PDA

View Full Version : Josh Willingham and Ben Revere



rgslone
11-15-2012, 09:58 PM
What about a deal with the Twins for Josh Willingham and Ben Revere. That could fix the LF and CF issue for next season and beyond if so desired. Plus the Twins are willing to deal, can afford to lose both these players, and are in dire need of pitching and a SS. Is Bailey and Stubbs for Willingham and Stubbs a fair trade? Or what about Cozart and Cingrani?

HometownHero
11-15-2012, 11:19 PM
Why would they want Stubbs or be willing deal a the league minimum player like Revere who hit .294 with 40 steals to get him?

rgslone
11-15-2012, 11:47 PM
Why would they want Stubbs or be willing deal a the league minimum player like Revere who hit .294 with 40 steals to get him?

Well, first the Twins already have Span in CF, and I beleive they also have a CF prospect in the minors they are high on. The Twins view Span as a more valuable trade commodity than Revere and would certainly want more if he was in a trade rather than Revere. Secondly, the Twins desperately need and want pitching, and their budget dictates they get it via trade rather than free agency. Bailey is a 26 yr. old power pitcher coming into his own with a 3.68 ERA and a perfect game last season. Of course the Twins would crave Bailey. As far as Stubbs - he's a throw in really. But he does hit LH pitching ok, and Span is a LH hitter - so maybe the Twins would view him as having some value as a 4th outfielder. Finally, this would also free up a few million for the Twins that they could use to get a stop-gap SS. Besides, Willingham is 33 or 34 years old, and Revere is certainly not some untouchable star - in fact, he's redundant for them, but he could hopefully fill our need in CF.

HometownHero
11-16-2012, 12:10 AM
Revere has high trade value since he can play CF, is cheap as can be and had a good year. They would no doubt have interest in Homer but would want no part of Drew at all.

People here always want to dump Drew off on teams in every trade but he has a borderline negative trade value right now. He had a terrible year and has a terrible line of the road with .221/.294/.337/.630 in his career and is now heading into arbitration where he's going to get a default boost in pay despite the poor play unless non-tendered. If Drew got moved in a trade it would be as a 3rd player filler or as just a dump off for a fringe prospect or someone else under achiever.

New York Red
11-16-2012, 12:31 AM
As a Lexington, KY native, I would love seeing Ben Revere in a Reds uniform. It won't happen, but I can dream. I know Ben would love that too.

herbdizzle
11-16-2012, 01:03 AM
I think targeting Willingham & Revere as a package is a good idea. However, I think in order to get close to a deal you have to overload on offering them pitching. I would try a deal of Bailey, Corcino, & a bullpen arm from Lecure/Ondrusek/Massett. A solid major league ready starter, a high level AAA starter prospect, and an established late inning reliever might get it done.

MoneyInTheBank
11-16-2012, 07:16 AM
Revere has high trade value since he can play CF, is cheap as can be and had a good year. They would no doubt have interest in Homer but would want no part of Drew at all.

People here always want to dump Drew off on teams in every trade but he has a borderline negative trade value right now. He had a terrible year and has a terrible line of the road with .221/.294/.337/.630 in his career and is now heading into arbitration where he's going to get a default boost in pay despite the poor play unless non-tendered. If Drew got moved in a trade it would be as a 3rd player filler or as just a dump off for a fringe prospect or someone else under achiever.

Stubbs literally may have been the worst hitter in baseball last season

rgslone
11-16-2012, 09:58 AM
Why the obssession with the Stubbs part of my proposal? I said he's a throw in, I have no delusion that the Reds would be able to "trick" the Twins on Stubbs. So, if just the name Stubbs makes you see red and you can't think beyond that, well throw somebody else's name out there - but, in my opinion, it shouldn't be a much more than a throw in. Bailey should be pretty close to enough. Sure, in a perfect world the Twins would like to keep Willingham, but he's not in their long-term plans. By the same token, the Reds would darn sure like to keep Bailey too, but you have to give up something to get something. Bailey for Willingham straight-up, in my opinion, is not a fair trade for the Reds.

It seems that there is this mindset that Reds have to always over pay to get anybody to trade with them. Well, look at how many games the Twins won verses the Reds and then tell me who's more desperate to make a trade to improve their team. Revere is a bit player. He played RF for the Twins and his power makes Billy Hamilton look like Babe Ruth. Do you think that the Twins would rather part with Span than Revere? If so, please swap Span as part of my trade proposal as fast as possible. But I think Revere can (and I know Span could) fill our need in CF next year. Then, when Hamilton is ready, use Revere as trade-bait.

But I've digressed horribly. My point is the Twins look like a good trading partner to me. Like the Reds, their best opportunity to improve is via a trade, rather than free agency. And they have players they're willing to move - and they're going to move to somebody - for pitching (their 1st priority) and a SS (their 2nd priority).

HometownHero
11-16-2012, 10:35 AM
We don't have to overpay but we sure as hell aren't going to underpay for cost controlled players who produce. You do know how many teams would like to have a 24yo guy making the league minimum who can hit in the .290's steal 40 bases and play plus defense right?

If we traded for Willingham's bat we would be forced to overpay for a CF to make up for him being one the worst OF in MLB right now. And that's only going to get worse the older he gets the next couple years.

swaisuc
11-16-2012, 10:54 AM
I'm going to be on an island based on last season, but I don't like anything about Revere's game. I think he's more Willy T than his BA last year suggests. .642 OPS so far in his career after last year's breakout. Stubbs OPS by comparison is .698. Both are pretty terrible offensively and can steal some bases and play defense. Neither cost much money. I really don't see the point.

Willingham I'd be interested in, but if we're going to pay his contract, why not just spend that money on a FA or bringing back Ludwick and keep our players?

HometownHero
11-16-2012, 11:17 AM
I'm going to be on an island based on last season, but I don't like anything about Revere's game. I think he's more Willy T than his BA last year suggests. .642 OPS so far in his career after last year's breakout. Stubbs OPS by comparison is .698. Both are pretty terrible offensively and can steal some bases and play defense. Neither cost much money. I really don't see the point.

He is 24yo and a perfect top of the order hitter he only swung and missed in 8.4% of his swings that was 2nd to his teammate Span's 8.2 in the AL. He will be 25 to start next year and has 74 steals to just 100 K's in 989 AB.

When looking for a CF there is more than OPS as we are talking about a guy who was 15th in the AL in batting this year and 3rd in SB, we need OBP and Revere posted a .383 OBP despite getting pushed up their system quick so there is only room to keep getting better. Look at what he's done in the minors to what Hamilton's done.

Minor League Numbers
.289/.364/.389/.753 in 1711 PA for BH
.326/.383/.404/.787 in 1755 PA for BR

rgslone
11-16-2012, 01:55 PM
I'm going to be on an island based on last season, but I don't like anything about Revere's game. I think he's more Willy T than his BA last year suggests. .642 OPS so far in his career after last year's breakout. Stubbs OPS by comparison is .698. Both are pretty terrible offensively and can steal some bases and play defense. Neither cost much money. I really don't see the point.

Willingham I'd be interested in, but if we're going to pay his contract, why not just spend that money on a FA or bringing back Ludwick and keep our players?

You have good points. Just looking statistically at last season and factoring in that Willingham had about 100 more abs than Ludwig, he doesn't appear to be that much of an offensive upgrade over Ludwig. Further, if his defense is as horrible as another poster suggested (I admit I know nothing about his defense), then I think I would rather have Ludwig also - assuming the Reds think he could get close to repeating last years numbers and his price & years demands are comparable to what the Reds would have to eat with Willingham.

I'm just spitballing, trying to think up possible remedies for the LF, CF and lead-off issues. By no means am I suggesting that Willingham and Revere are the only solution, or even the best solution - I just think the stars may be aligned so that it is a possible solution.

MoneyInTheBank
11-16-2012, 02:14 PM
Why the obssession with the Stubbs part of my proposal? I said he's a throw in, I have no delusion that the Reds would be able to "trick" the Twins on Stubbs. So, if just the name Stubbs makes you see red and you can't think beyond that, well throw somebody else's name out there - but, in my opinion, it shouldn't be a much more than a throw in. Bailey should be pretty close to enough. Sure, in a perfect world the Twins would like to keep Willingham, but he's not in their long-term plans. By the same token, the Reds would darn sure like to keep Bailey too, but you have to give up something to get something. Bailey for Willingham straight-up, in my opinion, is not a fair trade for the Reds.

It seems that there is this mindset that Reds have to always over pay to get anybody to trade with them. Well, look at how many games the Twins won verses the Reds and then tell me who's more desperate to make a trade to improve their team. Revere is a bit player. He played RF for the Twins and his power makes Billy Hamilton look like Babe Ruth. Do you think that the Twins would rather part with Span than Revere? If so, please swap Span as part of my trade proposal as fast as possible. But I think Revere can (and I know Span could) fill our need in CF next year. Then, when Hamilton is ready, use Revere as trade-bait.

But I've digressed horribly. My point is the Twins look like a good trading partner to me. Like the Reds, their best opportunity to improve is via a trade, rather than free agency. And they have players they're willing to move - and they're going to move to somebody - for pitching (their 1st priority) and a SS (their 2nd priority).

But why give him away? In Stubbs, you have a guy who was a high draft pick, has all the tools you want, plays a premium position very well and actually hit well against LHP. By giving him away, that's the definition of buying high and selling low. Why not try to put him in positions to succeed (i.e. hit him against LHP only) and have a useful player who can platoon with a cheap option who can't hit lefties (like Rick Ankiel), you can keep Bailey and pursue Willingham with a lesser player like you said earlier

HometownHero
11-16-2012, 02:21 PM
This is the list of teams that wish it had Ben Revere on its roster...
http://mlb.mlb.com/team/

rgslone
11-16-2012, 02:23 PM
HometownHero, Revere is kind of a home town boy (he's from Lexington, KY), so maybe he's related to you - or maybe not? Regardless, I think you way over value the market value of Revere. And those who follow the Twins agree with me (see: http://www.startribune.com/sports/twins/blogs/177464591.html). Revere could potentially be 4th on the depth chart of Twins CF options (behind Span, Aaron Hicks, and Joe Benson). If Ben Revere is just too good to put in a trade for Homer Bailey, then the Reds better just forget about it and go with what they have because the CF market is just too expensive (on the other hand, if that's the case, maybe the Reds can get at least a bucket of balls for Stubbs).

Nevertheless, while we do certainly disagree about Revere's market value, where I actually do agree with you is in your affection for Revere as a CF option. I love guys at the top of the batting order who don't strike out (e.g., Juan Pierre) - but I understand that I may overvalue these kind of players due to my borderline obsession with strikeouts. So, while you and I (and I'm sure others) like Revere, I don't think the market as a whole feels the same way.

HometownHero
11-16-2012, 02:29 PM
I think you way over value the market value of Revere.

24yo, good defense that can play at a plus at all 3 OF spots, speed, has bat control who can bat at the top of the order and can hit both LH and RHP and is cheap. This is a player every single team in the majors wants.

rgslone
11-16-2012, 02:42 PM
But why give him away? In Stubbs, you have a guy who was a high draft pick, has all the tools you want, plays a premium position very well and actually hit well against LHP. By giving him away, that's the definition of buying high and selling low. Why not try to put him in positions to succeed (i.e. hit him against LHP only) and have a useful player who can platoon with a cheap option who can't hit lefties (like Rick Ankiel), you can keep Bailey and pursue Willingham with a lesser player like you said earlier

Money, if the Reds can pull that off I'm ok with that. I'm not in love with Willingham, I'm just a Reds fan trying to think of realistic possiblities for my team to get better.

Also, I understand every point you make about Stubbs because I've argued most of those same things too in the past (e.g., "if the Reds would just hit him 6th or lower in the line-up", "if they would just use him against LH pitchers", etc."). But I just finally gave in to what I always felt was true in the back of my mind (even when I followed him in the minors) - and that is this: Stubbs can't hit, he has never hit, and he will never hit. He just can't make enough contact and it's not his fault - he doesn't have the skill set to do it (including, maybe most importantly, pitch recognition) and it's not something he can learn. He has a lot of other skills, but making contact will never be one. But keep up the faith, I hope you're right and I'm wrong.

rgslone
11-16-2012, 02:44 PM
24yo, good defense that can play at a plus at all 3 OF spots, speed, has bat control who can bat at the top of the order and can hit both LH and RHP and is cheap. This is a player every single team in the majors wants.

As I said, I like him too.

MoneyInTheBank
11-16-2012, 04:36 PM
Money, if the Reds can pull that off I'm ok with that. I'm not in love with Willingham, I'm just a Reds fan trying to think of realistic possiblities for my team to get better.

Also, I understand every point you make about Stubbs because I've argued most of those same things too in the past (e.g., "if the Reds would just hit him 6th or lower in the line-up", "if they would just use him against LH pitchers", etc."). But I just finally gave in to what I always felt was true in the back of my mind (even when I followed him in the minors) - and that is this: Stubbs can't hit, he has never hit, and he will never hit. He just can't make enough contact and it's not his fault - he doesn't have the skill set to do it (including, maybe most importantly, pitch recognition) and it's not something he can learn. He has a lot of other skills, but making contact will never be one. But keep up the faith, I hope you're right and I'm wrong.

I have no problem with you making a trade proposal. I simply offered my own spin on it, no reason to go on the defensive.

As far as Stubbs goes, I'm not sure you'll find a bigger Stubbs hater than myself. I think you have misunderstood my post. I'm saying, why attach him to Bailey just to get rid of him? So my post was "keep Bailey", not "keep Stubbs". I'd rather keep him for a year, try and put some lipstick on him, so to speak, and see if someone will bite instead of trading him for a bag of balls or attaching him to a good player just to get rid of him.

rgslone
11-16-2012, 05:05 PM
I have no problem with you making a trade proposal. I simply offered my own spin on it, no reason to go on the defensive.

As far as Stubbs goes, I'm not sure you'll find a bigger Stubbs hater than myself. I think you have misunderstood my post. I'm saying, why attach him to Bailey just to get rid of him? So my post was "keep Bailey", not "keep Stubbs". I'd rather keep him for a year, try and put some lipstick on him, so to speak, and see if someone will bite instead of trading him for a bag of balls or attaching him to a good player just to get rid of him.

If I came across that way Money, I apologize. I recall reading a number of your posts and they were well thought out and polite discussion that I enjoyed. I'll try to do better (and I mean that, I'm not being snarky).

MoneyInTheBank
11-16-2012, 05:20 PM
If I came across that way Money, I apologize. I recall reading a number of your posts and they were well thought out and polite discussion that I enjoyed. I'll try to do better (and I mean that, I'm not being snarky).

No need to apologize at all. I appreciate the kind words

rgslone
12-06-2012, 02:16 PM
Well, Revere is now off the board as a 2013 CF option for the Reds. But, Willingham is still available. Do you like him better than Ludwig? His total cost [e.g., $7M salary + player/prospect(s) in trade] would be more than Ludwig [approx. $8M salary]. Which would you prefer?

Larkin88
12-06-2012, 03:07 PM
Ludwick.

Bonzo
12-06-2012, 03:10 PM
Well, Revere is now off the board as a 2013 CF option for the Reds. But, Willingham is still available. Do you like him better than Ludwig? His total cost [e.g., $7M salary + player/prospect(s) in trade] would be more than Ludwig [approx. $8M salary]. Which would you prefer?

Willingham is the better player by a small margin, but he'll cost a good amount of talent to acquire. Since Ludwick will get roughly the same salary, but at no additional cost, he's preferable.