if you have to trade one of them it should be Bailey to the Pirates. He owns that ball park and they should pay a premium to get him given that fact.
Printable View
if you have to trade one of them it should be Bailey to the Pirates. He owns that ball park and they should pay a premium to get him given that fact.
I think with Madson, Broxton and Masset all as possible options next season, along with Marshall and Hoover being back in the fray, I like the odds of finding someone to be closer.
Even if they only sign one of Broxton or Madson, I think they'll be in good shape.
Exposed? Pedestrian? Dude has a 8:1 strikeout to walk ratio. I don't see where those terms should even be in the vocabulary.
There are no secrets. Teams know he's throwing a fastball 90% of the time. Yet he had a career-best 18.2% swinging strike rate this year -- second best only to Kimbrel. That's not pedestrian, that's flat out dominant.
Literally, if he only were half as effective as a starter, you're talking a 4:10 strikeout to walk ratio. That's amazing for a starting pitcher. That puts him in such company as: Felix Hernandez, C.C. Sabathia, Stephen Strasburg, Cole Hamels, Justin Verlander and Madison Bumgarner who all own a rate right around 4.0. Again, pedestrian?
But that ignores the possibility of him using his changeup, which the Reds say he has (and used a few times later in the year) and it becomes a plus third pitch.
I just don't see the downside here. Aroldis could lose so much production and still be a better starter than Bailey or Leake. There is so much margin for error there. And let's not forget, he signed with the Reds as a starter. He pitched most of 2010 as a starter. This isn't much of an experiment.
The Reds could throw him in winter ball, as they intended to do last year, and be able to gauge his progress by spring. So they won't have to make a decision without having some sort of knowledge how it will turn out. Nonetheless, I think you're underestimating the value of Bailey. His stats, on the whole, are OK but most parks, Bailey would play pretty well (as his road ERA suggests). I find it hard to believe they couldn't get a decent starter in return for him.
I tonight Leake has most of his options left. He's only been sent down once.
And the Reds were lucky this year in only needing 5 (plus one) starters all year. Very few teams start the season with the five starters they penciled in at the start of spring training.
I'm guessing the Reds keep all their starters, try Chapman as a starter in spring training, and worry about a glut if and when it happens before opening day.
No problem at all. It comes from the Major League Rules;
Rule 10 Waivers
10(b) When Waivers Are Required For Assignment
Leake first reported, if memory serves me correctly, on April 10, 2010. So his clock would expire April 11, 2013. Since he did not burn an option in any prior season, no seasons would be deducted from that date as mentioned in the rule.Quote:
(3) Optional assignment waivers. Optional assignment waivers are required for an optional assignment from a Major League Club to a Minor League Club only if the date of assignment is three or more years after the date the player first reported to a Major League Club during a championship season. One year shall be deducted from the above three-year period for each season in which the player may have been charged with an option prior to the championship season in which the player first reports to a Major League Club.
There have been rumors that while this is done out of procedure, there is a 'gentlemen's agreement' that other GMs don't make claims on option waivers. I don't know if that's true or not, but I do know the rule itself is strictly enforced.