give it an extended try, including at the major league level. I'm not saying Dusty is right nor wrong -- just that he's not on the same page.

edabbs44
08-21-2011, 09:57 PM
I'm not suggesting he belongs out there. But clearly somebody in the Reds organization wanted to give it an extended try, including at the major league level. I'm not saying Dusty is right nor wrong -- just that he's not on the same page.

My guess is that he would have gotten the extended try in the majors but he was an absolute fiasco out there. Tough to play someone when he looks like that, no matter what the case.

dougdirt
08-21-2011, 10:06 PM
My guess is that he would have gotten the extended try in the majors but he was an absolute fiasco out there. Tough to play someone when he looks like that, no matter what the case.

Not when the reports say "He isn't as bad as he has looked in 3 games out there". And you have to assume they do say that because there is no way the experiment would have lasted that long if he were.

edabbs44
08-21-2011, 10:08 PM
Not when the reports say "He isn't as bad as he has looked in 3 games out there". And you have to assume they do say that because there is no way the experiment would have lasted that long if he were.

But when he looks like he never played the position out there, maybe they need to reassess in the short term.

IslandRed
08-21-2011, 10:38 PM
Not when the reports say "He isn't as bad as he has looked in 3 games out there". And you have to assume they do say that because there is no way the experiment would have lasted that long if he were.

The line between an experiment succeeding and failing is not always black and white, sometimes it's in the eye of the beholder. The length of the experiment could be evidence the minor-league people felt he could play an acceptable left field, true. But it's also plausible that as long as they could say "well, he can still get better and he might not kill you out there," that was enough to keep trying. After all, there wasn't anything to gain by killing the experiment as long as Votto is still a Red. The recommendation might have been rather tepid, is what I'm getting at here.

It's still reasonable to ask if there's anything to gain by killing the experiment now, mind you. But as I've said before, shoddy defense is not a victimless crime.

Roy Tucker
08-21-2011, 10:45 PM
Teams have had great propects blocked before. It's nothing new.

Trade him in the off-season for an equal prospect who doesn't play 1B. Alonso really doesn't have any future besides 1B or DH. I think those kinds of trades are best made with the GMs clustered around a hot stove in the dead of winter without the competitive heat of the season clouding their thoughts.

Kc61
08-21-2011, 11:03 PM
If the front office wanted Alonso in LF most games, then Alonso would be out there. Dusty doesn't want him out there and nobody is overruling him, so he sits.

I don't blame them for deciding not to play him. They obviously do not think he helps the team out there, or he would play. That's their judgment, I understand it.

What is harder to comprehend is how slow this team is to make player moves. This predicament has been building for years. Yet no player move to resolve the situation.

I hope Yonder hasn't lost value and can bring a good return this off-season. I would hate to see him traded for a grade B prospect. Hard to imagine him sitting behind Votto for the next two years. Anything is possible, I guess.

westofyou
08-21-2011, 11:12 PM
I don't like them fellas who drive in two runs and let in three.

Casey Stengel

KronoRed
08-21-2011, 11:24 PM
Alonso should be down in L'ville playing. Bring up Hermida if you need a lefty bat off the bench.

I agree, what's Walt thinking with his one?

I don't buy that Dusty is defying everyone here, if he does then Walt should quit for not having control over the team, Dusty is likely doing just what Walt would wants done.

mth123
08-21-2011, 11:27 PM
This team had obvious issues coming into 2011. Alonso was and is a resource that could have been used to address those problems. Instead he's still here wasting away, the issues still exist and 2011 is down the toilet.

Its on Walt. 100% misuse of limited resources for a team that can't afford to have any wasting away. Now the problem is multiplied with several guys who are redundant and looking ready with no place to play. This team doesn't need a major overhaul, but it does need to reconfigure a bit to address its needs.

Guacarock
08-22-2011, 01:59 AM
I don't like them fellas who drive in two runs and let in three.

Casey Stengel

Funny quote, but this situation doesn't bring to mind Casey Stengel to me. I find myself wondering what Sparky Anderson would do, and wishing we had coaches today who were as creative as Sparky, and could actually think outside the box if that's what it took to win or improve the team.

GAC
08-22-2011, 05:52 AM
It's like trying to put a round peg in a square hole.

mth123
08-22-2011, 07:12 AM
It's like trying to put a round peg in a square hole.

Yep. There are other teams with extra square pegs that need a round one. Making a swap is 9 months overdue.

Roy Tucker
08-22-2011, 09:10 AM
I am starting to wonder what's going on. Both Alonso and Aroldis Chapman are extremely valuable MLB-ready prospects and the organization seems to be dithering about what to do with them.

Valuable time is ticking by and somewhere between Walt and Dusty is a muddle.

Scrap Irony
08-22-2011, 09:34 AM
Not when the reports say "He isn't as bad as he has looked in 3 games out there". And you have to assume they do say that because there is no way the experiment would have lasted that long if he were.

Why in the world would you have to assume that, doug?

I would assume the minor league coaches didn't get much of a vote at all about the move and were told to put him in LF despite the "cost" defensively.

It's happened this way for 150 years. Why would it be different now?

In other words, Jocketty had absolutely nothing to lose by playing Alonso in the AA/AAA OF. He was playing with house money and going all-in on a 2-7 off-suit. If he won, great. If not, shrug. You can still deal him, deal Votto, or find another position for his bat.

klw
08-22-2011, 10:05 AM
It's like trying to put a round peg in a square hole.

Doesn't a round peg fit easily into a square hole? Why do we always assume that the square peg going into the round hole is too large for the hole- maybe it is a smaller sized peg. And does anyone else see great similarities between Alonso and Votto's swings or have I just seen a small sample?

mdccclxix
08-22-2011, 10:31 AM
I am starting to wonder what's going on. Both Alonso and Aroldis Chapman are extremely valuable MLB-ready prospects and the organization seems to be dithering about what to do with them.

Valuable time is ticking by and somewhere between Walt and Dusty is a muddle.

Ouch. Putting those 2 side by side is tough to look at.

westofyou
08-22-2011, 10:32 AM
Funny quote, but this situation doesn't bring to mind Casey Stengel to me. I find myself wondering what Sparky Anderson would do, and wishing we had coaches today who were as creative as Sparky, and could actually think outside the box if that's what it took to win or improve the team.

You mean the same Sparky Anderson who couldn't live with the butcher Tony Perez at 3rd or the one that gave 900 PA's to Enos Cabell at 3rd in 82 and 83?

Guacarock
08-22-2011, 11:03 AM
You mean the same Sparky Anderson who couldn't live with the butcher Tony Perez at 3rd or the one that gave 900 PA's to Enos Cabell at 3rd in 82 and 83?

You must be talking about George Anderson! But seriously, Sparky could think outside the box. The revolutionary ways that he handled his bullpen forever changed the roles for relievers. And we all know how the Rose-Foster switchover in LF put the Big Red Machine into contention in 1975.

westofyou
08-22-2011, 11:08 AM
You must be talking about George Anderson! But seriously, Sparky could think outside the box. The revolutionary ways that he handled his bullpen forever changed the roles for relievers. And we all know how the Rose-Foster switchover in LF put the Big Red Machine into contention in 1975.

True, he could think outside the box, but a lot of his thoughts were consistently in the box. Rose to 3rd was no-brainer, turf was killing his OF play, he was an ex IF and Foster was ready to play FT.

But when it came to Lee May and Tony Perez, someone had to go, just like when Joe Adcock came up and Klu was at 1st, or when McCovey pushed Cepeda out of the picture in SF.

The man was a good manager, he wasn't a magician though.

_Sir_Charles_
08-22-2011, 11:23 AM
I still think its Dusty. I know, I know.... I don't like Dusty. But lets be real here. The last two seasons, the minor league guys have spent time getting Alonso time in left. This season, he played more in left than he played anywhere else. Walt traded Jonny Gomes and came out and said it was to get a spot for Alonso. So, the minor league guys clearly thought he was able to not kill a team defensively in left field. Walt Jocketty clearly thought the same thing. Dusty calls the entire thing quits after 3 games. It seems to me that its a Dusty thing rather than anyone else.

Don't get me wrong.... the guy isn't much of a left fielder. In fact, he is a bad one. But I don't think he is worse than Dunn ever was and he might be slightly worse than Gomes is. Yes, he has looked bad a few times out there. I can't preach small sample size enough though. There is a reason Rick Sweet played him 70+ times down there in Louisville and it wasn't because he was looking that bad all the time.

Let's be fair to Dusty here. He didn't get to see Alonso in left field in the minors. He saw those first 3 games or so...and they were atrocious. To say Dusty called it quits on him in left is also not fair. He played him there again yesterday (or the day before...I don't recall). But based on what he's done out there in the majors....Dusty's assessment is spot on. So the question isn't what Dusty or Walt or anybody else does...it's what does the REAL Yonder Alonso look like in left field in the majors going forward? If it's like those first horrific games...then the experiment needs to stop. If it was just bad luck or jitters....time will tell. But I certainly don't think anybody has given up on the guy...not even Dusty.


~edit~ Okay, I lost track of the time I guess. It was the 16th that he got back in there. Sorry. My point was that he did put him back out there after saying he wouldn't "any time soon" following that first series he botched so badly.

nate
08-22-2011, 11:25 AM
Can Alonso pitch? We could kill two birds with one stone!

:cool:

Guacarock
08-22-2011, 11:27 AM
True, he could think outside the box, but a lot of his thoughts were consistently in the box. Rose to 3rd was no-brainer, turf was killing his OF play, he was an ex IF and Foster was ready to play FT.

But when it came to Lee May and Tony Perez, someone had to go, just like when Joe Adcock came up and Klu was at 1st, or when McCovey pushed Cepeda out of the picture in SF.

The man was a good manager, he wasn't a magician though.

I have met Foster each of the past two years at Goodyear, and discussed those days with him. We've become acquaintances of sorts -- at least, he and I are now Facebook friends. Any Reds fans who haven't made the pilgrimage to Goodyear, I would recommend it. It's a great opportunity to get to know past and current Reds players in an atmosphere that's a lot more relaxed and intimate than you'll find once the season kicks off in earnest.

Raisor
08-22-2011, 10:54 PM
Alonso has had six total chances in LF. Six balls hit his way.

Anyone that makes any kind of decision based on six TCs is a boob.

PuffyPig
08-22-2011, 11:02 PM
Alonso has had six total chances in LF. Six balls hit his way.

Anyone that makes any kind of decision based on six TCs is a boob.

He caught 6 balls. There were quite a bit more hit his way.

Total chances are balls caught and errors.

And you could probably watch a player in practice and see that his range is very poor.

HokieRed
08-22-2011, 11:10 PM
All the "Alonso has no place to play" arguments are based on an assumption about Votto's long-term status with the team, which, to put a number on it, I'd put at no higher than 20%. In short, an offer for Alonso will have to be very very good, and I suspect no one's come close to that yet.

mth123
08-22-2011, 11:45 PM
All the "Alonso has no place to play" arguments are based on an assumption about Votto's long-term status with the team, which, to put a number on it, I'd put at no higher than 20%. In short, an offer for Alonso will have to be very very good, and I suspect no one's come close to that yet.

Votto is here for two more years. Alonso's a waste of resources sitting around until then. I'd rather deal him to bring in help while Votto is still here than hope that somehow a team that loses the best player its had in at least 15 years will have a better chance after he's gone.

HokieRed
08-23-2011, 12:29 AM
Votto is here for two more years. Alonso's a waste of resources sitting around until then. I'd rather deal him to bring in help while Votto is still here than hope that somehow a team that loses the best player its had in at least 15 years will have a better chance after he's gone.

Why not tell Votto to get a LF glove if we're sure he's gone?

cincyinco
08-23-2011, 04:29 AM
Not to hijack the thread, but why not just trade Votto and put an end to this charade.. He should bring in a better than ubaldo haul.. One would think anyway.

Bring in some new parts and trade away some of the redundancy to bolster the roster for next year. Have some guts, don't wait around for a Prince Fielder type situation. If you're going to truly rely on the pipeline for homegrown talent, then believe in the turnover and opportunities that can create for your franchise.

That's just my humble opinion though.

Superdude
08-23-2011, 05:00 AM
Not to hijack the thread, but why not just trade Votto and put an end to this charade.. He should bring in a better than ubaldo haul.. One would think anyway.

Bring in some new parts and trade away some of the redundancy to bolster the roster for next year. Have some guts, don't wait around for a Prince Fielder type situation. If you're going to truly rely on the pipeline for homegrown talent, then believe in the turnover and opportunities that can create for your franchise.

That's just my humble opinion though.

I'd shop Votto as well. Signing him long term probably isn't gonna happen without crippling the franchise, so sell him while we can still get a big impact return. Take Alonso's .850 OPS at first, bring in a haul for Votto, and restructure the roster for some sustainable success.

757690
08-23-2011, 05:33 AM
He caught 6 balls. There were quite a bit more hit his way.

Total chances are balls caught and errors.

And you could probably watch a player in practice and see that his range is very poor.

You don't need to hear me sing for longer than 30 seconds to know I can't sing, and never will be able to.

I don't know how anyone who saw Alonso play LF could want to see more of it, or think that any amount of practice would make him good at it.

Ron Madden
08-23-2011, 05:44 AM
Not to hijack the thread, but why not just trade Votto and put an end to this charade.. He should bring in a better than ubaldo haul.. One would think anyway.

Bring in some new parts and trade away some of the redundancy to bolster the roster for next year. Have some guts, don't wait around for a Prince Fielder type situation. If you're going to truly rely on the pipeline for homegrown talent, then believe in the turnover and opportunities that can create for your franchise.

That's just my humble opinion though.

I tend to agree with this opinion. Pick a course and stay that course don't half arse it.

GAC
08-23-2011, 06:22 AM
Doesn't a round peg fit easily into a square hole? Why do we always assume that the square peg going into the round hole is too large for the hole- maybe it is a smaller sized peg. And does anyone else see great similarities between Alonso and Votto's swings or have I just seen a small sample?

I was attempting to mimic Yogi Berra. :D

But my point with the statement was to show that we're trying make Alonso "fit" into a mold that is not a good fit - left field. And the sole reasoning behind that is because we already have a 1bman named Votto.

There seems to be two "Ifs" facing this organization in this situation....

IF this organization is that high on Alonso, and are pretty confident he will succeed at the ML level, and....

IF they also feel it is highly unlikely we are going to be able to retain Votto after the 2013 season...

then based on the premise the above leans more to the truthful side, then this FO needs to face this reality and start the wheels a rollin' to do something about it now. I love Votto. I'd love to see him in a Red's uni for a long, long time. But if Joey is not showing that he shares that same commitment to be with the Reds after two more years, then he has to understand "business is business", and the FO is going to do what is best for the organization. And that includes trading him, capitalizing on his high trade value, and get something solid in return. Not let him walk into FA for prospects. And if Joey doesn't like that "approach" then tough. He's the one that put us in that position. What would any organization do with a star player that is not committed to be there, or won't give them a firm answer?

I'd send Alonso back to AAA for the remainder of this year and put his butt where he belongs.... 1B. Again, I don't care what Joey Votto may think about it. I'd go into next year with Alonso playing 1B for Louisville while in the meantime I'm looking for the best possible deal for Votto. If it happens in the off-season then fine, Alonso is my 1Bman for 2012.

I don't think Alonso has anything further to prove in AAA from an offensive standpoint. What he needs to be given is a "home". And that home is 1B.

But Votto's "indecisiveness" has placed this organization in a very sticky position. And they need to gain the upper hand (not Votto) for the future of this team.

The only problem may be that any potential trade partner may also face the same scenario - losing Votto after 2 years. And that may effect any return we could get for him now. But I'd still dangle him.

And if this organization decides to hold onto Votto for those remaining two years and take their chances, then what do we do with Alonso in the meantime? He can't play LF. Let him waste away on our bench? Trade him? OK. Then you possibly end up losing two 1Bman. Then what ya got?

mth123
08-23-2011, 07:44 AM
I'd shop Votto as well. Signing him long term probably isn't gonna happen without crippling the franchise, so sell him while we can still get a big impact return. Take Alonso's .850 OPS at first, bring in a haul for Votto, and restructure the roster for some sustainable success.

.850 OPS for Alonso is a nice assumption and a huge hope. 2011 should be an example of why building a team on hopes doesn't work. Its OK to work in a guy here and there, but dealing off the team's best player and replacing him with a hope would seem to set the timeline back a few years. I'd be OK with gambling on that hope in addition to Votto for 2012, but Alonso can't play anywhere else and I don't endorse a plan to take that gamble in place of Votto.

I'm personally tired of rebuilding. Its funny to me that people who want to hold onto Alonso and deal Votto are worried that we'll be going into a rebuilding period when Votto leaves, but are happy to just go ahead and start rebuilding now. The Reds won't be able to make a deal for Votto that makes the 2012 team better overall IMO. They won't get a similar producer back at a different position. Its possible they could deal him for a decent pitcher (Ricky Romero would be my target in a Votto deal) but I'm guessing if the team wants to "get value" for Votto it will have to be a package of high end kids who won't help all that much for a few years (even if they are "ready" now) so its back to rebuilding and when those kids are ready, Cueto, will probably be gone and we'll keep waiting for tomorrow.

PuffyPig
08-23-2011, 07:56 AM
[QUOTE=mth123;2470697.... but I'm guessing if the team wants to "get value" for Votto it will have to be a package of high end kids who won't help all that much for a few years (even if they are "ready" now) so its back to rebuilding and when those kids are ready, Cueto, will probably be gone and we'll keep waiting for tomorrow.[/QUOTE]

Cueto is under control for 4 more years.

Votto would have exceptional trade value, and could be traded for major league players.

Maybe for Rasmus and Morrow from the Blue Jays.

mth123
08-23-2011, 08:08 AM
Cueto is under control for 4 more years.

Votto would have exceptional trade value, and could be traded for major league players.

Maybe for Rasmus and Morrow from the Blue Jays.

Sure he can get major league players, but he won't get Longoria, or Bauista or Tulowitzki like people are thinking.

Morrow and Rasmus might be realistic. Not sure it makes the Reds better. The Reds need to go the other way IMO opiniion and trade two or three decent guys for a superior one, not a superior one for two or three decent ones.

IslandRed
08-23-2011, 12:28 PM
Not to hijack the thread, but why not just trade Votto and put an end to this charade.. He should bring in a better than ubaldo haul.. One would think anyway.

Bring in some new parts and trade away some of the redundancy to bolster the roster for next year. Have some guts, don't wait around for a Prince Fielder type situation. If you're going to truly rely on the pipeline for homegrown talent, then believe in the turnover and opportunities that can create for your franchise.

That's just my humble opinion though.

Nothing wrong with the idea of maximizing trade value, but I don't think the Brewers are exactly regretting keeping Fielder around. Same with the Rays last year holding onto Carl Crawford. All the roster management stuff is a means to an end. Sometimes a team has to stop churning long enough to let the cream rise to the top.


Sure he can get major league players, but he won't get Longoria, or Bauista or Tulowitzki like people are thinking.

Morrow and Rasmus might be realistic. Not sure it makes the Reds better. The Reds need to go the other way IMO opiniion and trade two or three decent guys for a superior one, not a superior one for two or three decent ones.

I agree with that. Some teams need to hunt talent with a shotgun and other teams need to hunt with a rifle. Right now, the Reds are the latter. We need to turn that deep and talented Top 40 into a stronger, more cohesive Top 25.

puca
08-23-2011, 12:59 PM
Sure he can get major league players, but he won't get Longoria, or Bauista or Tulowitzki like people are thinking.

Morrow and Rasmus might be realistic. Not sure it makes the Reds better. The Reds need to go the other way IMO opiniion and trade two or three decent guys for a superior one, not a superior one for two or three decent ones.

Sounds nice in theory, but how easy is it to trade 2-3 decent players for a superior one? What are your targets, and what do you think is a reasonable offer?

If the Reds are positioned to take on salary, probably there are deals that can be made, but are they? CoCo will come off the books but a lot of other players will be getting a bump in pay. They could not pick up Brandon's option, but in the end will they be better?

Maybe Mes is attractive enough a prospect that he could fetch a good young (cheap) OF bat.

Guacarock
08-23-2011, 03:47 PM
Alonso starting tonight at 1B. Gives Votto two days off, and gets Alonso into the lineup. Wonder if there's also any showcasing going on with the Marlins?

HokieRed
08-23-2011, 11:03 PM
Alonso 2 for 3, W, 2Bi's, HR. Better than Votto?

HokieRed
08-23-2011, 11:34 PM
Votto to LF. You won't trade for a better bat than Yonder.

dougdirt
08-23-2011, 11:49 PM
You won't trade for a better bat than Yonder.

At least not without giving up one of Chapman, Cueto, Bruce or Votto.

Superdude
08-23-2011, 11:54 PM
Votto to LF. You won't trade for a better bat than Yonder.

Why can't this just happen already? Alonso looked like a stud tonight. Incredible discipline, pounded the mistakes...basically everything you want from a hitter. I really don't care about Votto's feelings unless he shows some kind of inclination towards staying in Cincy. Get in the outfield young man.

Big Klu
08-24-2011, 12:02 AM
Votto to LF. You won't trade for a better bat than Yonder.

Votto played 3 games in the OF in rookie ball for the Gulf Coast Reds in 2002, then played 40 games in LF and 2 games in RF for Louisville in 2007 before being called up and playing 6 games in LF for the Reds in 2007. That's a total of 51 games in the OF in 10 years--and no appearances since 2007. What makes you think he's a viable option in the OF? I think that ship has sailed.

CTA513
08-24-2011, 12:05 AM
Alonso 2 for 3, W, 2Bi's, HR. Better than Votto?

of course and if Votto wasn't selfish he would give his MVP award to Alonso.

dougdirt
08-24-2011, 12:05 AM
What makes you think he's a viable option in the OF? I think that ship has sailed.

The fact that he can run a little bit and has a solid arm. But, as I have said before, it doesn't matter. He isn't going to go out there.

HokieRed
08-24-2011, 12:07 AM
of course and if Votto wasn't selfish he would give his MVP award to Alonso.

It was a joke, though I do think getting Alonso into the lineup along with Votto ought to be this team's "highest priority," as H. Ross Perot used to say.

reds44
08-24-2011, 12:07 AM
Votto gon get traded in the offseason.

HokieRed
08-24-2011, 12:09 AM
The fact that he can run a little bit and has a solid arm. But, as I have said before, it doesn't matter. He isn't going to go out there.

Agree of course with the assessment of Votto. Not sure, though, I'm ready to completely accept the conclusion. I assume Votto wants to win. If we can get Baker to give Alonso another 100 AB's, my sense is it will become so obvious Alonso is the key to bumping this offense up that Joey might yet decide to play LF for the obvious good of the team.

Superdude
08-24-2011, 12:10 AM
The fact that he can run a little bit and has a solid arm. But, as I have said before, it doesn't matter. He isn't going to go out there.

Can't we just force him though? Not joking. Votto's clearly against it, but something has to be done. It doesn't look like he's taking a discount two years from now regardless of how we treat him.

757690
08-24-2011, 12:13 AM
Put both Alonso and Votto on the market in the offseason. See which one brings the deal that improves the team the most, and take it.

No way to get Alonso and Votto in the lineup at the same time, without putting out a Brewer/Cardinalesque defense. but either one will bring back great production that should compliment whoever stays.

This offseason is the time to make the decision.

CTA513
08-24-2011, 12:17 AM
Can't we just force him though? Not joking. Votto's clearly against it, but something has to be done. It doesn't look like he's taking a discount two years from now regardless of how we treat him.

You could try to force him, but I'm guessing that won't help the Reds when it comes to signing players.

Captain Hook
08-24-2011, 12:17 AM
I'm just glad Alonso is doing what he's doing with the Reds.His value didn't seem all that high at the trading deadline if you believe all of the talk about other teams being more interested in other prospects or guys on the big league team. Seems like he wouldn't have been the center piece in any deal that was being discussed at the time. Considering his age and the fact that he's going to be cheap for a while, I think that while maybe the Reds couldn't trade him for a better bat they may be able to trade him and get really good value for him now, this offseason.Not exactly ideal to trade a guy that can hit like he can but it's not really all that bad of a predicament either.

mth123
08-24-2011, 12:28 AM
Volunteer to move to the AL in the realignment scheme and play Alonso at DH.

Of course now there is no one to deal for James Shields.

Kc61
08-24-2011, 12:54 AM
Alonso is doing well. Great, now trade him and others. Get MVP Votto a cleanup hitter to pair with. Or a pitcher to pair with Cueto.

Trade the MVP? Blasphemy I say. Best hitter the Reds have had in many, many years.

Win WITH Votto for the next two years. Don't sacrifice still another two years for more rebuilding.

2014. Maybe Votto stays, maybe he goes, but he is the kind of rare player you can win with now. Seize the moment.

Alonso? Looks like a good young hitter. But the Reds already have a first baseman.

reds44
08-24-2011, 01:51 AM
You will get infinitely more for Votto than you would for Alonso.

And it's not rebuilding if you don't trade him for prospects. I'm not talking about selling him off.

Caveat Emperor
08-24-2011, 02:05 AM
2014. Maybe Votto stays, maybe he goes, but he is the kind of rare player you can win with now. Seize the moment.

He's gone. I don't know how much more plainly he can tell you without actually coming out and saying "I'm leaving in free agency as soon as I can." The only way the Reds afford him is if they grossly overpay (leaving themselves vulnerable with so much payroll tied into 1 player) or if he tanks so badly over the next 2 seasons that he brings himself into the Reds price range -- in which case why would you want him anyway?

Votto's the rare kind of player that can bring a quality major league player back in an area of need -- SS, LF, SP -- AND free up payroll to go and sign another impact player in another area of need.

Sell high. Bring back quality value that can shore up weak areas RIGHT NOW, and build a team that can compete for a decade, not just until Votto bolts for Toronto in 2014.

Plus Plus
08-24-2011, 02:18 AM
Sell high. Bring back quality value that can shore up weak areas RIGHT NOW, and build a team that can compete for a decade, not just until Votto bolts for Toronto in 2014.

I think that the Votto-to-Toronto idea is one of the most mythical molehill-mountains that I have seen in my time at RedsZone. I haven't seen a single statement from Votto that displays a desire to play in Toronto beyond saying that it was nice to be home when the Reds played in Toronto.

John Axford is from Canada too. Maybe Milwaukee should plan on trading their effective young closer in the offseason to the Blue Jays because the allure of Canada is drawing him to the AL East as well?

There are things to address for the Reds in the offseason, and that's without question. However, trading away a player who is (as of the time of this post) the reigning MVP in the National League and one of the best young players in baseball (regardless of contract status) because he is only under contract for 2+ more years and was born in a Toronto suburb is a bit irrational, imho. I mean, Toronto's biggest free agent signings in recent history were John Buck and Alex Gonzalez...

pedro
08-24-2011, 02:50 AM
Votto's not going to resign with the Reds and even if he was willing the Reds can't afford to resign him unless they commit to way more payroll than they ever will.

I see no issue with trading Votto if the right deal comes along. They're a .500 team with him, what's the risk?

reds44
08-24-2011, 02:55 AM
The Reds are better than they've played this year. When you consider the fact the Brewers are going to take 4 steps backwards next year, the Reds could easily find themselves back in the playoffs next year.

Larkin Fan
08-24-2011, 03:03 AM
A competitor like Votto wants to win. It's programmed into his core and judging by the intensity he displays on the field, it's a major part of who he is. Does it really make sense that he's going to bolt to Toronto, a team that has the misfortune of being in the AL East and consistently finishes behind the likes of the Yankees and the Red Sox, just because it's home? Not really.

Championship teams are built around players like Votto. The Reds are on the cusp of something great and they need to focus on filling in the missing pieces without trading the number one asset that this club has. All of the wild assumptions and speculation about what Votto will be doing come the end of his contract is actually quite entertaining, since he's never once given any indication of what he's thinking. Frankly, it brings to mind an old cliche about people who assume...

pedro
08-24-2011, 03:12 AM
The Reds have some holes, if they can fill them
by trading Votto then it should be considered, especially considering he's given every indication he intends to become a free agent when his time comes. Whether he signs with Toronto is anyones guess, but I think
the chances that he resigns with the Reds are very slim.

CTA513
08-24-2011, 03:21 AM
Hes only got so many prime years left and probably doesn't want to waste them waiting for the holes on the team to magically be filled.

KronoRed
08-24-2011, 03:32 AM
Something to consider here is that Votto likely isn't going to bring that SS/SP/LF this team needs straight up, he'll bring prospects.

We aren't talking about a gold glove center fielder, he's a 1B.

757690
08-24-2011, 03:44 AM
Something to consider here is that Votto likely isn't going to bring that SS/SP/LF this team needs straight up, he'll bring prospects.

We aren't talking about a gold glove center fielder, he's a 1B.

Yeah, he sucks. Why would any team even want him?

KronoRed
08-24-2011, 03:46 AM
Yeah, he sucks. Why would any team even want him?

Who said that?:laugh:

Ron Madden
08-24-2011, 04:52 AM
He's gone. I don't know how much more plainly he can tell you without actually coming out and saying "I'm leaving in free agency as soon as I can." The only way the Reds afford him is if they grossly overpay (leaving themselves vulnerable with so much payroll tied into 1 player) or if he tanks so badly over the next 2 seasons that he brings himself into the Reds price range -- in which case why would you want him anyway?

Votto's the rare kind of player that can bring a quality major league player back in an area of need -- SS, LF, SP -- AND free up payroll to go and sign another impact player in another area of need.

Sell high. Bring back quality value that can shore up weak areas RIGHT NOW, and build a team that can compete for a decade, not just until Votto bolts for Toronto in 2014.

Well said, I completely agree.

GAC
08-24-2011, 06:08 AM
Put both Alonso and Votto on the market in the offseason. See which one brings the deal that improves the team the most, and take it.

I think most interested teams would go after Alonso over Votto. I'm not as keen on the rules as some of you are; but doesn't a player need to have 3 yrs of ML service time, but less then 6, before they even enter their arb eligible years? I think that would make Alonso far more appealing to most teams over Votto. Votto is a rare type of player for sure. But Alonso, IMO, has an upside too. And they'd have control of Alonso for several years rather cheaply, and Votto could still bolt after 2 years (that's the downside on Joey).

And that's also why the Reds should keep Alonso. If it's most likely inevitable we're going to lose Joey then dangle him. But lets not create a scenario where we lose both. I really believe Alonso has the potential to be a solid run producer in the heart of this order.

We could still get quality return on Votto. And that's better then simply prospects in a couple years.

mth123
08-24-2011, 06:22 AM
Something to consider here is that Votto likely isn't going to bring that SS/SP/LF this team needs straight up, he'll bring prospects.

We aren't talking about a gold glove center fielder, he's a 1B.

Agree. I doubt we'll get star caliber players for him at areas of need. We could easily get 3 or 4 interchangeable parts, but we have those coming out our ears. I still think the most value would come by dealing him for several high cieling kids and I don't get it. We're concerned about about him leaving in 2 years and becoming a mediocrity and having to rebuild, so the solution is to deal him now to ensure mediocrity and pull the rebuild forward.

Puffypig's suggestion of Votto for Rasmus and Morrow is pretty good as far as what Votto could fetch. So, we deal two years of a cost certain MVP caliber Votto for 3 years of a now arb eligible OF who is at .239/.314/.415/.730 and 3 years of a decent pitcher who would help the rotation somewhat but is also arb eligible and due to make $5 Million plus IMO. It slighly upgrades the rotation and adds yet another CF to the mix who doesn't have the bat for an OF corner. I just don't see how adding interchangable parts or slight upgrades without really saving much on the payroll and downgrading from Votto to an unknown in Alonso improves the teams chances.

There is a better chance of adding a star caliber guy by dealing Alonso and some excess pieces to a team looking to shed payroll. Cough, James Shields,.cough.

lollipopcurve
08-24-2011, 08:21 AM
There is a better chance of adding a star caliber guy by dealing Alonso and some excess pieces to a team looking to shed payroll. Cough, James Shields,.cough.

It's possible Votto brings back Bautista. That notion cannot be dismissed out of hand.

Shields commands much more than Alonso and "excess pieces." Top tier SP on an affordable multiyear deal -- you're talking at least 3 top prospects.

757690
08-24-2011, 09:58 AM
Something to consider here is that Votto likely isn't going to bring that SS/SP/LF this team needs straight up, he'll bring prospects.

We aren't talking about a gold glove center fielder, he's a 1B.

Players who realistically Votto could yield in a trade:

Jose Bautista
Matt Kemp
Elvis Andrus
Jared Weaver
Starlin Castro
James Shields
Ricky Romaro
Tommy Hanson
Justin Verlander
Mike Stanton
Felix Hernandez
Brian McCann
David Price
Carlos Santana
Clayton Kershaw
Ryan Zimmerman
Rickie Weeks
Andrew McCutchen

Maybe a few of these guys would require a prospect as well, but I think any GM would listen if Jocketty called and offered Votto for any of these players.

It's absurd to think that the reigning MVP, whose in his prime, would only bring back prospects.

mdccclxix
08-24-2011, 10:26 AM
I'd like remind people, and Dusty said it best, that Alonso had a great night in front of his home and family - it happens often. He didn't just win the MVP. Sure, it was a glimpse into what he can do, but you have to keep a level head about it. Don't forget his dropped pick off throw from Cueto that lead to a 3 run inning...at this point Alonso my be just drawing even on RBI's vs. REI's (Runs Errored In - that's my new stat).

Redsfan320
08-24-2011, 10:28 AM
I'd like remind people, and Dusty said it best, that Alonso had a great night in front of his home and family - it happens often. He didn't just win the MVP. Sure, it was a glimpse into what he can do, but you have to keep a level head about it. Don't forget his dropped pick off throw from Cueto that lead to a 3 run inning...at this point Alonso my be just drawing even on RBI's vs. REI's (Runs Errored In - that's my new stat).

His defense isn't great, no doubt about it, but that pick-off is on Johnny. It was way wide.

320

Kc61
08-24-2011, 10:54 AM
I'd like remind people, and Dusty said it best, that Alonso had a great night in front of his home and family - it happens often. He didn't just win the MVP. Sure, it was a glimpse into what he can do, but you have to keep a level head about it. Don't forget his dropped pick off throw from Cueto that lead to a 3 run inning...at this point Alonso my be just drawing even on RBI's vs. REI's (Runs Errored In - that's my new stat).

How dare you put things in perspective.

I can understand people thinking that trading Votto makes more sense because of the business side of baseball. Maybe it's inevitable as a matter of dollars and cents.

But from a baseball point of view, we are comparing a league MVP to an unproven hitter who appears to have very good skills.

For me, baseball is mostly a short-term business. You try to win when you can. Teams that constantly play for two years afterwards are like perpetual tryout camps.

I'd hate to see the Reds trade Votto. It's hard to imagine they would get nearly equal value. I believe the guy is a great player, who will be a perennial all star, and I'd like the Reds to keep him as long as possible.

I certainly wouldn't trade him two years before his walk date, unless for an exceptional return.

mdccclxix
08-24-2011, 11:12 AM
How dare you put things in perspective.

I can understand people thinking that trading Votto makes more sense because of the business side of baseball. Maybe it's inevitable as a matter of dollars and cents.

But from a baseball point of view, we are comparing a league MVP to an unproven hitter who appears to have very good skills.

For me, baseball is mostly a short-term business. You try to win when you can. Teams that constantly play for two years afterwards are like perpetual tryout camps.

I'd hate to see the Reds trade Votto. It's hard to imagine they would get nearly equal value. I believe the guy is a great player, who will be a perennial all star, and I'd like the Reds to keep him as long as possible.

I certainly wouldn't trade him two years before his walk date, unless for an exceptional return.

One year of Votto at 9 million is not going to break the Reds bank. Bailing on an MVP with 2 years left is, well, unheard of. Which teams are in a position to PAY for an MVP with 2 years left? It makes little sense. The MLB players involved would be either too high profile, or not good enough. The MiLB players would be too numerous and high quality or too unproven. It's easy to say "it should happen", but making it happen, and making it work out, is not easy, at all.

mdccclxix
08-24-2011, 11:14 AM
You could spend a lifetime finding another MiLB prospect that becomes as good as Votto.

mdccclxix
08-24-2011, 11:19 AM
At this point, I'm praying Alonso's got some magic in that 3b glove. It's sad that it comes to this, but it's not unlike taking a 4 year old to the ice cream store, standing in line, looking at the menu for 5 minutes, talking about how delicious all the flavors are, sampling them at the counter from the nice girl, placing an order for a double scoop, pulling out the wallet to pay, then realizing all you have are Mexican Pesos and can't buy anything. The 4 year old, and Reds fans, are left tantalized and brokenhearted. Thanks Uncle Walt!!!!!:laugh:

Guacarock
08-24-2011, 11:57 AM
Put both Alonso and Votto on the market in the offseason. See which one brings the deal that improves the team the most, and take it.

No way to get Alonso and Votto in the lineup at the same time, without putting out a Brewer/Cardinalesque defense. but either one will bring back great production that should compliment whoever stays.

This offseason is the time to make the decision.

This approach makes sense. It's not a Votto vs. Alonso thing. We already know we can secure plus offense from either one of them manning 1B.

The question becomes more: Which of them, if traded, will net us the best deal in return? The only way to see is to float both on the market this winter and size up the potential returns.

Let's say the Rays want Alonso and will send us Shields if we relinquish him, Grandal and another stick. Meanwhile, let's say only the Cubs want Votto and they're offering Zambrano. Then, in this admittedly lopsided scenario, we would be wise to relinquish Alonso.

But what if the reverse held true -- the Blue Jays were so hot to bring Votto home that they would reluctantly make Ricky Romero available in return. Meanwhile, the Marlins wanted Alonso, but wouldn't surrender Nolasco or Sanchez -- only Vasquez. In this case, we would have to shift gears and consider moving our MVP.

We shouldn't get too locked into keeping Votto or Alonso. Having the flexibility and willingness to move either one will allow us to expand our potential pool of trading partners this winter and to then make the best deal possible to improve the team.

RedLegsToday
08-24-2011, 12:01 PM
Let's say the Rays want Alonso and will send us Shields if we relinquish him, Grandal and another stick

I'd do this in a second, as long as the other stick isn't Bruce.

Kc61
08-24-2011, 12:12 PM
It's not a Votto vs. Alonso thing. We already know we can secure plus offense from either one of them manning 1B.

.

We do? How so?

Plus offense for a first baseman is a tall order.

Have we seen Alonso steadily hit the long ball? How does he hit lefties at the major league level?

Lots of baseball teams have been burned by jumping to the conclusion that a young player will produce over 162 games.

We know Votto. We barely know Alonso.

Caveat Emperor
08-24-2011, 03:35 PM
We do? How so?

Plus offense for a first baseman is a tall order.

Have we seen Alonso steadily hit the long ball? How does he hit lefties at the major league level?

Lots of baseball teams have been burned by jumping to the conclusion that a young player will produce over 162 games.

We know Votto. We barely know Alonso.

I'm reminded of a quote from Ocean's 11, which I'll post here:


Cause the house always wins. Play long enough, you never change the stakes. The house takes you. Unless, when that perfect hand comes along, you bet and you bet big, then you take the house.

That's small market baseball. On a long enough timeline, the house (Phils, Yankees, Red Sox, etc.) always wins. This is an opportunity to throw big money down on a hand and turn the odds in the Reds favor. You're gambling that Yonder Alonso can play replacement level defense at 1st base and provide a stick to OPS around .850-.875. You're gambling that Joey Votto can bring back a player who will produce someplace else the team needs -- LF, SS, TOR Starter, etc. You're gambling that you can use Votto's money to go out and sign 2 or 3 quality players to shore up the bullpen.

I get the "Votto is proven, Alonso is unknown" logic. It makes perfect sense to me. But, the reality is that the current Cincinnati Reds team is a roughly .500 ballclub with Votto at first. They're playing the game and hoping the odds change for them -- that Chapman becomes a #1 starter, Rolen gets healthy, Bruce stops having Juan Castro months at the plate, some combination of Bailey, Wood or Volquez becomes a consistent pitcher, that someone steps up for the closer role, etc. That was, in fact, the gameplan this offseason: do nothing and hope that the young players develop and get even better.

Votto and Alonso give you an opportunity to change the narrative and flip the odds. There's only room for 1 of them on this team (if you think Alonso can play 3B after never seeing live action at the position since high school, I've got some news you'll probably find disappointing), and the decision of who to keep and who to send will in many ways define this particular incarnation of the Reds. Votto leaving and bringing back quality players in return could transform this team into a contender for the next 4-5 years. Alonso leaving (with prospects along) gives the Reds a shot at bringing back a good player to compete the next 2 years until Votto's contract ends.

That's the decision here. Me? I'm in favor of betting big and trying to take the house for a change.

Kc61
08-24-2011, 04:02 PM
I'm reminded of a quote from Ocean's 11, which I'll post here:



That's small market baseball. On a long enough timeline, the house (Phils, Yankees, Red Sox, etc.) always wins. This is an opportunity to throw big money down on a hand and turn the odds in the Reds favor. You're gambling that Yonder Alonso can play replacement level defense at 1st base and provide a stick to OPS around .850-.875. You're gambling that Joey Votto can bring back a player who will produce someplace else the team needs -- LF, SS, TOR Starter, etc. You're gambling that you can use Votto's money to go out and sign 2 or 3 quality players to shore up the bullpen.

.

So long as it is recognized to be a gamble, I understand the logic of the "trade Votto" and "keep Alonso" concept. Don't necessarily agree with it, but understand it.

A previous post started with the idea that, either way, we have a plus offensive first baseman. My point is "not necessarily."

osuceltic
08-24-2011, 04:46 PM
I'm reminded of a quote from Ocean's 11, which I'll post here:



That's small market baseball. On a long enough timeline, the house (Phils, Yankees, Red Sox, etc.) always wins. This is an opportunity to throw big money down on a hand and turn the odds in the Reds favor. You're gambling that Yonder Alonso can play replacement level defense at 1st base and provide a stick to OPS around .850-.875. You're gambling that Joey Votto can bring back a player who will produce someplace else the team needs -- LF, SS, TOR Starter, etc. You're gambling that you can use Votto's money to go out and sign 2 or 3 quality players to shore up the bullpen.

I get the "Votto is proven, Alonso is unknown" logic. It makes perfect sense to me. But, the reality is that the current Cincinnati Reds team is a roughly .500 ballclub with Votto at first. They're playing the game and hoping the odds change for them -- that Chapman becomes a #1 starter, Rolen gets healthy, Bruce stops having Juan Castro months at the plate, some combination of Bailey, Wood or Volquez becomes a consistent pitcher, that someone steps up for the closer role, etc. That was, in fact, the gameplan this offseason: do nothing and hope that the young players develop and get even better.

Votto and Alonso give you an opportunity to change the narrative and flip the odds. There's only room for 1 of them on this team (if you think Alonso can play 3B after never seeing live action at the position since high school, I've got some news you'll probably find disappointing), and the decision of who to keep and who to send will in many ways define this particular incarnation of the Reds. Votto leaving and bringing back quality players in return could transform this team into a contender for the next 4-5 years. Alonso leaving (with prospects along) gives the Reds a shot at bringing back a good player to compete the next 2 years until Votto's contract ends.

That's the decision here. Me? I'm in favor of betting big and trying to take the house for a change.

I think it's a good analogy but I look at it exactly the opposite way. Votto is the ace we're holding. We got lucky to be dealt him. Now we're trying to bet big while we have him -- knowing it could be a long time before we see another one.

In other words, I'm not really worried about losing Votto. I'm worried about winning while we have him. Trust me -- winning with Votto will be easier than winning without him. That won't always be true (if he's making $18 mil a year and strapping the team financially), but right now it is. So let's go all in.

Do you think the Brewers wish they had traded Prince Fielder two years ago?

Caveat Emperor
08-24-2011, 04:58 PM
Do you think the Brewers wish they had traded Prince Fielder two years ago?

Did they have a guy like Yonder Alonso ready to take Fielder's place when left?

bucksfan2
08-24-2011, 05:33 PM
I'm reminded of a quote from Ocean's 11, which I'll post here:



That's small market baseball. On a long enough timeline, the house (Phils, Yankees, Red Sox, etc.) always wins. This is an opportunity to throw big money down on a hand and turn the odds in the Reds favor. You're gambling that Yonder Alonso can play replacement level defense at 1st base and provide a stick to OPS around .850-.875. You're gambling that Joey Votto can bring back a player who will produce someplace else the team needs -- LF, SS, TOR Starter, etc. You're gambling that you can use Votto's money to go out and sign 2 or 3 quality players to shore up the bullpen.

I get the "Votto is proven, Alonso is unknown" logic. It makes perfect sense to me. But, the reality is that the current Cincinnati Reds team is a roughly .500 ballclub with Votto at first. They're playing the game and hoping the odds change for them -- that Chapman becomes a #1 starter, Rolen gets healthy, Bruce stops having Juan Castro months at the plate, some combination of Bailey, Wood or Volquez becomes a consistent pitcher, that someone steps up for the closer role, etc. That was, in fact, the gameplan this offseason: do nothing and hope that the young players develop and get even better.

Votto and Alonso give you an opportunity to change the narrative and flip the odds. There's only room for 1 of them on this team (if you think Alonso can play 3B after never seeing live action at the position since high school, I've got some news you'll probably find disappointing), and the decision of who to keep and who to send will in many ways define this particular incarnation of the Reds. Votto leaving and bringing back quality players in return could transform this team into a contender for the next 4-5 years. Alonso leaving (with prospects along) gives the Reds a shot at bringing back a good player to compete the next 2 years until Votto's contract ends.

That's the decision here. Me? I'm in favor of betting big and trying to take the house for a change.

This to me is like going all in with pocket 2's. You know that you have a pair but also know that if anyone else at the table pairs up your done. With a stack full of chips you may and try to bully the opposing players pre-flop but with a dwindling chip stack moving all in with pocket 2's is a desperation move.

There are only a few players in baseball that I would make the move for right now. And truth be told it isn't Jose Batista. I also am intrigued by Alonso's bat but not sure what to think of him when he is forced to play the field. I would put him out in LF every day to end the season and see if his ability is acceptable. If its not, then the increased interest should bring more back in a trade.

Slyder
08-24-2011, 05:36 PM
Did they have a guy like Yonder Alonso ready to take Fielder's place when left?

Matt LaPorta (debut 2009 season)
Had Braun moved to LF already at that point?
Mat Gamel comes to mind (although he would have been rushed a little bit)

osuceltic
08-24-2011, 05:53 PM
Did they have a guy like Yonder Alonso ready to take Fielder's place when left?

Yes. Matt LaPorta. They used him to land CC Sabathia and make the playoffs.

I wish the Reds' front office understood the value of winning the way the Brewers seem to.

Slyder
08-24-2011, 05:58 PM
On Votto/Alonso I give Alonso a chance to play 3b at winter ball somewhere and see if at his size its feasible even with the threat of guys just tomahawking balls at him to get his bat into the lineup. With scouts/teachers basically paid to work with him, Arizona runs from October 4th to November 19th (championship game).

The owner's meetings are November 15th and 16th at this point you probably know pretty well if the Alonso plan has merit or not. You begin looking around at what you can get for either Alonso or Votto. Unless you're totally blown away (IE Bautista, Romero, and filler for Votto and filler or Shields for Alonso straight up) you sit tight.

The winter meetings are December 5th-9th in Dallas. Which gives you ~3 weeks to assess whether its remotely feasible that Yonder can adjust to 3b or look over any offers you received at the owners meetings.

If Alonso can play 3b as well as Aramis Ramirez has for the years he has then I go into the season with him at 3b and I would look at bringing in Rollins at SS.

2b Phillips
ss Rollins
1b Votto
3b Alonso
CA Mesoraco
RF Bruce
CF Stubbs
LF TBD

First bat off the bench: Miguel Cairo
Player/Coach: Scott Rolen
Backup catcher: Ryan Hanigan
Mr. Everywhere: Todd Frazier
Backup OF: Heisey/Sappelt/etc
Backup IF: Valaika/Cozart

It may not translate much over the long course of the season but I have always liked Stubbs lower in the order and Phillips higher in the order. Both may have their quips with OBP but Phillips seems like a much better hitter when his main purpose is getting on base rather than trying to jack every pitch out of the park when he bats cleanup.

Flip Mesoraco and Stubbs if you want it's largely to just try and put everyone in the best position to produce. I have Stubbs lower because he can be given more of a green light to generate something with his speed knowing that we have LF and the pitcher coming up and may cause the opposing defense into more mistakes.

KronoRed
08-24-2011, 06:12 PM
Players who realistically Votto could yield in a trade:

Jose Bautista
Matt Kemp
Elvis Andrus
Jared Weaver
Starlin Castro
James Shields
Ricky Romaro
Tommy Hanson
Justin Verlander
Mike Stanton
Felix Hernandez
Brian McCann
David Price
Carlos Santana
Clayton Kershaw
Ryan Zimmerman
Rickie Weeks
Andrew McCutchen

Maybe a few of these guys would require a prospect as well, but I think any GM would listen if Jocketty called and offered Votto for any of these players.

It's absurd to think that the reigning MVP, whose in his prime, would only bring back prospects.

Sorry but I doubt it, half the teams those players are on won't be able to afford Votto either if the Reds can't, the rich ones will be able to fill their 1b slot this off season by going after Fielder or Pujols.

Maybe Walt will cast some spells to get more and I'll be wrong, but I'm reminded of similar trades in the past and what the take was for the dealing team.

Caveat Emperor
08-24-2011, 07:13 PM
Yes. Matt LaPorta. They used him to land CC Sabathia and make the playoffs.

I wish the Reds' front office understood the value of winning the way the Brewers seem to.

The goal should be to build a team that wins consistently, not just in the years where you cash a bunch of chips in to add rent-a-players to make the postseason.

Slyder
08-24-2011, 07:20 PM
The goal should be to build a team that wins consistently, not just in the years where you cash a bunch of chips in to add rent-a-players to make the postseason.

No one will remember that the Twins were really good for a lot of years in a row but everyone will remember that the Marlins won it going "all in".

dougdirt
08-24-2011, 07:26 PM
No one will remember that the Twins were really good for a lot of years in a row but everyone will remember that the Marlins won it going "all in".

You remembered it.

Kc61
08-24-2011, 08:16 PM
The goal should be to build a team that wins consistently, not just in the years where you cash a bunch of chips in to add rent-a-players to make the postseason.

I don't know what "wins consistently" means.

Does it mean go .500?

Does it mean finish a strong second in your division?

Does it mean occasionally make the playoffs?

To me, the goal is to win championships. You do that with great players. You don't do that cashing them in to run a new tryout camp.

I've heard it a million times -- don't sign big time players until you are ready to compete. So now the Reds are ready to compete and what do people want? More rebuilding. Let's be semi-decent for the indefinite future.

My objective is for the Reds to be a top team. That requires top players. Of which they now have one. Who folks want to trade off.

puca
08-24-2011, 08:22 PM
If Alonso can play 3b as well as Aramis Ramirez has for the years he has then I go into the season with him at 3b and I would look at bringing in Rollins at SS.


I'm thinking BobbyBonilla-ish (Mets version even) be the best case scenerio. If he could play like Ramirez defensively he would be a all-star.

757690
08-24-2011, 08:23 PM
Sorry but I doubt it, half the teams those players are on won't be able to afford Votto either if the Reds can't, the rich ones will be able to fill their 1b slot this off season by going after Fielder or Pujols.

Maybe Walt will cast some spells to get more and I'll be wrong, but I'm reminded of similar trades in the past and what the take was for the dealing team.

Reds aren't thinking of trading Votto because the can't afford him. He is signed through 2013 at a reasonable price.

They are thinking of trading him because of the emergence of Alonso.

mth123
08-24-2011, 08:38 PM
I'm with KC in the point that assuming Alonso will be a plus 1B is a huge assumption. People are saying things like "take Alonso's .850 OPS st 1B and deal Votto...."

Jay Bruce has an OPS of .853. Are we really going to assume that a guy based on a few ABs is lock to just step into the line-up and be as good as Jay Bruce? Do we really want to deal off the most reliable, consistent and effectve player we've had here since Eric Davis' hey day to replace him with a question mark? Didn't we learn anything about trusting everything to unprovens by the debacle of 2011? There is definitely a place to work in kids, but replacing your centerpiece with a question mark is not the way to win IMO. You want to deal Drew Stubbs and his 91 OPS+ and replace him with Sappelt? OK by me. If he tanks the fall really isn't that far and we have Heisey as a fall back. You want to talk Rolen into retiring and turn things over to Todd Frazier? Its questionable, but the drop off can't be huge. You want to let Ramon walk and install Mesoraco? Great as long as he's only counted upon as a bottom of the order complementary piece until he proves something. But taking your centerpiece, dealing him for lesser players whose value is propped up by virtue of playing other positions and expect improvement? I think that's as shaky as depending on a bunch of question marks for the rotation.

Always Red
08-24-2011, 08:39 PM
Reds aren't thinking of trading Votto because the can't afford him. He is signed through 2013 at a reasonable price.

They are thinking of trading him because of the emergence of Alonso.

And Dan Driessen was going to make Reds fans forget all about Tony Perez. :)

I'm not at all convinced yet that Yonder will ever become the hitter that Joey Votto is. But so far, so good. I'm confused that after his great night last night, Dusty can't find room for him in the lineup and again inserts...Fred Lewis. Nothing against Fred, but we know what Fred can do. The rest of this year is about making the 2012 team better.

I can't help but think back to another one time Red who struggled on defense. the Reds tried him in any number of places, until finally trading him away to an AL team. Hal McRae wound playing 19 seasons and posting a career .800 OPS. Hal couldn't play defense well enough to start on the BRM teams, but the Reds only got Scheinblum and Nelson in return for him and an injured Wayne Simpson.

Matt700wlw
08-24-2011, 08:56 PM
I think Dusty sees Alonso as an inconvenience.

Big Klu
08-24-2011, 08:57 PM
Reds aren't thinking of trading Votto because the can't afford him. He is signed through 2013 at a reasonable price.

They are thinking of trading him because of the emergence of Alonso.

I respect a lot of things you post, but I can't believe you said that. Alonso really has become the new toy on Christmas Day.

Are the Reds really thinking of trading Votto, or is RedsZone thinking of trading him? You build around players like Votto--you don't trade them and resume the perpetual cycle of rebuilding. We already traded one MVP for a handful of magic beans in recent years. I don't want to make that mistake again.

757690
08-24-2011, 09:14 PM
I respect a lot of things you post, but I can't believe you said that. Alonso really has become the new toy on Christmas Day.

Are the Reds really thinking of trading Votto, or is RedsZone thinking of trading him? You build around players like Votto--you don't trade them and resume the perpetual cycle of rebuilding. We already traded one MVP for a handful of magic beans in recent years. I don't want to make that mistake again.

My bad, I didn't mean to give the impression that the Reds should be trying to trade Votto. I just said "thinking" about trading him. I just meant that they should be gathering info and analyzing the pros and cons.

They have to be doing this or they aren't very good at their jobs.

For the record, I'm hoping part of their calculation is that Alonso is far from a sure thing.

oneupper
08-24-2011, 11:37 PM
Are the Reds really thinking of trading Votto, or is RedsZone thinking of trading him? You build around players like Votto--you don't trade them and resume the perpetual cycle of rebuilding. We already traded one MVP for a handful of magic beans in recent years. I don't want to make that mistake again.

Yep. Lock him up, like the Brewers did with Braun. If it costs $20 mil/year, so be it.

WVRedsFan
08-24-2011, 11:44 PM
I think Dusty sees Alonso as an inconvenience.
I agree. Dusty loves his vets and that's why we see so much of Lewis and(shudder) Janish as well as Cairo and Renteria. Having talented kids around says different things to Dusty than us. It means that he knows what to expect from those other guys and the kids are an iffy situation. Even if the vets fail time after time. Janish is batting .214 now. Lewis is at .240. I could go on and on, but one thing is clear. Baker prefers that to the upside of Alonzo, Frasier, and even Sappelt.

traderumor
08-24-2011, 11:44 PM
No one will remember that the Twins were really good for a lot of years in a row but everyone will remember that the Marlins won it going "all in".But is "creating memories" the goal? Who is filling up two years into a new stadium in a market that was right in contraction talks with Florida, who has had to cajole for years to get what they are finally building now?

I'd say the Twins are the better run organization and have created more capital by the "consistent winner" approach than the Marlins, who seem bent on fielding a team and trying to convince everyone they have pitching to trade in their pitcher friendly ballpark, win, then tear it down. No capital built.

Can the new stadium create it? Guess we'll see on that one, but I sure wouldn't tout the Marlins as a viable business model for the business of baseball.

nemesis
08-24-2011, 11:57 PM
I think Dusty sees Alonso as an inconvenience.

You can easily read between the lines when it comes to Dusty and his opinion on Alonso.

Maybe he is trying to play tug of war with Walt. Maybe he just generally dislikes the kid. But there is no hidden dislike of having to play him.

That being said, I am all for moving Votto at this point to Toronto. Alonso can man 1B at 8.5 Million cheaper, put up about a .850+ OPS and moving Votto to Toronto would net us our future 3B in Brett Lawrie who is a .900 OPS RH bat with 6 years of control, in waiting. I'd also ask for Snider who is still just 23 with a need for a fresh start and Drew Hutchison to give the upper minors a #2/3 type starter. Throw in Francisco for a replacement and deal is done.

That deal would make the Reds better in 2012 than they would be with Votto offensively as long as Yonder can OPS .850...

2B Phillips
SS Cozart
1B Alonso
3B Lawrie
RF Bruce
C Mesoraco
CF Stubbs
LF Snider

Larkin Fan
08-25-2011, 01:04 AM
Those of you that are saying that Alonso will be an .850+ OPS player... what in the world are you basing that on? The grand total of 58 at-bats he has at the major league level? It certainly can't be from his minor league performance since 2011 was the first time he even cracked the .850 OPS mark.

I like Alonso and I think he has a great deal of talent. I also think he's getting a raw deal from Dusty by not getting more of a chance to prove himself, but all of this talk about Alonso being a viable replacement for an MVP player needs to be realistic and realize that we're still dealing with a very raw and unproven prospect here that hasn't proven anything.

WVRedsFan
08-25-2011, 01:44 AM
LF:

I'm with you on this. He is a prospect, but a very talented one. He is the kind of bat that is missing from this lineup--but not at first base right now. With Dusty trotting out Fred Lewis (what in the world do they see in him? I want to know) in left field) every other day and the earlier experiments with Gomes and even RedsZone darling Heisey, it would make sense to put Alonso out there. He could be no worse than Dunn, and the others do not impress me in left (including Sappelt, who I think will be a great player some day). But first belongs to Joey V. until he decides to move on. Which he will. Dusty should find a way to get this guy into the lineup every day. And find a way to keep Janish away from short (just had to insert that :)).

Superdude
08-25-2011, 03:48 AM
Those of you that are saying that Alonso will be an .850+ OPS player... what in the world are you basing that on? The grand total of 58 at-bats he has at the major league level? It certainly can't be from his minor league performance since 2011 was the first time he even cracked the .850 OPS mark.

I like Alonso and I think he has a great deal of talent. I also think he's getting a raw deal from Dusty by not getting more of a chance to prove himself, but all of this talk about Alonso being a viable replacement for an MVP player needs to be realistic and realize that we're still dealing with a very raw and unproven prospect here that hasn't proven anything.

No one's guaranteeing an .850 OPS. It's just a ballpark projection for discussion sake. Alonso's not a completely unknown commodity. By the time a player's spent a full season in AAA, you generally have at least some idea of what you're dealing with.

KronoRed
08-25-2011, 05:51 AM
Reds aren't thinking of trading Votto because the can't afford him. He is signed through 2013 at a reasonable price.

They are thinking of trading him because of the emergence of Alonso.

That's part of it, the other part is the assumption, based in reality or not, that Votto wants to go free agent in two years no matter what, that will be known by every other team the Reds might talk to about him.

cincyinco
08-25-2011, 06:14 AM
That's part of it, the other part is the assumption, based in reality or not, that Votto wants to go free agent in two years no matter what, that will be known by every other team the Reds might talk to about him.

So then whats better?

Trading for Votto with 2 years that everyone knows will test FA?

Or Trading for Votto with 1 year or 3 months that everyone knows will test FA?

His value may never be higher, and if every team knows he will test FA, and the Reds know he will test FA, I think its fairly reasonable to suggest that the Reds should explore trading him, especially with Yonder knocking on the door.

Can Yonder be Votto? Highly unlikely.

But there was a time that not even the best of us thought Votto would be who he is today... He had serious question marks coming in as well. I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who thought Votto would put up MVP calibur numbers.

Yonder may never reach that level of play, it would be silly to expect him to. But I dont think he'd be a slouch with the stick either. And if 1b is really his only position he's capable of playing at in the field, and if Votto is as good as gone as hinted.. then I say find some gumption and trade the guy while the getting is good.

No one at the beginning of the year would have thought the Rockies had the guts to trade Ubaldo, but on the surface they seem to have done well. I say be proactive.. if there's a market for Votto, test it and end the "predicament"

GAC
08-25-2011, 06:53 AM
But from a baseball point of view, we are comparing a league MVP to an unproven hitter who appears to have very good skills.

I don't think anyone, at least from my perspective, is comparing the two as far as skill level. That would be silly at this stage.


I certainly wouldn't trade him two years before his walk date, unless for an exceptional return.

I think they could get that exceptional return. They should at least investigate it looking at the future circumstance with Votto staring them in the face.


One year of Votto at 9 million is not going to break the Reds bank.

No one said it would. Joey made 5.5M in 2011, jumps up to 9.5M next year, and then 17M his final year (2013). But it's not an issue of affordability at all.


Which teams are in a position to PAY for an MVP with 2 years left? It makes little sense.

I personally don't think this FO will even entertain trading Votto, and not because of his skill set, but also because of his fan popularity and draw to the stadium. That's far more important to this ownership group. It's Cincinnati. They'll let him play out the next 2 years while they run their PR game of telling the fans they want Joey to be here long term and are trying to accomplish that. He'll then walk into the market for prospects.

Now is allowing that scenario to play out a terrible idea? Maybe not from a business aspect (ticket and merchandise sales). But to even refuse to entertain offers for a high-caliber player like a Votto, who will most likely walk, and to see what kind of return one can get is.


The MLB players involved would be either too high profile, or not good enough. The MiLB players would be too numerous and high quality or too unproven. It's easy to say "it should happen", but making it happen, and making it work out, is not easy, at all.

Sure, making it work may not be easy. And as far as what caliber of player(s) we could get in return? That's uncertain. One doesn't know until they try. And if it's not there you don't have to make deal. But at least you tried.

But the longer this organization waits the harder it will get because teams that are highly interested in Votto will simply say "Why trade away talent to get him when I can just wait a little longer, when he enters the market, and get him for far less."

edabbs44
08-25-2011, 08:03 AM
I agree. Dusty loves his vets and that's why we see so much of Lewis and(shudder) Janish as well as Cairo and Renteria. Having talented kids around says different things to Dusty than us. It means that he knows what to expect from those other guys and the kids are an iffy situation. Even if the vets fail time after time. Janish is batting .214 now. Lewis is at .240. I could go on and on, but one thing is clear. Baker prefers that to the upside of Alonzo, Frasier, and even Sappelt.

It seems like only last year when Janish was a kid who was blocked by OCab and Dusty the vetophile.

Oh wait....it was.

wlf WV
08-25-2011, 08:05 AM
Yep. Lock him up, like the Brewers did with Braun. If it costs $20 mil/year, so be it.
Agree. Again,it's a small list Joey's on,very small.

membengal
08-25-2011, 08:51 AM
It seems like only last year when Janish was a kid who was blocked by OCab and Dusty the vetophile.

Oh wait....it was.

In terms of "prospect" status, that's like comparing apples to space cabbage.

mdccclxix
08-25-2011, 11:09 AM
So then whats better?

Trading for Votto with 2 years that everyone knows will test FA?

Or Trading for Votto with 1 year or 3 months that everyone knows will test FA?

His value may never be higher, and if every team knows he will test FA, and the Reds know he will test FA, I think its fairly reasonable to suggest that the Reds should explore trading him, especially with Yonder knocking on the door.

Can Yonder be Votto? Highly unlikely.

But there was a time that not even the best of us thought Votto would be who he is today... He had serious question marks coming in as well. I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who thought Votto would put up MVP calibur numbers.

Yonder may never reach that level of play, it would be silly to expect him to. But I dont think he'd be a slouch with the stick either. And if 1b is really his only position he's capable of playing at in the field, and if Votto is as good as gone as hinted.. then I say find some gumption and trade the guy while the getting is good.

No one at the beginning of the year would have thought the Rockies had the guts to trade Ubaldo, but on the surface they seem to have done well. I say be proactive.. if there's a market for Votto, test it and end the "predicament"

If you look at what Colorado got for 2 years of Ubaldo, it's not much better than one would expect for a year of his services.

Alex White - #47 BA 2011, 15th overall pick
Pomeranz - #61 BA 2011, 5th overall pick
Joe Gardner - 3rd round pick, 4.82 era, 23 y/o in AA
Matt McBride - 2nd round pick, 26 years old in AA


2 years of service does not seem to be worth double that of 1 year of service, and maybe it shouldn't. I tend to think in the Reds case it should for Votto. I also think fans believe we'll get something close to double, we won't.

Adrian Gonzalez brought back, for one year of service
Casey Kelley, #31 2011 BA, 30th overall pick, in AA
Reymond Fuentes, 28th overall pick 2009, 20 y/o in A+
Anthony Rizzo, #75 BA 2011, 21 in AAA
Eric Patterson, journeyman OF

In both trades the selling team got 2 top 100 prospects and a couple of high upside guys that the seller liked. Not a sure major league star among them. It doesn't appear to me that Colorado was able to haul what they wanted, and it certainly isn't indicative of trading 2+ years worth of a star player. Colorado put themselves in a bad spot by adamantly trading their star, teams were rightfully suspicious or at least saw a weakness.

The Reds will likely get as much value pre 2013 if they are shrewd dealers. Either way, it appears teams are not likely to trade MLB stars for MLB stars. It's about bargaining with prospect currency, which is volatile. I'd rather wait until after 2012 or during 2013, we'll still likely be able to demand 2 first round players at any point.

mdccclxix
08-25-2011, 11:18 AM
I don't think anyone, at least from my perspective, is comparing the two as far as skill level. That would be silly at this stage.



I think they could get that exceptional return. They should at least investigate it looking at the future circumstance with Votto staring them in the face.



No one said it would. Joey made 5.5M in 2011, jumps up to 9.5M next year, and then 17M his final year (2013). But it's not an issue of affordability at all.



I personally don't think this FO will even entertain trading Votto, and not because of his skill set, but also because of his fan popularity and draw to the stadium. That's far more important to this ownership group. It's Cincinnati. They'll let him play out the next 2 years while they run their PR game of telling the fans they want Joey to be here long term and are trying to accomplish that. He'll then walk into the market for prospects.

Now is allowing that scenario to play out a terrible idea? Maybe not from a business aspect (ticket and merchandise sales). But to even refuse to entertain offers for a high-caliber player like a Votto, who will most likely walk, and to see what kind of return one can get is.



Sure, making it work may not be easy. And as far as what caliber of player(s) we could get in return? That's uncertain. One doesn't know until they try. And if it's not there you don't have to make deal. But at least you tried.

But the longer this organization waits the harder it will get because teams that are highly interested in Votto will simply say "Why trade away talent to get him when I can just wait a little longer, when he enters the market, and get him for far less."

I disagree, see above. Selling with 2 years left, or even 2+ years, doesn't really mean you'll get a better deal. With that 1, or less than 1, year window of service for a star the terms are very clear, teams are gearing up to win immediately, their risk in acquiring a star that may flop is less, etc. It's just cleaner. "For 1 year of this superstar, I want a through e." If you think doubling the service time means doubling the return, you're not likely to be correct. It won't be "I want a through j" A deal like that would literally cripple 28 of the 30 farm systems and doesn't make sense. Nor have we seen a willingness to part with MLB players in these mega trades.

I'm all for doing the due process on transactions, but realistically, and in terms of actual value of those transactions, I think trading Votto now is likely a terrible idea.

mdccclxix
08-25-2011, 11:22 AM
Alonso should not be the catalyst to trading an MVP for less than he's worth. I'd rather be the team acquiring great talent to surround Votto with by trading from our deep farm. For now, I'm doing all kinds of superstitious crap to see if it helps Alonso play 3b.

757690
08-25-2011, 11:43 AM
If you look at what Colorado got for 2 years of Ubaldo, it's not much better than one would expect for a year of his services.

Alex White - #47 BA 2011, 15th overall pick
Pomeranz - #61 BA 2011, 5th overall pick
Joe Gardner - 3rd round pick, 4.82 era, 23 y/o in AA
Matt McBride - 2nd round pick, 26 years old in AA


2 years of service does not seem to be worth double that of 1 year of service, and maybe it shouldn't. I tend to think in the Reds case it should for Votto. I also think fans believe we'll get something close to double, we won't.

Adrian Gonzalez brought back, for one year of service
Casey Kelley, #31 2011 BA, 30th overall pick, in AA
Reymond Fuentes, 28th overall pick 2009, 20 y/o in A+
Anthony Rizzo, #75 BA 2011, 21 in AAA
Eric Patterson, journeyman OF

In both trades the selling team got 2 top 100 prospects and a couple of high upside guys that the seller liked. Not a sure major league star among them. It doesn't appear to me that Colorado was able to haul what they wanted, and it certainly isn't indicative of trading 2+ years worth of a star player. Colorado put themselves in a bad spot by adamantly trading their star, teams were rightfully suspicious or at least saw a weakness.

The Reds will likely get as much value pre 2013 if they are shrewd dealers. Either way, it appears teams are not likely to trade MLB stars for MLB stars. It's about bargaining with prospect currency, which is volatile. I'd rather wait until after 2012 or during 2013, we'll still likely be able to demand 2 first round players at any point.

The Red Sox traded for many years of Adrian Gonzalez. They only made the deal after they talked to his agent and were assured that he would sign a long term extension.

Plus Gonzalez had a better track record than Jimenez, and no questions about his health.

bucksfan2
08-25-2011, 11:45 AM
Could Fred Lewis have started in LF because of the windy conditions in Miami last night? Look what happened to Alonso in Chicago when the wind was blowing. And for what its worth Lewis made two catches last night that I doubt Alonso gets to.

Oh and that guy playing 1b had a pretty good day, 5-7 2 HR.

mdccclxix
08-25-2011, 12:04 PM
The Red Sox traded for many years of Adrian Gonzalez. They only made the deal after they talked to his agent and were assured that he would sign a long term extension.

Plus Gonzalez had a better track record than Jimenez, and no questions about his health.

Why can't the Reds offer the same with Votto at some point?

Plus,
Ubaldo - 20 career WAR
Adrian - 26 career WAR

lollipopcurve
08-25-2011, 12:22 PM
Why can't the Reds offer the same with Votto at some point?

Reds 09 revenues -- 171 million
Red Sox 09 revenues -- 269 million

mdccclxix
08-25-2011, 01:01 PM
Reds 09 revenues -- 171 million
Red Sox 09 revenues -- 269 million

Meaning the opportunity for a team to try to sign Votto long term if we're trading him. I wasn't meaning the Reds could resign Votto to a Gonzalez type contract.

PuffyPig
08-25-2011, 03:04 PM
But the longer this organization waits the harder it will get because teams that are highly interested in Votto will simply say "Why trade away talent to get him when I can just wait a little longer, when he enters the market, and get him for far less."


I'm sure there are many teams that sad the exact same thing about Gonzalez, Santana, Holliday, Rolen (way back when) etc. If you wait, most of those players are traded elsewhere and are signed to extensions well before they reach market.

IslandRed
08-25-2011, 04:53 PM
It seems like only last year when Janish was a kid who was blocked by OCab and Dusty the vetophile.

Oh wait....it was.

That's what I was thinking, too.

I can go along with the griping about wanting to see other guys in LF instead of Lewis, and maybe more work at 3B for others than Cairo (although Miggy's probably back on the bench next year, so he ought not be totally mothballed either). And Janish isn't good. But honestly, in his case, he's not taking reps that need to go to other people. There's Renteria (the real veteran in the discussion), Cozart (out for the year), Janish, and nothing. No one else is even remotely on the radar as (1) a real shortstop and (2) a real prospect within hailing distance of the majors.

I suppose one could argue for playing non-shortstops at shortstop just to get them at-bats, but that has significant collateral damage on pitchers. Cure worse than the disease, etc.

So I'll avert my eyes when Janish hits but I can't offer a rational alternative to writing him into the lineup right now.

WebScorpion
08-25-2011, 07:23 PM
In terms of "prospect" status, that's like comparing apples to space cabbage.come ooon... who're you trying to kid? There's no cabbage in space! ...unless you count kimchi. http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-cool05.gif (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys.php)

GAC
08-27-2011, 06:16 AM
Alonso should not be the catalyst to trading an MVP for less than he's worth.

I'm certainly not saying that. Only that they listen to offers and currently see what he could get them. Wouldn't we be getting "less then he's worth" if he walks in 2 years for prospects?


I'd rather be the team acquiring great talent to surround Votto with by trading from our deep farm.

I agree. But when was the last time this organization went out into the market and paid the BIG bucks to acquire an established star position player? Griffey Jr? And many would contend that it greatly hindered this organization, from a financial (payroll) perspective, from doing anything further to add or improve the team.

I still think back at how much better this team may have been over the last decade if we had been able to afford (add) Rolen when he was available (2002), and who publicly alluded that he'd love to play for Cincy. But we just couldn't simply afford it.



For now, I'm doing all kinds of superstitious crap to see if it helps Alonso play 3b.

Odds are it's not going to succeed either......

http://mlb.sbnation.com/2011/8/4/2344677/yonder-alonso-third-base-cincinnati-reds-news

HokieRed
08-27-2011, 10:22 AM
Seems like Dusty found a way to use everybody last night except Alonso. Need a managerial change.

HokieRed
08-28-2011, 06:34 PM
Getting his at-bat a week, Alonso homers. How much longer do we have to put up with Baker?

Redlegs
08-28-2011, 06:39 PM
I've supported Dusty in the past, but I think he should be canned soley on his handling of Yonder Alonso. The guy makes a couple miscues in LF and he's yanked for the rest of the season. This is the same organization that witnessed Adam Dunn in LF for many years and Kal Daniels years before him.

757690
08-28-2011, 07:22 PM
I've supported Dusty in the past, but I think he should be canned soley on his handling of Yonder Alonso. The guy makes a couple miscues in LF and he's yanked for the rest of the season. This is the same organization that witnessed Adam Dunn in LF for many years and Kal Daniels years before him.

It wasn't a few miscues. It was clear evidence that Alonso doesn't have the ability to play LF in the major leagues, no matter how well he hits.

Dunn and Daniels could at least make the standard plays. I don't have faith that Alonso could make those more than half the time.

A good organization does not play Alonso in LF after witnessing what they witnessed. I have more faith in Votto at SS than I do in Alonso in LF.

dougdirt
08-28-2011, 07:27 PM
It wasn't a few miscues. It was clear evidence that Alonso doesn't have the ability to play LF in the major leagues, no matter how well he hits.

Dunn and Daniels could at least make the standard plays. I don't have faith that Alonso could make those more than half the time.

A good organization does not play Alonso in LF after witnessing what they witnessed. I have more faith in Votto at SS than I do in Alonso in LF.

As someone who has watched Alonso 50+ times in left, I am telling you now.... what you saw in a Cincinnati uniform is NOT the true abilities of Alonso in left. Don't take that as me saying he is good. He isn't. But he isn't nearly as bad as the 3 games made him look.

Redlegs
08-28-2011, 07:48 PM
It wasn't a few miscues. It was clear evidence that Alonso doesn't have the ability to play LF in the major leagues, no matter how well he hits.

Dunn and Daniels could at least make the standard plays. I don't have faith that Alonso could make those more than half the time.

A good organization does not play Alonso in LF after witnessing what they witnessed. I have more faith in Votto at SS than I do in Alonso in LF.Well, he only played a couple games out there. So, I don't know how many miscues he had the chance to accumulate. He needs to play and play every day, IMO.

Kc61
08-28-2011, 07:50 PM
I've supported Dusty in the past, but I think he should be canned soley on his handling of Yonder Alonso. The guy makes a couple miscues in LF and he's yanked for the rest of the season. This is the same organization that witnessed Adam Dunn in LF for many years and Kal Daniels years before him.

Do you really believe this is Dusty's decision alone? Please.

Everything going on now, the use of the youngsters, the decision to keep certain guys on the team, is being orchestrated by overall design including Walt.

You may not agree with it, but let's not blame Baker. He is part of an organization that is making these calls.

My guess is that the Reds feel strongly that they need to finish over .500 this year, for whatever reasons, and have decided that Yonder is not ready to play left field on such a team.

And it's possible that Yonder could spend the off-season some place working on his left field play, and could be back as a left fielder next season.

marcshoe
08-28-2011, 07:58 PM
Alonso just told Jim Day he's starting at third tomorrow.

membengal
08-28-2011, 08:04 PM
:)
Alonso just told Jim Day he's starting at third tomorrow.

Hard to see this situation as anything other than whiskey tango foxtrot at this point. Where was the foresight to get him that run at AAA? This is all just so...kinda incompetent.

Ron Madden
08-28-2011, 08:15 PM
:)

Hard to see this situation as anything other than whiskey tango foxtrot at this point. Where was the foresight to get him that run at AAA? This is all just so...kinda incompetent.

I agree with you.

Slyder
08-28-2011, 08:38 PM
Bill Bavasi at his finest....?

HokieRed
08-28-2011, 08:50 PM
Today's box: Lewis 3 AB's, Sappelt 4 AB's, Frazier 6 AB's, Stubbs 6 AB's, Janish 3 AB's, Renteria 3 AB's. Yonder 1 AB.
Somebody needs to think a little more creatively.

mth123
08-28-2011, 09:15 PM
:)

Hard to see this situation as anything other than whiskey tango foxtrot at this point. Where was the foresight to get him that run at AAA? This is all just so...kinda incompetent.

Kinda??

Outside of the Bruce deal, pretty much all that has been done the last 3 years would qualify as baseball malpractice. I put less blame on Dusty than Bob and Walt. Dusty is forced to utilize guys in less than an ideal way because he just doesn't have the horses to make an ideal line-up or rotation.

osuceltic
08-29-2011, 11:14 AM
Today's box: Lewis 3 AB's, Sappelt 4 AB's, Frazier 6 AB's, Stubbs 6 AB's, Janish 3 AB's, Renteria 3 AB's. Yonder 1 AB.
Somebody needs to think a little more creatively.

He's a first baseman. You want to bench Votto for him?

This third base thing is a joke. The guy should have been traded already. That's the only reasonable solution.

lollipopcurve
08-29-2011, 11:31 AM
This third base thing is a joke. The guy should have been traded already. That's the only reasonable solution.

Have to disagree that there's only 1 reasonable solution. Trading Votto and the $26 million owed him could also work. Not saying it should be done, but it's a legit option to be explored.

redsmetz
08-29-2011, 12:10 PM
This third base thing is a joke. The guy should have been traded already. That's the only reasonable solution.

Another poster noted that there is at least one other reasonable solution, but I'd rather address how much of a joke this wasn't - what has Alonso shown in his limited playing time since being called up? He's shown he's perfectly capable of hitting Major League pitching. That raises his stock, whether for us, or in a trade. I'd love to find a place for him here because I think he's precisely the type of power bat we need in this line-up. If he remains with us and jumps around between 1B, 3B, LF and DH next season, I think we'll find value in that.

Too often we seem to want to deal in absolutes here at RZ. We forget, I think, that this is a game played by human beings who many a time can rise to the occasion and perform in ways we presume they can't. Lets see how this plays out in this season.

And we can't dismiss the clubs efforts to salvage something from this season, getting as many wins as possible and finishing with a winning record. It's unfortunate that Milwaukee found some magic mid-season to leave the rest of the division in the dust. Barring an epic collapse, they'll win it, but I still want us to finish well. If Alonso's bat helps (and it has already), full speed ahead.

RANDY IN INDY
08-29-2011, 12:38 PM
The first go around the league is always easier than the next go round. Can you make the adjustments once they figure your weaknesses? Alonso looks like a real good hitter but I'm not ready to put all my apples in that basket.

HokieRed
08-29-2011, 01:06 PM
He's a first baseman. You want to bench Votto for him?

This third base thing is a joke. The guy should have been traded already. That's the only reasonable solution.

I want, and have been making the case for two years, the current MVP to see that it's in the best interests of the team to move to LF so that Alonso can be installed at 1b.

Trading Alonso before he has established his value would have been to get less for him than we might otherwise.

I also don't think there is any way we can trade for as good a LF bat as Alonso will provide in 2012-13 (not without trading players at the very core of this team).

Trading Alonso and then losing Votto after two more years (which I assume will happen) will come, I predict, to look as bad down the road as the previous FO's trading of an MVP for a AAA pitcher.

I consider it essential that either Votto or Alonso is still in a Reds uniform in 2014, and preferably both.

mdccclxix
08-29-2011, 01:10 PM
nm

IslandRed
08-29-2011, 01:14 PM
Another poster noted that there is at least one other reasonable solution, but I'd rather address how much of a joke this wasn't - what has Alonso shown in his limited playing time since being called up? He's shown he's perfectly capable of hitting Major League pitching. That raises his stock, whether for us, or in a trade.

Yep.

To the extent some feel all this futzing around is hurting Alonso's trade value, I disagree completely. Other clubs know exactly what the Reds are doing -- trying to find a way to get his bat into the lineup because first base isn't available. His ability, or not, to play left field or third base isn't going to affect another team's willingness to trade for him as a first baseman as long as he hits.

Cooper
08-29-2011, 01:16 PM
You can't fill your needs with what you get back in trade. It just never happens. He's a 6-7 WAR player. You'll get back a guy that turns into a 3 WAR and a couple guys who might but it's not the totality of what you get back it's how much above the margin that you may already have at existing positions. You're never gonna get back the kind of value Votto presents.

Reds/Flyers Fan
08-29-2011, 01:31 PM
Another poster noted that there is at least one other reasonable solution, but I'd rather address how much of a joke this wasn't - what has Alonso shown in his limited playing time since being called up? He's shown he's perfectly capable of hitting Major League pitching. That raises his stock, whether for us, or in a trade. I'd love to find a place for him here because I think he's precisely the type of power bat we need in this line-up. If he remains with us and jumps around between 1B, 3B, LF and DH next season, I think we'll find value in that.

Too often we seem to want to deal in absolutes here at RZ. We forget, I think, that this is a game played by human beings who many a time can rise to the occasion and perform in ways we presume they can't. Lets see how this plays out in this season.

And we can't dismiss the clubs efforts to salvage something from this season, getting as many wins as possible and finishing with a winning record. It's unfortunate that Milwaukee found some magic mid-season to leave the rest of the division in the dust. Barring an epic collapse, they'll win it, but I still want us to finish well. If Alonso's bat helps (and it has already), full speed ahead.

It isn't fair to the Brewers to call dismiss this season as simply "magical." They built this team properly. They did their homework in the offseason and added the pieces they needed to an already strong club. They made the moves at the deadline to correct any lingering deficiencies. They were proactive. This is the result.

The Brewers now have a very legitimate shot to finish with the best record in the NL and advance to the World Series. It appears that they weren't content to just win a weak division. Good for them.

bucksfan2
08-29-2011, 03:24 PM
It isn't fair to the Brewers to call dismiss this season as simply "magical." They built this team properly. They did their homework in the offseason and added the pieces they needed to an already strong club. They made the moves at the deadline to correct any lingering deficiencies. They were proactive. This is the result.

The Brewers now have a very legitimate shot to finish with the best record in the NL and advance to the World Series. It appears that they weren't content to just win a weak division. Good for them.

I would venture to say that winning 20 out of 25 or 25 out of 30 like Milwaukee is doing would be called "mid season magic". No matter how you good you build a club you just can't project a run like Milwaukee is on.

RedsManRick
08-29-2011, 04:48 PM
It isn't fair to the Brewers to call dismiss this season as simply "magical." They built this team properly. They did their homework in the offseason and added the pieces they needed to an already strong club. They made the moves at the deadline to correct any lingering deficiencies. They were proactive. This is the result.

The Brewers now have a very legitimate shot to finish with the best record in the NL and advance to the World Series. It appears that they weren't content to just win a weak division. Good for them.

No need to make it either/or.

The Brewers certainly made moves to maximize their chances of winning this year both before and during the season. But they've also benefited from some good timing in terms of when they scored/prevented runs (i.e. luck) that isn't necessarily a function of front office savvy. The runs scored/allowed don't indicate that the Brew Crew has played a quality of baseball that is 10 games better than the Cards/Reds, despite the respective records.

It's not like they had a top notch bullpen -- it's decidedly middle of the pack on the season. Sure it's been quite good since the deadline, but they had already built out a record that was above their pythag.

None of that is to say that the Reds should not have done more. But I do wonder just what trade opportunities Walt has had and what budget limitations he's working under. In terms specifically of Alonso, I don't see how this could possibly hurt him. He's a known quantity defensively at 1B and I doubt anybody outside of Cincinnati would be looking at him in LF. If he can show that he's capable in either LF or at 3B, it only helps his value. And if he can't, at least he's been getting some opportunity to show that his bat is for real.

redsmetz
08-29-2011, 04:58 PM
I would venture to say that winning 20 out of 25 or 25 out of 30 like Milwaukee is doing would be called "mid season magic". No matter how you good you build a club you just can't project a run like Milwaukee is on.

This is what I was getting at with my specific choice of words. And I'm not suggesting that they won with just "smoke & mirrors" or even just dumb luck (although you have to have some good luck to win that high a percentage of games).

They have put a good club on the field and they've made some good, astute moves that have paid off in the way they had hoped. My "mid season magic" was not meant as a slight to the Brewers very good play of late.

mth123
08-29-2011, 08:11 PM
You can't fill your needs with what you get back in trade. It just never happens. He's a 6-7 WAR player. You'll get back a guy that turns into a 3 WAR and a couple guys who might but it's not the totality of what you get back it's how much above the margin that you may already have at existing positions. You're never gonna get back the kind of value Votto presents.

:thumbup:

wlf WV
08-29-2011, 09:07 PM
You can't fill your needs with what you get back in trade. It just never happens. He's a 6-7 WAR player. You'll get back a guy that turns into a 3 WAR and a couple guys who might but it's not the totality of what you get back it's how much above the margin that you may already have at existing positions. You're never gonna get back the kind of value Votto presents.

:thumbup::thumbup:

nate
08-29-2011, 09:45 PM
You can't fill your needs with what you get back in trade. It just never happens. He's a 6-7 WAR player. You'll get back a guy that turns into a 3 WAR and a couple guys who might but it's not the totality of what you get back it's how much above the margin that you may already have at existing positions. You're never gonna get back the kind of value Votto presents.

If this were true, trades would never be made.

Cooper
08-30-2011, 01:50 AM
If this were true, trades would never be made.

Bad trades are made all the time. Poor teams rarely get back what they give up in WAR. They do get some cost savings (that's why trades are made). What rarely occurs is increased marginal value. Teams only hope they get it back (WAR) what they are really trading is a big contract- they get cost savings -they do not get close to equal value in WAR relative to marginal positional value.

You don't understand the concept.

westofyou
08-30-2011, 10:39 AM
You can't fill your needs with what you get back in trade. It just never happens. He's a 6-7 WAR player. You'll get back a guy that turns into a 3 WAR and a couple guys who might but it's not the totality of what you get back it's how much above the margin that you may already have at existing positions. You're never gonna get back the kind of value Votto presents.

http://www.baseball-cards.com/jpgs/1967t/1967-337a.jpg

Value is in the eye of the beholder when a trade comes through.

There are no absolutes.

nate
08-30-2011, 10:43 AM
Bad trades are made all the time. Poor teams rarely get back what they give up in WAR. They do get some cost savings (that's why trades are made). What rarely occurs is increased marginal value. Teams only hope they get it back (WAR) what they are really trading is a big contract- they get cost savings -they do not get close to equal value in WAR relative to marginal positional value.

You don't understand the concept.

I understand it entirely.

You have a very narrow view of trading situations.

IslandRed
08-30-2011, 10:50 AM
I think a better way of phrasing the statement might have been, "you can't trade a superstar and expect the return to make your team better right away." Which can be debated as to its veracity, but it's true more often than not, since the motivation for trading the superstar is usually not based on win-now factors.

RANDY IN INDY
08-30-2011, 01:06 PM
http://www.baseball-cards.com/jpgs/1967t/1967-337a.jpg

Value is in the eye of the beholder when a trade comes through.

There are no absolutes.

I've always liked that Joe Morgan card. Best set of Topps cards ever, in my opinion.

Cooper
08-30-2011, 10:07 PM
I was referring to trading a player of Votto's caliber -a superstar. Yes, WOY -you found an example from 40 years ago- you found the blemish and now you can throw out the whole idea. Neat.

When you trade a tent pole player with a big contract for numerous parts -you rarely get back in value what you give up re: to marginal value. You may get 3 players that add up to 6 WAR and in total that appears to be a trade of equal value. It's not. Even getting 4 minor leaguers that might turn into a tent pole player -you're back to where you started from and you've also lost years of Opportunity costs.

As for Morgan -my guess he was making 7K at the time. It was perceived as a trade for equal parts re: WAR.