David Holmberg

[Chuckie]

The fact that Mesoraco is raking early this season takes some pressure off Holmberg, but considering we traded a valuable asset like Hanigan for him, Holmberg's production will still be under the microscope. I cringed when I saw he gave up 6 ER in 0.1 IP today.

I was fully on board with trading Hanigan for a prospect. But could we have done better? Forget about today's start, what do we know about Holmberg? Do you think this was a good trade? I'm sure this has been debated before, but I'm curious to hear some fresh thoughts now that the season has started. No question Hanigan needed to be moved in order to make room for Mesoraco as the everyday catcher. But my question is could Walt have gotten more on his return?

[dougdirt]

Ryan Hanigan had very little trade value. The guy didn't hit his body weight and isn't a starting player (though at his position, there aren't many true starters). But no, I was surprised the Reds got someone like Holmberg back and I am not a big believer in Holmberg being more than a 6th inning reliever/swingman 5th starter.

[marcshoe]

I was hoping he would perform better simply because I don't want to see Jeff Francis called up if there's a need (or Wang for that matter.) Time to really pull for Crabbe and Smith, or for Holmberg to bounce back a bit.

[klw]

It was tough day for Louisville pitching as even the master knuckler Sir Corky yielded 7 in an inning.

[mdccclxix]

While you don't like to see an outing like you stated, it's just one outing. Also, he's a back of the rotation guy. The Reds haven't had one of those in in their rotation in about 4 years. They are unfamiliar to the eye. Back of the rotation guys have bad outings. If they get 20 starts, they'll even out around 4.5 - 5.00 era. One year they might pitch under 4 era. In AAA, I expect he'll end up between 3.4 and 3.8 era at 23 y/o. Is that worth 1 year of 34 year old Ryan Hanigan? I'd say most likely, although it's about even in terms of certainty of production. With Hanigan you know what you're going to get. With Holmberg, you know you'll get something at some point. You trade the major league production in 2014 for the upside of Holmberg over the next 6 years. Holmberg's upside is a solid #5 over the course of 6-7 years, or even a high quality 7th-8th inning setup man. He might have a year or two where he's a solid #4. Maybe a contract year type of thing. But if he flames out as a starter in AAA, I still think he could get people out in the bullpen, as most converted starters with his talent can.

[camisadelgolf]

Having the Reds' defense behind him shouldn't hurt too much either.

[No pants Mcgee]

I think the Reds got excellent value for Hannigan. I doubt Holmberg is ever more than a bullpen guy, or SP depth for the reds in AAA, but that is something they really lacked a season ago. As far as Hannigan goes I think he's a classic case of the old saying when ever you lose something it doubles in value. Nobody showed as much love for Hannigan while he was here.

[Chuckie]

Ryan Hanigan had very little trade value. The guy didn't hit his body weight and isn't a starting player (though at his position, there aren't many true starters). But no, I was surprised the Reds got someone like Holmberg back and I am not a big believer in Holmberg being more than a 6th inning reliever/swingman 5th starter.

But the Rays turned right around and signed Hanigan to a 3-year, $11-million contract. They obviously thought he had some value and they are a very well-run organization.

I think you're right though. We can argue about exactly how much value Hanigan had, but honestly it wasn't all that much. Getting a guy like Holmberg was probably the best we could do. I was hoping to get someone a tad better, but that was probably unrealistic.

I do like that Holmberg is a lefty. But that's about all I like thus far. His numbers in previous years in the minors have been OK. Not a great K rate though, which concerns me.

[RedsManRick]

But the Rays turned right around and signed Hanigan to a 3-year, $11-million contract. They obviously thought he had some value and they are a very well-run organization.

I think you're right though. We can argue about exactly how much value Hanigan had, but honestly it wasn't all that much. Getting a guy like Holmberg was probably the best we could do. I was hoping to get someone a tad better, but that was probably unrealistic.

I do like that Holmberg is a lefty. But that's about all I like thus far. His numbers in previous years in the minors have been OK. Not a great K rate though, which concerns me.

To be fair, a 3-year, $11-million contract says the Rays put a FA price on him of less than 1-win per season. Hanigan probably provides a win in pitch framing alone. If he hits .240/.320/.300, they'll be getting their money's worth and more.

Long relievers are more fungible than elite defensive catchers.

Personally, I'm just happy Mesoraco is going to get 450+ PA.

[Rojo]

I think the Rays were the market for Hanigan. But if Maddon's into him, that does say something.

[camisadelgolf]

Walt moving Hanigan was about A.) creating playing time for Mesoraco; B.) business; and C.) doing a class move to thank Hanigan for his time in Cincinnati.

Hanigan was traded to a team willing to give him both more money and playing time, and once it was decided to move on to Mesoraco, I'm sure that was the only condition Jocketty was willing to do that trade. At that point, it was simply a matter of getting the right prospect in return, which is why the Diamondbacks got involved.

The Rays supposedly value pitch framing more than anyone else, so good on Walt for getting Hanigan to a spot where Hanigan can compete and be appreciated. In the process, he got a pitcher that will likely be useful. That's not too bad of a return when you consider the Reds were too classy to put themselves in a position of having leverage or trading him to a team that would've kept him on the bench.

[OGB]

To me, one of the hallmarks of a really well run organization is knowing when to part with competent, expensive veterans and make way for cheap, home grown, big upside prospects. The Reds doubled down on that this off-season with Arroyo/Cingrani and Hanigan/Mesaroco.
Maybe they could've gotten more return but I doubt it.
I think it was time to pull those triggers, though, and I feel good that both players will pan out.

[Chuckie]

To me, one of the hallmarks of a really well run organization is knowing when to part with competent, expensive veterans and make way for cheap, home grown, big upside prospects. The Reds doubled down on that this off-season with Arroyo/Cingrani and Hanigan/Mesaroco.
Maybe they could've gotten more return but I doubt it.
I think it was time to pull those triggers, though, and I feel good that both players will pan out.

No question it was time to part with both Hanigan and Arroyo. I just think Hanigan had some value and hopefully we got more in return than a guy that struggles at the AAA level.

[RedTeamGo!]

"struggles at the AAA level"

he is 23 and it was one bad start.

[kaldaniels]

How is the defense portion of a catcher's WAR figured? I mean in just a few games Hanigan still has an awful bat, but somehow the metrics of his defense have given him a positive WAR.