Re: Should the Reds re-sign Wilson for 2005?
Originally Posted by oregonred
Agree -- Wilson one year at 3-3.5M. I'd almost consider him a must sign unless the Reds get a killer deal at the deadline this season. Reds have no other viable rotation options in waiting for April 2005 and they need THREE rotation spots filled next season -- and that assumes Claussen/Harang are your two. Moseley maybe can help in '05.
In any event, the Reds need a quality #3 veteran presence. I'm skeptical you'll find anything better than Wilson bottom-fishing on a 1 yr deal -- I think the market for viable arms is going higher in the offseason due to the attendance spike and increased parity. My guess is someone would offer Wilson a 2 yr deal and that's why the F.O. needs to move fast and ship him out if he's not signable.
Hope is that by 2006 the promising wave of Nelson/Moseley/Gardner/Pauly allows you higher upside guys to fill out your rotation holes.
Assuming you can't do better, signing mediocrity, hoping for young pitchers to pan out. Haven't we been here before? Wasn't DanO brought in to change things?
Investing in a #3-4 guy and gambling on #1 and #2 doesn't strike me as all that sound an idea when you could invest in #1 and possibly a #2 and gamble on that #3-4 guy.
Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong
I'm witchcrafting everybody.
Last edited by M2; 07-23-2004 at 04:58 PM.