Why not?
According to mlbtraderumors.com
The dodgers are talking to boston about Kemp for Lester. Even though Lester would be only a 2 month rental. Sounds like Dodgers are willing to eat some of his salary also.
Why not Kemp? Right handed , young , under contract, Dodgers are willing to pay some salary. We can't resign all of our starters anyways and one of our starters would be for this season and next.
We are talking about taking on Byrd"s 8 million for two more seasons. Why not Kemp?
I'd trade Bailey for him straight up, contract for contract.
Hoping to change my username to 75769024
If this was 2011 Matt Kemp, sure. But it's not. It's the injury-prone, .270-hitting with no power, no range in the outfield/zero defense Matt Kemp. Basically, he's a younger Ryan Ludwick, although I presume Matt still runs faster. Plus, he's owed $107 million more in money after this season. The Dodgers would have to assume at least 3/5 of that before I'd even consider a trade (and that assumes we do not have to give up one of our young prospects like Stephenson or Winkler to get him). Otherwise, no.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and [the St. Louis Cardinals]."--Benjamin Disraeli
Who takes his place in the rotation?Originally Posted by 757690
Have them throw in Maholm or Haren. Besides, it would be a deal aimed at 2015 and beyond more than 2014.
Hoping to change my username to 75769024
Agreed I wouldn't do it unless the Dodgers are going to pay part of salary and according to mlbtraderumors.com it sounds like they are and yes this move would be geared toward next year and beyond.. Face it .. we are not making the playoffs this year.
and by looking at Kemp's numbers he would rank in the top 4 on our team in all categories HR, RBI, BA, OPS, OBP, SLG, Hits, Doubles, Triples, and Runs… Would lead us in doubles.
plus he isn't getting to play everyday.. that must be hard staying in a groove and not counting the Plate appearances he is missing.
Homer Bailey is not going to be traded any time soon.
I like the Kemp idea but the money doesn't work. Even at 60% being paid by LA he's still owed more than BP. And he'd increase the down the road payroll for older players that is already pretty tenuous. Plus the rumor mill has the Red Sox and Mariners in play so the Reds would be competing for him against much higher payroll capable teams. Also, they didn't sign Homer to a LT contract just to trade him - a mediocre season won't scare them into dumping him.
99% of all numbers only tell 33% of the story so when looking at the numbers remember that numbers is plural...
Odd that you say that because I was just thinking last night that he might be the one guy out of Latos, Cueto, Leake and Bailey that I would want to trade. Is the contract the reason you're saying that? I could see the logic behind saying we signed him at too high a rate so other teams wouldn't want that contract. Which makes me also see the logic behind giving him to an LA or NYY that don't seem to care too much about price tags as long as the player is productive.
I think we made a huge mistake to signing him. Not to mention setting a huge precedent for mediocre pitchers money on the open market.
Steven, nothing is higher than an architect.
But that precedent was set by the rest of the market before homer and the reds even set down.
Honestly, you can make an argument that the reds should not have signed bailey.
You can't honestly look at the free agent pitching market and call homer's contract out of line.
"Even a bad day at the ballpark beats the snot out of most other good days. I'll take my scorecard and pencil and beer and hot dog and rage at the dips and cheer at the highs, but I'm not ever going to stop loving this game and this team and nobody will ever take that away from me." Roy Tucker October 2010
I think bailey will throw 1 more no hitters but will end up with a career 4 something era he is like bruce at the plate alot of hot and cold streaks
I didn't realize our outfield was this bad until I saw this table.
In my private opinion, we need two outfielders, not just a LF.Code:OPS 2013 2014 Differential C .616 .838 +222 1B .904 .737 -167 2B .695 .674 -21 3B .702 .754 +52 SS .646 .583 -63 LF .687 .685 -2 CF .862 .650 -212 RF .812 .666 -146
I don't think that if the Reds are genuinely serious about contending next year, they can afford to carry a CF whose values are derived only from the defense. We already have two (Cozart and Phillips) and that's enough.
Posting Permissions
|
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |
