How The Reds Quietly Won At The Winter Meetings

[Krusty]

Interesting read:

http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/just-a-...bleacherreport

[REDREAD]

Yes, I am not sure if we "Won" compared to the other teams, but the Reds did darn good.
Shed salary, added 4 young players, 2 of which are ML ready. And one of those ML ready guys is a SS that had minor league numbers approximating Didi.
Can't really ask for more than that.

[Falls City Beer]

They shed contracts, which is what they set out to do. They got some inexpensive middling talent. So not bad, I suppose.

Nevertheless, I dislike the notion that these deals represent "winning" anything (even the metaphorical notion of winning and losing trades/offseasons is kind of ridiculous). This team is still pretty bad. Just less expensive.

[corkedbat]

They have won nothing unless they address the gaping holes in the roster. I might buy in if they can successfully address LF, a 4th OF and the bullpen.

[toledodan]

Yes, I am not sure if we "Won" compared to the other teams, but the Reds did darn good.
Shed salary, added 4 young players, 2 of which are ML ready. And one of those ML ready guys is a SS that had minor league numbers approximating Didi.
Can't really ask for more than that.

if anything detroit media thinks they over paid for simon.

[REDREAD]

They shed contracts, which is what they set out to do. They got some inexpensive middling talent. So not bad, I suppose.

Nevertheless, I dislike the notion that these deals represent "winning" anything (even the metaphorical notion of winning and losing trades/offseasons is kind of ridiculous). This team is still pretty bad. Just less expensive.

If the premise was that this team is "pretty bad", then the Simon and Latos trades look even better, IMO. Why tie up money in having those guys for one more year if the team is bad?

I know you weren't expecting much for Simon (no one was). I think some people were disappointed with what Latos returned, but the guy still is hurt.

Honestly, if Descalso becomes a solid #5 starter or a middle reliever as valuable as Simon was, we did ok on the Latos trade. If Latos is healthy, the Marlins probably "win", but that doesn't necessarily mean the Reds lose.

[REDREAD]

if anything detroit media thinks they over paid for simon.

Yep. Seems like a great chance Suarez at bare minimum can be the Cozart for the next few years. Cozart is going to start getting expensive eventually, just due to service time.
Great fit for the Reds. How long have we craved a young SS with some upside. I doubt Suarez becomes an allstar, but the Reds need young guys like him to be able to pay the star players.

[Trajinous]

They shed contracts, which is what they set out to do. They got some inexpensive middling talent. So not bad, I suppose.

Nevertheless, I dislike the notion that these deals represent "winning" anything (even the metaphorical notion of winning and losing trades/offseasons is kind of ridiculous). This team is still pretty bad. Just less expensive.

I vehemently disagree that this team is bad. 2013 and 2014 were practically the same team, the only difference were the injuries sustained during 2014. This is a playoff team if healthy.

[Kc61]

I vehemently disagree that this team is bad. 2013 and 2014 were practically the same team, the only difference were the injuries sustained during 2014. This is a playoff team if healthy.

So I guess the goal is to be the 2013 team which collapsed down the stretch and lost badly in the wild card game with the owner publicly leaving the ballpark and the manager being fired.

I agree that the Reds are not "bad." The Reds are pretty good, if healthy.

But the goal shouldn't be pretty good.

[REDREAD]

But the goal shouldn't be pretty good.

Different people have different goals. I am not a fan of fan of the A's blowing themselves up this offseason too.
I would be furious if the Reds did that.
And you could say the A's were only "pretty good".

1999 was one of my favorite seasons with the Reds, and they didn't even make the playoffs.
The were just a pretty good team also.

Not saying you are wrong, but different people want different things out of the Reds.
The winter trades help keep the Reds interesting. I do hope more moves are coming, but even if there is no LF this year, it's a team worth watching.

[dougdirt]

So I guess the goal is to be the 2013 team which collapsed down the stretch and lost badly in the wild card game with the owner publicly leaving the ballpark and the manager being fired.

I agree that the Reds are not "bad." The Reds are pretty good, if healthy.

But the goal shouldn't be pretty good.

With how the playoffs go, the goal should be to be pretty good. Get to the playoffs and hope the ball rolls your way.

The Cincinnati Reds just can't be the Dodgers/Cubs/Yankees/Red Sox and just spend more money than everyone else. That's not realistic. So for the Cincinnati Reds the goal should be to be pretty good every year and hope you catch the bounces in the playoffs. I have to wonder, and not specifically towards you KC, but in general, if the Reds had won a playoff series but still not have reached the World Series over the last few years, if people would have a slightly different outlook on reaching the playoffs as being a goal. There'd be something they could look back on as playoffs being successful rather than a total and complete embarrassment given how things have gone in two of the three trips.

[_Sir_Charles_]

I vehemently disagree that this team is bad. 2013 and 2014 were practically the same team, the only difference were the injuries sustained during 2014. This is a playoff team if healthy.

Agreed. I don't get the "woe is me" crowd around here.

[villain612]

Goal should be to win the division and avoid the play in game but ultimately, just getting to the playoffs is most important.

In the last 15 years, Cincinnati has made the playoffs a total of 3 times. They haven't won a title under Walt, but the losing stench of the lost decade is over.

Take a look at the Cardinals from the early 2000's. They had 5 playoff appearances with no title (multiple 100+ win teams). Then they won it all with an 83 win team. Baseball is a funny game.

[Kc61]

With how the playoffs the goal should be to be pretty good. Get to the playoffs and hope the ball rolls your way.

The Cincinnati Reds just can't be the Dodgers/Cubs/Yankees/Red Sox and just spend more money than everyone else. That's not realistic. So for the Cincinnati Reds the goal should be to be pretty good every year and hope you catch the bounces in the playoffs. I have to wonder, and not specifically towards you KC, but in general, if the Reds had won a playoff series but still not have reached the World Series over the last few years, if people would have a slightly different outlook on reaching the playoffs as being a goal. There'd be something they could look back on as playoffs being successful rather than a total and complete embarrassment given how things have gone in two of the three trips.

I just don't agree that "pretty good" is the goal. The goal for me is "solid contender." One of the best teams in baseball, although likely behind the top two or three in talent level and depth.

Maybe it's a definitional difference. But I think the Reds have been spending enough money to get there.

My view is that the 2013 and 2014 Reds failed to reach this level. Not because of salary issues, but because of a lack of creativity and a devotion to certain players. The 2013 team, in particular, might have been a solid contender all season with a couple of creative in-season moves.

My goal is to have a team I expect to be competitive in playoffs. Not a team that barely gets in, or like in 2013 limps in. Understanding fully that luck will play a role.

[Falls City Beer]

"Pretty good" would get you a spot in the playoffs when it was just the Reds and Cards as the only relevant teams. Those days are gone. On paper there are four better teams than the Reds in their own division. Yeah, lots of parity, true, but it's a position that's not likely to improve without infusions of talent.