Originally Posted by texasdave
My point of view is that if teams that were as good as or better than the Reds in 2012 (i.e. Washington and Atlanta) are filling their OF needs with top tier players, then I don't care how many 2nd and 3rd tier OFs that Cincinnati can get cheaply.
I think the Reds were lucky in 2012 to come up with 97 wins. They way outplayed their Pythag, their starters didn't miss a turn and they won't have 15-18 games against the Astros in 2013. I think we need to get the better players to stay in the hunt. Not settle for leftovers.
So, I certainly find no solace in the fact that the big names are signing with other contending teams and the Reds will get some relative table scraps cheaply.
We can debate the luck of the Reds all day and never come to an agreement. I'll just say this, they were projected to win 91 games according to the Pythag. It's not like they were projected to win 70 and won 97.
The Reds obviously found the cost prohibitive on Span. They couldn't pay for Hunter or Upton anyway. Again, I'm not saying "Let all the good free agents go so we can get the scraps!" The point is that other guys may come affordable if they are still sitting around with few options. Or they could get both Ludwick and Victorino. Rather than overpaying (which is what you have to do to sign someone this early in free agency) they may get guys for under market value.
Will they be as good on paper as the Nationals with Ludwick and Victorino? No, but would the Reds be better than the Nationals if they traded for Span and the Nationals went ahead and signed Hamilton or Bourn? Fact is, Washington has a huge checkbook for free agents. The Reds don't. They can't compare themselves to them. They must concentrate on making themselves better.