Originally Posted by acredsfan
Wow, he's kinda hung up on the Bedard for Bruce thing. Why would the Reds, who have made such a big emphasis on rebuilding the farm system, especially under Krivsky, make that move? It seems wrong to me, especially considering it wouldn't be a striaght up move, especially since the Orioles have been asking for the sky. He said they need 3 solid 30 start pitchers... Great, but Bedard only did that once. He's a health risk... He doesn't pitch 200 innings, EVER. Yeah, he's above average talent wise, but Bruce is too. Of course Bedard has shown he can utilize his talent at the major league level when his health allows him, but I don't want a guy who is going to become a chronic injury problem.
I don't think he's arguing that the Reds should
trade Bruce for Bedard. I just think he's entertaining the idea because, from a "win now" perspective, landing Erik Bedard makes a lot of sense within the current Harang-Arroyo-Cordero window. The signing of Cordero is most likely to be a good investment for the first two years, when most project him to continue producing at his current level, anchoring down the late innings for the bullpen. Given that we've already acquired this pricey piece of the puzzle, we still probably need one more 30-inning starters to sniff the playoffs. And so, as the title of his piece suggests, Bedard would seem to be the best fit on the market for Cincinnati's needs
I can't say I disagree with the premise of his argument. Landing Bedard would be a good idea and would probably make the Reds a playoff contender. Trading Bruce is very risky proposition... and yet doing so must be heavily considered given the investment in Cordero that is already on the books. Wayne and the FO have put themselves in an in-between position here... and I think you could argue it's time to fish instead of cutting expensive bait.
Then again, this topic has already been covered ad nauseum
on other threads, so I'll stop here.