Astros "looking hard" at Iglesias

[podgejeff_]

Houston and Cleveland can also look elsewhere as well if the price is too high. I agree the Reds need to do well if they trade Iglesias and that they don't have to trade him, but at the same time Houston and Cleveland also need to do what is right for their teams. If it doesn't work with the Reds, they can look to San Diego, Miami, and other places for a reliever.

By all means, please do.

The Reds are more than happy to keep Iglesias. If the Tribe wants years of a cheap closer, then you're going to have to pay for it. Because we don't want to give him up.

The price is high because he's valuable. For a club who is at the start of their window a trade for a controlled bullpen piece like Iggy is a trade they don't have to make next year and the year after.

[Sea Ray]

It's not like we have another closer in the wings nor do we have to trade Iggy for $$ reasons. Therefore I only trade him if we're bowled over with an offer. In general terms I want at least three prospects who play positions of need. In other words, no 1B, C, 3B or LF.

[LoganBuck]

Remember what the Indians gave up for Andrew Miller? It is going to take at least that for Iglesias.

[Donder]

It's not like we have another closer in the wings nor do we have to trade Iggy for $$ reasons. Therefore I only trade him if we're bowled over with an offer. In general terms I want at least three prospects who play positions of need. In other words, no 1B, C, 3B or LF.

I’d be ok with Hughes or Garrett closing. Maybe Lorenzen.

[Big Klu]

Remember what the Indians gave up for Andrew Miller? It is going to take at least that for Iglesias.

Do you think Iglesias is as good as Andrew Miller in 2016? I don't. I mean, I think he's a good pitcher, but not as good as Miller. (And also, he's not a southpaw.)

[mth123]

Houston and Cleveland can also look elsewhere as well if the price is too high. I agree the Reds need to do well if they trade Iglesias and that they don't have to trade him, but at the same time Houston and Cleveland also need to do what is right for their teams. If it doesn't work with the Reds, they can look to San Diego, Miami, and other places for a reliever.

I agree with this. I don't see getting the haul for Iglesias everyone wants and the Reds probably won't deal him for what contenders will be willing to pay. There are so many terrible teams with late inning relievers who they will make available, contenders will decide what they will shop with and move on to somebody else. If the Reds won't deal Iggy for Cionel Perez and Myles Straw, they'll move on to Brad Hand, Kyle Barraclaugh, Blake Treinin, Brad Brach or any of about 15 late innings guys likely to flood the deadline market. Somebody will take it. Teams in need of a true closer (Philly, Atlanta maybe Milwaukee) might pay for somebody like Iggy. Cleveland may if Miller doesn't look like he's coming back, but like it or not, Iggy isn't Chapman or what Miller was when he was dealt. His value is high because of the years of control, but teams dealing now only care about August, September and October and won't pay inflated prices for those extra years. Tanking has changed the dynamic of this market IMO. Too many sellers and not enough buyers.

I still think the best bet for Iggy is a deal with Atlanta for two or three of there solid, ready now pitching prospects. It probably won't be one of te top 2 or 3 guys though. Guys like Allard, Toussaint and Fried might be obtainable, probably not Soroka, Wright or Gohara.

[BillyJoeJimBob]

It's not like we have another closer in the wings nor do we have to trade Iggy for $$ reasons.

do you really not think that Garret could step into that role without issue?

Imo, he steps right into that spot and doesn't miss a beat..

[757690]

It's not like we have another closer in the wings nor do we have to trade Iggy for $$ reasons. Therefore I only trade him if we're bowled over with an offer. In general terms I want at least three prospects who play positions of need. In other words, no 1B, C, 3B or LF.

The key to Iggy is that he is under team control for so long, that it’s likely he’s around for some contending years, assuming the Reds don’t screw things up.

The only reason to trade him is if he brings back players that will help the Reds when they next contend, more than he will.

[Schrammwich]

If the Reds were in contention this year, would we be willing to trade Senzel or Greene for a reliever?

While this exercise might seem to be the same as far as how our top prospects match with theirs. It really has too many different variables.

1 of those variables. Let’s say the reds were in contention, that would insinuate our Major League team has more value than it currently does. Say a more complete offense/defense in our starting 8. Or a competent starting rotation that had 3 legit options that are racking up wins. Another variable is payroll, which has already been discussed how prospects mean more to a smaller market team who can’t sign top tier FAs or hold onto the entire core for most of their career.

Hypothetically, if we were in contention and seem to be in our window(which the Astros are and will be for at least 3 years). I would be fine with dealing Senzel as we probably already have his position filled with a quality producer.(Which the Reds already seem to have this problem)

[KronoRed]

Too early to trade Iglesias, we need to wait until he's about to be a FA and then get a lot less then offers now.

[Sea Ray]

do you really not think that Garret could step into that role without issue?

Imo, he steps right into that spot and doesn't miss a beat..

I think the Reds would miss a big beat. Simply put, the Reds do not have a surplus of pitching to deal. In fact pitching is our weakness. Garrett is barely a major leaguer. A few months ago, it was questionable whether he'd make the team. Let's let him establish himself as a set up man first

- - - Updated - - -

Too early to trade Iglesias, we need to wait until he's about to be a FA and then get a lot less then offers now.

He's not going to be a FA till 2022. Let's try to win something by then and he can be a part of that

[Tribe Guy]

Do you think Iglesias is as good as Andrew Miller in 2016? I don't. I mean, I think he's a good pitcher, but not as good as Miller. (And also, he's not a southpaw.)

2018 Iglesias 35.2 Innings 39 strikeouts 1-1 15 saves 2.52 ERA 1.07 Whip Right hander
2016 Chapman 31.1 innings 44 strikeouts 3-0 20 saves 2.01 ERA 0.89 Whip left hander at time of trade
2016 Miller 45.1 innings 77 strikeouts 6-1 9 saves 1.39 ERA 0.77 Whip left hander at time of trade

I repeat Iglesias is a good reliever and is worth a lot, but he is not the equal to the 2016 Miller at that time and will not command the same type of deal.

[Spanky]

2018 Iglesias 35.2 Innings 39 strikeouts 1-1 15 saves 2.52 ERA 1.07 Whip Right hander
2016 Chapman 31.1 innings 44 strikeouts 3-0 20 saves 2.01 ERA 0.89 Whip left hander at time of trade
2016 Miller 45.1 innings 77 strikeouts 6-1 9 saves 1.39 ERA 0.77 Whip left hander at time of trade

I repeat Iglesias is a good reliever and is worth a lot, but he is not the equal to the 2016 Miller at that time and will not command the same type of deal.

How many years was Miller under control for and how expensive was he at the time?

[Sea Ray]

How many years was Miller under control for and how expensive was he at the time?

The Yankees signed him to a 4 yr contract prior to 2015 for $9 mill/yr

[Tribe Guy]

How many years was Miller under control for and how expensive was he at the time?

2016 - remainder of 9 million contract.
2017 - 9 million
2018 - 9 million.

2 1/2 years of control.