PDA

View Full Version : Where will Oswalt end up?



Pages : 1 [2]

RedsManRick
02-07-2012, 05:56 PM
True, so why is having quality depth bad? What is wrong with the Reds bringing in a guy for 1 year to try and win now? When are we going to try to win beyond just the division?

So, you think Bailey is going to pitch 200 innings in 2012? What would you base that on? Luck?

Bum

I don't think anybody is against adding him. But essentially trading Bailey for Oswalt doesn't really help us in the "reliable innings" department

Bumstead
02-07-2012, 05:57 PM
The Cardinals won the world series last season with no starter having an ERA+ better than 107. So let's stop pretending that the Reds, or just about any other team in the playoffs, has no chance with a solid, but unspectacular rotation.

Historically that is not the case as you are well aware. Having well-above average #'s 1-3 certainly increases one's chances does it not? And having quality pitching depth would also increase one's chances, would it not? Maybe we should just halfway try to win and be happy? C'mon Doug!

I like Bailey as much as anybody, but to rely on him for 180 plus innings or even to rely on Francis to provide decent innings in relief makes me cringe.

Bum

Bumstead
02-07-2012, 05:57 PM
I don't think anybody is against adding him. But essentially trading Bailey for Oswalt doesn't really help us in the "reliable innings" department

Clearly, you and I disagree on that.

RedsManRick
02-07-2012, 06:01 PM
Historically that is not the case as you are well aware. Having well-above average #'s 1-3 certainly increases one's chances does it not? And having quality pitching depth would also increase one's chances, would it not? Maybe we should just halfway try to win and be happy? C'mon Doug!

I like Bailey as much as anybody, but to rely on him for 180 plus innings or even to rely on Francis to provide decent innings in relief makes me cringe.

Bum

How does adding Oswalt at the expense of Homer help our depth? If it were just a question of adding Oswalt or not, I've not seen anybody say that they don't want him on the 25 man. Who would be upset if Castellini just decided to open his wallet and add Oswalt to the picture?

It's just that he's as questionable in terms of innings reliability as Homer and the only pitcher who he's clearly better than performance-wise is the one guy who is a sure thing for innings and who isn't going anywhere.

dougdirt
02-07-2012, 06:02 PM
Historically that is not the case as you are well aware. Having well-above average #'s 1-3 certainly increases one's chances does it not? And having quality pitching depth would also increase one's chances, would it not? Maybe we should just halfway try to win and be happy? C'mon Doug!

I like Bailey as much as anybody, but to rely on him for 180 plus innings or even to rely on Francis to provide decent innings in relief makes me cringe.

Bum

Having depth would of course help. Trying to win halfway? I don't know if you know this, but we are the Reds, not the Red Sox. We can't just "go all in at all costs". We don't have such a luxury.

And while it historically isn't what happens with the Cardinals situation and their starters, I feel pretty confident that the Reds will have at least three pitchers BETTER than a 107 ERA+ in 2012 without adding Oswalt.

RedLegSuperStar
02-07-2012, 06:22 PM
I think majority of Reds fans would rather have Roy Oswalt instead of St. Louis having Roy Oswalt.

savafan
02-07-2012, 06:42 PM
I still can't get over the fact that we're talking about Bronson Arroyo like he's Eric freakin' Milton here. What are we basing this claim on that Bailey is better than Arroyo? If we're talking about last season, okay, fine. A year in which Arroyo started off with mono and never really got on track. Outside of 2011 though, year by year and for the duration of their careers as pitchers for the Cincinnati Reds, Arroyo has outpitched Bailey every season.

savafan
02-07-2012, 06:49 PM
For reference:

Arroyo


Year Age Tm Lg W L W-L% ERA G GS GF CG SHO SV IP H R ER HR BB IBB SO HBP BK WP BF ERA+ WHIP H/9 HR/9 BB/9 SO/9 SO/BB Awards
2000 23 PIT NL 2 6 .250 6.40 20 12 1 0 0 0 71.2 88 61 51 10 36 6 50 4 1 3 338 73 1.730 11.1 1.3 4.5 6.3 1.39
2001 24 PIT NL 5 7 .417 5.09 24 13 1 1 0 0 88.1 99 54 50 12 34 6 39 4 1 4 390 90 1.506 10.1 1.2 3.5 4.0 1.15
2002 25 PIT NL 2 1 .667 4.00 9 4 1 0 0 0 27.0 30 14 12 1 15 3 22 0 0 0 123 107 1.667 10.0 0.3 5.0 7.3 1.47
2003 26 BOS AL 0 0 2.08 6 0 2 0 0 1 17.1 10 5 4 0 4 2 14 1 0 0 66 229 0.808 5.2 0.0 2.1 7.3 3.50
2004 27 BOS AL 10 9 .526 4.03 32 29 0 0 0 0 178.2 171 99 80 17 47 3 142 20 0 5 764 121 1.220 8.6 0.9 2.4 7.2 3.02
2005 28 BOS AL 14 10 .583 4.51 35 32 1 0 0 0 205.1 213 116 103 22 54 3 100 14 1 5 878 101 1.300 9.3 1.0 2.4 4.4 1.85
2006 29 CIN NL 14 11 .560 3.29 35 35 0 3 1 0 240.2 222 98 88 31 64 7 184 5 0 6 992 142 1.188 8.3 1.2 2.4 6.9 2.88 AS,MVP-23
2007 30 CIN NL 9 15 .375 4.23 34 34 0 1 0 0 210.2 232 109 99 28 63 6 156 13 0 4 921 109 1.400 9.9 1.2 2.7 6.7 2.48
2008 31 CIN NL 15 11 .577 4.77 34 34 0 1 0 0 200.0 219 116 106 29 68 2 163 6 0 6 871 93 1.435 9.9 1.3 3.1 7.3 2.40
2009 32 CIN NL 15 13 .536 3.84 33 33 0 3 2 0 220.1 214 101 94 31 65 6 127 9 0 1 923 110 1.266 8.7 1.3 2.7 5.2 1.95
2010 33 CIN NL 17 10 .630 3.88 33 33 0 2 0 0 215.2 188 95 93 29 59 5 121 6 1 1 880 105 1.145 7.8 1.2 2.5 5.0 2.05 CYA-12,GG
2011 34 CIN NL 9 12 .429 5.07 32 32 0 1 1 0 199.0 227 119 112 46 45 5 108 6 0 0 855 77 1.367 10.3 2.1 2.0 4.9 2.40
12 Seasons 112 105 .516 4.28 327 291 6 12 4 1 1874.2 1913 987 892 256 554 54 1226 88 4 35 8001 104 1.316 9.2 1.2 2.7 5.9 2.21


CIN (6 yrs) 79 72 .523 4.14 201 201 0 11 4 0 1286.1 1302 638 592 194 364 31 859 45 1 18 5442 105 1.295 9.1 1.4 2.5 6.0 2.36

Bailey


Year Age Tm Lg W L W-L% ERA G GS GF CG SHO SV IP H R ER HR BB IBB SO HBP BK WP BF ERA+ WHIP H/9 HR/9 BB/9 SO/9 SO/BB Awards
2007 21 CIN NL 4 2 .667 5.76 9 9 0 0 0 0 45.1 43 32 29 3 28 1 28 3 1 1 205 81 1.566 8.5 0.6 5.6 5.6 1.00
2008 22 CIN NL 0 6 .000 7.93 8 8 0 0 0 0 36.1 59 36 32 8 17 1 18 0 1 4 180 56 2.092 14.6 2.0 4.2 4.5 1.06
2009 23 CIN NL 8 5 .615 4.53 20 20 0 0 0 0 113.1 115 61 57 12 52 1 86 3 0 6 496 93 1.474 9.1 1.0 4.1 6.8 1.65
2010 24 CIN NL 4 3 .571 4.46 19 19 0 1 1 0 109.0 109 55 54 11 40 6 100 3 1 3 465 91 1.367 9.0 0.9 3.3 8.3 2.50
2011 25 CIN NL 9 7 .563 4.43 22 22 0 0 0 0 132.0 136 68 65 18 33 2 106 5 0 4 561 88 1.280 9.3 1.2 2.3 7.2 3.21
5 Seasons 25 23 .521 4.89 78 78 0 1 1 0 436.0 462 252 237 52 170 11 338 14 3 18 1907 85 1.450 9.5 1.1 3.5 7.0 1.99

Bumstead
02-07-2012, 06:55 PM
Having depth would of course help. Trying to win halfway? I don't know if you know this, but we are the Reds, not the Red Sox. We can't just "go all in at all costs". We don't have such a luxury.

And while it historically isn't what happens with the Cardinals situation and their starters, I feel pretty confident that the Reds will have at least three pitchers BETTER than a 107 ERA+ in 2012 without adding Oswalt.

So, to add a $7M pitcher is suggesting that we spend like the red sox? Really, that's your retort? Thanks for setting me straight...

dougdirt
02-07-2012, 07:31 PM
So, to add a $7M pitcher is suggesting that we spend like the red sox? Really, that's your retort? Thanks for setting me straight...

My retort is that the Reds simply can't just make money appear like other teams can. $7M for the Reds is the equivalent of about $15M for the Red Sox.

dougdirt
02-07-2012, 07:33 PM
I still can't get over the fact that we're talking about Bronson Arroyo like he's Eric freakin' Milton here. What are we basing this claim on that Bailey is better than Arroyo? If we're talking about last season, okay, fine. A year in which Arroyo started off with mono and never really got on track. Outside of 2011 though, year by year and for the duration of their careers as pitchers for the Cincinnati Reds, Arroyo has outpitched Bailey every season.

Similar walk rates. Bailey having a MUCH higher strikeout rate. Bailey having better stuff and improving each and every year. Arroyo having middling stuff at best, relies heavily on his defense turning balls in play into outs at a high rate. That certainly suggests that Bailey should be better than Arroyo moving forward. Doesn't mean it will happen, but it does suggest it should.

LegallyMinded
02-07-2012, 07:46 PM
I still can't get over the fact that we're talking about Bronson Arroyo like he's Eric freakin' Milton here. What are we basing this claim on that Bailey is better than Arroyo? If we're talking about last season, okay, fine. A year in which Arroyo started off with mono and never really got on track. Outside of 2011 though, year by year and for the duration of their careers as pitchers for the Cincinnati Reds, Arroyo has outpitched Bailey every season.

Even if we discount 2011, Bailey has surpassed Arroyo. In both 2009 and 2010, Bailey had a better FIP, recorded a much higher K rate, and gave up many fewer home runs. Moreover, Bailey's stats have actually been trending in the right direction. Going forward, he's almost surely going to be the better pitcher.

Vottomatic
02-07-2012, 07:56 PM
It disappoints me that the Reds can't spend another $10M. John Fay had payroll at around $72M. I think I had it around $80M.

Cardinals and Brewers have spent into the $90 to $100M range. I just can't believe the Reds can't do it. It pretty much tells you that Votto and BP won't be signed and we better pray they put it together and get some luck these next 2 seasons, because I think we'll be seeing the Dayton Dragons guys about then as the current roster ages and becomes free agents.

Disappointing about payroll.

Still happy with all the other moves though.

But I'd like to have QUALITY starting pitching depth considering they started last year with Bailey and Cueto on the DL, and Arroyo had mono all season.

traderumor
02-07-2012, 08:06 PM
It disappoints me that the Reds can't spend another $10M. John Fay had payroll at around $72M. I think I had it around $80M.

Cardinals and Brewers have spent into the $90 to $100M range. I just can't believe the Reds can't do it. It pretty much tells you that Votto and BP won't be signed and we better pray they put it together and get some luck these next 2 seasons, because I think we'll be seeing the Dayton Dragons guys about then as the current roster ages and becomes free agents.

Disappointing about payroll.

Still happy with all the other moves though.

But I'd like to have QUALITY starting pitching depth considering they started last year with Bailey and Cueto on the DL, and Arroyo had mono all season.Maybe they could but don't see this as a good buy.

757690
02-07-2012, 08:38 PM
Even if we discount 2011, Bailey has surpassed Arroyo. In both 2009 and 2010, Bailey had a better FIP, recorded a much higher K rate, and gave up many fewer home runs. Moreover, Bailey's stats have actually been trending in the right direction. Going forward, he's almost surely going to be the better pitcher.

You have to figure in IP, plus the fact that Arroyo has actually pitched at a superior level for many years, while Bailey has not.

FIP tells me very little until a pitcher actually turns that into a real ERA. Until Bailey pitches a full season with an ERA below 4.40, i'm assuming he never will, especially after so many years when he didn't.

I have more faith that Arroyo will bounce back from Mono, than I have that Bailly will learn now to pitch.

savafan
02-07-2012, 09:14 PM
You have to figure in IP, plus the fact that Arroyo has actually pitched at a superior level for many years, while Bailey has not.

FIP tells me very little until a pitcher actually turns that into a real ERA. Until Bailey pitches a full season with an ERA below 4.40, i'm assuming he never will, especially after so many years when he didn't.

I have more faith that Arroyo will bounce back from Mono, than I have that Bailly will learn now to pitch.

This. You can't say that one guy IS a better pitcher just because his stuff and his peripherals say that he SHOULD be. The facts are, when you add up the results, Arroyo has been a much more successful pitcher than Homer.

dougdirt
02-07-2012, 09:23 PM
This. You can't say that one guy IS a better pitcher just because his stuff and his peripherals say that he SHOULD be. The facts are, when you add up the results, Arroyo has been a much more successful pitcher than Homer.

Having better results before doesn't mean you will continue to though.

savafan
02-07-2012, 09:41 PM
Having better results before doesn't mean you will continue to though.

I agree, but likewise, having never had good results doesn't mean that you ever will.

Patrick Bateman
02-07-2012, 10:33 PM
I agree, but likewise, having never had good results doesn't mean that you ever will.

FYI, xFIP and FIP are results. Just a different type of result.

They are like ERA, a formula based on things that actually happened.

And these results happen to have a better correlation to future results.

This belief that ERA is more of a real result than FIP and such is pure hogwash. ERA contains considerably more noise in evaluating a pitcher's performance.

In relation to Arroyo/Homer, the seasons that Bailey has been a decent pitcher result in a fairly small sample size. It's not much of a stretch to belive that in the early part of his career he just stunk, and once he actually improved, the improvement has been masked by injuries and more or less, poor luck (although their could be an argument based on the "bad pitch" theory posed on this thread). There's a strong chance going forward that his improvement will show through in his ERA making a trade of multiple years of Bailey to fit in Oswalt, both a potentially short term minimal improvement, but also a significant future downgrade. As such, I have zero interest in adding Oswalt if it means moving Homer.

savafan
02-07-2012, 10:48 PM
That's all well and good if you want to believe that, but I for one won't be surprised if Homer remains a .500 type pitcher who gives up close to an average of 5 runs per 9 innings, which for the entirety of baseball history up until this day and age of the first commandment of thou shalt not argue with fringe statistics has indicated that a guy is not the type of pitcher you want to rely on and lose sleep over the possibility that he "might" put it together somewhere else if you trade him away because his non-traditional stats show that he's been on the cusp of putting it all together for 5 consecutive seasons. Thank you and goodnight.

nate
02-08-2012, 12:00 AM
That's all well and good if you want to believe that, but I for one won't be surprised if Homer remains a .500 type pitcher who gives up close to an average of 5 runs per 9 innings, which for the entirety of baseball history up until this day and age of the first commandment of thou shalt not argue with fringe statistics has indicated that a guy is not the type of pitcher you want to rely on and lose sleep over the possibility that he "might" put it together somewhere else if you trade him away because his non-traditional stats show that he's been on the cusp of putting it all together for 5 consecutive seasons. Thank you and goodnight.

K/9, BB/9 and HR/9 are not "fringe" statistics.

They're much more indicative of pitching performance than Win/Loss record.

If Win/Loss record meant what you're making out to be, why field a defensive team? Why have an offense? Why not just let baseball be an individual sport like tennis?

Those other guys on the field, in the dugout and in the bullpen contribute more to the pitcher's Win/Loss record than the pitcher does. A starting pitcher goes into the 7th inning of a game ahead 3-2 and two back to back defensive miscues that aren't ruled errors result in runners on 1st and 2nd. Relief pitcher comes in and gives up a HR.

How is this potential loss the starting pitcher's fault?

How is the ERA bump the starting pitcher's fault?

Arroyo was terrible last year. Homer was averagish. Arroyo can probably give you 200 innings but what kind of innings will they be? I think it's likely they'll continue to be below average or worse. I think Homer can throw average to above average innings. The real question is, how many?

The other question and topic of this thread is can Oswalt help? I think the answer is "yes" if he replaces the pitcher least likely to be effective. To me, that pitcher is either Arroyo or Chapman. That's not because I don't think Chapman can't be good, it's because I think Arroyo is likely to continue to be below average or worse and Chapman will be all over the place as he finds himself. Or not.

Patrick Bateman
02-08-2012, 12:04 AM
That's all well and good if you want to believe that, but I for one won't be surprised if Homer remains a .500 type pitcher who gives up close to an average of 5 runs per 9 innings, which for the entirety of baseball history up until this day and age of the first commandment of thou shalt not argue with fringe statistics has indicated that a guy is not the type of pitcher you want to rely on and lose sleep over the possibility that he "might" put it together somewhere else if you trade him away because his non-traditional stats show that he's been on the cusp of putting it all together for 5 consecutive seasons. Thank you and goodnight.

I can't see, nor do I see, anyone arguing that Bailey has been on the cusp, or flat out good for 5 seasons. I think he has been close over the last 2 years, and with injuries, and perhaps some bad luck has held him back from being very serviceable. I really don't see what is so ridiculous about that notion. It happens all the time. I think it's fairly obtuse to ignore some very strong realities of modern day baseball. I recognize that Oswalt is still somewhat likely to outpitch Homer next season, but that is clearly a debateable topic.

It's not like Roy would be the first 34 year old pitcher (who happens to have back problems) would continue declining. I just don't think it's a great bet. If they can afford to bring in Roy while keeping Bailey, great, but it's playing against the numbers to bet against the aging arch.

savafan
02-08-2012, 12:14 AM
There's nothing ridiculous about that notion, just as there's nothing ridiculous to the notion that Homer could be "close" for the next 10 years and he'll continue to be plagued by injuries, inconsistency and bad luck. Why is that hard to admit to? Bailey has been a poor major league pitcher. While his career isn't over, and the jury is still out, I think it's fair to say that he has failed to live up to expectations at this point. We don't know that he's ever going to put it together. I feel that Oswalt is a safer bet due to track record. Betting 2012 all on the numbers of 2011 for Arroyo, Oswalt and Bailey to me seems rather foolhardy if you choose to not look at the entirety of their careers.

savafan
02-08-2012, 12:19 AM
K/9, BB/9 and HR/9 are not "fringe" statistics.



For their careers, Arroyo has better H/9 and BB/9 numbers than Bailey. The HR/9 is a difference of .3, and the K/9 a difference of1.

Victories aren't given to the team whose pitcher strikes out the most opposing batters, it's given to the team that scores more runs than their opponent. Strikeouts are exciting and sexy, but you guys really do put too much emphasis on them.

nate
02-08-2012, 12:59 AM
For their careers, Arroyo has better H/9 and BB/9 numbers than Bailey. The HR/9 is a difference of .3, and the K/9 a difference of1.

H/9 isn't solely a function of pitching. It's a combination of pitching, defense and luck. Those who understand the importance of these stats don't look at H/9. Instead, they look at hit types and BABIP. Arroyo has had some rather unsustainable BABIP numbers which make his ERA look shiny while actually being mediocre at best.

Regarding the other numbers, what's their trend over the last three years? What are their ages? How much money do they makes?


Victories aren't given to the team whose pitcher strikes out the most opposing batters, it's given to the team that scores more runs than their opponent. Strikeouts are exciting and sexy, but you guys really do put too much emphasis on them.

Victories aren't given to the team with the most hits or fewest errors either. Those who understand the importance of strikeouts realize that there aren't any certainties in baseball, only things you can do to increase your odds of winning. If you strike out more batters, you reduce the number of balls in play. Fewer walks means fewer base runners (potential runs) and I think fewer HR is self-explanatory, especially in light of the other aspects of pitching.

Arroyo, has been declining in these areas making him less likely to give the team a chance of winning. Homer has been improving. It is likely these trends continue. Replacing Arroyo's innings with Oswalt is likely to have more of a positive impact on the team record than replacing Homer's innings with Oswalt.

BuckeyeRedleg
02-08-2012, 01:06 AM
I cannot believe people are still citing Win/Loss record as the mark of a good pitcher.

savafan
02-08-2012, 01:14 AM
I cannot believe people are still citing Win/Loss record as the mark of a good pitcher.

I don't think anyone did that, although that's what people seem to want to make it appear as what I'm doing. I'm looking at the full package, end results and not just cherry picking stats here and there to make an argument that Bailey has been the better pitcher when the full body of their work shows Arroyo to have been more valuable to his team. Others are saying, yes, but Bailey could be better or that he should be better, while I'm pointing out that he hasn't been, yet no one seems to want to concede that fact.

Blitz Dorsey
02-08-2012, 01:40 AM
I don't think anyone did that, although that's what people seem to want to make it appear as what I'm doing. I'm looking at the full package, end results and not just cherry picking stats here and there to make an argument that Bailey has been the better pitcher when the full body of their work shows Arroyo to have been more valuable to his team. Others are saying, yes, but Bailey could be better or that he should be better, while I'm pointing out that he hasn't been, yet no one seems to want to concede that fact.

I'll agree with you Sava. Arroyo has had by-far the better MLB career compared to Bailey. It's not even close.

RedsManRick
02-08-2012, 02:31 AM
I'll agree with you Sava. Arroyo has had by-far the better MLB career compared to Bailey. It's not even close.

I'd agree with that too.

If only the pertinent question for this conversation were "Which guy has had the better career so far". But it's not. Rather, it is "Who is going to be the most effective pitcher in 2012?" These are certainly related questions, but hardly the same thing and quite possibly have different answers.

We generally know the best ways to project pitcher performance -- and Wins and ERA aren't part of that. Both FIP and xFIP are better predictors of future ERA than is ERA itself. The bigger unknown, obviously, is health/durability. Questions certainly abound for Homer in that regard.

RedlegJake
02-08-2012, 03:46 AM
I just want to point out that pitchers often mature later than hitters. Pitchers can and do struggle until they are 27, 28 and suddenly click.

Bailey's numbers have been good enough to suggest that is a possibility for him - health is his biggest bugaboo. Patience is a huge key for pitchers. If he was giving up a ton of home runs or his K rate was abysmal I'd be all for giving up but that's not the case.

Bailey is every bit the kind of pitcher you give up on and watch him win 20 games for your trade partner. That isn't to say I wouldn't let him pitch out of the pen in long relief if Oswalt was signed, but I wouldn't trade him just to sign Oswalt.

Arroyo has had much the better career to this point, imo, (comped to Bailey) and I'm not worried about him in 2012. I do believe 2011 was an aberration and that he'll return to 2009-2010 form this year.

The thing about Oswalt is as long as Bailey is healthy I think he'll out pitch Arroyo and Roy this season. Thing is that's a big if. Keeping all 5 starters healthy is a huge if. Having all 5 healthy when the season opens is a big if. I just don't see a big deal about having 6 starters - I think there may be a few times, a week here and a couple weeks there when it will matter and cause Dusty some head scratching, the rest of time someone will be out of the rotation anyway.

membengal
02-08-2012, 06:34 AM
Chapman was a fun novelty act, but I wouldn't hesitate to dump him if the right opportunity arrived.

applause

Vottomatic
02-08-2012, 07:13 AM
......and suddenly a thread on come on to read information about Oswalt has turned into a Bailey vs. Arroyo thread.

Ugh.

Edd Roush
02-08-2012, 09:14 AM
......and suddenly a thread on come on to read information about Oswalt has turned into a Bailey vs. Arroyo thread.

Ugh.

Well, if Oswalt comes to Cincinnati, he is going to take someone's spot in the rotation. Why can't a corrolary discussusion of who is less deserving of a rotation spot be spun into the conversation as well? I feel the Arroyo vs. Bailey discussion is very applicable to this thread, personally.

I would love to have Oswalt. I think he could be our #2 behind Latos next year. That being said, I am a big Homer Bailey fan who realizes that past peripherals indicate future success in terms of ERA better than past ERA does. There are many posters on this board, who can make this argument better than I can, and several have on this exact thread, so I will not re-hash these arguments.

I think Bailey is a much better bet to have a better ERA than Arroyo in 2012. Bailey can keep guys off the base better with his stuff and strikeout numbers and he has decreased his walks to an average level over the past three seasons. Furthermore, Bailey doesn't allow nearly as many home runs which prevents the big inning.

Bailey is not 100% durable, but I don't think durability of a starting pitcher should be nearly as large of a concern as the quality of the innings he is out there for. Bailey is on the upswing of his career, while Arroyo is clearly on the downswing.

Bumstead
02-08-2012, 09:26 AM
My retort is that the Reds simply can't just make money appear like other teams can. $7M for the Reds is the equivalent of about $15M for the Red Sox.

I understand the economics of the situation. Thank you. In my opinion, it seems like a good situation (1 year contract for a quality starting pitcher) to find out if the fan base will support a bit higher payroll. Otherwise Castellini/Jockety are basically blind to it regarding extending Phillips and/or Votto. I'm not saying it's likely or not likely that we extend one, both or neither but it would be interesting to see how the fans reacted to the team pushing the budget to try to win now. Otherwise, their "win now" statements ring a little hollow to me.

Bum

nate
02-08-2012, 09:28 AM
......and suddenly a thread on come on to read information about Oswalt has turned into a Bailey vs. Arroyo thread.

Ugh.

How Oswalt would fit into the Reds rotation is very much on topic.

Very few threads stay on rails after about three pages.

_Sir_Charles_
02-08-2012, 09:32 AM
I understand the economics of the situation. Thank you. In my opinion, it seems like a good situation (1 year contract for a quality starting pitcher) to find out if the fan base will support a bit higher payroll. Otherwise Castellini/Jockety are basically blind to it regarding extending Phillips and/or Votto. I'm not saying it's likely or not likely that we extend one, both or neither but it would be interesting to see how the fans reacted to the team pushing the budget to try to win now. Otherwise, their "win now" statements ring a little hollow to me.

Bum

Maybe it's just me, but I certainly don't recall seeing fans of ANY team come out in bigger numbers because the FO upped the payroll. I see them come out in bigger numbers after the team starts winning more games. I see them come out in bigger numbers after adding a really big name player. Sorry, but Oswalt isn't a big enough name player to bump up the attendance. And if we replace Bailey with Oswalt, you're talking about a few extra games won IF things go perfectly. The odds are still quite good that Oswalt never regains his old form due to the back and age. So where are you seeing a bump in attendance by adding a win or two and an aging vet?

lollipopcurve
02-08-2012, 09:42 AM
Sorry, but Oswalt isn't a big enough name player to bump up the attendance.

I disagree. There would be buzz around him, not major buzz, but enough to draw a little extra, I think, in his first appearances. If he pitches well, that could continue. His name has been well-established in Reds country. If he goes from Reds killer to Reds stopper, I think it's a story with legs. Especially given his low-profile, country persona -- a winner with Reds fans.

Bumstead
02-08-2012, 10:04 AM
I disagree. There would be buzz around him, not major buzz, but enough to draw a little extra, I think, in his first appearances. If he pitches well, that could continue. His name has been well-established in Reds country. If he goes from Reds killer to Reds stopper, I think it's a story with legs. Especially given his low-profile, country persona -- a winner with Reds fans.

I agree. I think he is a perfect fit. If he improves the rotation, which he does, then I don't understand the hand wringing. 3-5 more wins can be the difference between winning the division and finishing 3rd. If the fans don't support a winning team that spent money to get there then how would they support just extending Votto at $20M per season?

Bum

Tony Cloninger
02-08-2012, 10:35 AM
Oswalt or not..... I do not see how anyone cannot look at what the Reds have done...and not feel they are looking to win now and not want to go. They still need to win but people should be enthused to go and there should not be any excuses when they start winning....if they don't.

Bumstead
02-08-2012, 11:18 AM
Oswalt or not..... I do not see how anyone cannot look at what the Reds have done...and not feel they are looking to win now and not want to go. They still need to win but people should be enthused to go and there should not be any excuses when they start winning....if they don't.

If the Reds come out winning and the fans don't come to the park and support that, then the fans can't blame the Front Office when they let Votto and Phillips walk at the end of their deals.

Ron Madden
02-08-2012, 01:07 PM
At one time Roy Oswalt was a Reds Killer he's not anymore.

Oswalt is 34 years old with deterioration of a couple disk in his back.There is a reason Oswalt remains unsigned and the reason is he wants to be paid like a top of the rotation starter. There isn't a team in MLB that still views him as a top of the rotation starter. I think he's done.


Besides Walt said he has not been talking to Oswalt or his agent.

Brutus
02-08-2012, 01:32 PM
At one time Roy Oswalt was a Reds Killer he's not anymore.

Oswalt is 34 years old with deterioration of a couple disk in his back.There is a reason Oswalt remains unsigned and the reason is he wants to be paid like a top of the rotation starter. There isn't a team in MLB that still views him as a top of the rotation starter. I think he's done.


Besides Walt said he has not been talking to Oswalt or his agent.

He hasn't said anything about his agent. He said "I haven't had contact with that player."

Walt is notorious for speaking in technicalities or framing things a certain way. So he says or doesn't say probably isn't worth much anyhow.

Reds/Flyers Fan
02-08-2012, 01:43 PM
At one time Roy Oswalt was a Reds Killer he's not anymore.

Oswalt is 34 years old with deterioration of a couple disk in his back.There is a reason Oswalt remains unsigned and the reason is he wants to be paid like a top of the rotation starter. There isn't a team in MLB that still views him as a top of the rotation starter. I think he's done.


Besides Walt said he has not been talking to Oswalt or his agent.

We said that about Lance Berkman too. Do we really want to see Roy Oswalt win 15 games in STL this summer?

defender
02-08-2012, 01:54 PM
One thing I agree with Bumstead is that Bailey should be able figure out a way to pitch from the pen. If the Reds get Oswalt I still want Bailey on the team. He may end up spending some time as a reliever, but I think he will have the opportunity to make a significant contribution as a starter.

Ron Madden
02-08-2012, 02:30 PM
We said that about Lance Berkman too. Do we really want to see Roy Oswalt win 15 games in STL this summer?

We'll see what happens but in my opinion Oswalt is just about done.

Vottomatic
02-08-2012, 04:41 PM
Brewers season ticket sales jumped substantially when they traded for Greinke. Almost to the point of paying for his salary.

If the Reds sign Oswalt, their sales definitely will increase and the buzz around baseball will have the Reds in the conversation more and more.

It's a no-brainer. Sign him for $9M. Move Bailey or Leake to the bullpen as long guy (and they rarely get used). Last season started with Bailey and Cueto on the DL, and Arroyo should have been on the DL with mono. This team needs some quality depth in the starting rotation. Or call it options. If any of them stumble, you have a quality option to replace them.

If the Reds can't afford another $9M, they should just gut the team and start over. That's frickin' pathetic if they can't. There is no hope for signing Votto or BP if they can't add Oswalt.

Simple no-brainer. It's a long season and a quality extra starter WILL BE NEEDED, probably more than most think.

It would suck to make all the moves they've made so far and have a key starter go down early in the season and see Francis out there when it could have been Oswalt or the guy sitting out because of Oswalt.

I believe they're all in. I'm just not completely sold on the rotation yet.

Spend the frickin' money and strengthen this team even more. If you sign him, THEY WILL COME. Hehehe.

Cedric
02-08-2012, 05:32 PM
Brewers season ticket sales jumped substantially when they traded for Greinke. Almost to the point of paying for his salary.

If the Reds sign Oswalt, their sales definitely will increase and the buzz around baseball will have the Reds in the conversation more and more.

It's a no-brainer. Sign him for $9M. Move Bailey or Leake to the bullpen as long guy (and they rarely get used). Last season started with Bailey and Cueto on the DL, and Arroyo should have been on the DL with mono. This team needs some quality depth in the starting rotation. Or call it options. If any of them stumble, you have a quality option to replace them.

If the Reds can't afford another $9M, they should just gut the team and start over. That's frickin' pathetic if they can't. There is no hope for signing Votto or BP if they can't add Oswalt.

Simple no-brainer. It's a long season and a quality extra starter WILL BE NEEDED, probably more than most think.

It would suck to make all the moves they've made so far and have a key starter go down early in the season and see Francis out there when it could have been Oswalt or the guy sitting out because of Oswalt.

I believe they're all in. I'm just not completely sold on the rotation yet.

Spend the frickin' money and strengthen this team even more. If you sign him, THEY WILL COME. Hehehe.

There is nothing pathetic about it. The Reds aren't a franchise that can afford 9 million dollars for depth.

savafan
02-08-2012, 05:55 PM
There is nothing pathetic about it. The Reds aren't a franchise that can afford 9 million dollars for depth.

You don't think they could creatively make it happen? I do.

Vottomatic
02-08-2012, 09:06 PM
There is nothing pathetic about it. The Reds aren't a franchise that can afford 9 million dollars for depth.

It continues to astound that after a subpar 2011 Reds season, that began with Cueto and Bailey on the DL, and Arroyo having mono all season, that people actually question and/or minimize the importance of quality starting pitching depth.

Oswalt would not be the depth. He would go into the starting rotation, and either Bailey or Leake would be the depth.

I just don't get how people cannot see how much this would improve the team.

Votto is going to bolt in 2 years. BP won't be here either. The farm system will reload many positions again, and the payroll will be cheap at some point. Surely they can be creative and get this done.

Cedric
02-08-2012, 10:11 PM
It continues to astound that after a subpar 2011 Reds season, that began with Cueto and Bailey on the DL, and Arroyo having mono all season, that people actually question and/or minimize the importance of quality starting pitching depth.

Oswalt would not be the depth. He would go into the starting rotation, and either Bailey or Leake would be the depth.

I just don't get how people cannot see how much this would improve the team.

Votto is going to bolt in 2 years. BP won't be here either. The farm system will reload many positions again, and the payroll will be cheap at some point. Surely they can be creative and get this done.

I really doubt Oswalt is enough of an upgrade over Homer this year to make it worth losing Homer long term. Which is what I think would have to happen to make this work.

I also think Leake will be better than Oswalt this year.

Boss-Hog
02-09-2012, 07:09 AM
We're long past the point of discussing where Roy Oswalt will go or even who's a better pitcher between Bronson Arroyo and Homer Bailey. Unfortunately, it's evolved into users talking down to others and I don't have any tolerance for that. Let's get this thread back on track.

Kc61
02-09-2012, 09:06 AM
With all the back and forth about Oswalt, one thing is indisputable. Several teams have focused in on him. All have refused to sign him.

The Rangers, Cards, and Red Sox have all been strongly rumored to be in on Oswalt. None have signed him. The Reds have had interest to some extent. Haven't signed him.

What's wrong with this picture?

These teams aren't all impoverished. They are all contenders who might use the Oswalt of old.

He is either asking for way too much money; or teams doubt he has much left; or teams doubt his health; or some or all of the above.

The Cards, Red Sox, and Rangers are not teams slow on the trigger finger. Their decisions so far to pass on Oswalt is a red flag IMO.

Yes, I'd love the Reds to have the Oswalt of old, even the healthy Oswalt of recent past.

But if he wants a king's ransom or if they think he isn't right, that explains the Reds' decision so far, and I wouldn't second guess them.

Walt has been very active and I have to think that if Oswalt was a healthy, effective, reasonably priced, available pitcher, Walt would have significant interest. Doesn't seem to be the case.

Boss-Hog
02-09-2012, 09:17 AM
With all the back and forth about Oswalt, one thing is indisputable. Several teams have focused in on him. All have refused to sign him.

The Rangers, Cards, and Red Sox have all been strongly rumored to be in on Oswalt. None have signed him. The Reds have had interest to some extent. Haven't signed him.

What's wrong with this picture?

These teams aren't all impoverished. They are all contenders who might use the Oswalt of old.

He is either asking for way too much money; or teams doubt he has much left; or teams doubt his health; or some or all of the above.

The Cards, Red Sox, and Rangers are not teams slow on the trigger finger. Their decisions so far to pass on Oswalt is a red flag IMO.

Yes, I'd love the Reds to have the Oswalt of old, even the healthy Oswalt of recent past.

But if he wants a king's ransom or if they think he isn't right, that explains the Reds' decision so far, and I wouldn't second guess them.

Walt has been very active and I have to think that if Oswalt was a healthy, effective, reasonably priced, available pitcher, Walt would have significant interest. Doesn't seem to be the case.

That's a really good post...spot on, IMO.

Boss-Hog
02-09-2012, 09:21 AM
EDIT: sorry I see Bosshog's post above now, I will refrain from trying any further.
Yes, please do.

LegallyMinded
02-09-2012, 09:32 AM
With all the back and forth about Oswalt, one thing is indisputable. Several teams have focused in on him. All have refused to sign him.

The Rangers, Cards, and Red Sox have all been strongly rumored to be in on Oswalt. None have signed him. The Reds have had interest to some extent. Haven't signed him.

What's wrong with this picture?

These teams aren't all impoverished. They are all contenders who might use the Oswalt of old.

He is either asking for way too much money; or teams doubt he has much left; or teams doubt his health; or some or all of the above.

The Cards, Red Sox, and Rangers are not teams slow on the trigger finger. Their decisions so far to pass on Oswalt is a red flag IMO.

Yes, I'd love the Reds to have the Oswalt of old, even the healthy Oswalt of recent past.

But if he wants a king's ransom or if they think he isn't right, that explains the Reds' decision so far, and I wouldn't second guess them.

Walt has been very active and I have to think that if Oswalt was a healthy, effective, reasonably priced, available pitcher, Walt would have significant interest. Doesn't seem to be the case.

I'm not sure teams' refusal to sign Oswalt is a red flag. I think it's just a product of Oswalt deciding to limit his market to teams that, for one reason or another, can afford not to sign him.

As Dave Cameron recently pointed out (http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/roy-oswalt-and-the-rangers/), "No team in baseball needs a starting pitcher less than the Texas Rangers." The Red Sox, meanwhile, are concerned about (http://www.weei.com/sports/boston/this-just-in/21171911/cherington-no-mandate-be-under-luxury-tax) the luxury tax, and "the team is operating under a self-imposed budget." Moving Scutaro freed up about 6 million dollars in payroll, but if Oswalt is asking for a reasonably sized deal akin to Edwin Jackson's, then 6 million dollars simply won't cover even his modest his asking price. As for the Cardinals, they, too, have a full rotation, and so there simply isn't much pressure on them to sign another starter.

AmarilloRed
02-09-2012, 10:17 AM
Retirement a possibility with Oswalt? It doesn't seem that teams want to meet his asking price, and more than a few players have retired rather than sign at bargain prices.I saw where the Cardinals were waiting for Oswalt to meet their price.

PuffyPig
02-09-2012, 10:17 AM
Oswalt wants to pitch for a contender and would like $10M to do so.

I think the money is way more important to him than it may be suggested.

The Voice of IH
02-09-2012, 11:04 AM
If I were to write a book about how to run a proper dictatorship, I would use Boss-Hog as an example. He runs this place with an iron fist, yet has the complete respect from all posters. Great job Boss :)

As for Oswalt, the best way for the Reds to get him is for him not to sign a deal with another team. Sounds kind of silly, but in truth the longer his free agencies last, the better the chance the Reds have.

Roy Tucker
02-09-2012, 11:31 AM
I think this is a bit like the Ryan Madson "see which GM blinks first" kind of market. But Oswalt is an older and more used commodity.

They ran a $$$ number up the flagpole and nobody saluted. So, at some time soon, that number will start to slide. At some further point, a GM will say "OK, we can live with that". Who and when that is is the $64K question. But this is all an imperfect process.

I, for one, am not all that keen on Oswalt. He has a lot of miles on him.

savafan
02-09-2012, 01:41 PM
I don't know if it's posturing, but I read some reports this morning where Boston was saying that they were out on Oswalt.

jojo
02-09-2012, 01:54 PM
It is incredibly difficult to read.

So is your stuff, but we all give you slack,,,, buh bum bump.... :D

LegallyMinded
02-09-2012, 02:03 PM
Zips projections for Texas (http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/oracle/discussion/2012_zips_projections_texas_rangers) came out yesterday, and I think they underscore how unlikely it is that the Rangers shell out for Oswalt. Currently, the Rangers have 6 starters projected to have an ERA+ of 109 or better. Oswalt, by contrast, is projected at an ERA+ of 108 (http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/files/oracle/discussion/2012_zips_projections_-_philadelphia_phillies/). I know there's no such thing as too much pitching, but if you already have 6 potential starters who are better than what's on the market, I can't imagine you're likely to dip into that market.

jojo
02-09-2012, 02:26 PM
Yet, aside from last year where we have to agree that he was sick, he hasn't "gotten worse" over the years. His numbers may have had a small drop off in some areas, while he improved in others. Mostly though, he's been pretty consistent, not counting 2011. Sure, he doesn't light the world on fire with the sexy strikeout stats, but he's been an all-star (not picked by the fans, as he's a pitcher), won a gold glove and received votes for Cy Young and MVP. He's been better than average.

Here's another view of Arroyo:

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2511099&highlight=arroyo#post2511099


My take on Arroyo?

His ERA has been driven by his BABIP both of which have dramatically improved with the significant improvement of the defense behind him. In other words, significant interaction between his performance and the Reds defense is a large reason why he's outperformed his peripherals so dramatically (i.e. his ERA has been better than his FIP would predict) over the last several seasons. Or to say it another way, put him in front of the Reds defense of 2006-2008 and his ERA would be much closer to his FIP.

Why do I argue this?

Here is a breakdown of Arroyo by year showing his ERA, FIP and BABIP. When the FIP-ERA is positive, it means his ERA was lower than his peripherals would predict (i.e. his ERA outperformed his FIP):




Arroyo
Season ERA FIP FIP-ERA BABIP
2006 3.29 4.15 0.86 0.271
2007 4.23 4.57 0.34 0.309
2008 4.77 4.5 -0.27 0.314
2009 3.84 4.78 0.94 0.265
2010 3.88 4.61 0.73 0.239
2011 5.07 5.71 0.64 0.278

It's important to note that Arroyo's ERA has outperformed his FIP in 5 of the 6 seasons he's been a Red. But many would agree his 2006 ERA was an anomaly that was unsustainble. Certainly the magnitude of difference between his FIP and ERA spanning the 2009-2011 seasons would not have been expected based upon his prior performance or legitimately ascribed to a skillset. Realizing some may argue this point, below follow a few tables that hopefully demonstrate why one might make the above statement.

Here's the same breakdown for the Reds' pitching staff over the same years:




Reds
Season ERA FIP FIP-ERA BABIP
2006 4.51 4.63 0.12 0.31
2007 4.94 4.55 -0.39 0.31
2008 4.55 4.53 -0.02 0.312
2009 4.18 4.66 0.48 0.283
2010 4.01 4.18 0.17 0.288
2011 4.16 4.45 0.29 0.282

Here are the BABIP for the Reds staff and Arroyo for the two periods of his tenure as a Red (2006-2008 where the Reds had one of the worst defenses in the league and 2009-2011 where the Reds had one of the best defenses in the league):




BABIP by defensive performance
Reds Arroyo
2006-08 0.311 0.298
2009-11 0.284 0.261
Decrease -0.026 -0.037

The data above indicates that for the period of 2009-2011 when Arroyo's ERA has significantly outperformed his FIP despite declining peripherals, the Red's staff as a whole has consistently outtperformed it's FIP as well. The third table suggests the reason why-the dramatically improved defense has driven a large part of this outcome. So he did not outperform his FIP independent of significant influence by his defense.

So in other words, if the Reds were to pay market value for Arroyo's production over the last several seasons, they'd essentially be "paying double" for the cost associated with building their defense. This also can explain why Arroyo does not have a great deal of trade value despite his ERA's.

All of that said, a look at Arroyo as a Reds does seem to suggest he has outperformed his peripherals to a greater degree than can solely be explained by the impact of the defense behind him. So there may be room to poke at something interesting here, albeit a minor effect. However, when looking at his time as a Pirate and BoSock, he displayed no discernible ability to consistently outperform his peripherals.

The ultimate takehome? If they can get a legit arm for their rotation, they should. At least Arroyo should not be a rationale for preventing such a trade.

If the Reds want to improve their rotation, then Cincy is a valid destination for where Oswalt might end up...

Gallen5862
02-10-2012, 06:50 PM
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/

ESPN.com's Jayson Stark says Roy Oswalt is not going to sign with the Rangers or Phillies. The right-hander could end up in Boston, where he doesn't seem to want to play, or with the Cardinals, who are interested if Oswalt agrees to their terms.

savafan
02-10-2012, 09:21 PM
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/

ESPN.com's Jayson Stark says Roy Oswalt is not going to sign with the Rangers or Phillies. The right-hander could end up in Boston, where he doesn't seem to want to play, or with the Cardinals, who are interested if Oswalt agrees to their terms.

Isn't it a bit odd that it sounds like, from the reports we're hearing, that Oswalt isn't too keen on playing for the teams that want his services? Is it really the money that's holding this up from getting done, or is it the likely destinations?

Oswalt may be best served to wait until after spring training starts and see if some team has an injury to one of their starters and needs his services.

Redhook
02-11-2012, 07:21 AM
I'd be shocked if he's playing for anyone other than the Cardinals this season.

RANDY IN INDY
02-11-2012, 07:44 AM
Me too. My bet is he'll be wearing the birds on the bat.

Blitz Dorsey
02-11-2012, 11:21 AM
Sounds like he wants to play in the NL, wants to be somewhat close to his Mississippi home and wants to play for a contender. Also, doesn't want to play in a little bandbox of a stadium. Add it all up and yes, I have no doubt he's StL-bound.

Dammit. Step it up Boston! Give him money that he can't turn down. Have you noticed the offseason the Yankees have had? It's been good. You better do something.

AmarilloRed
02-11-2012, 11:49 AM
The one thing that make me doubt he'll end up in St. Louis-the Cardinals insistence that he meet their offer of 1 year, 5 million. I don't see Oswalt settling for that.

RedEye
02-11-2012, 04:01 PM
I know Walt sez he's not interested in signing Oswalt -- but he probably wasn't that interested in signing Madson before the price plummeted either. I'm of the school of thought that you can never have enough quality starting pitching depth (see: Cincinnati Reds 2011) and getting Oswalt at the right price could only add to this banner "all-in" offseason for the FO... just sayin' is all.

WebScorpion
02-11-2012, 04:45 PM
The one thing that make me doubt he'll end up in St. Louis-the Cardinals insistence that he meet their offer of 1 year, 5 million. I don't see Oswalt settling for that.The thing that makes me think they won't sign him is they don't need him. They've got a full rotation of 5 seasoned starters Carpenter, Wainwright, Garcia, Lohse, and Westbrook, and they have a slew of pitchers coming up through their system one of whom (Miller or Martinez?)) should be ready if a starter goes down. Then again, you can never have too much pitching... :D

Vottomatic
02-11-2012, 10:35 PM
It wouldn't surprise me to see the Reds sign him if his price goes below $8M, simply to beat the Cardinals to the punch. Walt & Bob want to stick it to their old team badly.

757690
02-11-2012, 11:34 PM
Isn't it a bit odd that it sounds like, from the reports we're hearing, that Oswalt isn't too keen on playing for the teams that want his services? Is it really the money that's holding this up from getting done, or is it the likely destinations?

Oswalt may be best served to wait until after spring training starts and see if some team has an injury to one of their starters and needs his services.

I think this is dead on. I predict Oswalt goes to whichever contending team suffers the first serious injury to their starting rotation. Probably none of the teams currently discussed.

mdccclxix
02-12-2012, 12:20 AM
Where are some of the west coast teams on this? Seems so odd. Adding a #2/#3 for 8 mil is a sweet deal. AZ? SF? COL? Not a peep.

Phhhl
02-12-2012, 01:51 AM
Where are some of the west coast teams on this? Seems so odd. Adding a #2/#3 for 8 mil is a sweet deal. AZ? SF? COL? Not a peep.

There does seem to be a tremendous amount of reluctance from many teams. Unfortunately, this thing seems to be trending towards the Cardinals. Maybe he is an outrageous risk and we are all idiots to even consider him as an option. Back problems can be chronic and career threatening. But, I maintain, if he signs for less the 5 mil with St. Louis, it could cost the Reds dearly. All of a sudden, that club goes from a good rotation with very little other than Shelby Miller on the back end, to a good rotation WITH exceptional depth. I do feel like the Reds are being played in this entire soap opera, and that Oswalt really has a jones for the Cardinals. He keeps kicking good Americal League clubs to the curb as if they were left off the cheerleading squad and he was the high school quarterback. To say he has no agenda is kind of like saying MADD has no problem with one or two drinks at lunch with a client. His agent is trying to play the Reds' percieved desperation against themselves to drive up the price he is determined to wring from St. Louis.

He has commented on how befitting the Cardinals are of his supreme talent in the past, so I just feel that is where he is destined to be if the Reds let this play out without overspending a little.

Oswalt is definately not going to "fall" to us. We are going to have to take him.

Ron Madden
02-12-2012, 02:21 AM
Maybe teams around MLB are worried about the two degenerative disc in Roy's lower back.

http://espn.go.com/new-york/mlb/story/_/id/7181719/source-new-york-yankees-scared-roy-oswalt-back-woes

mth123
02-12-2012, 03:45 AM
Maybe teams around MLB are worried about the two degenerative disc in Roy's lower back.

http://espn.go.com/new-york/mlb/story/_/id/7181719/source-new-york-yankees-scared-roy-oswalt-back-woes

No kidding. Its only going to get worse.

Vottomatic
02-12-2012, 08:29 AM
Frankly, if Oswalt is smart, he stays in shape and ready to go, so that when the first true contender that he's willing to play for has a starter go down with season ending injury. Then he'll get close to his asking price. Although if it's 2 or 3 months from now, that team most likely will prorate it for the remaining months.

Boss-Hog
02-13-2012, 02:14 PM
I moved all the recent posts I could find that didn't have anything to do with this topic to its own thread here (http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=93917). Please continue discussing BABIP and Jimmy Anderson in that thread.

Homer Bailey
02-13-2012, 02:17 PM
Can't even call this a rumor, but:

Our friend Johnnie Smith tweeted that Bailey and Francisco are dealt or are to be dealt to Toronto for Thames and prospects, and Oswalt to be signed. So, yeah.

I feel dirty for even posting this "rumor."

gilpdawg
02-13-2012, 02:32 PM
Well, that guarantees that it won't happen. That dude has never been right.

MartyFan
02-13-2012, 02:35 PM
Well, that guarantees that it won't happen. That dude has never been right.

It's not like his name is Gammons, c'mon! :D

Plus Plus
02-13-2012, 04:32 PM
Well, that guarantees that it won't happen. That dude has never been right.

To be fair, I think he was right about Cozart being called up, although that tweet has since been deleted. The big news that he "broke" was that the Reds were going to make a large move at the trade deadline, but that it got vetoed or fell through. He also stated that Votto for Bautista was indeed being discussed, but that Toronto wanted Boxberger and Frazier in addition to Votto and that was a deal breaker (just for some perspective on the poster).

lollipopcurve
02-13-2012, 04:40 PM
I tend to find this idea somewhat plausible. Toronto's a super aggressive team on the trade market, and they need a fifth starter. Reds have been looking for a lefty bat for the OF. The curious piece is Francisco -- Reds kind of need him, unless they are comfortable with Frazier backing up Rolen. And the Jays don't really need Francisco, unless they want to install him at DH. Though if they prefer to move Lawrie to 2B, Francisco could play 3B there. The Reds have never really said they're out on Oswalt, and things have been very quiet on that front -- no new developments -- since it was rumored the Reds were re-engaged. This could be the outcome of the Reds trying to move payroll to fit him.

Then again, it could just be a wily annoyance on Twitter.

Ron Madden
02-13-2012, 04:47 PM
I hope and pray that Oswalt signs with someone else.

RedsManRick
02-13-2012, 04:53 PM
Can't even call this a rumor, but:

Our friend Johnnie Smith tweeted that Bailey and Francisco are dealt or are to be dealt to Toronto for Thames and prospects, and Oswalt to be signed. So, yeah.

I feel dirty for even posting this "rumor."

Interesting. That seems like a high price for a guy who profiles at the plate like a LH Heisey. Hopefully it'd be decent prospects. Can't say I'd be a fan, but I wouldn't complain either.

Ron Madden
02-13-2012, 05:14 PM
From John Fay:

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/reds/2012/02/13/jocketty-expects-no-roster-additions/

Blitz Dorsey
02-14-2012, 12:36 AM
Can't even call this a rumor, but:

Our friend Johnnie Smith tweeted that Bailey and Francisco are dealt or are to be dealt to Toronto for Thames and prospects, and Oswalt to be signed. So, yeah.

I feel dirty for even posting this "rumor."

Oh my goodness. I shouldn't have even read this. Now I'm way more excited than I should be. Allow me to go dry myself off.

This would be so great. I love the idea of "selling" on Bailey while his stock is relatively high. I just don't see him ever being a consistently-good MLB pitcher. I could be way off, but we shall see. This "rumor" probably won't come to fruition, but man it's got my attention. I definitely hope this happens (obviously depending on who exactly the prospects would be that we'd get for Bailey in the trade).

JaxRed
02-14-2012, 12:41 AM
I would feel exactly the opposite. This would be a terrible trade unless the prospects are really incredible.

Blitz Dorsey
02-14-2012, 12:51 AM
I would feel exactly the opposite. This would be a terrible trade unless the prospects are really incredible.

You're probably in the majority and I'm in the minority. I get that. I just think Oswalt has one more great year in him despite the back injury, and if we could insert him into the rotation instead of Bailey, PLUS get some top prospects in return for Bailey, sign me up for that ASAP. Course, as we discussed earlier, it obviously depends on who the prospects are. But just as a theory/idea, I like this. Like it a lot.

Vottomatic
02-14-2012, 08:14 AM
Our friend Johnnie Smith tweeted that Bailey and Francisco are dealt or are to be dealt to Toronto for Thames and prospects, and Oswalt to be signed. So, yeah.

Bailey & Francisco to Toronto for D'Arnaud, Marisnick, Syndergaard, and Nicolino.

klw
02-14-2012, 09:02 AM
Thinking a little differently.
Why not offer Oswalt a minor league contract with an escape day of March 30? If he make the big league club, salary will be x. Advantage to Oswalt would be he can showcase for the Spring and get in pitching shape without getting stuck with a deal he doesn't want. Reds advantages are obvious.

(I doubt Oswalt would do it- yet)

crazybob60
02-14-2012, 09:14 AM
As each day passes, I truly believe that Oswalt is going to retire.

Homer Bailey
02-14-2012, 11:38 AM
I would feel exactly the opposite. This would be a terrible trade unless the prospects are really incredible.

Agreed.

RedlegJake
02-14-2012, 12:36 PM
You're probably in the majority and I'm in the minority. I get that. I just think Oswalt has one more great year in him despite the back injury, and if we could insert him into the rotation instead of Bailey, PLUS get some top prospects in return for Bailey, sign me up for that ASAP. Course, as we discussed earlier, it obviously depends on who the prospects are. But just as a theory/idea, I like this. Like it a lot.

Wow. I'm crazy maybe but I actually have to agree this time, Blitz, depending on the prospect(s), of course, this could be a very interesting trade - I really like Thames. If the prospect was one of Toronto's better young arms (they have several really good ones) I could love this deal.