Re: Dexter Fowler
Originally Posted by RedEye
No one is saying this right now - but isn't there a chance that Billy Hamilton doesn't work out? That his bat doesn't end up playing in the big leagues? If so, then it makes sense to get a guy like Fowler, who is under club control till 2016 and complements the pieces already in place on the major league roster. He's both a current fix and a potential longer term solution to the team's problems. If Billy succeeds, then the team has a downright scary top of the lineup in front of Votto, Bruce and Frazier. If not, well, they've got Fowler - and that, to my mind, is a good thing. Not getting Fowler because Hamilton "is going to come up and dominate by September 2013" seems like like a iffy approach to me. I want the Reds to be good in April 2013.
No question that Hamilton could flop. Thing is, there is also a pretty decent chance that Aroldis Chapman in the rotation doesn't work out either. The Reds won 97 games last year with the problems we have in CF. They were below .500 when the rotation was weak. Nobody is a bigger skeptic where Stubbs is concerned than I am, but that position can be improved quite a bit by dealing spare parts and minor leaguers for the right role player(s). The Rotation should be kept strong with only a deal being considered if its an offer we can't refuse. That is not a guy who is a question mark away from his home park and a question mark defensively. The Reds don't need more guys who are Superman at home and Lois Lane on the road. Even if GABP would approximate Coors, I'd prefer a more consistent performer if I'm giving up a guy like Homer. The Reds can get flawed guys who can provide situationally dependent production for a fraction of that cost.
"All I can tell them is pick a good one and sock it." --BABE RUTH
Having better players makes "the right time" or "the big hit" happen a lot more often. PLUS PLUS
Last edited by mth123; 12-03-2012 at 10:02 PM.