Originally Posted by RedsIn07
Just out of curiosity why are you for Pena than Kearns, do you feel that Pena is more likely to reach his ceiling than Kearns?
Austin so far has shown a Willie Greenesque commitment to the game. He's got talent for it, but he's put on a dog the past two-plus years. Rarely will you see a player react worse to an injury than Austin did after Ray King used him like a hemorrhoid cushion.
One thing that impresses me about Pena is that he works hard. Plus, I think he's got a higher ceiling. Keep Kearns in 2006 and, unless he changes his act, you've got a guy with middling power whose OB and defense have been in retreat since he debuted in 2002. Honestly, if Austin's in a Reds uniform he doesn't have to care until 2007, his contract year. If that's all the team's going to get out of him then I'm not that interested. I suspect a trade might shake him up and give him something to prove, but that doesn't help the Reds.
If you keep Pena in 2006 and he might hit 40 HR. He's got big power in a steroid-free game. He's also Reds property for the next three years.
So I figure the Reds stand to get more out of Pena. I like the idea of his power behind Adam Dunn. Though you've got to play him in CF, where he oddly seems to have a clue.